The Delphi Murders: The Bridge Guy Video and the Motion to Reconsider

[00:00:00] The search for truth never ends. Introducing June's Journey, a hidden object mobile game with a captivating story. Connect with friends, explore the roaring 20s and enjoy thrilling activities and challenges while supporting environmental causes. After seven years, the adventure continues with our immersive travels feature. Explore distant cultures and engage in exciting experiences. There's always something new to discover. Are you ready? Download June's Journey now on Android or iOS.

[00:00:30] You deserve little luxuries. Items and experiences that make your day special that lighten your mood. Well, if you want luxury that won't break the bank, you ought to check out our wonderful sponsor, Quince. Do not miss out. Quince is a brand that's providing luxury products for all of us ordinary people. Silkshirts and dresses that are not only quality made, but also washable. 14 karat gold jewelry for when you want something sparkly. Sweaters of Mongolian cashmere and organic cotton.

[00:00:57] Those are the kind of premium products that Quince offers at a great price. All Quince items are 50% to 80% less costly than those of their competitors. Plus, Murder Sheet listeners are going to get a great deal on shipping and returns. But Quince is able to do all of this by cutting out the middleman. The savings pass on to you. And just remember, by supporting our sponsors, you're really supporting us.

[00:01:20] We recently gifted ourselves some luxurious pieces from Quince. I got their suede bomber jacket and I love it. And whenever I wear it out, I get lots of compliments, which, of course, I enjoy. It is also highly functional and comfortable. And I've really appreciated it during this cold Indiana winter. Give yourself the luxury you deserve of Quince. Go to Quince.com slash msheet for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns.

[00:01:49] That's Q-U-I-N-C-E dot com slash msheet to get free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com slash msheet. Content warning. This episode contains discussion of the brutal murder of two girls. So today on The Murder Sheet, we're going to talk about stuff that's happening in the Delphi case. So we move on. Let's do it. My name is Anya Kane. I'm a journalist. And I'm Kevin Greenlee. I'm an attorney.

[00:02:19] 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, the Bridge Guy video and the motion to reconsider.

[00:03:18] Well, the motion to reconsider actually came first. But why don't we talk about the Bridge Guy video first instead? Because I think that's what's on top of everyone's mind today. Yes. So what's happening?

[00:03:33] Well, last night there was news that the, I think, 43 second video that Liberty German took on her phone capturing the beginning of her and Abigail Williams' abduction by Richard Allen came out on the Internet.

[00:03:52] And so, you know, what this, this is kind of the famous video that she captured on her phone capturing the image of her killer and, you know, capturing his voicing guys down the hill. It's that video for people who are wondering. Yeah, it shows Richard Allen kidnapping the two girls just prior to him committing murder. Mm-hmm.

[00:04:18] So it's, you know, people are wondering, well, has this, I mean, people are asking, like, has this video ever been talked about before? Yes, it's that video. It was shown at trial. What this appears to be is the stabilized version. There are two versions that were shown at trial. One was more raw. The camera was spinning. It was a bit harder to make out. Then they were able to go through a software and stabilize it. So that is the one that seemingly has come out. Yeah. And one of the many things that's interesting about this is we don't know how it came out.

[00:04:48] Some of the people who are close to the defense team, like a well-known shill and also this appellate attorney, Kara Weineke, have indicated that this was somehow released by the defense team. Ms. Weineke seems to insist that this is the raw video from the phone, the unstabilized version. Nope. So Ms. Weineke, as you may or may not know, also believes we never landed on the moon.

[00:05:17] So I'm not sure how much credibility we should give to that. She's wrong. It's not the stabilized version. It is the stabilized version. It's not the raw version. Yeah. My recollection of the raw version is that it was, as Anya indicated, a much more unstable image. It was like upside down at one point. It was spinning around. I mean, they cleaned it up. I mean, so people could see it. Yeah. So I don't know why she's saying that.

[00:05:46] I don't know why the defense would release this with no warning. Well, let's talk about that. Well, first, earlier in the day, Judge Gull had indicated that the public exhibits would indeed be released to the public. She set out the process for how that would occur. Basically, they would be put on some sort of a thumb drive that would be sold to people for $25.

[00:06:13] And she said attorneys would be contacted when that was ready to occur. And obviously, this is not what she anticipated. It showed up on a website that is apparently affiliated with Richard Allen's defense team if Ms. Weineke and others are to be believed. Yeah. Yeah.

[00:06:38] So this is something where we don't – people have asked us, is this a leak? Is this improper? Is this against the rules? We don't know. I mean, it's a weird situation. That's all I'm saying. It's odd. I don't know if we can say it's against any sort of rule. We just don't know. I mean, it's just a weird thing to do, frankly. I want to talk a little bit about this website.

[00:07:04] It is not a new website because the URL for it has been going around on Twitter since at least November. And I wanted to read something to you from another page of the website. Quote, enter your email below to receive updates on our ongoing efforts and important announcements related to Richard Allen's case.

[00:07:30] When the time comes, there will be many ways to support, all of which will make a difference in the fight for justice. End quote. That language there makes me feel that at some point, whoever runs this website intends to solicit donations. And I don't know if this video being placed on the website is part of that ultimate effort.

[00:07:56] I will note an obvious point that perhaps does not get noted often enough is that earlier in this case, Richard Allen's defense team, even though they were being funded by the taxpayers of Carroll County, Indiana, they, for some reason, solicited funds from the public. And the public responded, sending them something to the tune of $40,000.

[00:08:21] Since that time, there has been no accounting for what was done with that $40,000 that was received from the public. So I would hope that no one would be silly enough to send more money to sites affiliated with the defense, at least until such time as we get an accounting for what happened to that $40,000. Yeah. What do you think happened to that $40,000? That whole thing was so bizarre. Yes. Yes.

[00:08:49] It was a fundraiser that they were trying to raise funds for something that was already being funded by the government. Yeah. And by the taxpayers. $40,000 was raised. No one has explained what happened to it. Well, it was also a situation where it turned out later, you know, they're saying, well, Judge Gull isn't giving us funds for experts. Boo hoo. And then it turned out. That was a lie. They were just they were filing things wrong and they weren't like doing invoices properly.

[00:09:16] And it was like, no, you're just bad at your job. So where's the money? The fact that they're filing things wrong, you know, reminds me, Miss Wienicke said this was the raw version when it was obviously the stabilized version. That makes me think that this was released by the defense because they're the gang that can't shoot straight. No matter what they do, they find a way to do it incorrectly. It really is. It's almost impressive at this point.

[00:09:43] And also, can I just say, when I look at this website, you know, it's trying to be all sleek and whatnot. I would say the thing that comes to mind for me is the Luigi Mangione case. And that, of course, is the man accused of killing the UnitedHealthcare CEO. Right. Yeah. And he's he's he's facing trial.

[00:10:04] And, you know, in that case, it sort of, in my view, made sense to set up some kind of website because he's received such an outpouring of support from the public for his defense team. Kind of having a way to streamline that and make it more organized makes sense. In this case, I think if these guys are trying to use the Luigi Mangione playbook, they've got another thing coming.

[00:10:25] The reason that Luigi Mangione became popular with the general public is because that whether or not people agree with, you know, what he's alleged to have done. A lot of people have very legitimate grievances with the health care system in the United States. That's not the case here. I don't think anyone has murderous grievances with teenage girls. If they're trying to make Richard Allen some sort of cause celebrity, I just think that's that's misguided.

[00:10:53] I mean, he's he's just he's a creepy dude who murdered some kids. I mean, I don't really think that's something a lot of people will want to get behind in the same way. I'm just saying that I think the whole thing is so bizarre. What? We don't we don't have a confirmed for sure that the defense is behind this. I don't know why they would lie. I don't want I don't know why their close associates online would lie about that. Can I break in here as we were Lily, as we are sitting here recording.

[00:11:22] I got a little notification that I had an email and the email was from Stacey Ulliana, who is one of the appellate attorneys. I sent her a request for comment earlier this morning, basically saying, hey, people like Weineke and Mata are suggesting this came out from the defense attorneys. Yeah. Do they mean appellate defense? Do they mean criminal defense? What do you know? No.

[00:11:49] And I'm going to read you the relevant part. Quote. We by we she means herself and Mark Lehman, who are the two appellate attorneys. We also are not associated with any website or podcaster. We had nothing to do with the release of the video, although I cannot speak for the trial attorneys. I doubt they were involved either. You may be getting incorrect information. End quote.

[00:12:15] If that's the case, people like the well-known Shill and Miss Weineke may be just completely off base. Well, I mean, it makes sense for the appellate team not to be involved at all with this because, I mean, there are questions that they're going to be looking at and what they're going to be working on, you know, toiling on for probably a very long time are questions of the law. Did Richard Allen get a fair trial? Were there any issues at trial that came up that deprived him of a fair trial?

[00:12:41] Were there any issues that, you know, the higher courts need to look at and sort out? I mean, that's their job. So, you know, they're not the type that would be going out and posting weird stuff like this, frankly, because it's just more academic.

[00:13:01] It's a little bit less, I don't know what the, you know, the trial stuff is where you kind of get into, like, the facts and things like that and, you know, the mystery of what's going on. But, I mean, I don't know. Well, I appreciate her responding. So, I don't know what to think. I take her at her words that she and Mr. Lehman had nothing to do with this. I would imagine. And she doesn't seem to have firsthand information about the defense attorneys, but she doubts it. I don't know why they would release it.

[00:13:30] I don't know why either. That's the only thing that keeps me from being entirely like the defense definitely did this because it's not good for their client. It's very bad in my mind. This video is bad for Richard Allen.

[00:13:45] I mean, it's very bad not only for Richard Allen, but also for the defense's allies in the social media world, the shills, if you will, because the release of this video has really shown how much those shills were lying about the contents of the video. Do you want to elaborate on that? Yeah, let's. This is something where, you know, we were at trial.

[00:14:14] They showed this video a few times. We're understanding that people make mistakes, right? But there was it just seems weird when people are making mistakes consistently in the same direction because that doesn't really, you know. We described the video at the time accurately. These people who I refer to as shills did not. They said, oh, the so-called bridge guy is so far in the background. You can barely even see him.

[00:14:43] There's no way this person could have crossed the bridge in time to catch up with Abby and so forth. Well, also, they were saying they were saying some people, I believe, were saying you can't see bridge guy at all. He's not in the video. And now anybody who's seen the video knows knows otherwise and knows that they have been lied to by these shills. And so releasing the video first, it shows, OK, these people who said these things were lying. No, no gray area there. And I'm just begging.

[00:15:12] And that would make people think, oh, if these people lied about the contents of a video that was displayed in front of them on a large screen, what else are they lying about? What else are they not telling us about the case? And when it comes to the shills and stuff, I can tell you they're lying about a lot. And there's a lot they're not telling you about the case. But go on. It's so funny to see some of the head explosions around this where people are saying, wait, but my favorite law tuber said there was no bridge guy.

[00:15:42] What? And seeing people trying to spin to make sense of that. It's like sometimes people just lie because that's just what they want to do. It's not really that deep. I mean, don't listen to people who are just constantly telling you what you want to hear. I don't know what to say. It's really, I mean, honestly, and if you're ever in the unfortunate situation where you like a creator and you're enjoying them and whatnot, but then stuff like this happens, look at how they react to it.

[00:16:12] I mean, if they're saying, hey, guys, I'm really sorry I messed up, then OK, maybe maybe it was a mistake. If they're if they're just doubling down on the next talking points, which we'll talk about in a minute, then I would say buyer beware. I mean, you don't. That's not really a trustworthy person. That's not really a trustworthy response. I think I think there's been a lot of dishonesty. I think there's a lot of dishonest coverage at trial. I'm.

[00:16:36] You know, I remember some of this stuff we were putting out there and people are like, oh, did you really hear that? Or did you really see that? Because all these other people are saying something different. It's like, no, we really that we are going to tell you what we saw. We're not going to like whatever whatever was up there. We we tried to describe it to the best of our ability. And I'm pretty sure we were. We were very, very accurate. Stay hydrated. Stay healthy. When you podcast as much as we do, you learn that firsthand.

[00:17:05] We drink lots of water so we don't sound terrible and alienate all of you good people. It's also nice to feel hydrated and refreshed. The thing is, though, I've always encouraged Kevin to drink more water. But he's always the guy that wants bottled water because he doesn't like the taste of tap water. Wow. So fancy. Turns out, though, Kevin's pickiness may be right for a change. Just this once. Research by the Environmental Working Group finds that many homes in America can have harmful contaminants in their tap water.

[00:17:35] That's where AquaTrue comes in. This four stage reverse osmosis water purification system will make your life so much easier and healthier and also help you save a lot of money. AquaTrue removes 15 times more contaminants than ordinary pitcher filters. They've got all kinds of water purifiers to fit your needs. Countertop purifiers that don't require a plumber. High capacity under the sink options. Mineral boosting purifiers. One that connects to Wi-Fi.

[00:18:05] That's the one we have now. I love it. It's easy to use. Plus, it's got both of us drinking more water. Murder Sheet listeners get a great deal. AquaTrue comes with a 30-day money-back guarantee and even makes a great gift. Today, my listeners receive 20% off any AquaTrue purifier. Just go to AquaTrue.com. That's A-Q-U-A-T-R-U.com and enter code MSHEET at checkout.

[00:18:30] That's 20% off any AquaTrue water purifier when you go to AquaTrue.com and use promo code MSHEET. Life comes at you fast. Whether you're busy working, taking care of your family, or perhaps assembling a crack team to heist of cereal factory, we all need an uncomplicated way to relax, recharge, or stay focused. That's why we love VIA. VIA creates premium hemp products.

[00:18:57] Their topicals, drops, vapes, and gummies are each crafted to elicit a specific mood or experience. If THC is your thing, they've got that at all levels, even allowing for microdosing. They also have THC-free options. We love their CBD gummies. If you haven't tried VIA yet, you're missing out. You've got to give them a try to enhance your every day and night. Their CBD Flow State gummies have really helped us out during this rather busy season of our lives.

[00:19:27] I will break out the Flow State and toss Anya a gummy and have one myself. Flow State is all about focus, helping you to get work done, and we feel it really helps us as we juggle podcast production and book writing. Maybe you're like us and you love those CBD Flow State gummies. But if you're not sure and you don't know where to start, try VIA's quick product finder quiz. They'll send you personalized recommendations on what to try.

[00:19:51] If you're over 21, treat yourself to 15% off and get a free gift with your first order using our exclusive code MSheet at Viahemp.com. Plus, enjoy free shipping and orders over $100. That's V-I-I-A-H-E-M-P dot com. So, I don't – I, like, you know –

[00:20:15] Our inbox is full of people this morning telling us – telling us, oh, we listen to a lot of stuff. You guys gave by far the most accurate description. Well, that was very nice of them. It's like – I'm not trying to be, like, brag or be like, oh, we're the best. It's just, like, we respect our audience, and I don't think a lot of these people do. To quote Kendrick Lamar, the audience is not dumb, okay?

[00:20:37] People are going to figure it out if you're just BSing them constantly, and I, you know, I respect that you guys are taking the time to listen to us. It would be rude and horrible of us to be, like, trying to spin you on something, especially something like that where it's concrete facts.

[00:20:54] And also, I and certainly Anya, as we cover this trial and the whole case, I think we have operated largely on the assumption that eventually as much of the evidence as possible would be released to the public in one form or another. I didn't imagine it would be leaked on some bizarre website, but I imagined it would have come out at one time or another.

[00:21:21] And so if you know something is going to come out and you know that people will be able to compare the release of that exhibit or that document to what you said about it, then that should inspire you to say, oh, everything I say is going to be a test of my credibility. So I want to be as accurate as possible every step of the way. That's what I don't understand about these people, but here's my thinking. I think a lot of them have cultivated extremely stupid audiences. I'm just – I'm going to be blunt here.

[00:21:50] I think they've cultivated extremely stupid audiences who basically worship them and don't really care if they have credibility or not because they're just locked in. I think people – I mean, we – I think our audience is incredibly bright, but I also know that because whenever we mess up or we say the wrong thing or we get a scientific thing wrong or we get a mental health thing wrong, people are on us. They're saying, no, you messed up. Fix it. And we say, okay, sure.

[00:22:14] So people hold – you want to have an audience and you want to have people who you're engaging with who are holding you accountable and ensuring that you're doing the right thing because we are far from perfect. Okay? We are – we have messed up. We will continue to mess up. People are like, why am I listening then? Like, and that's – and that's – you know, we're human beings, but we try to fix it or work with it if we can if there's a situation where we do mess up.

[00:22:42] I think a lot of these people, you know, it's this kind of like cult-like atmosphere. You know, it's one side versus the other side, so we're just going to stick with them even if we kind of are getting the sense that we're being lied to. And I think that's really unfortunate. And I, again, want to stress that this – the release of this video was not done in the orderly way that the court had described just a few hours earlier.

[00:23:06] I feel that the way it was done showed a real lack of concern and care and empathy for the families. They had no warning of this. And then all of a sudden it was all over social media, all over the news, and that seems really unkind. I want to ask you in your gut – and we're speculating here – put the speculation label over this portion of the episode.

[00:23:33] Do you think this was the original trial defense team or do you think this was their sort of inner circle of people who are like writing filings for them but not really abiding by the gag order and just kind of running around and that kind of like – there's like levels almost. There's different circles within this group. I'll be very honest with you. I don't know.

[00:23:59] And the reason is is because ordinarily the way you evaluate whether or not someone did a particular thing is you ask yourself, is this a rational thing for an intelligent person to have done? And for the trial defense team to deliberately release damaging evidence against their convicted client, that doesn't seem rational. It doesn't seem to be any sense to it at all.

[00:24:23] But I can go back through this case and give you many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many instances where they did things that were irrational, that did not help their client. So my answer is I don't know. I think it's plausible. What do you think? I think it's plausible they did. I also think it's plausible that there's some sort of half measure where like they're obsessive fans are texting them and saying, hey, we should do this. And they're like, yeah, but like they're not really directly involved.

[00:24:53] So I don't I don't know. The whole thing's bizarre. If it was done by some of their obsessive fans, I would I would be curious. How did those obsessive fans get a hold of the video? Yeah. And have they had access to protected materials for a long time? And obviously, we know that there was a leak of crime scene photos that was ultimately traced back to an incident that occurred in Baldwin's office. Oh, man.

[00:25:20] Do you think Mitch Westerman did another Mission Impossible style break in to get stuff from Baldwin's office? Is that what we think happened? I mean, geez. I do find it interesting. I don't know if this is indicates that it was done by the defense team or people close to them.

[00:25:36] But when I've taken a look at some of the social media coverage of this by people who I would say are in the pocket of the defense team who are who are shills for them, I see a lot of very similar talking points. Yeah, to the point where it's inorganic. Yeah. And when you have a bunch of people making the same not too convincing points, you think, well, this was planned. Oh, yeah. It looks I mean, it looks planned. I think this was the defense. I do.

[00:26:04] Because, again, how did they get the video? And then, you know, that whole aspect of it. Because that's that's totally par for the course. And and here's here's what I'm going to say about the talking points. I think, you know, the reason why we say this is damaging for Richard Allen is because the video shows, despite what people are saying, no indication that the girls saw anyone else there.

[00:26:29] There's no there's no glimpse or mention or audio of a second person lurking around or a group of Odinus hiding behind the trees or anything like that. What it looks like is two kids being followed by some creepy lumbering dude across a bridge. That's what it looks like. So that that points to the state's case. That doesn't you know, there's no oh, my gosh, there's someone over here. There's nothing there's nothing like that. There's no indication.

[00:26:56] And then when you also when you when you look at it, you know, the girls sound nervous. There's no indication they know the guy. They're not saying, oh, hey, it's this guy. They're just at one point. It seems like Abby is asking if he's still behind her. So they're obviously scared of this stranger who is following them. And one thing that's also interesting is that this captures the, you know, the guys down the hill statement.

[00:27:22] This is not enough audio for experts to analyze and do any sort of voice match. But we're no experts, so we can do it. Yeah, I don't care. I listened to this guy, you know, whining and crying throughout, you know, dozens of phone calls in trial. And it sounds exactly like Bridge Guy. The voice of Bridge Guy is the voice of Richard Allen. Richard Allen is Bridge Guy. Richard Allen abducted and murdered Liberty, Liberty German and Abigail Williams. Yeah.

[00:27:51] So, I mean, I don't know. It's I think it's bad for them. Here are the talking points. And I think these are hilarious. Kevin, can I just say the talking points because they are they are talking points of weakness. They are not talking points of strength because they are so narrow and so subjective that it's like, you know, these people kind of were like, oh, OK, I guess we could say this. So it was it was frankly stupid to release this one first. If you're just looking at this purely strategically, there were probably other exhibits that they could have put out. That would have been a better start for them.

[00:28:21] But, you know, whatever. So one of the talking points is the girls don't seem scared. OK, first of all, no. Second of all, tell me you've never interacted with or talked to a teenage girl at all. You know, what I hear are two kids who are breathing heavily. Their voices are very high pitched. They sound nervous.

[00:28:48] And they at some point, I mean, it sounds to me like Liberty, who seems to be doing a lot of the talking, is doing that thing that I've done when I've been around a creepy male. I like I think almost every woman has had this situation happen to them and has maybe reacted somewhat similarly. You're around someone, but you don't want anything bad to happen.

[00:29:12] So you sort of try to kind of chatter away and act like everything's normal so that, you know, because you think, OK, if I just kind of keep the normalcy going, nothing bad is going to happen. It's fine. And that's what it sounds to me like what she's doing. She's listening to her instincts. It's very upsetting to listen to, frankly. So one is they're not scared, which, again, I mean, in my subjective opinion, they sound terrified. I don't.

[00:29:40] I think these people are just full of it. And I think there's also something that's so subjective. There's no fear measurement. We can't put the fear-o-meter on the video and see what's going on. So it's kind of like, again, that's why I think it's a very weak talking point because they're like, well, in our opinion, she doesn't sound scared. It's like, OK, thanks for your input. But other people are just claiming that this is straight up artificial intelligence. So, OK, like, you know, I don't know what to do about that one.

[00:30:08] And then people say that Libby must be whispering to someone other than Abby. So there must be people in the bushes. So, no. Yeah, the suggestion is that even though no witnesses saw anyone else, there's no evidence of anyone else. There was somehow another person there other than Liberty, Abby and Richard Allen, who, of course, murdered them. So as you're as you're probably wondering, you know, well, I mean, like, I just think those are weak talking points.

[00:30:37] I think I think this crowd has enough, you know, brain cells between it to realize that this is bad for the guy they've decided to try to treat like a rock star, even though he killed two kids. So I think that they're scrambling and it's it's embarrassing. It's it's not it's not intellectual. It's not intellectually honest. And I think I think it's going to get worse when the audio comes out. But, you know, I mean, the audio from the phone when his voice comes out. Yeah, it's going to get worse.

[00:31:04] And I mean, the videos that I the phone calls, but also that first interview he did with Tony Ligon and Steve Mullen. That sounds exactly like Bridge Guy. Yeah. In the second interview, we reported that his voice sounded a bit different. Yeah, it did. But in the first interview and in all of the phone calls, it very clearly was the voice of Bridge Guy.

[00:31:29] And it feels kind of odd for us to be here, like reporting on this video when we already did it. We saw this video back in the trial. We reported on it accurately. It's not newsworthy. Yeah. It's not newsworthy now. I mean, it's like we reported on it. I think some media outlets reported on it. They got it right, too. I mean, you know, it's like we've already been here. It annoys me to even have to talk about this because there's always this expectation like, oh, transcripts are out. Are you going to talk about it? It's like, no, because we were there.

[00:31:59] You know, we already reported on it. Like, there's nothing new. We already got it. I imagine there are some good hearted people out there who listen to the shill and heard him say, oh, Bridge Guy. So far, the background could possibly have been involved in the killing and believe that. And if that's true and they base their decisions and conclusions about the case based on that, they were deceived.

[00:32:28] But at some point, people need to realize that if I continue to allow myself to drink from a poisonous well, I will continue to get bad information and draw bad conclusions. And at some point, if you willingly do that and go back to that poison as well and depend on that, then it's on you. Oh, yeah. I mean, fool me once, right? I mean, this is Lucy with the football.

[00:32:57] We don't you know, you don't need to keep trying to kick it. One one problem for a lot of these people is it is basically a cult. People who have middling careers at best or people who feel lonely get love bombed by Richard Allen fans. They get made into a part that they get welcomed into a community and get a lot of attention and affirmation.

[00:33:23] And then they know that if they ever change their mind, if they ever doubt the conclusion of the community, they will be drummed out and they will be alone again and they will be ostracized and criticized. I've seen this happen over and over and over again. It's crazy how overt it is. It's not subtle. And so because of that, that's another reason why a lot of people have difficulty changing their minds. Yeah, because they know they're going to get like completely hounded.

[00:33:50] And, you know, and they've also probably said a bunch of wild stuff to these people where, you know, blackmail material, frankly. I think, you know, I'm going to say this like I I don't know. So I I think it's important to remember that, again, we don't know if this is even a leak. We don't know if this is against the rules. Obviously, through Gull's ruling, this was going to come out no matter what. So, you know, we posted in our Facebook group. We're not posting it in there.

[00:34:20] The reason for that is very specific to our Facebook group. We have a ton of people from Delphi. We have victims family members in there. We have people who knew the girls. We have people who love the girls. We have people who are just from that traumatized community. We don't really want this in our group just because I think it would be needlessly upsetting for those people. And people can find the video elsewhere. It's going to be on. It's on the news at this point. It's not it's not like by not having in our group we're depriving everyone of access. So, you know, I think that's where we are.

[00:34:50] That's just our personal decision. We're not condemning people for doing something different. But, you know, I do think even though this was already going to get out there no matter what. I think having it happen, as you said, in such a sort of jarring way. I mean, I do. My heart does go out for the families because suddenly they're walking onto a social media landscape where suddenly the last moments of their children's lives, you know, as they're being abducted and going to be killed. By Richard Allen.

[00:35:18] By Richard Allen are auto playing in front of them. I want to emphasize this video shows Richard Allen. He did it. Yeah. The evidence proved that he did it. I think it looks like him. I think it sounds exactly like him. And I think I'm done kind of playing around with the kind of nonsense and the conspiracy theories. And people are saying, well, it doesn't show Richard Allen. It just shows someone who looked exactly like him and sounded exactly like him.

[00:35:46] It's like, you know, murderers don't necessarily usually approach their victims saying, hello, I'm Richard Matthew Allen. That's not exactly what you'd expect. But I think, you know, there was this thing where we had like a trial and he got convicted on four counts of murder. So I'm pretty confident with that jury's decision. Actually, no, I'm certain of that jury's decision. And I think I actually think when some more of the audio comes up, people will will possibly.

[00:36:15] Just keep in mind the jury based their decision based on what they saw and heard in the courtroom. A lot of people out there are basing their decision on what they see and hear on YouTube. Yeah. Or just vibes, you know, and a lot of people on YouTube lied. So, I mean, that's that's it's not even that, oh, you're direct, you're removed. It's like, no, people were just straight up omitting and lying. So some people might be in for a surprise.

[00:36:44] And I hope some of them consider like, OK, yeah, I was fooled. You know, like it's not it's it's it's not shameful to be like, oh, yeah, some people manipulated me. I got that wrong. Because as long as you can see that it's not it's not really your fault. Someone was doing that to you. But what becomes a problem is when people like won't won't even recognize that. And, you know, I just hope people can. I don't know. It's also ridiculous, frankly, Kevin. I don't I don't understand why this is happening. It's just it.

[00:37:13] It's just stupid. It's just it's just always this case is just stuff's happening that I don't understand. Should we move on to the other things? Yes, let's please. I just want to very quickly say that the notice of appeal was filed the other day as well. So that's not the actual appeal is saying, hey, we need to get some transcripts. We're going to study them and then we're going to eventually write a brief.

[00:37:39] So I think when a lot of people think of an appeal, what they're really thinking of is what appears in the brief. That hasn't happened yet. And that's probably still some time away. Yeah. And to be clear, as is proper, these appellate attorneys are going to probably, you know, need a lot of time putting this together. There there's options for them to probably ask for extensions, continue, you know, like kind of push it back. And they should because it's got to be.

[00:38:09] Good. They can't rush this. And it's going to be a lot of stuff to look through. It was a long trial. And these are well regarded appellate attorneys. So we'll be really curious. I mean, that's something I've been looking forward to talking to because I feel like that. Has the most chance compared to some of this stuff that's been happening to be like an actually interesting discussion, like seeing what, you know, fresh eyes looking at the case see. Do they see any issues with, you know, this or that? I mean, they're going to. That's their job.

[00:38:39] But like, what are those issues? What points do they raise? That's going to be a really interesting thing to look at, I think, because it's going to really get into the law. I remember before the trial, I said, hey, I have a bias. What I really want to see is I want to see great lawyering on both sides. So when the verdict comes out, whatever the verdict is, people can have the maximum amount of confidence in it. I did not get that. I did not get great lawyering on both sides. A lot of great lawyering from the prosecution.

[00:39:08] The defense was shockingly bad. Now, as we enter the appellate process, I have the same bias. I would like to see Mr. Lehman and Ms. Uliana do as good a job as possible and raise and articulate whatever they deem to be the most significant issues and have them discussed in an intelligent and thoughtful way.

[00:39:31] So whatever the final analysis, whatever the final decision is from the appellate courts, everybody can say, OK, it was fair. Yeah, that's exactly what you want. Wouldn't that be wild if they did ineffective counsel? Oh, man. You're suggesting they might. The appellate attorneys might say that Brad Rosey and Andrew Baldwin and Jennifer O'Shea did such a lousy job that they deprived.

[00:39:58] I don't think they could argue that, though, because I mean, like you can argue it. I don't know if you'd win it. I don't think you'd win it. I think that is such a high bar. And they were doing a lot of stuff. I mean, they were it was not like they were neglecting their client. They were vigorous. And it's also complicated by the fact that when Judge Gould raised concerns about the quality of the legal work being done by this team and removed them, Mr. Allen fought vigorously to get them returned. Yeah.

[00:40:29] So the other thing that was filed is that Jennifer O'Shea filed a motion to reconsider. And I'll discuss that. I'll discuss the substance of that in a moment. But I wanted to say that is I was reading it. I didn't get to. Obviously, I started reading in the first page, not the last page. And as I'm reading it, I'm saying, well, this is. This is pretty decently organized. There's not not a lot of extraneous stuff at all.

[00:40:58] This isn't what I'm used to from this team. And it turns out it wasn't written by Andrew Baldwin. It was written by Miss O'Shea. So it was only a few pages. If Baldwin had written it, it would have been like probably 30 pages and inexplicably included references to Jeffrey Turco. And would have read like somebody writing something while weeping at 4 a.m.

[00:41:19] So what Miss O'Shea argues is she goes back to the original motion to reconsider, which was denied. And she raises the Glossop case. The Glossop case is a recent Supreme Court case which deals with the application of the NAPU case. And basically, I'm simplifying a bit here.

[00:41:43] But that's the ruling in that case is if a prosecutor puts someone on the stand and if the prosecutor knows or should know that the testimony that person offers is incorrect and that prosecutor does not correct that testimony, then that's such a violation that the defendant gets a new trial.

[00:42:08] And so her argument is, well, some of the testimony by Brad Weber was incorrect. And Mr. McClellan did not correct it. And the issue there is, there is been no proof that Mr. Weber's testimony was incorrect.

[00:42:32] Basically, there's a lot of wishful thinking on the part of the defense they try to use. They have a video that has incorrect timestamps. They have a hunch as to what the correct timestamps were, and they think that somehow proves it was incorrect. But the fact is, there has been no reliable testimony to indicate that Mr. Weber's testimony was incorrect.

[00:42:57] And unless you can prove that the testimony was incorrect, you don't even get to the next level where the prosecutor should have corrected it. Because how can Prosecutor McClellan correct something that we don't even know if it was correct or incorrect? It doesn't make any sense. No, it doesn't. Yeah. And I will say that as we're recording, I got yet another email. Oh, God. And Judge Gull has filed her response to that motion, which I will read in full. Wow.

[00:43:27] This is timely. Quote, court takes no action on defendant's motion to reconsider denial of motion to correct error. Filed March 11th, 2025 at 4.03 p.m. As the notice of appeal was filed with the Indiana Court of Appeals clerk of the court on March 11th, 2025 at 2.19 p.m. End quote. So she's saying since the appeals process has already started with the filing of the notice of appeal, I'm not even going to deal with this.

[00:43:56] So I think that's reasonable. Wow. So it's going to be out of her hands pretty soon then, right? Yeah. The main thing is her court still has the responsibility to complete a whole bunch of transcripts and get those transcripts over to the court of appeals so the appellate attorneys can start studying them. Can we give this over to some appeals podcasters or something? No, I'm just kidding.

[00:44:21] You know, I mean, we're determined to cover this because something or other is going to, you know, it's important in the sense that, you know, I think there's so much misinformation there that when you step away from the battle, then, you know, people who are not honest gain a lot of ground. So that's our feeling on it. But it's definitely feels like we're circling, in terms of this case, we're circling the drain. I really do hope.

[00:44:51] But I mean, I think that'll change, hopefully, with an appeal. So I think that'll, you know, we're hanging on for that. But, yeah, that's interesting with, I mean, I think OJ, I'm going to say this, this was controversial because I think a lot of people at trial were very critical, you know, just in the gallery about her performance. You and I have always said behind the scenes that we thought she probably did the best job of the defense team at trial. Yeah, by far.

[00:45:21] Yeah, I thought she was the most consistent and I thought she was I thought she was stronger than the other two. I just I just. Yeah. And if you say what is the strongest moment from the defense team from the start of jury selection to the reading of the verdict, I would say it's no context. No context. No context. I would say it's no contest.

[00:45:46] I would say that by far the strongest moment from the defense team was Jennifer OJ in the very last pretrial hearing. Her cross of one of the sketch artists I thought was very effective. And I would struggle mightily to even guess or speculate as to what the second most effective thing was. I remember once Brad Rosey made a joke. Yeah, that was a funny joke. But they really did not do well in this case. No, I mean, they didn't they didn't do three day hearing bad.

[00:46:16] But that's, you know, that's not really saying much. It just wasn't good. And frankly, like it's it's it's hard to see like stuff like this, like website coming out, because I think normally you'd be able to just immediately dismiss it. Right. And say, oh, that defense attorneys wouldn't do this. You know, I mean, like, as I said, there might be a situation in a case like the Mangione case where you can understand it. But, you know, in this case, why would they do it?

[00:46:44] But, you know, I mean, gosh, there's been all sorts of weird stuff that's happened. So who knows? It would not be normal, but that's kind of been the whole. They've done it a bunch. I can start saying many again if you want. They've done it. Many, many, many, many. That's just not doing your weird bits over there. Yeah, but that's that's the latest in Delphi. We forgot to say whether this was important or not at the top because I think we're just burned out. What's is this important?

[00:47:15] Kevin, tell me. I don't think the release of the video was newsworthy. It does show the last moments in or some of the last moments in the lives of two girls before their lives were snuffed out by Richard Allen. I to some level, it's or to some extent, it's interesting for people to be able to look at the video and then say, oh, I was lied to by some people. I have a question for our audience.

[00:47:44] And the reason I'm asking this is because I know our audience is very, very bright. We always get messages from people who are like experts in their field and just awesome people. And here's my question for people who are more in the perhaps, I don't know, mental health space, perhaps more of the I don't know whether you say like sociology. This is my question for you.

[00:48:06] What makes people become conspiracy theorists in defense of a child murderer? You know, what would account for a fandom arising around a convicted child murderer? That's my question, because I find this phenomenon strange. I find it we see it in some cases. Absolutely.

[00:48:36] But there's something with with the Richard Allen case that definitely is just kind of obviously we're focused on that. So we're looking at it. But I just find it odd in this case. Yeah, I do too. You know, there's other cases where I can be like, oh, I kind of understand people are sort of standing this person because they're aspirational or they're sympathetic in some way. Or, you know, like that, like there's there's something going on. You know, they're a handsome young man.

[00:49:00] And you're kind of like, OK, I kind of see where this is going, even if I don't agree with it or don't approve of it. But you can kind of understand it with Richard Allen. He's not handsome. He's not charismatic. He'd made a mess out of his life. Yeah, it's it's there's nothing there's nothing really there to grasp onto. But yet you have people working very hard to try to get this like I would call it a fandom going. And I would just I'm just very curious what would drive that in this case.

[00:49:29] But yeah, so sorry. Now I'm interviewing people aren't here. That's what this case is done. I think with that with that, it's time for us to go. I'm going to try to get on you to bed. Hit the button. 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.

[00:49:57] 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.

[00:50:27] 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.

[00:50:54] 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. So, Ania, before we let people go, I wanted to talk again about the Silver Linings Handbook. And more specifically, I want to talk about Jason Blair, because certainly there have been times when something happens and we don't know what to do.

[00:51:21] We're just out here rubbing two sticks together, and we need to turn to somebody for advice. I'm sure everybody's had that experience. We need to turn to somebody for advice. And one of the people we turn to most often is Jason Blair. And he's always been there for us. He's always willing to give you time. He's always willing to give you great advice.

[00:51:41] And so now what's wonderful is that everybody within the Sound of My Voice has access to his insights and his compassion and his advice, because you can find all of that on his podcast. Yeah, this podcast is a bit like being able to sort of sit down and sort of hear some interesting insights. I always feel inspired by it.

[00:52:02] He's had on some really incredible guests recently, and they've had just such heartbreaking, real conversations with people like Jim Schmidt, who his daughter Gabby Petito was murdered. Jim just came across just as such a real and empathetic and wonderful human being. He was even given – one of Jason's friends kind of told him recently about some abuse she had suffered. Jim was giving advice. I mean, it was really incredible. I'm thinking of Kimberly Loring. Her sister went missing in Montana.

[00:52:32] It's another case involving a Native woman. So raising awareness about that, talking to the woman who lost her father, who was a Los Angeles Police Department detective. He was murdered so he couldn't testify at a robbery trial. Just like awful stuff. But ultimately, really focusing on the compassion and allowing people the space to tell their stories. I think Jason shines as an interviewer because he has that natural empathy and curiosity, too.

[00:52:58] Whenever I'm thinking of a question like, oh, I hope they get into this, he's asking it two seconds later. So it's a really enjoyable listening experience. And I feel like whenever we listen to it, you and I end up discussing some deep stuff like religion or what kind of positivity we want to share with the world. And you're looking to have those kind of thought-provoking conversations in your life. This is the show for you. 100%.

[00:53:23] So I would just say that if you're interested, subscribe to the Silver Linings Handbook wherever you listen to podcasts. 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. Kevin and I really like their non-THC CBD products.

[00:53:52] 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. 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.

[00:54:22] It's very high quality, high value. Anya, if I wanted to get 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 Viah, 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. And after you purchase, they're going to ask you, hey, where did you hear about us?

[00:54:50] Say the murder sheet because then it lets them know that our ads are effective and it really helps us out. We'll see you next time. Okay. Thank you.