DELPHI, Ind. – Attorneys for Delphi murders suspect Richard Allen made another attempt to have evidence linked to their alternative murder theory presented to the jury.
In a motion filed Wednesday, attorneys Andrew Baldwin, Bradley Rozzi and Jennifer Auger asked the court to “admit certain evidence” that the defense has been prevented from presenting in the presence of jurors.
In a September 2023 filing supporting its request for a Franks hearing, the defense outlined a theory that followers of Odinism, a Norse pagan religion coopted by white supremacists, killed Abby Williams and Libby German as part of a ritual.
Delphi murders: Contentious cross examination of investigator marks Day 4 of testimony
Gull ruled in early September 2024 that the defense could not present evidence tied to the theory to jurors during Allen’s trial.
In its new motion, the defense cited the testimony of crime scene investigator Brian Olehy, who discussed branches and sticks found on the victims’ bodies.
Olehy told the court he believed the branches and sticks were laid on the girls in order to conceal their bodies.
The defense believes that testimony opens the door to present at least some of its findings regarding the Odinism theory. In August 2024, a defense expert testified that the killings bore signs of being ritualistic in nature.
Some of those signs included positioning sticks and using blood to create runes on trees. The motion also noted that investigators explored the Odinism angle as early as two days after the girls were found dead.
Delphi murders: Jurors watch video extracted from Libby German’s phone
Jurors and court observers saw the sticks and branches on the girls’ bodies during testimony about the crime scene earlier this week. While the state offered its explanation, the defense argued that Allen has a right to present an alternative explanation.
“Additionally, the sticks on the girls appear to be arranged in a pattern/arrangement or (at a minimum) using a person’s own eyeballs, common sense, logic and reason could cause a reasonable person to believe that the sticks were formed into some pattern/arrangement and weren’t being used to conceal the bodies,” the defense wrote in the motion.
The defense also pointed to blood found on a tree. The state employed a blood spatter evidence seven years after the murder to testify on the matter. The defense argued that Allen has a constitutional right to call his own expert to counter that testimony.
The defense is asking the court for the opportunity to rebut the state’s testimony on the sticks and branches, counter testimony from the state’s blood spatter expert and offer an alternative explanation to “any confused juror” who may question the layout of the sticks and branches.