The prosecution and defense presented closing arguments, with the state focusing on Allen’s confessions, physical evidence, and witness testimony, while the defense emphasized a lack of forensic evidence, disputed the reliability of witness accounts, and argued Allen’s confessions were coerced due to solitary confinement. After instructions, the jury began deliberations but adjourned early, leaving the verdict uncertain.

Closing Arguments:

Prosecution:

  • Timeline:
    • Focused on witness testimonies and digital evidence placing Allen at the trails during the time of the murders.
    • Emphasized Libby’s video, the “guys down the hill” audio, and Sarah Carbaugh’s testimony about seeing a muddy/bloody man.
    • Claimed Allen’s car was seen on the Hoosier Harvest store video and that it was the only black 2016 Ford Focus registered in Carroll County at the time.
  • The Bullet:
    • Highlighted state expert testimony connecting the unspent cartridge to Allen’s gun.
    • Emphasized that other guns were tested but could not be excluded, and ultimately Allen’s gun was the only “match.”
  • Confessions:
    • Characterized Allen’s confessions to his wife and mother as “unprovoked and unpressured,” focusing on his statements like, “I did it. I killed Abby and Libby.”
    • Referenced Allen’s desire to apologize to the families.
  • The Van:
    • Pointed to Allen’s confession detail about being startled by a van as a key fact only the killer would know.
    • Connected the van detail to Brad Weber’s van, claiming he drove by the private drive around the time Allen would have been at the crime scene.
    • Harshman’s voice analysis: Prosecutor mentioned that law enforcement officer Harshman, who had listened to numerous calls of Allen, positively identified Allen’s voice as the voice on Libby’s video.
  • The Phone:
    • Referred to Abby as a “hero” for hiding Libby’s phone, implying a conscious effort to preserve evidence.
  • Closing:
    • Emphasized that all pieces of evidence, especially Allen’s confessions, point to his guilt.
    • Implored the jury to act upon the evidence presented and find Allen guilty on all four counts.

Defense:

  • Countering the State’s Narrative:
    • Highlighted discrepancies and omissions in the state’s case, repeatedly asking why the state didn’t present certain evidence or witnesses.
    • Stressed that the burden of proof lies solely with the prosecution and the jury must act on evidence, not speculation.
  • Challenging Witness Testimony:
    • Criticized Sarah Carbaugh’s testimony about the muddy/bloody man, highlighting inconsistencies and calling her credibility into question.
    • Presented alternate witnesses (David McCain, Cheyenne Mill, Shelley Hicks) who were at the trails around the time of the murders but saw or heard nothing suspicious.
  • Attacking the Bullet Evidence:
    • Emphasized the state expert’s initial inability to match the unspent cartridge to Allen’s gun.
    • Argued against the validity of comparing a fired cartridge with an unspent one.
    • Questioned why the state, after their “match” was challenged by the defense expert, didn’t seek a third-party analysis for unbiased verification.
  • The Van Detail:
    • Cast doubt on the significance of the van detail, highlighting the prevalence of vans in the area.
    • Pointed to Brad Weber’s inconsistent accounts about his whereabouts that day.
    • Questioned why Weber brought text messages to the police interview when, according to Mullen, he was not told why he was being interviewed.
  • Exposing “Acts of Desperation”:
    • Pointed to several late-stage investigations (DMV search for Allen’s car, DNA test on the hair in Abby’s hand, the Google search by the state’s digital expert) as evidence of the state’s “desperation” to fit the crime to Allen.
  • Focus on False Confessions:
    • Emphasized the severe and abnormal conditions Allen endured in solitary confinement, claiming it caused mental breakdown and false confessions.
    • Compared solitary confinement to Medieval torture techniques, arguing that prolonged isolation under harsh conditions could break anyone.
    • Stressed that numerous mental health professionals treating Allen at the prison failed to identify the detrimental effects of solitary confinement, asking “Where is the moral compass?”.
    • Cast doubt on Dr. Walla’s testimony and notes, hinting at her potential biases.
  • Phone Data Discrepancies:
    • Referred to the Health Data on Libby’s phone, highlighting its limited stair-count data that contradicts the state’s theory about how and where the girls were moved.
    • Emphasized the phone’s accuracy as a source of data, stressing the unusual audio input/output activity (headphone plugged in/out) at 5:44 pm and 10:32 pm that cannot be explained if the phone was undisturbed under Abby’s body.
  • Lack of Forensic Evidence:
    • Pointed out the absence of Allen’s fingerprints, footprints, DNA, or clothing at the scene, and no trace evidence from the crime found on Allen, his home, or his car.
  • Closing:
    • Implored the jury to be the “moral compass” and reject the state’s inhumane treatment of Allen.
    • Summarized by highlighting discrepancies, challenging the state’s evidence and pushing the narrative of a botched investigation that resulted in coerced, false confessions from a mentally ill, psychologically broken man.

Judge’s Instructions:

  • Reiterated standard instructions: Reasonable Doubt, presumption of innocence, careful consideration of all evidence, witness credibility, and exclusive judgment of the jury in determining guilt or innocence.

Jury Deliberations:

  • Jury deliberations began at 1:25 p.m. and were adjourned at 3:20 p.m., despite the Judge’s intention to continue until 4 p.m.
  • This unexpected early adjournment left everyone speculating about whether the jury reached a decision or had hit a roadblock.
  • The jurors will resume deliberations at 9:00 a.m. the following morning.