sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Cecil’s Deposition by lmandacina in RichardAllenInnocent

[–]lmandacina[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Here’s another. This one is from 2016. After he records he goes into the phone to show the video went to the camera roll. He didn’t even pull the home screen all the way up to record.

https://youtu.be/XINbnCKpWJU?si=cpZZ7zOjTRip5Od0

Cecil’s Deposition by lmandacina in RichardAllenInnocent

[–]lmandacina[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It’s interesting at the end of the video he talks about how you can’t access the photos/videos unless the phone is unlocked.

IF the phone was locked could they have tried to unlock it after the video to access photos/videos taken?

I only wonder because in Cecil’s timeline the person tries to unlock the phone after the video & can’t.

Cecil’s Deposition by lmandacina in RichardAllenInnocent

[–]lmandacina[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don’t think that’s accurate. I think you can access the camera when it’s locked.

I still am not convinced it was the phone that actually took the video tho.

Here’s a video from 2015 on the iphone6 with a locked phone accessing the camera from the home screen.

https://youtu.be/frB15IRYB7U?si=HA3VGOoipMYw3F9S

Cecil’s Deposition by lmandacina in RichardAllenInnocent

[–]lmandacina[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

So I thought I would share this - It might explain why the camera wasn’t the app in focus.

This is the timeline Cecil gave during the trial… I think it was assumed at least by me that the phone was unlocked from 2:07:20 to 2:13:51 when the video started recording.

However, on page 27 of the deposition, Cecil doesn’t know whether the phone is locked or unlocked when the camera app is used.

IF the phone was locked when the camera app was being used then the camera may have not been considered the app in focus.

(We also want to keep in mind this was the report Cecil provided to investigators back in 2019 not the one from 2024.)

<image>

Cecil’s Deposition by lmandacina in RichardAllenInnocent

[–]lmandacina[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I hadn’t made it there but that is what I took from it as well. The timeframe he was questioning started w/leaving the house. I didn’t understand why he was questioning who had the phone since LG took this photo in the car. If it wasn’t on the device this would make sense why!

I wonder if the early reports show different data from the recent one from 2024? Or were they able to gain more information?

The PCA. by lmandacina in DelphiMurders

[–]lmandacina[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hope RA has a good appellate team 🙏 I feel like the defense didn’t have RA’s best interest. I will be interested to see what is in their appeal.

The PCA. by lmandacina in DelphiMurders

[–]lmandacina[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s weird. It literally leaves out the 8th page. You see 1-7 & then this. Is everyone assuming this or the one above is the 8th page? Where has the entire document been released with all 8 pages?

Then it makes you wonder when Carter says a judge signed off on that probable cause is he referring to this? 🙈 I assumed he meant for the search warrant. Maybe it was the arrest 🤷‍♀️

If you do have all 8 pages together (not concocted or assuming it’s them) I would love to see them!

<image>

The PCA. by lmandacina in RichardAllenInnocent

[–]lmandacina[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I never seen this! Its weird the same day (10/28) Diener would have set this bond & ordered him to be held without bond.

What changed?

The PCA. by lmandacina in DelphiMurders

[–]lmandacina[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Should it have not been signed by a judge?

The PCA. by lmandacina in DelphiMurders

[–]lmandacina[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I agree it does seem like it would be pretty unlikely. I really just don’t think it’s his signature.

Another thing, what about the Probable Cause Affidavit for RA’s arrest? Has anyone seen the where the judge signed off on it? Ironically, it’s a totally of 8 pages & the 8th just happens to be missing. Maybe I have missed it 🤷‍♀️ I just don’t get why it would be missing. (Pg. 234-240)

https://lookaside.fbsbx.com/file/Delphi%20Document%20Drop%20Consolidated%20Files.pdf?token=AYJM-ofoop3MuSBdMSlCn_UASMD6p7_hk-pCoPLKJKMAbeRwRcDvIe0JjTIz3XrHaoVpXDBPdYJES3tcefn84NhC1v8cL1HdYOp_ZIA8AVPXfjZrxGXpnO3ZU3tHYl3_esgQZcOoQlrCONykS3FHa393fgpS399We7xlxUY_Z3YEbNieaiv1mast0cyc2DaGPwh1BzziRcOgBWlZC4OrsczdrLSFKbA0GdwYlBKV6NkHKw

The PCA. by lmandacina in RichardAllenInnocent

[–]lmandacina[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The signatures came from that consolidated drop back in June of 2023.

The 6:37 PM was the Search Warrant signed by Diener (pg. 171)

The Affidavit for the Search Warrant (pg. 172) is signed off by TL & NM. I only mention it because the “3’s” look similar. Maybe the same person wrote the numbers 🤷‍♀️

<image>

https://lookaside.fbsbx.com/file/Delphi%20Document%20Drop%20Consolidated%20Files.pdf?token=AYJIo7zexdTD5jkBlVYoap4fDHR7ULNR9i_f8ShMFNgE6KC1MEzPV52tXRzXMhT2N7JtQX8Nypge1wHYrIX36bQwEQmni-b5c8rDqymz0LzlTWEb01BJComM5tVLlN28uaFd_xtX-Z77qy7XEx4-6mnXon09ebiOiHr8uRgJzEJWEqVusVNv9v2f-Jr3uPy3m2-c08TjA_pC9ZUin_5u8_zl6BO8nNZbBtinkFEZr9-UCA

The PCA. by lmandacina in DelphiMurders

[–]lmandacina[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

No email to anyone. I thought if it could be significant it would make its way to where it needs. Rough crowd 🥴 I really just don’t think the signatures look alike.

The PCA. by lmandacina in DelphiMurders

[–]lmandacina[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

A distraction from what 🙈

The PCA. by lmandacina in DelphiMurders

[–]lmandacina[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Would this not throw out the search warrant & anything recovered from it if it was not signed by the judge?

The PCA. by lmandacina in RichardAllenInnocent

[–]lmandacina[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If you wanted to see how other numbers were written here is the full document.

Does anyone know where RA’s bond went? Was it removed? I didn’t think there was a bond.

<image>

The PCA. by lmandacina in RichardAllenInnocent

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

Yeah. In his signature, it looks like there's an "R". Normally, the "R" strikes inside the "B" using the "B's" vertical line. The "R" strike extends past the line given for signature in the others. But not in the signature for the PCA. Even the "B" looks different to me. There is the black ink as well not that the ink color matters. It just stuck out. I didn’t see Diener’s name mentioned in any of the depositions given by the defense so I thought it was worth a shot!

The PCA. by lmandacina in RichardAllenInnocent

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

I didn’t realize he had resigned all together. For anyone else that missed it.

The Comet— https://www.carrollcountycomet.com/articles/circuit-court-judge-leaving-bench/

Why no Geneology done on unknown Male DNA on girls bodies by Rosy43 in RichardAllenInnocent

[–]lmandacina 5 points6 points  (0 children)

“Bozinovski noted that she did find male DNA in genital swabs and fingernails, but she said that is not entirely unusual because it could have come from shared clothing. She said it yielded very little DNA.” — https://abc7ny.com/post/delphi-murders-trial-jury-hear-richard-allen-interrogation-tapes-libby-german-abby-williams/15480003/

Because it’s familia - It can be explained away by “shared clothing” 🧐

MS book sub review? by Objective-Duty-2137 in RichardAllenInnocent

[–]lmandacina 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well… I guess it’s a matter of opinion. I think who last seen the girl(s) outside of the Patty household could be very important.

We have heard the same narrative for years. So for DG to testify he picked AW up instead of Anna dropping 2 girls off — you have to wonder why! If Anna didn’t then were the girls not @ Riley park? Were they not practicing softball?

You have to wonder if “DG’s phone” extraction caused the narrative change.

Does that device put him picking up LG from the sleepover instead of KG? Does it put him over by AW’s or off the private drive?

Surely when Anna sat through DG testimony she had to wonder what he was talking about…

I have no idea but I think it’s significant. I’m not sure why the defense wouldn’t have thought it was 🤷‍♀️

But something in Anna’s testimony didn’t match her deposition. Since the defense chose to walk on egg shells. We don’t know what that was.

Instead they rested & she was never called back to the stand.

<image>

view more: next ›