The Delphi Murders: The Wreckage of the Ricci Davis Theory

[00:00:00] We all love a little luxury in our lives, but sometimes it can be very hard to justify the expense. That's why we love our sponsor, Quince. It's a company that helps us all enjoy the little luxuries without breaking the bank. Quince offers high-quality products. We're talking washable silk tops and dresses, 14-karat gold jewelry, and organic cotton sweaters. They even have 100% Mongolian cashmere sweaters from $50. Quince's prices are 50% to 80% less than those of their competitors.

[00:00:28] So you're getting the best for a wonderful price. You can stock up on classic fashion staples without overspending. Quince is accessible and affordable because they cut out the middleman. And they only work with safe factories to get you the very best without compromising their ethics. I love my Mongolian cashmere sweaters, which again start at just $50. I got the black v-neck sweater and a dark blue turtleneck sweater. I really like the way they make me look.

[00:00:56] I recently donned the turtleneck when I went out to dinner and then a board game night with friends. We played this insane game from the 80s that was like a cross between Monopoly and life called Going For It. It was really fun. But anyways, my sweater has gotten some compliments and it goes with a lot of my wardrobe, so I love it. It really shocks me how affordable these high-quality sweaters are. Give yourself the luxury you deserve with Quince. Go to quince.com slash msheet for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns.

[00:01:27] 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 includes discussion of the murder of two children. Also, I just want to say, like, there might be cursing. I don't know, but we'll see. Going on, yeah, I'm pretty sure there's going to be cursing because we certainly had a spirited pre-programmed discussion.

[00:01:54] But before we get into that, before we get into the meat of the episode, I wanted to mention we were actually in Delphi, Indiana on Monday of this week. And one thing that's kind of funny is that when we go to Delphi and people see us, sometimes they come up to us and say things like, oh, did something bad happen? Because they're used to us being there when there's some court hearings or things of that nature. And actually, we went there for a happy reason.

[00:02:24] Steve Mullen, who was one of the investigators for prosecutor Nicholas McClelland, was becoming the chief of police for the city of Delphi. And on Monday was the ceremony where he was sworn in. And let's be honest, ceremonies at City Hall aren't like Fast and Furious movies. They're not full of big budget special effects and explosions. Not usually a hot ticket.

[00:02:53] But this ceremony for now Police Chief Mullen, the room was packed. There were people lining the walls of the room. I think there were people out in the hallway who couldn't even get into the room. And I think that really speaks to the nature of Steve Mullen and how much he is loved and respected by the people of that community.

[00:03:21] And how very different he is from the caricature that the defense in the Richard Allen case has tried to create of him. And I think that's worth noting. And I think they've given the world a very distorted and unfair view of that city and the people in it. Actually, some of the people who were worried that we were there for a really bad reason that we ran into when we told them why we were there,

[00:03:47] they were expressing that they were really excited that Police Chief Mullen was taking over at this point because they were familiar with his brand of policing. And what we heard was that it's very community-centric, very friendly. And so I think people there were excited that he's taking on that role again and feel like he's going to imbue that office with a lot of integrity as he has in the other offices in law enforcement he's held in that community. So that's really cool.

[00:04:15] And it's just nice to kind of, I don't know, like see things like this happen outside of the context of the Delphi case. Because as you said, that's not really an accurate or good view of anyone in this. I mean, there's been so much smearing and nonsense going on. But in this case, it was like, you know, people really love that guy. So I think that's what you should take away. He's very, very loved and admired and respected in that town.

[00:04:43] I also, I think I would be remiss if I didn't mention that after the ceremony, we had lunch at the biscuit place. The biscuit company. Buttermilk biscuits. We're obsessed. Okay. I'm sorry. This is the best biscuits. It's, you can also get the waffles. The waffles are great. Yeah. I did something in Orthodox, did not get the biscuit. I got a waffle with strawberries and quite good. Here's the thing.

[00:05:09] I always just either get the waffle with strawberries on the side or I get the, usually I get the plain biscuit. Because, you know, I can get good waffles down here. I can't get any biscuits like that where we live. And I would just say, that's what we typically get. But there's a lot of different options. You should go there. If you're in Delphi, go there. By the McBiscuits. Some of the people who listen to the show, you might one day visit the trails, visit the bridge. Support the local businesses in Delphi. A lot of great people there. Try the biscuits. You won't regret it.

[00:05:39] Lots of great businesses there. So with all of that said, I think the rest of the show, we promised that we'd tell you when the show wasn't worth your time. This show is unimportant. It's not worth your time. So let me just say, you know, there's people who are going to want to tune in to hear about updates in Delphi. You can listen to this or you can have your time back. So we're not going to be offended if you bounce now.

[00:06:03] And just know that for these Delphi episodes, we're not going to really have them be bumping back our coverage of other cases as we're trying to move into other cases. So these will be little things that pop up as updates happen. But just rest assured that this doesn't mean we're sort of pivoting back to Delphi at the same clip. It just means that, hey, something happened. If you want to listen to it, great. If not, we'll see you for the next one. But this one's not important. This one is not important.

[00:06:32] This one is in no way important. This one is absolutely not important. I don't think I can stress that enough. I don't think I can underline enough how unimportant this recent filing is. I wish it was like the old days when you could have like newspapers with a huge type and the newspaper headline of the details, what we're going to be discussing today would say, no big deal. Nothing to be seen here. Don't waste your time.

[00:07:01] Don't be like us. Yeah. I wish. Anja said, you know, she's offering the listeners, our dear listeners, and like an hour of their time back. I wish I could get the time back I spent reading this motion. Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep. Okay. Are we ready for the music? Yeah. Why don't you hit the button? My name is Anja Kane. I'm a journalist. And I'm Kevin Greenlee. I'm an attorney. And this is The Murder Sheet.

[00:07:27] 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 wreckage of the Ricky Davis theory.

[00:07:41] So what we're going to be talking about here, the document is Richard Allen's verified reply memorandum to the state of Indiana's response to preserve and produce and request for sanctions.

[00:08:40] Before we get into this document and waste all of our time, I'd like to make a couple of big picture points. One of the points that Andrew Baldwin does not make in this document is that after Ricky Davis told his story about Ron Logan, and again, it was a story in which Ron Logan allegedly confessed to Ricky Davis.

[00:09:07] Once he told that story to authorities, and that story contained numerous things that were flagrantly untrue, Mr. Davis, that fine, upstanding gentleman, was given a lie detector test, and he failed it badly. He completely failed that lie detector test. I want to make that point. Do you think it's just because the investigators were mean to him and didn't make him feel confident and didn't really believe him and didn't let him wear a wire to entrap Ron Logan?

[00:09:36] No, I think he failed the lie detector test because he was lying. We can all have different points of view about the lie detector test and how valid it is, blah, blah, blah. But in this case, I believe the result was accurate. This man is a liar. His word is worth nothing. And that's another point I want to mention is sometimes when we talk about these filings, I like to talk about the dog that didn't bark. What does that mean? Our dog doesn't really bark a lot. So are you talking about Lanny? No, I'm not talking about Lanny.

[00:10:05] I'm talking about things that don't appear in the document that maybe I would expect to see in the document. Or sometimes omissions can be interesting. So Mr. Davis, this fine upstanding citizen who's incarcerated for 50 years for drug offenses and who threatened us, this fine upstanding citizen who Mr. Baldwin suggests has great credibility, in letters to Prosecutor Nicholas McClelland,

[00:10:33] Mr. Davis suggested that defense attorney Andrew Baldwin wanted him to lie. So he was basically suggesting that Andrew Baldwin was trying to suborn perjury. Oh, Kevin, you know how it is. Mr. Baldwin does not refer to that in any way in this filing. Why not? I don't know. Because what is there to say? Well, I'll tell you what the problem is.

[00:11:03] Ricky Davis is a liar. And so the only evidence we have, and I use the term evidence very loosely, the only evidence we have that Andrew Baldwin tried to get him to commit perjury is the word of Ricky Davis. So his word is worth nothing. So I'm not going to sit here and say I believe what Ricky Davis said about Andrew Baldwin, but because I think that would be intellectually dishonest. You have to be consistent.

[00:11:32] If you say this person's word means nothing and then he says something that you think seems plausible, you can't say, well, no, I believe that. No, you have to be consistent. And if you believe he is a liar and his word means nothing, then it has to apply to everything. Okay. But Mr. Baldwin wants us to regard Mr. Davis as a credible witness.

[00:11:58] And he does all sorts of contortions during this document where he basically suggests, well, maybe Ricky Davis was accurately reporting what like Kagan Klein said, but maybe Kagan Klein was lying. But he wants us to believe that Ricky Davis accurately reports the things he is told. Okay.

[00:12:21] Well, then if that's the case, if he accurately reports things he was told, then what are we supposed to think about him saying he was encouraged by Mr. Baldwin to lie? Right. So I fail to understand how you can say he is a credible witness who accurately reports things while at the same time he reported that you were encouraging him to lie. Yeah.

[00:12:50] Can someone explain that to us? I mean, for the people who are cheerleading this, like it's the biggest, you know, huge break in the case since whatever. I, I, I, what, how do you, how do you reconcile those things? How is he a person who's believable, but also saying that Baldwin tried to push him to do something obviously wrong? I don't understand that.

[00:13:12] It almost seems to me as a person on the outside that he's just making wild accusations at anyone based on what he thinks the person he's talking to wants to hear, which would not be out of place for a disreputable prison house snitch. You know, getting attention, getting accolades, maybe getting some commissary money from people at this point.

[00:13:38] You know, so I, how do we, how do we reconcile his accusation towards Baldwin with his accusations toward everyone else? That's a good question. To me, the intellectually honest points of view would be he's lying about everything. He's lying when he accuses Baldwin. He's lying when he said, uh, he got confessions from Logan and Klein or the other intellectually honest point of view would say he's a truth teller. He accurately reports what he hears.

[00:14:07] He accurately reported what he heard from Klein and Logan, and he accurately reported what he heard from, from Baldwin. I think those are the two options. I'm pretty solidly in the camp that the guy is a liar and we can't believe anything he said, including his accusation against Andrew Baldwin.

[00:14:25] But I think if Andrew Baldwin wants anybody to take this man's story seriously, he needs to come up with a plausible explanation for why we should disbelieve Mr. Davis when Mr. Davis says Mr. Baldwin was doing something wrong. But we should believe him when Mr. Davis says things that Mr. Baldwin likes.

[00:14:46] You know what these, you know what the, I mean, obviously Baldwin is dealing with it by just not talking about it because I don't think there's a way for you to do that in a legal filing. I think that's impossible. What their online acolytes are doing, I think are essentially asking everybody, okay, you just saw us dump a bunch of rat poison into the chicken noodle soup. But what we're going to do is dip our hands in there, grab some chicken. I don't think this one was contaminated. Go ahead and eat it. No.

[00:15:16] What? Kevin's like, I'm never eating your food again. But I mean, but in all honesty, I mean, what Ricky Davis says is contaminated. If he's lying about Baldwin, then what he's saying about anyone else is contaminated. That means he's not a person to be trusted. This is, you know, this is like, this drives me crazy when people are like, oh, well, this YouTuber, this social media poster got all these things wrong. But I want to check them out because maybe sometimes they get things right.

[00:15:42] In my view, when we're dealing with like a murder case, if you're getting stuff wrong or you're lying, that's it. You know, unless there's some sort of amends made or apology given or sort of some sort of here's what happened. No, like we don't need to give people second chances. That's just not appropriate in this space. And I think that certainly is perhaps even more important for someone who's accusing people of murder.

[00:16:03] You know, as many a defense attorney has appropriately pointed out in many cases that we've looked at, especially cases of wrongful convictions. People have their own baffling agendas when it comes to this stuff. And you cannot necessarily trust what another inmate is saying about another inmate if it's not bolstered by corroborating evidence. It's just a completely fantastic notion, I guess, to Baldwin. But I mean, that seems.

[00:16:32] Yeah, the fact that he's getting accused, too, is just I mean, that is just such delicious irony. You need you need to deal with it. You need to deal with it. Yeah, you need to say, gosh, this person is so unreliable. He even accuses me. Yeah, you need to deal with it. You got to say something like, oh, I think there was a miscommunication. You know, I wasn't asking him to lie for me. I was asking him to bake a pie for me. You know, like there's got to be there's going to be something.

[00:16:59] Obviously, there couldn't be because anything they'd come up with would probably be even more ridiculous than that. But there's there's there's got to be something. I think the fact that he basically looked at that mess and said, well, not touching that. I'm going to walk right around. That is very telling. Yes, the dog is the dog that didn't bark. Yeah. But I mean, like, good Lord. I mean, have some dignity. Life moves fast. Sometimes you're minding your own business, trying to do a podcast and battle misinformation and true crime. And the next thing you know, you got to sell some T-shirts.

[00:17:29] We all need an uncomplicated way to relax, recharge or stay focused. That's where VIA comes in. VIA is a company that crafts premium hemp products tailored to a specific mood or experience. Topicals, drops, vapes. We love their CBD gummies. They offer products with all levels of THC, along with THC free options. If you've not tried VIA, you are missing out.

[00:17:54] Whatever you need to do, whether that's unwind, get creative or hone your focus, they've got you covered. Enhance your every day, even at night. We have absolutely been relying on the flow state gummies to write this book and record this podcast at the same time. Like when we sit down and get to work, we both make sure to have one. Right now, we are coming into the final stretch of some pretty important work, so it's been helpful to feel extra locked in and focused. Get started with their quick product finder quiz.

[00:18:22] They will send you personalized recommendations on what to try. Again, if you're 21 and older, head to viahemp.com and use the code MSHEAT to receive 15% off. Free shipping on orders over $100. And if you're new to VIA, a free gift of your choice. That's V-I-I-A-H-E-M-P.com and use code MSHEAT at checkout. After you purchase, they ask you where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them we sent you. Enhance your every day with VIA.

[00:18:49] So the meat of this is about the letters that Ricky Davis wrote to the prosecution. In these letters, Mr. Davis said that Mr. Baldwin's client, Richard Allen, was involved in the murders. He was accusing Mr. Allen of being involved in the murders.

[00:19:11] And so on page one of this filing, Mr. Baldwin says the prosecution has the duty to turn over exculpatory evidence. Exculpatory evidence is defined as evidence tending to establish a criminal defendant's innocence. And again, in these letters, Mr. Davis says that Mr. Allen is guilty of murder. Very exculpatory.

[00:19:38] So it's not the least bit exculpatory. Yeah. Well, are we done? Can I read, can I go ahead to the defense theory? Yeah. And just read what their theory is and then maybe get into the state's theory as described in the defense. Read how he describes the defense theory. Quote,

[00:20:32] This reminds me of all things. There was a long time ago, there was an article in Playboy magazine on the history of comic books. And one writer I like said that that essay on the history of comic books was so error ridden that you could actually do a good college test if you had students read it and point out all the errors.

[00:20:55] And it feels like much the same thing is at work here because virtually everything that Anya just accurately read about their theory is not supported by the facts at all. Yeah. And this isn't even one of the egregious ones. This is a very toned down version of their theory, I will say, that doesn't get into all the wild stuff.

[00:21:19] But ultimately, what happened at the three day hearing and certainly what happened at trial was that they were not able to really establish any of this particularly well. It's not their burden to prove anything. To be clear, they could have done nothing at trial. And that would have been Richard Allen's right. But the fact of the matter is, I mean, that's the risk you take when you go with an alternate theory to a certain extent. So, I mean, I don't know.

[00:21:47] So, they're a theory that the evidence strongly supported. I mean, obviously, the jury did not agree. So, let's go to the state's theory. Also, I just really find some of this discussion very fun from a creative writing standpoint because in the defense's theory paragraph, it's a very tight paragraph where they just kind of straightforwardly lay out all of the basics. They don't really go out on any limbs.

[00:22:09] In the state's theory paragraph, it's all like – it's basically a long, long sentence held together by a bunch of clauses and commas to indicate. And the reason for that writing-wise is if you make a whole long list of something rather than just sort of succinctly summing it up, then it makes the whole thing sound a lot more insurmountable and ridiculous.

[00:22:31] So, instead of saying, I got ready in the morning, saying, well, first, I put on my clothes, then I brushed my teeth, then I went downstairs and looked around, and then I let Lanny out, and then we went on a walk, and then Kevin called me, and then I was looking around for the cereal I wanted. It starts to sound much more – how could Anya have accomplished so much in such a short amount of time? And that's what they're doing here, which is, again, a trick for rubes.

[00:23:00] Let's be honest, right? Basically, like, we think you're stupid and you're going to fall for this. So, one thing that they were really appalled with was the state's theory. They talked about how Bridge Guy was, quote, seen – was seen, quote, walking casually and not panting like a 45-year-old man who would run across the bridge, end quote.

[00:23:20] One of my favorite things is the way they always talk about Richard Allen, just being this completely useless, you know, completely useless person who can't walk anywhere, is too little to accost two girls with a gun and get anything accomplished. He's too short, too small, too old, too sad to do anything. And one thing that just strikes me about this is how ridiculous it is, given that we only have, what, a few seconds of Bridge Guy, a.k.a. Richard Allen, on audio saying, guys down the hill.

[00:23:50] You know, it's not like they had a boom mic on him where we can hear all of his gasping and whatever. I mean, it's just stupid. I mean, like – I don't know. I just – this stuff just bothers me. Then he talks about the – this is – and again, the use of language here, quote, both victims somehow were undressed, end quote. So, like, it's so unfathomable that a sexual predator would hold a gun on his victims and force them to undress. Like, why is that – why is that somehow in there?

[00:24:20] It's to kind of, again, give you the impression through language and through writing that this is just – oh, how could – how could any – how could any reasonable person believe this? It's like – sounds pretty par for the course to me. I mean, geez. They talk about how, quote, the lone panic killer murdered one victim and then murdered the other victim without anyone hearing any screams in spite of sound traveling very well throughout that area all the way to the bridge, end quote.

[00:24:50] Okay. Okay. So, one thing that the defense tried to do at trial, in fairness, was bring out trail witnesses who could – who would have been there and basically say, well, why did they hear nothing? And time and time again, they put these people on the stand and then the state established that they'd been there far after everything was over. They were there usually after 3 p.m. So, who cares? If no one's on the bridge to hear it, no one's on the bridge to hear it. And guess what? They did not put anyone on the bridge at the appropriate time.

[00:25:19] So, yeah, that's why no one heard anything. Yeah, I'm still astonished all these months later at what a poor job the defense did. That's it. That's all I got to say. That's the end of the episode. Yeah, they – I don't even know what to say. Yeah. Did they put those people on the stand not realizing they were there much later than when the murders happened? Or did they think – They don't care.

[00:25:49] They just wanted to confuse people. Or did they just want to confuse people, try to trick the jury? I don't get it. That's one of the mysteries to me about this is they profess to be so confident. And that confidence was entirely unwarranted because they had a weak hand and they played it remarkably badly.

[00:26:10] I think one thing that may be kind of an undertone of some of these filings is certainly behind the scenes there was a feeling from the defense side. I think it's fair to say that they viewed McClellan as a hillbilly or a rube, just a guy who didn't even know what he was doing.

[00:26:32] And then he turned around, this person they were mocking, and just completely dominated them, just completely made them look foolish and ridiculous. And it's one thing to be beaten by like a Clarence Darrow. It must have really hurt their egos to be beaten by someone they clearly did not respect. And so I suspect that some of this stuff that is going on is their attempt to deal with that psychic wound.

[00:27:00] Yeah, I was like – when I read this from Baldwin, a lot of it did seem like self-soothing and ego wound. Those are difficult to deal with. You know, you think you're one thing and then your performance doesn't live up to that. That ought to, I would say, prompt some self-reflection on how you can do better in the future for your clients. Because I don't feel like they did a particularly good job for Richard Allen. I don't feel like it rose to the level of being ineffective. I think they were certainly vigorous in what they were doing. I just don't think it was good. And I don't think it was truthful. And frankly, I don't think they did it with dignity.

[00:27:29] But, you know, that kind of failure can actually prompt growth and people doing better in the future. But that requires you to, like, not blame everyone else for your own actions here. And what I see is, like, you see a lot of second-guessing of his own strategy in this whole thing. We'll talk more about this later. But you see a lot of being like, well, this is important. This is important. It's like, well, you fooled us because we were only hearing about Odinism from you guys from, like, a year. So, like, what gives? That's not the strategy you picked.

[00:27:56] So, now that you've been completely dominated by Prosecutor McClellan, you want to, like, second-guess or come up with excuses. Just deal with it. You lost. I think they're mad. I mean, I think it's like maybe you're mad at yourself. Like, I mean, honestly, because it's like why wouldn't you – if you felt like any of this was reasonable. But, you know, again, it's everyone else's fault and they can't lose unless the other team cheated and it's all set up.

[00:28:18] If they had gotten out of the echo chamber they put themselves into, I think they would have realized a long time ago what a ridiculous theory Odinism was. But I digress. I didn't mean to interrupt. No, it's appropriate. You know, they talk about how it's, you know, ridiculous that Richard Allen would leave to walk westbound toward his vehicle on 300 north, you know, and even though he would be in full view of any vehicles.

[00:28:44] You know, their client made some pretty baffling choices while he was drunk and sexually aroused by the thought of raping some women or girls. So I don't know what to tell you. That's not exactly a state that I would think – and also having just killed two kids. I mean, I don't – who cares? So they also talk about – so, quote, The state's theory was not that multiple men slash women were involved in the crimes, but one man alone committed all these acts and did so on the afternoon of February 13, 2017.

[00:29:12] That is completely plausible. And we saw that because it was outlined very well by the prosecution team at trial. You know, this is something that the defense consistently does, and they use creative writing, and they use this aggrieved, shocked tone to convey things that are ultimately totally reasonable. Just because I say something in an aggrieved and shocked tone does not make me right.

[00:29:38] I can say, Kevin, you're saying the sky outside is blue? And yeah, it could be. Just look outside yourself. And guess what? We looked outside ourselves. We went up every day of that freaking trial. So, yeah, I feel pretty confident saying what the state put out there was very plausible and backed up by, I don't know, this crazy thing called evidence. Whereas the defense floundered. I think they could have presented a better case for their client.

[00:30:06] That would have probably required ditching Odinism a long time ago. But, I mean, we're beyond that now. I mean, they lost. So let's move on. They lost. It's all these letters. And again, the letters came from a person who failed a lie detector test and whose story. Who got details wrong. He got many, many, many details completely wrong. Think of it this way.

[00:30:35] If I were to sit down with you, dear listener, and said, I'm going to describe what your house is like. You're obsessed with their houses all of a sudden. I would describe details.

[00:30:48] I would describe details. Kevin's been inside my house.

[00:31:18] And they're taking this story of Mr. Davis told and just picking out the things they like. Everyone made such a big deal about him talking about a box cutter from Ron Logan. Wasn't one of the letters we reviewed? He was talking about a carpet knife. Yeah. So it's like, oh, wow. It's almost like he's throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks. But no, Ricky would never do that.

[00:31:40] And also, I mean, if the gold standard is if a person knew about the box cutter being the murder weapon, that's very significant. Well, golly. Richard Allen certainly had that piece of information. And he didn't need to guess a bunch of times. No. So let's see. I love the foot. I just I love the footnotes. The footnotes are always so revealing.

[00:32:03] They talk about how, you know, one of one of Davis's claims was Richard was, you know, like involved, but talked about meetings during the evening. And well, Richard Allen was at home on the evening of February 13th at 27 in the morning of February 14th, 2017. I always find it fascinating when this defense team is focusing a lot on times and dates because, I mean, there's an obvious question. Where was your client between noon and 5 p.m. on February 13th, 2017?

[00:32:33] Surely that should not be too hard to answer. Where was he? They haven't even put out like they haven't even put out. Well, he was just at home. They've never put anything out. Can Kathy Allen account for him? Can his parents account for him? No. That's another dog that didn't bark. Where was Richard Allen at the time? The state says the girls were killed. You know, that's the dog that didn't bark. Because, yeah, I mean, he didn't he didn't disappear. He had to be somewhere. You would think they would put down something.

[00:33:02] But I don't think they can because I think he was. These are the time of the murders. Richard Allen was committing murder. Yeah. I also I'm glad you highlighted that because they say they're all Richard Davis. Richard Davis. Ah. Mashup. Talking about the great reporter Richard Harding Davis. No, Richard Allen was at home on the evening of February 13th, 2017 and the morning of February 14th, 2017. Prove it. Correct me if I'm wrong, Anya.

[00:33:30] At no time during the course of the trial was any evidence given about where Richard Allen was on the evening of February 13th or the morning of February 14th, 2017. That's correct. And throughout this document, Baldwin is going to say, oh, there's evidence that Richard Allen was at home during these times. There's evidence he's at home during these times. And it's like, where's the evidence? And then finally, he says, well, you know, if we'd wanted to, we could put Kathy Allen on the stand to say that. Well, you didn't.

[00:33:59] You didn't put her on the stand. So you don't get to go and say, oh, there's evidence of this if you did not put forth that evidence and subject it to cross-examination. Put Kathy Allen on the stand. Swear her under penalty of perjury and have her say where Richard Allen was that night. And then I will give it some credence. Yeah. Don't just say, oh, there's evidence of this when you're not providing us with that evidence. Like a baseball player on a losing team saying, I could have hit a home run. Well, you didn't. And then you lost.

[00:34:29] Yeah, they didn't put Kathy Allen on the stand. They had the opportunity to do so. And they failed to do so. Obviously, when a defense attorney chooses not to put someone on the stand, we have to assume that they are rational actors and they're not putting that person on the stand because they feel that the risk of that person messing up and hurting their case is greater than the chance that that person will help their case. Also, it doesn't matter that he was home that night.

[00:34:57] But it would matter if he was home between approximately noon and I guess 5 p.m. Somewhere in there because, you know, he's spotted right before four walking bloody and muddy along the road. So let's give him that time range. If he's there, if he's somewhere else during that time, that would be great to know because that would be an alibi. But if he can't account for that, I don't care where he was at 7 p.m. or 6 p.m.

[00:35:23] I just like that doesn't matter to me because, you know what, this is crazy. I mean, this may shock some people, but you can go home after you do something horrible and be in your house. It's not like he would have been magically barred from the door because, you know, the house would have realized he was a murderer now. I mean, why are we supposed to care about where he was that evening? Like, I don't even understand why they're emphasizing this like it's some big gotcha, but I guess that's kind of what their MO is. Again, more creative writing.

[00:35:52] Can I talk about the Kagan Klein confession? Yeah, do that. I love the creative writing here because, again, it's just it's so transparent. So they talk about, quote, in this case, Kagan Klein's confession to the murders and also Klein's claim that Ron Logan was involved. Let's just stop there. Stop there. Kagan Klein's confession. There's no Kagan Klein confession, at least in this iteration. OK, there's what we have from Ricky Davis, the defense's own unreliable witness slash accuser of.

[00:36:22] Perjury suborning who we know lied to them and who they could have had access to throughout the trial, could have brought to the stand at the three day hearing, could have used for an offer of proof. We have what he's claiming Klein said. But again, what they do is they overextend themselves and get beyond the truth in their language.

[00:36:43] And that is to try to manipulate members of the public from going to saying, well, somebody said Kagan Klein said this to suddenly it's the Kagan Klein confession. That makes it concrete. That makes it real. That makes you subtly tricks your brain into believing in it. But let's just be clear. That doesn't exist. All we have is Ricky Davis's word and his word is garbage because he's a liar.

[00:37:05] Yes, I feel we should give the exact same amount of credence to Ricky Davis's claim of Kagan Klein's alleged confession as we give to Ricky Davis's claim that Baldwin tried to get him to commit perjury. Yeah. Let's give them the same level of credence. And again, I suggest that that level of credence is exactly zero.

[00:37:26] Right after what Anya read, Klein and Ron Logan, quote, these were the two most likely suspects during the investigation. End quote. If that was the case, if that was the case, if you believe the Klein and Logan were the two most likely suspects, then why on earth did you waste a year of everyone's life by running after the Odinism butterflies?

[00:37:56] With a big net. That's a really good question. I mean, again, that's why I feel like this this is almost this is Baldwin's disguised confessions about how he feels about some of those things, because it's like, are you like it must be agonizing to feel like, you know, you could have done better on the most high profile case of your career. And you just instead sort of embarrass yourself. I think I could understand feeling regrets here.

[00:38:23] But basically, all this feels like is just a man wailing and gnashing his teeth. You know, it's sad, but it's not it's not something that we all need to see at this point. Frankly, I think it's I think that's so stunning. But of course, the people who are obsessed with this case who are like, you know, they're fanboys and girls are just going to be like, oh, that's fine. You know, we were carrying water and, you know, setting up anti-Odinist watchdog groups for like a year.

[00:38:52] But now that you say, you know, you say jump, we say how high when it comes to Klein and Logan. Those are the two most likely suspects. They're the public enemies, number one and two. Maybe that should have been your focus instead of this Odinism nonsense. And let's be let's be clear, they did actually ask for those two things during the three day hearing during the third party offer, you know, that where they're trying to get third party. OJ blundered through Ron Logan for like five minutes and that was it. She basically did nothing on Logan.

[00:39:22] It was pathetic. When we look at Klein, Rosie made more of an effort on Klein. I felt like they had a little bit more there, but it was nothing compared to the mountain of effort of Odinism. It did not. It was clear that I mean, we were people who got pretty deep into the Klein lead. We reported on it extensively. We know it pretty well. So to my ears, it was someone who had done a bit of work on Klein, but I didn't feel like it was someone who had done extensive work on Klein.

[00:39:51] And again, I thought I thought his part of the whole thing was probably the high point for the defense at the three day hearing. So I'm not even that's a very little that's a low bar. But like if they really wanted to go all in on Klein, they could have done a lot more and they could have put resources toward investigating that angle. And that would have made sense to me. But instead, we got basically those kind of tacked on at the last minute in a way that was just overtly kind of frankly sloppy looking.

[00:40:17] And and now it's, you know, revisionist history where I mean, again, like just admitting incompetence. You know, you had every chance to center that and maybe had you done so. I don't know, maybe I think it's pretty hard to overcome the fact that Kagan Klein was on his phone in Peru during the murders. I think that is a very that's a hard thing to overcome, but maybe there could have been something said for that had they put more effort into it.

[00:40:46] Quote, the defense could have argued that Kagan Klein knew details of the crime that no one else knew. And furthermore, the he Klein was protecting an unknown third party by claiming that Allen was the third party after Allen's arrest in quote. So he's saying we can pick and choose the details we like from this alleged confession that we got secondhand through through a liar.

[00:41:11] And I'm not I didn't see anything in there that Kagan Klein allegedly said that was a detail only the killer would know. Not at all. And I think it would be very difficult to say, well, this guy, he lied about these details and he lied when he accused my client. But hey, the rest of the story looks pretty good, huh? Well, except the part where they say that I tried to get him to commit perjury. But the rest of it, huh? I don't see a jury buying that.

[00:41:38] Also, can I just point out that like the killers, the details only the killer would know. Yeah. What details? What I saw were a couple of details that the defense say aligned with their grand theory that they didn't prove out in court and that they barely even tried. They tried to prove a few times. And with that, I'm talking about the crime scene. We'll probably get more into that later, right? Yeah. But here's here's another thing. They talk about how Allen had no linkage to either Klein or Logan. So that's why it's all so exculpatory.

[00:42:05] Well, I don't I don't I've never heard of any linkage between Allen and Logan. That is not true for the Klein family. I mean, the Allens come from Miami County. Kathy grew up in Peru. Richard grew grew up right outside in Mexico. So not only that, but we talked to a lot of people in that area. And I mean, we could never absolutely prove a connection, but there were many times we got very close. I'll just say this.

[00:42:35] People would be like, oh, they knew each other. Absolutely. They absolutely knew each other. Was anyone able to say they were like best friends? No. Do I think there was a strong link there between the families? No. Do I think they knew each other? I think the evidence indicates that maybe not very well. And again, I'm not someone I do not believe that there was a link that had any sort of relevance to this case. But when you want to be very bold with your language and say Allen didn't know these people. Well, that is certainly not true.

[00:43:03] I mean, maybe he didn't know kegging Klein specifically. But I think based on what we've heard from people in Peru and in that general area, it's very likely that Allen knew the Kleins in general. And in fact, I would be surprised if he didn't at all. And again, I think that's a coincidence. I'm not saying that to put it out there like, oh, this is some, you know, everyone knew each other and everyone's connected. It's just more of like, that's a pretty bold statement from this defense team. And honestly, that was one of the reasons I always figured they never went with kegging Klein.

[00:43:33] Because I think they were. I mean, well, if you would ascribe to sort of a rationalist view of the defense where they're making rational decisions, then you don't necessarily want to open up a can of worms that then could blow up in your face. Right. Right. But I don't know why I can't worms blow up in your face. But anyways, weird metaphors aside, I think I am. It just. It's interesting that they said that.

[00:43:59] Quote, Ricky Davis claims that Klein detailed that the girls bodies were moved three times and they were not killed where they were found. And furthermore, their bodies were staged, end quote. And that's just another, like I said, go through it and pick out the errors because there was expert testimony given at the trial that indicates the girls were killed where they were found.

[00:44:23] And so if Klein allegedly said otherwise, that on top of the failed lie detector test and all this other stuff, that is further reason to doubt the alleged story. And if that is a key part of the theory, I mean, I often wonder during the trial, Pat Cicero and the crime scene investigators did such a great job of making it clear the girls were killed where they were found.

[00:44:53] If the defense wanted us to believe otherwise, why didn't they find an expert of their own to contradict the findings of Mr. Cicero? It's a heck of a question. I posit that if there is an expert who could have helped them and they didn't use that expert, then perhaps that expert did not exist.

[00:45:16] I'm not sure that anyone who is an expert in the field and who looked at the large amount of blood on that scene would have said, oh, yeah, these girls were killed and moved three times before they were they were placed here. It's an idiotic notion if you saw the crime scene photos as Ani and I have. You have, as you said, Major Pat Cicero. You had Sergeant Jason Page. You had now retired crime scene investigators Brian Olihai and Dwayne Datsman.

[00:45:45] That was what the state had for. What they said happened at the crime scene. There are other cases where a defense can put on saying, hey, these are our experts and this is what they have to say. They say something different. They don't think the bloodstain pattern analysis is correct from the state. Here's what they have to say. They could have done that. They did not. I agree with you. I don't think they could find anyone remotely credible who was willing to say what they wanted them to. So then they couldn't use anyone. And this defense team had no problem putting on witnesses.

[00:46:15] Don Perlmutter. Yeah, they put on witnesses who were not super credible. You know, and so also, I mean, moved three times. Moved three times. And the thing that gets me is not killed where they were found. So all that blood there is just a massive red herring, right? Yeah. It's just, it's outrageous. One thing I found, so this next part where they talk about, they talk about essentially Kagan Klein in his confession talked about how the killers went to Lafayette afterwards.

[00:46:44] Lafayette for people who are not from Indiana is like the biggest city nearby Delphi. Is that fair to say? Yeah, what, 15, 20 minutes away? Very close by. Home of Purdue University. Purdue University. Boilermakers. So this is, this is where, this is, I just, this made me laugh. Because I remember, this reminds me, when I was in college, me and a couple of my friends did like, there was like some sort of campus scavenger hunt. And we all were like, for some reason in this weird thing where we'd read a clue.

[00:47:12] And then like, it was like we were almost in this like fugue state where somebody would say, oh, I think the answer is Lake Matoka, which was a lake right near campus. And then we'd all run to Lake Matoka, which is, was not close to where we were at the time. This happened like two times or three times where we ended up at this lake. And there was never a clue there. And it was like we would just, for some reason, primed, jump to conclusions that it was at Lake Matoka. And I feel like Lafayette is that for them here because they're saying, Kagan Klein mentioned going to Lafayette.

[00:47:41] And hey, Ron Logan went to Lafayette to get some fish food. Hmm. Interesting. Lafayette, anybody? And that's, that's something that establishes Richard Allen's innocence because the, because the word Lafayette, the city of Lafayette came up in these conversations. I mean, like, what? Yeah. They're not saying that. I mean, like, I'm, oh, Jesus. It's like, it's the biggest city nearby. Like, that's where people might get fish food. It's just stupid. I feel, uh, I'm losing IQ points just talking about this.

[00:48:11] But I did want to highlight another thing here. Uh, quote, in his February 12th, 2025 interview at Newcastle Prison, Ricky Davis provided further details that he, Davis, claimed slash believed. That he also provided the prosecution concerning details that Kagan Klein stated to Davis. In that interview, for example, Ricky Davis claimed that Kagan Klein stated that the girls were handcuffed to each other.

[00:48:38] After the meeting, defense counsel, OJ, Baldwin, and investigator Matt Hoffman viewed the crime scene in autopsy photos to determine whether there were any indicators on the victim's wrists that would support this new information that the victims were handcuffed to one another.

[00:48:53] The admittedly non-expert eyeballs of the attorneys and investigator observed straight lines on the left hand of the wrists of both girls, which, if true, could indicate that one victim walked immediately behind the other with each of their left hands handcuffed to each other so they could not easily run away. End quote. So this is... Jesus Christ. Uh, I, I have many strengths, many good things about me. Don't know anything about cars.

[00:49:22] So if you opened up the hood of your car and I described what I thought I saw there, my observations would be worth absolutely nothing. And I, I respectfully suggest that the, uh, admittedly non-expert eyeballs of OJ Baldwin and, uh, Matt Hoffman, their, their observations of what they imagine that they see in these photographs, what they very much want to see in these photographs.

[00:49:51] I, I think that their observations are completely worthless. And I do note that everybody who worked on this case, all the crime scene investigators, all the experts, all the people who actually are experts who saw the photographs of the deceased girls who worked with the bodies of the deceased, deceased girls. They all consistently found no indication whatsoever that the girls had been handcuffed or bound in any way.

[00:50:20] And if you say, oh, this is all part of a conspiracy to frame Richard Allen, you know, they made those observations years before Richard Allen was arrested. Let me just say something too.

[00:50:33] Again, much like the crime scene, the defense had every opportunity to bring these photographs to a forensic pathologist who could have been their own expert or, or some other form of expert to testify that in their view, that those markings were consistent with handcuffs or other forms of ligature marks. They had every opportunity to do that. That can happen in cases where you have people who disagree, dueling experts. We certainly saw it with the, with the cartridge in this case.

[00:51:02] So it's not as if the defense didn't do that with any piece of evidence. They did it with the cartridge. They had the opportunity to do with both the crime scene and their imaginings about the bodies. And they chose not to. And again, you have to wonder why. You have to wonder why. You have to wonder, was that because they couldn't find anyone who told them what they wanted to hear? I mean, they certainly were all telling each other what they wanted to hear. And I think that's the reason this defense went so off the rails, frankly.

[00:51:30] But I mean, that doesn't mean you're going to be able to find an expert, even if you pay them to just say whatever, because people do have professional credibility. And if they go completely, completely just far afield from reality, that's going to possibly hurt their reputation in the field. So again, they didn't, they didn't present anything like that. They didn't seemingly have an expert. They didn't even offer that in the three day hearing.

[00:51:56] It's not like they tried to bring that in, but then they couldn't because the third party, that wouldn't have anything to do with a third party. It would just be possibly, I mean, that would have been actually probably good to mention with a third party, I guess. I don't, I don't know. It's like, I don't even, it's just, it's just the usual, like, you know, I think this just strikes me as someone like jettisoning all the stuff, all the material he didn't use.

[00:52:19] You know, nowadays, just as, as, as the last sort of last gasp of attention on him is sort of like leaving the room. And I said, I don't understand a lot of the decisions the defense made during the course of their stewardship of this trial in this case.

[00:52:38] I do fully understand why they did not use Ricky Davis's story at the trial because it is obvious nonsense and it is just absurd that it's come to this. Yeah. Uh, again, I mentioned this earlier that they say, oh, we would have called upon Kathy Allen to show that Richard Allen was at home during that timeframe and not with Logan and Kagan Klein on that evening. And again, this is more wishful thinking because they claim they have evidence of where he was at that time.

[00:53:08] Where he was when the killings weren't taking place and when it didn't matter anymore. So completely irrelevant timeframe. But the reason they, I have to assume they're skilled attorneys if they don't put a witness on the stand. I mean, I don't know. Don't answer that, but I'm just telling you. I have to assume if they don't put a witness on the stand, it's because they think that witness would harm them more than help them. And they did not put Kathy Allen on the stand.

[00:53:29] Or, you know, they realized that, frankly, if you bring the wife up and she says, uh, yeah, I saw him at 6 p.m. after I got off of work, the jury's going to be thinking, well, who cares? Oh, he wasn't talking about murdering anyone that day. Well, maybe he lied to you, lady. I mean, like, I, I don't, I, it doesn't matter. She'd done fine on the stand. What she has to say in that regard doesn't matter. And I think the jurors were paying attention. They were paying attention to the timeline. We know that.

[00:53:57] And I think if you throw something, well, hey, this didn't give him an alibi, but it happened later that day. I don't think they would have cared. You know, unless you're telling me, oh, no, he had to be in Pittsburgh at 6 p.m. that day. And then I, I, I don't mean Pittsburgh, Indiana. I mean Pennsylvania. Like, unless, unless you can show he's somewhere where he couldn't have gotten there in time and still been in Delphi at a certain time, then it doesn't matter. He obviously doesn't have an alibi because they never utilized it. Uh, I don't have anything I want to talk about until page 10.

[00:54:26] Is there anything you want to cover prior to page 10? Yeah, we're, we're getting into the, you know, still freaking out about Ricky Davis. This whole, this whole, this whole letter just reads like a. Filing. Filing, I'm sorry. This whole filing just reads like a. It reads like a letter. It doesn't read like a professional document. It reads like somebody in their diary complaining about something. But all the wrong's done to them. It's just seething. It's seething, but it's not effective seething. All right, let's get to 10.

[00:54:55] So there's nothing you wanted before 10? No, I'm, let's get out of here. Let's, let's end this. Let's skedaddle. Page 10, quote. McClellan was getting called out by the defense once again. And once again, he was ultimately forced to turn over the letters. Perhaps out of fear that the defense would eventually gather DOC records that would then expose McClellan's misrepresentation. End quote. What alternate universe, what alternate universe does Andrew Baldwin live in

[00:55:24] where he imagines that the release of letters in which the defense's star witness accuses the defense's client, Richard Allen, of murder. And furthermore, letters in which the defense's star witness accuses Andrew Baldwin of suborting perjury. In what alternate universe is this in any way harmful to Nick McClellan?

[00:55:54] I just love, I don't love it, but it's like the tone with McClellan is so weird in these. There's like, there's this like real anger to it. You know, have you, have you noticed that? Yeah, it's very personal. He's very bad and he should go to jail because he's a liar and he's mean. It's like, what? And he should have to pay for all of his experts. He should have to pay millions and millions of dollars. It just seems like the ramblings of a five-year-old getting into a conflict in kindergarten. I think it's what I said before, that they really badly underestimated this man, Nicholas McClellan.

[00:56:24] And it hurts and humiliates them that this person who they thought so little of was such a better attorney than they were. Yeah. I mean, but they could at least be less obvious about that in the filings. There's something distasteful about this. There's something like when I come upon some of these recent Baldwin filings, I feel like I'm reading someone's diary or I'm like overhearing a conversation. Like, I don't want to hear this is too. There's something really weirdly personal about it in a way that feels like. Just tone it down. You know what I mean?

[00:56:53] Like, we don't need to see all this sort of naked resentment. It's just weird. I want to talk about there. There's a concept called kitchen sinking in arguments between people who are in a relationship with each other. Why are you looking at me meaningfully? Well, because I'm hoping you can explain it better than I can. So kitchen sinking would be as if Kevin and I get into an argument. And let's say the argument is I don't I feel Kevin, you know, should.

[00:57:23] I don't know what would be. I don't want to do something that would actually be real and then have this turn into a weird. How about this? Let's say I get upset with Anya. Oh, now you're the one. Yes, because Anya has stolen some cereal. OK, I stole your cereal. No, you stole cereal from the store. Oh, and I or I believe you've stolen cereal from the store and say, I see this box of cereal here on the kitchen table. Obviously, you stole it. That's terrible. And Anya says, well, Kevin, here's the receipt.

[00:57:53] And so, you know, Anya, last night you were talking about mowing the lawn and you didn't do that. Yeah. So it's when someone is losing an argument, they start bringing up things from the past because that's a tactic born of desperation because they know they're losing and they don't like losing.

[00:58:12] And I bring this up because this filing towards the end gets into kitchen sinking because Baldwin brings up a lot of his grievances from the past. It's the airing. It's the airing of grievances portion of this. And these things like, for instance, some interviews with a couple of suspects, some interviews with a couple of people who bawled when regarded as suspects were. No one else did.

[00:58:41] Because, you know, alibis. The opinions were erased. And if you're interested in that topic, everything you ever wanted to know about that topic but were afraid to ask, it was covered in depth in hearings, in pretrial hearings close to a year ago. But he brings that up again. It's been thoroughly aired. There was nothing improper done. Thoroughly discussed. He brings that up again. He brings up – what else is he bringing up?

[00:59:05] Oh, he brings up Todd Click, one of the former investigators who was a proponent of the Odinism theory, writing a letter to McClelland saying that he thought his theory was right. And what they argued was, well, that's exculpatory. And what McClelland and the prosecution pointed out was you could talk to Todd Click and you did. Like, what?

[00:59:29] And Todd Click had – his letter was basically a summary of evidence and materials which had been handed over to the defense. They had all the reports. So thoroughly aired. Turco, they bring up the Turco issue. How could you bring up – this is when I – whenever at this point when I see the name Jeffrey Turco, no offense to this man, it's not directed at him, but when he's coming up in the context of this case, I just want to like – I just want to like sit down and like hold my head in my hands.

[00:59:58] Why are you bringing this up? This is like – like imagine the most embarrassing faux pas socially you've ever done in your life and then you bringing it up in casual conversation. Something that really humiliated you, not like a quirky, awkward moment, oh, you're so adorable. I mean like you – this haunts you. This really haunts you. And then you're bringing it up somehow in every conversation where people are just like – and then actually acting like it was like your greatest triumph of all time.

[01:00:26] That's what they're doing with Turco. Turco, to remind everyone, was – is a Purdue University professor. He came into this case because essentially he was asked by state police early on about, okay, we're looking into this Norse pagan angle. We're investigating it. And what do you think about the crime scene or sticks? Could there be anything there?

[01:00:53] And what he gave was kind of a typical ambivalent academic answer. Like these don't really match runes, but who knows what the person had in their mind. So pretty – pretty – you know, pretty nuanced. That's what you would expect from an academic. And somehow, you know, he's deposed. And what you had the defense say was he totally backed up our theory. And then Jerry Holman of the state police tried to hide him somehow, I guess. I don't know. Spirited him away.

[01:01:21] And Jerry Holman prepared a summary saying that he actually supported Jerry Holman, but Jerry Holman's a liar. Yes. So – And then Turco came out and said, no, Jerry Holman's summary was accurate. Yeah, your summary, the defense's summary, that was the stuff that was inaccurate. If I got – if that happened to me, I would never bring that up again at all. That would just – you know, and like rightfully so. Maybe you make a mistake and you got the wrong impression. Never bring it up again. There's no winning this.

[01:01:48] But these guys can't – they're so – I mean there's a kind of an arrogance to this kind of procedure. I don't know if that's what's underpinning it for them personally. But there's like – we can never be wrong. You know, like there's never any sort of like, okay, that really was not our finest moment. Let's focus on what's working or what we could make work. It's like, no, everything I ever did was perfect and how dare you say anything different.

[01:02:15] Like that's – that's the whole – like I don't understand. Like when the guy – I mean there's also – I mean there's the fact that not only did they not call Jeffrey Turco at trial or the three-day hearing, they were desperately calling people – they tried to call our source, Lauren Crowe of the Troth, a group of inclusive pagans, inclusive heathens who worship Norse paganism but are very inclusive and nice and we had a great time talking to her.

[01:02:43] But they called her up like a month before trial saying, can you be our Odinism expert? She declined. She declined. The fact that they were doing that tells me that they were desperate to find someone and could not. I think that they probably – I mean I don't know. I think they probably just could not get an academic or any sort of credible expert to say what they wanted to. Because their theory was nonsense. And their theory was nonsense. And frankly if I were an academic and I saw what they did to Turco where they were acting like he was in the bag for them and, you know, I would be wary of defense using those tactics.

[01:03:12] And also again this thing that they bring up again was thoroughly adjudicated. This is all adjudicated. This was a whole thing. Before we go on to a couple other things that they bring up which have already been thoroughly adjudicated, there was another quote in here I wanted to read that jumped out at me. Oh gosh. Let's see it. This was going back to the erased interviews. Quote,

[01:03:33] The defense was lucky to even notice Mullen and McClellan's claim that the crucial video was taped over if such information was sandwiched between other minutiae contained in a document. End quote.

[01:03:43] I'm always fascinated by the fact that the defense in this case seemed to have the view that anything they thought was important in any discovery material should have been printed at like 36 point type with like stars next to it and arrows.

[01:04:06] And they seem to think that because that wasn't done, because they were expected to actually read the documents that they were given, that they are somehow heroes. So they're wanting to be padded. Oh, they're lucky to find this thing that was mentioned in a document they were given. I think the prosecution likely assumed that the defense would read it if it was written on paper or a document given to them. I think their history is brave as soldiers for doing their jobs. I think actually it's prosecutorial misconduct.

[01:04:35] If Nicholas McClellan didn't drop what he was doing, drive down to Franklin and personally deliver Baldwin a delicious cup of hot chocolate while he was looking at discovery, you know, because otherwise it's just not fair to him. I mean, like the amount of handholding they required throughout all this, the amount of complaints that then turned out to be nothing because they were claiming they weren't getting stuff that they turned out they were getting. I mean, again, why waste your credibility on this? Why? Why do any of this?

[01:04:59] I mean, I would think if I were going to accuse a prosecution team of misconduct, I would be very, very certain and very, very thorough in checking that I did not, in fact, have those things. And they had a history of not doing that, first of all. So, I mean, it's not like it's something where they really didn't criticize anyone until they were sure. That's not what happened. That's not what we saw throughout the pretrial process. And then, yeah, I never felt that they had a particularly good grip of their own discovery. Their constant complaints about it never would have been.

[01:05:29] I mean, if I were on if I were someone who was close to Richard Allen and felt he was innocent, I would be very concerned by all the complaints around that because it's basically like, why can't we find anything? You're so mean. You should tell us where everything is. And it's like, oh, shouldn't you have figured that out a while ago before we're going to trial? You know, like I. I get that it was a lot for anyone to deal with an untangle. I mean, it's a big case is a ton of discovery. But it's also ridiculous because then they're also complaining. You know, one thing about the discovery is that there's so much of it.

[01:05:58] But then they're, you know, crying and wailing because they didn't get some letter from some obvious liar who's also accusing their client. They're giving us too much. They're not giving us enough. They need to help us find what we want to find in it. I'm sure if they had, I'm sure if they'd done everything they wanted, then they would accuse them of like misleading them through that process somehow. I mean, it's just there's no winning. I mean, there's just it's ridiculous.

[01:06:21] Another thing they bring up, which was already thoroughly adjudicated, was what they describe as a faked crime scene photo, which they claim appeared on the Facebook page of someone they falsely accused of murder. This so-called fake crime scene photo is a photo that was taken well before the murders. Also, let's I mean, that's creative writing. Fake crime scene photo. That sounds very incendiary. Whoa. If he faked a crime scene photo, maybe he didn't know.

[01:06:51] It's a picture that I the two things in common are females on a forest floor and they're white, I guess. Yeah. It doesn't look it to me. It's like it's creepy. I can understand why people saw it and are like, oh, that's weird. But there's nothing. There's nothing to me that's like, wow, this is some magic link, you know? So what's the theory?

[01:07:15] This guy, they falsely accused of murder, planned the murders years in advance and put a photo of people pretending to be dead, thinking, well, this is how I'm going to do it someday. And we don't even know they're pretending to be dead. They're lying there. I mean, I mean, it could just like who knows? It's also this is the same guy. This is Brad Holder. This is the same guy who is falsely accused of murder. Well, he was at work and then at the gym. So, I mean, like he's the one guy where you could say, well, he definitely wasn't there.

[01:07:43] Of course, then they say, oh, well, he's Charles Manson. Charles Manson wasn't at all the murders. It's like at some point, you know, the goalposts just get moved so endlessly that they're like not even on the field anymore. They're in traffic. And what is their current theory? Did are they are they positing that it was Klein, Logan and Holder? Oh, don't even don't even give them an idea.

[01:08:08] I think we're going to see I think we're going to see like some sort of like rewind montage of all the clips of all this, you know, random people who came up on Reddit over the years, no matter how ludicrous if this keeps going on. So that that's thoroughly adjudicated. And then also they bring up some video of Brad Holder and another gentleman that appeared on Facebook with them doing some sort of pagan ritual. Cool. Yeah.

[01:08:37] Well, which is it? Is it Logan and Klein or are we all Odinists today? Quote, it does not matter whether the contents of the Ricky Davis letters can be questioned as unreliable. Okay. Quote, it does not matter whether those letters may conflict with other defense theories. In quote, you know, one of the defense theories it conflicts with is the is the defense theory that their man was innocent because the letters positive theory that their man was in fact guilty of the murders.

[01:09:06] Kind of a big part of the theory. It's like, I don't know. I, I, I, I think, I think nursing an ego wound is not a good reason to, to do a legal filing. I think this is a good, let this be a lesson to all of us for that.

[01:09:26] It stinks to feel bad and to lose and whatever, but, you know, you can, you can, you can rebuild, but you can't rebuild if you are basically obsessively doing this. And, you know, I just think the desperation to still be involved is embarrassing. Like, let some professionals take over. Yeah, there's a lot embarrassing about this. Yeah, there really is. It's, it's like, it's uncomfortable to watch at some point. And actually, here's one thing I keep thinking of.

[01:09:56] Is he still billing Carroll County for this work? Because if I were in Carroll County and my taxes were going up because this guy couldn't, you know, accept that he lost and is just having a hissy fit in a series of legal filings, I would be pretty irritated. You know, I really was before the trial and during the trial, my attitude about money.

[01:10:16] And again, it's, it's easy for me to say because I don't live in Carroll County, but my attitude about money was it's a really important case and the defense and the prosecution should spare no expense within reason because it's important for both sides to do what they need to do. But this is not that. No, we are well past that.

[01:10:33] And if this man is billing his, you know, hourly rate so he can work on this like sad scream into the void fan fiction where he's a good boy who did nothing wrong and Nick's a big mean guy who is mean to him and, oh, he cheated and that's why he won. You know, then, no, like that's, that's, that's, I mean, this isn't, this isn't about him. It's, it should have been about his client. I feel like that got lost in a lot of the defense.

[01:11:02] Yeah, it stopped being about Richard Allen a long time ago. Oh yeah. But you know. And it stopped for these men, for these defense, this defense team, it stopped being, it was never about Libby and Abby. Oh no, I mean, geez. Yeah, no, I mean, but you know, it should have at least been about their client in fairness. And I really don't think it was. I don't think they did right by him. I don't think they did well by him. I think he was guilty. I think a different defense team could have done a better job.

[01:11:26] I personally think that the case against him that we saw presented was strong enough that he was pretty much not going to walk. He was, you know, I just, I think, I think the conviction was pretty inevitable at some point. But I think somebody else could have done a better job. And I think certainly a less embarrassing job, I guess. And, you know, but here's what we have to deal with now. Ricky Davis, known liar, failed lie detector test.

[01:11:54] The accounts he gives contradict many, many details about the actual crimes. I also know there's a number of people on the trails that day who gave reports about who they saw on the trails that day. No one gave any description of anyone who could have matched the description of Mr. Klein or Mr. Logan. The only person described was Mr. Allen.

[01:12:23] The only person described who was in an opportunity to commit the crime. He committed the crime. This is, this is sad nonsense. I think Brett from the prosecutors called it a farce. It's time to bring the curtain down on the work of these defense trial counsels. They lost the trial. They lost the trial. They got very badly outclassed by a superior attorney. Yeah. And I, I, again, again, I, if there's. And not just Nick alone.

[01:12:53] I should also, a single offer, praise the efforts of Stacey Diener and James Luttrell. So it's, but, you know, it's just, yeah, it's, we, we kind of, it's amusing some of these things. But it's also like, it's, it's kind of distasteful. And it's, I think at a certain point, getting to the point where you're like, this seems pretty bizarre behavior.

[01:13:15] And as we've always said, we really are interested in what the appellate team does and sort of what issues they, they single out and think are interesting as far as the law goes. And as far as Allen's rights go, I think those, I mean, if they do a good job, that could be something that could be a really interesting discussion. And we can like look at those and kind of getting fresh eyes on the case.

[01:13:35] But, but this is just like, this is, I mean, this is somebody sitting at the bar and griping about a baseball game they lost in high school 20 years ago. I mean, this is, I hear glory days playing in the background when I hear this. But the problem is there weren't even any glory days for this team in this case. They lost badly. They're trying to spin it out as something I think that didn't really happen. Yeah.

[01:13:59] So it's, it's sad, but I'm, I'm sure we'll see more of it just based on the way things are going. So we get out of here, please. Yeah. Sorry. You said originally, let's try to keep it a half an hour. And then I think we said, oh, we'll give you back an hour of your time. And it looks like we've been going for like hour and 10 minutes. Well, we apologize, but we warned you in the beginning. So it's not like the people are sticking around to this point. They, they knew, they knew what they were signing up for.

[01:14:26] But when you see some of this stuff and it's so illogical, you have like, I just like, I, like, is anyone else seeing this? Am I losing my mind? You know, like that's. Anya, everyone else sees it except for the acolyte. Except for people who don't want to see it because they're, for some reason, their identity is so bound up in a specific outcome. There's people who are sending money to Ricky Davis now. God, you, you work hard, you earn your money and you're sending it to some grifter.

[01:14:53] Like, it, like, don't make it make sense, Kevin. Make it make sense. It's a cult. It's a fandom. I don't know what to say about it. It's just bizarre. But it's what the defense team obviously wanted. Because, I mean, they catered to it. They cultivated it. In some cases, they responded to it directly. So, I mean, I'm not surprised. I'm just extremely weirded out. I'm discomfited.

[01:15:24] All right. Can we please go? Yeah. Can we let these people go? Sorry, everybody. Again, you don't have to listen to these ones that we say are unimportant because it's a waste of everyone's time. But you're contractually obligated to listen to everyone else we do. No, you're not. Don't tell them that. I just said it. And silence equals consent. No. Well, I just disagreed with it. Jeez. Oh, gosh. All right. Well, you guys all take care. Thank you for listening.

[01:15:51] We hope you have a – you look expectantly now. No, no. Oh, no. You're okay. So, take care of yourselves and we'll talk soon, I'm sure. All right. Bye. 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. If you have actionable information about an unsolved crime, please report it to the appropriate authorities.

[01:16:17] If you're interested in joining our Patreon, that's available at www.patreon.com slash murdersheet. If you want to tip us a bit of money for records requests, you can do so at www.buymeacoffee.com slash murdersheet. We very much appreciate any support.

[01:16:43] 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. If you're looking to talk with other listeners about a case we've covered, you can join The Murder Sheet Discussion Group on Facebook. We mostly focus our time on research and reporting, so we're not on social media much. We do try to check our email account, but we ask for patience as we often receive a lot of messages.

[01:17:13] Thanks again for listening. So, Anya, 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. 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.

[01:17:41] 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. 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.

[01:18:06] 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. 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.

[01:18:31] 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. 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.

[01:18:59] 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. 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.

[01:19:27] So I think if you're looking for that and you're looking to have those kind of thought-provoking conversations in your life, this is the show for you. 100%. 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 VIA. This is really a wonderful product. I think it's really helped both of us get a lot better rest. VIA is pretty much, I guess you'd say, the only lifestyle hemp brand out there. So what does that mean?

[01:19:55] It means that they're all about crafting different products to elicit different moods. Kevin and I really like their non-THC CBD products. Specifically, Zen really helps me fall asleep. Some Zen can really just kind of help me get more into that state where I can relax and fall asleep pretty easily. And they've been such a wonderful support to us. They're a longtime sponsor. 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.

[01:20:25] And it kind of makes it possible for us to do this show. So if you or one of your loved ones is interested in trying some of this stuff, you're going to get a great deal. It's very high quality, high value. 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 VIA, get a free gift of your choice. That's V-I-I-A hemp.com and use code MSHEAT at checkout.

[01:20:54] 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? Say the murder sheet because then it lets them know that our ads are effective and it really helps us out.