The defense challenged the prosecution's narrative by highlighting inconsistencies in witness testimonies, raising concerns about evidence handling, and suggesting a possible multi-perpetrator theory, but faced limitations due to the judge's rulings against admitting certain evidence.

Defense Witnesses & Testimonies:

Christopher Gootee (Hammond CountyPolice Officer, FBI GRIT Taskforce):

  • Testified about conducting interviews with witnesses, including Brad Weber, in the early weeks of the investigation.
  • Defense attempted to impeach him with a prior statement from Brad Weber, suggesting Weber didn’t go straight home after work on the day of the murders.
  • Judge allowed impeachment for credibility purposes only.
  • Witness struggled to recall details from the FBI report, despite acknowledging it refreshed his recollection, frustrating the defense.

Dr. Deanna Wenger (Indiana Department of Corrections/Centurion, Dr Wala’s supervisor):

  • Explained Richard Allen’s classification as a “safekeeper” and the challenges in providing appropriate mental health care within the prison system.
  • Noted Allen met the criteria for mental health care but was never placed in a specialized facility.
  • Described Allen’s mental health decline due to extended solitary confinement.
  • Confirmed Dr. Walla initially suspected Allen was faking mental health issues, but later recognized the need for involuntary medication.
  • Discussed how conflicting classifications of “safekeeping” and “serious mental illness” contributed to inadequate treatment for Allen.
  • Revealed concerns regarding the impact of constant video surveillance on Allen’s mental health.

Max Baker (Defense Legal Intern):

  • Tasked with compiling and organizing video evidence of Richard Allen’s time in prison, highlighting his mental state and the conditions of his confinement.
  • Prepared video summaries of Allen’s behavior for specific periods.
  • Prepared videos with audio of Allen’s interactions while being moved around the facility.
  • Prosecutor raised concerns regarding the accuracy of the video timelines, delaying the presentation of these exhibits to the jury.
  • Judge ruled against admitting a video showcasing Allen’s mental state outside the designated periods of his “mental health decline.”
  • Judge also excluded audio from the “walkaround” videos, citing hearsay concerns.

Brad Heath (Former Exterminator):

  • Testified to seeing an “old-timey” vehicle near the Monon High Bridge on the morning and afternoon of the murders, potentially contradicting evidence about Richard Allen’s car.

David McCain (Monon High Bridge Project Manager):

  • Described his familiarity with the area, including details about the Monon High Bridge and the surrounding trails.
  • Recalled being at the trails on the day of the murders, potentially contradicting sightings of “Bridge Guy.”
  • Testimony supported Derrick German’s account of searching for the girls and asking witnesses for information.
  • Testified about interactions with law enforcement and handing over his camera’s memory card, which was never returned.

Daryl Starrett (Former Delphi Fire Chief):

  • Detailed the fire department’s involvement in the initial search efforts.
  • Described the areas they searched and emphasized the use of flashlights.
  • Faced extensive impeachment based on inconsistencies between his trial testimony and his prior deposition, creating doubt regarding his recollection of events.

Steve Mullen (Carroll County Prosecutor’s Investigator):

  • Acknowledged the importance of preserving evidence and disclosing any lost evidence to the defense.
  • Testified about the disappearance of critical interview recordings from the early days of the investigation, highlighting significant issues with evidence handling.
  • Admitted to writing undated reports regarding the missing interviews, raising concerns about the timeline of discovery disclosure.
  • Revealed details about his recent interview with Brad Weber, aiming to verify the “van sighting” mentioned in Richard Allen’s confessions.
  • Faced challenging questions from the defense about his failure to record the Weber interview and the potential for pre-interview communication influencing Weber’s statement.
  • Struggled to explain inconsistencies in Weber’s statements about his actions on the day of the murders, creating doubt about the credibility of the “van sighting” and its connection to Allen’s confessions.

Tobe Leazenby (Former Carroll County Sheriff):

  • Initially stated he believed Richard Allen was the sole perpetrator.
  • Defense successfully impeached him with his deposition, where he expressed a belief that multiple people were involved.
  • Acknowledged both he and current Sheriff Liggett believed more than one person committed the murders, casting further doubt on the prosecution’s theory of a single perpetrator.

Legal Arguments & Judge’s Rulings:

Admission of FBI Agent Pohl’s Testimony (Touhy Request):

  • Defense requested Agent Pohl’s testimony, arguing they need it to establish that Brad Weber’s account of his actions after work was inconsistent with the prosecution’s narrative.
  • Cited Agent Pohl’s medical condition preventing travel and proposed using video testimony for his convenience.
  • Prosecutor opposed the request, arguing Weber should be re-examined instead.
  • Judge denied the remote hearing request, claiming the defense failed to demonstrate “good cause” for video testimony and prioritizing in-person appearances.

Admission of Third-Party Suspect Evidence:

  • Defense renewed efforts to introduce evidence regarding potential involvement of third parties in the Delphi murders.
  • Argued “the door was opened” based on previous testimonies discussing items found at the crime scene and a statement from a potential third-party suspect.
  • Judge ruled against the defense again, reiterating a lack of “nexus” between the proposed evidence and the Delphi murders.

Notable Courtroom Events:

  • Extended sidebars and private conferences with the judge, revealing tensions and disagreements surrounding admissible evidence.
  • Frustration from the defense at difficulties eliciting information from some witnesses, particularly regarding prior statements and potential exculpatory details.
  • Jury actively participating by submitting numerous questions, showcasing their interest in the evidence and timelines presented.

Analysis:

Day 13 witnessed a series of challenges for the defense, marked by reluctant witnesses, frequent objections, and strict rulings limiting the scope of their evidence. Despite the hurdles, the defense managed to:

  • Highlight inconsistencies in witnesses’ testimonies, especially related to the timeline of events and Richard Allen’s alleged involvement.
  • Raise serious doubts about the integrity of the investigation due to lost interview recordings and potentially mishandled evidence.
  • Plant seeds of doubt regarding Brad Weber’s account of the “van sighting” and its potential to verify Allen’s confessions.
  • Introduce evidence supporting a possible “multiple perpetrator” theory, which contrasts sharply with the prosecution’s current narrative.

However, the judge’s unwavering rulings against third-party suspect evidence and video testimony for Agent Pohl pose significant limitations on the defense’s ability to fully explore their alternate theories. It remains to be seen if the defense can overcome these challenges and successfully present a compelling counter-narrative to the jury.