Richard Allen’s sentencing for the 2017 murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German in Delphi, Indiana, marked a profound moment of closure and controversy. On December 20, 2024, Judge Frances Gull delivered the maximum sentence of 130 years, two consecutive 65-year terms, to the man convicted of one of Indiana’s most harrowing crimes. The courtroom was charged with emotion as the families of the victims shared their pain, but the day’s proceedings also reignited intense debates over the integrity of the investigation and the fairness of Allen’s trial. The sentencing hearing began with emotional victim impact statements that laid bare the anguish felt by the families of Abby and Libby. Abby’s grandmother, Diana Erskin, spoke of sleepless nights haunted by crime scene photos, while Libby’s mother, Kerry Timmons, described a path of destruction left by Allen’s actions. The families’ grief was palpable, their words searing—a demand for justice and a desire for closure that could never be fully realized. However, the day’s events were as much about the case’s unresolved questions as they were about the conviction. Richard Allen’s defense attorneys had argued throughout the trial that his confessions were not credible, claiming they were the product of mental duress and “situational psychosis” brought on by his prolonged isolation in prison. These confessions, made during phone calls with his wife, included the chilling admission, “I did it. I killed Abby and Libby.” Yet, the defense maintained that the circumstances surrounding these statements—and their admissibility—warranted scrutiny. Central to the prosecution’s case was the discovery of an unspent .40 caliber bullet at the crime scene. Forensic analysis linked the cartridge to Allen’s Sig Sauer P226 firearm. This connection was pivotal in securing his conviction, but it was not without contention. The defense questioned the reliability of the forensic methods used, suggesting that the evidence lacked the scientific rigor needed for such a consequential case. Moreover, audio recordings recovered from Libby’s phone, capturing the infamous “Down the hill” command, were presented as circumstantial evidence. However, no definitive voice analysis linked the recordings to Allen, raising further doubts about the prosecution’s narrative. The trial’s controversies extended beyond the evidence. Judge Gull’s decision to exclude the defense’s alternative theory—that members of a Norse pagan group, known as Odinists, were responsible for the murders—became a focal point of criticism. Allen’s attorneys argued that this theory was supported by evidence pointing to ritualistic elements at the crime scene. The exclusion of this theory, they contended, deprived Allen of a fair opportunity to present his defense. The procedural limitations imposed on the defense team compounded these concerns. Despite the gruesome nature of the crime and the emotional weight of the case, questions about other potential suspects lingered. Notably, Kegan Kline, a man accused of using a fake social media profile to communicate with Libby, remained a figure of interest. Similarly, the late Ron Logan, on whose property the girls’ bodies were found, had faced scrutiny in the early stages of the investigation. The lack of a comprehensive exploration of these avenues left some observers questioning whether the true scope of the case had been fully uncovered. For the families of Abby and Libby, the sentencing provided a measure of justice, but it came with a heavy cost. The crime scene photo leak in 2023 had forced them to relive their trauma repeatedly, with images circulating online despite their efforts to halt the dissemination. Becky Patty, Libby’s grandmother, spoke passionately about the need for accountability, not only for the crime but also for the harm caused by the mishandling of sensitive materials. Judge Gull’s remarks during sentencing underscored the gravity of the case. Addressing Allen directly, she noted his dismissive demeanor, including moments of eye-rolling during the proceedings. Her words reflected the collective outrage felt by the community, but they also highlighted the deep divisions in public opinion about the trial’s fairness. As she lifted the gag order that had silenced parties involved for over two years, the broader implications of the case’s handling began to emerge. A significant point of contention in the Delphi community is the growing belief that they have been lulled into a false sense of security by the very institutions they trusted to protect them. Many feel that law enforcement failed to do their jobs, ignored crucial clues and signs, and ultimately covered up their missteps by deleting evidence. This perception has fueled skepticism about Richard Allen’s guilt, with some arguing that the rush to convict him may have been an attempt to obscure investigative failures. ...
