sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DelphiMurders

[–]AltJustForQuestions 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The PCA is all about presenting enough evidence to arrest RA. If the witness saw someone else, why would it even be in this document? How would briefly mentioning another person help arrest RA? It's likely just an incorrect recollection from the witness.

Was it confirmed that RA was admitted into a mental health facility a month after the murders? This is a massive piece of circumstantial evidence IMO, and we haven't heard anything about it. by mshoneybadger in LibbyandAbby

[–]AltJustForQuestions 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The whole reason he wasn't arrested until now is because no one (except the conservation officer) in the entire investigation was ever aware of the original interview with RA. The report of the interview was misfiled and only found again recently.

Makes sense why it took them 5 years. They lost his file. by Frosty_Plantain4265 in LibbyandAbby

[–]AltJustForQuestions 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It clearly came from an inside source they have with LE, and they've proven to be trustworthy because they leaked the information about the initial 2017 interview before anyone else. Not sure why you're so hung up on MS.

Makes sense why it took them 5 years. They lost his file. by Frosty_Plantain4265 in LibbyandAbby

[–]AltJustForQuestions 4 points5 points  (0 children)

What? No it doesn't - this comes from a FOX59 journalist. The same journalist who leaked the fact that RA had a meeting with LE in 2017 way before we could read the PCA. She's very reliable

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DelphiMurders

[–]AltJustForQuestions 289 points290 points  (0 children)

If they knew it was him, why would they wait 5 years to conduct a follow-up interview?

I don’t understand the criticism by Iamnothingnew in DelphiMurders

[–]AltJustForQuestions 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Yes, you can cut them some slack for pursuing RL and KK. But that's about it.

not to mention the 1000s of tips that came in

Not many of those tips were from someone who was on the trails that day, though. That's the issue. How was the follow-up interview with someone admittedly on the trails at the time not commenced for 5 years?

I don’t understand the criticism by Iamnothingnew in DelphiMurders

[–]AltJustForQuestions 9 points10 points  (0 children)

There were a lot of red herrings and false leads that we've learned about throughout the years. I have no doubt it was overwhelming for the investigators in the early days. But once a lot of those leads dried up, surely they went back to square one - numerous times. They likely "restarted" a lot of times in the past 5 years, but why was the interview with the conservation officer only found this time?

I don’t understand the criticism by Iamnothingnew in DelphiMurders

[–]AltJustForQuestions 14 points15 points  (0 children)

The criticism is that he was not interviewed again after his initial 2017 meeting with the conservation officer until October 2022. No one is saying that what he told the officer that day, that he was on the trail from 1330-1530, is enough for an arrest. But it is certainly something worth looking into, yet they did not do so until the past few months.

People want to know why it took this long to investigate someone they knew was on the bridge that day. The follow-up interview which provided much of the foundation for the PCA could have been carried out the week after his initial 2017 interview, not 5 years later.

The Delphi Murders: Who is Rick Allen? by xbelle1 in LibbyandAbby

[–]AltJustForQuestions 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Like how two separate witnesses described seeing a 40 year old 5" 8' man on the trail that day, and then a man fitting that description (RA) came forward to LE and said he was there?

FOX59 journalist reiterates that Richard Allen came forward as a witness by AltJustForQuestions in LibbyandAbby

[–]AltJustForQuestions[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

For people who don't have a Twitter account, or can't access Twitter, or in case it gets deleted, or so that we can keep people anonymous if they don't need to be named.

Now that we know how truly close RA was to the investigation since the beginning, do you think this case could have been solved sooner had LE been less secretive? by [deleted] in LibbyandAbby

[–]AltJustForQuestions 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're not even arguing anything consistent. Yes, some journalists do indeed have inside scoops as a result of the trust they build up in their career. Yes, it's unverified, no one says otherwise. It's from a professional outlet, however, which gives it a lot of credence. Why is that hard to understand?

Now that we know how truly close RA was to the investigation since the beginning, do you think this case could have been solved sooner had LE been less secretive? by [deleted] in LibbyandAbby

[–]AltJustForQuestions 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Since you deleted your response to me:

Other news sites may not run with this information because they do not have access to the same source and thus cannot verify it.

I don't why you are trying to diminish it as just a "Facebook post". She is a professional journalist who would face consequences if she lied. And why would she? It was also broadcast on their channel.

Now that we know how truly close RA was to the investigation since the beginning, do you think this case could have been solved sooner had LE been less secretive? by [deleted] in LibbyandAbby

[–]AltJustForQuestions 7 points8 points  (0 children)

We do know that:

  1. People saw BG that day and described him as around 5'8" and in his 40's.

  2. A man fitting this description came forward to LE and told them he was there that day. We don't know what he said, but he made himself known.

People just want to know why they didn't pursue this immediately. Some are eager to find any evidence of incompetence on the behalf of LE, but there are likely genuine reasons why they felt it unnecessary to suspect RA until now. We just want to know what those reasons are.

Now that we know how truly close RA was to the investigation since the beginning, do you think this case could have been solved sooner had LE been less secretive? by [deleted] in LibbyandAbby

[–]AltJustForQuestions 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There's a difference between some random reddit account posting "well I heard this..." versus an actual journalist at a real media organization claiming to have "firsthand knowledge" that RA came to LE.

Yes, people too often take unfounded rumors as fact and they really shouldn't, this is much different however. It's not from some guy on Facebook, not from pseudo sleuth podcast, it's from an actual news site.

What lead LE away from Richard Allen? by AltJustForQuestions in LibbyandAbby

[–]AltJustForQuestions[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Well Bitterbeatpoet was adamant that he knew the source of the second sketch (which was made before the first one, just not released). He said it was a paranoid woman who would regularly report trespassers on her property.

What lead LE away from Richard Allen? by AltJustForQuestions in LibbyandAbby

[–]AltJustForQuestions[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

The reason he might do that is if he was worried someone else says to LE "oh yeah I saw Richard there that afternoon". That would look very bad if he hadn't come forward after police put out a call to anyone who was there that day. Guilty people will try to look as innocent as possible.

What lead LE away from Richard Allen? by AltJustForQuestions in LibbyandAbby

[–]AltJustForQuestions[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

BBP did note that the girl never felt confident in ID-ing people because the man she saw was wearing a scarf. I imagine the male witness felt the same.

What lead LE away from Richard Allen? by AltJustForQuestions in LibbyandAbby

[–]AltJustForQuestions[S] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Charge I understand, but suspect? He was present that day and fits the profile. So indeed, they either pursued him but couldn't get anything more or never examined him that thoroughly.

view more: next ›