The Delphi Murders: First Person: James Luttrull: Part Two

[00:00:00] Content Warning, this episode contains discussion of murder, including the murder of two children. Working together, a prosecution team of Nicholas McClellan, James Luttrull, and Stacey Dienert 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 Mr. Luttrull. They will be released on the same day, so go back and listen to Part 1 if you've not done so already.

[00:00:30] In this episode, Mr. Luttrull talks about the trial, including his crucial cross-examination of defense firearm and tool mark expert Eric Warren, and what it was like to wait for the verdict. Now that the gag order is lifted, Mr. Luttrull and others are free to speak about their experiences with the Delphi case. 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.

[00:01:00] If you had a direct role in the case and are open to talking with 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. 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.

[00:01:29] We're The Murder Sheet. And this is The Delphi Murders, First Person, James Luttrull, Part 2.

[00:01:37] You know, in this case, as you sort of alluded to, there has been a sizable international, I would say, online following of it for quite some time.

[00:02:33] And certainly a lot of mainstream media scrutiny, things of that nature. What was it like working on a case with all of those considerations and trying to still bring it back down to terra firma? I think treating it as a case. Stacy and I had more experience than Nick, but Nick had the benefit of having defense experience, criminal defense experience. Well, we looked to our experience to guide us.

[00:03:01] We looked to the investigators and to the laboratory work done on the case. And we focused on those things. And we didn't really pay much attention. I didn't pay any attention to the international following, the YouTubes and the podcasts. I really just focused on the case. And I think those inspirational aspects of the case were critical to helping me do that.

[00:03:29] I can't answer for Stacy or Nick, but what the families had every right to expect of us and what the officers who had put so much blood, sweat and tears into this case, what they deserve was us giving our best and not being distracted. I think it helped. There was a downside to being the old guy on the team. And I had to deal with some old guy jokes.

[00:03:56] And I bored people by saying too often, you should have seen me 20 years ago. I was really good then. But I think there is a benefit to not having approached this case with an ego, I guess, is the only way to think about it. That I really wasn't concerned about anything but doing the best I could about the case. And I don't know that 20 years ago I could have done that. So I'm not saying I'm anything special.

[00:04:24] I'm just saying that I was at a time in my career where I was just, I was only there for one reason. And I had the benefit of maybe some life experiences and some prosecutorial experiences that helped with that. And I didn't have that kind of pressure. So I'm not saying I would have been the same way 20 or 30 years ago. But I found it easier than I thought to ignore the noise. What was it like to work with Stacey Deiner?

[00:04:55] Stacey and I had two difficulties. Number one, she didn't understand any of my jokes. She's a very concrete person. And some of my snide sarcasm she took as seriousness when I meant it to be a joke. And that's a reflection of my fault, not hers. And then she can't read any of my writing. My writing has deteriorated from bad to really bad.

[00:05:25] So I would write a note during the trial and then I would rewrite the note as carefully as I could, hand it to her. She would just hand it back saying, I can't read it. Other than that, Stacey was terrific. Both of those problems were my fault, not hers. She's got a really, she and Nick are both great listeners.

[00:05:47] She, I think she listened differently than I did or Nick did to in meetings or in interviews in court. And I think she, she really was very good at that. She's a frank person who, who just very common sense and direct in a nice way. So I think she was, she was good at some of the communication that had to happen before and during the trial.

[00:06:17] We relied on her a lot. She did, she did great with the, the witnesses that she was assigned to. She had all the mental health professionals as well as family and the, kind of the civilians that were a part of the timeline. And I thought she just did a great job with them. And now you had through Nick's the elected prosecutor. So he's a boss. I had been a boss. She had been a boss.

[00:06:47] So you had three bosses sitting there at the trial. And I think we had to have an understanding that there's a different role Stacy and I are playing now than we would have played back when we were heading our offices. Because she had been an elected prosecutor as well.

[00:07:07] So once, once I think we, we learned that, or at least I learned that it was easier to be of assistance to Nick. Um, you've mentioned, um, some of the law enforcement officers who worked on this case and sort of what the investigation, um, meant to them.

[00:07:28] I'm, I'm just curious, you know, what do you make of the investigation that they put together that then you all were able to run with, um, for this trial? Yeah, well, it was, um, they were under incredible pressure and scrutiny.

[00:07:48] Um, it probably was a benefit to, for me not to have been a part of the 2017, 2018, 2019 that come in as more of an outsider. Um, but it, it's harder for me to understand and appreciate the type of pressures, uh, that they were under during all these years. Um, but it, I, they were, they were excellent to work with. Um, you know, everybody is human.

[00:08:17] Uh, we're, we're all, we all make mistakes. Um, there was just a real, uh, emphasis on, okay, let's deal with that and let's move on. How do we, uh, now that we know something that we, uh, didn't know, how do we incorporate that? There was a real absence of egos, um, which was remarkable.

[00:08:44] So, um, I really appreciated being able to work with them. Um, as I said, I knew, I knew Jason, uh, page, uh, from previous work that he did in Grant County, but, um, the other officers and Jason, I was just very impressed by this is, we have work to do. This is a case. We, this is a case like other cases and we're going to do our best.

[00:09:10] And, um, I appreciated that, that focus. And of course I'd long been a fan of the Indiana state police lab, um, laboratory division. It just does great work. And so while I had some difficult subjects that I worked on personally, the, um, firearm and tool mark,

[00:09:32] the DNA, the crime scene, the autopsy, I also was dealing with very experienced witnesses who understood how to communicate to a jury. Um, so that was, that was a benefit that I had, you know, and if I can just add one thing about inspiration and motivation in this case to, to work as hard as you can and do their best.

[00:09:57] Um, so that's, um, it just occurred to me recently that how much we respected this jury and, um, you all were observers of the time that they put in, the attentiveness, the questions, the long, um, journey that they were on with this case. Um, that also is a compelling motivator to now me to do my best.

[00:10:26] These people really deserve the best I can give them, uh, because they seem to be taking it so seriously and they seem to be doing their job. It's all a more reason to do mine. Yeah. Our, our observation with was just from the questions that the jury was paying attention. I remember in one of your, I believe cross examinations, maybe I may be butchering this. So Kevin, correct me if I'm wrong. You started to ask something, I think it was overruled. And then one of the jurors asked it like immediately afterwards.

[00:10:56] And I was like, they're really engaged with, with this. My question though, I want to go to the, um, state's witnesses that you worked with. You mentioned, um, you're working with a lot of forensics professionals. Um, they're experienced, um, in terms of, um, being witnesses, expert witnesses. Um, what was it like to prepare them and go over all of that with them, you know, in the lead up to trial?

[00:11:18] Yeah, it was, it was, um, the most enjoyable part of, of the case, uh, a demanding part of the case, but, uh, um, and, and a challenge. But, um, because they were so committed to doing their best and being true professionals, it was, um, much easier than I would have thought. They were patient with me.

[00:11:46] You know, it was God's little joke on me that my English and political science major that I had to understand, you know, physics and biology and deal with, with all of these difficult subjects that I had avoided, uh, in college. So, uh, they were very patient in going over things. I don't know how many times I said to Melissa Oberg or Stacey Bosonowski or Pat Cicero,

[00:12:15] I know I've asked this question before, but help me understand this. Tell me what this is again. And I hope that that was effective with helping the jury to, uh, absorb and understand information because I wasn't, um, I had to start where maybe some of them were with not knowing much about the topics.

[00:12:34] Uh, I had worked on, on, on firearms and, um, DNA and, um, attended autopsies or, uh, had pathologists testify on numerous occasions, but I still always tried to approach it as a help me understand this. And I think, uh, they were wonderful to work with. Dr. Kaur had, you know, been testifying for a number of years.

[00:13:02] So they were all very dedicated, very professional. It was, it was a challenge, but one that was really, I felt in some ways I had an easier role than Stacey and Nick did. Nick had to handle the cell phones, which boggles my mind still to this day. And, uh, plus a lot of the other, uh, law enforcement matters, uh, a broader area. Mine was more focused.

[00:13:29] Well, doing the crime scene stuff and the autopsy and things of that nature, that certainly would not strike too many people as being an easy, uh, burden. And how did you prepare those witnesses and, uh, deal with all that? Well, I was, again, I was benefited. I benefited from the fact that, that they were all experienced and had all testified many times.

[00:13:55] The challenge was, uh, a lot of information to absorb and trying to understand that we can't give the jury everything. I did, it wasn't my plan. For example, to have firearms testimony take all day. The direct exam tended to go a little slower than what I had planned, but I wanted to make sure, even though it may have felt methodical at times, that it was building a wall that would survive scrutiny

[00:14:25] and would help to prove, help to prove our, our case. And so it was a challenge, uh, and, and to spend a lot more time with the crime scene photos than what I would have wanted to. And that was certainly a difficulty, but it comes with the territory. And as part of the downside of such a wonderful opportunity to be a part of the case is just the price I, I had to pay.

[00:14:53] But the witnesses were very professional, prepared, and I, I hope we told a compelling and, and coherent story. You mentioned, um, the, uh, the forensic firearms, um, taking all, all day. I remember being very impressed with Melissa Oberg's performance on the stand, uh, especially, I mean, in direct, yes, but also in, in a very, very lengthy cross-examination.

[00:15:20] And I guess I'm just, what's it like for you or that that's, that's your witness in a way. And then that's going on and it's kind of dragging on, I guess, just like what's going through your head at that moment. Just, just trying to assess when to intervene and when to stay out of it. She's such a, I found her to be a very outstanding scientist, uh, forensic scientist, and understood her, her role and her job very well.

[00:15:49] She, um, so dedicated to the discipline. And I felt like, um, she was, she was prepared. So just knowing when, uh, when to step in and when not to step in as, as, uh, for example, if you were referring to cross-examination, that was just something you tried to do.

[00:16:11] I, I probably deferred to her experience and, and, uh, understanding of subject matter more than I would have if she were less experienced and less experienced at testifying. I, I, I just thought she did a great job. Um, it's a difficult subject. Uh, Mr. Rosie was very, um, diligent in, in his preparation. And, um, so she had a, she and I both had a big task.

[00:16:39] It was an important part of the, of the evidence. And I thought the defense did, uh, what they could to, uh, to address and to rebut her testimony. I thought she did a great job. Then I want to focus on, um, sort of the portion with Stacey Boschinovsky for a minute. The, the big thing that, you know, comes out is that, um, there's not really usable, uh, offender DNA evidence in the case, which for people following it, I don't think was necessarily too much of a surprise.

[00:17:07] But one thing we hear a lot is, you know, how can there be no DNA in a case? And I guess just as, as a person with such experience, um, prosecuting cases, I was wondering if you can kind of underscore, um, you know, you know, maybe, I guess talk about the CSI effect a little bit or about how people's perceptions may be different from, uh, the reality. Yeah.

[00:17:28] I, I think that, you know, if we're, if we're encouraged to follow the science, the science makes it very clear that, that there is, um, DNA evidence that is, there's overwhelming DNA. And then there's the, there's the rich source of DNA. And then there's the very, uh, poor or bad source of DNA. And that given the facts of this case, there was, I think her, her testimony helped to illustrate that.

[00:17:56] There was any touch DNA that would have been present, would have been overwhelmed by an incredible, um, amount of DNA in the blood. And all of those locations where touch may have occurred were also places where there was extraordinary amount of blood present. And I think getting that across, uh, was the biggest, biggest challenge.

[00:18:20] So our, our, our, our effort was to show there was a thoroughness in the crime scene investigation and the crime scene gathering of evidence and a, and a, um, that they did their job appropriately. And that there was, um, certain because of time, because of the, the creek, because of the sand and dirt, uh, that there were inhibitors present.

[00:18:49] And that, uh, once the evidence got to the DNA lab, that, that Stacy did her job appropriately. And it's not a good fact or a bad fact. It's a fact. It's, it is what it is. But I wanted the jury to be, to believe what I believed, which is that the work was, that was done was done thoroughly and professionally and forensically in a sound forensic way. And, uh, that was, that was the message that we hope to communicate.

[00:19:19] I felt, and maybe this was just my perception, but that you and Rosie were sort of pitted against each other a lot, um, in terms of witness for witness and sort of cross-examining each other's witnesses. And, um, I'm just curious, what was, what was that experience like? Um, you mentioned that he was very thoroughly prepared around, um, ballistics. And I guess if you could, uh, speak more to that. Yeah, I think that was completely coincidental. I don't, I don't know that he knew or I knew that that was going to happen.

[00:19:47] I don't think there was, uh, on, in either side, as far as I know, there was no, like, we'll match lawyers against lawyers. I think it was just the way the experience level and the skills of the various lawyers involved were matched up in that way. And, uh, he was a skilled and experienced lawyer. I knew he had done his homework.

[00:20:09] And, um, it's kind of what I, what I hope and expect from a defense attorney in court is to put us to our test and test the evidence. And I, I think, uh, in regards to the physical forensic evidence that, um, I was involved in and that he was involved in, which was cause and manner of death. Uh, some of the crime scene, the DNA and, and, uh, firearms. It's interesting.

[00:20:37] Yeah, we were, we were, uh, matched up against each other. You know, it was, we're both doing our jobs and, um, I thought he, he brought his skill and experience, um, to the courtroom. We've talked a bit about how you would prepare witnesses for direct examination. I'm curious another, obviously another important part of your job was to cross examine defense witnesses. How would you prepare for that? You know, there's different, different things you do. You try to gather as much information as you can.

[00:21:06] Um, you talk to your own, um, expert in that area, since the areas I was involved in involved expert testimony. In some cases we, we anticipated cross-examination pretty well because in the firearms portion, um, they had done a deposition of the state's witness, uh, Ms. O'Bourke. And I had done a deposition of, uh, Mr. Warren, Dr. Warren.

[00:21:35] So those experiences prior to trial gave you some heads, heads up as to what the issues might be. And just do as much research as you can on the topic. Try not to cross swords with an expert in their area of expertise. Or if you do so, do it with your eyes wide open. You know, there's a statement that you hear some trial lawyers and, and teachers of trial advocacy say that never ask a question unless you know the answer to it.

[00:22:01] Um, I think that's wise advice, but not always practical. So don't ask a question unless you can handle the answer or believe you can handle the answer, even if you don't know what it's going to be. So that's always a challenge. And every trial lawyer is aware of the one question too many. So you try to avoid that question and sometimes you don't know it until you've asked it. And that's, that's unfortunate.

[00:22:27] So trying to, um, have a plan and stick with the plan is something that every, uh, cross examiner tries to do, uh, maintain control as much as possible. That's one of the goals of cross examination. The goal of direct examination, especially with an expert witness is to be transparent and, and to be invisible is what I should say.

[00:22:52] And let the jury see that witness and, and you're just there trying to think through kind of in a stage director way, the questions that this person needs to answer and stay out of it. I just soon did not even know I was there. And then cross examination, the goal is always to maintain some level of control. It's easier said than done.

[00:23:16] And it's interesting you say that about being invisible because I remember during the three day hearing over the summer when you presented the testimony of Pat Cicero, it's, I didn't even realize how good a job you had done because you made yourself so invisible. And it was like later I remember saying to Anya, wait a minute, he did an incredible job. So that's, that's interesting. That's something you were deliberately trying to do because you, that was an amazing job.

[00:23:42] And I also felt in terms of cross examinations, your cross examination of Warren, who was their ballistics expert, really was amazing. And it was crucial because he, of course, was trying to dispute the analysis of Oberg. I'm curious, what was your impression of that particular cross examination?

[00:24:04] Well, that's, that's a situation where I think I'd rather let the observers be the, have the say on that than, than me. Fair enough. There were times where, you know, you're kind of in the moment and you're trying to assess how it's going and, and you really have to rely on other people to, to give you kind of a heads up about it. But I let, I guess I'll let observers decide about that.

[00:24:31] But is there, is it stressful to do a cross like that when you know it is potentially very important? Oh, it certainly is. Stressful for me anyway. There's an art of cross examination and any successful artist knows there are rules to art. It's not just all throw it up on the wall, creativity.

[00:24:55] And if you know the rules, then you can know when to maybe deviate slightly from those rules and take a chance on something. So cross examination has always been a great challenge, but it is stressful. And it's, it's something that as I'm preparing for it, I think I'm going to, and you know, this is great. This is exciting, invigorating. When you're in the middle of it, sometimes you're not so sure.

[00:25:23] And afterwards you're either think you did a great job or you, or you think you did a horrible job. But in the, in the end, the goal is to get the jury to see as clear a picture of what your perception and understanding of the facts are. Or, you know, there's the case you try, there's case you plan to try, the case you try, and the case you wish you had tried. I go through that with every aspect of a trial whenever I'm dealing with it. It's not always exactly what you planned.

[00:25:52] And later you wishing you had done something a little differently. And I don't know if this, this particular aspect of the trial was any different for me. But it was, yeah, it was stressful. The jury questions add a different component to direct and cross-examination. You know, and that's something that happened in the latter part of my career is when Indiana allowed jury questions.

[00:26:17] At first you think this is nothing but a bad idea, but it becomes part of the trial. And I think it has an interesting and had an interesting impact in this case at times. I'm curious, for you, what was the most memorable moment at this trial? There were several. Obviously, very compelling emotional testimony.

[00:26:42] Even when you have a job that you're focused on and you're doing, you still are impacted by a grandmother's testimony, for example, or a sister's testimony. Those are very powerful. Maybe the most memorable, if this makes any sense, is Nick McClellan's final argument.

[00:27:04] Hearing so much of what we hoped the record would show and realized that we did get that into evidence. That evidence did come into the record, and it came in in largely compelling ways. And for him to put it all together in his final argument, pretty complex factual scenario. The timeline that we had discovered and presented to the jury.

[00:27:35] That was really a moment where I had a satisfaction that what we had hoped to do, we had done. And proud that Nick delivered it, I thought so well and so compellingly. We've talked about your thoughts on Prosecutor McClellan and Ms. Diener. I'm curious if you had any observations you'd like to share about Judge Goal and the defense team.

[00:28:04] Judge Goal had a difficult job to do in the case. I think she brought a lot of experience as a judge to a difficult case. She had been involved in several high-profile cases, which I think served her well. So those are my observations. She had a difficult job to do as an experienced and dedicated judge. I think she maintained control of the case and the trial,

[00:28:34] and I thought the case handle was very orderly, which is what a judge is supposed to do. Defense skilled and experienced and obviously smart. They definitely saw this case very differently than what the prosecution did. At least the case that they presented and the arguments they made

[00:28:59] and the evidence that they sought to introduce was very different than the case that the prosecution team had. The way we analyzed the facts is probably all I can say at this time. What was it like when the final arguments were done and then it was time to wait for the verdict? What's that process like for you and what was it like in this case?

[00:29:26] That's a very dramatic part of the trial. I'm also a fan of Anatomy of a Murder. I don't know if you're familiar with that film, but the novel is great by Robert Traver. I have several Robert Traver books. He's amazing. People know his story about being a prosecutor in Marquette County, Michigan, and then eventually becoming on the Michigan Supreme Court.

[00:29:52] He was an excellent trial lawyer, but he was an even better fly fisherman and wrote this really insightful book and very great read. And then I thought it was made into a great movie. Jimmy Stewart and George C. Scott. I mean, how can you go wrong? But there's that scene where they're just, you know, Jimmy Stewart is playing the piano

[00:30:18] and they're just in this law office waiting for the verdict and there's that tension that it seems to capture. I thought that's the most realistic picture. And I probably transpose or put in a lot of my emotions into that movie when I watch that part of it. So you're on pins and needles and then you realize you may and likely are in for a long wait. So you have to pace yourself.

[00:30:49] Adrenaline is leaving your body now that your work is done. And so it's a really odd time and it's a difficult experience. You just don't know. Everything that we viewed about the case was that it would not likely be a quick verdict and that a long deliberation, which is often thought to be a signal and advantage to the defense,

[00:31:18] was not necessarily the case. So we were patient. But it was an odd time. And I'd never had – I'd had some long jury deliberations, but I'd never had something go this many days. And so that was an adjustment. It was a surreal experience. I don't know if I answered your question or not, but – You did. And I have to say we love Anatomy of Murder. We love Robert Traver's books.

[00:31:44] And Anatomy of Murder is actually the book we're reading in our program's book club this month. Oh, that's great. So perfect timing. And there's a book, Small Town DA, that I happened to find in a used bookstore that has all these little short stories about his experiences. And it's just such a great writer. Yeah, he's very, very great. Yeah, he's a great storyteller.

[00:32:11] You were living this, so I don't know if you paid any attention to any of the media coverage. If you did, do you think the media covered this trial well? I really don't – I'm not a very good position to say so because I really didn't follow. You know, you'd hear bits and pieces, but just like my critique of some of the media is you're just getting – you don't know the context.

[00:32:39] And sometimes I would hear a media story and realize – I have to tell myself, I don't know the context. I don't know what they may have said in an earlier broadcast or what they may be saying in the next broadcast. So I didn't want to be overly critical or overly sympathetic or positive about anything because they didn't have the time to really take it all in.

[00:33:07] So it would have been a very challenging case, I think, to report. So I'm not in a good position to give an opinion. Talk me through about hearing that a verdict came out and sort of what that experience was like. It'd be interesting to be hooked up to a blood pressure cuff at the time that, you know, you get that news. But there's just a quickening and a nervousness that kicks in.

[00:33:34] The jury deliberation had been long enough that any outcome, you know, was plausible. Obviously, there was the fear of a hung jury after that many days, but I don't think it was something that was a given, but it was certainly something that we were afraid of. So when we heard a verdict coming, you just realized it could be either good news or bad news. So that was a nervous time.

[00:34:04] And I don't know how many times, I guess 200 times or so I've been through that. Never gotten used to it. Never feel like I know what's getting ready to happen. You watch the jury when they do file in and you just never know. What did it feel like to hear that it was guilty on four counts?

[00:34:28] Yeah, that was a big affirmation and a big relief. Grateful. I felt very, very good about the evidence that we presented. I feel like those three areas that we wanted to focus on, Bridge Guy's the murderer and Richard Allen's Bridge Guy, that's his bullet at the crime scene between the two girls.

[00:34:57] And his confessions are reliable and truthful. Those were the three things we wanted every bit of evidence to focus on. And I felt like it came in in a convincing way. Just never know about the jury. They seem to be very attentive. And there seemed to be a cohesion with the jury that doesn't always exist. They seem to be patient and appreciative of each other.

[00:35:28] You don't know if that's the case, but as you watch them just body language, it seemed to be the case. And so I took that to be a good sign. You've talked throughout our conversation with obvious affection towards people like Prosecutor McClelland, Stacey Deener, Steve Mullen, Jerry Holman. What do all of these people mean to you now that you've been through this incredible experience together?

[00:35:53] Yeah, I think I look at them as have a unique vantage point of being an outsider and also those 38 years I went on and on about of experience. And to care so much about justice in the community.

[00:36:15] On final argument, I've told this, I've used this illustration in Grant County before that Grant County Courthouse used to have a dome on it. And on the dome was a statue of Lady Justice. The dome burned and they've never replaced it. And so we're without the dome or the statue. But you, ladies and gentlemen, are ladies and men of justice. And you can speak for your community.

[00:36:42] And I just felt like there was such a I just respect the commitment that I saw from each of those people. There's been something said about Kathy Shank. And I was very glad that she was really a necessary witness to explain the turn in the investigation and the focus of the investigation on Richard Allen.

[00:37:09] But just the kind way that she had food for people when they showed up for meetings. She just showed up for a work day. And Nick's staff were just great. But those officers that you mentioned, their dedication, it was just a privilege to be a part of it.

[00:37:28] And to someone who knows how important this is to a community, to have trust in the work that law enforcement is doing is so critical to a healthy community. So it was an honor to be a part of it. Now that it's over, at least the trial's over, what do the memories of Libby and Abby mean to you?

[00:37:54] And what do their families, surviving loved ones, mean to you now that you've been through this experience? Well, I had high expectations for the kind of gravitas and compelling moving victim impact statements before we got to the sentencing. But even with those high expectations of what I expected from those individuals, having learned a little bit about them, they went over and beyond that.

[00:38:22] And for me, grateful to have had a little bit of a part of getting to that place where they could have that opportunity to speak and to say it, say what they said with such grace and such, even through such pain and their demand for justice. It was very moving and grateful to be a part of it.

[00:38:51] What are the memories of the girls? Yeah, I think of the girls. I think of those individuals, sister, mother, father, grandfathers, grandmothers, other relatives. I think of them, I see them through those people.

[00:39:10] I think those girls would be very proud of the way their families were so steadfast and so determined and so patient and yet desiring for justice.

[00:39:25] It's such a shame that there have not been high school graduations and proms and college experiences and weddings or other experiences that these families should have had, these girls should have had. So that's obviously very sobering. Still hard to understand.

[00:39:50] And we'll never fully appreciate why these things happen. Such a loss. Such a senseless loss. I'm curious, what's next for you? Are you going back into your well-deserved retirement or you have other cases you might be willing to come back for? Well, I think my name's on a list with the Indiana Prosecutor Attorney's Counsel for Senior Prosecutor Options.

[00:40:18] I told myself and my wife that I wouldn't put my name on that list unless I knew I could say no when appropriate. So I'll see if anything comes along there that I feel like I can be the right person to handle occasionally. We're blessed with 12 grandchildren who are on two different continents. Some, even the ones in North America, some of them are far away.

[00:40:47] So we want to visit and see them. There's still some cathedrals in the UK and Europe that we haven't seen yet. And so there's some traveling that we want to do and some things to pursue. You know, one of the things I did, you'll be interested to know in my six-month retirement is I took a short story writing class. So I don't know if that's going to be a part of my future or not.

[00:41:15] I was literally about to say, you have so many great stories. And it's evident we've just barely, barely scratched the surface. Is there any possibility of you writing your memoirs or even fictional stories? Small Town DA2. Oh, man. There's such a discipline and effort required with writing. And I know some people, a couple of people are good writers and one, it just pours out of them.

[00:41:45] And the other one is just like fits and it's just agony to do it. But then they have a great product in both cases after they're done. And I don't know how you guys, whether it comes easy or not for you, but I don't know. I would like to tell, I love good storytellers. I have been blessed with a lot of good stories. Maybe that'll happen. I selfishly hope it does because I would enjoy reading that. Wrap up question.

[00:42:14] So the question we always ask at the end, this is such a huge, complicated case. Are there things you wanted to talk about that we didn't ask you about? Or are there things people should know that we haven't discussed with you today? Oh, I think we covered a lot. You know, and there's certain prudent judgment that needs to take place in terms of what, in my specific role as a deputy prosecutor and officer of the court,

[00:42:43] there's so many limitations on what is appropriate to share. And so I think we've covered pretty much everything. Shout out to a few people that I didn't mention that really aren't, not a part of Delphi, but a part of my experience and people who have helped me in my career is,

[00:43:09] I had two chief deputies while I was prosecutor, Bill Heck and Lisa Glancy. And I just want to thank them for their dedication, their work that helped me be prosecutor I am. And one of the rewards of going back to your hometown and being a prosecutor, although there's some complications, obviously, is to get to work with people you knew as a kid.

[00:43:34] And one of my childhood friends, one of my closest friends is a law enforcement officer named J.K. And he is deputy or chief deputy now at the Grant County Sheriff's Department, had been captain of detectives for many years and marrying police. And then when he retired from that, I was able to hire him as an investigator for the prosecutor's office. And he's just a remarkable public servant and dedicated law enforcement officer.

[00:44:04] And when I look at any of the officers I had a pleasure to work with in Carroll County, I kind of use him as a standard to compare. And fortunately, many of them were, if not up to his standard, were close to what he's done. So I just want to thank those people who have helped me be the prosecutor that I am.

[00:44:31] Not long after we recorded this interview, Mr. Luttrell got back in touch with us. He actually sent us an email sharing a few more thoughts he had about the case. We thought what he had to say was worth sharing with you all. So we got him on the phone for kind of a last minute addendum to our interview. Kevin and Anya, I want to come back to a topic we touched on earlier.

[00:44:57] People often ask, would ask me, they ask police and prosecutors, how do you do this job? Dealing with the very worst of what people do to other people. You know, I've been asked this question in one form or another a bunch of times. And certainly in the Delphi murders case, that was a very common question. And it's a good question. The blunt answer is that it just has to be done. So you do it.

[00:45:25] But how you do it really makes a difference, not just in your success as a communicator in court, but also to avoid the subject matter destroying you. And there's three things I thought about how I tried to do it. And I think all of us working on this case exhibited the same three categories. You go about, first, you do it with professionalism.

[00:45:51] Second, you do the job from within a team or really, in this case, more accurately, within a community. And finally, you seek to do it in a way that honors the victims, Abby and Libby. By professionalism, I mean communicating this horrific story competently, but also respectfully. I felt like our CSIs did that.

[00:46:16] They had a job to do and they needed to do it thoroughly and correctly, but also with respect to the victims. A great example of this was our bloodstain pattern expert, Major Pat Cicero. He was clear and knowledgeable and scientific in his descriptions, very gruesome and disturbing things and injuries. But he was also a compassionate contender at the same time. And I think that matters.

[00:46:44] It matters not just for the court and for the jury, for observers, but it matters to Pat. It matters to me, certainly, and helps you get through these difficult things. And you do it within, as I said, a community. When I consider the remarkable community of those people who worked on the Abby Libby case,

[00:47:10] I'm reminded of one of my favorite writers, Wendell Berry, a Kentucky native son who's an environmentalist, novelist, and essayist, farmer. He has these Fort Williams stories, this fictional town in Kentucky. And one of his great characters is Burley Colter. Burley says in one of the stories, The way we are, we are members of each other, all of us, everything.

[00:47:40] The difference ain't in who is a member and who is not, but in who knows it and who don't. Membership in a community is a big theme in Barry's stories. And I thought of that membership when I thought about the team and the community that worked on this case. They really developed a lovely membership in the Delphi murders investigation among those who investigated and those who supported the investigators.

[00:48:07] Some of us were aware of it and some of us weren't. But it was a unique membership. It was an honor to participate in the case. I referenced that earlier in our conversation about it being an honor. And to many people, when I talk about accepting the responsibility of joining this team. But more importantly than the honor it was to be in this community, I believe Nick and Stacey and I sought to honor Abigail and Liberty.

[00:48:37] The novelist Marilynne Robinson, main character in Gilead, says near the end of the story, and he's speaking about being a servant in a small town community. He says, The theologians talk about a prevenient grace that precedes grace itself and allows us to accept it. I think there must also be a prevenient courage that allows us to be brave. That is to acknowledge that there is more beauty than our eyes can bear.

[00:49:07] That precious things have been put into our hands. To do nothing to honor them. It's to do great for them. And therefore, this courage allows us, as the old man said, to make ourselves useful. To allow us to be generous. Which is another way of saying exactly the same thing. So that quote comes near the end of the novel Gilead. And I thought about that. That line, precious things have been put into our hands.

[00:49:35] And to do nothing to honor them is to do great harm. I thought about that line frequently when I worked as a prosecutor, when I worked at DCS. And certainly on this case. This case allowed me a front row seat to see generosity and courage in the honoring of precious things. A local community and investigative team that had the courage and wisdom to recognize the precious things that can put into our hands.

[00:50:02] To do nothing to honor them is to do great harm. The precious things placed in our hands were first and foremost Abigail Williams and Liberty Chairman. And the necessity of seeking justice for them. But secondarily, a town's sense of community and neighborliness in it. And a town's trust in the justice system. And all that that means. Those were the precious things that needed to be affirmed and defended.

[00:50:32] And ultimately, they were. And it was really an honor to be asked to be a part of it. 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.

[00:50:58] If you have actionable information about an unsolved crime, please report it to the appropriate authorities. If you're interested in joining our Patreon, that's available at www.patreon dot com slash murdersheet. If you want to tip us a bit of money for records requests, you can do so at www.buymeacoffee dot com slash murdersheet.

[00:51:27] We very much appreciate any support. Special thanks to Kevin Tyler Greenlee, who composed the music for The Murder Sheet. And who you can find on the web at kevintg dot com. 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.

[00:51:54] 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. 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. 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.

[00:52:23] 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. 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.

[00:52:51] 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. Anya, if I wanted to give this discount you speak of, what do I do? Okay, if you're 21 and older, head to viahemp.com and use the code MSHEAT 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 MSHEAT at checkout. Spell the code. M-S-H-E-E-T.

[00:53:21] 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. Before we wrap up this episode, can we take just a moment to say a few more words about our great new sponsor, Acorns? 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. We love our sponsors. Absolutely.

[00:53:49] 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.

[00:54:19] 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.

[00:54:48] 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 involves risk. Acorns Advisors LLC and SEC Registered Investment Advisor. You important disclosures at acorns.com slash msheet. Can we talk a little bit before we go about Quince, a great new sponsor for us?

[00:55:15] 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? 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.

[00:55:44] 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. You've gotten a lot of compliments when you go out wearing these sweaters. I think I have. Yeah. And deservedly so. 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.

[00:56:14] 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 got your cool jacket. 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. I do wash my clothes. I know you wash your clothes, but I mean – You're filthy. You just made me sound awful. So no, I wash my clothes. But you don't really – I launder them.

[00:56:44] 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. Thank you. So great products, incredible prices. Absolutely. Quince.com. 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 quince.com slash msheet. So that's quince. So. Thank you.