The Delphi Murders: The Secret Messages of the Delphi Defense’s Brain Trust: Part Two: "That’s a Job for a Group of Sleuths"

[00:00:00] Content Warning, this episode includes profanity, along with discussion of violence and the murder of two girls as well as suicide. If you look at the title of this episode, you will see that it is a Part Two.

[00:00:12] In Part One we more fully explain what the subject matter of these episodes consists of. In that sense, we have been given access to a trove of messages sent to and from various figures closely associated with the defense in this case,

[00:00:27] including attorneys Kara Weineke, Michael Ozbrook and Bob Mada, and Internet sleuths Nicole Miller, Angela Sledowski and Courtney Parsons. These messages shed an important light on how behind the scenes people closely associated with the defense have worked to secretly shape and manipulate public opinion.

[00:00:47] We should note that they called their main messaging group the Due Process Gay. This was the group that included all of them. In this episode, we will refer to that group as both the Due Process Gang and as the main group.

[00:01:00] Again, please keep in mind that all of them were regular participants in this group. In this episode, we'll discuss Kara Weineke's revelation that she wrote a brief for the defense after she formally left the case, and some of the conspiracy theories of Angela Sledowski.

[00:01:16] At the end, we will share what we think about all of this. 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.

[00:01:33] We're The Murder Sheet. And this is The Delphi Murders, the secret messages of the Delphi Defense's brain trust. Part two. That's a job for a group of sleuths. Let's start with something that we're going to be a bit vague about.

[00:02:21] First, we'll take a quick moment to give you a reminder about a detail from our earlier episode, The Delphi Murders, The Unacceptable, which came out on December 20th, 2023. Part of that episode involved a claim made by Paul Mannion.

[00:02:34] We actually just interviewed him this week. Check out those episodes. This claim goes back to the leak of crime scene photos by Baldwin's friend and former associate Mitch Westerman. Of course, Westerman passed the photos onto a man we called R on the show.

[00:02:47] R unfortunately died by suicide amidst the investigation into that leak. In any case, Paul mentioned in a post on a particular discord that the defense team had been warned about a possible leak from R on the show while in advance of the crime scene photos getting out there.

[00:03:03] And it doesn't appear as if the defense team did anything about that information. We wanted to report that information on The Murder Sheet. Now, when you prepare to report something like that, it is customary to reach out to people involved and ask them for comment and context.

[00:03:19] With that in mind, we want to highlight a December 19th, 2023 message that Bob Mada sent to Nicole Miller and Angela Sledowski. And we are also going to read their replies. I'll start with the message that was sent by Bob Mada.

[00:03:34] And please keep in mind that in these messages when Mada refers to they, he is talking about Anya and myself. I'm now going to read the message from Bob Mada.

[00:03:44] Quote, I know they bullied Andy into meeting with them last week with an or else threat about these episodes. Off the record. As a matter of fact, everything I say to y'all is off the record. Miller responded with what? And then Sledowski came back with yep.

[00:04:01] So Mada seems to know about an email sent by us to Baldwin and both he and Sledowski appear to state that we had a meeting with Baldwin in December of 2023. We wish to stress that we never mentioned any off the record meetings or conversations to others.

[00:04:16] Even now, we are choosing to neither confirm nor deny that such a meeting took place. But either way, Mada and Sledowski appear to be in close contact with either Baldwin or his inner circle. This seems to highlight the close ties between Baldwin and Mada and Sledowski.

[00:04:32] While we are not confirming or denying this meeting, we will state in the strongest possible terms that we have never bullied or threatened anyone into giving us an interview or to talk to us off the record. That allegation is completely untrue.

[00:04:49] And I would go so far as to say that it is libelous. I note with no pleasure that in a message we quoted in our other episode Bob Mada mentioned that Ani and I could lose our business that we have worked so hard to build.

[00:05:02] And in these messages, he is lying about us in a way that almost seems calculated to harm our reputation and our business. So we state again in the strongest possible terms that that claim is a lie, that it is libelous.

[00:05:18] And that if necessary, Ani and I are prepared to back up what we have just said with relevant emails and other documentary evidence. And let's just apropos of nothing mention something about off the record.

[00:05:31] Merriam-Webster defines off the record as given or made in confidence and not for publication. In journalism, off the record conversations are helpful when a source wants to tell you something but does not want it published.

[00:05:43] Journalists release off the record recordings and quotes when it turns out their sources are lying to them. Things happening off the record do not require us to stand silently by while bad actors make things up. That's just something for everyone to keep in mind.

[00:05:55] And again, I stress in the strongest possible terms, Mada is lying. And I wish to say again in the strongest possible terms that the story that Mada shared about us allegedly bullying is utterly false.

[00:06:09] Either Mada made up those claims about us bullying or someone else made them up and repeated them to a credulous Bob Mada. Before we leave this subject, let's talk about one more lie told about this incident by Bob Mada.

[00:06:21] Here's a message about us he sent to the due process gang on March 15th, 2024. Quote, I can absolutely grasp the depth of what you're saying.

[00:06:30] I advised Andy to tell them to go fuck themselves when they were giving him an ultimatum of either meet with us or we were doing an episode about these emails he was receiving early on that were related to tips they were receiving.

[00:06:41] He caved and hence they aimed their weak ass sights on you too, unquote. That message was sent at 1250 AM. Again, we stress that we have never gotten or tried to get an interview or a conversation via a threat or an ultimatum. Mada is simply lying.

[00:06:58] We find it odd that Mada seems to imagine the reason we discussed Sid Lousk and her associate Courtney Parsons is because Baldwin is said to have met with us. Not only is that untrue, but frankly it doesn't even make any sense.

[00:07:10] But there's a lot about all of this that doesn't make sense, including why lawyers like Mada are even a part of this due process gang. And of course, he is not the only professional in the group. So let's talk about Kara Weineke.

[00:07:23] As we've mentioned before, Weineke believes that we never landed on the moon. That it was all hoax. If you check out her personal Twitter feed, you'll find she believes all sorts of things. She's also an important part of Richard Allen's defense team and she has some interesting ideas.

[00:07:37] Let's take a look at some messages sent to this due process gang group chat on March 29th, 2004. This one is from Kara Weineke. Quote,

[00:07:50] I have on a few occasions let Brad and Andy know that there are people willing to work for free who are very good at what they do and can help. I don't know why they won't do it.

[00:07:59] Joel and I were just talking this morning that Gull is calling 600 prospective jurors. Who is going to look at all those questionnaires? Maybe do a little digging on their social media? They certainly don't have time. Bob Mada responded, How long prior to trial are those received by counsel?

[00:08:16] Kara Weineke replied, Well good question. I've seen courts not even do questionnaires until that morning. All the way up to parties getting to see them six weeks before trial. I have not heard that Brad and Andy have received the questionnaires.

[00:08:30] But then again, I'm getting bits and pieces of info. I doubt they have them yet though. At this point, Nicole Miller chimed in. 600 people is a lot of people. That's a job for a group of sleuths who will dig up those folks' entire lives, LOL. Bob Mada replied,

[00:08:47] The Nutsos will start screaming jury tampering. Miller replied, Why would they know what was happening? Kara Weineke replied, I told Brad and Andy that you wanted to help sleuthy goosey. So I have to say that is an attorney. I found this particular exchange more than a little chilling.

[00:09:07] Mada said that so-called Nutsos would call it jury tampering. Well guess what? I believe the so-called Nutsos would be absolutely correct to be concerned that this could lead to jury tampering or jury intimidation. Our whole justice system rests on the jury system.

[00:09:27] And Weineke, again, not only a denier of the lunar landing but also a valued member of this team, wants to hand over to Nicole Miller all sorts of personal information about all the potential jurors in this case.

[00:09:41] And please keep in mind that these people have repeatedly demonstrated they lack the ability to keep a secret. This episode is more proof of that. Let's be clear, some sort of background checks around prospective jurors by qualified professionals like investigators or legal professionals is acceptable.

[00:10:01] But what Weineke wants to have happen is to turn over wholesale all sorts of personal information about these prospective jurors to an internet sleuth so she and whoever she shares the information with can quote, dig up those folks' entire lives. That is horrifying.

[00:10:31] And all of this talk about juries and jurors brings up something else. Weineke actually appeared on a podcast recently when she was asked about jury intimidation.

[00:11:04] Anya will now read what Weineke said and please listen carefully because I really think it's important and gets to the absolute heart of what we've been discussing here.

[00:11:14] Quote, I think a lot of that is coming from the outside people saying, oh, I think that the jury feels intimidated. I don't know if the jury actually feels how feels that level of intimidation most of the time in these bigger cases.

[00:11:27] Maybe they do, although I don't know if that really changes their decision. Sometimes I wonder if these higher profile cases, if that makes those juries, those jurors that are holdouts, dig in even more because now they know that they have people watching

[00:11:42] and that might bolden them more, especially if they know that there are people on both sides of the debate. They might feel more empowered to stay their position because they don't think that it's a crazy position.

[00:11:55] So the way Anya and I hear that is that Weineke is essentially saying that if in a high profile case you can get people in the wider community to have strong opinions on both sides of an issue,

[00:12:08] you, in her mind, make it easier to have a situation where you have a hung jury because she believes jurors will feel more emboldened and more likely to be holdouts if they imagine there are people in the wider world who agree with their position.

[00:12:23] We really think that explains a lot of what we've seen in this case. The defense seems to be pursuing a hung jury strategy. They are trying to manipulate public opinion with half truths and lies in order to get people on their side,

[00:12:36] and then they seemingly hope that the presumably sequestered jury will get word that there are people who support Richard Allen and then cross their fingers and hope for a hung jury.

[00:12:44] Now, we think it is also worth highlighting that Weineke doesn't seem to know a lot about this case that she champions. Here is a March 26, 2024 message she sent to the group, the group that of course they call the due process gay.

[00:13:00] Quote, need help. Does anyone have a bullet point list of reasons why we think Rick is innocent? End quote. So she apparently does not realize why she herself believes that Richard Allen is innocent. That is interesting.

[00:13:17] And again, that quote came from Kara Weineke who is a valued part of this defense team. Let's look at another message that Weineke sent to the group on March 29, 2024. Quote, Joel and I co-wrote the motion for parody for them.

[00:13:34] We've been trying to do very small specific projects for them when they ask end quote. And just to clarify, Joel is Kara Weineke's husband and law partner. So she is revealing there that she and her husband actually wrote one of the briefs in the case.

[00:13:51] She also indicated in another message that this motion for parody that she co-wrote was essentially a press release. Can you read that message on you? Quote, so the denials for experts was in a sealed order.

[00:14:05] She handed down just to Brad and Andy because the whole process was supposed to be ex parte. Their ex parte motion asked for certain experts. The motion for parody lays out what they asked for and what she said.

[00:14:16] Part of the reason they filed the motion for parody was to let the public know what was happening. I don't think Gull was expecting them to do that end quote. So again, Kara Weineke is helping the defense team write briefs in particular the motion for parody.

[00:14:33] That got us curious. She says she and her husband co-wrote that motion. That made us wonder if she ever commented on it and she did. On March 26, 2024, she tweeted out the following from her professional account.

[00:14:49] In the motion for parody, they stated that their request for a psychologist was denied. They had retained a psychologist and she had completed some work on the case. But she wasn't done, and of course she won't testify without being paid.

[00:15:01] So their request for additional funds so she could complete her work in preparation for trial were denied. Same thing with a ballistics expert. They found someone according to the motion, but they don't have the funds for him to complete his review and testify. That request was denied.

[00:15:15] False confession expert? Denied outright. Expert to analyze the digital evidence, cell phone data, geofencing data, etc. Denied outright. And on March 29, 2024 she again referenced this motion on Twitter. Quote, the motion for parody reads as if the defense currently has no funding permitted for any testifying experts.

[00:15:37] I think there were two experts who did do work on the case and received funds for that work. But the work was not done. From the docket so far we have not seen any other funding requests filed.

[00:15:48] So if trial started tomorrow, any expert the defense called would either have worked for free, doubtful, or paid out of the defense's own personal funds or came from the crowdfund. Hopefully Hennessy addresses these questions on Defense Diaries Live. End quote.

[00:16:04] So she's publicly commenting about a brief she wrote without disclosing that she did in fact write it. What does that suggest to you, Anja?

[00:16:13] It sort of feels like if I invited a group of our listeners to some sort of art gallery and gave a little tour of all the displays and exhibits and whatnot,

[00:16:25] and then stood over a specific painting and stroke my chin and mused about what did I think that the artist was trying to convey? Look at the use of color. Look at the use of blues. What is the sort of melancholy sense that we're looking here?

[00:16:39] And then you went home, looked it up and found out that I painted that painting. I just think it's weird. It's weird. Almost as weird as believing we didn't land on the moon, but just almost. Now, Wynneke is not officially working for Richard Allen at this time.

[00:16:56] But all of this does show that she is indeed doing legal work for him and also going on discussing that work publicly.

[00:17:05] This may not violate the actual letter of the gag order, but having defense attorneys speak out about their filings in this case certainly seems to violate the spirit of that order.

[00:17:18] And let me just say it's even weirder when you consider how directly involved Wynneke was in fundraising efforts. Indeed. And frankly, despite all the hue and cry about funds in this case, it's not completely clear to us that Judge Gull did anything wrong here.

[00:17:33] It sort of sounds from her filings that there may have been a process issue and the burden would be on Baldwin and Rosie to correct that in order to get funds. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be frustrated with the slow process.

[00:17:45] I'm just saying that when you have one side begging for money based on very, very black and white binary language and then things come out that perhaps requests were not filed properly. That should be looked at. That should be interrogated.

[00:18:00] I also want to be clear while we're on this topic that Wynneke's work for the defense is not limited just to secretly co-writing one brief. Here's an April 8, 2024 message she sent to the main group also known as the due process gang.

[00:18:18] Quote, Jull and I are meeting with them tomorrow to try to help them figure out how to get hearsay evidence into the trial if certain people either do or don't testify. We're assuming they are referring to statements Elvis made to people or Brad, etc.

[00:18:34] This is at 528 a.m. And here is an April 8, 2024 message that Kara Wynneke sent to the main group, which of course is known as the due process gang.

[00:18:45] This is in reference to the issue of ballistics more particularly the person who conducted the test which linked a bullet found in the crime scene to a gun owned by Richard Allen. Quote, I do know Brad and Andy had two ways to go with attacking this.

[00:19:00] Attack the science or attack the expert. My understanding is that they are going to attack the expert because she did the entire test wrong. Knowing that detail about how the defense intends to handle the ballistics just underscores how important Wynneke is to this team.

[00:19:15] So what else did she work on? Well, she worked on me. According to messages sent to Sudlowski by her close associate, Cato Hare, a Mexico based educator on January 6, 2024, Wynneke did a quote little checking on Kevin. She looked into his employment history and then got his home address.

[00:19:36] This reminds us of the time when one of the investigators for the defense team tried to friend us on Facebook in a seeming attempt to learn something about us. We will say now what we said then.

[00:19:46] This defense team would be well advised to use their limited time and resources to research and make a case for their client instead of trying to pry into the lives of private citizens who have absolutely no connection to the crime.

[00:20:03] Another good example of how this group operates can be found in a series of messages from March 17, 2024. The first two messages here are from Carol Wynneke.

[00:20:15] The first one makes it clear that she is in direct contact with Rosie and Baldwin, and the second one is also highly interesting. And these were sent again around the time of the contempt hearing.

[00:20:27] Quote, my understanding is that tomorrow we should see a new filing up and it's a juicy one. Also, Andy will have his phone in the courtroom. Brad will not. I asked Andy to text me with updates.

[00:20:38] I think she's not going to do anything tomorrow. Andy thinks she's going to remove just him. Brad thinks they're both going to jail. I guess we'll find out who's right.

[00:20:47] The thing I hate most about being a lawyer is that I can't say what I really want to about the injustice of this all.

[00:20:52] I can't say how I feel about the judge. I can't express how absolutely pissed off I am that we are here, again dealing with this nonsense. And then Miller responded with something interesting.

[00:21:03] Send it to me, Cara. I'll copy and paste that shit and use it as a transcript and say it with my mouth on all my platforms. We'll have a space, a YouTube live shit. I'll even do a TikTok live assholes.

[00:21:14] Unquote. What is the significance of that in your mind, Anja? I mean there's obviously been some pretty extreme source capture here from people like Miller who I think when you're saying I'm going to just run whatever you want me to.

[00:21:28] I'll use my voice to say your words. You're seeing sort of how the flow of information can go out from there.

[00:21:37] And what's interesting to me is not necessarily that somebody who's on a social media influencer side of things is offering that, but why would an attorney be interested in that?

[00:21:48] Yeah, it is also interesting because people who follow Miller on social media deserve to know is she reflecting her own views or is she just parroting the views of a defense attorney?

[00:22:02] Yeah. And let's be clear. There are explicit offers to basically be mouthpieces for this team littered throughout these messages and in fact numerous instances where people involved are acting as mouthpieces for the defense. Let me quote again. This is from Szydlowski on March 17th, 2024.

[00:22:21] Quote. Kourtney and Sleuthie and I can be your mouthpieces on the ground while you all take on the legal powers that be.

[00:22:27] I know we bitch and moan a lot in here about being bullied, but that's just because we feel safe and trust y'all so it's a welcome outlet. But we've never met an unpopular bold opinion that we didn't want to share. End quote.

[00:22:38] So again, if you are reflecting a view other than your own, you let your audience know whose view you are reflecting. No one will send Anya and I a press release that we will then read verbatim without telling you the source.

[00:22:53] You need to respect your audience otherwise your audience doesn't trust you.

[00:22:58] Nor should they in this instance. I think this is this is bad and frankly, I think most sophisticated attorneys would not really want to get involved with people who have no standards because that's what that is that that's having no standards in terms of putting out information.

[00:23:13] Listen, not everyone's a journalist, but I do think that anyone with any sort of platform does have some responsibility to maintain certain standards and I don't understand why someone who's a trained attorney wouldn't run screaming from this situation.

[00:23:28] I think it goes back to that quote we read before. I think what they're trying to do here is create a situation where they can hope for a hung jury.

[00:23:37] Yes, if we put out the wildest, most twisty theories possible and happen to get somebody who's conspiracy minded on the jury, we can get a hold out. We can get a hung jury that does seem to be the goal as it's discussed here.

[00:23:52] And in that case, it's not about actually influencing the most people. It's just about appealing to a sort of small group of people and then hoping for the best with the jury.

[00:24:04] I think there's risk in that because I think if Wadir goes the prosecution's way, they might root anyone with that inclination out. But also given the fact that there's been so much discussion about sharing perspective jurors personal information, I don't know. It's concerning. It raises concerns.

[00:24:23] It's troubling. Before we leave the subject of Wyonkey, I'd like to make a final point. When you consider some of the extreme behavior of the people she was working with in this so-called due process group or brain trust, it may be tempting to assume she was not fully aware of their antics,

[00:24:42] but she was. We saw at least one person very politely tweeted her about Sledowski and Parsons and their lack of credibility in this case. Wyonkey saw that tweet because she responded to it, but then she went right back to working closely with both Sledowski and Parsons.

[00:24:59] Wynneke presumably saw all the messages in the group chats that called Judge Gola bitch and ranting about all kinds of ridiculous notions and outrageous conspiracies. And none of these things apparently bothered her. She did not run screaming. She continued to work closely with them.

[00:25:19] And what's especially interesting is that screenshots of Wyonkey's exchange with a person who tried to warn her on Twitter also appear in these messages. And of course, one of the people Wyonkey was warned about was Angela Sledowski.

[00:25:36] She's a licensed clinical social worker associate in North Carolina. Before we discuss her too much, we have a couple of quick things to disclose.

[00:25:44] We have covered Sledowski's role in this case in the other episodes we've released today and in earlier episodes, perhaps most extensively in our episode, The Delphi Murders, The Unacceptable, which we mentioned at the top of this episode.

[00:25:57] In that, we discussed Sledowski's documented history of harassing and bullying others in this case and spreading around hateful language about some of the figures in the case.

[00:26:07] It also notes her failed lawsuit against Carroll County authorities over a law that didn't apply to the situation she was suing over.

[00:26:16] After that episode was released, we heard from a number of mental health professionals all over the country who expressed alarm and dismay that this woman was working with vulnerable people.

[00:26:25] They all strongly urged us to take the information about Sledowski, which we detailed in the episode, and to share it with the social worker licensing board so that they can determine if her actions were appropriate. We did so. That matter is still pending.

[00:26:39] For now, the question is what exactly is Sledowski's role in this case? In a November 2023 message to a group chat with Mada and Miller, Sledowski writes,

[00:26:51] Quote, Bob between us, I've been working Andy and his team, not officially, not licensed in Indiana as a subject matter expert since December.

[00:27:01] Quote, she also claims to be in contact with both attorneys. For instance, in April 30th 2024 message to Miller, Sledowski wrote, quote, I talked to Andy throughout the day.

[00:27:15] Now, in a January 26 2024 message to Sledowski, why Niki wrote, quote, you've talked to them. They're like fish out of water with the publicity thing. Brad's too cool to care about it. But Andy is just so focused on the case. He isn't considering that publicity can help.

[00:27:31] In quote, the clear implication in that message is that why Niki is indeed confirming this. To both Rosie and Baldwin. What makes all of this even more interesting is that in a response to a request for comment, we sent him on June 20 2024.

[00:27:51] Andrew Baldwin wrote us quote, I have never met Angela Sledowski or Courtney Parsons and quote, we will leave it to the listeners to judge. Now, in a February 25 2024 message to win a case, Sledowski writes, quote,

[00:28:07] I haven't told anyone this, not even my core little group just out of an abundance of caution. But I had a meeting with Brad and Matt on Friday and against Matt yesterday. So I could present two years worth of evidence of the state's strategic coordinated leak problem.

[00:28:23] End quote. The Brad in that message is a reference to attorney Brad Rosie. The Matt in that message is a reference to Matt Hoffman, who is frequently referred to as an investigator on this case on behalf of the defense team.

[00:28:39] The alleged evidence of a leak problem by the state would have theoretically been a value to the defense at the March contempt hearing. And in fact, both Sledowski and Parsons were scheduled to testify at the March 2024 contempt hearing, but neither appeared in court.

[00:28:56] Their messages to the group offered little concrete detail about what they would have testified to or why they ultimately chose not to attend. So in these messages, Sledowski frequently refers to defense investigator Matt Hoffman.

[00:29:12] The case indicates that she is in fact in regular contact with him. And he seems to be ready, willing and available to answer whatever questions she sends him about the case.

[00:29:23] She has also claimed to have met with Hoffman in person at least once. It is likely that this meeting took place when Sledowski was in Indiana to mount groundswell, a low quality, low turnout rally in support of Allen.

[00:29:35] She mentions this meeting with Hoffman in a January 2024 message to Weineke. Quote, while I was in Indy with Matt, he suggested that perhaps Gull herself is being blackmailed or threatened. Now I'm like IDK LOL, could she be? None of her behavior makes any sense. End quote.

[00:29:55] Let us just note that it is difficult to believe that any rational reasonable person could actually believe that someone was threatening or a blackmailing judge Gull.

[00:30:07] It is frankly a ridiculous notion. And we suggest that Hoffman supposedly saying this is revealing of the level and quality of thought on the defense team.

[00:30:20] Moving on in a series of messages to Miller and Parsons on November 10th, 2023, Sledowski went so far as to describe the process of portraying a fake identity.

[00:30:34] Quote, you can also fuck with those background reports and searches BTW. Like all you have to do is this is me update my info button somewhere and add a fake fucking number under someone's name.

[00:30:46] It's very easy to manipulate this shit. People don't understand just how fucking easy it is to frame someone or to portray a false identity on the fucking open source internet. End quote.

[00:30:57] That potentially becomes more interesting when you consider the message that Sledowski sent to the group on March 19th, 2024. Quote, LOL I made an undercover identity to try and troll him into saying shit. End quote.

[00:31:11] Meanwhile, the sleuths in the group dubbed it an even more details in disturbing conversations in their various side chats. For instance, Courtney Parsons shared the crime scene pictures in a group chat with Sledowski and Miller on April 27th, 2024.

[00:31:29] The women interrupt their discussion of the bodies of two deaf children to complain about not getting enough peanut butter for their apple dip and one of them writes.

[00:31:38] Quote, yeah I don't mean to be cold but the pictures were not nearly as upsetting as I expected them to be. End quote.

[00:31:45] Next let's talk about the delay in this case. You will remember that Richard Allen's defense requested a speedy trial and that it was scheduled for May 2024.

[00:31:54] At almost the very last moment it ended up getting pushed back to October. Publicly many supporters of the defense team decried this decision and blamed Judge Gull for it. But what was really happening behind the scenes?

[00:32:07] Interestingly enough, the people and the gang seem delighted by the news. First let's look at a couple of messages from Mata from March 25th, 2024.

[00:32:16] Quote, I've said it many times on lives a speedy trial is a very dangerous gambit for both sides. This trial is barreling towards the station like a runaway freight train. And at this juncture no one is ready for it. Mata also added.

[00:32:33] It's not the hiring of experts part he's right about. He's unwittingly right. Michael and I both agree that the speedy strategy is cutting the defense's own legs out from underneath them and would not allow them to fully investigate.

[00:32:47] Leaving them with the throw enough shit against the wall will respect to alternate suspects that we can create reasonable doubt approach, which frankly is the defense attorney's least favorite strategy, LMHO.

[00:33:01] So to be very clear, if you are not part of this group and you say something very similar on your show that makes you a pro prosecution law enforcement plant. But I guess that was a pretty popular opinion behind the scenes too.

[00:33:16] Yeah, as I recall during this time period on our program, we frequently mentioned our concern that the defense was not acting in Richard Allen's best interest and that they plainly were not prepared for this May trial.

[00:33:29] Here is a message from Sledowsky and Mata sent on May 7, 2024. First is Sledowsky. Quote, I just don't see this being a bad thing as long as Rick survives. End quote.

[00:33:42] Mata. Thank God you don't see it as a bad thing. This was mandatory. They weren't ready plain and simple. And again, he's talking about saying the delay was good. Defense team was not ready. And let's look at one more May 7, 2024 message from Mata.

[00:34:01] Quote is two lawyers with vast trial experience. Ali and I were calling for this thing to be continued. It was absolutely evident they weren't fully ready for trial. I'm incredibly relieved. End quote.

[00:34:16] It is clear that the people who knew most about the state of the defense, the people who were rooting hardest for Richard Allen to prevail, were delighted by the news of the delay.

[00:34:25] The talk about blaming Judge Gull and the prosecution for the delay seems to have been primarily spin in an attempt to manipulate the public.

[00:34:33] One thing that sort of jumped out at me about these messages concerns odinism. All of us have heard that as far as we know, the all but official defense theory of the case is that the girls were killed in an odinism ritual of some sort.

[00:34:48] So you would probably expect to see quite a bit of conversation about odinism. But actually it isn't mentioned all that much. Instead there is quite a bit of talk and speculation about a host of other theories.

[00:35:00] It almost feels like an implicit recognition by this group that the odinism theory hasn't caught on and they need something better.

[00:35:08] For one thing it's worth noting that on April 1st 2024 Michael Osbrook writes that there was a quote high probability, unquote, the image of Bridge Guy is a fake.

[00:35:18] Please remember that the only plausible way that the Bridge Guy image could be faked would be if Libby's family somehow did it. So when people say that the image is fake they are essentially accusing the family of something.

[00:35:32] Then again Osbrook mostly seemed interested in talking about trolling YouTuber Anthony Greno more than anything else. So one of the more recent controversies in this case involves Dr. Monica Walla. She's a psychologist who works at Westfield Prison and is said to have treated Alan.

[00:35:49] It has been widely reported that at some point in her interactions with Alan he is alleged to have admitted to her that he was guilty of murdering Abby and Libby.

[00:35:59] One rumor that's spread around the online community around the case is that Dr. Walla was a member of some Facebook groups relating to Delphi. Dr. Walla is obviously an important witness and so it is interesting to see how this due process gang discussed her.

[00:36:15] On May 8th 2024 Parsons posted an image of kids that she claimed were Dr. Walla's young children to the due process gang. It is unclear what she thought this would add to the discussion of Dr. Walla's involvement in the case.

[00:36:28] Later that day Wynneke sent a message to the group. Quote, anything you guys find on Walla will you send it to me? Andy seems interested.

[00:36:39] The group imagined without apparent evidence that Walla must have repeated the story of Alan's confession to her to one of her children who then shared it online. This would potentially be a professional violation. On May 28th 2024 a message to the due process gang, Szydlowski weighed in.

[00:37:00] Quote, IDK it's hard for me as an MH professional to see her as anything but a treacherous cog in the corrupt system but I'll try to reserve judgment. End quote. Appreciate her being open minded. There's also talk about new witnesses with allegedly important information.

[00:37:17] Osbrook for instance seemed quite excited about talking with a man named Tim Prater. On May 6th 2024 he said he would be talking to Prater the next day and afterwards there would be a riot. So obvious question. Who the devil is Tim Prater?

[00:37:32] Well he's a man who claimed again without any discernible evidence to back it up. Do you have inside information about how Richard Alan was treated in Westville?

[00:37:42] Prater claimed that his mother-in-law worked inside Westville, that Alan's food was being messed with and then Alan was told his wife and mother would be murdered if he did not confess to the murders. Again Prater seemed to offer no evidence to back up these wild stories.

[00:37:58] We will also note that the group's interest in hearing from him seemed to wane somewhat after Prater apparently tweeted out a photo of his genitalia. Who are these people?

[00:38:12] So in a number of messages we saw the members of this group talk at some length about how weak the case against Richard Alan allegedly is.

[00:38:22] I mean as late as May 7th 2024 Michael Osbrook was indicating that he felt there was a quote, fair chance that the case actually ended up being dismissed. We don't know what to make of this.

[00:38:36] It is possible that the attorneys just thought that the truth doesn't matter and displaying a lot of blustery confidence would somehow impress people. That is the kindest interpretation. Another possibility is that they have actually convinced themselves the case against Alan is weak. Let's be absolutely clear.

[00:38:53] Whether you believe Richard Alan is guilty or innocent, the case against him is not weak. He says he was in the area of the murders at the time of the crime. He looks and sounds like the man depicted in Libby German's video.

[00:39:09] A bullet linked to his gun was found at the crime scene. He has repeatedly confessed to the crime and made incriminating statements. That is not a weak case and his lawyers did not do anyone any favors by pretending otherwise. Think of it this way.

[00:39:28] Imagine you have serious health issues and go to a doctor. Would you want a doctor who carefully examines you, figures out what your problems are and works with you to develop a treatment plan?

[00:39:39] Or would you prefer a doctor who breezily declares that you're perfectly healthy, have nothing to worry about and then just sends you on your way? You want and need the doctor who sees reality. The doctor who recognizes your health problems and offers solutions.

[00:39:57] If you get a doctor who doesn't see your health problems, they will just go untreated and you will suffer for it. And if all Richard Allen's attorneys can offer is a sense of delusional, blind confidence, then he will certainly end up getting convicted.

[00:40:13] We want to conclude by discussing a theory that Zdalski shared in separate message threads to Miller alone and to the due process gang as a whole. These messages come from March 20th and March 21st, 2024.

[00:40:27] So Dalski never made a clear why, but she definitely doubted the version of events concerning Mitch Westerman's leak of crime scene photos. But she made clear she suspected someone else, an attorney in Andrew Baldwin's law firm who we will call Ashley.

[00:40:44] Ashley did not leak the crime scene photos. Let me say that again. Ashley did not leak the crime scene photos. The person who leaked the crime scene photos was Mitch Westerman, who admitted to doing so and assigned Alpha David. Zdalski spelled out why she suspected Ashley.

[00:41:04] Quote, she'd also have access to unedited pics outside of prepared exhibits. End quote. This is sent at 1159 p.m. Zdalski's theory of events was elaborate with no evidence. She indicated she believed a false claim that Ashley, who is married, was in an adulterous relationship with Mitch Westerman.

[00:41:25] The man accused of leaking the crime scene photos to a man we've called R. R, of course, subsequently committed suicide. But then Zdalski went even further. She theorized, again with no evidence, that Ashley was also in an adulterous relationship with R.

[00:41:42] She shared her theory with defense investigator Matt Hoffman, and she shared with Miller screenshots of what she said was her exchange with Hoffman. Quote, were they both dating Ashley? Uggg! Hoffman. Uh, it's possible. Here's Zdalski again. Welp. So maybe the motive makes more sense?

[00:42:05] Just saying if there was a love triangle R maybe wouldn't have cared as much about betraying his friend by sharing photos, you know? End quote. We are at an utter loss to understand why Hoffman did not tell Zdalski that her theory about his colleague Ashley was nonsense.

[00:42:23] He owed that to Ashley in our view. Let's take a moment to point something out. We believe Hoffman knew Zdalski's theory was wrong because he knew who Mitch's girlfriend really is. It's not a secret in Johnson County. We know who it is too.

[00:42:37] We've never mentioned it because there's no valid reason to violate this woman's privacy. But it would have been easy for Hoffman to tell Zdalski she was wrong about his colleague. But he didn't do that. And again, the so-called evidence that Zdalski has for her claim is nonsensical.

[00:42:54] Here's an example. In an online message, R Woods shared what he said was a critical quote from an Indiana defense attorney about the lawsuit Zdalski had filed against Carroll County. Here's how Zdalski now interpreted that. And this is from March 20th, 2024 at 1151 p.m. Quote.

[00:43:13] We couldn't make sense of this until it just clicked. Fucking Ashley is the Indiana defense attorney he's referring to. Making fun of me in the lawsuit? Ashley knows MS. She has to. So Mitch is dating Ashley. R is dating Ashley. Ashley is literally leaking shit.

[00:43:32] To be clear, Ashley has never given us any information. So here are a few more messages from Zdalski. Quote. But Nick, MS is involved. Because I swear to you, no one knows about that lawsuit. That specifically.

[00:43:51] MS are the only people on the planet who give a fuck and won't stop talking about it. And they hate me, so it makes sense that they'd give bad impression to Ashley, who would give bad impression to R, who would unleash on me randomly.

[00:44:05] My only fucking concern is if we are right, even half right. Ashley gots to go. End quote. And Miller responded to the Ashley's got to go. Messages by saying ASAP. So a couple of things there.

[00:44:23] First is interesting to note that Zdalski seems to believe that anybody's negative opinion of her is somehow directly attributable to us. That's not the case. It's also worth noting that this lawsuit that she filed against Carroll County was indeed covered by people other than us.

[00:44:42] And in fact, Zdalski herself wrote a letter about that lawsuit, which was printed in the Carroll County comment months and months before Anya and I even said a word about that suit.

[00:44:55] And not only was Ashley supposedly carrying on this affair with R, but she also did him wrong. Here's what Zdalski had to say. I think Ashley was using him blackmail. It's fucked. End quote.

[00:45:09] In a message to Miller Zdalski wrote about how much better it would be for the defense team if Ashley was fired. Quote. Well, but if she is out of the picture, I imagine it will lighten their workload tremendously to not have a mole in their midst. End quote.

[00:45:25] But then in a message to the group, Zdalski suddenly stepped back from the edge and posted this. Quote. So Ashley, associate attorney at Baldwin's firm, wife to Indiana appellate judge was absolutely not in a relationship with Michael Westerman. End quote. So it's Mitchell Westerman by the way.

[00:45:46] So considering all of that, we have some questions throughout this whole process, this gang of people, this defense brain trust has spread half truths and out and out lies. They have manipulated people.

[00:46:02] They have spread nonsensical conspiracy theories that have done real harm to real people who have absolutely nothing to do with this case. They have intimidated people. They have threatened people. They have damaged people's reputations.

[00:46:19] And while all this has been going on, the so-called professionals in this case who have at best just stood by and quietly let it happen in at worse actively manipulated people to make it happen. Did nothing to stop it.

[00:46:32] And I guess I think that's because they believe that the chaos is in their interest. And who cares if anyone gets hurt or even commits suicide as long as it helps them. But what I want to know is, is this particular case different?

[00:46:49] Is it different when the person who is stalked and potentially put at risk because of the process you've enabled is someone you know and care about? Obviously these people don't care what happens to strangers.

[00:46:59] But what if it happens to someone they work with, someone they know and respect and value? Is that enough to reach them and make them realize the harm they're doing? Because it almost happened.

[00:47:08] The Sledowsky's group came so close to publicly calling out Ashley for sexual and professional improprieties, which Ashley never committed. They came close to calling for her to be fired.

[00:47:20] And the evidence they had to support those charges was just as flimsy and nonsensical as the evidence they've had to call out and shame countless other people.

[00:47:29] Is that at long last enough to shock this defense team into lucidity and make them realize how destructive their process has been? Andrew Baldwin likes to talk about how much he values his colleagues and his team. Here's a chance to see if he means it.

[00:47:45] Here's a chance to see if what nearly happened to Ashley is enough to make Richard Allen's defense team change and stop inflicting so much needless harm. There is absolutely no reason for attorneys to be dragging vulnerable and uninformed people into a misinformation campaign. And what about Kara Weineke?

[00:48:02] She is an appellate lawyer, and she has posted that in a couple of months she will be doing an oral argument before the Indiana Court of Appeals. One of the judges who will hear that argument is Ashley's husband.

[00:48:14] So I wonder if Weineke would reflect on her own narrow escape here. How would it have felt to stand before that judge knowing that she was a part of her group which had spread baseless rumors about his wife's alleged infidelity?

[00:48:29] Would Kara wonder if the judge knew what she had done? Would Kara have even been able to look him in the eye? At long last, do these people have any sense of humanity or decency?

[00:48:41] I very much hope that this close call with the personal and professional reputation of a colleague does indeed manage to reach some bit of humanity involved when in Weineke, and make them realize how very far off course they have strayed.

[00:48:53] And maybe if they don't care about any of the people harmed so far. Maybe if they don't care about the reputations of Ashley or her husband. Maybe they will be smart enough to realize that if the monster they've created attacks Ashley today,

[00:49:05] tomorrow it might turn around and attack someone close to them, or perhaps they will find themselves to be the target. In any case, I hope what nearly happened to Ashley makes the defense team finally decide to do the job they were appointed to do.

[00:49:21] We have literally spent weeks going through the messages of Weineke, Osbrook, Mada, Fledowski, Miller, and Parsons. Frankly, while we believe that people like Parsons and Svdlowsky and Miller are toxic, harmful cranks, we ultimately view them as the victims here.

[00:49:39] We feel that they have been manipulated, exploited, and left to make fools of themselves on behalf of this defense team. As for the attorneys, we're just baffled. Weineke and Osbrook are professionals who had an opportunity to assist directly with a high-profile case and then bow out gracefully

[00:49:56] or continue doing quiet work behind the scenes. Instead of just doing that, they seemingly have attempted to also leverage their newfound internet fame while trying to sick attack dogs on targets of their choosing.

[00:50:07] As for Mada, instead of declaring himself a spokesperson and being honest about his level of connections to the defense team with his audience, he sought to make the most of his access by setting himself up as the voice for Richard Allen without even disclosing that.

[00:50:20] He's made noises here and there about having links to this defense team. It's not sufficient, not even a little. What's more is that these messages prove that this defense team continues to leak.

[00:50:31] Osbrook and Weineke and Hennessy may not be technically gagged, but that's honestly utterly beside the point. A man died by suicide in the midst of the Westerman leak. I do not understand how you can possibly read the ramblings of these cranks,

[00:50:48] especially Svdlowsky and Parsons, and not feel concerned for their mental states. Did this defense team learn nothing? Do they just not care?

[00:50:58] The one lesson they should have learned is that you under no circumstances leak in a way that drags in potentially vulnerable people to get the word out. Just argue your case! Do your jobs!

[00:51:12] I hope they finally, at long last, put away the nonsense and the stupid distractions and the vicious character assassinations and actually start representing the interests of their client. It would be a refreshing change.

[00:51:27] Richard Allen, and everyone who cares about this case, deserves far better than what this team has offered so far. 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.com.

[00:51:48] If you have actionable information about an unsolved crime, please report it to the appropriate authorities. 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.com.

[00:52:31] 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.

[00:52:45] 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.