It's so frustrating that we can't watch the trial and get the vibe ourselves. Everyone I listen to has different opinions on how the jury questions are being asked and who they are more promising for. People seem to be flipping back and forth. Especially with the confessions
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I am disappointed that’s it so far, looking forward to hear what the defence say.
However at what point is there too many coincidences
He was on trail at time and wearing same clothes as bridge man.
He knew about white van when it hadn’t been mentioned.
Why did he try change his height after murder.
The phone he had at time is missing ( he kept all the rest ]
The bullet ( I am not convinced by this though ]
The confessions ( although could be due to being locked up ]
But is it enough to convict him, not sure yet.
However at what point is there too many coincidences
He was on trail at time and wearing same clothes as bridge man.
He knew about white van when it hadn’t been mentioned.
Why did he try change his height after murder.
The phone he had at time is missing ( he kept all the rest ]
The bullet ( I am not convinced by this though ]
The confessions ( although could be due to being locked up ]
But is it enough to convict him, not sure yet.
The state paid someone to listen to his phone calls but wouldn't pay $10k for an analysis to work out the height of Bridge Guy...RA is very short, knowing the rough height of Bridge Guy could easily rule him in or out.
Angela Burkhart's coverage has been excellent however she is a criminal defence lawyer so has a slight slant but generally a great analysis and also can call out when she thinks incorrect judicial decisions have been made. Lawyer Lee is perhaps more impartial but not as in depth (I watch both each day).
I could not convinced it is RA. The evidence is weak and the crime scene doesn't make sense for just one person to have been involved.
I honestly think the bullet could be from anywhere, ok it wasn't a hunting bullet but I'm sure people go out into the woods to shoot especially if they live in a town or built up area.
The box cutter evidence is shifty imo. He says on a confession he did it with a box cutter and suddenly the medical examiner agrees just before trial...
His treatment in prison was horrific, imagine being in solitary confinement and not allowed outside for 13 months...
Angela Burkhart's coverage has been excellent however she is a criminal defence lawyer so has a slight slant but generally a great analysis and also can call out when she thinks incorrect judicial decisions have been made. Lawyer Lee is perhaps more impartial but not as in depth (I watch both each day).
I could not convinced it is RA. The evidence is weak and the crime scene doesn't make sense for just one person to have been involved.
I honestly think the bullet could be from anywhere, ok it wasn't a hunting bullet but I'm sure people go out into the woods to shoot especially if they live in a town or built up area.
The box cutter evidence is shifty imo. He says on a confession he did it with a box cutter and suddenly the medical examiner agrees just before trial...
His treatment in prison was horrific, imagine being in solitary confinement and not allowed outside for 13 months...
I think this woman is the most sensible in how she analyses cases.
I came to this assuming he was guilty, after all why would they make an arrest so long after the crime if they weren't sure? However, the prosecution case has convinced me that Richard Allen is innocent. More importantly, even if he was guilty, they haven't proved this at all.
His confessions are tainted by the prison psychologist being active in online communities discussing the case and sharing this info with RA. This means unless it's possible to prove there was no mention of a van anywhere online in relation to this crime, there has to be reasonable doubt about where he got the information from. Of course, the defence appear to have some information that Weber's van wasn't there anyway...
I'm not sure why people think the change in height on the fishing licences is suspicious. The most likely explanation is that the form was filled in one year by RA and the other by his wife, as they shared both the computer and fishing licence. RA wouldn't be the first short man to add a bit to his height.
I also don't understand the inclusion of the bullet evidence. Even if it were possible to definitively link the bullet to RA (it's not) there's no proof it's linked to the crime. It's a common calibre bullet found on the ground in an area known for hunting. Maybe it is connected, but there's no way to prove this.
I've been truly shocked at the sheer amount of incompetence and unethical behaviour in this case. It's so disrespectful to Abby and Libby and their families.
His confessions are tainted by the prison psychologist being active in online communities discussing the case and sharing this info with RA. This means unless it's possible to prove there was no mention of a van anywhere online in relation to this crime, there has to be reasonable doubt about where he got the information from. Of course, the defence appear to have some information that Weber's van wasn't there anyway...
I'm not sure why people think the change in height on the fishing licences is suspicious. The most likely explanation is that the form was filled in one year by RA and the other by his wife, as they shared both the computer and fishing licence. RA wouldn't be the first short man to add a bit to his height.
I also don't understand the inclusion of the bullet evidence. Even if it were possible to definitively link the bullet to RA (it's not) there's no proof it's linked to the crime. It's a common calibre bullet found on the ground in an area known for hunting. Maybe it is connected, but there's no way to prove this.
I've been truly shocked at the sheer amount of incompetence and unethical behaviour in this case. It's so disrespectful to Abby and Libby and their families.
Is there a list anywhere of all of the questions that the jury have asked?
I love that aspect of the legal process, I think we should have that here (UK).
I also think he could be guilty but couldnt agree that he was guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
I know they think this white van is a smoking gun but RA has admitted he was at the site, why wouldnt he have seen the van? I dont think it makes a difference either way.
I also think the statement of 'I was going to grape them, but I was spooked so I killed them' makes little sense. His aim being sexual assault had nothing in its way of achieving it. He spent time killing them, so why didn't he do what he wanted? It does not make sense.
I love that aspect of the legal process, I think we should have that here (UK).
I also think he could be guilty but couldnt agree that he was guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
I know they think this white van is a smoking gun but RA has admitted he was at the site, why wouldnt he have seen the van? I dont think it makes a difference either way.
I also think the statement of 'I was going to grape them, but I was spooked so I killed them' makes little sense. His aim being sexual assault had nothing in its way of achieving it. He spent time killing them, so why didn't he do what he wanted? It does not make sense.
I cannot believe they have ducked this up so badly after all this time. Those poor kids and their families deserve justice.
There is no definitive list of questions asked by the jurors but Andre's Burkhart does an indepth run down every evening and includes the questions.
This case is horrible. I feel so awful for Abby and Libby and their families as this is not justice. I think the evidence against RA is a nothing burger, they wouldn't have known he was on the trail if he hadn't gone to them.
I don't think the scene from the descriptions I've heard sound like one person could have done this. I honestly think RA is a scapegoat and the police will die on the hill that he was wrongly acquitted (presuming he is and I think he should be) so they can quietly close the file.
I mean there was more evidence against Alec Murdaugh who I think did kill Maggie and Paul but I'm not sure the evidence against him was all that strong!
This case is horrible. I feel so awful for Abby and Libby and their families as this is not justice. I think the evidence against RA is a nothing burger, they wouldn't have known he was on the trail if he hadn't gone to them.
I don't think the scene from the descriptions I've heard sound like one person could have done this. I honestly think RA is a scapegoat and the police will die on the hill that he was wrongly acquitted (presuming he is and I think he should be) so they can quietly close the file.
I mean there was more evidence against Alec Murdaugh who I think did kill Maggie and Paul but I'm not sure the evidence against him was all that strong!
The whole case is weird. But I do wonder why, if RA were innocent, is the defence team coming up with outlandish cult theories for which there is no evidence either.
Some defence teams do this even when everyone knows that didn’t happen. It’s just to introduce reasonable doubt. For example, Casey Anthony’s defence team introduced the idea that Caylee accidentally drowned in the family swimming pool and her dad helped Casey cover it up. Neither Casey nor her father ever said such a thing. But it was enough to get her off.
Some defence teams do this even when everyone knows that didn’t happen. It’s just to introduce reasonable doubt. For example, Casey Anthony’s defence team introduced the idea that Caylee accidentally drowned in the family swimming pool and her dad helped Casey cover it up. Neither Casey nor her father ever said such a thing. But it was enough to get her off.
I'm not sure if they came up with it but I've seen people say that Abby was posed like the hanged man tarot card which is based on Odin.
I wonder if it was an FBI theory but not sure.
I don’t understand why neither the state or defence asked any of their whitenesses if “ the man you saw in the trail/ area that day was the man sitting here” of course not conclusive but the “muddy & bloody man” must of been a very strong visual … how powerful each way for a yes or no.
Possibly because eyewitness accounts of something like that tend to be unreliable. Eye witness accounts are unreliable generally, especially after the fact because people can sometimes project stuff.
Oh of course, I think here where I would say RA is “unique” for his height as a smaller man, it would of been interesting to ask the witnesses, of course not concrete evidence but a good indication in their opinion on what they saw that day.
bridge guy didnt look that small to me, but understand perspective can be a funny thing.
I know we haven't been able to watch the trial but if I was on the jury it's an easy not guilty for me.
The bullet evidence doesn't make sense, the expert could match it to RAs gun but couldn't rule out others...
I don't see how one person could have done the crime by themselves.
I think Abby was at least posed.
I don't think the branches were to cover the bodies to hide them
And not heard in trial someone else confessed at least two or three times!!!!!!!!
I'd be not guilty as well. Although I do lean to him being the culprit, with him admitting being there for example, it's mainly on circumstantial evidence and the state's case in no way convinces me beyond reasonable doubt.
I'm so frightened these girls will never get justice.
The jury has been sequestered for a month and probably want to go home. They deliberated for two hours today and asked to be excused early. My prediction is that they did a poll and had a discussion and everyone is on the same page and they’ve gone to sleep on it and I suspect they’ll be back early tomorrow with a not guilty verdict.