Shadow of the Bridge /// Part 2 /// 879 | Forensic Files

On October 17th, discover the secret behind the mask in Black Phone 2. Critics are calling it a cold-blooded
masterpiece, and it's the rare sequel that's scarier than the original. Ethan Hawk is pure nightmare fuel and returns
as the grammar, and Mason ths as Finny. This time, Vengeance isn't going to let death stand in its way. Spine chilling
and heart pounding. It'll get under your skin and into your dreams. Scott Derekson's anticipated sequel asks the
question, do you know what happens when you die? Find out on October 17th when Black Phone 2 arrives in theaters.
Just in, thousands of winter arrivals at your Nordstrom Rack store. Save up to 70% on coats, slippers, and cashmere
from Kate Spade New York, Vince, UGG, Levis's, and more. >> Check out these boots.
>> They've got the best gifts. >> My holiday shopping hack. Join the Nordy Club.
>> Get an extra 5% off every rack purchase with your Nordstrom credit card. Plus,
buy it online and pick it up in store the same day for free. Big gifts, big perks. That's why you rack.
>> Welcome to Off the Record. I'm your host Nick Crime. >> It's good to be seen and it's good to
see you. Off the record. Thanks for listening. Thanks for telling a friend. >> True Crime podcast.
>> Be good. Be kind. and don't little crime. >> Gather around, grab a chair, grab a
beer. Let's talk some true crime. >> In July of 2017, police unveiled the composite sketch of
Bridge Guy, the the Deli double homicide suspect. And then quite a bit later, we
get several months later, we get the New Direction press conference, as it's often referred to as, where we get a a
new composite sketch. We get a little bit more of the audio that is released to the public. When this news broke, I
know that it was pretty much a gamecher for everyone that was covering the case.
What was it to you guys at the time? I because there was a lot of feelings and mixed emotions about that press
conference. Some of the things that Doug Carter said about the shack and about maybe the killer is is sitting here in
this room today. He's addressing the killer directly now directly to the killer. You never thought that we would
change directions in our investigation, but we have. We know that you want to know what we know. And then also the
behind the scenes with the meeting with the families just 15 minutes prior to this press conference where they're
going to get new information dropped onto their heads and shoulders as well and they're a bit blindsided. How did
what was your reaction at the time? Go back in time and tell us what was your reaction, your feelings and your
observations about the New Direction. So, the New Direction conference happened, I think, prior to Kevin and I
even knowing each other, but I do remember it because again, like me and my mom were following this case just
from from New York. And I remember talking to her and I was like, "Okay, either they're about to arrest somebody
or perhaps more likely they don't have anything cuz it just seemed kind of like a shot in the dark to me." And and I
think that ended up being the case what we found out behind the scenes. I think it was a calculated shot in the dark,
but at that point they didn't really they I mean they were just trying to basically they got a profile saying,
"Hey, if you confront the killer, he might make a mistake and trip himself up." So that was what they were trying
to do. Do you remember it, Kevin? >> Yeah, I remember it. My reaction was much the same. Uh I also remember that
people were speculating a lot about why did Carter mention the shack? Is that some sort of code? Were the girls killed
in a shack? And so that was one of the questions we asked Carter and essentially he was just riffing.
>> He was riffing and then the the wildest thing was afterwards Holman went up to
him and was like, "What is the shack?" Like why why did you mention like what what are you talking about? Although I
think he said it in a slightly more profane way, but um I I think he was just trying to I think he was they were
thinking maybe the guy's religious or maybe he has religious family members and they're just trying to appeal to
that. But I think everyone was reading so much into it and sort of treating it like it's like the Da Vinci Code or
something where we can all figure it out. But I think it was really just for an audience of one which was supposed to
be the killer. And that was based again on that they got some profilers to tell them, okay, we think this is the kind of
guy who did this. And I think that profile ended up being somewhat accurate actually to Richard Allen. But but they
were like, "Go out there, confront him, and see if he maybe does anything." So, I think a lot of it was more about
trying to get his goat than anything else. >> Yeah. And there was contention behind
the scenes, not just with the family, but amongst law enforcement because the idea was, let's have one of our guys go
up there just just one guy be talking to the killer one on one. That man they selected to do that was Doug Carter. And
the then sheriff of Carroll County told Blesenby says, "No, it's not right. I'm the elected sheriff. It's our case. I
should be up there, too." And the two men got into quite a heated argument in the minutes leading up to that press
conference. >> And that is a strategy that goes back many years, decades. In fact, we saw the
FBI roll out a similar strategy in the Atlanta child killings case. We know that they did the exact same thing out
in Witchah with BTK with Ken Len Lenwear who was the uh officer out there that they behind the scenes they they were
saying we need a super cop. We need we need to put forward a face and a body that is the super cop that that our
killer will not he needs to be challenged and he's of the type that needs to be challenged and therefore we
we don't know his face and we don't know his name. However, on our side, we're going to put a face and name to a worthy
adversary of this unknown killer and challenge them publicly because we know that it's about power and control. So,
we're going to start to take some of that power and control away by presenting you with somebody that we
don't think that you can defeat. And they certainly did that with Doug Carter. They certainly picked the right
person. But as you said, there was some squabbbling behind closed doors of is this the right tactic? Some words were
exchanged and probably some feelings were hurt. >> Oh yes, I imagine so. And you know, and
I can understand where all the sides were coming from behind the scenes, but it it definitely and ultimately, I mean,
Allan did not take the bait, so it wasn't something that ended up being fruitful, but knowing what I know now
about where they were with the investigation, I understand why they did it and why they felt like they needed to
take that risk at that point. >> Yeah. My thoughts on that would be if there was a continuation of killings
that maybe you could then challenge this killer. But I think because there wasn't a continuation
that we knew of that maybe the approach would be to try to reach some kind of humanity in this individual if there's
any left to try to get them to come out of the woods. >> Yeah. Well well said. I think there was
also a bit of an idea of maybe he's got relatives who are ready to come forward or maybe there's someone who knows
something that we can kind of push a little bit here. And again, that didn't work either.
>> Yeah. and the thought that they were and usually, you know, this isn't just this
investigation, but oftent times the investigators are pretty well convinced that the killer has told somebody or
somebody close to them has witnessed, overheard something or has suspicions, but they've not there for one reason or
another, they don't feel comfortable coming forward with that information. It only takes one tip. We know that in
every situation. And they I think you're right. They were trying to not necessarily draw out the killer with
this tactic solely, but also maybe draw out somebody that knows the killer has a
suspicion about somebody that they maybe even love and care about. But then back
to the killer, you could you could make him squirm, make him do some something out of desperation because that, and
you're right, that that press conference took place before you guys started your
podcast, but it was well enough into the investigation and years into the investigation that one could come to the
conclusion that, oh, they haven't caught me yet because they don't have anything.
They haven't caught me yet because I've not given them anything. their investigation is is is no good. And and
soon they will give up. And part of that is just reminding the killer, we're not
giving up. We're we've we've not cut back on the hours. We've not cut back on on the people power here. We're putting
in the time and we're going to get you. We will not rest until until we do. But sadly, as you said, that nobody comes
forward with that. And it doesn't even appear that I hope it made Richard Allen squirm like hell. I hope it made him
nervous as hell with many sleepless nights to just know that they one day they're going to come a knocking on his
door. >> Yeah, I hope it did too. >> I mean, sadly, I don't think it did, though, because
they're they're coming out again in this almost taunting, challenging manner, but
then they release a sketch that, you know, the first sketch looks like Richard Allen, second sketch does not.
So if if I was Richard Allen at that moment, I'd go, they got nothing and they're even further away from me than
they're claiming. >> Yeah, I do agree that the first sketch looks a lot like him to me and that
second one doesn't. >> Interesting to wonder, too, did he have any thought at any time of getting rid
of that gun? I mean, we know that he kept it obviously and that worked to the advantage of getting justice for the
girls, but one person absolutely did know that he was at the trails that day, the day that the girls were killed. And
in fact, he lied to that woman and and or conveniently left out the part where he walked onto the bridge, which later
he tells that to police and Kathy's left scratching her head saying, "Well, you never told me about that part." Had he
at some point got rid of that gun, that might have been a telltale sign to her that maybe my husband, who was at
the trails that day, wasn't doing what he said, and I shouldn't believe everything I've I've come to believe
about what he's told me. >> Right. She'd have to pull her head out of the sand. I I think like for me
though, I don't know if he knew that he lost a cartridge that day. It's It's not
really clear to us. It's It's possible to me that he didn't realize that because he was drinking that day and
maybe loses track. I'm speculating here. >> Right. But if he if he wrecked the gun
twice, which I believe in one of the confessions he talks about at the top of the hill and then obviously he would
have done so at the bottom of the hill as well. Did he collect the bullet at the top of the hill? And again, like you
said, because he was drinking, not collect it at the bottom of the hill. >> I think some have also said like you can
rack a gun once and then if you rack it twice, then it ejects. I don't understand guns at all.
>> Well, because there's no bullet loaded in the in the chamber. So when you rack
it the first time, that's what kicks the bullet into the chamber. So then if he would were to rack it again, then it's
going to expend it out the side. And I think you're absolutely right, Anya. I don't think he had any clue that that he
had did that. It may have happened on accident or in the heat of the moment, he didn't realize that he had done it
twice. But and and the reason why we we can speculate that it may have happened simply on accident was something that
the law enforcement officers at the murder scene were talking about behind closed doors. Uh they were checking to
make sure that it wasn't one of their guns that had left the bullet there. And some investigators
had told and explained to you guys that often times we'll remove our firearm when we have to go into these crime
scenes, especially ones where there's hills and and rough terrain involved because you can accidentally expend a
bullet. >> Yeah. And it's it's uncive investigators. It's just hard to be like kind of crouching and doing all this
different stuff when you've got a gun on. So, I think they a lot of them just didn't even bring one that day. And then
they were checking around, okay, could could anyone else have dropped this? And >> the answer was no one else had a gun
like that. So, it was like, okay, this can't be us. This has got to be the killer.
>> Talk about Richard Allen's phone a little bit that he had with him on that day in 2017. Because so much of this
story is Liberty German's phone, how it led us to the suspect, visuals of the suspect being found at the murder scene,
but his phone is a large part of this story as well. He says he's on his phone that day, but we know that they did a a
data dump and and don't seem to have been able to track his phone in the area that day, but when they search his home,
obviously they're looking for electronic devices. They don't find that phone. We
don't we to this day we have no clue what happened to that phone. >> Yes. It's very unusual and we know
exactly what phone he had in 2017 because in the initial lead that he called in on himself, he gives Dan
Dulan, a Department of Natural Resources officer, his IME number, which is specific to a device. So, we're able to
pinpoint, okay, that's the exact phone he had. And as you mentioned, he claims he's on his phone during his hike on the
trails. He claims he's looking at his stock ticker and when they look at the data from the towers, they don't see it
there. So, that's one issue. But then the other issue is that some people, you know, they trade in their phones and
then other people, they kind of hoard all their old phones in like a bag in their office or something. Richard Allen
is the latter kind of person. He is the kind of person who's got all of his old phones in one place and he just has
them. The one phone that is missing from that collection that he has in his house
when police search it is the phone that he had in 2017 with that specific IME number. So it raises some questions. Why
get rid of that phone and none of the others? >> And it doesn't register in their data
dump. Correct. So it it's there's yeah that that his phone is is a very weird mystery to me on this this
whole front. >> I have a two-part question. >> Hit him hit him hard, Captain. >> Do it.
>> Do it. >> Hit hit me right in the face. So this is actually for all three of you. For
people that are on the fence on whether or not Richard Allen is responsible for this crime or solely responsible for
this crime, is there a piece of evidence that you think they're overlooking? And
is there a piece of evidence or maybe speculation out there that makes you feel like they're somewhat justified for
questioning this uh result in the trial? I I think one of the challenges in this
case for people is there's not one single piece of evidence you can point to and say this alone proves it. You
know, there's no like DNA at the crime scene or anything of that nature. It's a lot of things that just add up and
gradually build a wall around him and box him in. >> Yeah. It's it's just not a sexy case in
the sense that normally you can say okay there was DNA found on the body and the
killer cut himself and so his blood is there and it's like okay that you can immediately understand what happened
there. This is the case where it's not one big boulder. It is a bunch of small pebbles adding up to a greater weight.
To me, the pebble that's most important to me, I guess, or I should say that I think is kind of conclusive and cinched
it for a lot of people is Richard Allen confesses. And in one of his, well, he confesses like 61 times,
but the one of the confessions that was very descriptive and much more in-depth than the others, he talks about how
there was a van that came by that day as he was abducting the girls and that he saw this van and he panicked and he
forced them across the creek and killed them. This van was not in the discovery.
This van, there was nothing about this van in anything that he could have seen. This van was not something that was
being talked about. This van was driven by a man named Brad Weber who lived at the end of this access road kind of
trail thing that went past the bridge and he would be the only people who had any reason to be on that were people who
who lived there and it was just very sparsely populated. though investigators were able to actually go back and figure
out based on texts that Brad Weber would have been driving his van that day. And
we know that because he's texting people, oh, I'm going to bring this to you and it requires a hitch to move it
and his van is the only thing that has that hitch. They're also able to find his his work records. He clocks out at
early a little bit early that day and the time he clocked out would have taken him under the bridge and in that area at
the exact time they're being abducted. So it all aligns. How on earth does Richard Allen know about a van being
there at a specific time when even the police didn't know about that until he said something? I also find persuasive
after the murders, the police talked to everybody who was out on the trails that
day and they know about everybody who was there and when they were there and what they saw. The only person they're
not able to identify is bridge guy, but they they'll have like a group of witnesses say, "Oh, around this time we
saw a bridge guy going towards the bridge." Then Richard Allen uh appears and he says, "Oh, those witnesses who
said they saw bridge guy, I saw them and I was dressed just as bridge guy was dressed." And there's actually two
groups of witnesses or there rather there's two witnesses important who have these bridge guy sightings. And so then
you'd have to imagine if Richard Allen is innocent, then you need to have another person out there dressed just
like Bridge Guy that no one else saw. >> And in addition to that, Richard Allen's
just unfortunate enough to have a firearm that matches a spent an unspent cartridge at the scene. And he confesses
in a way that has details only the killer would know. So it's like everything. >> And he also sounds just like Bridge Guy.
He also sounds exactly like Bridge Guy and just happened to have the day off of CVS and be at the trails that day and
you know to express a lot of remorse and saying, "Oh, I'm I killed those girls. Do you still love me?" To his wife and
mother. So, it's just there's too much that adds up. I understand why people have skepticism, though. I want to say
that. I really do because I think a lot of the coverage of this case at trial specifically was flawed. uh flawed at
best and actually misleading at worst. So when people are kind of basing their assumptions off of what they're hearing,
a lot of what they heard is nonsense. And so I don't blame those people for coming to what I think is a wrong
conclusion. I just think they're they have bad information. And when people I see dive into it and they really get
immersed in it, I see them saying, "Oh, wait. Now I get it." So it's interesting. Like I think people who
have a little bit of information tend to be very skeptical and I think people who
really dive into it at the end of the day most people who are acting in good faith I think they say oh I think I
understand this better now. So it's just it's it's not really people's fault in a
way >> and I'll echo what Anya and Kevin laid out for us here because I I think that
it it is the totality of the evidence. And I know that wasn't your question there, Captain, but I think in this
case, and in a lot of cases, it gets really difficult to boil it down to one piece of evidence, but uh a couple of
things here. When when they're searching his home, he's saying it's he's repeatedly saying it's all over, which
is a strange thing for an innocent man to be saying in that moment. Now, now, you know, we might be picking at nits
with with that sort of speculation there, but let's take it a step further. Part of it's his car. When he's denying
any involvement, before he's locked up and starts con confessing, when he denies any involvement, his car seems to
be parked right where the witness where the a witness comes forward and says, you know, I think I saw bridge guy
walking to his car. I think I saw the suspect walking to where he may have been parked. And and so we learn that
about Richard Allen and his vehicle before he confesses. This is during the part where he's still denying any
involvement. The part about the van when he when he is confessing once he's locked up that the piece about that van
is exactly right. there there's only the only way for him to know that and you can call you can call his confessions
crazy if you want but in that confession he gets that detail that nobody else knows 100% correct and then I also think
that people are a little too quick to dismiss the ballistics testing on the bullet they don't the general public
does not have the experience that we have here in the garage or that Anya and Kevin have with the murder sheet. We are
thankfully tasked with examining cases every single week. You guys have been doing it for 5 years. We've been doing
it for for well over nine years now. And we've reviewed >> we've reviewed a lot of cases. We've
reviewed a lot of cases where there's there's different there's different gun work and ballistic work that is
conducted in these cases. And I don't think that the general public realizes more than often the the testing reveals
that it's either not a match or it's inconclusive. It's it's almost I wouldn't say that it's exactly oneird,
but we've reviewed a lot of cases and it feels very much onethird of the time it
comes back as a match. So to to dismiss that or be so quick to dismiss that, I think that that that that is is
something that is easily overlooked by the general public. >> That's extremely well said in my
opinion. I think I think you just summed it up really well because it's like it's
frustrating to see people get it wrong, but we just try to remember that people,
you know, we all hear what we hear and sometimes it's easy to just fall into assumptions based on limited
information. And that's just a very human thing to do. And we just hope that this case is a good almost like lesson
for everybody, ourselves included, that it's it's dangerous to just kind of make
assumptions. But I I agree with you. I found the cartridge extremely compelling and I thought the state's expert on that
Melissa Oberg was extremely good on the stand and I think uh you know one thing that people may not realize is that she
did the testing and saw that there was it was consistent with with the with a bullet with a cartridge exe ejected from
his gun. But her supervisor also did the identical test without knowing what her
results were and he got the same conclusion. So, it wasn't like they were just slapping something together. I
mean, these are pretty highly trained experts. >> Yeah. I think I differ from a lot of
people in this case in the sense of, okay, now we have a verdict. And so, I do think there's this group of people
that are then questioning things. But I think I think it's also in the similar manner of which we dove into the case
initially was cuz you want justice for these girls. And I think double-checking the work of justice for this girls is is
something I feel like sometimes we're so quick to go, well, here's the answers. That's the answers. There's no other
possibilities. You're stupid if you think so. And I think a lot of these individuals that
are just questioning things are still doing so with the the lens of justice for these two girls.
>> I think for some of them it's more of their own egos, though. I think I think
cuz some of them are the same people that continue to attack the girls families and it's like if you care so
much about the girls, why are you doing that? You know, it's like leave the families alone at least. But I think
some people got really convinced that their person of interest was going to be it and then they just kind of they've
gone off on that. And it's like I think if they step back and sort of really thought about it, they might they might
go about things in a different way. Although some of them are just kind of nuts, I think.
>> Yeah. And I I think the other thing uh about this is like you said some of it is ego that
you had a thought and and so that thought is right and when it's proven wrong that you just stick to that that
initial thought. But I think a lot of these other individuals that haven't moved on, that haven't put
a period in their chapter of okay, we we covered this case uh and now it's time to move on. I think some of that is this
is the biggest thing that has happened to them and whether they have hundreds of thousands of listeners or viewers.
some of these people to have a hundred listeners or viewers, it's the biggest thing that
has happened in their life. Um, and I and I feel sad for them because I could understand getting some attention in
this world where it's hard to get attention in this world. So to get any kind of attention, whether that's good
attention or bad attention, that I feel bad for these individuals that just can't seem to move on and just want to
keep and I don't even know if they believe everything that they're saying because if they had a definitive
viewpoint and not a everchanging viewpoint, then they would lose the attention. So, I think some of these
people are just going, "Well, here's new speculation. I'm going to go down that rabbit hole and it'll just keep this
attention coming on onto me." And I and I feel sad for them that they they can't
move on. >> I I feel sad for them, too. I think that's very well said. And I'll go even
so far as to say that when I consume some of the content these people put out, I can often tell that these are
people who have some good qualities. They have some intelligence, maybe some wit. And I I find myself wishing they
would find a way to make more constructive use of their gifts. And also when you look at these people, a
lot of them have frankly had lives of disappointment >> and a lot of them have lost quite a bit
because of their obsession with this case. There's people who've lost marriages, jobs, their homes over their
obsession with this case. And it is just sad. It is just very sad. >> It makes me sad. I I feel like true
crime should never be something that hurts your life. And if it's ever getting to that point, then people need
to step back and sort themselves out before they continue with because it deli is a good example. We've talked
about how some of the bad actors have hurt the families or people in the case and they've done things that are not
okay, but they've often really just ended up hurting themselves. And it it's genuinely it's it's sad. You don't want
to see people go down that road. [Music] If you're still overpaying for wireless,
it's time to say yes to saying no. At Mint Mobile, their favorite word is no. No contracts, no monthly bills, no
overages, no hidden fees, no BS. Plans start at $15 a month at Mint. All plans come with high-speed data and
unlimited talk and text delivered on the nation's largest 5G network. Use your own phone with any Mint Mobile plan and
bring your phone number along with all your existing contacts. It's just that easy. Start saving money and get the
same great quality wireless service that you are used to with Mint Mobile. People
are saving $40, $50, $60 a month with MintMo and getting the same great service. Ready to say yes to saying no?
Make the switch at mintmobile.com/tcg. That's mintmobile.com/tcg. Upfront payment of $45 required,
equivalent to $15 a month. Limited time new customer offer for first three months only. Speeds may slow above 35 GB
on unlimited plan. Taxes and fees extra. See Mint Mobile for details. [Music] Let's talk about the trial a little bit
and talk about the the prosecutor, the defense team. I was a little surprised. I wasn't completely blindsided by it,
but I was a little surprised because with the defense team, one attorney in particular, Rosie, I was I was somewhat
mildly familiar, let's say, with his career in some cases that he had worked over the years. And I I thought he had
done a good job in those cases. But I I ultimately my we'll get in my feelings here a little bit. I thought a lot of
what the defense did and how they conducted their defense of Richard Allen was a bit slimeball at times.
>> Oh, yeah. I I think they're complete slime balls. I'll just be totally blunt.
I think that's a good word for it. I We were shocked. We We had done some pretty
in-depth profiles on both Rosie, uh, Brad Rosie, who was the lead counsel, and Andrew Baldwin, who was working with
him. And we we expected to be dazzled. We expected that they were going to do a really good job. We'd heard very good
things. So, we had every expectation that these are going to be some really good attorneys who are going to do some
really good attorneying. And that's not what happened. >> And a lot of it was wasn't subtle stuff.
One of the moments that stands out in my mind is from even before the trial began, which was during the process of
jury selection. This is an opportunity for the attorneys to ask questions of the prospective jurors and generally
they want to come across as seeming like a nice regular guy. And one woman is in
the jury box and Rosie looks at her and says, "So, is it true that you have an intellectual disability?"
And the room falls silent and the woman just says, "No." And that really alienated a lot of people.
>> He also came in with his like little poster board and he was like, "All right, guys. I'm gonna dumb this down
for you." And you can just tell the jury, the prospective jurors were just like, "What the heck? He's just
arrogant." You know, and so we can talk all day about them. They they they did a
they did a I mean there's there's what we see in the movies when it comes to defense attorneys and and that tends to
be very flashy and over the top and then there's what is actually being a good defense attorney and oftentimes that's a
little bit quieter. It might mean making a really good deal or making a lot of objections to ensure things are
preserved for the record. And it it's usually not crafting a narrative of the case that's going to sell in the media
based on the fact that these guys were literally filming themselves work seemingly in anticipation of being part
of a documentary series. I just I don't feel like their hearts were in the right
place, I guess, is is what I view from from this because it's about your client. It's not about your own egos or
being part of a docky series or portraying yourself as some sort of hero attorney Attakus Finch style. It's just
like it just they seem to be in it to arandise themselves. >> Well, and to stay on that topic a little
bit, they recently put out key issues that Allen's attorneys are focusing on for the appeal. Do you have any thoughts
on on that article that came out? Yeah, let's get to that. But before we get into that, let's not brush aside the
idea that they were essentially trying to blame the murders on other folks. That gets tossed out. Doesn't get
allowed to be in court. And to the captain's point, exactly what he's saying now. They're they're like, "Oh,
well, you didn't believe that? Well, how about this?" you know, and they're just
shifting gears to what what appears to me that they're pointing the finger in a different direction now.
>> Yeah. You know, this Odinism theory, this theory that the girls were murdered
by a cult of white supremacists in a sacrifice in the woods, it was very heavy on speculation and very light on
actual facts. And in Indiana at least, you have to have some evidence to bring in a third party suspect in court. And
the judge rightfully dismissed that because >> there's a reason for that because it
wouldn't be fair if I was accused of a terrible crime if I could go into court and say, "Oh, it wasn't me. It was the
captain." And >> goddamn right it was. >> You can't just drag someone in without
any evidence because then you're violating that person's rights. And there was a three-day hearing where the
defense had an opportunity to present evidence. Here's why we think it was these other people and they weren't able
to produce anything. In fact, their investigators had to admit that they could not even come up with any evidence
that their main suspect was even in Deli at the time of the murders. So if you came and place your suspect in the the
town where the murders happened, how can you claim that you have good enough evidence to accuse him publicly in a
trial? >> But it but it fit their modus operandi because they were just ma writing these
uh legal filings that were really more like press releases. Like normally legal filings are super dry and they go to the
judge and you're trying to convince the judge to do what you want. They seem to be writing for the media and for the
public and they they were, you know, I mean, it was a pretty open secret that they were leaking like crazy and they
were trying to cultivate media. They were trying to cultivate YouTubers. And I think the the idea was to try to taint
a jury pool in order to basically put out their side so that no one would vote to convict. And I I think they convinced
themselves that that was going to work. But I mean, these guys just I mean, they
they didn't do very well. They weren't good. Uh the the prosecution team, they were very prepared. They were organized.
They were methodically building their case. It felt like the defense was almost like ad libbing or like, you
know, doing some kind of like riff solo. Like it it just didn't it didn't work. Well, I questioned these guys'
intelligence because at first when they when they spoke, I thought, okay, well, the state is going to be in for a fight
here, but their main suspect that they keep pushing, like you said, we can't even place him in deli at the time of
the crimes. And I've heard that there's actually definitive evidence that puts him at work during the time of the
crimes. But if you dive into the suspect, which I won't even uh entertain the audience with giving out his name,
uh his online social presence is the second coming of Buffalo Bill. And so I think there are some individuals out
there that when you see I don't know if you ever saw some of the video footage that was put out on Richard Allen of him
playing pool at a bar, he just looks like this normal guy. He doesn't look like this psychotic serial killer. And
when you watch this footage of this suspect, he, like I said, he comes off uh very crazy. Um, and I think some of
the individuals that are on the fence or or or opposed to Richard Allen being Bridge guy, they see this uh this
footage and they can't unsee it. >> And when you see somebody, I mean, and I think he's doing this on
purpose. Again, I think he's probably somewhat of a sick individual, but here's another person involved in the
case that is enjoying uh attention and speculation that he might be the real killer.
>> Yeah, I think that's well said. And it's like people, I think, are comforted by
the idea that the killers amongst us have to be kind of walking red flags because then you could just avoid the
creeps. If someone's creepy, hey, they might be a bad person. Let me get away from them. When you're dealing with
somebody like Richard Allen where it's more below the surface, that's scary because how would you ever know? And we
uncovered things that, you know, Richard Allen is a pretty creepy dude himself. Yeah.
>> But he's a lot more subtle about it. And his social media presence isn't, as you
said, you know, like a walking nightmare. So, you know, you can understand why people are creeped out by
this guy, but people just need to remember like Ted Bundy was a law student, you know, and he seemed like a
nice guy to a lot of people, but he was not a nice guy, and people can wear masks. Page 405
from Shadow of the Bridge reads, "After hearing the jury convict her husband of the murders, Kathy Allen
had walked out of the courthouse and passed a line of television cameras." And it goes on to say that she looks at
members of the media and says, "This isn't over. Now, we know that you guys were there. You're battle tested and
battle true. You went to the trial. You stood in line. You sacrificed so that you could cover the trial for everybody.
Put our wonderful listeners into your shoes and tell them about what was the trial experience like for you guys and
what was it like in the moment when the verdict was finally read. >> It was an it was a battle. It was uh we
did not get media passes because we're podcasters and um the judge was like nope. So, and honestly, even the people
who did get media passes that a lot of them still had to wait in line certain days. It was a very small courtroom,
limited amount of seats. I think there were usually about like 25 seats. Kind of varied dayto-day.
>> We should say when we talk about waiting in line, it it's not like waiting in
line to get something at the grocery store. You had to get in line in the early days of the trial. You'd have to
get in line like at 1:00 a.m. for a trial that would begin at 9:00 a.m. And then as the trial progressed, you'd have
to get in line earlier and earlier. And by the end, by the when the trial would finish for one day, there would already
be a line forming for the next day. And also, so the judge decreed that you can't get out of your seat in the day
and then get your seat back. Once you get out of your seat, you forfeit it. So you can't go and take a restroom break.
So that meant we couldn't eat anything or drink anything for the morning or really for the afternoon session either.
So you're very dehydrated and hungry and you're also sleepd deprived because you
got in line so early. It's also very cold out. And there's also kind of a weird threat of violence because most of
the people in line were super nice and people got along pretty well, at least in the beginning. But we've been
threatened before. We've gotten threats from people. And so there's always that worry in the back of your head. Are they
going to show show up and start shooting or try to beat us up or something? So there's that. Also, getting in getting a
seat in the morning does not guarantee a seat in the afternoon. So you have to get back in line in the lobby uh after
the morning session in order to get another seat. So and there's constant fighting and oh this person cut me in
line and all this stuff. There's like a lot of drama eventually. The judge seems
to keep changing the rules cuz in the beginning if you got a seat in the morning that was your seat in the
afternoon but then she's like no everyone vacate the courtroom and go down no first line up in the hallway.
No, now go downstairs. So, you sort of feel like you're playing musical chairs, except like there's no music and it's
it's just bad vibes all around. I guess it was uh it was really insane. But we had a lot of help. I mean, that was the
only way we got through this was getting help from people who sat in line for us
because by we we really didn't want to do that. We were like, we want to stand in line ourselves. We don't want to be
like hiring people or doing anything, but people volunteered. And I think that saved us cuz we were
starting to like visually hallucinate by the end. By the end of when we were staying up all night doing this, it was
it was getting bad. >> Well, in fairness to the judge's decision, uh podcasters are the lowest
form of content creators. >> I I having been through this, I can't like be that mad about it because I'm
like now we're self-hating podcasters. Well, and and talk about the the verdict. When the verdict was finally
read and being present for that, what was the reaction in the courtroom and around the courtroom?
>> We had these wonderful, lovely people who let us kind of hang out. They had this house that they were sort of
renovating and doing construction around, but it was a nice place to go to kind of just sit down and, you know,
warm up and have like a break once in a while. So, we were there and we got the news that a verdict had come in and I I
love that place because they had these wonderful cats and I would just play with the cats and they were like my
therapy cats throughout this whole thing. So, shout out to Stuart and Sheldon. But, so we get this tech, we
get, you know, like, hey, there's a verdict. And it had been a couple of days. So, I at that point was like,
maybe it is going to be a mistrial. I think Kevin was still hold kind of believed that it would be a conviction.
and we were convinced that it was going to be a conviction once the verdict came
in. >> We knew that after sitting through that trial and hearing all the evidence that
he would not be acquitted. So we knew it was either going to be a conviction or a
mistrial because of a hung jury. And so as soon as we found out there was a verdict, we we knew he's been convicted.
And then there was a gap of I think an hour or so after the time it was announced they had a verdict and before
the verdict was revealed. It was it was awkward because a number of people did not share our certainty that it
would be a conviction. And I remember we we talked to a reporter I think on television and they said what do you
think is going to happen? And and I said a conviction. And I think the reporter gasped and said really?
>> Yeah. And people afterwards were like, "Are you sure?" Like, "I mean, I think
that might this might be an acquitt." And we're like, "Nope, we're definitely right." Like, we're just being obnoxious
about it because we've we have no social skills because we've gone totally feral
during this trial. And >> you've listened to the podcast. >> You know how we are. You know how we
are. So, we're just like, "No, no, no. We're it's definitely he's going to prison." And and people were just
shocked. And one thing I remember, we were like kind of power walked over to the court cuz it's, you know, we were
pretty nearby. And there was this one really nice lady we met who was covering it herself. She's walking by. She's
like, "Hey guys." And we're like, "There's a verdict." And she's like, "What?" Like, she just starts running.
And there's like kind of almost a panic outside because everyone's trying to fight to get in. We at that point made
the executive decision. We don't care about getting in. Like, one of the reasons we kept fighting to get in was
because there were people going and like lying about what was going on inside. Like they would go and they'd cover it
and it would have no bearing on reality. So, we fought to get in to counteract that
>> during the trial. during the trial, but we were like, there's no point in fighting to get in now because no one's
going to be able to lie about a verdict. So, we just didn't really care anymore.
So, we hang out outside on the sidewalk. There's all this weirdness going on. This one lady's like singing hymns. It's
just all very extra, but there's like, you know, there's like a big anticipation. And then finally, people
start walking out of the courthouse. I think I kind of I don't know if you remember this, Kevin. I remember someone
yelling guilty on all counts. a cheer went up in the crowd. It seemed like the crowd was mostly pretty happy about
that. And but you could see certain people who were big defense partisans, they they almost just looked shell
shocked. They looked struck like they had no idea that was going to happen. There was some shock, but there was a
lot of uh relief, I think. >> So, you guys are are dialed in much much more than most people involved. And
Kevin, especially with your background, you are a helping hand in allowing the rest of us to understand that. But where
does this stand? Where does Richard Allen's appeals stand? What's the next part of this process that hopefully
leads to him spending the rest of his days and serving out the 130ear sentence that he received? The next thing that's
going to happen is that his appellet attorneys are going to file a brief in which they are going to try to argue
that the trial was unfair. And I should stress two things. First of all, the appellet attorneys are different from
the attorneys who represented him in the trial. And the appellet attorneys have an excellent reputation. And so I
imagine they will do a great job with the brief. But I'd also like to add it's very very rare for a conviction to get
overturned and so I don't expect that to happen here. They've indicated that one
of the things they will be arguing is that it was unfair that the judge didn't allow third-party stuff to come in. That
it wasn't fair that the judge didn't let the attorneys go in and accuse other people of committing the crime even
though there was no evidence. those people committed the crime. And they've also indicated that they are going to
try to argue that the search of Richard Allen's home was improper and that the things seized during that search should
not have been admitted into evidence. And I think that's also a very weak claim that I don't expect to succeed.
>> And I apologize, Captain. I have to jump in because I got to get there. And this
is just purely your guys's opinion, but sorry, there's no nice way to put this. How freaking dumb does the defense team
look when they're pointing the finger at this Odinism idea when you had two suspects that you very likely could have
worked into the trial much easier than this Odinism theory? Yeah, we know that law enforcement went down that rabbit
hole. let's a rabbit hole, let's call it. But you have here you have Ron Logan who we know that they conducted a
search, right? They they filed for a search warrant and you also have Kean Klene who at times even admits
involvement and has a communication with one of the victims. It it's it's like if
you were going to pick somebody to point the finger at, why the hell did they go
in this direction? It just seems so blatantly dumb that the the obvious places to point the finger were right
there in front of you the whole time. >> Well, don't give them any ideas. >> Well, no. I mean, you're right. I mean,
he's It's too late. And and and those would have been better suspects in our opinion. We were shocked that they
didn't go those routes. We thought that those would be the natural fit for a third party. And if people are
wondering, I mean, they did try to get them in at the third party hearing, but they really, really did not put in a lot
of effort, especially with Logan. It was just sort of like, yeah, here's Ron Logan. Anyway, they didn't seem to care
much about that. So, I have some theories, and I just want to be clear. I'm speculating here because the defense
team would not talk to us for this book. So, we don't know what was in their heads. it. I think when you look at this
from like a storytelling perspective, the Odinist theory is the most exciting because it's a cult. It's a mysterious
group of evil white supremacists in the woods sacrificing people. It's almost out of a pulp novel. It's almost out of
some like weird detective magazine that you'd read in like the 1940s. So, I think the storytellers in them that
appealed to them because they knew it was going to get a lot of media interest, maybe even more so than this
kind of ornery property owner who was accused of uh domestic abuse and a sexual predator. It was just going to be
something that was really exciting for the press to cover. And I think they were I think they were obviously
motivated to try to get as much press attention and and stuff out of this as possible. I mean, they were literally
filming themselves work like like they wanted that attention. It's sort of like wanting a lot of attention is the root
of all evil in this case because whenever people are motivated by that versus like what's the right thing to
do, it just seems things go off the rails. So, that's one aspect of it. And then the other aspect of it is Richard
Allen starts confessing to the crime and I think they wanted to have a way to be
able to cast doubt on that and they encountered these guards in the prison who had like a Norse symbol on like a
patch on their uniform. And let's just be clear, you can be a Norse pagan and not be evil or racist or a white
supremacist. You can just you can just dig Odin and Thor and all that. I mean, it's it's a religion. There's an element
of it that is white supremacist and then there's another element that's not. It's
just, you know, it's just people with their religion, whatever. It's an it's a not a common religion, but it doesn't
mean that people who are Norse pagan are bad people. So, I think when they saw that, they thought, "Oh, we can tie this
all together into a big conspiracy and make it out that like everyone's in on it. the state of Indiana like you know
the police are covering up for the odinness. I think they just almost got ahead of themselves and they were
thinking more like YouTubers and I don't mean just like any YouTubers. I mean conspiracy YouTubers. They were thinking
more like that than lawyers because like a lot of the things they did just didn't
make any sense as far as benefiting their own client. Well, and also sometimes there's symbols that mean one
thing and then we can make assumptions of what their meaning is. But I also heard speculation early on when these
defense attorneys signed on. Like I said, when they first talked, I was like uh shocked by their intelligence at
first and thought the state's in for a fight. But I heard speculation from from jump that these individuals were more
interested in being involved in a documentary or writing a book. >> Yeah. I think they It's funny because I
think they seem to think that the prosecutor was like this small town attorney who was out of his league. And
I think in the end Rosie and Baldwin were small town attorneys, way out of their league. Like I think they really
overestimated their own abilities, right? >> And you don't want to have here's an
example. They both seem to get sort of emotionally invested in this case in a way that I think is inappropriate. It's
okay to care about your client and it's okay to really fight for them and to form a bond and that's all great, but
once you're just letting your emotions make all the decisions, that's not good. And and their emotions I think were more
selfish than they probably even want to realize. I think they came into this and
thought that this would be a case that would put them on the map and they wanted to make it as dramatic as
possible because that's what makes a that that's what gets you in a documentary. If you just defend your
client to the hilt and do it in a quiet and thoughtful way, that's not as sexy as we're the we're the uh lawyers who
solve the case and, you know, expose the cult that controls all of Indiana. that's a lot bigger and better as far as
a narrative is concerned. But I think they just they got they they were just goofy at some point. It was just
embarrassing to watch. I mean, I think they overestimated themselves, but I think they also really underestimated
the prosecutor. >> Want me to ask the last question? >> Hit him hard, Captain. >> Do it.
>> Well, this is not going to be a hard question. Um, >> take it easy on him, Captain.
>> Come on. Give us mercy. >> All right. Fall is in the air. The smell of bonfires.
Autumn leaves are falling. Right. We're in the Midwest. You could call me Kathleen Kelly. I'm walking down the
streets of New York with my pixie cut, my pencil skirt, and a my penny loafers, carrying my Pride and Prejudice book. I
love the fall. So, in that spirit, to end on a a fun note, pumpkin pie or pumpkin spice latte?
>> That is a good and hard question. I thought you were going easy on us. I got to say pumpkin pie.
>> I got Yeah, I don't drink uh tea or coffee or hot drinks. I don't believe in it. So, I go with pumpkin pie.
>> But I will say I do like a nice PSL once in a while. But my my pref preference is
chai latte. But but a pumpkin pie, that's just classic. >> Well, you're both wrong because the
answer is pumpkin beer. So there we go. Thanks for joining us here in the garage.
>> Thank you for having us. >> Thank you for having us. You guys are awesome. >> You guys are the tops. And as I said
earlier, you're our neighbors. So don't be a stranger. Let's do this again sometime. And congratulations on the
book. >> Thank you so much. That means a lot coming from you guys. And you guys have
to come visit us in Indiana at some point. [Music]

Shadow of the Bridge /// Part 2 /// 879

Part 2 of 2

www.TrueCrimeGarage.com (http://www.truecrimegarage.com/)

This week we are very excited to have our friends from the Murder Sheet Podcast joining us in the Garage. The Murder Sheet podcast is hosted by journalist Aine Cain and attorney Kevin Greenlee. The show explores many cases but over the years has had a heavy focus on the Burger Chef Murders and the Delphi Murders. In late August 2025 Aine and Kevin released their Pegasus Crime published book - The Shadow of the Bridge: the Delphi murders and the dark side of the American heartland. They have joined us to talk all things Delphi.

We are running out of True Crime Garage Halloween shirts and hoodies. LIMITED EDITION 2025 HALLOWEEN shirts and other great True Crime Garage swag is available on our website’s “MERCH" page.

More True Crime Garage can be found on Patreon and Apple subscriptions with our show - Off The Record. Dozens of episodes of Off The Record plus a couple of Bonus episodes and our first 50 when you sign up today.

Thanks for listening and thanks for telling a friend. Be good, be kind, and don’t litter!

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com (https://pcm.adswizz.com) for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Brief Summary

The episode covers the Delphi murders, Richard Allen's confessions, and critiques of the defense team's trial strategy.

Key points

Black Phone 2: A Chilling Sequel. Critics hail it as a cold-blooded masterpiece, scarier than the original.
The New Direction Press Conference. A pivotal moment in the investigation where police revealed new information.
The Mystery of Richard Allen's Phone. The missing phone from the suspect raises questions about the investigation.
Misunderstanding Information. People often come to wrong conclusions due to bad information. "It's not really people's fault in a way."
Defense Team's Conduct. The defense's approach was criticized as being 'slimeball' and not focused on the client. "They seem to be in it to merchandise themselves."
Trial Experience. The media faced challenges getting access to the trial, with long waits and limited seating. "You had to get in line like at 1:00 a.m. for a trial that would begin at 9:00 a.m."

Episode highlights

Episode quotes

It's just a calculated shot in the dark.

Discussing the police's strategy during the press conference.

3:25WatchOct 14, 2025

Tension

75/ 100High tension

More from True Crime Garage TV

Solve the Crime

Read a real case one clue at a time, then see how your call held up against the investigators.