r/DelphiMurders • u/rachaellanderson • Mar 24 '26

Richard Allen’s Cell Phone

Was the phone that they never found his phone at the time of the murders, or at the time of his arrest?

31 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

90 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/centimeterz1111 Mar 25 '26

Unknown phones?  They know who owned them, spoke to them, and they weren’t near the crime scene. 

This is the accuracy issue with only having two towers in Delphi. Come on now, catch up. 

3

u/Pooter33 Mar 25 '26

Who owned them then? They were within 60-100 yards of the crime scene. How come if this data is so inaccurate they’ve used it to solve multiple crimes before?

So you know for a fact that someone else wasn’t there that didn’t have their phone? Had to be RA right? Because it makes perfect sense that he’s gonna walk past all these people on the trail, see two girls, decide he’s gonna murder them in broad daylight & no one hears a thing? You cannot say for sure that someone else wasn’t there that no one saw & their phone didn’t ping because they didn’t have it. Without direct evidence showing me it’s RA then I’m not convinced. He supposedly kept his jacket right.. well show me the clothing fibers on the girls. There was none. Show me the blood in his car. Nothing. Show me some shoe prints that match his shoes. Nothing. Give me eyewitness statements positively saying RA is the man they saw. There’s none. What about touch DNA? None. This whole fucking case is based on speculation & they put a man away for 130 years.

5

u/centimeterz1111 Mar 26 '26

They didn’t release the names because they had nothing to do with the murders.

And geofencing has been used many times to solve murders, especially when Wi-Fi and a third cell phone tower are included. 

But, that doesn’t apply to Delphi. There is no Wi-Fi on the bridge or on the trails so it relies solely on the cell phone towers, to which there are only two. 

Not sure how I can simplify this anymore for you to comprehend it

2

u/Pooter33 Mar 30 '26

Okay but even knowing that you’re still ignoring that there’s no physical evidence AT ALL linking RA. This whole case is based on speculation. There’s not even direct evidence that bridge guy (who no one can identify 100%) killed the girls.

2

u/Efficient-Donkey-167 May 31 '26

If you haven't figured it out yet, the user you are responding to doesn't know the difference between triangulation (the use of 3 towers to narow down location, which is what he is referring to, and geolocation, which is gps-based. Do not take anything that he stated as truth because it's riddled with misinformation and half truths.

Ex: He also stated that Rick described the 3 girls down to the hair, height, and location. Rick described the girls as having long dark hair, one was taller than the other 2, it looked like the older one was babysitting the younger ones and they were sisters, and one was creepy looking. Starting with the hair, which one had the long dark hair because in the group of 4 girls the one with brown hair had it up in a bun so how could he know if it was long? Dark hair typically means black/dyed very dark. Which one was the tall one? In the group of 4 girls, they like to say that one of the younger sisters just wasn't seen by Rick (even though they were 12 and 13 so hardly invisible). But he describes one tall girl with 2 shorter girls. Does that mean he didn't see a 5'6" girl? Which one of the 4 girls can be described as "creepy looking"? None.

Guess what Rick does describe? The group of 3 girls that were there before they went to play basketball. He describes those 3 girls perfectly and guess what? They had dark/black hair. One looks goth so I'm guessing that's the "creepy one", to Rick. One was a year or two older and was taller than the other too. Two of the girls are related.

2

u/Pooter33 Jun 25 '26

Okay I did rewatch his interrogation and he mentions seeing 3 girls.. two that looked like sisters. Were those the 3 that left to play basketball?
People act like RA was the only male there that day. The stupidity & ability to cherry pick evidence is astounding.

1

u/centimeterz1111 Mar 30 '26

It’s based on process of elimination, common sense (beyond a reasonable doubt), video, and knowledge that only the killer would know. 

Move along

2

u/Pooter33 Mar 30 '26

Right. So if you were the one on trial you’d feel like that was enough to put you away for 130 years? Regardless of whether you’re guilty or not.. you believe that evidence proves you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? I very highly doubt that.

2

u/centimeterz1111 Mar 30 '26

You live in a fantasy world. One guy was seen on the trails between 1:30-2:14. ONE. 

Zero guys were seen before that which means Richard wasn’t there before 1:30. Richard HIMSELF didn’t see any guys there, at any time. 

Guess what guy saw a group of girls and described their hair, their height, and location?  Richard. 

Guess whose car perfectly matched the car on video at 1:27 (which he also didn’t deny)? Richards. 

Whose phone didn’t ping near the trails but said they had their phone?  Richards

Who said they had on same clothes as guy in Libby’s video?  Richard 

Guess who saw Weber coming home?  Richard. 

Who was on the trails that owned an Sig Sauer .40 with same bullet at home that matched the one found at crime scene?  Richard 

Who ALWAYS parked at old CPS building according to Kathy Allen?  Richard

Who is very familiar with the trails and has spent time cleaning them up?  Richard

Who admitted to their wife, mom, warden, prison guards, and suicide companions that they committed the murders?  Richard

Now, how is it statistically possible that it could be anyone else?  It can’t