The Delphi Murders: First Person: Chief Deputy Prosecutor Stacey Diener: Part Two

[00:00:00] [SPEAKER_02] Content Warning, this episode contains discussion of murder, including the murder of children.

[00:00:05] [SPEAKER_03] Working together, a prosecution team of Nicholas McClelland, James Luttrell, and Stacey Diener successfully secured the conviction of Richard Allen for the murders of Liberty German and Abigail Williams. We are speaking with all three of them this week. This is the second of two episodes featuring our interview with Chief Deputy Prosecutor Diener. They will be released on the same day, so go back and listen to Part One if you haven't already.

[00:00:28] [SPEAKER_02] In this episode, we talk more about some standout moments from the trial, including a cross-examination from Chief Deputy Prosecutor Diener that was so effective it seemed to turn a defense witness into a witness for the prosecution. We also discuss Brad Rosey's unusual closing argument, which featured images of torture devices and snakes.

[00:00:51] [SPEAKER_03] Now that the gag order is lifted, Chief Deputy Prosecutor Diener and others are free to speak about their experiences with the Delphi case. This will be the second of two episodes featuring our interview with Chief Deputy Prosecutor Diener. They will be released on the same day, so go back and listen to Part One if you haven't already. These episodes are part of our first-person interview series. We will seek to interview as many of the individuals with first-hand experience in the Delphi case as possible in the coming weeks and months.

[00:01:18] [SPEAKER_03] If you had a direct role in the case and are open to talking to us, email us at murdersheet at gmail.com. This is part of our ongoing efforts to report on the Delphi murders. For many years, we have not gotten the chance to hear directly from some of the principal figures in the case. That all changes now. My name is Anya Kane. I'm a journalist.

[00:01:36] [SPEAKER_02] And I'm Kevin Greenlee. I'm an attorney. And this is The Murder Sheet. We're a true crime podcast focused on original reporting, interviews, and deep dives into murder cases. We're The Murder Sheet. And this is The Delphi Murders. First Person. Chief Deputy Prosecutor Stacy Diener, Part Two.

[00:01:56] [SPEAKER_02] I don't know how much you'd want to talk about this, but one of your standout moments, I think, was your cross of Deanna Dwinger.

[00:02:50] [SPEAKER_02] And I remember the people in the gallery, by the time it was over, including your follow-ups to some of the juror questions, they believed you had flipped her from being a defense witness to a prosecution witness. Is there anything you feel comfortable talking about that?

[00:03:09] [SPEAKER_00] In all honesty, I knew ahead of time that Deanna Dwinger was better for the state than for the defense. We had had a deposition of her, not because the state requested one, but because the defense had. So I was quite prepared for her testimony and for that cross-examination. I felt like I had a good handle on where she was coming from.

[00:03:34] [SPEAKER_00] And one of the things that I wanted to make sure I set the record straight on through her testimony was that Dr. Walla's reputation was quite good in her own arena and among her peers. And those were not necessarily people who she had any control over. Deanna Dwinger was a supervisor and was a DOC employee. Dr. Walla was not.

[00:03:59] [SPEAKER_00] And so I felt like her testimony was very important to rehabilitate the attacks that were being made against Dr. Walla.

[00:04:09] [SPEAKER_03] Another one of the sort of mental health witnesses was Dr. Polly Westcott. And you did quite a substantive cross of her findings around mental health. Can you tell us about that?

[00:04:20] [SPEAKER_00] Dr. Walla Yes. I read her report multiple times. Again, in the way that I prepare, I highlighted, I made notes, I tab, I reread and read again. I prepared for that cross in order to point out from what I reviewed was that she either was not being given all of the records or her report was selective about what she included in the report.

[00:04:45] [SPEAKER_00] Dr. Walla I wanted to make sure that I pointed out that things that, to me, seemed rather relevant and important, like confessions, seemed to be missing from her summary. There was every reason to think that her report or her testimony would include handing that report to the judge and the jury.

[00:05:07] [SPEAKER_00] And I just wanted to make very sure that they knew that there is at least a reasonable basis for believing that the entries were selective with regard to the confessions.

[00:05:20] [SPEAKER_03] Do you have a strategy or philosophy typically when it comes to cross examination as a whole?

[00:05:25] [SPEAKER_00] Dr. Walla I like to keep it to a minimum as a person is testifying after I've done direct or maybe they are a defense witness. And so I'm not doing, you know, recross. I'm just doing cross examination.

[00:05:39] [SPEAKER_00] I'm making notes throughout about high points that I think can be focused on in order to either, you know, turn the testimony to favor the state's position, you know, point out omissions or inconsistencies. And that's what I did with the witnesses that I had that responsibility for.

[00:06:01] [SPEAKER_03] And then I want to go back to direct for a minute because this is something I thought was another sort of standout. It was a bit quieter. You know, when you were doing direct examinations with the relatives of the victims, I felt like you were able to really kind of step back and like let them tell their stories. It really felt like there were some very highly emotional moments in there. And those are very powerful. And I think I even noticed some of the jurors actually getting emotional. What went into that?

[00:06:28] [SPEAKER_00] Dr. I made sure to talk with each of them, not about necessarily just the nuts and bolts of what happened that day that the girls went to the trail, which were the necessary things. Right. I mean, like I needed to know for Kelsey, when did you drop them off? What did they take with them when they left your car? When did you find out that they weren't where they were supposed to be? You know, with Derek German, when did you get there? Why do you know that that's when you got there?

[00:06:58] [SPEAKER_00] How many times did you try to call? Those are the nuts and bolts of things. But in addition to that, I wanted to say, tell us about how you felt at that moment or what kind of person, you know, was Libby or Abby? And, you know, were they the kind of kid that would not be where they were supposed to be and not tell you or fail to communicate? You know, and that is giving the jury more than just the nuts and bolts. That gives them a sense of the person.

[00:07:26] [SPEAKER_00] And I not only wanted them to have a sense of who Libby or Abby was, but also a sense of the family member and how their relationship was with the girls. I think it's important. You can't just give the jury A plus B equals C. It's very sterile and out of context. And there are lots of things that would be context that you can't put in that are not allowed by the rules.

[00:07:54] [SPEAKER_00] But the things that you can put in, I think, are important because you want the jury to have a visual and to be there with you going through these events. And I think that the witnesses did that. Pat Brown was a very emotional witness. I did not tell him to be emotional. He was reliving that moment as he described it. And I think that was true from watching him.

[00:08:17] [SPEAKER_02] One thing about this case that is interesting, and I think maybe it was a challenge to some people who aren't super familiar with trials, is it wasn't like television. There wasn't like one single piece of dramatic evidence that conclusively proved everything. It was the totality of how all things kind of fit together and gradually built a box around Richard Allen, who, of course, killed those two girls.

[00:08:45] [SPEAKER_02] And a crucial piece of all of that was the trail witnesses, which you handled. How did you approach getting their stories out there in a clear way so that the jury could put all those pieces together?

[00:09:00] [SPEAKER_00] When I needed to start reaching out to trail witnesses, again, I was being very sensitive to the fact that they were so young at the time. I think lucky for me, they were all female. And so it was easy for me to relate to them. I have two daughters and a son. One of my daughters is the same age.

[00:09:24] [SPEAKER_01] I'm sorry, I haven't cried about this case yet. No, it's okay.

[00:09:28] [SPEAKER_02] It takes your time.

[00:09:29] [SPEAKER_01] I know. It's just when you're getting ready for the case and you're in the case, you can't. I almost did the day of closing or the day before. I can't remember. And then when you get the verdict, you're so elated that you don't need to cry. So then you just kind of forget to go through that process.

[00:09:47] Yeah.

[00:09:47] [SPEAKER_01] I didn't expect this, but I was kind of getting teary eyed yesterday when I heard Nick talking about the case. But okay. So let's start that again. Yeah.

[00:09:55] [SPEAKER_02] We're the trail witnesses. Yes. How could you present those stories in a way that the jury would even put the pieces together?

[00:10:04] [SPEAKER_00] So one of the challenges with the trail witnesses was recognizing the age of the witnesses I chose to have testify was quite young when this happened. And certainly this was a startling event for all young people at that time and continued on until now. So I was trying to be very sensitive to their anxiety about being involved or their fears. And it proved true.

[00:10:32] [SPEAKER_00] I mean, when I met with the two witnesses from the trail that I called, you know, they were nervous and disturbed, you know, by what had happened to people that they knew so closely. So one witness, in fact, had gotten an attorney. She did not want to return my calls. It was a bit of a struggle. But once she got counsel involved, we were able to talk together in a group and then she felt comfortable. But just getting over that stumbling block. And then it was quite easy.

[00:11:01] [SPEAKER_00] Like she knew that I was sensitive to the experience and dealing with a female prosecutor, I think was helpful. And then the other one, I met with her in a place that was comfortable with her. I mean, I went and said, I'll come to your apartment, you know, if that makes you more comfortable. I drove an hour and a half and we met there. And obviously I had conversations with her about her as a person, not just, hey, tell me what happened.

[00:11:30] [SPEAKER_00] So, again, young person, age of my own children, you know, I could relate to her and make her comfortable. There were witnesses that were on the trail other than just the two girls, young girls that I called, obviously. The other two that were with those girls were not in a position to participate for various reasons. One had just had a baby and it was complicated for her to participate. The other one had been so young at the time.

[00:11:59] [SPEAKER_00] I just thought it was wise not to involve someone who was like eight years old at the time. That was just a prosecutor choice. And then with Betsy Blair, she's an educated, smart woman. She was very easy to work with. I just, I sat down with her and went through all of her statements, gave her the opportunity to read them in written form and also in audio form. And so then she felt prepared. And we just had conversations about questions in the process. And then with Sarah Carbaugh, I spent extensively more time.

[00:12:27] [SPEAKER_00] She had been interviewed a lot. It was very lengthy. We watched all of it. We went through everything. And she was, you know, by her own admission, deals with anxiety. And so it was difficult for her to feel comfortable being a witness.

[00:12:43] [SPEAKER_00] And I guess I would say I want people to know that not everyone who participates in a trial is experienced at talking about something so traumatic in front of strangers and in that setting. And they should be given some grace, you know, in how they present themselves, how they respond to a nervous situation. And, you know, I did what I could to make them comfortable. And sometimes they just struggle.

[00:13:12] [SPEAKER_03] And that's going to happen. I mean, you're asking them to recount something that's incredibly traumatic and upsetting. So, yeah, I completely agree.

[00:13:21] [SPEAKER_00] I would say the other thing that you might not realize or people might not realize, a lot of these witnesses and some of which I didn't call but I reached out to and prepared them for depositions were harassed by social media individuals. And it was quite difficult. I mean, people needed to delete their social media. They felt like they went into hiding.

[00:13:47] [SPEAKER_00] They lived their lives differently from the time that their name became associated with being on the trail that day. They were they felt attacked.

[00:14:00] [SPEAKER_03] I just find it such a bizarre place that I feel like true crime as a whole is in where we've gotten to the point where it's like these people on social media, like they claim to be helping cases or helping. I don't know how that helps at all. But they do that by harassing actually actual witnesses who actually have some actual connection to the case. So I don't know. That's not a question. Sorry.

[00:14:27] [SPEAKER_00] I will comment on that if you don't mind. Yeah. I would like to say from a prosecutor's perspective, if you think that you're helping with justice or helping with the investigation, you're not because then those people are less likely to cooperate with those of us who are trying to solve the crime because it's impacting them negatively in a very personal way.

[00:14:51] [SPEAKER_00] And then their choice is to be the person who sees something horrible happening and wants to turn their eyes and walk away rather than to be helpful and to make a report and to be on the side of the victim.

[00:15:07] [SPEAKER_00] So it makes it very difficult and it's really unfortunate that people who want to engage in conspiracy theories or get a lot of attention for their podcast or whatever their motivation might be, that they do it at the expense of people who did not choose to be a witness.

[00:15:26] [SPEAKER_03] Yeah, I've always found this case to be, unfortunately, I think it's not going to just be Delphi. I think it's just going to be a lot of high-profile cases going forward. But it's always just been like real-life Delphi versus internet Delphi. It's like two, I don't know, two competing concepts, but it's interesting.

[00:15:44] [SPEAKER_02] I wanted to jump back to Dr. Dwinger just for a second because one of the things that I thought was really impressive, there was a juror question and then you followed up by getting Dr. Dwinger to discuss how can you tell if a person's story is delivered when that person is psychotic or if that person is rational. And she gave an answer, it was basically saying, well, if it's rational, then you would look for these qualities.

[00:16:14] [SPEAKER_02] And the qualities she specified were exactly the qualities that were described being Richard Allen's confessions. So I just wanted to single that out. It was a great moment. How are you as an attorney able to identify moments like that and seize them so well?

[00:16:32] [SPEAKER_00] I would say that the deposition was the first opportunity to get a sense of how Dr. Dwinger could be helpful in her background as having been a lead psychologist prior to her more administrative responsibility that she was in at the time. And then knowing she would have the knowledge to explain that sort of thing because she was in the same position that Dr. Walla had been in.

[00:16:58] [SPEAKER_00] So she would have been seeing the same kind of people and making the same kinds of evaluations. So I just, you know, wanted her input to have what would be maybe a disinterested party to comment on what became the ultimate question was how do we evaluate these very detailed chronological statements that Dr. Walla was the recipient of? And how do we test them, you know, against this argument that he was psychotic?

[00:17:28] [SPEAKER_00] And to me, it seemed very clear what the professionals would describe as a psychotic episode. No one said he is a psychotic person. They said he was having a psychotic episode in their diagnoses. And we needed to know what the difference was. And when he made detailed confessions to Dr. Walla, to me, it was a very common sense thing.

[00:17:56] [SPEAKER_00] Having been the person who read every note that she made from beginning to end, having it in that context, which you can't really present that in trial. I mean, that's like 3,000 pages of records. And so I needed something that was concise for the jury to be presented with and being able to rely on to say, how do you tell the difference? What kind of statement, you know, looks like a statement that comes from a person experiencing psychosis?

[00:18:25] [SPEAKER_00] And what kind of statement comes from someone who is lucid, chronological, detailed, and oriented to person, place, time, and situation?

[00:18:39] [SPEAKER_02] I mean, as the trial of this stage is a bit of a blur, we've tried to talk about some of the moments involving you that really stood out to us and impressed us. Are there other moments that stand out to you?

[00:18:51] [SPEAKER_00] I was really happy with the testimony with regard to Dr. Dwanger and the cross of Dr. Westcott. I feel like I did my job there, set out what I had hoped to do based on what I had learned through trial prep.

[00:19:09] [SPEAKER_00] I was very proud of the trail witnesses and, you know, Pat Brown and Jake Johns, who needed to help us with putting together the discovery of the bodies and how it wouldn't be so obvious to someone.

[00:19:29] [SPEAKER_00] I was very proud of Derek German as the dad who's out there looking for these girls and the person who probably felt very responsible for the fact that he's there and they're not. Like, did I miss something? Why aren't they here? And him being able to describe the terrain and where he looked and why he would not have been in the location where they were ultimately found.

[00:19:55] [SPEAKER_00] I just felt like for someone in a family relationship like that, having to deal with the loss of his child and her friend being able to keep himself together, you know, to describe that for the jury, I thought it was a good moment.

[00:20:12] [SPEAKER_03] When it came to the defense's case, they called people who were on the trails that day, but it seemed like all of them were there well after the crime would have occurred. What did you make of that?

[00:20:23] [SPEAKER_00] I thought that was an interesting defense strategy, I guess. One of the challenges when I was getting ready for the case is I know what trail people I want to call because I've read all the reports and I, for myself, had gone through the law enforcement timeline. And I still had this fear in the back of my mind, like whose name is going to be in this voluminous report that I'm going to miss, that defense is going to identify and have them come in and then just blow the timeline apart. So I was very concerned about that.

[00:20:53] [SPEAKER_00] And so I was being very diligent about not only preparing myself for the witnesses we wanted, but also the ones that I thought they might call and doing the same kind of preparation. And so when they chose to call the ones that they did, I had already spoken with those witnesses and prepped them for the deposition because I certainly didn't want them showing up to a deposition unprepared. Here's your, here's your, a copy of your report. Why don't you come in and I'll show it to you and see if you have any questions.

[00:21:22] [SPEAKER_00] Is there an audio recording that you may have given that I haven't located yet? Those kinds of things. So as you may have noticed, Cheyenne Bell said my first contact with regard to being part of this trial was Stacy Diener, who told me I was going to have a deposition and here's your statement. I was doing that with everybody's name I could find because I didn't want to get blindsided.

[00:21:47] [SPEAKER_02] You said that was an interesting strategy. I thought Brad Rosey's closing argument was also interesting. Do you have any comments on that?

[00:21:59] [SPEAKER_00] It was like no other I had ever experienced. Yes, I did elbow Nick McLeanland about an objection, but trying not to be very obvious. But by the same token, I kind of understood and knew in my own mind why he was not objecting.

[00:22:21] [SPEAKER_00] And I think it was the right call because I think that the defense was invalidating their own argument by going down the road that they did with pictures of medieval torture and portraying the state as a snake. There's not much more I can say about that politely.

[00:22:45] [SPEAKER_03] I'm going to ask you about performances of different sort of people and entities at this trial. How did you feel about Judge Gull's performance at trial?

[00:22:53] [SPEAKER_00] I was very impressed and thankful when the defense wanted her off the case. Not only did I kind of take offense to it as a female attorney. I'm not going to hide that. I felt like she was the best thing that this case could look for in a judge because what you want in a judge is someone with lots of experience in major felony cases.

[00:23:22] [SPEAKER_00] That is very familiar with the law and willing to make a decision. You know, sometimes you can get a judge who's indecisive and it can be very detrimental to your case or someone who isn't willing to hold the attorneys accountable in a very even handed way. And she has high expectations for her court, which we learned by doing our own homework about asking people who work in her court, you know, what are her expectations?

[00:23:52] [SPEAKER_00] How does she handle different situations? What about pretrial pleadings? You know, just trying to get a sense of how she conducts business. And I feel like the way that we experienced it was very much like the description we got from doing our homework. I respect her.

[00:24:12] [SPEAKER_00] I'm so thankful that she didn't walk away from a difficult situation when she was being personally attacked and professionally, you know, through pleadings being asked to be removed, that she was willing to stay the course. When we would have specific legal questions raised by pleadings that were set for hearing.

[00:24:38] [SPEAKER_00] If we came back with, well, judge, the law says she always appeared to have already researched it, already was familiar. It wasn't a situation where we had to wait and have her take something under advisement to do the research. She was always on top of things. And that was a real benefit for everyone.

[00:24:59] [SPEAKER_03] How did you feel about the defense's performance at trial, if you can answer that?

[00:25:08] [SPEAKER_00] I was concerned. I think I already said about how they might cross-examine family. And so I was pleased to see that they were not hard on the family with regard to their testimony. Kept thinking there's something that the defense seems to feel is strongly in their favor that we're going to see at some point. And they're hoping that we're not prepared for it. I never saw that.

[00:25:36] [SPEAKER_00] The testimony from their expert that was previously with the FBI about the phone and the perception that something had been plugged in. I thought it was more compelling to focus on the fact that she had not testified in that kind of capacity before except once. And being an expert in that realm was rather new to her.

[00:26:02] [SPEAKER_00] And I thought that Nick McLeland brought that out in cross-examination and addressed that particular evidence. Otherwise, with regard to how defense handled their side of the case, it was very much in step with what we had seen at the previous hearings and what we were expecting based on pleadings. So I really didn't see any surprises.

[00:26:29] [SPEAKER_00] How do you feel that Prosecutor McCleland and James Lettrell performed at this trial? Well, they're part of my team. So, you know, I think that we each did what we were supposed to do. We fully prepared for our witnesses and those that were ours by identification from the defense.

[00:26:52] [SPEAKER_00] I mean, not only did we choose, you know, by joint decision who we were going to call and who we were each going to be responsible for, but we also discussed who would be responsible for what witness coming from the defense. And so I think, for example, Jim Lettrell did a great job dealing with witnesses called by the defense that were called to the family. You know, those are tough witnesses.

[00:27:19] [SPEAKER_00] And so he was well prepared and was effective. Even when if it was just to say, you know, thank you for coming today, you know, we have no questions for you. That's strategic as well. Let's be honest. So it was a great team. I think we complemented one another in our preparation. We were willing to give constructive, you know, criticism or input when it was needed. And it made us all better at our job. And I'm curious, how did you feel that you did at trial?

[00:27:49] [SPEAKER_00] You know, even after and this is my 31st year in prosecution. Obviously, one of those years had a 10 month gap, but this is the 31st year of doing prosecution work. Obviously, I grew to love it. I told you I did it, you know, to get over the fear of trial, but I love it. And it's where I feel at home in my profession. So I was prepared. I mean, like I said, I consumed all of my time with this trial.

[00:28:17] [SPEAKER_00] And the things that I personally, you know, tried to anticipate and prepare for worked out well. There isn't anything I would necessarily change. If I could have presented more through Dr. Walla to provide greater perspective, that would have been nice. But we also had to balance that against how much time the trial was taking, how much information we were putting on the jury.

[00:28:46] [SPEAKER_00] And so you have to be sensitive to what you're asking them to do and how much time you're taking away from their lives in order to do it. So that was a consideration.

[00:28:57] [SPEAKER_03] You were probably too busy to follow most of it. But how did you feel the media did covering the facts of the case in the trial?

[00:29:06] [SPEAKER_00] I didn't have a lot of time to follow any of that. But to the extent that I had friends and family who watch mainstream news coverage, I was very disappointed in what I perceived as inaccurate and definitely slanted toward supporting defense conspiracy theories that I didn't think were part of our trial.

[00:29:35] [SPEAKER_02] Whether it involves you or not, what was the most memorable moments of this trial for you?

[00:29:41] [SPEAKER_00] Well, certainly when you have someone testify and you get all of the information in that you felt like you needed did, it's a win. But when you get to cross-examine someone and it goes in your favor, that's an even higher point. I really enjoyed that. So cross-examination of Dr. Dwanger, cross-examination of Polly Westcott, Dr. Polly Westcott. I want to give her the respect that she's due. You know, that was very satisfying.

[00:30:12] [SPEAKER_00] Those are the highlights for me. The verdict is the real highlight because I guess I want to say this. I've thought a lot about having the opportunity to say what should we all take from this? And I hear a lot about the defense's perspective that they lost because there's a conspiracy or the judge is biased. It really isn't about winning or losing.

[00:30:33] [SPEAKER_00] It's about Mr. Allen having his day in court, which happened to be almost 30 days, and making sure that the rules are followed, which is the judge's function. And when the prosecution makes a choice to charge someone with any crime, especially when you're talking about something like this, the process is supposed to check whether we have done our job in charging the person and whether we have the evidence to prove that they did what we've accused them of.

[00:31:02] [SPEAKER_00] So it isn't about winning and losing. It's about did we make a good charging decision and do we have the evidence to back it up? And so when people are attacking the jury process in this case specifically and pointing to conspiracy theories or a biased judge, I would say the jury did its job. No one interfered with their process.

[00:31:25] [SPEAKER_00] The judge did her job in making sure that the evidence that came in had a legal basis for being admitted. And the result reinforced what Nick McGleeland decided, which was we're going to charge Richard Allen with kidnapping resulting in murder.

[00:31:46] [SPEAKER_00] And then we, together as a team, discussed adding the intentional murder charges once we had an opportunity to review the confessions in conjunction with all of the other evidence. And it all has to be looked at as a group.

[00:32:01] [SPEAKER_02] You talk about the verdict. The jury was actually out for several days. What was it like waiting for that verdict to come in?

[00:32:12] [SPEAKER_00] It's okay the first day or the second day when you're dealing with something that took as long as it did. I fully expected it would take at least until noon on Saturday. So through noon on Saturday, I still felt pretty good about it. Sunday was hard. Being away from the office, not having anything to work on related to the Richard Allen case, it's like, what more can I do? There's nothing to do.

[00:32:37] [SPEAKER_00] You're not around the people who are waiting for the same thing you're waiting for. So being away from everyone. We had the support of our witnesses and our team when we were here in the courthouse. So that's comforting. And then when we come back on Monday and you hit noontime, you start to wonder where we're headed. But at that point, we had been contacted pretty close in time.

[00:33:05] [SPEAKER_00] I can't remember what time on Monday we were told there was a verdict. But I think we were back in the courtroom by one or so. So I would say Sunday, Monday is the worst part. You know, we're sitting in the courthouse and we can sense that there's movement. But, you know, you really don't know what's happening.

[00:33:25] [SPEAKER_03] So when you remember where you were, what you were doing when you heard there was a verdict and did you feel like this must be guilty or did you were you like, I don't know?

[00:33:34] [SPEAKER_00] My concern was hung jury. I really felt like it was guilty or hung jury because there was some division in the group. And then at that point, we would feel responsible like, oh, did we, you know, did we pick someone who wasn't prepared for the job? Some people don't like to pass judgment on others or they let sympathy for the consequences, you know, interfere with their decision.

[00:33:59] [SPEAKER_00] And so you always wonder about that when you're picking a jury because you don't have a lot of time to get to know the people. So when we got a verdict, I felt pretty good that we had a guilty verdict.

[00:34:10] [SPEAKER_03] And then what was the reaction? Like we were not there for the verdict. So I'm just curious, what was the reaction like in the courtroom? How did you react? How did the people around you react when they heard it was? And how did you feel when it was guilty on all counts?

[00:34:22] [SPEAKER_00] So just to backtrack a second, you asked where I was. I was sitting right here at my desk waiting. We were here every day, you know, all day when the jury was deliberating. We were here. And then to answer your second question, it is a relief that I cannot describe. Not only realizing that everything that you'd worked for had outcome that was needed for justice,

[00:34:49] [SPEAKER_00] but also for the family sitting behind you that is there every day, wringing their hands, you know, fretting about how things went and, you know, what will happen at the end. It's a mix of those two.

[00:35:04] [SPEAKER_03] I mean, going from that and then this has been sort of discussed a little bit, but just, you know, some of the threats to the people involved in this case. I'm talking witnesses, law enforcement, people like that. You know, I don't know. What are your thoughts on that now that we're kind of in this kind of new phase of the case where there's no trial going on?

[00:35:25] [SPEAKER_00] There's a period of time where it's kind of hard to adjust back to the everyday schedule, what we would say getting back to normal, because our minds have been so preoccupied with getting ready for Richard Allen, listening to calls every day, pouring through documents. You kind of had a loss of what to do with your free time.

[00:35:50] [SPEAKER_00] You had to relearn what it's like to have free time, because it was over a year and certainly very intense, you know, at the end. And then I've still really stayed away from the coverage because of the reasons I stated before. I'm pretty selective about what I seek out, and I certainly don't watch the nightly news. I get enough bad news at work I don't need to watch the news.

[00:36:20] [SPEAKER_03] So when it comes to the sentencing, a lot of the family members that you worked with sort of on the stand as witnesses got to deliver some very powerful victim impact statement. What was it like to hear that?

[00:36:33] [SPEAKER_00] Well, because we get a copy of the pre-sentence investigation, we also, we the prosecutor's office and the defense does to get a copy of all of those statements that are presented as part of the pre-sentence investigation. So I read all of those before that day.

[00:36:52] [SPEAKER_00] And I can honestly say that in trying to get through them, I had to take a break, especially with knowing some of the people, but even people I didn't know, you know, school officials or teachers were writing in and having a sense of who Abby and Libby were and knowing the family. It was heartbreaking.

[00:37:11] [SPEAKER_00] I think the thing that I was most taken by was how appropriate and how well-written the statements were.

[00:37:23] [SPEAKER_00] You didn't get to hear them, but for people that were so strongly affected to be able to articulate their message and to make you understand how heartbreaking it was, you know, how it affected their lives and how it continues to was really impressive. How do you feel about the sentence that Richard Allen got?

[00:37:48] [SPEAKER_00] I really had settled on the strong possibility that he would get the minimum number of years allowed for each murder run consecutively. I went in there expecting 45 years on each consecutive because if the court found his lack of criminal history to be compelling, that was where we stood.

[00:38:13] [SPEAKER_00] But when the judge talked about why she was doing the maximum sentence on each, I can't get into the same position she's in where she has seen as many other murder cases as she has. I mean, her court, like I said, is high volume and lots of murder cases. And I think she's in a perfect position to have the perspective to know that he is among the worst. So certainly we were pleased with the sentence.

[00:38:41] [SPEAKER_00] And I'm glad that she had reasons that could be articulated and that they were articulated as to why he was receiving the enhanced amount of years for each. So I know that the family had to be happy about that. I mean, they expressed it.

[00:38:58] [SPEAKER_03] What do you think the biggest misconception from the public is regarding this case?

[00:39:03] [SPEAKER_00] I would say there are two. That the length of the investigation was somehow due to a deficiency in law enforcement because there wasn't anybody involved in this case that didn't want to get it solved.

[00:39:23] [SPEAKER_00] And the other would be the idea that Mr. Allen's confessions can somehow be explained away by depression and anxiety or a psychotic episode related to that.

[00:39:42] [SPEAKER_03] Yeah. And then what has it been like to sort of immerse yourself in what is, you know, truly, truly a horrifying and disturbing case on a daily basis for this long?

[00:39:53] [SPEAKER_00] I knew what I was getting myself into. I mean, like I said, I'd had other murder cases. There are others I didn't share with you that were very disturbing. You know, I had a murder case where an elderly man was left in a nature preserve and had been beaten by a young man, probably left alive. And because of his injuries, he died and he wasn't found until much later. I knew what I was getting myself into without having followed everything.

[00:40:23] [SPEAKER_00] So I was mentally prepared. I knew it was going to be a lot of work. I was willing to do it. I wanted to do it. I asked, you know, to be involved. There were moments where I said to myself, as I think any reasonable person would, I mean, am I the right person for the job? Am I going to do what needs to be done? I don't want to let down my team. That makes me human. But I always knew what I was getting myself into.

[00:40:51] [SPEAKER_00] And it's really nice to be on the other side of it now and having it be done and look back on it and be able to be proud of the work that we did.

[00:41:00] [SPEAKER_02] How are you doing now?

[00:41:03] [SPEAKER_00] I believe that I've caught up on sleep to the extent that I can. This case doesn't cause me any anxiety or loss of sleep or regret. You know, I don't think back and say, oh, I really screwed this up or I wish I would have done that or this. So it's overall a very positive experience. I'm glad to have the opportunity to be in the office full time. I could retire.

[00:41:32] [SPEAKER_00] In fact, I had retired officially from being a prosecutor. I had enough years in. And with my age, I don't have to do this. I do it because I like it. And so it's nice to have that opportunity and be back at it and share what I've learned over 30 years and contribute.

[00:41:53] [SPEAKER_03] What do the investigators on this case and the other prosecutors mean to you now that you've all been through this experience together?

[00:42:01] [SPEAKER_00] It's a very binding experience. You know, I still have very fond memories of the people who were involved in the three-week murder trial that I had when I was elected in Plaski County. It's a similar, in fact, even more, I would say, bigger and better experience. But this case, just because of the volume of people that were involved and how we all worked together and supported one another,

[00:42:30] [SPEAKER_00] you know, one of the things that was really impressive is when we were getting ready for trial, now technology is such a big part of what we do. And we had some challenges. You know, the beautiful piece of equipment that we didn't really have time to learn how to use, you know, was a source of frustration. And everybody got to see that. And we tried to work with it as we went.

[00:42:49] [SPEAKER_00] But we had people who showed up that were supposed to be here just to be security and to help us manage witnesses, meet them at the door, make sure that they were at the courtroom door when we needed them, who ended up volunteering to stay late at night, you know, to help us with technology issues. And you kind of become a family, honestly.

[00:43:15] [SPEAKER_00] In fact, when it was done, you know, knowing that everyone was going to go back to their respective areas and some of them were traveling over two hours to get to us when they would come, that we weren't going to see them anymore, you know. And it's like, I'm really going to miss you, you know. You've been part of this team and it's been so emotional. It's like having a family reunion and then saying, well, I guess I'll see you when we have the next one. You don't have one planned.

[00:43:41] [SPEAKER_03] You know, you worked so closely with them, preparing them for this trial. What do the families of Lippie and Abby mean to you at this point?

[00:43:53] [SPEAKER_00] It does, again, with them as well, just like with the law enforcement team, create a bond that you don't want to let go of. So when Christmas and New Year's happened, I sent a message to Becky Patty and I, you know, told her that I was thinking about her and her family.

[00:44:10] [SPEAKER_00] And I did the same thing with Anna Williams because, you know, when I experience a family holiday, you know, you think about who's not there and I know they're doing that too. And so you can't help but think, you know, they're having another Christmas without Abby or Libby and you feel for them. So you reach out. And then what are the memories of the girls themselves mean to you?

[00:44:38] [SPEAKER_00] I think about them in the context of being like my own children because of the age when this happened to them. And I'm sad that I didn't get an opportunity to know either one of them because they certainly had plans and a lot to offer.

[00:44:58] [SPEAKER_00] And getting to know their closest family members, you know, made it all the more bittersweet, you know, to say we've accomplished this great thing in your honor and to, you know, get justice for a horrible event. But it doesn't bring them back. And so that's what I think about.

[00:45:23] [SPEAKER_02] You've been very, very generous with your time. We've talked about a lot of subjects related to this case. Is there anything we didn't ask you about or anything you'd like to talk about that we haven't discussed?

[00:45:35] [SPEAKER_00] No, I think it brought up the things about, you know, people's perspective on witnesses and not everyone's created equal. And, you know, some people should be given some grace for not being in a position that they anticipate causes them to be involved. And the media, of course, you know, the negative treatment of the prosecutor's case or latching on to defense conspiracy theories without really seeking the other side. And we couldn't, you know, we couldn't give it to them.

[00:46:04] [SPEAKER_00] But they didn't seem to temper the coverage taking that into consideration. And that's about it. Yeah.

[00:46:15] [SPEAKER_03] Well, thank you so much for your time. And we really appreciate that and the work you put in on this case. You're welcome. Thanks very much to Stacey Diener for taking the time to talk to us. We so appreciate the care she took in doing this important work.

[00:46:30] [SPEAKER_02] Thanks so much for listening to the Murder Sheet. If you have a tip concerning one of the cases we cover, please email us at murdersheet at gmail dot com. If you have actionable information about an unsolved crime, please report it to the appropriate authorities.

[00:46:51] [SPEAKER_03] If you're interested in joining our Patreon, that's available at www.patreon.com slash murdersheet. If you want to tip us a bit of money for records requests, you can do so at www.buymeacoffee.com slash murdersheet. We very much appreciate any support.

[00:47:15] [SPEAKER_02] Special thanks to Kevin Tyler Greenlee, who composed the music for the Murder Sheet, and who you can find on the web at kevintg.com.

[00:47:24] [SPEAKER_03] If you're looking to talk with other listeners about a case we've covered, you can join the Murder Sheet discussion group on Facebook. We mostly focus our time on research and reporting, so we're not on social media much. We do try to check our email account, but we ask for patience as we often receive a lot of messages. Thanks again for listening.

[00:47:46] [SPEAKER_02] Can we talk a little bit before we go about Quince, a great new sponsor for us? I think in one of the ads that we've already done for them, we talked about the compliments I'm getting on my jacket. I know you're a very modest woman, but can we talk about the compliments you're getting on the Quince products you wear?

[00:48:12] [SPEAKER_03] Yeah, I've got two of their Mongolian cashmere sweaters. They're a brand that just does this sort of luxurious products, but without the crazy costs really well. They give you Italian leather handbags. They do like European linen sheets. You have a really cool suede jacket, and I really like the way I look in my sweaters. I like the way you look in your bomber jacket. It looks super cool.

[00:48:38] [SPEAKER_02] You've gotten a lot of compliments when you go out wearing these sweaters.

[00:48:41] [SPEAKER_03] I think I have, yeah.

[00:48:42] [SPEAKER_02] And deservedly so.

[00:48:43] [SPEAKER_03] Also, I'm one of those people, my skin is very sensitive. So when it comes to wearing sweaters, sometimes something's too scratchy. It really bothers me. These are so soft. They're just very delicate and soft. Wearing them is lovely because they're super comfortable. It's not one of those things where you buy it and it looks great, but it doesn't feel that great. They look great. They feel great. But yeah, I really love them. And you've got your cool jacket.

[00:49:11] [SPEAKER_03] I mean, that's a little bit of a – you're the guy who wears the same thing all the time. So this was a bit of a gamble for you, a bit of a risk. You got something a bit different.

[00:49:19] [SPEAKER_02] I do wash my clothes.

[00:49:20] [SPEAKER_03] I know you wash your clothes, but I mean –

[00:49:23] [SPEAKER_02] You're filthy. You just made me sound awful. So no, I wash my clothes.

[00:49:28] [SPEAKER_03] But you don't really – You don't really experiment with fashion that much is what I'm saying. So this is a little bit out of the norm for you, but I think you really like it and it looks good.

[00:49:36] [SPEAKER_02] Thank you. Great products. Incredible prices. Absolutely. Quince.com.

[00:49:41] [SPEAKER_03] There you go. So you can go to Quince.com slash msheet. And right now they're offering 365-day returns plus free shipping on your order. So that's quince.com slash msheet. That's Q-U-I-N-C-E dot com slash M-S-H-E-E-T.

[00:49:58] [SPEAKER_02] Before we go, we just wanted to say another few words about Vaya. This is really a wonderful product. I think it's really helped both of us get a lot better rest.

[00:50:07] [SPEAKER_03] Vaya is pretty much, I guess you'd say, the only lifestyle hemp brand out there. So what does that mean? It means that they're all about crafting different products to elicit different moods. Kevin and I really like their non-THC CBD products. Specifically, Zen really helps me fall asleep. Some Zen can really just kind of help me get more into that state where I can relax and fall asleep pretty easily. And they've been such a wonderful support to us. They're a longtime sponsor.

[00:50:34] [SPEAKER_03] We really love working with them and they really make this show possible. I'm going to say this. You may not realize this, but when you support our sponsors, you're supporting us. And it kind of makes it possible for us to do this show. So if you or one of your loved ones is interested in trying some of this stuff, you're going to get a great deal. It's very high quality, high value.

[00:50:54] [SPEAKER_02] Anya, if I wanted to give this discount you speak of, what do I do?

[00:50:57] [SPEAKER_03] Okay, if you're 21 and older, head to VayaHemp.com and use the code MSHEET to receive 15% off. And if you're new to Vaya, get a free gift of your choice. That's V-I-I-A, hemp.com and use code MSHEET at checkout.

[00:51:12] [SPEAKER_02] Spell the code.

[00:51:13] [SPEAKER_03] M-S-H-E-E-T. And after you purchase, they're going to ask you, hey, where did you hear about us? Say the murder sheet because then it lets them know that our ads are effective and it really helps us out.

[00:51:26] [SPEAKER_02] Before we wrap up this episode, can we take just a moment to say a few more words about our great new sponsor, Acorns?

[00:51:34] [SPEAKER_03] Yeah, thanks so much to Acorns. Remember, when you support our sponsors, you're supporting us. And our sponsors make it possible for us to do this job. So we really appreciate them.

[00:51:42] [SPEAKER_02] We love our sponsors.

[00:51:43] [SPEAKER_03] Absolutely. Acorns is a terrific investing app. It's the perfect thing for somebody who wants to get started with their personal finance journey. That can seem daunting. It is daunting. I'm so not financially minded. For me, it's always really hard to get started with something like this where you're like, what am I doing? But Acorns sort of takes the guesswork out of that. It gets you started and it will essentially help you take control of your financial future. You can get set up pretty quickly.

[00:52:13] [SPEAKER_03] And it allows you to start automatically saving and investing. That money can help you, your kids, if you have a family, your retirement. And you don't need to be rich. You don't need to be an expert to do this. It's very simple. And you can start with only $5 or whatever change you have. It's not like you need to put in some massive payment. So it's a great fit for people who are starting out, but they want to take the next step and improve themselves financially and make their money work for them more.

[00:52:43] [SPEAKER_03] So if you're interested, head to acorns.com slash msheet or download the Acorns app to start saving and investing for your future today. Paid non-client endorsement. Compensation provides incentive to positively promote Acorns. Tier 1 compensation provided. Investing involved risk. Acorns Advisors LLC and SEC registered investment advisor. View important disclosures at acorns.com slash msheet.