Day 9 of the Richard Allen trial featured testimony on DNA and blood spatter analysis, revealing no direct link between Allen and the Delphi murders, raising questions about the prosecution’s case which appears to heavily rely on Allen’s confession.

DNA Testimony (Stacy Bozinovski)

Expert Qualifications:

  • Indiana State Police forensic scientist.

Key Findings:

  • No direct DNA link to Richard Allen: Extensive DNA analysis of various items from the crime scene, the victims’ bodies, and Allen’s home revealed no DNA evidence connecting him to the murders.
  • Male DNA present, but inconclusive: Male DNA was found on the external genitalia and fingernails of both victims, but insufficient for generating a full profile. This could be due to a vasectomy, inconclusive tests, or potentially from household contact. No male DNA was found in the victims’ vaginal or cervical swabs, although possible semen was detected.
  • Mixture of victims’ DNA: Many items, especially clothing, showed a mix of Abby and Libby’s DNA, likely due to transfer during the struggle. One of Abby’s shoes had a mixture of blood where Libby was the major contributor, raising questions about the sequence of events.
  • Contamination and degradation issues: The black hooded sweatshirt, tested months after the murders, revealed a mix of Abby, Libby, and a lab employee’s DNA, indicating contamination. Samples from the creek and some other items yielded insufficient DNA for analysis, possibly due to degradation.
  • Emerging DNA technologies not utilized: The defense questioned why the Indiana State Police (ISP) lab didn’t utilize advanced DNA analysis techniques like autosomal Y-STR and SNP analysis, or send samples to labs capable of doing so. The prosecution argued that all available methods at the ISP lab were used and no further analysis was deemed necessary at the time.
  • Hair analysis: 80 hairs were found at the scene, but only one yielded a DNA profile belonging to an unknown female, not matching the victims or Kelsi German. A hair found on Abby’s body was initially thought to belong to a family member but was later confirmed to be from Kelsi. 72 hairs were sent to the FBI for advanced rootless hair testing, but the testing hasn’t been conducted to preserve the samples for potential future advancements in technology.

Blood Spatter Testimony (Pat Cicero)

Expert Qualifications:

  • Sheriff of LaPorte County with extensive experience and training in bloodstain pattern analysis, having testified 34 times previously.

Crime Scene Analysis and Conclusions:

  • Minimum of one perpetrator: Based on the bloodstain patterns, Cicero concluded that at least one person was involved in the murders, but could not rule out multiple individuals.
  • Libby’s movements: Blood spatter on the “F” tree, shaped like an upside down “L”, was attributed to Libby’s handprint while she was still mobile after receiving a neck wound. Blood flow patterns indicated that Libby may have been seated at some point and then dragged to her final resting location. The lack of drag marks was attributed to the leafy terrain. Upward blood flow patterns on her face suggest her head was positioned lower than the neck wound at some point, possibly while being dragged.
  • Abby’s unusual lack of blood: Abby’s body was found in the “pugilistic pose” with remarkably little blood on her hands, arms, or clothing, despite a neck wound. Cicero found this unusual and suggested she might have been bound, unconscious, or restrained during the attack. The defense suggested the possibility of her hands being washed postmortem.
  • Movement of bodies: Cicero stated that both bodies appeared to have been moved or repositioned at some point. He acknowledged the defense’s argument that Libby (200 lbs) would have been difficult for a smaller individual like Richard Allen to drag without leaving more obvious drag marks.

Points of Contention:

  • Timeline of involvement: The defense highlighted that Cicero’s expertise was only sought seven years after the murders.
  • Dragging theory: The defense challenged Cicero’s theory that Libby was dragged, given her weight and the lack of drag marks.
  • Simultaneous or separate attacks: Cicero could not definitively determine whether the attacks on Abby and Libby occurred concurrently or at different times.
  • No direct link to Allen: Under cross-examination, Cicero confirmed that he found nothing linking Richard Allen to the murders based on his blood spatter analysis.

Other Notable Events

  • Juror emotional response: A juror showed visible distress during the blood spatter testimony.
  • “Bombshell” email evidence: The prosecution revealed an email address, potentially belonging to Richard Allen, containing sexually suggestive emails. The admissibility of this evidence was challenged by the defense, arguing that the prosecution needed to prove exclusive access to the email account by Allen. The judge took the matter under advisement.
  • Debate over Google search evidence: A dispute arose over the admissibility of a Google search found on a tablet used by both Richard Allen and his wife, Kathy Allen. The defense argued against its admissibility due to lack of clear ownership of the device and account.

Key Takeaways and Concerns

  • Lack of direct physical evidence: While forensic evidence was presented, no DNA or blood spatter evidence directly linked Richard Allen to the crime scene.
  • Reliance on confession: The prosecution’s case appears to hinge heavily on Richard Allen’s confession, which has not yet been presented in court. Concerns were raised about the potential for coercion during his time at the Westville Correctional Facility.

Overall: Day 9 focused on complex forensic evidence that, while providing some insights into the crime, failed to establish a direct connection between Richard Allen and the murders. The prosecution’s reliance on the yet-to-be-heard confessions, coupled with concerns about potential coercion, creates significant uncertainty about the strength of their case. The trial continues to raise questions about whether a fair and impartial verdict can be reached based on the evidence presented.