I keep coming back to the geofence data. The State had it, I assume. So was it in Discovery? If not, why not? If it was, why didn't the Defense introduce it to the court? It was admissible in 2017 when it was collected. They had Rick's phone's EMEI number, they knew all about Ron Logan's phone(s), presumably Brad Holder's and Patrick Westfall's too, as well as Keagan and Tony Kline's. The geofence data would have included the positions and timed movements of any phone in or near the crime scene throughout the time period in which the State believed the crime took place. Anyone who wasn't there at the right time could have been excluded from the investigation.
Surely the exclusion of the FBI's geofence survey is a glaring error with obvious harmful effects on the outcome of the trial. That survey alone should solve the whole case.
This seems to me to be such a no-brainer that I think I must be missing something. Someone please put me straight.
Mcleland demanded that the geofence data be banned from the trial, and the defense barred from talking about, or to, the FBI analyst who did the geofence. He said geofence data is unreliable, and would simply confuse the jury. And, of course, Gull complied with his orders.
The Defense were trying to compel Discovery regarding the geofence - basically, it wasn't handed over except for one "geofence map" hidden among eleventy billion pages of guff, that made the Defense realise geofence data existed and was of interest - and we don't know that this discovery was ever hander over, cos the next thing that happened was the Motion in Limine and geofence got liminied out.
So there are a few options here
Defense never got the full info
they got it too late and were thus unable to include it in the record
they got the info, but it wasn't helpful. Maybe it was too limited in scope, maybe it was only showing people known to be at the trail at the time and no one else, because the girls and the perpetrators were actually not anywhere near the scene at the supposed time of the murders - then it could have been dismissed by claiming that "well Rick just didn't have his phone on him that day"
All just speculation, because we - the public - do not have this information
And it's not part of the record.
Direct appeal can only address the issues that are part of the record, and even then they had to pick and choose the ones they thought had the best chance of succeeding, due to limited space.
I've always found this to be the most bizarre part of an already incredibly bizarre case. If the state could track Rick's phone showing he was there at the time of the murders they would. If they could show that he didn't make a single call or text message during the time the murders were being committed, they would! On the other side, if he was making phone calls, checking his stock ticker, doing anything on his phone the defense should be screaming that from the rooftops! Even if they don't have geo-fencing data they could have gone back to his cell phone company and requested call/texting/data usage logs. The same goes for banking/ credit card statements. Did he buy beer that morning or not?? These things are so easy to request, even five years after the fact. Why did none of that come in?? From either side??
I looked into what cell phone records would have been available 5 years later. Rick had Ting which in 2017 used the Sprint network. This is what I could find with regards to how long they keep various kinds of information
Sprint record Approximate retention Subscriber/account information ~10 years Call-detail records ~18 months Call records with cell-site/tower information ~18 months More precise network-location data ~180 days Text-message content generally not retained as useful historical content
I’m also interested in if the beer purchase was looked into. It could have been a cash purchase and five years would be long time for an eyewitness but I wonder if financial records were looked into. It seems like looking at the other points of reference in that ‘confession’ would be helpful. We never heard any information from anyone else who interacted with him that day from either side.
I believe it was, at least at beginning the FBI that did the geofencing and perhaps once they parted ways was under no obligation to share work product. The autopsy and who attended the autopsies is what drives me crazy. The county claimed is was a county case yet ISP determined the who and where of the autopsies. That decision was made day children were found, Feb 14th, so the state was running a heavy hand beginning day one. Two hour drive to Vigo County vs 1 hour drive to Marion County with a reknowned children's hospital. Who would see more crimes against children, a county with a population of 100,000 or a county with a population 900,000? It never made sense. It was almost as if from day 1, the state had mission to increase the confusion in the case and it continued through the trial with lost evidence, no paper trail etc. Mistakes happen, repeating mistakes like basic report writing and filing is an intentional decision or severe lack of training at local and state level.
There is some discussion of this in Holeman’s August 10 2023 deposition it appears on pages 51-52 it isn’t very detailed.** **The exchange begins with the defense asking whether the geofencing information connected Richard Allen to the crimes. Holeman answers: “He was in the geo fence, but more than likely his phone was at his residence it appears.” He then says Allen claimed to have been using his phone on the trails, but investigators had no evidence that occurred. When the defense asks whether the geofence itself detected Allen’s phone, Holeman clarifies that the detection he is talking about occurred later in the evening, and says he does not want to give an exact time because he might be inaccurate.
Did the group of 3 (not 4) girls that RA saw get discussed at the trial - meaning was the group of 3 named to the jury and a group of 4? Or is the group of 3 just a fact known outside of the trial?
No. Andrew Baldwin wasn't even aware of this group of girls, let alone that we knew their names and have confirmed they were there at the time Rick said he was there (early), until very recently.
Despite multiple people trying to get this information to him prior to the trial, especially through the two women that present themselves as "Defense PIs", EM and CS.
The alleged March confession reported by Gallipeau that’s believed to actually be April, do we know if he changed the date, or is that speculation? Not unfounded if is speculation, but is there anything factual to back it up?
My recollection is that he essentially conceded the date was wrong in his testimony. There was other evidence that made it clear that what was described in that note did not line up with the purported date. I believe Wala's notes/testimony were able to disprove the accuracy of that date.
Two out of the group of 4 testified at the trial, BW and RV.
The group of 3, known from their SM posts around the time of the murders, was never even spoken to by anyone from the LE - and they never went to them themselves, because they (like Rick) left the area by the time Abby and Libby were dropped off.
In one of the jail calls, Rick said something like he felt like he was already in hell. Does anyone know where I can find the specific note about this?
I have the confession log from All Eyes, but I don’t see it in there.
I don’t remember for certain if it was in the audio that was made public or a written record of it.
Visited some of the more prolific creators who've covered Delphi in detail ... that I hadn't seen this Appellate round and ...
I wanted to ask after Lawyer Lee: I noticed she's yet to cover the Delphi Appellate hearing - which seems odd? Her channel looks current & busy, and if she weighs in on Delphi Appellate I'd love to tune in. Anyone heard from her on Delphi?
And as to Tom Webster - did he retire his channel?
→ More replies (1)
10
u/TheRichTurner Sep 28 '26
I keep coming back to the geofence data. The State had it, I assume. So was it in Discovery? If not, why not? If it was, why didn't the Defense introduce it to the court? It was admissible in 2017 when it was collected. They had Rick's phone's EMEI number, they knew all about Ron Logan's phone(s), presumably Brad Holder's and Patrick Westfall's too, as well as Keagan and Tony Kline's. The geofence data would have included the positions and timed movements of any phone in or near the crime scene throughout the time period in which the State believed the crime took place. Anyone who wasn't there at the right time could have been excluded from the investigation.
Surely the exclusion of the FBI's geofence survey is a glaring error with obvious harmful effects on the outcome of the trial. That survey alone should solve the whole case.
This seems to me to be such a no-brainer that I think I must be missing something. Someone please put me straight.