Crime Stories with Nancy Grace - HIDEOUS CRIMES: DELPHI CHILD KILLER RICHARD ALLEN TO WALK FREE?

Episode Date: February 3, 2025

First, the white van. Prosecutors claimed a white van spooked Allen before he could rape the girls. Second, Ron Logan’s confession. Logan owned the property where Abby Williams and Libby German were killed. He lied to police about his alibi, gave reporters tours of the property, and pointed out where the girls were found. An FBI agent wrote that Logan’s physical build matched the “Bridge Guy” in the video taken from Libby’s phone, and his voice was “not inconsistent” with the person heard in the clip. Allen’s defense team claims Logan confessed to killing the girls while in prison on a probation violation. Third, Allen’s prison transfer. His attorneys argue that Carroll County Circuit Judge Benjamin Diener, who approved the search warrant for Allen’s home, helped Sheriff Leazenby draft the safekeeping order and should have recused himself. They claim Allen had the right for another judge to review and issue the safekeeping order and an “absolute right” to refuse transfer into state custody. Because the order was never served to Allen or his attorney, Brett Gibson, they were unable to challenge it. Allen’s lawyers argue the state violated his constitutional rights under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments. Lastly, a reported connection involving a pair of headphones. At trial, defense expert Stacy Eldridge testified that someone appeared to have plugged headphones into Libby’s phone at 5:44 p.m. on February 13 and removed them at 10:32 p.m. the same day. This contradicted the state’s timeline. The state’s phone expert, ISP 1st Sgt. Chris Cecil, testified after conducting a Google search that dirt or water damage could have caused the logged activity. The defense argues they had no opportunity to counter this claim. Eldridge testified she was “unaware of any scientific or technological research suggesting that water or dirt damage to an iPhone 6s would cause the phone to inaccurately log wired headphones in or out.” Since the state never argued Allen returned to the crime scene, the defense claims that if a jury accepted Eldridge’s analysis, the state’s “narrative is impossible. Joining Nancy Grace today:  Greg Morse – Partner at the law firm of King Morse, PLLC. Current CJA counsel (Southern District of Florida), Former West Palm Beach Public Defender’s Office. Author: “The Untested” found on Amazon Dr. Bethany Marshall – Author: “Deal Breaker,”  featured in hit show: “Paris in Love” on Peacock https://www.drbethanymarshall.com/ , Instagram & TikTok: drbethanymarshall, X: @DrBethanyLive Sheryl McCollum – Cold Case Investigative Research Institute Founder & Host of “Zone 7;” X: @149Zone7 Bill Daly – Former FBI Investigator and Forensic Photography, Security Expert  Scott Eicher – A founding member of the FBI’s Cellular Analysis Survey Team (C.A.S.T); Historical Cellular Analysis Expert; Former FBI agent of 22 years; Former Police Officer and Homicide Detective with Norfolk Virginia Police Dept. having served 12 years; Currently with Precision Cellular Analysis handling Criminal, Defense and Civil case Joe Scott Morgan – Professor of Forensics: Jacksonville State University, Author, “Blood Beneath My Feet,” and Host: “Body Bags with Joseph Scott Morgan;” Twitter/X: @JoScottForensic Susan Hendricks – Journalist, Author: “Down the Hill: My Descent into the Double Murder in Delphi’;” IG: @susan_hendricks X @SusanHendicks See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You're listening to an iHeart Podcast. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. Hideous crimes. The convicted Delphi child killer, Richard Allen, to walk free? Is that even possible? I'm Nancy Grace. This is Crime Stories. Thank you for being with us.

We also know by three o'clock, nobody's hearing them. There's nobody screaming. Nobody's running. Nobody's calling on their phones. Again, this was a very fast deal. And y'all, here's the reality. Most children that are going to be murdered are murdered in the first three hours. That's right. Convicted child killer. A jury said

he murdered Abby and Libby. Their bodies found practically drained of blood in a remote area near a trestle bridge. He was convicted and now he is back in court citing new evidence that demands a new trial. How is this possible? Well, the first thing he is claiming is all about a guy named Ron Logan. Listen. Other names mentioned throughout this long period of time before anyone was in custody, Daniel Nations, Paul Eder, James Chadwell, Keegan Klein, Tony Klein, and of course, Ron Logan. There were two searches of his property, two, and he was never arrested or charged with the crime. Out of all the suspects, the POI is persons of interest that police sheriffs investigated. What's different about Ron Logan? into court with his fleet of lawyers demanding to be set free or in the alternative a new trial

because of Ron Logan and three other points. So what's so special about Ron Logan? Listen. Connie Dillman is the ex-girlfriend of Ron Logan. Their six-year relationship had come to an end by the time of the Delphi murders. Dillman believes Ron Logan is the killer. She says the voice on the tape saying down the hill is absolutely him. She also claims that Logan was violent and when she refused him sex one night, he hit her with a wrench causing seven stitches. Their bodies were found on his property, his house only 1,400 feet away from where the girls were discovered. Logan matched the appearance of the man in the blue jacket walking on the bridge that

was captured in Snapchat footage taken by the girls just before they disappeared. Ron Logan was questioned by detectives at length, but police let him go and moved on to other potential suspects. That's not all. The defense is claiming that Ron Logan confessed to the murders of Abby and Libby. This is nothing new. Listen. Ron Logan confesses to fellow inmate Ricky Davis that he was walking and talking with the girls about knowing one of their fathers when one of the girls wanted to turn around. Logan grabs Abby's shoulder, causing Libby to freak out,

and one of the girls says something about calling the police. Logan asks if they want to see his animals, including horses, and Abby wanted to go. Libby did not. This led to a scuffle, and Logan got hit in the nose, and he pulled out a box cutter and attacked Libby, cutting her throat. Logan said he took Abby somewhere and eventually cut her neck too. Hours after killing the girls, he came back because he wanted to move Libby to an area where she wouldn't be found. He says he burned his clothes in a burn pit with boots, gloves, and a bag, but feared drops of blood from his nose may have ended up on the girls' clothes. Lots of inconsistencies with Ron and Logan's so-called jailhouse confession with the facts as we know them. And I'm talking about forensic evidence straight out to Susan Hendricks, joining us, investigative journalist and author of Down the Hill, My Descent into the Double Murder in Delphi.

She was there every single day of testimony. Susan Hendricks, now Richard Allen's defense, his fleet of defense attorneys demand freedom or a new trial based on four points. The first being Ron Logan. What happened with Ron Logan? Who is this guy? And why do we care? We knew about Ron Logan at the get go. He was ruled out. Absolutely, Nancy. It's good to see you. And last night I spoke to, at the time, detective who was a big part of this, Jerry Holman. And he said to me, look, Susan, we investigated Ron Logan excessively, meaning two searches of the property. But what is different here is soon after the murders, allegedly, Ron Logan

confessed. That's what the defense attorneys are saying, confessed to someone he was in jail with. He was in jail for four plus months because he violated probation. And I remember he left court and said, next time I won't have girls murdered on my property, Ron Logan. But he was investigated. He did not do this. The investigators looked into him. Of course, it was on his property. But I go back, Nancy, to Libby's phone when Abby says, we heard it in court, don't leave me up here. Well, then when did she talk about the horses? After that, I believe that evidence on Libby's phone makes it Richard Allen and him putting himself there. Okay. Repeat very slowly what you just said.

It was Libby's phone. He put himself there and it lines up with who was on Libby's phone, bridge guy. And we saw it in court. And what we did see was a man approaching on the bridge coming up behind Abby. And she says, and you could hear it on Libby's cell phone, don't leave me up here. And then you see them, you hear the voice. All of that may be true, Susan Hendricks. In fact, all of that is true. However, the defense is claiming the guy on the bridge is Ron Logan. Joining me in addition to investigative reporter Susan Hendricks, who literally has written the book, Cheryl McCollum is with us, Cold Case Research Institute founder and star of Zone 7 podcast.

Cheryl McCollum, we sat through testimony. You have extensively investigated the scene. What do you make of the claim that Ron Logan's confession should have come in to evidence. Number one, you're talking about a man that now cannot defend himself and say whether or not he did or did not make that claim. Number two, Allen never said he saw another man, not on the trail or the bridge. So where was he that Allen himself would not have seen him? Allen placed himself on the bridge at the time the girls were there. He claimed he saw the other

witnesses that were young females at no time did he see anybody else that was a man. To Susan Hendricks, Ron Logan's confession did not come in in front of that jury for many reasons. Why? Yeah, it was known. And that is one of the questions that I asked now Lieutenant Jerry Holman last night and said, is this new? And he said, no, they both had it. They didn't bring it into evidence. And he also stated, and this is key, that he failed a polygraph, the prisoner who says, hey, Ron Logan, and it is specific. We heard it off the top of the show. What allegedly Ron Logan did? Well, he failed that. So and nothing ever tied him, as Cheryl said. What you're saying, the inmate to whom Logan confessed failed a poly. Yes. And Ron Logan is dead. He can't be brought in. Okay.

Joining me right now is Greg Morse, partner at law firm King Morse, veteran trial lawyer and author of The Untested on Amazon. Okay, Greg, before you light into me with your defense theories, can we just agree that the first thing you do when you have an inmate claiming they have information, you find out in many jurisdictions it's called a HALL, H-A-L-L issue. Has the inmate been offered a deal in exchange for the testimony, such as a lighter sentence. That's the first thing you look at. Would you agree? A hundred percent, Nancy. That's the first thing you look at because jailhouse snitches are notoriously lack credibility and they're generally looking for a deal. I have not seen any information that this inmate was looking for a deal, but my guess is he probably was. I mean, Greg, I'm speaking just as a lawyer, not a former prosecutor right now. Of course,

they're looking for a deal. They're sitting in four walls the rest of their life very often. And if they see a light at the end of the tunnel by snitching out or giving even a fake statement, they'll do it to get out. Susan Hendricks, did I hear you say, let me make sure I understand this, that both sides had Ron Logan's confession? Did the defense ever seek to enter it? Well, I know he was on the witness list for the hearing at the end of the summer, the preliminary hearing, to see if the defense could have a third party defense. So he was on that witness list. He could have been called, but he wasn't. It wasn't mentioned. They went with the Odinus theory. Now they, to me, in my opinion, they want to go to the Ron Logan theory now. Okay. I'm going to get back to the Odinus theory

since it didn't come in. I'm not addressing it right now and it's not being raised as new evidence. Okay. Greg Morris, I needed the answer to that question before I take out my guns and fire at you. The defense is claiming this is newly discovered evidence. It's not. They had Logan before he died. They had Logan's fake confession before he died and they chose not to bring in Logan. They cannot complain about a strategic maneuver they pulled during the trial. One, it's not newly discovered evidence. Two, it was their decision not to bring in the Logan confession. That would have been, I would have been running across the courthouse steps in front of the jury up

and down those steps. I took them many times with Ron Logan's confession in my hand. They chose not to use it and go with some cockamamie Odinism. You know what Odinism is, right? The Norse gods, like Thor. They were going to go with Thor worshipers committed the murders as part of some sacred ritual. They chose that over Logan.

Insanity. It is completely seems like a misstep from the defense in the sense that you don't need Logan to testify to get his. The fact that the police investigated him and this person confessed. It comes in under the police's investigation and why they did what they did. So I don't know why the defense left that out and focused on a Norse god and ritualistic killings when there was a lot of information that could have led to this, Logan, potentially, or at least created, as we know, reasonable doubt. However, you can't look at these issues in a vacuum, Nancy. This dovetailed with the other three issues. It becomes more important after the fact. But you are right. It's going to be a hurdle for the defense that they had

the opportunity to bring this stuff up. And I didn't see any new evidence that was created that would excuse the defense. Okay. That's a lot of words. Why use one word when you can use 200? Okay. Greg, bottom line. Now is the time for newly discovered evidence. If there really is newly discovered evidence that exonerates Richard Allen, which is total BS, technical legal term. If there is such evidence, there deserves to be a hearing. Okay. This is not new evidence, period. Their blunder at trial is their fault.

Now you've got Logan dead now and the inmate failed to polygraph. So I don't know how much it would have helped them. I don't know that they could have gotten it in under the rules of hearsay, but to Susan Hendricks, why is Logan, Ron Logan, the single best candidate for the defense to hone in on now. So a key part of this that the defense is saying why they want to bring in Ron Logan now is a box cutter, the alleged weapon. Because in this supposed confession that Ron Logan confessed to that he did it, He said he did it with a box cutter. So when the autopsy was done on Abby and Libby, graphic brutal pictures that we saw in that courtroom, and the gentleman who performed that said, maybe it could have been a box cutter. So that's what they're saying. Hey, wait a minute. That can't be coincidental. If it was a box cutter, then we need

to bring this back in because Ron Logan confessed that it was a box cutter. So let's bring them in. We would have if we knew that detail, they're saying. And then you have the issue of Logan seeking a fake alibi for the time the girls were murdered. That doesn't look good. Listen. Ron Logan does not have an alibi. According to cell tower data, his phone was at his property at 2.09 p.m. We know from the video that Libby took on her phone that the girls were approached on the bridge at 2.13. Ron had claimed for many years that he was on surveillance video at this tropical fish store in Lafayette some 30 minutes away, but that store didn't have surveillance videos. There is no proof that he was elsewhere. That does not mean that he's the killer of the girls,

but his alibi does not check out. What is your last memory? Dropping her off at their house with her paints. And it wasn't until later on when we got to the sheriff's department and actually saw the Snapchat picture. But that's the last picture I have. That is the last visual I have of my little girl. It's on that bridge. Richard Allen and his defense team back in court.

Who is Richard Allen? watched the two little girls, Abby and Libby, coming in and out and in and out of his pharmacy every week. Him convicted in the murders of Abby and Libby and now back in court stating that newly discovered evidence will set him free. Well, you got another thought coming, Richard Allen. He is claiming number one, that Ron Logan, that guy is the real killer. But to everyone on the panel, take a look at Ron Logan compared to the composite sketch and Ron Logan compared to the man on the bridge. It's not him. Now look at this. Richard Allen compared to the composite sketch and the man on the bridge. Should I believe Richard Allen or my lion eyes, Cheryl McCollum? It's not him. It's Richard Allen. And Nancy, there's another component we haven't talked about.

We also had the killer's voice. The defense put up nobody that said that was not Richard Allen. Nobody came forward, not the former girlfriend, not a neighbor. Nobody came forward and said, that sounds like Logan. No one. Cheryl McCollum, you're right. The defense brought no one because they chose not to pursue Ron Logan as the SOD, some other dude that did it. And they did have someone, the former girlfriend of Logan. She stated to police that when she saw the shot of the man on the bridge, she thought, well, there's Ron Logan. She thought that was Logan. And that when she heard the voice, that she thought that was Logan's voice.

They could have brought her on, but they didn't. Let me go quickly to Joseph Scott Morgan joining us. Professor of Forensics, Jacksonville State University, renowned death investigator, author of Blood Beneath My Feet on Amazon, and star of a hit podcast, Body Bags with Joe Scott Morgan. Joe Scott, could you just give us all a reminder of what happened to Abby and Libby? Well, to kind of break it down as best we can in these moments, their throats were cut, Nancy. And let's think about that. That's the baseline, because when we begin to think about their cause of death, as you like to say, the COD, we have essentially Abby, who has got a singular two-inch laceration to her throat. And then with Libby, it's a bit more dynamic in the sense that the forensic pathologist identified that she had four overlapping

lacerations, or let's just say incised injuries or cuts to her throat. Both of these, in both cases, Nancy, affected the jugular vein. And can I make one quick comment, please, about this reactionary kind of event that defense is alleging took place, I guess, on the bridge, where he snapped back in a reactionary form and essentially cut the throat. And Nancy, one of the big questions I would have is if that happened up on the bridge, we would see a copious amount of blood. I worked thousands of throats being cut, unfortunately, over my career. And you bleed more profusely out of that location than just about anywhere in the body. There would be blood trails leading to specific locations that would have been very recognizable. I mean, are they postulating that

he goes up with Clorox and cleans up the bridge so that you can't identify this on the cross ties or any other location? I just don't think this is plausible based upon these injuries, Nancy. To Susan Hendricks joining us, investigative journalist who literally has written the book on the Delphi murders of Abby and Libby, people gasped, started crying, grabbed each other, hugging. Jurors tried to look away from the shots of Abby and Libby. They were displayed for anyone in the courtroom to see. And isn't it true, Susan, that the ground around the girls was still saturated in blood when their bodies were found? Yeah, just huge puddles of blood. And you're right, there were gasps in that courtroom. And

I remember, Nancy, during the victim impact statements, the day he was sentenced, Diane, Abby's grandmother, and Abby's grandfather, Eric, they read their victim impact statements. And I remember Diane saying, look, Abby wasn't a daredevil. She was worried. She was concerned. Don't leave me up here. And then seeing the crime scene photos, it was horrific to see and knowing the long-term effects on the family members and what those girls went through in the last moments. But the victim impact statements to me were so powerful

saying, we sat through this every day. We can imagine what the girls went through and this is generational, the pain inflicted on us. But you are right, seeing those, and Eric said, Abby's grandfather, they're worse than I even thought they were. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. To Dr. Bethany Marshall joining us,

renowned psychoanalyst out of the L.A. jurisdiction, author of Deal Breaker. You can see her on Peacock now at DrBethanyMarshall.com. Dr. Bethany, the fact that Richard Allen and his defense team are raising these four issues, Ron Logan being one of them, as a bid for freedom or a new trial. How does that affect Abby and Libby's family? Nancy, the fact that Richard Allen could be roaming public around that town where there are other children, other families, and putting girls at risk is absolutely terrifying first of all secondarily unfair nancy what i want to contrast is what the family saw in court the blood the lacerations the cuts their daughters and granddaughters dead compared to logan and alan and that inmate who were talking about it, the incarcerated guy, those men are bragging. It's become an urban myth for them. I did it. No, I did it. No, I did it. It's like

these guys are allegedly asserting themselves into the notoriety of the crime, reliving the sexual excitement, turning it over in their head and talking about it like a great movie that they all went to together. Whereas the family and the people in the court will have those images seared into their mind forever. As a secondary post-traumatic stress response, looking at those images, they'll never be able to get the images out of their mind. Nancy, I just feel that there's so many sex predators in the general public that you have one crime near another person's property who now all of a sudden says he committed the crime. Allegedly, we'll never know he's dead now. And it makes me think about how pedophiles congregate and share stories and how the defense has sort of taken that up as a strategy to point the blame towards yet another pedophile, alleged pedophile. Whereas,

in fact, we know Allen did it. That's already been proven. In a nutshell, Susan Hendricks, explain the significance of the white van. Brad Weber was on the stand two times and he said he left work and it aligned with the confessions of Richard Allen of he was spooked. We believed his story. He looked at a white van. It's only something he would know. He crossed the creek and killed the girls. So what they're saying is the defense that Libby's phone stopped moving at a particular time.

Well, now from surveillance footage, it appears that the time is off a bit. So I thought about this a lot last night. I think we're listening to Richard Allen and everything he says. What if he was spooked by the white van, but near where the bodies were found? I was there. After he was sentenced, I went to where the bodies were found.

And coincidentally, you could hear a car. It was Brad Weber's car, not the white van, another one. And it is loud and it's right there. Convicted child killer Richard Allen back in court with his defense team demanding either freedom or a new trial based on four newly discovered pieces of evidence. All along, there was an online tide, a tsunami wave against the state. Listen. Some people paying attention to the Richard Allen Delphi murder trial are taking to social media to pass judgment on the prosecution and support for the man accused of killing Libby German and Abby Williams. Autumn on X post, I reserve the right to be wrong, but I'm absolutely not seeing how anyone is convinced Richard Allen committed the murders. Luke Nicholas on X says, time for a motion for directed verdict in the Delphi case. Put it to the jury now.

The state no longer has enough evidence to overcome the exculpatory evidence already presented. And Teresa chimes in with, this needs to stop. This has been a huge cover-up from day one. Free Richard Allen and arrest the real killers already and all involved in the cover-up. Straight out to Joe Scott Morgan, who lived the case along with many of us. Joe Scott, you have studied the case along with many of us. Joe Scott, you've studied the forensics so carefully. What do you believe is the strongest evidence against Allen? Well, I think that probably, for me at least, one of the things that really stands out, and you kind

of touched on it just a moment ago, Nancy, was this expended round that was found at the scene. If you can throw this up on the camera, this is actually a.40 caliber round right here. This is what it would have looked like. This is in pristine shape. This thing has been ejected from a weapon, which was actually at Sig Sauer, so that when this thing is racked back, it leaves these little striations on the external portion of the round. That round is tied back to the weapon that he possessed, Nancy. That's one of the really big pieces for me relative to the physical evidence. It's not pure ballistic evidence because this is an unfired round. However, this is accepted science, Nancy. And so that's one of the big pieces here for me.

You know, the ballistics evidence cannot be ignored. But the defense is conveniently doing that, Joe Scott, and they are focusing on not only Ron Logan's false confession, they are focusing on the timing of the van as it relates to the last time the girl's phone was used. And they are also arguing about Libby German's cell phone being used after the state says she's dead. Listen. Shocking moment in the courtroom when former FBI forensic examiner Stacey Eldridge says Libby German's phone received a call at 545 p.m. February 13th, 2017. And within milliseconds, a headphone jack was inserted into the phone. Eldridge says the headphone jack was removed nearly five hours later at 10.32 p.m. Eldridge says, I cannot think of any explanation that doesn't involve human interaction.

Joining us, Scott Eicher, a founding member of the FBI cellular analysis team, former FBI. Scott, what are they saying exactly? It sounds like they're saying that there was, you know, a headphone plugged into the phone and then removed right after a call that occurred. It's hard to tell from, you know, the not looking at the actual phone and the extraction of the phone, why they're saying that. I mean, there could be several different things that occur. A device was plugged in or was somehow the insertion point filled with dirt or something that allowed it to think that something was plugged into it. Well, the state responded. The defense motion that we're looking at today demanding either freedom or a new trial goes on to say that dirt or water could not have clogged the phone. So what does dirt or water clogging the phone have to do with this?

Listen. After the shocking news that a headphone jack had been plugged into Libby German's phone milliseconds after receiving a call at 545 p.m. February 13, the defense calls back to the stand State Police digital forensic expert Chris Cecil and asks about the lack of reporting about the headphone jack data. Cecil said he did a Google search and found a headphone jack could register as being used if water or dirt is in the port. The defense counter is asking Cecil, do you normally Google search when conducting a criminal investigation? Defense attorney Jennifer Auger presses further saying, you and the state have had seven and a half years to research and you came in here with a Google search? The defense is claiming that the girl's cell phone was used,

was plugged into a jack after they're dead. Clearly arguing that someone was manipulating the phone. Okay? Or even the girls manipulating the phone, which would throw off the state's timeline

because they claimed the phone was used. Got it so far? Yes, no. I got it. And that's the strongest point in their motion is the headphone jack. Let me tell you the rest. So the state brings on, so this is not newly discovered by the way, again, because that came up at trial and the state brought on an expert to counter it, claiming, hey, it got clogged with water and dirt, which was at the scene. He, Allen, forced the girls through a creek. And the defense attorney says, well, what do you have to support that? And the state's expert said, a Google search. Long story short, the defense said, after this long, all you got is a Google search. I would have said, well, after this long,

why didn't you do a Google search? Well, it's not the defense's job to prove their innocence. That's on the prosecution. And I wish I worked in a county where experts get on the stand for the prosecution and rely on Google searches. You know, we've all seen the mugs. Don't mistake my law degree for a Google search. Same thing with science. That is appalling. Palm Beach County, the prosecutors are much better. I don't know. I don't know who would have authorized this. No, no, no, no, no. You got it totally bass-ackwards, Morris. The defense should have done a Google search and figured out you can get the same reaction from a cell phone if it's clogged with dirt or water.

You know what? If you have a question for the FBI cellular analysis expert, here's your chance. What about it, Scott? Could you explain to Morse the state's theory that the reason it looked like her phone had been plugged into a jack was because it was clogged with dirt and water, which it was. Most definitely. I mean, that water is a conductor of electricity and it's a very small amount of electricity. When the phone like like a phone jack is plugged into the bottom of the phone and it allows that connection. Right. It allows that electrical connection to be made water is just like that right that allows electricity electricity to go

through should that have been a google search you know on during the trial no should it have been something that they looked at prior to going to trial and had an expert come in or should they have tried that on another phone i agree. They definitely should have done that prior to having this brought up. Oh, wait a minute, Scott Eicher. The defense can do it, too. The defense has subpoena power. They're getting paid. Investigators paid for by you and me, the state, for the defense. Yes, we pay for his defense. So you and Morse are arguing, well, the state should have done this and that. B.S. The defense could have done it themselves. Why didn't they do it? I agree. They definitely could have done it themselves, too. That would have been a big thing to bring up by the defense if they had done that on their own. But they didn't. What about that, Morse? Well, again, prosecution has to prove someone is guilty. However, it sounds like all

these issues that you're looking at to affect the verdict, it sounds like they really lead to an ineffective counsel claim. That's what these issues are. Those are notoriously last ditch efforts that people convicted file. They have less than 10% chance to prevail. So I see you're giving up on the cell phone and you're giving up on the cell phone. Not giving up on it, Nancy. Now you're giving up on the cell phone and you're giving up on the cell phone not giving up on it you're taking your backup clients and effective assistance i know what you're doing you can't have an expert get on the stand and say they researched google this is a court of law this is people's lives we have a constitution that has a standard it's it's not for social media consumption standard in court you keep saying he can't, she can't, they can't.

Well, they did. In 25 years, I would be appalled, and I do serious cases like this, if a prosecutor got up and said, well, my expert did a Google search. That's it. That person is excluded. They have zero credibility. Zero. Susan Hendricks, that's not how it happened.

This expert testified and was on cross-exam and was asked, well, how do you know that water or dirt can cause the same result? He went and Googled it, man. Absolutely. Absolutely. And Rosie mentioned it in closing. What happened? What happened was they alluded to the fact the defense is saying, hey, someone was there or move Libby because her phone, someone plugged something in. But that doesn't really make sense if you think about it. So the prosecution was saying, yes, this could happen because of dirt and water.

And it was I was in the courtroom. Yes, I could see the defense. I look right at Rosie and Baldwin. And they went like this. They Googled it. They Googled it. They mentioned it in the closing argument. He Googled this. Turns out one of the jurors was interviewed on Murder Sheet and they said that they kind of put aside. What they really focused on was Richard Allen, his voice, him putting himself there, an interrogation video where his wife walks in and says, you didn't tell me you were at the bridge that day. That's what it boiled down to. But you're right. And the reality is that

attacking the state's witness because they used a Google search, everybody on that jury probably relies on Google. So they're barking up the wrong tree with this. We also know by three o'clock, nobody's hearing them. There's nobody screaming. Nobody's running. Nobody's calling on their phones. Again, this was a very fast deal. And y'all, here's the reality. Most children that are going to be murdered are murdered in the first three hours. I will.

Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. Joining me is former FBI investigator and expert in forensic photography, Bill Daly. Bill, thank you for being with us. We were talking earlier about those crime scene photos that made people start crying in the courtroom, gasp, grab each other for support. One of your expertise is forensic photography. How do you get through taking the photographs of crime scenes, for instance, where two little girls are brutally murdered? Well, Nancy, I can tell you, you know, the times I've gone to crime scenes where there have been bombings and kidnappings, bank robberies where people have been killed, you really have to remove yourself. You really have to get to step back and say you're doing it for the victims.

You're doing it for the betterment of society that you're going to find out who's responsible for these heinous crimes. And so you kind of look through the viewfinder as you're photographing and documenting the area to kind of say this is going to go towards making justice happen. So you kind of need to put a bit of a shield up to protect yourself. Otherwise, like you said here, people looking at it from the jury box are going to be overwhelmed with emotion because you picture yourself. If you start imagining that those are your children, your nieces and nephews or mother or father, sister, brother, it will be too overwhelming. So that's what you really need to do. You need to kind of distance yourself and look at it through the kind of empirical view of a lens to hope to get to the truth. The last major point the defense is bringing up is the fact that Richard

Allen was kept in DOC, Department of Corrections, as opposed to another jail. Why do they care? Because it was there he was placed in solitary confinement and gave, I think it was 61 confessions that he murdered Abby and Libby Lisson. The defense also claimed Allen had no absolute right to refuse being transferred into state custody. Since the safekeeping order wasn't served to Allen or his attorney, Brett Gibson, they never argued against the transfer. So another thing that was never brought up, Susan Hendricks, the significance of arguing about where he was housed is because they cannot suppress those statements. He gave statement after you can't suppress 61 confessions, right? Including to your wife over the phone, being recorded to other inmates, to the wardens, to everybody. He told everybody I did it. So, OK, Kent can't suppress those.

So argue the fact that he was in the wrong facility. In a nutshell, explain this argument. I think, Nancy, this is their strongest point for a possibility of an appeal, which is right after he was arrested, Sheriff Tobe Lesenby at the time, it was a safekeeping order, said, look, he won't be safe at Carroll County, so we have to send him to another prison. Well, they're saying he should not have been there, of course, innocent until proven guilty. And they're saying, as you mentioned, it drove him crazy, so to speak. So that's why he confessed, because of where he was. But the state says, look, he was treated better than other inmates.

He had an iPad. He had a lot more than he would have had, meaning the psychologist, Dr. Walla, he wouldn't have had at Carroll County. And I bet they're wishing he didn't have that because that's who he confessed to. So essentially to you, Cheryl McCollum, they're arguing he was in the wrong facility, I think, as a bid to get the statements thrown out. You sat in court with me. What do you make of the doctor claiming Richard Allen was faking it? I mean, he looked sane in the courtroom. I agree with the doctor. First of all, I believe he's still confessing today.

And I believe if you listen to what he confessed to, he tells the story in chronological order. Somebody that is delusional cannot do that. He starts where he went to his parents. He got beer. He went home and changed clothes. That is also key. Why are you changing clothes and putting on more layers on a warm day? He tells exactly where he went, where he parked his car far away. He went to the trail. He went to the bridge. He saw the girls. He followed them. He tells you in order that this crime occurred. Later, he also tells you the motive and the reason he did not complete the sexual assault because of the white man. Greg Morse joining us, a renowned trial lawyer. Greg Morse, maybe suppressing one confession, but 61 confessions, not going to happen. Well, you're right. That's a lot to overcome, especially when they're on jail phone calls, speaking with family. However, the more difficult thing here or the issue is this person had a lawyer. They contacted the police department and I guess he was under a

different name. There's a reason why in cases, the second that I'm retained, we file an invocation of rights. It doesn't matter if the police or people go talk to the person. So their issue is trying to use he didn't get counsel when he had one. They used a different name and dovetail that into his this decompensated psychosis that led him to a confession. He's probably not going to get on those grounds. But the not putting him in touch with a lawyer who contacted him was hired for him. That's particularly troubling under the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution. Troubled you may be, but does it warrant a new trial, much less a reversal in freedom?

No, that's not going to rise to that level. The standard is not innocence. It is, is there a possibility the result would have been different? That's all it is. So the prosecution stuck to a timeline here. Then it turns out not all of the evidence that they found, whether it's related to the Logan person or the headphone jack, doesn't fit into their own narrative. And these create issues that this guy should get a new trial. He may be convicted again with the other evidence, but these issues taken together are to not warrant a new trial here for ineffective or for the court allowing some of this stuff in with the Google search. We wait as justice unfolds in that Delphi courthouse. And now we remember an American hero, Sergeant Chris Jenkins, Loudoun County Sheriff's, Tennessee, struck and killed in the line of duty.

U.S. Air Force vet, 20 years with Loudoun County, survived by grieving children, Clay and Chloe, mourning fiancé, Christy, and canine partner, Deja Vu. American hero, Sergeant Chris Jenkins. Nancy Grace signing off. Goodbye, friend. You're listening to an iHeart Podcast.