Hidden True Crime - DELPHI: Richard Allen Trial Day 9 Monday 10/28 DNA & BLOOD PATTERN ANALYSIS

Episode Date: November 10, 2024

About Hidden True Crime: Lauren Matthias, a former television reporter, and her husband Dr. John Matthias, a criminal psychologist, started Hidden True Crime in 2020 with their Season, 'Beyond the Veil,' a psychological deep dive into the doomsday murders and prophet. What started as a simple conversation at their dinner table became a captivating podcast. Join the dynamic duo of Dr. John Matthias, a forensic psychologist, and Lauren Matthias, an investigative journalist, as they delve into the psychological facets of unthinkable crimes every week. Their unique perspectives and in-depth analysis offer a fresh take on true crime storytelling. Thank you for your support through sponsorships, subscribing, listening, and becoming a Patreon member at Patreon.com/HiddenTrueCrime Our Sponsors:* Check out Acorns: https://acorns.com/HIDDENTRUECRIME* Check out Acorns: https://acorns.com/HIDDENTRUECRIME* Check out Armoire and use my code HIDDENTRUECRIME for a great deal: https://www.armoire.style* Check out Effecty and use my code HIDDENTRUECRIME for a great deal: https://www.effecty.com* Check out Happy Mammoth and use my code HIDDENTRUECRIME for a great deal: https://happymammoth.comSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/hidden-a-true-crime-podcast1836/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hey everyone, I am in Delphi, Indiana, spending long nights in line, camping out in order to get into the courtroom each day and bring you the latest on the Richard Allen trial. Alan is charged with murdering 13-year-old Abigail Williams and 14-year-old Liberty German in February of 2017. Now, this episode you're about to listen to was originally recorded as a live stream on YouTube right after court ended on Monday. We've made some edits for our podcast version. But if you notice any choppy moments or references to a live chat, that is why. We appreciate you understanding as we work around the clock to bring you the latest on the Richard Allen trial with a quick turnaround. And if you would like to catch the full unedited live stream, you can always head over to Hidden Chew Crime on YouTube. Hey, Hidden Jems. Is everyone there?

Hello, hello, hello. Thanks for everyone being here. got started a little bit late, but you know what? Court went a little bit late today. Court almost went until 6 p.m. It was a long day and we had two huge witnesses today. Well, we have a lot to go through. Let me give you just a rundown of some of the things we're going to cover today. First off, my lunch live, I shared essentially what happened before lunch, which is that no DNA of Richard Allen was found. at the crimes and connecting Richard Allen to any of these crimes. Somebody mentioned that I seemed disappointed at lunch, thus I'm biased.

You know, if I am biased anywhere, it's that I want to have faith in this investigation, that I want to think, you know, that investigators are telling us, you know, the right things. that maybe perhaps Abby and Libby will get justice. And I think that's where my mind goes. I don't want anyone to be guilty. I just, I want justice for these girls sitting in there is really hard. We looked at crime scene photos again today.

I made a new graph and I'm going to show all of you, this graph that I made showing and depicting the crime scene and what a blood splatter analysis thought of the crime scene and some certain things. And I think also hearing that today, it's just been a really heavy day. It's been a confusing day. It's been a frustrating day.

So, yeah, that's where I am is, you know, we, we have, I have a ha moments and then I have moments where I'm like, huh. And I'm just, I'm, I'm following the evidence. I'm following the facts. I'm following the evidence. and sometimes I feel like maybe we're on to something. Yesterday I was on with last night with Dutty Don or Dutie Ron, sorry. And I felt like he helped answer a lot of my questions.

And so I think I had this high of a lot of clarity. Like, okay, this really helped me understand something. And I recommend everyone watch that. It was about, if you have any questions about the firearm toolmark. analysis. And then I go to court today. And I feel like I'm starting to wrap my mind around it. Because as my husband, Dr. John, always says, people want to make sense out of things. Right. We want things to make sense. Human beings want things to make sense. And I certainly do. I'm human. And so then we get to court and, you know, you know how we always say that.

Make it make sense. I want this to make sense. And I sort of left today just a little bit more confused. And so if people felt emotion from my lunch live and even actually, I was really flustered at the beginning too. I, in fact, I walked back into the court going I was really flustered on my lunch live and I don't know why. I think that, thank you so much to your talk. I think that I just, I just want answers. I've been sitting in there every day for a long time. and I'm going to continue following the evidence and following the facts. And sometimes I have highs and sometimes I have loads. And it's not because I want somebody to be guilty.

I just want to have faith in the justice system. And I want seeing this brutal crime, I hope that one day Abby and Libby get justice. So just a few things on my mind. that's that's where I am right now that's where I am right now I also have a recap of the entire last week the a little bit more than last week because it's actually gone about a week and a half and that was posted or published today on YouTube a full video so if you have any friends that want to understand the entire last week of the Richard Allen trial and they don't want

to go through hours and hours of lives send them my 45 minutes summary and hopefully they'll feel pretty caught up. All right, with all of that being said, let's get into it because I'm sure you're waiting for me to get into it. Since you guys sort of know the conclusion of the DNA, I'll go through it a little bit. I will definitely go through the details because that's what I'm here to do to give you all the details since there's no audio and no video in court. And then I want to jump into Cicero. Cicero is a crime scene investigator, specializing in blood spatter and some other things and blood patterns. And he certainly has some theories about the crime scene.

And we looked over the crime scene again today. Sorry, I forgot to turn my phone off. My phone never stops. That's one thing. All right. Nobody's phone stops these days. So, and so I, that's what I made a graph about. We had to see the crime scene photos again, very difficult again.

And, but I did try to take some good notes and really try to study some of the environment so I can share just a little bit more about the crime scene. So the day starts, where am I? October 28th, 2024. It's Monday. I'm in Delphi, Indiana at the Richard Allen trial. It's Monday a new week. And we started today with witness Stacey Bosanovski. It's a great last name. I hope. I didn't butcher it. Stacey. Sorry. No, just kidding. That is how you pronounce it. And she is with the Indiana State Police Lab in Indianapolis. She's a DNA analyst and forensic scientist. She has both a undergrad and a master's. masters in science.

And she, Lutrell's doing the prosecution questioning today, calling the witness. And she specializes an STR technology, next generation sequencing, specializes in the field that is ever changing, which is true. We know that about DNA. It is ever changing, isn't it? Man.

She, again, got her undergrad in biology, and then her master, or masters in forensic science. And she, she was an impressive woman. She was a very impressive woman on the stand. She was an excellent expert witness and someone I really respect. She went over everything in detail. And, you know, we all suspected again that there wouldn't be DNA found because we've heard that.

We've heard that there was no DNA found. We've heard that in trial. We've read that in the probable cause there was no DNA. Like we all pretty much know there's no DNA. But I think for me, like maybe just maybe there was this like five or 10% chance that maybe they got something in the last month, you know, and they didn't tell us. Like they went back to retest something, right? Like that just thought maybe we're going to have some answers today.

I love me some answers. That's what I'm wanting. And so she went through details. of all of her analysis starting in February 2017. She shared her CV resume. CV is, you know, all of her continuing education resume. What is DNA? And she shared that one thing that's important for us all to understand during her witness testimony is single source DNA and mixtures.

And essentially a single source is a term that expresses a DNA profile that comes from a single DNA profile or a single DNA profile or a single. person and she shared mixtures, which are two or more individual, so two or more of DNA profiles or multiple alleles, as they are said. The single DNA profile has two alleles, but with the mixtures that has multiple alleles. And again, it can be two or more. She also referred to Snips. Let me pull this up. I did this before I jumped on. Thank you. AI overview. They are single nucleotide polymorphisms or SNPs. They're a variation of DNA sequences that occur when a single nucleotide is different from the reference sequence. They are the most common type of genetic variant in humans and they occur in almost every 1,000 nucleotides. Did you guys get that? I

didn't either. This is why we have Stacey on the stand for us. But SNPs were very important to her process and to any DNA analysis. So we talked a lot about SNPs. Snips, of course, as you point out, they refer to the risk of disease, the act as biomarkers, contributing to diversity. All of these things we learn a lot about when we are doing a genetic profile and ancestry or wherever. So those are the things that were, I think, most important to her exploring all the DNA that she tested. Lutrell handles all of this. He hands the state exhibits. By the way, the day started, I just want to say with a very large evidence table.

You knew that we were getting into business when we all walked in. The evidence table was out. All of, you know, the victim's family was there. It was a full courtroom, completely full. Um, every chair taken this morning. It was actually hard to get in. And I, you know, we even had people helping us get in. Thank you so much.

And then, um, in addition to that, we had Kathy Allen there. Kathy, uh, Richard Allen's sister was there. Richard Allen's mother was not there. So I hope she is doing okay. I don't know, um, how she is. But keeping her thoughts, we had, um, on the prosecution side, of course, we had Libby's mother that was there. attending every single day, as have the patties and Libby's sisters and her half-sisters

and her sister Kelsey. So, and more, more people were there. The prosecution side was full. So they explain, first off, they start with the sexual assault kits, the R kits, one for Abby and one for Libby, and she actually has the boxes. has the boxes. And the one for Abby, one for Libby, they are a series of items, a wash, a vaginal wash sample, oral and external, internal swabs, hair from Liberty. It was all tested and screened, a cervical swab. There were a lot of swabs. Again, if you want to see what an intense

SA kit is all about. I recommend it, like, I hear it. it helped me because I really felt that they really screened a lot. Like I really understood everything that they tested and swabbed for. And then interestingly enough, the DNA test results from those kits, there was male DNA present on the external genital swab. but it was insufficient DNA in the content of kits so no DNA analysis was able to recover from kit and it was external and I want to say let me let me pause and reread my words because I want to get this right um yeah I even have asked somebody because I think it might have been just

one of the girls that had um I'm going to find out but that And they explained that it was so minimal, so minimal that there was a male DNA unknown, that it could also be, it could be from anywhere even like, I think it reminded me of sort of like it could be, I don't know, let's see. Maybe let me keep reading and seeing where it is. In the cervical and the V swabs, I'm watching my language because of YouTube, not because I don't want to say it, but just because. I don't want to be censored on YouTube, respecting their rules. On both kits, DNA results in no male DNA present on those swabs. I keep looking here. DNA on fingernail scrapings or external, though.

Oh, so there was male DNA on some fingernail clippings as well. Okay. But the DNA, she states, on fingernail scrapings or external, isn't an unusual find. fingernails are in contact with things every day, and then external genital swabs come into contact with clothing and laundry, etc. So that was sort of her reference point. Like when they said this, I was like, wait a minute, what there was externally, there was male DNA. But again, she explains that this isn't uncommon. Fingernails, contact every day with things.

And then laundry, clothing, everything like that. this isn't uncommon, this minimal amount. So then we get into all these different exhibits, and she explains how she received the original items on February of 2017, as well as some trace examination, blood samples that were used for as DNA standard. As she had a bunch of line lab item numbers,

we read them all and explained that lab items, 128 and 9. They received, hold on, I'll tell you what they are. I wrote that. Okay, lab items, uh, one, two, eight, and nine were swabs, swabs from Libby, German, and they had blood detected on one, eight, and nine. Two were possible blood. DNA analysis looking for male DNA, no male DNA on, uh, number two.

That was, uh, taken from Libby's right upper thigh, her left thigh, her left breast, her right breast. Her right breast, the DNA of male present, I have. But again, not enough to make a profile, any DNA profile, just minimal. There was analysis of blood from her left wrist, her right wrist, a swab of her thigh, and there was blood confirmed from that, and as well as fibrous material, human hair from the left pinky of Libby German. There was some left a human hair, excuse me, but it was not able to be used. She explained that actually this idea of hairs, they actually collected many, many hairs. I mean, some of them so small.

Some of them don't have roots. Some of them do have roots. You need a root to get a good DNA. I learned so much about DNA. My mind's about to honestly kind of explode. And then just right after DNA again, we went to blood splatter. It was a heavy day. It was a heavy day.

So there was no DNA and most things. On item 22, there was slight male DNA, but it was insufficient with a DNA analysis. And 22 was, I'll tell you what 22 was. Um, let's flip the page and find out. It was a swab of thigh from Libby German. And there was blood confirmed and minimal DNA inconclusive. Then there was a hair on Abby's left arm. Two hairs were actually present in both had root.

So they're able to take the DNA profile and create it because there was a root on the hair. And as they created it, it was, really? See, this is like, you guys are going to understand how the whole day was today. This is how I felt. I was like, okay, something's coming, something's coming, and then deflated. Like something interesting, we're going to have answers, we're going to have answers, and then something, no. Because I have here that this was Abby's hair, left arm, and these were two hair present,

both had root, DNA profile created. And then, so you're like, okay, okay. what's next? You're like watching, you're like listening. You're like, and again? And then the conclusion is, although there was a root present on hair, there was not enough for further analysis. And you're just like, really? So that was, honestly, that sort of explains like the entire morning a little bit. Like, we want answers, we want answers. And then no, nothing, nothing. Um, there was, uh, some fibers from a tree. And they were examined. microscopically if indeed it was human hair. Oh, and then with the tree, it had yes to blood,

and that blood was consistent to Libby German. That's important. We're going to get into that at the crime scene analysis. And then there was a DNA profile of Abby and Libby that was, uh, hold on. Okay, so this is the hair that was believed to be a relative of Ms. German. So the hair found on Abby. They did conclude to be a relative of Libby, and they later concluded that it was Kelsey. And, you know, Abby was found in Kelsey's sweatshirt. It was actually being borrowed by Libby, but Abby was found in it. And, yeah, Abby was found wearing Libby's sweatshirt, and it was consistent as being Kelsey Germans.

Item 16 is the cartridge she examined. She received it on 2017, 2017. She examined the item. It was DNA analysis. The cartridge, she explained, was slightly dirty. She took one swab of the entire cartridge. The swab had a light brown stain from dirt. She attempted to collect skin cells.

Swabbing is a method they used for that. She put it in a brown paper bag. She sealed it. Had a loose debris when she opened it, did it, da-da-da. Kept it safe. Nothing. Cartridge continued. Part of the process is to wet the swab with water.

Thus, it would remove the dirt. And then she added this to the case notes because dirt could impact her ability to obtain a sample. She removed the content of the back from the manila envelopes. It was sealed again. It was a piece of white paper that sealed it. Her initials were on an exam. The day she performed her exam, there was cartridge and loose debris. DNA preferred analysis for this item, but they did not see any prints. But they wanted to note to see if there was any blood. There was no blood. There was no fingerprints. No body fluid, didn't see anything. And so she removed it for testing, swabbed with maximum effort. The result of the cartridge, boom, boom, boom, insufficient DNA for further analysis. Do you see how this morning was? That's what I'm saying. Like, we're sitting there, like hearing this entire process, which is so important.

I'm not blaming the witness. I'm not blaming the state. But, like, I just think everybody just wants the answers. That's why you guys are all here live. It's why we're listening to everyone that's in the courtroom life, right? We just, I think it's human beings. We want answers. We want justice.

We want, I think answers equate to hope to me. And even though I shouldn't have had any expectations today, the way the morning was going, I just kept thinking, and, and, and, you know, they go through this whole process and nothing. Sort of my morning. Hence, I came out a little flustered. She tested the right and left converse shoes. Now, as you remember, the converse shoes were being worn by. Abby. They were her shoes. She came in those shoes. She was, she had the shoes on. It starts with a visual

exam. She starts with a visual exam of the shoes. There's discolouralization. There's no blood detected on item 14. There, there is a bit of, she swabs the shoe because there looks like to be, looks to be a little bit of blood on the outside of the converse. And 14 and 15, these swabs are consistent with Abby Williams. So her. Converse shoes came back with the DNA profile of the owner of the shoes. But then it actually had another individual that was on the shoe, another DNA profile, and that was Libby German. So Abby and Libby's DNA profiles both came from the converse of the shoes, and it was a

partial DNA, and then there was some partial DNA profile, but there were no further conclusions. And then she also explained that the shoe having was heavy with soil dirt and plant material. And to be honest, the shoe is very dirty, not just the sole, the whole shoe. The dirt was embedded, embedded into that fabric material. Blood detected in the tongue of shoe is a mixture of DNA, which would be Abby and Libby. So the tongue of the shoe had Abby and Libby's DNA. and the swimming, the black sweatshirt owned by Kelsey being found on Abby, the German Delphi swimming sweatshirt. She did a visual exam of this sweatshirt.

And this, by the way, this sweatshirt was really heavily tested more than once. So she originally did a visual exam. It was heavily saturated with red stain, which makes sense. And next, the shoulders, they had all. a stain. There was a lot of heavy plant material and dirt, like a lot. She kind of explained. Like there was so much plant material, dirt material, soil, sand, and blood detected. Detected all over the shoulder, the hoodie, and the neck. There was blood. And there was also a whitish stain. Three swabs of an area of a sweatshirt. They did a microscopic exam, took several

hairs from the sweatshirt. And it was consistent of, Abigail Williams and a mixture of both of them, Libby and Abby. It was consistent again with their profile and the hair found on the sweatshirt was insufficient to test. The Maurice jeans taken from the body of Abigail, so they were actually owned by Libby found on Abby. And there was a visible exam. They were heavy dirt like presence throughout the jeans like sand like or mud substance that enhance with the ultra-red or ultra-violet light use to sort of test the outside for anything visible. There was a lot of dirt like staining, testing areas of genes to see what might have been embedded under the dirt. And there was, in quotes, the possible presence of blood.

The DNA analysis of genes, two swabs inside the crotch area, swabs on the button and zipper of genes. One hair had root. The hair failed to demonstrate one gene-prose. The hair failed to demonstrate one gene profile and failed to demonstrate, oh, the hair failed to demonstrate a complete DNA profile. But there was one gene profile. It was Abby Williams and the other was Libby German, plus one other, a laboratory technician. So on the genes, it sounds funny, on the gene profile, the genes, J-E-A-N-S, on those genes, The gene profile, DNA profile was Abby, Libby, and then they found somebody else. And they were, she was really like interested.

She said, yeah, I found someone. And then they explained it was a laboratory technician, so like a personnel. And inside the crotch area, there was a mixture of DNA and it was Abby and Libby. Um Then back to a Nike shoe Wait, let me make sure, am I in the right spot? No, I'm not. I, okay.

Then we had a break and we came back. We're still before lunch. So, you know, this was still all before my lunch life. They tested some additional items. Hold on, pause. Pause right here. This, okay, this may or may not have been after lunch. I can't remember.

if this is a 15 minute break or lunch break. It's all a blur, guys. Um, so they identified a bunch of items after this break. And they talked about these are the things that they also, that she, Stacey also, um, analyzed the pink top on the body of Abby. That's like a pink sleeveless top that was found on her, her gray cotton bra and her black bra. If you remember, Abby was found in two bras, like a regular looking bra and then a sports bra over the top of it. And they tested that for outside and inside the breast area. The pink tank top did have blood on it. It was as it was Abigail Williams DNA.

There was a gray bra with blood. They did two cuttings and they discovered it was Abigail Williams, three swabs in the breast area, Abigail Williams. Third swab was a mixture, another mixture, but they were not getting anything conclusive. They tested. hairs, items from the DNA. They tested 14 cuttings from the pink sleeveless. It was all consistent with Abby Williams. They tested four more hairs, and they all failed to demonstrate enough for the DNA analysis. The black Nike shoe, which would have been Libby's, but was found under the body of

Abigail Williams, there was blood on the shoe. Seven swabs collected, and then collected two other swabs in shoe. And the swabs, three seventh of those, three out of seven of those were consistent with Abigail Williams. And forgive me, I lost my place. And then of the two, Abby and Libby, the hair was insufficient. Lately, I've been trying to be more intentional about what I wear, intentional about everything,

just choosing pieces that feel effortless, still put together, timeless, but also not overthinking it every morning. It's why I keep going back to Quince. their pieces just make getting dressed easier and I feel so classy. I feel elevated. The fits are flattering. The fabric is really high quality. Everything is wearable day to day. I actually got this really beautiful yellow V-neck midi dress from them and I paired it with some Italian leather sandals. It's one of those outfits that just works. It feels polished but still comfortable. It's exactly

what I've been looking for. What surprises me, though, is the quality for the price. Quince uses premium materials like European linen, organic cotton, but they cut out the middleman. So everything is priced way lower than you'd expect. Refresh your every day with luxury you can actually use. Head to quince.com slash hidden true crime for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's quince, Q-U-I-N-C-E-D-C-E-D-C-C-E-D-Crine. For free shipping and 365-day returns, quince.com slash hidden true crime. What's one financial lesson you learned the hard way?

I'll go first. It's not too late to start saving. Today's episode is sponsored by Acorns. Acorns is a financial wellness app that makes it easy to start saving and investing for your future. You don't need to be an expert. Acorns will recommend a diversified. portfolio that matches you and your money goals, you don't need to be rich. Acorns lets you get started with the spare money you have right now.

And one of the best things about Acorns is they allow you to see projected growth on their website. Simply go online, type in how much money you'd put in and see the potential future balance of your account. Sign up now and join the over 13 million all-time customers who have already saved and invested over $22 billion with Acorns. Head to Acorns.com slash hidden true crime or download the acorns app to get started paid non-client endorsement compensation provides incentive to positively promote acorns tier one compensation provided investing involves risk acorns advisors LLC and sec registered investment advisor few important disclosures at acorns dot com slash hidden true crime does anyone else find themselves saying i feel way older than i actually am or i feel way

younger did you know there might be some truth behind that feeling that's where true diagnostic comes in with their true age test, you can discover your true biological age, plus get insights into health risks for heart disease or Alzheimer's, even your mortality. I just ordered my true diagnostic test, and while nervous, I'm looking forward to what it may tell me about my own health so I can take control of things now. When taking tests pertaining to my health, I want to make sure it's scientifically backed and true diagnostic is. Their true age test is based on peer-reviewed research from scientists working at Harvard, Duke, and Yale. And by tracking your biological, age, you can actually see how the changes you make, whether that's exercise, diet, or sleep,

will affect your health over time. Ready to find out your biological age? Right now, our listeners can get 20% off their entire order at TrueDiagnostic.com by using code hidden true crime at checkout. That's True Diagnostic, T-R-U-D-A-G, and O-T-I-C-C-com. Just use code Hidden True Crime to save 20% off. Plus, if you subscribe, you'll get an additional 20% off. Discover your true age today.

Has losing weight and getting healthier been on your mind lately? Have you heard about groundbreaking GLP1 treatments like OZMPIC and WeGO? With Effecti, getting access to these powerful medications has never been easier or more affordable. Starting a new medication is always a bit scary when you aren't sure what to expect. And using Effecti makes it so much easier with their hands on support, which gives unlimited access to licensed doctors so you never have to jump through hoops for help with any dosing or just other support when you need it. Effecti uses rigorous testing and their products are backed by research so you can rest assured.

Ready to level up your weight loss game right now. My listeners can get $50 off of GLP1 weight loss treatments at Effecti.com with code hidden true crime at checkout. That's effecti.com, EFFF-E-C-T-Y.com and use code Hidden True Crime to get $50 off your first month of GLP1 weight loss treatment, no hassles, no memberships, and no hidden fees. Get started today. Just let me see. I've lost my place. Stay with me, guys. Hold on. Oh, and then four of the seven were not consistent with Abigail Williams on the Nike. Excuse me. I was in the wrong place. But one was consistent with Abigail Williams. And then there was a mixture and they could

not determine. Now, back to the Nike shoe. She explained that the Nike shoe had heavy soil. And then Lutrell actually gives evidence envelopes out. He's passing that. He makes sure everybody has them. He says what number these are. Thank you so much, Laura. I really appreciate it. Thank you. He shares what numbers these are and they're all swabs from the ground and trees. There's blood detected on all of them. All of them are from Liberty, German, by the way. All of the swabs that they're collecting here, well, specific ones. We'll get in, again, we'll get into the crime scene and the blood. And just a minute, I have the answers to the entire crime scene.

So stay with me, guys. Because I want to look like, look at that with all of you. There was blood detected on the ground. They took swabs of everything. They took the swabs of the left index finger and pinky finger of Libby German. And the possible presence of blood was Libby German. All of the spouts that were mentioned by Luttrell on the ground. So all of the blood that was found on the ground minus right where Abby was.

And this is important. We're going to get into this later. It was all Libby. Minus right where Abby's body was. Beyond Abby's body, all of the other blood. And we're going to point out, I drew something to kind of show you guys where it was all located. It was all Libby. All of it on the ground was Libby that they tested.

There were so many spots named on the ground by Lutrail. He went over them one by one. And again, they were all Libby German. So sad. Then they started explaining all of the items that were recovered from the creek. They tested those together. And of course, yes, this impacts. the DNA analysis when they're found in the creek.

So there was a sweatshirt recovered from the creek, item 68, a pair of underwear that was recovered from the creek. There was a sock recovered from the creek. And there was, hold on. Another sock recovered from the creek. There was a green headscarf from the creek. There was a tank top like a camisole from the creek. The other Nike shoe, the one that wasn't found under Abby, was discovered in the creek.

There were items recovered from the creek. The items that were recovered from the creek did affect her results. The water has a potential to remove or delete DNA. The Nike was heavily soiled. There was no blood. They took five swabs that were collected from the shoe. Abby Williams' DNA was found in. there were two swabs that were a partial DNA profile.

The recovered genes from the creek, heavy dirt, stains, the attempted to swab the areas of genes to get skin cells. Inside of the genes was a mixture. It was Abigail Williams, a minor profile of Libby German. And the second swab was a zipper. And it was a mixture that could not determine how many profiles. So the mixture, again, the mixture of DNA, meaning more than one person, they could not determine how many contributors were to that mixture.

The tie-dye shirt that was found in the creek had heavy mud on it. Like she emphasized that. There was heavy mud on this shirt. They tested it in many areas. No blood was detected. One hair in the shirt and that hair failed. There was a gray hooded sweatshirt. That was the sweatshirt.

We all saw Abby in her last picture on the bridge. and the gray hooded sweatshirt that was recovered from the creek, it appeared slightly dirty, cleaner than the other items, though. And something appeared like detergent on it. So they took seven swabs of this hoodie, taken off the sweatshirt, and most swabs couldn't get a profile. The underwear that was found in the creek, it was examined for blood and semenal material, semen, but we'll call it semenal material. That's what she called it, and I think you two would probably like that more.

And they also were always testing for seminal material. I want you to share. I want you to know that was a common thing in a lot of this. They tested for blood. They tested for DNA. They tested for seminal material. And they did cutting and swabbing inside the crotch area, the waistband, the swabs consistent all with Abigail.

All of it was Abigail. The underwear did have staining, and the staining was consistent with Abigail. There was a black sock that was tested. Two swabs failed to demonstrate any DNA profile and the three hairs found all failed. You guys are going to, this is what it was like sitting in the court today. If you guys are like, can you tell us something? Bethy Ann, I'll share that. I kind of did at the beginning of this video, share my thoughts. But I'll share a bit at the end too. Thank you. the three hairs the pink sock no blood

or seminal material found the three hairs retained failed to demonstrate a DNA profile and then the green scarf this is interesting the green scarf was embedded with mud

and it may not have even been related to this crime they're not even sure I thought that was interesting because I think it could be related to the crime but today they said it may not even be related

to this crime I don't know what do you guys think tank. Okay. And then the tank top or the camisole that was recovered from the creek. There were several areas for blood and semen. They took swabs from inside the shirt. They recovered DNA or a partial profile that they could not determine. The next report, April 11th, a reexamination on the sweatshirt that Abby was wearing that said Delphi swimming German on it. And it was a was back then she decided to reexamine it. And she also decided to reexamine Abby's, or she reexamined

the swab of the iPhone of Libby German. So two major items, she's like, you know what, I'm going to go back. And we're going to really cover these items. That's essentially what she's telling us all in court. I just thought, you know, it's time to redo this. Let's let's get really serious with this and try one more time. It was the sweatshirt Abby was in and the iPhone of Libby German. So she does DNA, two swabs. There's a mixture that comes out. So again, a mixture, DNA profile, that good old, good old fashion mixture. And there were no conclusions to decide to take any additional samples of the sweatshirt.

Tested all of the areas. She said that she went over the whole thing. May have come into contact. She just figured the reason why she was testing it, she was asked, why did you test this? And she thought, well, it may have come into contact with a suspect. And because it was in the middle of the. the crime scene. She wanted to go back and do additional swabs and testing. So she swabbed the front, the arms, the back, 22 swabs of the sweatshirt. So on the sweatshirt, she came up with three individuals

and an additional interpretation. And she assumed that they were all contributors and deduced them. And she discovered an unknown male. When she stated this, there were whispers in the courtroom. You could hear it. Like, it's like we had been waiting for the. moment like you're going to have an answer for us you're going to you're going to find something you're going to have a clue for us just something for us to think about right to chew on like think like what who did this this little little girls so she goes back and she discovered an unknown male they entered and submitted this for potential offenders we had not gotten this far in court we had not gotten as far as her saying and now we're testing for potential offenders I'm like what okay

hey, what do we have? What do we have here? Stacey. And she ran it through CODIS. And then they discovered that it was an unknown employee. In other words, in Indiana State Police Lab personnel. So, nada. After her going back and doing all that testing. mixture. There was a mixture of two people on the sweatshirt. That would be Abigail Williams and Libby German. It was examined by Indiana State Police on the Lafayette Post on July 11th, 2017. So this is when she made the conference room, an examination room. Why did she make it an examination room in the conference room and not use her regular lab? Well, because she was testing the tree branches for blood. And I love the somebody falling, like, called them tree branches. These are not sticks. In fact, this tree branch that she was testing for blood was seven feet long. So it was clearly the one I think that was found by Libby at the crime scene. And all of those swabs that she tested on July 11th, 2017, she took several swabs from each branch. She was trying to get swabs for skin cells. So she did examine on the tree branches that

there were possible blood, but she was more interested in getting swabs for skin cells, because you sort of have to pick and choose sometimes. So she gets these, she, she does these swabs. She's really looking for skin cells, which would come back with a DNA profile. She took several swabs from each branch. Some branches were seven feet long. All of those swabs failed to demonstrate in any DNA profile, and the sample, several samples failed, which actually used the word failed. She did get samples and did swab the branches to test positive for blood, and that blood profile was, of course, Libby German, as is most of the blood at the crime scene. The branches, she explained, posed problems for testing because they impacted her ability

to get a really good solid skin cell sample because they were covered in dirt. They were picking up plant material. the plant material was falling all over. And Lutrell concluded with topics, he said, Lutrell concluded by asking, well, besides the branches, what other items pose difficulty for your analysis? And she explained that the genes found on Abby. She was dealing with a lot of issues.

And the clothes found in the creek were covered in water and dirt, a lot of sand and dirt. and then the nature of item 16 was really hard. And I don't know if you guys remember what item 16 is, but item 16 is the cartridge found at the crime scene. She explained the item 16 cartridge has a very small surface area. It was minimally handled. And it was probably a one-time contact by somebody.

And now they typically don't even test cartridges. They're so difficult. And then hair, she explained, everybody thinks you can get a really great DNA profile. file from hair, but she said that's not necessarily true. Now, hair naturally sheds, uh, follicles and skin cells. They shrink. There's DNA.

There's fading. There's naturally shedding hair that's not very, uh, the naturally shedding hair is not typically very successful because it doesn't have the root like as if you pulled it. If it just naturally sheds, not as great. Um, and then right when she started to say, the FBI indicated a report. There was a very loud. objection by the defense. So picture this.

Expert witness up there, DNA analysis, sharing all this stuff, has been up there for hours. And then says, oh, and, you know, the FBI indicated a report and just a giant objection. Hearsay. That came from the defense. Luttrell then explains his, why he wants, you know, this to continue. He says, look, she is the DNA analyst. She is the expert herself.

And so he was able to continue. How many times he asks, hold on, pause. I've got to like be able to read my own notes. Okay. Here we go. So she explains that she sent the FBI 72 hairs. There's a lot more than like the hair we heard of or the five hair or the four hairs.

we now know that the FBI was sent 72 hairs to analyze. And then the Lutrell asks, how many hairs did the FBI identify that were not consistent with Abby or Libby? Okay, so 72 hairs sent to the FBI. They're only going to send back a report the hairs they discovered that were not consistent with Abby or Libby. and they sent back three, three out of 72 hairs. And after this, they concluded there were no conclusions.

They concluded after this that there were no conclusions, but her role is to research what technology may be available to do the testing. So this got interesting. So from these 72 hairs, we learned that the FBI sent back three of them, three that were not Abby or Libby's hairs. So we're all wanting to know, right? She's explaining that the research in order, so in order to test these hair, you've sort of got like one chance to do it.

You can't like test these hairs and test them again and test them again and test them again. It's like a, it's like a, you know, one hit wonder sort of a thing. And the research at this time shows that the success rate for these rootless hairs is testing, is very low, very low. So she has these hairs and she needed them for testing. There were five centimeters of hair. And with the low success rate, she wondered that one day if DNA might improve

and that she could really get a solid DNA profile from these hairs. And it was her supervisor's decision that was made that she that she keep the hairs and not test them at this time. I actually think that's really interesting. And I don't. I think that's that, you know, we hear about that all the time now, right?

Those of us that follow true crime where they store DNA for a future date and then cold cases, right, forensic files and they go back into the evidence. Now that we have all this advanced, all these advanced tools and we go back and they take something from 30 years ago and they learn who the killer is. It almost seems like that's what they're doing here. So they have these three hairs that may or may not be something. And she's saying, look, the testing is really bad right now. These are small hairs. They are rootless. The research is telling us the success rate if we test these is really low. And if we test them more than once, that's it. We got one chance.

So it was her supervisor's decision to keep them rather than waste them, that maybe, just maybe there will be a future where there's advanced technology that can test this rootless hair. Interesting decision. She made it very clear on the stand that she did not make that decision. It was her supervisor's decision. She only does the testing that she's requested to do. but that was something. So she said, we decided, but with a low success rate and a one-time opportunity, they chose not to test the hairs.

And they likely might be informative one day. They got into shedding, how some people shed more than others. They got into how just millions of cells create DNA. there was an objection by the defense that was sustained by the judge. The judge was actually sustaining a few objections by the defense today. And it was, as he started to talk about DNA and stuff, the defense said, look, these are facts that are not in the record, an objection, and the judge, judge goal sustained that. And then this is what I stated at lunchtime.

So, yeah, we haven't gotten to lunch yet. Here it is. and this is how we concluded before lunch. After all of that, after hours and hours of that, did you find Richard Allen's DNA in your findings? Her answer, in quotes. No, I did not. And then, Lutrily asked her,

did you develop a male DNA profile of any man found? She said, I did not develop a DNA profile of any man. Conclude. And that, at that moment, was when lunch came and I walked out and I walked to my car and I gave my lunch live. And again, I was a little flustered at the beginning and people wondered why and people wondered how I was feeling. And I just think, like most of you, I just want answers. I want answers for these girls, for their family, for justice. and while I wasn't necessarily expecting answers from a DNA analysis at this trial,

I guess there was a bit of hope and that was taken away. When we returned from lunch, it was cross-exams time to do DNA analysis. And Augei questioned. And you know what? She did a great job. I actually think she does a really good job as a defense attorney. She's a good balance. She asked a lot of interesting questions.

She, let me decide where to start. She started by arguing over how much SNPs analysis was there. And honestly, I was like, oh, SNPs, NSPS is that's kind of over my head. but then it got interesting when she started saying this, where she said, do you recall Baldwin and I coming to you and discussing genealogy testing? I was like, oh, what's this about? She goes, yes, she remembers. And then she said, can you guys hear that train outside?

And then she said, and you've solved cases with this, didn't you? Yes, Stacey said. And our sequencing analysis and there's new chemistry, we are evaluating, people have been able to identify DNA profiles for a while and people have been able to generate DNA from SNPs and from ancient people and from all these places. And you've said over and over that you were just, we're not able to get enough to test.

So she's really kind of putting the pressure on. Like, really? Um, and then she said, and you can't go and test those three hairs. You have three hairs. This is where I thought she did a great job. She goes, you have three hairs you could test. and Richard Allen is on trial right now.

And you're not going to go test those hairs right now. And the answer is, well, if I consume that hair, I no longer have it. In other words, if she tests the hair, if Stacey test the hair, like I explained, this is one-time opportunity, one-hit wonder, she no longer has it. And the research says the success rate is low, low, low. But she's like, but Richard Allen's on trial right now. and you're not willing to test those hairs. I thought this was a good moment.

Like, I see both sides here. I'm like, yeah. And she's, they explained, but I have seven, there's a question. You have 72 hairs and you sent to the FBI. And you have, and you're holding on to them. So you've made the decision to save it for possible advances because you didn't want to consume them. And she goes, and then she explains, Stacy explains, though, I did not make that decision. It was a decision by investigators.

They didn't want to consume the DNA that might be iffy without advances in technology. And then the question was asked again. So you, so a decision in general then, Al Jais says, was made not to test these hairs while my client's on trial. And she said, so, and she explained again, so the jury doesn't have evidence to look at why Richard Allen is on. trial. She said, well, I believe, then she said, I asked again, so you've chosen to do this. And that's actually when Stacey said, I believe I have answered this. And it has not, she goes, I believe I have answered this.

It has not been started or tested. You're right. And then defense asks, well, they told you, if microscopic hair samples are requested, please submit any hair samples of the suspect. And she said, yes. And so then the defense asked, well, have you sent any samples of hair of Richard Allen in? And her answer is no, I have not. The FBI examination did the hair, she explained.

They were microscopic. They stated that the hair is, she suggested that if the hair needs testing, so if you want to test the hairs, please submit the hair sample of Richard Allen at the same time or the suspect at the same time. And so she said, so at the state police lab, you did not submit what they requested. She again explained, well, you know, that's if we test, they need a sample of the suspects here. But yes, we did not submit this.

And then she asked, do you perform tests that they don't request? And she said, well, it depends. I need to know what type of testing. Like if they ask me to look for blood, but I go under, you know, the lighting and look for visible marks and I see semen, then I'm going to go back and tell them that I'm not going to look for blood because I found something else that's important. So she explained that, yes, sometimes she does do testing that people don't ask her to do. But for the most part, she just takes orders and doesn't make the decisions. Then she said the item 17 hair from Abby Williams, right hand, you know pretty quick it was a female hair.

And Stacy said, yes, I know that. And then she said, and did you know it was Kelsey? And her answer is, well, I learned that it was Kelsey's hair. and she then says, and you had samples from Becky Patty, right? And she said, not at that time. But then she said, but as of March 7th, defense says as of March 7th, 2017, you have a hair identified as a female hair. And no one asked you to compare it until this trial started. And she said, correct.

So I think that's where the defense is going in their opening statements, that there's a female hair that the, prosecution never tested. That doesn't belong to Richard Allen. So in other words, we just learned that they only tested that since the trial started and it belongs to Kelsey German. She said that she was looking to, and then she said that she was specifically looking to determine male DNA. And that's why she didn't take the time to test Kelsey's hair. She was specifically looking to determine male DNA. She said, but there are all these unknown females. You have an unknown female one, an unknown female two, and an unknown female three as well that you haven't tested for. She said, yes, it's true. She said an unknown female three came from the

body bag or the sheet under the body bag of Abigail Williams. And then there's an unknown female one and unknown female two. So in other words, so the only DNA profiles you have from the crime scene is an unknown female one and an unknown female and an unknown male. And she said, yes, that's correct. And you are only looking for the mail, she asks. And then her stacy, the answer is, I don't know what investigators we're looking for. Most people don't realize how much their personal information is being bought and sold every day. Data brokers are making billions, pulling details about you from public records and the internet, and then packaging and selling it, usually without your consent. That's how your

information lands in the hands of scammers, spammers, even stalkers. It's why you get endless robocalls and why ads seem to follow you everywhere. That's where ORA comes in. ORA actively removes your data from broker's sites and keeps it off. They also instantly alert you if your information shows up in a breach or on the dark web. But ORA goes beyond data protection. With one app, you get a VPN, antivirus, password manager, spam call protection, dark web monitoring, and even up to $5 million in identity theft insurance, all backed by 24-7 U.S.-based fraud support. Other companies might sell just credit monitoring, or just a VPN. ORA gives you all of it, together, at the same price competitor.

charge for just one service. Start your free trial today atora.com slash remove. Protect yourself now at aura.com slash remove. You just were told to look for a mail. And she said, well, the info I got from the case info I read, including the R kit or the SA kit, is that it may be a male perpetrator. And so the defense says, so this essay kit that you examined, they had nothing, it had nothing to do with Richard Allen.

And her answer is, I made no profile of a male on the samples. I can only speak for my findings. And then she asked, so how many samples are standards of DNA? Did you receive? Her answer? Hundreds. And so then more than one person, so then she jumps to this. The defense jumps to this.

So more than one person could have committed this crime, right? And that's when Stacey says, I cannot make that decision. I just do my work as a DNA analyst. And I determined what I'm asked to do. A lot of the DNA was from a lot of people. And then she said, well, there are a lot of results that were mixtures, correct? And she said, yes, at least two or three people are in the mixtures. And she was trying to push her and say, well, just how many could there be?

Could it be, she said it could be one or two? Well, could it be more than two? And after she asked that, there was a giant objection. And then prosecution said this has been asked and answered multiple times. It was sustained. Then there was a question about how many had access to the sweatshirt that had German on it, the sweatshirt, the black sweatshirt. And she explained that she was the only person to examine it.

And that someone, but so although she was the only one that examined it, someone she admits did pick it up and transport it to from the crime scene. and she, so it's the entire chain of custody. You can check the sheet. She doesn't completely know, but someone had to have transported it, but she was the only person who examined it. And then she said, but you found unknown male DNA from someone in your lab, correct? And then she explained, well, the state police is considered part of our lab.

So it could have been someone that actually transported it in the evidence bag or whatever. Didn't necessarily have to be from the lab. And then the defense said, did anyone in the lab touch the sweatshirt? And then Stacey answered, while it was in my custody, no, no one else touched the sweatshirt. She asked, did you do the testing? She said, yes, I did. Did anyone else do the testing? Not that I'm aware of. Were there any mail assistance? No, there were not any male assistance. And were there any items that you came, that came from Richard Allen's home that connected to Abby and Libby.

And did you examine the blue car heart coat owned by Richard Allen. She said, yes, I did. And did you analyze the Ford Focus? Yes, I did. And the black dirty boots. Yes, I did. And there was no evidence,

the defense asks, of Abby or Libby, On those items. The answer, correct. No evidence. Ashley's President's Day sale is going on now for a limited time. Feel the freedom to shop incredible hot buys. Your style, your choice, all at an unfeatable price. Plus pay over time with up to 60 months special financing. From bedroom looks to living room styles and every room in between. Our hot buys make saving big and styling your space easier than ever. Only at Ashley in North Charleston and Mount Pleasant. Subject to credit-approved, minimum monthly payments required, minimum purchase required. See store for details.

Hello, it is Ryan, and I was on a flight the other day playing one of my favorite social spin-slot games on chumbacasino.com. I looked over the person sitting next to me, and you know what they were doing? They were also playing Chumba Casino. Everybody's loving, having fun with it. Chumba Casino's home to hundreds of casino-style games that you can play for free anytime, anywhere. So sign up now at chumbac casino.com to claim your free welcome bonus. That's chumbac casino.com and live the chumba life. And you said it was hard to get DNA from cartridge, correct?

She said, yes. But you can get DNA from a metal surface. Can you not? You can. So despite blood at the crime scene, there is no DNA for Abby and Libby? Wait, hold on. I don't know what that means because clearly we're, so let me skip that. She said there was not enough DNA at the crime scene for a profile for anyone.

She asks how many hours Stacey had spent on this case. She says she doesn't know, but she tested hundreds of items. She just spent a lot of time. There are no DNA results for the unknown male profile. And she asks if DNA can come from spit. Yes, it can. And then she explained, we do not do hair analysis in our labs to compare the FBI does it,

but it's more like a tool for investigative purposes, not always to identify. And they said that the review of the case exhausted resources. And then we had a very long sidebar. Are you guys still with me? Way to hang out with me here as we go through DNA analysis. Thank you. What was really interesting is after this analysis,

the jury questions were long and there were a lot of them. And I have to admit, I suspect again, that some of these jurors know a lot about this case. Not saying that's good or bad. I'm just stating it as a fact. They seem to know a lot about this case. The first question was what types of quality control is necessary in testing for DNA reagents? I don't think anybody ever mentioned that today, reagents. What she explains that DNA reagents are prepared with protocol, log manufacture,

and as far as the use of reagents, we do quality control, and yeah. And then another question for the jurors was do you need to do repetitive testing to validate results. No, there's not a need to reproduce test as a confirmation. The validation studies to ensure consistent results. Next question, do multiple people perform various places of analysis? No, assigned analysis to each case. Occasionally an analyst will do, I don't know what, I can't read my own handwriting, forgive me, guys. Like one analysis will do one part of the testing and another will do the DNA testing, but mostly it's just one. one person. So, no, multiple people do not typically do the testing. And, uh, let's see.

You know what? There are a few more. There were so many, like you guys, they ask like if the storage refrigerators are locked at all times. Yes, they are. They ask about restricted access policies that are in place. They ask if toxic drugs or after DNA strands, like if you can test for them, on DNA, or if they alter, excuse me, if toxic drugs can alter DNA strands, they ask what PCR is. Am I right that these are really interesting questions? I mean, these jurors are not amateurs, man. They come with the questions.

They come with the questions. So am I back? Is duty Ron in chat right now? Duty Ron, we're all praying for you. And duty Ron, I'm so glad that Ed Wallace has a ton to say. That's great. Thank you, Judy Ron. Maybe we can jump on later tonight or something.

Let's figure that out. Maybe he can come on because I've got questions, man. That's all I'll say. Or maybe this. Maybe I don't have questions. I'm just asking. for understanding. I just need some understanding. All right. Um, okay, so the trail is going to question, uh, the new witness and this is Cicero, Patrick Cicero. I just have to find out where we start.

Okay, here we go. So, all right. Um, thank you so much. Thank you guys. Patrick Cicero, um, he, It has a rank of a major. He also had a microphone on the stand. Like, what was that? Like, all of a sudden I could hear somebody on the stand. I was like, oh, oh, we can improve sound on the stand today. He has a microphone. So that was cool.

He's employed by the Carroll County Sheriff's Office, rank of a major in charge of civil division, in charge of the agency. I looked him up. Impressive guy. big guy, glasses bald. He started as a patrol officer. He became a detective, which he was for the majority of his career.

But then in 2002, he became a crime scene investigator. And then the forensics and specialty, blood analysis, bloodstain analysis, certified crime scene investigator for the state. And the training he has received in bloodstain spasper. bloodstained and bloodstained spatter. And now that Judy Ron's here, and I'm like nervous with my terms because I already know that like I'm going to,

everyone be kind to me. Forgive me for butchering any appropriate words here. But this was a really, really, really important, a witness. And it was very sad too. It was just,

it was very sad. Had to look at, um, how to look at crime scene photos again. He explains his training. most expert witnesses, we spend a really long time on their background, their CEs, their continuing education, everything that makes them an expert. He even teaches, he's an instructor, and he actually teaches blood spatter analysis and blood stain analysis and blood pattern.

He has several hundred cases. He has been part of several hundred cases covering the blood at the scene. This is actually his 34th time testifying in court. And again, instructor with India, Law Enforcement Academy and St. Joseph's Academy, he knows blood spatter. He's been doing it actually for 20 years now at this time. His field of study in blood, he's learned that during his field of study in blood, the blood reacts in a repeatable, predictable way. It measures size, shape, body distribution, the body of the blood, location of the blood. It tells a story. Blood always acts in a very similar manner. Blood is a fluid that reacts in repeatable patterns. Blood reacts in a similar manner. I've said that multiple times, they said it multiple times, so I wrote it

multiple times. The shape of the stain matters, the amount, the volume, the location, the patterns, The crime scene reconstruction oftentimes results in a bloodstain analysis, all data, trying to determine the best explanation. And this is what he observed. And I'm going to bring up very soon my drawing I did of the crime scene. They showed the same diagram that I drew a picture of last week. So I took a little bit more time. It was up longer. I took a little bit more time to draw it again.

and I'm going to bring it up and also share some new findings that Cicero observed and what his theory is on a few of the mysteries surrounding this crime and this murder of Abby and Libby. So some things that he observed, by the way, to make his assessment is he observed numerous files, flash drive, autopsy, diagrams, lab reports, photographs of the crime scene. But to note, he was never at the crime scene. This is what he observed after. If you remember from previous testimony last week, the defense criticized law enforcement for not having a blood spatter expert out earlier at the crime scene.

And he came on board later and he examined it. I actually have April 4th, 2024, so not even until this year. He observed the clothing worn by Abby, the two bras, the hoodie, the black sweatshirt, the jeans. He asked if he recognized these photos and they were photos of the crime scene. He said he did. And again, they brought up this diagram and showing how Abby and Libby were laying and the bloodstains on the ground. And I have like five photos here. I am now going to bring up what I drew here. I wish I had a sketch artist today. my dear friend is gone. So you've got me, guys.

All you have is me. And I don't enjoy sharing this. It's so sad and hard. But let's bring this up. Okay. I drew this in court. Let me see if I can make it a little bigger. So you guys can take a look at that.

We'll go over that in a second. So these are the things he mentioned. So this is, again, the same diagram that we saw. last week. I just did the new drawing. So let's just start with the basics. The green are two trees. The red are the markings of where the main blood is at the crime scene.

And the yellow are the twigs and branches and sticks. And so there was a really, really large tree that Abby, or excuse me, that Libby was right by. So there's a giant big tree. Like as in it's like got a double trunk. It's like a very, very large tree, hence the larger drawing on the on over here by Libby. And then on the other side, you have a smaller tree and that's known as the F tree because it has the F stain or the upside down L, which I actually saw more clearly today. And then by that smaller tree with the F stain is a small. blood stain. Can you guys, if I do that, can you guys see my thing? Does that work? So that's a

spot of blood. This is the largest. And then below the girls where their bodies were found is the largest pool of blood. They just kept emphasizing just how big that was, how thick it was. Yeah. So really quickly, I'll just share what I have here, a few things. And then we'll go into more detail. He believes that Abby, or excuse me, I keep, forgive me, he believes Libby, Libby German, was wounded over by the F tree. You can see your cursor. Okay, I'll go back. So he believes that Libby was wounded over by this F tree. And there are, there are some markings. Four feet up this tree is what people have become, have called it an F. We got closeups of it because they put this violet stain on it to emphasize the blood.

So it was purple. So we were looking at a purple stain on the tree, but we saw it. And it was sort of like this upside down L. And actually Cicero said that he calls it an upside down L. He thinks that's more of the way to say it. And then there's this little piece right here where he said it has sort of like the same square marking as the F.

So he believes that it was made by the same object. and that there's blood splatter. And then that is four feet up the tree. And then two feet up the tree is this stain. So his belief is that Livy was wounded here. And that then she came down and she sat, according to her the patterns, because it looked as if there was blood

that dripped from her neck onto her thighs. hence that would be why the blood pattern on her thighs was the way it was, is that she was bending over with her neck and her neck went onto her thighs. So she believes that she was sitting here. And then she laid down in all of the blood all over Libby. He said short of explains that. And this isn't easy guys. And then just so you know there was also blood above. there was on both the girls actually we need to talk about it both on both the girls there was

blood so the only wounds were to the the neck mostly but yet they had blood all over their face which cicero explains that means that at one point their head or their chin was lower than their neck he believes that libby was dragged here by somebody and that is when i also agreed that the blood on her hands was from touching her hands. And he suspected that he dragged Libby, he, she, the killer, to the large tree because it conceals her and it could help conceal her.

And he implied that he felt the sticks were to help conceal things. And so he does believe that Libby was moved. When it comes to Abby, he does believe that Abby was already dressed, and I'll come over and see you guys. I feel like I need to come see.

I was looking at that. He does believe that Abby was dressed at the time of her death that she wasn't dressed after because, and this does make sense to me, it makes logical sense to me, because she had blood, on the inside of the sweatshirt. And if,

and because she had blood on her face, Abby had some blood on her face. And when the clothes were removed, blood like got rubbed on her arm and everything during the autopsy. But it was completely clean at the crime scene. So if someone had tried to dress her after her death, they would have gotten blood smeared. And that just did not happen.

It was clean. So in other words, I do agree with that, that theory that Cicero brought to court today that she was most likely dressed before. Again, Libby was nude. She was not dressed. Abby, this was a confusing part of today. Abby had also, and they had close-ups of her face again.

Guys, man, it was a hard day. It was a really hard day. And I'm not even in order now. I need to go back to my notes and I'll still tell you everything that Cicero said, but let's just talk about this and I'll go back. And Abby had her one neck wound that hit her big jugular vein and she had blood up on her face. Libby had a lot of blood on her face, but she had blood on her face. And Cicero explained, he's like, like, blood doesn't do that.

Like you can't just like change gravity. Like at one point her chin had to be lower than her neck in order for the blood to come up and get on her face. And that makes a lot of sense. But it also left a lot of questions and was really confusing because he's also stating that he believes that Abby wasn't moved. The Abby was harmed there. The Abby died there and she didn't move. And her chin is not like below her. her neck so I don't I don't understand and then the other thing that they really talked about

which has also confused me and again this is why I have a lot of confusion still is that her hands were completely clean from blood I mean pure from blood and it is very confusing like when they they again she was this was her pose and she had the sweatshirt over her hands and when they pulled her sweatshirt down. They were just the cleanest hands you'd ever seen. And he said there was really only one answer to that. And that was she was either restrained or unconscious. But he said in all of his career, he has never seen hands of a victim, like not having

some blood on this. them. I jumped ahead of myself because I concluded this graph actually at the end of the day. So I'm going to go back to make sure I don't miss anything that Cisro says. Is that okay? Would you rather see the graph while I talk? Maybe the graph is more interesting than me. I'll fix that just a second. Let me go back to the beginning. I'll make this bigger. What am I doing? We'll just keep it like that. So, okay, so first he explains again, the F tree. So again, the F tree is closer to where Abby is. It's, it says number one on it and it's where a Cicero believes that Libby was wounded because there's a big pool of blood there that's Libby's. And that's important. The reason,

the reason that it's all of Libby's blood around the crime scene, that's one reason for Cicero's theory. Yeah, let me explain that. So, like, Cicero's theory is partly because all of the blood around all of the crime scene, all of those red marks, except for the one by Abby and under Abby, all of it is Libby's blood. And so this is also where Cicero's, like, thesis comes in. His, um, so let me go back. So that F, tree, again, they have that. Let me make it larger. Let's just start. So he started here. Do you see that? So the F tree, he says it's more like an L. He describes this as an upside down L. They applied a chemical stain to the blood to see it. And it was, again, four feet from the base. And it was what was called

a transfer stain. It was, there was additional spatter around the stains. And essentially, when force is applied, an individual drop, make contact. That's the spatter. But this is called a transfer stain. It was 1.37 inches wide and 1.59 inches top to bottom. It was called a transfer stain, and that happens when an object comes into close contact. And that was the F.

He said, yeah, he describes it as an upside down F. And again, there was another two feet up the tree, the same tree, and that, let me get my, and that is that stain. So two feet up the tree, that stain, four feet up the tree that stain. Transfer stains. Okay. Yeah, so it's four feet hypothesis. So when it comes to the F tree or the upside down L, this is his hypothesis.

The top is square. It's likewise, and they have a likewise small stain right next to it. So it's interesting because it's uniform and even, if you can see that, like the little square next to the upside down L. And it's more consistent with a pattern transfer. And then two feet, again, above the base is all consistent with the transfer as well. Like a bloody object came into contact with the tree. And while it's the tree closest to Abby, it is not her blood.

But right by the tree is a very large. accumulation of blood. And that's what he calls it. By this tree, there's a large accumulation of blood. And then when we get to this largest pool of blood, where he believes Libby sat, he said it's gelatinous, there are leaves stained sticks on the brown. It was so large. It was the largest pool of blood. At this moment, Libby's mom is an absolute tears, crying, and the bottom of Libby's foot. Oh, he believes, excuse me, and why is this on my go away? Come over here. Thank you, Lolo. So Libby's mom is crying at this moment, and he explains that the bottom of Libby's foot and the bottom of an object came in contact with the foot.

Kelsey and the patties are also there. He explains that Ms. German, he called Abby Ms. Williams and he called Libby, Ms. German. In fact, at one moment he slipped up and almost called Ms. German Libby and he caught himself and called her Ms. German. He said that she was upright clearly at one point, again, because her neck and upper chest areas, There were numerous bloodstain transfers on her neck and upper chest. And then on Ms. Germain's face going downward to the right side of her face, to the bottom of her face, her right eye, downward to the ear. There was so much blood on her hands.

And just so much, she explained in Ms. German's left hand, in the cuticles of her nails, just so much blood. The branches were removed. I just tear. I got it. I'm going to just see you guys for a second. The branches were removed and it showed the big slices in her neck after they removed those big branches there. And you got a closer shot.

We saw the flow pattern on her face at the crime scene covered, her face covered in blood. And during this time, I mentioned that Richard Allen is watching. her right hand is similar to the left hand as far as flow pattern goes there is so much blood a lot in the fingernails some blood transferred off as if she touched someone that was hard to hear miss germans right thigh there were bloodstains dripping the top of uh onto the top of her right thigh in a projecting pattern. And that again implies that she had have been sitting. Something was dripping onto her thigh and then going down both sides. At this moment, I see Becky Patty wipe and I and her mother is crying.

And because of the side pattern drip on Libby's thighs and face, now he says it was likely from laying down. So after she was standing, she went to sitting. Let's see this again. So one, two, three. After she was standing, she was, so in number one,

she was standing, then down low in the largest pool of blood. That's where she sits. And then it was likely she laid down after that. And the best explanation is that Ms. German would have been seated for the wound to be over the leg, The drops are called scalps, a cardiovascular system, pumping out blood, and it actually, the blood actually shows energy when it pumps out quickly.

And there's an altered pattern, any pattern that originates and then changes patterns. They did a close up of her eye and how it almost looked. there was like blood coming from down her eye guys and um there was like blood coming down her eyes and her nose like it looked like she was bleeding from her eyes and from her nose um and he said it's indicative indicative of movement and then they asked cicero if he believes that liby was moved after she died and he said yes so Back to Livy on the crime scene. There was blood staining on her leg, her right leg, and along the backside.

And so they showed the back of her at the crime scene. They lifted her up and you could see the back and you could see all the leaves sticking to her backside. And they were sticking to her backside, Cisero explained, because of the blood. There was just a little blood on the leaves when she was discovered, though, which means that she was no longer bleeding. when she was moved. That's interesting. So there was enough blood for the leaves to stick on her, but there was not that much blood. So this does make sense to me. So the big pool of blood again. Most people don't realize how much their personal information is being bought and sold every day. Data brokers are making billions, pulling details about you from public records and the internet,

and then packaging and selling it, usually without your consent. That's how your information lands in the hands of scammers, spammers, even stalkers. It's why you get endless robocalls and why ads seem to follow you everywhere. That's where ORA comes in. ORA actively removes your data from broker sites and keeps it off. They also instantly alert you if your information shows up in a breach or on the dark web. But ORA goes beyond data protection. With one app, you get a VPN, antivirus, password manager, spam call protection, dark web monitoring,

and even up to $5 million in identity theft insurance. all backed by 24-7 U.S.-based fraud support. Other companies might sell just credit monitoring or just a VPN. ORA gives you all of it, together, at the same price competitors charge for just one service. Start your free trial today atora.com slash remove. Protect yourself now at aura.com slash remove. It would be where she died and then she was moved up against this really large tree because there was a lot less blood, meaning she was no longer bleeding when she was moved.

The only area of blood for Ms. William is to the left of her. So, um, so again, as far as Ms. William goes, it was to the left of her and, and underneath her a bit. Um, and Libby's, or excuse me, Abby's pants were undone and she was in like a, like a pugilistic pose, bent at the elbows close to her body. Her sleeves were pulled down. And Cicero noticed no blood on Ms. Williams' hands. and he could not observe blood stains on the sleeves or arms of Ms. Williams.

The autopsy photos of the arms did have blood on them. And he acknowledged that it was very steep to be carried up the cemetery, all these girls, and moved up a hill and transported. And the blood, actually, there was so much blood. It was actually, some of it was really dry and some of it was still kind of wet. And the moving of the body could have affected. the blood stains at that moment, and it could have transferred as she was moved. So while there was no blood at the crime scene, there was some blood at autopsy.

And at this time, by the way, throughout this, Baldwin, defense Baldwin had his arm around Richard Allen once again. So the first time that we were looking at crime scene photos, he had his arm around Richard Allen and the second time we're looking at crime scene photos Baldwin has his arm around Richard Allen like really around it. He explained that the blood flow patterns on Abby go up onto her face. They do and they do. They go up onto her face and over her chin to find gravity and that's not consistent

to a final resting place. So I was like, okay. So this gets confusing for me. and Abby, the jugular vein was breached on Abby. There was a lot of blood loss and her hands are completely clear of blood. Her torso, let me explain. The torso is exposed the absence. There's an absence of blood on her bra and on her torso area.

And that would be consistent with Abby wearing this outfit at the time of passing because her torso was completely clean. In other words, like she was covered. in clothing. The blood moves up and over her mouth, Abby's mouth, meaning that she could have been moved or at one point, not moved, but at one point, like, her neck had to be, again, higher than her chin for the blood to come down. Her head would have gone, her head would have had to go back, in other words. So Cicero believes. though, after all of that, I thought, okay, so he's going to say Abby was moved too, but no, he believes that she was killed at her current location.

And that's where Abby was wounded and where she died. He doesn't believe Abby moved and that Abby wasn't moved. And I wrote, I'm confused because you just said, like, you know, that at one point her neck would have to be, I don't, I don't know. let's not think about it too much. I'll just share what I learned. He said, it is very unusual to not have blood on your hands. Very, it's just like he's said, very unusual. There's no evidence that she died immediately.

This would have taken time. So he, in quotes, he has never seen this. He said, the hands would have transfer stains. So what is the explanation to Abby? having no blood whatsoever on her hands. And that's when he said, well, she was either bound, she was unconscious or she was restrained. In his opinion, Abby was wearing the clothes at the time of death.

Her clothes were saturated from inside. Then I have this that I drew, that I put up there. And so then there's a question that based on the crime scene reconstruction, do you have an opinion on how many people this crime would have taken? And right after the prosecution asked that, the defense jumps right out and objects and says this was out of the scope. And Lutrell argues, well, hey, he's the crime scene investigator. I can ask that.

And Cicero responds, at least one person committed this crime. That is possible. It was just one person. And then there's cross. Age says, the first thing she asks, Cicero at Crosses, at least one person responsible, if not more. And Cicero responded, yes, at least one. And then she asked, were you not able to view the scene in person?

He says, correct. It was not. You only looked at pictures, she said. Correct. I only looked at pictures. And she said, but the forest can really change quickly because he did go to the crime scene after to observe it. But so she's saying, well, the forest can really change quickly.

He says, yes, ma'am, I agree. And she says, so they were in the lowest part of the crime scene. And then he said, I can't say the lowest in the woods. But in that particular area, it was the lowest around that area, the lowest, lowest part around that area. And dressing Abby would have altered blood pattern. Yes, correct. Then she said, well, are you aware that people refer to this as the F tree? Yes, ma'am, I am.

Libby was mobile when her neck was cut. yes ma'am then she asked was blood flowing the defense cross exam blood flowing down and blood was flowing down the neck and shoulders yes and she was found and the blood was found in several areas of the crime scene

yes and then she was sitting down answer based on evidence yes and then she was moved yes were you is it your testimony that Libby German was drug from here to here and she points to the largest pool of blood

to where she was dragged by that tree? He says yes. Well, there are a lot of leaves between that last pool of blood and her last resting place. He comes down the stand at that moment to come look at the big screen to see that, to see a picture on the big screen. And he says, she says, you said you saw blood on her face was not consistent with her final resting place that she was moved. And he said, yes, her head would have had to have been lower than her body, yes. And that's the same with Abby? Well, not necessarily. She questions, well, you said that Abby had to be lower, too.

And he explained, her chin would have had to be lower at some point. This has to do with positioning. She could have turned her head and her turn. chin would just simply need to be lower than her neck somehow. The placement of Libby German's body being concealed depends on the person looking at what direction. So again, now the defense is saying, look, you might say that this conceals Libby's body more being against this tree, but it depends on what position you're coming from, right?

Like if you're on one side of the tree, it might conceal it, but if you're on another, it doesn't. And then she asked how much of liberty was covered by sticks. And he answered a very, very small area, which is true. You can see that there. And so the crime scene was analyzed in 2007, correct? Let me make this just a little bit bigger. Is that better?

So the crime scene was analyzed in 2017, and the drag marks would be important to note. Wouldn't they, the defense asked? He said, yes. He goes, wouldn't it be important to note these drag marks in diagrams or in evidence numbers or with notes? you know, I mean, it's a solid point. Question. Did you talk to Jerry Holman about your analysis? No, he did not.

You say you've never seen a lack of blood on hands. Correct. I never have. Could that have been because multiple people were holding her down? He said, yes, that could be one reason. Or how about someone washing her hands? And he said, I cannot rule that out.

In all of your testimony, in all of your work on this case, you have found nothing that has connected Richard Allen to the crime scene, correct? He said, no, I have not found anything. Question on redirect. So now if the prosecution's turned to redirect after that pretty good defense cross-exam. Question from prosecution. So do you believe that Libby was dragged? Answer.

there is a lot of blood on the right side of her body and the bottom of her foot like she had been dragged. You might not see drag marks, but there are a couple of layers on the ground. It was thick with leaves. If she was seated, they asked, could her head go back when her face is below her neck? I didn't really understand that question. And the answer is when she was dragged, so we're referring to Libby, her, oh, so the question from the defense is, so help me understand if you're saying that at one point Libby's head had to be below her neck. How does it happen if she's standing or sitting? And his answer is, well, when she was dragged, that's when it would have happened. Her head would go back. She asks about the F tree, he explained. I call it an upside down L because that makes

more sense to me. But I get why other people call it an F. She asks, do you have the best explanation? do you have a the best explanation is a transfer to the tree do you have an object in mind that would have transferred this blood to the tree his answer is

potentially her hand and part of her arm that's our hypothesis so if you want to know what the blood spatter expert says when it comes to the

F tree or the L he believes that it was part of her hand and her arm on the tree and it would be about four feet up and it would be Libby's hand and arm, according to the blood spatter expert.

Question, can you see sexual assault happen without the DNA of a suspect being left behind? His answer, absolutely. Then there was recross once again with defense. The question is, this is just a hypothesis, right? You have no idea how it happened. Yes, it's just a hypothesis. You said injuries could have been inflicted at different times, correct? Correct, he says.

I cannot rule it out. It could have happened at the same time or a different time. You can't rule out Libby and Abby killed at the same time. Answer, no, I cannot. Then they say we're ready for the jury questions and they have a massive sidebar before the jury questions. So this was an interesting moment. This is the end of the day.

It's after 5 p.m. We just had a really heavy afternoon. And they have a very long sidebar. We wait for jury questions. And then I wrote after that, never mind, we're done. They never did jury questions. But then the state argued at the end

that they want Google search results from Allen after he confirmed an email from his account was like Foojack and a number at gmail.com. It was really kind of hard. hard to hear. So they're arguing that they want to submit this evidence of Google search results from that email. And then the defense is objecting because they want to show that only one person ever had access to that account and they don't know if they can approve, they don't know if they can prove that. And this is under advisement by the judge. No decision was made. And a court was adjourned.

The jury was actually left before this submitting of evidence. They did not hear the submitting of evidence. So after the jury left, the submitting of evidence, this idea of Google search results by Richard Allen using an email address. The defense saying he might not have been the only one that uses email address. So we don't know about this. We object under advisement. And then that was it for court. I need to catch up with chat and see your questions. So I'm going to go over to the start.

How is everyone doing? Let me check my phone and see if there's any emergency text from anyone. Any of my mods or somebody. Okay. I think we're good. I feel better when I don't see any, like, Mayday techs. Thank you, everyone. Thank you to your talk so much.

Thank you, Jamie. Thank you so much, Big Doodle. Yes, there have been some locals saving our spot in line for all of the creators, not just me. Like, they came, it's been amazing. Like, people like, the last time I actually stayed out at night. This is great. In front of me in line was someone holding the space in line for another creator.

And they happened to be a therapist. And they were like, you got to stop. You got to ask. You got to give yourself permission. She was so nice. And so we had our first blind suitors last night. And thank you again to Caleb and to Megan. Thank you, Mallory.

I appreciate it so much. Thank you, Laura. I agree that the duty Ron videos a must watch. Like I said, I'm a human. I like answers. I like understanding. And you guys all allowed me to come on last night and ask some questions I had about the gun.

Yeah, the tool mark analysis. It was great. Can I clarify the place of death versus the place they were found? I think I covered that. This probably came earlier in the day, right? Yeah. came a lot earlier. So I hope I covered that. This is a very tough case. My opinion of today,

I think I think I sort of shared it at the beginning of this. I think this is all it is is, yeah, I think the beginning of this is the best way to say I want justice, I want closure, I want peace for the families, and I want to answers. And there are some days where answers feel closer in this case and there are some days where answers feel further away. And I think today was just a day where answers felt further away from me. I'm left with a lot more questions. Thank you, Irish Alexandria. Absolutely right, YC. It must be real justice and true evidence must speak to the jurors. Only they can decide if Richard Allen is innocent or guilty. Absolutely. Couldn't say it better. From all the excellent and detailed reporting you've done, thank you so much. It would

be it would be hard right now. I actually agree with you. It would be extremely hard to convict him right now. It would be difficult. I don't know, and I have no idea what the jury is thinking. In my opinion, people would think it would make more sense for one person committing this crime. Yeah, thank you for sharing your thoughts, Betsy. Thank you guys so much. Wow, thank you so, so much. I appreciate it. Oh man, there are a lot of people. sleeping last night and a lot of people sitting in chairs. In fact, the line is starting earlier and earlier. Duty Ron, tell Ed Wallace, tell Ed that I need to have them on the show then, hopefully soon, because we need to talk about this. Text me because I would love to understand

more about the DNA. Thank you, everyone, for all your super chats. Guys, honestly, thank you. I hope this was clarified, Kimberly, that the F tree is where they believe Libby was initially wounded, where she put her hand and arm on the tree, and then she stabbled over, sat down, and that's where the largest pool of blood was down low, and then was dragged after her death. They have not said anything about the girls attacking or fighting against their attacker. they have not found any defense wounds. That doesn't mean they didn't.

They could have even tried to run away, right? Like, who knows? Who knows? Oh, my gosh. I will send this to John, and he will, he will take our guide to Ben and Jerry's his favorite. Thank you. Thank you, Molly. Thank you, Ashley.

Thank you, guys, so, so much. Let me just check. There was one thing up here. I want to look at it really quickly. All right. Let me go back and see if anybody, if you have questions, can you explain the bonds with other creators and reporters?

Is the community appreciative of your coverage? Delphi, yeah, I think that, I think all of the creators, we're all friends. I sat next to Andrea today in the courtroom. I see Lee every day. I've met other creators as well with the people I didn't know before and they're wonderful and they're doing incredible work

And I would say that everyone is really kind because I think that everyone feels, even if the way we're presenting the case, even if we have different thoughts about the case or the way we're presenting the case online might be different. I think all of us are united in that because there's no audio and no video in the courtroom that we all need to be sharing with the public what's going on. and when somebody misses something with notes, somebody else helps. And there's just a genuine,

I think, warmth and a united effort knowing this is so important. And for that, I'm grateful. Yeah, in other words, in other words, all of the creators are getting along. And I think that shows the uniting, what Abby and Libby have done.

This is really about Abby and Libby. And yes, they have united all of us. It was a hard day, guys. Um, again, you know, I, I, I've seen the crime scene photos once, you know, I thought it wouldn't be so bad the second time. I don't know. Maybe it's because, thank you, Ivana. Maybe it's because, um, I wasn't expecting it to hit me so bad today because I'm prepared.

I've seen them. Um, and then you see them and they're described in a different way and they talk to you about a different way. and I had to hold back some tears myself today. So I hope we can get answers. Anyway, again, for those that want, I'm just going to say it one more time because one thing I'm doing are weekly updates. You know, this is clearly a two hour live, right?

And while I'm so grateful all of you are here with me for this two hour live and you want all the details, not everyone has that time. And so if people just want to understand some of the biggest moments, of last week's trial again, head to, head to our channel, hit subscribe, and then go watch my weekly, entire weekly update. And that'll give you all the main points or some of the most important points from last week, and you can send that to your friends.

Again, thank you, everyone, for your support. Keep the family in your prayers, in your thoughts, and your good vibes, whatever it is, you do, the energy you give into the world. families everywhere. So both families and all the families. So all right, guys, have a great night. I'm going to go get some rest and head over and check out things outside of the courthouse. And yeah, go from there. Thanks, guys. We'll see you. Bye-bye. It's the Ashley President's Day sale. Going on now. Right now, you can feel the freedom to save up to $1,000 on select mattresses. Plus, you can snooze now, pay later with up to 60 months special financing. And for a limit,

limited time. Receive a $300 coupon with the purchase of a premium mattress. Customizing your sleep has never been easier. Hurry in and start saving today. Only at Ashley in North Charleston and Mount Pleasant. Subject to credit approval. Minimum monthly payments required. Minimum purchase required. See store for details. Ladies and gentlemen, we are now boarding group A. Please have your boarding passes ready to scan. If your phone is cracked, old, or was chewed up by your Chihuahua travel companion, please refrain from holding up the line. Instead, go to Verizon and trade in any phone in any condition from one of their top brands for the new Samsung Galaxy S25 plus with Galaxy AI and a watch and tab on any plan. Only on Verizon. With new line on my plan, service plan required

for watch and tab. Additional terms apply. See Verizon.com for details. Most people don't realize how much their personal information is being bought and sold every day. Data brokers are making billions, pulling details about you from public records and the internet. and then packaging and selling it, usually without your consent. That's how your information lands in the hands of scammers, spammers, even stalkers. It's why you get endless robocalls and why ads seem to follow you everywhere. That's where ORA comes in. ORA actively removes your data from broker sites and keeps it off.

They also instantly alert you if your information shows up in a breach or on the dark web. But ORA goes beyond data protection. With one app, you get a VPN, antivirus, password manager, spam call protection, dark web monitoring, and even up to $5 million in identity theft insurance, all backed by 24-7 U.S.-based fraud support. Other companies might sell just credit monitoring, or just a VPN. ORA gives you all of it,

together, at the same price competitors charge for just one service. Start your free trial today atora.com slash remove. Protect yourself now at aura.com slash remove.