February 3, 2025 • 42 mins
First, the white van. Prosecutors claimed a white van spooked Allen before he could rape the girls.
Second, Ron Logan’s confession. Logan owned the property where Abby Williams and Libby German were killed. He lied to police about his alibi, gave reporters tours of the property, and pointed out where the girls were found. An FBI agent wrote that Logan’s physical build matched the “Bridge Guy” in the video taken from Libby’s phone, and his voice was “not inconsistent” with the person heard in the clip. Allen’s defense team claims Logan confessed to killing the girls while in prison on a probation violation.
Third, Allen’s prison transfer. His attorneys argue that Carroll County Circuit Judge Benjamin Diener, who approved the search warrant for Allen’s home, helped Sheriff Leazenby draft the safekeeping order and should have recused himself.
They claim Allen had the right for another judge to review and issue the safekeeping order and an “absolute right” to refuse transfer into state custody. Because the order was never served to Allen or his attorney, Brett Gibson, they were unable to challenge it. Allen’s lawyers argue the state violated his constitutional rights under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Lastly, a reported connection involving a pair of headphones. At trial, defense expert Stacy Eldridge testified that someone appeared to have plugged headphones into Libby’s phone at 5:44 p.m. on February 13 and removed them at 10:32 p.m. the same day. This contradicted the state’s timeline.
The state’s phone expert, ISP 1st Sgt. Chris Cecil, testified after conducting a Google search that dirt or water damage could have caused the logged activity. The defense argues they had no opportunity to counter this claim. Eldridge testified she was “unaware of any scientific or technological research suggesting that water or dirt damage to an iPhone 6s would cause the phone to inaccurately log wired headphones in or out.” Since the state never argued Allen returned to the crime scene, the defense claims that if a jury accepted Eldridge’s analysis, the state’s “narrative is impossible.
Joining Nancy Grace today:
- Greg Morse – Partner at the law firm of King Morse, PLLC. Current CJA counsel (Southern District of Florida), Former West Palm Beach Public Defender’s Office. Author: “The Untested” found on Amazon
- Dr. Bethany Marshall – Author: “Deal Breaker,” featured in hit show: “Paris in Love” on Peacock https://www.drbethanymarshall.com/ , Instagram & TikTok: drbethanymarshall, X: @DrBethanyLive
- Sheryl McCollum – Cold Case Investigative Research Institute Founder & Host of “Zone 7;” X: @149Zone7
- Bill Daly – Former FBI Investigator and Forensic Photography, Security Expert
- Scott Eicher – A founding member of the FBI’s Cellular Analysis Survey Team (C.A.S.T); Historical Cellular Analysis Expert; Former FBI agent of 22 years; Former Police Officer and Homicide Detective with Norfolk Virginia Police Dept. having served 12 years; Currently with Precision Cellular Analysis handling Criminal, Defense and Civil case
- Joe Scott Morgan – Professor of Forensics: Jacksonville State University, Author, “Blood Beneath My Feet,” and Host: “Body Bags with Joseph Scott Morgan;” Twitter/X: @JoScottForensic
- Susan Hendricks – J
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Crime Stories with Nancy Grace, hideous crimes the convicted Delphi
child killer Richard Allen to walk free. Is that even possible?
I'm Nancy Grace, this is Crime Stories. Thank you for
(00:23):
being with us.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
We also know by three o'clock nobody's hearing them. They're
nobody's screaming, nobody's running, nobody's calling on their phones. Again,
this was a very fast deal. And y'all here's the reality.
Most children that are going to be murdered or murdered
in the first three hours.
Speaker 3 (00:45):
That's right.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
Convicted child killer A jury said he murdered Abby and Libby,
their bodies found practically drained of blood in a remote
area a treussel Bridge. He was convicted, and now he
is back in court citing new evidence that demands a
(01:09):
new trial.
Speaker 3 (01:11):
How is this possible?
Speaker 1 (01:13):
Well, the first thing he is claiming is all about
a guy named Ron Logan.
Speaker 4 (01:23):
Listen, we're other names mentioned throughout this long period of
time before anyone was in custody, Daniel Nations, Paul Ederging, Shadowell,
Keeping Klein, Tony Klein, and of course Ron Logan. There
were two searches of his property too, and he was
never arrested or charged with the crime.
Speaker 1 (01:42):
Out of all the suspects, the pois pursons of interest
that police sheriffs investigated. What's different about Ron Logan? And
now Richard Allen comes into court with his fleet of
lawyers demanding to be sent free in the alternative any
trial because of Ron Logan and three other points?
Speaker 3 (02:05):
So what's so special about Ron Logan? Listen.
Speaker 5 (02:08):
Tommie Dillman is the ex girlfriend of Ron Logan. Their
six year relationship had come to an end by the
time of the Delphi murders. Dilman believes ron Logan is
the killer. She says the voice on the tape saying
down the Hill is absolutely him. She also claims that
Logan was violent and when she refused him sex one night,
he hit her with a wrench, causing seven stitches.
Speaker 6 (02:28):
Their bodies were found on his property, his house, only
fourteen hundred feet away from where the girls were discovered.
Logan matched to the appearance of the man in the
blue jacket walking on the bridge that was captured in
snapchat footage taken by the girls just before they disappeared.
Ron Logan was questioned by detectives at length, but police
let him go and moved on to other potential suspects.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
That's not all The defense is claiming that Ron Logan
confessed to the murders of Abby and Libby.
Speaker 3 (03:04):
This is nothing new, listen.
Speaker 7 (03:07):
Ron Logan confesses to fellow inmate Ricky Davis that he
was walking and talking with the girls about knowing one
of their fathers. When one of the girls wanted to
turn around. Logan grabs Abby's shoulder, causing Libby to freak out,
and one of the girls says something about calling the police.
Logan asked if they want to see his animals, including horses,
and Abby wanted to go. Libby did not. This led
to a scuffle and Logan got hit in the nose,
(03:29):
and he pulled out a box cutter and attacked Libby,
cutting her throat. Logan said he took Abby somewhere and
eventually cut her neck too.
Speaker 8 (03:37):
Hours after killing the girls, he came back because he
wanted to move Libby to an area where she wouldn't
be found. He says he burned his clothes in a
burn pit with boots, gloves, and a bag, but feared
drops of blood from his nose may have ended up
on the girl's.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
Clothes, lots of inconsistencies with ron Logan's so called jailhouse
confession with the facts as we know them, and I'm
talking about forensic evidence straight out to Susan Hendricks, joining
US investigative journalist and author of Down the Hill, My
Descent into the double murder in Delphi. She was there
(04:15):
every single day of testimony, Susan Hendrix. Now Richard Allen's defense,
his fleet of defense attorney's demand freedom or a new
trial based on four points, the first being ron Logan.
Speaker 3 (04:30):
What happened with ron Logan?
Speaker 1 (04:32):
Who is this guy? And why do we care? We
knew about ron Logan at the get go.
Speaker 9 (04:37):
He was ruled out absolutely, Nancy, it's good to see you.
And last night I spoke to at the time detective
who is a big part of this, Jerry Holman, and
he said to me, look, Susan, we investigated ron Logan excessively,
meaning two searches of the property. But what is different here?
Soon after the murders, allegedly ron Logan confess. That's what
(05:01):
the defense attorneys are saying, confessed to someone he was
in jail with. He was in jail for four plus
months because he violated probation. And I remember he left
court and said next time, I won't have girls murdered
on my property, Ron Logan. But he was investigated. He
did not do this. The investigators looked into him. Of
course it was on his property. But I go back
(05:23):
Nancy to Libby's phone when Abby says, we heard it
in court, don't leave me up here? Well, then when
did she talk about the horses after that? I believe
that evidence on Libby's phone makes it Richard Allen and
him putting himself there.
Speaker 3 (05:37):
Okay, repeat very slowly what you just said.
Speaker 9 (05:40):
It was Libby's phone, he put himself there, and it
lines up with who was on Libby's phone, bridge guy?
And we saw it in court. And what we did
see and was a man approaching on the bridge, coming
up behind Abby. And she says, and you could hear
it on Libby's cell phone, don't leave me here, and
(06:01):
then you see them you hear the voice.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
Fine, maybe true, Susan Hendricks. In fact, all of that
is true.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
However, the defense is claiming the guy on the bridge
is Ron Logan joining me. In addition to investigative reporter
Susan Hendrix, who literally has written the book. Cheryl McCollum
is with US Cold Case Research Institute, founder and star
of Zone seven podcast.
Speaker 3 (06:27):
Cheryl McCollum. We sat through testimony.
Speaker 1 (06:29):
You have extensively investigated the scene. What do you make
of the claim that Ron Logan's confession should have come
in to evidence.
Speaker 10 (06:42):
Number One, you're talking about a man that now cannot
defend himself and say whether or not he did or
did not make that claim. Number Two, Allen never said
he saw another man, not on the trail or the bridge,
So where was he that Alan himself would not have
seen it. Alan placed himself on the bridge at the
(07:05):
time the girls were there. He claimed he saw the
other witnesses that were young females. At no time did
he see anybody else that was a man.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
To Susan Hendrix, ron Logan's confession did not come in
in front of that jury for many reasons.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
Why.
Speaker 9 (07:26):
Yeah, it was known. And that is one of the
questions that I asked now Lieutenant Jerry Holman last night
and said is this new? And he said no, they
both had it. They didn't bring it into evidence. And
he also stated, and this is key, that he failed
a polygraph. The prisoner who says, hey, ron Logan, and
it is specific. We heard it off the top of
the show. What allegedly ron Logan did well? He failed
(07:48):
that so and nothing ever tied him as Charyl'm.
Speaker 1 (07:51):
Saying the inmate to whom Logan confessed failed a polly yes,
and Ron Logan's dead.
Speaker 3 (08:01):
He can't be brought in. Okay. Joining me right now.
Speaker 1 (08:04):
Is Greg Morse, partner at law firm King Morse, veteran
trial lawyer and author of the Untested on Amazon. Okay, Greg,
before you light into me with your defense theories, can
we just agree that the first thing you do when
you have an inmate claiming they have information, you find
(08:28):
out in many jurisdictions it's called hall Hll issue. Has
the inmate been offered a deal in exchange for the testimony,
such as a lighter sentence.
Speaker 3 (08:41):
That's the first thing you look at, would you agree,
one hundred.
Speaker 11 (08:44):
Percent, Nancy, That's the first thing you look at, because
jail house snitches are notoriously lack of credibility, and they're
generally looking for a deal. I have not seen any
information that this inmate was looking for a deal, but
my guess is he probably was.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
I mean Greg, speaking just as a lawyer, not a
former prosecutor. Right now.
Speaker 3 (09:05):
Of course, they're looking for a deal.
Speaker 1 (09:07):
They're sitting in four walls the rest of their life
very often, and if they see a light at the
end of the tunnel, by snitching out or giving even
a fake statement, they'll do it to get out. Susan Handricks,
Did I hear you say. Let me make sure I
understand this that both sides had Ron Logan's confession.
Speaker 3 (09:30):
Did the defense seek to enter it?
Speaker 9 (09:33):
Well, I know he was on the witness list for
the hearing at the end of the summer, the preliminary
hearing to see if the defense could have a third
party defense. So he was on that witness list. He
could have been called, but he wasn't. It wasn't mentioned
they went with the o'ness theory. Now to me, in
my opinion, they want to go to the Ron Logan theory.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
Now, okay, I'm going to get back to the odness theory.
Since it didn't come in, I'm not addressing it right
now and it's not being raised as new evidence. Okay,
Greg Morris, he needed the answer to that question before
I take out my guns and fire at you. The
defense is claiming this is newly discovered evidence.
Speaker 3 (10:10):
It's not. They had Logan before he died.
Speaker 1 (10:14):
They had Logan's fake confession before he died, and they
chose not to bring in Logan. They cannot complain about
a strategic maneuver they pulled during the trial. One, it's
not newly discovered evidence. Two, it was their decision not
(10:35):
to bring in the Logan confession.
Speaker 3 (10:37):
That would have been I would have been running.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
Across the courthouse steps in front of the jury, up
and down those steps. I took them many times with
Ron Logan's confession in my hand. They chose not to
use it and go with some cocamane odinism. You know
what odinism is, right, the Norse gods like they were
(11:01):
going to go with thor worshipers committed the murders as
part of some sacred ritual.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
They chose that over logan insanity.
Speaker 11 (11:10):
It is completely seems like a misstep from the defense
in the sense that you don't need Logan to testify
to get the fact that the police investigated him and
this person confessed. It goes in. It comes in under
the police's investigation and why they did what they did.
So I don't know why the defense left that out
(11:32):
and focused on a Norse god and ritualistic killings when
there was a lot of information that could have led
to this logan potentially or at least created as we
know reasonable doubt. However, you can't look at these issues
in a vacuum, Nancy. This dovetailed with the other three issues.
It becomes more important after the fact. But you are right,
(11:54):
it's going to be a hurdle for the defense that
they had the opportunity to bring this stuff up. And
I didn't see any new evidence that was created that
would excuse me.
Speaker 3 (12:04):
Okay, And that's a lot of words. Why use one
word when you can use two hundred, Okay, Greg.
Speaker 1 (12:13):
Bottom line, now is the time for newly discovered evidence.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
If there really is newly.
Speaker 1 (12:19):
Discovered evidence that exonerates Richard Allen, which is total BS
technical legal term. If there is such evidence, there deserves
to be a hearing. Okay, this is not new evidence period.
Their blunder at trial is their fault. Now you've got
logan dead now and the innmatefield to polygraph. So I
(12:44):
don't know how much it would have helped them. I
don't know that they could have gotten it.
Speaker 3 (12:49):
In under the rules of hearsay.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
But to Susan Hendrix, why is Logan ron Logan the
single best candidate.
Speaker 3 (12:59):
For or the defense to hone in on now?
Speaker 9 (13:02):
So a key part of this that the defense is
saying why they want to bring in ron Logan now,
is a box cutter the alleged weapon Because in this
supposed confession that ron Logan confessed too that he did it,
he said he did it with a box cutter. So
when autopsy was done on Abby and Libby at graphic
(13:23):
brutal pictures that we saw in that courtroom, and the
gentleman who performed that said, maybe it could have been
a box cutter. So that's what they're saying, Hey, wait
a minute, that can't be coincidental. If it was a
box cutter, then we need to bring this back in
because ron Logan confessed that it was a box cutter,
so let's bring him in. We would have if we
knew that detail, they're said.
Speaker 1 (13:43):
And then you have the issue of Logan seeking a
fake alibi for the time the girls were murdered.
Speaker 3 (13:53):
That doesn't look good, listen, ron.
Speaker 10 (13:55):
Logan does not have an alibi.
Speaker 12 (13:57):
According to cell tower data, his phone was at his
property at two oh nine pm. We know from the
video that Libby took on her phone that the girls
were approached on the bridge.
Speaker 3 (14:07):
At two thirteen.
Speaker 12 (14:08):
Ron had claimed for many years that he was on
surveillance video at this tropical fish store in Lafayette some
thirty minutes away, but that story didn't have surveillance videos.
There is no proof that he was elsewhere. That does
not mean that he's the killer of the girls, but
his alibi does not check out.
Speaker 3 (14:26):
What is your last memory dropping.
Speaker 10 (14:29):
Her off at their house with their paints?
Speaker 9 (14:32):
And it wasn't until later on when we got to
the Sheriff's department it actually saw the snapchat picture.
Speaker 2 (14:40):
But that's the last picture I have as the last
visual I have with little girl.
Speaker 13 (14:44):
So that bridge.
Speaker 1 (14:46):
Richard Allen and his defense team back in court. Who
is Richard Allen, the man convicted, the pharmacy tech who
likely watched the two little girls, Abby and Libby coming
in and out and in and out of his pharmacy
every week.
Speaker 3 (15:05):
Him convicted in the.
Speaker 1 (15:07):
Murders of Abby and Libby, and now back in court
stating that newly discovered evidence will set him free. Well,
you got another thought coming Richard Allen. He is claiming
number one that Ron Logan, that guy is the real killer.
(15:30):
But to everyone on the panel, take a look at
Ron Logan compared to the composite sketch, and Ron Logan
compared to the man on the bridge.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
It's not him.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Now look at this Richard Allen compared to the composite
sketch and the man on the bridge.
Speaker 3 (15:56):
Should I believe Richard Allen? My lion I, Cheryl McCollum,
it's not him. It's Richard Allen and Nancy.
Speaker 14 (16:05):
There's another component we haven't talked about. We also had
the killer's voice. The defense put up nobody that said
that was not Richard Allen. Nobody came forward, not to
former girlfriend, not a neighbor. Nobody came forward and said
that sounds like Logan.
Speaker 4 (16:24):
No one.
Speaker 3 (16:25):
Cheryl McCollum, you're right.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
The defense brought no one because they chose not to
pursue Ron Logan as the sod some other dude that
did it. And they did have someone. The former girlfriend
of Logan, she stated to police that when she saw
the shot of the man on the.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
Bridge, she thought, well, there's Ron Logan.
Speaker 1 (16:47):
She thought that was Logan and that when she heard
the voice that she thought that was Logan's voice. They
could have brought her on, but they didn't. Let me
go quickly to Joseph Scott Morgan joining US professor forensic
Jacksonville State University, renowned death investigator, author of Blood Beneath
(17:11):
My Feet on Amazon, and star of a hit podcast,
Body Bags, with Joe Scott Morgan.
Speaker 3 (17:17):
Joe Scott, could you just.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
Give us all a reminder of what happened to Abby
and well.
Speaker 15 (17:25):
To kind of break it down as best we can
in these moments, their throats were cut fancy and let's
think about that. That's the baseline because when we began
to think about their cause of death, as you like
to say, the cod we have essentially Abby who has
(17:45):
got a singular two inch laceration to her throat. And
then with Libby it's a bit more dynamic in the
sense that the forensic pathologists identified that she had four
overlapping lacerations or let's just say in sized injuries or
(18:05):
cuts to her throat, both of these. In both cases
Nancy affected the juggler vein. And can I make one
quick comment please about this reactionary kind of event that
defense is alleging took place, I guess on the bridge
where he snapped back in a reactionary form and essentially
(18:30):
cut the throat. And Nancy, one of the big questions
I would have is if that happened up on the bridge,
we would see a copious amount of blood worked, thousands
of throats being cut unfortunately over my career, and you
bleed more profusely out of that location than just about
(18:50):
anywhere in the body. There would be blood trails leading
to specific locations that would have been very recognizable. I mean,
are they postulating that he goes up with clorox and
cleans up the bridge so that you can't identify this
on the cross ties or any other location. I just
don't think this is plausible based upon these injuries.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
Nancy to Susan Hendrix joining us in investigative journalists, who
literally has written the book on the Delphi murders of
Abby and Libby. People gasped, started crying, grabbed each other, hugging.
Speaker 3 (19:30):
Girars tried to look away from the shots of Abby
and Libby. They were displayed for anyone in the courtroom
to see. And isn't it true?
Speaker 1 (19:41):
Susan that the ground around the girls was still saturated
in blood.
Speaker 3 (19:49):
When their bodies were found.
Speaker 9 (19:51):
Yeah, just huge puddles of blood. And you're right, there
were gasps in that courtroom. And I remember Natcy during
the victim impact statement the day he was sentenced, Diane,
Abby's grandmother, and Abby's grandfather, Eric, they read their victim
impact statements and I remember Diane saying, look, Abby wasn't
a daredevil. She was worried, she was concerned. Don't leave
(20:14):
me up here. And then seeing the crime scene photos,
it was horrific to see and knowing the long term
effects on the family members and what those girls went
through in the last moments. But the victim impacts statements
to me were so powerful, saying we sat through this
every day. We can't imagine what the girls went through,
and this is generational the pain inflicted on us. But
(20:36):
you were right seeing those and Eric said, Abby's grandfather,
they're worse than I even thought they could.
Speaker 3 (20:49):
Crime Stories with Nancy Grace.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
Two, doctor Bethony Marshall joining us, renowned psychoanalyst out of
the LA jurisdiction, author of deal Breaker.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
You can see her.
Speaker 1 (21:02):
On Peacock now at Dr Bethany Marshall dot com, Doctor Bethany.
The fact that Richard Allen and his defense team are
raising these four issues, ron Logan.
Speaker 3 (21:15):
Being one of them, as a bid.
Speaker 1 (21:17):
For freedom or a new trial, how does that affect
Abby and Libby's family?
Speaker 16 (21:25):
Nancy? The fact that Richard Allen could be roaming public
around that town where there are other children, other families,
and putting girls at risk is absolutely terrifying, first of all,
secondarily unfair, Nancy. What I want to contrast is what
the families saw in court, the blood, the lacerations, the cuts,
(21:51):
their daughters and granddaughters dead, compared to Logan and Alan
and the inmate who were talking about it, the incarcerated guy.
Those men are bragging. It's become an urban myth for them.
I did it, No I did it, No I did it.
It's like these guys are allegedly asserting themselves into the
(22:12):
notoriety of the crime, reliving the sexual excitement, turning it
over in their head, and talking about it like a
great movie that they all went to together, whereas the
family and the people in the court will have those
images seared into their mind forever. As a secondary post
traumatic stress response, looking at those images. They'll never be
(22:34):
able to get the images out.
Speaker 9 (22:35):
Of their mind.
Speaker 16 (22:35):
Nancy, I just feel that there's so many sex predators
in the general public that you have one crime near
another person's property, who, now all of a sudden, says
he committed the crime allegedly will never know he's dead now.
Speaker 9 (22:48):
And it makes me think about how pedophiles.
Speaker 16 (22:50):
Congregate and share stories, and how the defense has sort
of taken that up as a strategy to point the
blame towards yet another pedophile alleged patophle file, whereas in fact,
we know Allan did it. That's all already been proven.
Speaker 1 (23:04):
In a Nutshelle Susan Hendricks explain the significance of the
white van.
Speaker 9 (23:09):
Brad Weber was on the stand two times and he
said he left work, and it aligned with the confessions
of Richard Allen. If he was spooked, we believed his
story he looked at a white van. It's only something
he would know he crossed the creek and killed the girls.
So what they're saying is the defense that Libby's phone
stopped moving at a particular time. Well, now from surveillance footage,
(23:30):
it appears that the time is off a bit, so
I thought about this a lot less than I think.
We're listening to Richard Allen and everything. He says, what
if he was spooked by the white van but near
where the bodies were found? I was there after he
was sentenced. I went to where the bodies were found,
and coincidentally you could hear a car. It was Brad
Weber's car, not the white van. Another one, and it
(23:51):
is loud, and it's right there.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
Convicted child killer Richard Allen back in court with his
defense team demanding either freedom or when trial based on
four newly discovered pieces of evidence.
Speaker 3 (24:06):
All along there was an online tied a tsunami wave
against the state.
Speaker 7 (24:15):
Listen some people paying attention to the Richard Allen Delphi
murder trial or taking to social media to pass judgment
on the prosecution and support for the man accused of
killing Libby Jerman and Abbie Williams autumn on ex post.
I reserve the right to be wrong, but I'm absolutely
not seeing how anyone has convinced Richard Allen committed the murders.
Luke Nicholas on X says time for a motion for
(24:36):
directed verdict in the Delphi case. Put it to the jury.
Now the state no longer has enough evidence to overcome
the sculpatory evidence already presented, and Theresa chimes in with
this needs to stop. This has been a huge cover
up from day one. Free Richard Allen and arrest the
real killers already and all involved in the cover up.
Speaker 1 (24:54):
Straight out to Joe Scott Morgan who lived the case
along with many of us. Joscott, you have studied the
physics so carefully. What do you believe is the strongest
evidence against Allen?
Speaker 15 (25:07):
Well, I think that probably for me at least, one
of the things that really stands out, and you kind
of touched on it just a moment ago, Nancy, was
this expended round that was found at the scene. If
you can throw this up on the camera, this is
actually a forty caliber round right here. This is what
it would have looked like. This is in pristine shape.
(25:29):
This scene has been ejected from a weapon which was
actually a six hour so that when this thing is
racked back, it leaves these little striations on the external
portion of the round. That round is tied back to
the weapon that he possessed. Nancy. That's one of the
really big pieces for me relative to relative to the
(25:51):
physical evidence. It's not pure ballistic evidence because this is
an unfired round. However, this is accepted science, Nancy. So
that's one of the big pieces here from me.
Speaker 1 (26:02):
You know, the ballistics evidence cannot be ignored, but the
defense is conveniently doing that, Joe Scott, and they are
focusing on not only Ron Logan's false confession, they are
focusing on the timing of the van as it relates
(26:24):
to the last time the girl's phone was used. And
they are also arguing about Libby Germans cell phone being
used after the state says she's dead.
Speaker 8 (26:40):
Listen shocking moment in the courtroom when former FBI forensic
examiner Stacy Eldridge says Libby Germans phone received a call
at five forty five pm February thirteenth, twenty seventeen, and
within milliseconds a headphone jack was inserted into the phone.
Eldridge says. The headphone jack was removed nearly five hours
lea at ten thirty two pm. Eldridge says, I cannot
(27:04):
think of any explanation that doesn't involve human interaction.
Speaker 1 (27:08):
Joining Scott Iiker, a founding member of the FBI Cellular
Analysis Team, former FBI Scott.
Speaker 3 (27:15):
What are they saying exactly.
Speaker 13 (27:17):
Well, it sounds like they're saying that there was a
headphone plugged into the phone and then removed right after
a call that occurred. It's hard to tell from you know,
the was it not looking at the actual phone and
the extraction of the phone. Why they're saying that. I mean,
there could be several different things that occur. A device
(27:40):
was plugged in, or was somehow the insertion point filled
with dirt or something that allowed it to think that
something was plugged into it.
Speaker 1 (27:51):
Well, the state responded the defense emotion that we're looking
at today demanding either freedom or a new trial.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
Us on to say that.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
Dirt or water could not have clogged the phone. So
what does dirt or water clogging the phone have to
do with this?
Speaker 3 (28:14):
Listen?
Speaker 7 (28:15):
After the shocking news that a headphone jack had been
plugged into Libby Jerman's phone milliseconds after receiving a call
at five point forty five pm February thirteen, the defense
calls back to the stand State Police digital forensic expert
Chris Cecil and asks about the lack of reporting about
the headphone jack data. Cecil said he did a Google
Search and found a headphone jack could register as being
(28:37):
used if water or dirt is in the port. The
defense counter is asking, Cecil, do you normally Google search
when conducting a criminal investigation. Defense attorney Jennifer Auger presses further, saying,
you and the state have had seven and a half
years to research and you came in here with a
Google search.
Speaker 1 (28:56):
The defense is climbing that the girls sell phone was used,
was plugged into a jack after they're dead, clearly arguing
that someone was manipulating the phone, okay, or even the
girls manipulating the phone, which would throw off the state's
(29:17):
timeline because they claimed the phone was used.
Speaker 3 (29:21):
Got it so far?
Speaker 1 (29:23):
Yes, no, I got it and that's the true okay,
So in their motion is the headphone jack?
Speaker 3 (29:29):
Let me tell you the rest.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
So the state brings on so this is not newly discovered,
by the way, again, because that came up at trial
and the state brought on an expert to counter it, claiming, hey,
it got clogged with water and dirt which was at
the scene he alan forced the girls through a creek,
and the defense attorney says, well, what do you have
(29:54):
to support that, and the state's expert said a Google search.
Speaker 3 (30:00):
Story short.
Speaker 1 (30:01):
The defense said, after this long, all you got is
a Google search. I would have said, well, after this long,
why didn't you do a Google search?
Speaker 11 (30:07):
Well, it's not the defense's job to prove their innocence.
That's on the prosecution. And I wish I worked in
a county where experts get on the stand for the
prosecution and rely on Google searches. You know what we've
all seen the mugs. Don't mistake my law degree for
a Google search. Same thing with science. That is appalling
Palmage County. The prosecutors are much better.
Speaker 13 (30:29):
I don't know, I don't know.
Speaker 7 (30:30):
No one else.
Speaker 1 (30:31):
Now you got a totally bass Ackwards Morse. The defense
should have done a Google search and figured out you
can get the same reaction from a cell phone if
it's clogged with dirt or water. You know what, if
you have a question, cell analysis expert, here's your chance.
What about it, Scott, could you explain two Morse? The
(30:55):
state's theory that the reason it looked like her phone
had been plugged into a jack was because it.
Speaker 3 (31:01):
Was clagged with dirt and water, which it.
Speaker 13 (31:03):
Was most definitely. I mean that water is a conductor
of electricity, and it is a very small pound of
electricity when the phone like a phone jack, is plugged
into the bottom of the phone, and it allows that connection.
Right allows that electrical connection to being made waters just
like that right that allows electricital electricity to go through.
(31:28):
Should that have been a Google search on during the trial?
Speaker 1 (31:32):
No?
Speaker 13 (31:32):
Should it have been something that they looked at prior
to going to trial and had an expert come in,
Or shouldn't they have tried that on another phone? I
agree they should definitely should have done that prior to
having this brought up.
Speaker 1 (31:44):
When a minute, Scott iiker, the defense can do it too.
Speaker 3 (31:48):
The defense has subpoena power.
Speaker 1 (31:50):
They're getting paid investigators paid for by you and me
the state for the defense. Yes, we pay for his defense.
So you and Morse are arguing the state should have
done this, and that yes, the defense could have done
it themselves.
Speaker 3 (32:05):
Why didn't they do it?
Speaker 13 (32:06):
I agree, they definitely could have done it themselves too.
That would have been a big thing to bring up
by the defense if they had done that on their own,
but they didn't.
Speaker 3 (32:14):
What about that, Morse?
Speaker 11 (32:15):
Well, again, prosecution has to prove someone is guilty. However,
it sounds like all these issues that you're looking at
to affect the verdict sounds like they really lead to
an ineffective council claim. That's what these issues are. Those
are notoriously last ditch efforts that people convicted file. They
have less than ten percent chance to propose.
Speaker 1 (32:35):
Say you're giving up on the cell phone. You're giving
up on the cell phone giving I know what you're doing.
Speaker 11 (32:45):
You can't have an expert get on the stand and
say they researched Google. This is a court of law,
this is people's lives. We have a constitution that has
a standard. It's not for social media consumption.
Speaker 14 (32:57):
Standing.
Speaker 3 (33:00):
They can't. They can't.
Speaker 11 (33:01):
Well they did in twenty in twenty five years I have.
I would be appalled and I do serious cases like this.
If a prosecutor got up and said, well my expert
did a Google search, that's it. That person is they
have zero credibility.
Speaker 1 (33:18):
Zero susan And what happened? This expert testified and was
on cross exam and I was asked, well, how do
you know that water or dirt can cause the same result?
Speaker 9 (33:31):
They went Google, absolutely absolutely, And Rosie mentioned it in closing.
Speaker 3 (33:36):
What happened? What happened.
Speaker 9 (33:39):
Was they alluded to the fact. The defense is saying, hey,
someone was there, or move Libby because her phone someone
plugs something in. But that doesn't really make sense if
be thinking about it. So the prosecution was saying, yes,
this could happen because of dirt and water, and it
was I was in the courtroom, yes, if I could
see the defense, I looked right at Rosy and Baldwin
and they went like that. They googled it. He googled it.
(34:01):
They mentioned it in the closing argument. He googled this.
Turns out one of the jurors was interviewed on murder
sheet and they said that they kind of put aside.
What they really focused on was Richard Allen, his voice
and putting himself there an interrogation video where his wife
walks in and says, you didn't tell me you were
at the bridge that day. That's what it boiled down to.
(34:22):
But you're right, the.
Speaker 1 (34:23):
Defense they use that attacking the state's witness because they
used to Google search. Everybody on that jury probably relies
on Google, so they're balking up the wrong tree with this.
Speaker 2 (34:34):
We also know by three o'clock nobody's hearing them they're
nobody's screaming, nobody's running, nobody's calling on their phones. Again,
this was a very fast deal, and y'all, here's the
reality most children that are going to be murdered or
murdered in the first three hours.
Speaker 3 (35:03):
Crime stories with Nancy Grace.
Speaker 1 (35:10):
Joining me is former FBI investigator and expert in forensic photography,
Bill Daily, Bill, thank you for being with us. We
were talking earlier about those crime scene photos that made
people start crying in the courtroom, gasp, grab each other
(35:30):
for support. One of your expertise is forensic photography. How
do you get through taking the photographs of crime scenes,
for instance, where two little girls are brutally murdered.
Speaker 3 (35:47):
Well, that's I can tell you.
Speaker 17 (35:47):
You know, the times I've gone to crime scenes where
have been bombings and kidnappings, bank robberies, where people have
been killed, you really have to remove yourself. You really
have to get a step back and say you're doing
it for the victims, You're doing it for the betterment
of society, that you're going to find out who's responsible
for these heenous crimes. And so you kind of look
through the viewfinders you're photographing and documenting the area to
(36:10):
kind of say, this is going to go towards making
justice happen, So you kind of need to put a
bit of a shield.
Speaker 3 (36:17):
Up to protect yourself.
Speaker 17 (36:18):
Otherwise, like you said, here, people looking at it from
the jury box are going to be overwhelmed with the
emotion because you picture yourself. If you start imagining that
those are your children, your nieces and nephews, or mother
or father or sister, brother, it will be too overwhelming.
So that's what you really need to do. You need
to kind of distance yourself and look at it through
the kind of empirical view of a lens to hope
(36:41):
to get to the truth.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
The last major point the defense is bringing up is
the fact that Richard Allen was kept in DSA Department
of Corrections as opposed to another jail. Why do they
care because it was there he was placed in solitary.
Speaker 3 (36:57):
Confinement and gave.
Speaker 1 (37:00):
I think it was sixty one confessions that he murdered
Abby and Lebby Listen.
Speaker 7 (37:07):
The defense also claimed Alan had no absolute right to
refuse being transferred into state custody since the safekeeping order
wasn't served to Allan or his attorney, Breg Gibson. They
never argued against the transfer.
Speaker 3 (37:18):
So another thing that was never brought up. Susan Hendrix.
Speaker 1 (37:22):
The significance of arguing about where he was housed is
because they cannot suppress those statements he gave. Statement after
you can't suppress sixty one confessions right including to your wife,
over the phone, being recorded, to other inmates, to the wardens,
to everybody.
Speaker 3 (37:41):
He told everybody, I did it, so okay, can't suppress those,
So argue the fact that he was in.
Speaker 1 (37:51):
The wrong facility. In a nutshell, explain this argument, I.
Speaker 9 (37:56):
Think, Nancy, this is their strongest point for possibility of
an appeal, which is right after he was arrested, Sheriff
tob Lesbie at the time it was a safe keeping
order said look he won't be safe at Carroll County,
so we have to send him to another prison. Well,
they're saying he should not have been there, of course,
innocent until proven guilty, and they're saying, as you mentioned,
(38:17):
it drove him crazy, so to speak. So that's why
he confessed because of where he was. But the state says,
look he was treated better than other inmates. Get an iPad,
he had a lot more than he would have had,
meaning the psychologist, doctor Walla, he wouldn't have had at
Carroll County, and I bet they're wishing he didn't have
that because that's who he confessed.
Speaker 1 (38:36):
To, so essentially to you, Cheryl McCollum, they're arguing he
was in the wrong facility. I think as a bid
to get the statements thrown out.
Speaker 3 (38:46):
You sat in court with me.
Speaker 1 (38:48):
What do you make of the doctor claiming Richard Allen
was faking it? I mean he looked sane in the courtroom.
Speaker 10 (38:56):
I agree with the doctor. First of all. I believe
he's still confessing today, and I believe if you listen
to what he confessed to. He tells the story in
chronological order. Somebody that is delusional cannot do that. He
starts where he went to his parents, He got beer,
He went home and changed clothes. That is also key.
(39:19):
Why are you changing clothes and putting on more layers
on a warm day. He tells exactly where he went,
where he parked his car far away, He went to
the trail, He went to the bridge, He saw the girls,
he followed him. He tells you in order that this
crime occurred later. He also tells you the motive and
(39:39):
the reason he did not complete the sexual assault because
of the white.
Speaker 1 (39:43):
Man Greg Morris joining US renowned trial lawyer Greg Morse.
Maybe suppressing one confession, but sixty one confessions not.
Speaker 3 (39:55):
Going to happen.
Speaker 11 (39:56):
Well, you're right, that's a lot to overcome, especially when
they're on j a phone call speaking with family. However,
the more difficult thing here, or the issue is this
person had a lawyer. They contacted the police department, and
I guess he was under a different name. You know,
there's a reason why in cases the second thought, I'm retained,
(40:16):
we file an invocation of rights. It doesn't matter if
the police or people go talk to the person. So
their issue is trying to use he didn't get counsel
when he had one, they used a different name, and
detail that into is this decompensated psychosis that led him
to a confession. He's probably not going to get on
those grounds. But not putting him in touch with the
(40:37):
lawyer who contacted and was hired for him, that's particularly
troubling under the sixth Amendment to the Constitution.
Speaker 1 (40:44):
Troubled you may be, but does it warrant a new trial?
Much lesser reversal in freedom.
Speaker 3 (40:51):
No, well, I think all the mission into naturrial.
Speaker 11 (40:54):
The standard is not innocence. It is there a possibility
the result would have been different. That's all it is.
So the prosecution stuck to a timeline here. Then it
turns out not all of the evidence that they found,
whether it's related to the logan person or the headphone,
doesn't fit into their own narrative, and these create issues
(41:16):
that this guy should get a new trial. He may
be convicted again with the other evidence, but these issues
taken together are to not warrant a new trial here
for ineffective or for the core allowing some of this
stuff in with the Google search.
Speaker 1 (41:30):
We wait as justice unfolds in that del Fi courthouse,
And now we remember an American hero, Sergeant Chris Jenkins,
Lowden County Sheriff, Tennessee, struck and killed in a line
of duty. US Air Force vet twenty years with Louden County.
Survived by grieving children Clay and Chloe, mourning fiance Christy
(41:52):
and canine partner. Deja vu American hero Sergeant Chris Jenkins.
Nancy signing off goodbye friend,
Crime Stories with Nancy Grace, hideous crimes the convicted Delphi
child killer Richard Allen to walk free. Is that even possible?
I'm Nancy Grace, this is Crime Stories. Thank you for
(00:23):
being with us.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
We also know by three o'clock nobody's hearing them. They're
nobody's screaming, nobody's running, nobody's calling on their phones. Again,
this was a very fast deal. And y'all here's the reality.
Most children that are going to be murdered or murdered
in the first three hours.
Speaker 3 (00:45):
That's right.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
Convicted child killer A jury said he murdered Abby and Libby,
their bodies found practically drained of blood in a remote
area a treussel Bridge. He was convicted, and now he
is back in court citing new evidence that demands a
(01:09):
new trial.
Speaker 3 (01:11):
How is this possible?
Speaker 1 (01:13):
Well, the first thing he is claiming is all about
a guy named Ron Logan.
Speaker 4 (01:23):
Listen, we're other names mentioned throughout this long period of
time before anyone was in custody, Daniel Nations, Paul Ederging, Shadowell,
Keeping Klein, Tony Klein, and of course Ron Logan. There
were two searches of his property too, and he was
never arrested or charged with the crime.
Speaker 1 (01:42):
Out of all the suspects, the pois pursons of interest
that police sheriffs investigated. What's different about Ron Logan? And
now Richard Allen comes into court with his fleet of
lawyers demanding to be sent free in the alternative any
trial because of Ron Logan and three other points?
Speaker 3 (02:05):
So what's so special about Ron Logan? Listen.
Speaker 5 (02:08):
Tommie Dillman is the ex girlfriend of Ron Logan. Their
six year relationship had come to an end by the
time of the Delphi murders. Dilman believes ron Logan is
the killer. She says the voice on the tape saying
down the Hill is absolutely him. She also claims that
Logan was violent and when she refused him sex one night,
he hit her with a wrench, causing seven stitches.
Speaker 6 (02:28):
Their bodies were found on his property, his house, only
fourteen hundred feet away from where the girls were discovered.
Logan matched to the appearance of the man in the
blue jacket walking on the bridge that was captured in
snapchat footage taken by the girls just before they disappeared.
Ron Logan was questioned by detectives at length, but police
let him go and moved on to other potential suspects.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
That's not all The defense is claiming that Ron Logan
confessed to the murders of Abby and Libby.
Speaker 3 (03:04):
This is nothing new, listen.
Speaker 7 (03:07):
Ron Logan confesses to fellow inmate Ricky Davis that he
was walking and talking with the girls about knowing one
of their fathers. When one of the girls wanted to
turn around. Logan grabs Abby's shoulder, causing Libby to freak out,
and one of the girls says something about calling the police.
Logan asked if they want to see his animals, including horses,
and Abby wanted to go. Libby did not. This led
to a scuffle and Logan got hit in the nose,
(03:29):
and he pulled out a box cutter and attacked Libby,
cutting her throat. Logan said he took Abby somewhere and
eventually cut her neck too.
Speaker 8 (03:37):
Hours after killing the girls, he came back because he
wanted to move Libby to an area where she wouldn't
be found. He says he burned his clothes in a
burn pit with boots, gloves, and a bag, but feared
drops of blood from his nose may have ended up
on the girl's.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
Clothes, lots of inconsistencies with ron Logan's so called jailhouse
confession with the facts as we know them, and I'm
talking about forensic evidence straight out to Susan Hendricks, joining
US investigative journalist and author of Down the Hill, My
Descent into the double murder in Delphi. She was there
(04:15):
every single day of testimony, Susan Hendrix. Now Richard Allen's defense,
his fleet of defense attorney's demand freedom or a new
trial based on four points, the first being ron Logan.
Speaker 3 (04:30):
What happened with ron Logan?
Speaker 1 (04:32):
Who is this guy? And why do we care? We
knew about ron Logan at the get go.
Speaker 9 (04:37):
He was ruled out absolutely, Nancy, it's good to see you.
And last night I spoke to at the time detective
who is a big part of this, Jerry Holman, and
he said to me, look, Susan, we investigated ron Logan excessively,
meaning two searches of the property. But what is different here?
Soon after the murders, allegedly ron Logan confess. That's what
(05:01):
the defense attorneys are saying, confessed to someone he was
in jail with. He was in jail for four plus
months because he violated probation. And I remember he left
court and said next time, I won't have girls murdered
on my property, Ron Logan. But he was investigated. He
did not do this. The investigators looked into him. Of
course it was on his property. But I go back
(05:23):
Nancy to Libby's phone when Abby says, we heard it
in court, don't leave me up here? Well, then when
did she talk about the horses after that? I believe
that evidence on Libby's phone makes it Richard Allen and
him putting himself there.
Speaker 3 (05:37):
Okay, repeat very slowly what you just said.
Speaker 9 (05:40):
It was Libby's phone, he put himself there, and it
lines up with who was on Libby's phone, bridge guy?
And we saw it in court. And what we did
see and was a man approaching on the bridge, coming
up behind Abby. And she says, and you could hear
it on Libby's cell phone, don't leave me here, and
(06:01):
then you see them you hear the voice.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
Fine, maybe true, Susan Hendricks. In fact, all of that
is true.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
However, the defense is claiming the guy on the bridge
is Ron Logan joining me. In addition to investigative reporter
Susan Hendrix, who literally has written the book. Cheryl McCollum
is with US Cold Case Research Institute, founder and star
of Zone seven podcast.
Speaker 3 (06:27):
Cheryl McCollum. We sat through testimony.
Speaker 1 (06:29):
You have extensively investigated the scene. What do you make
of the claim that Ron Logan's confession should have come
in to evidence.
Speaker 10 (06:42):
Number One, you're talking about a man that now cannot
defend himself and say whether or not he did or
did not make that claim. Number Two, Allen never said
he saw another man, not on the trail or the bridge,
So where was he that Alan himself would not have
seen it. Alan placed himself on the bridge at the
(07:05):
time the girls were there. He claimed he saw the
other witnesses that were young females. At no time did
he see anybody else that was a man.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
To Susan Hendrix, ron Logan's confession did not come in
in front of that jury for many reasons.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
Why.
Speaker 9 (07:26):
Yeah, it was known. And that is one of the
questions that I asked now Lieutenant Jerry Holman last night
and said is this new? And he said no, they
both had it. They didn't bring it into evidence. And
he also stated, and this is key, that he failed
a polygraph. The prisoner who says, hey, ron Logan, and
it is specific. We heard it off the top of
the show. What allegedly ron Logan did well? He failed
(07:48):
that so and nothing ever tied him as Charyl'm.
Speaker 1 (07:51):
Saying the inmate to whom Logan confessed failed a polly yes,
and Ron Logan's dead.
Speaker 3 (08:01):
He can't be brought in. Okay. Joining me right now.
Speaker 1 (08:04):
Is Greg Morse, partner at law firm King Morse, veteran
trial lawyer and author of the Untested on Amazon. Okay, Greg,
before you light into me with your defense theories, can
we just agree that the first thing you do when
you have an inmate claiming they have information, you find
(08:28):
out in many jurisdictions it's called hall Hll issue. Has
the inmate been offered a deal in exchange for the testimony,
such as a lighter sentence.
Speaker 3 (08:41):
That's the first thing you look at, would you agree,
one hundred.
Speaker 11 (08:44):
Percent, Nancy, That's the first thing you look at, because
jail house snitches are notoriously lack of credibility, and they're
generally looking for a deal. I have not seen any
information that this inmate was looking for a deal, but
my guess is he probably was.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
I mean Greg, speaking just as a lawyer, not a
former prosecutor. Right now.
Speaker 3 (09:05):
Of course, they're looking for a deal.
Speaker 1 (09:07):
They're sitting in four walls the rest of their life
very often, and if they see a light at the
end of the tunnel, by snitching out or giving even
a fake statement, they'll do it to get out. Susan Handricks,
Did I hear you say. Let me make sure I
understand this that both sides had Ron Logan's confession.
Speaker 3 (09:30):
Did the defense seek to enter it?
Speaker 9 (09:33):
Well, I know he was on the witness list for
the hearing at the end of the summer, the preliminary
hearing to see if the defense could have a third
party defense. So he was on that witness list. He
could have been called, but he wasn't. It wasn't mentioned
they went with the o'ness theory. Now to me, in
my opinion, they want to go to the Ron Logan theory.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
Now, okay, I'm going to get back to the odness theory.
Since it didn't come in, I'm not addressing it right
now and it's not being raised as new evidence. Okay,
Greg Morris, he needed the answer to that question before
I take out my guns and fire at you. The
defense is claiming this is newly discovered evidence.
Speaker 3 (10:10):
It's not. They had Logan before he died.
Speaker 1 (10:14):
They had Logan's fake confession before he died, and they
chose not to bring in Logan. They cannot complain about
a strategic maneuver they pulled during the trial. One, it's
not newly discovered evidence. Two, it was their decision not
(10:35):
to bring in the Logan confession.
Speaker 3 (10:37):
That would have been I would have been running.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
Across the courthouse steps in front of the jury, up
and down those steps. I took them many times with
Ron Logan's confession in my hand. They chose not to
use it and go with some cocamane odinism. You know
what odinism is, right, the Norse gods like they were
(11:01):
going to go with thor worshipers committed the murders as
part of some sacred ritual.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
They chose that over logan insanity.
Speaker 11 (11:10):
It is completely seems like a misstep from the defense
in the sense that you don't need Logan to testify
to get the fact that the police investigated him and
this person confessed. It goes in. It comes in under
the police's investigation and why they did what they did.
So I don't know why the defense left that out
(11:32):
and focused on a Norse god and ritualistic killings when
there was a lot of information that could have led
to this logan potentially or at least created as we
know reasonable doubt. However, you can't look at these issues
in a vacuum, Nancy. This dovetailed with the other three issues.
It becomes more important after the fact. But you are right,
(11:54):
it's going to be a hurdle for the defense that
they had the opportunity to bring this stuff up. And
I didn't see any new evidence that was created that
would excuse me.
Speaker 3 (12:04):
Okay, And that's a lot of words. Why use one
word when you can use two hundred, Okay, Greg.
Speaker 1 (12:13):
Bottom line, now is the time for newly discovered evidence.
Speaker 3 (12:17):
If there really is newly.
Speaker 1 (12:19):
Discovered evidence that exonerates Richard Allen, which is total BS
technical legal term. If there is such evidence, there deserves
to be a hearing. Okay, this is not new evidence period.
Their blunder at trial is their fault. Now you've got
logan dead now and the innmatefield to polygraph. So I
(12:44):
don't know how much it would have helped them. I
don't know that they could have gotten it.
Speaker 3 (12:49):
In under the rules of hearsay.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
But to Susan Hendrix, why is Logan ron Logan the
single best candidate.
Speaker 3 (12:59):
For or the defense to hone in on now?
Speaker 9 (13:02):
So a key part of this that the defense is
saying why they want to bring in ron Logan now,
is a box cutter the alleged weapon Because in this
supposed confession that ron Logan confessed too that he did it,
he said he did it with a box cutter. So
when autopsy was done on Abby and Libby at graphic
(13:23):
brutal pictures that we saw in that courtroom, and the
gentleman who performed that said, maybe it could have been
a box cutter. So that's what they're saying, Hey, wait
a minute, that can't be coincidental. If it was a
box cutter, then we need to bring this back in
because ron Logan confessed that it was a box cutter,
so let's bring him in. We would have if we
knew that detail, they're said.
Speaker 1 (13:43):
And then you have the issue of Logan seeking a
fake alibi for the time the girls were murdered.
Speaker 3 (13:53):
That doesn't look good, listen, ron.
Speaker 10 (13:55):
Logan does not have an alibi.
Speaker 12 (13:57):
According to cell tower data, his phone was at his
property at two oh nine pm. We know from the
video that Libby took on her phone that the girls
were approached on the bridge.
Speaker 3 (14:07):
At two thirteen.
Speaker 12 (14:08):
Ron had claimed for many years that he was on
surveillance video at this tropical fish store in Lafayette some
thirty minutes away, but that story didn't have surveillance videos.
There is no proof that he was elsewhere. That does
not mean that he's the killer of the girls, but
his alibi does not check out.
Speaker 3 (14:26):
What is your last memory dropping.
Speaker 10 (14:29):
Her off at their house with their paints?
Speaker 9 (14:32):
And it wasn't until later on when we got to
the Sheriff's department it actually saw the snapchat picture.
Speaker 2 (14:40):
But that's the last picture I have as the last
visual I have with little girl.
Speaker 13 (14:44):
So that bridge.
Speaker 1 (14:46):
Richard Allen and his defense team back in court. Who
is Richard Allen, the man convicted, the pharmacy tech who
likely watched the two little girls, Abby and Libby coming
in and out and in and out of his pharmacy
every week.
Speaker 3 (15:05):
Him convicted in the.
Speaker 1 (15:07):
Murders of Abby and Libby, and now back in court
stating that newly discovered evidence will set him free. Well,
you got another thought coming Richard Allen. He is claiming
number one that Ron Logan, that guy is the real killer.
(15:30):
But to everyone on the panel, take a look at
Ron Logan compared to the composite sketch, and Ron Logan
compared to the man on the bridge.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
It's not him.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Now look at this Richard Allen compared to the composite
sketch and the man on the bridge.
Speaker 3 (15:56):
Should I believe Richard Allen? My lion I, Cheryl McCollum,
it's not him. It's Richard Allen and Nancy.
Speaker 14 (16:05):
There's another component we haven't talked about. We also had
the killer's voice. The defense put up nobody that said
that was not Richard Allen. Nobody came forward, not to
former girlfriend, not a neighbor. Nobody came forward and said
that sounds like Logan.
Speaker 4 (16:24):
No one.
Speaker 3 (16:25):
Cheryl McCollum, you're right.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
The defense brought no one because they chose not to
pursue Ron Logan as the sod some other dude that
did it. And they did have someone. The former girlfriend
of Logan, she stated to police that when she saw
the shot of the man on the.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
Bridge, she thought, well, there's Ron Logan.
Speaker 1 (16:47):
She thought that was Logan and that when she heard
the voice that she thought that was Logan's voice. They
could have brought her on, but they didn't. Let me
go quickly to Joseph Scott Morgan joining US professor forensic
Jacksonville State University, renowned death investigator, author of Blood Beneath
(17:11):
My Feet on Amazon, and star of a hit podcast,
Body Bags, with Joe Scott Morgan.
Speaker 3 (17:17):
Joe Scott, could you just.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
Give us all a reminder of what happened to Abby
and well.
Speaker 15 (17:25):
To kind of break it down as best we can
in these moments, their throats were cut fancy and let's
think about that. That's the baseline because when we began
to think about their cause of death, as you like
to say, the cod we have essentially Abby who has
(17:45):
got a singular two inch laceration to her throat. And
then with Libby it's a bit more dynamic in the
sense that the forensic pathologists identified that she had four
overlapping lacerations or let's just say in sized injuries or
(18:05):
cuts to her throat, both of these. In both cases
Nancy affected the juggler vein. And can I make one
quick comment please about this reactionary kind of event that
defense is alleging took place, I guess on the bridge
where he snapped back in a reactionary form and essentially
(18:30):
cut the throat. And Nancy, one of the big questions
I would have is if that happened up on the bridge,
we would see a copious amount of blood worked, thousands
of throats being cut unfortunately over my career, and you
bleed more profusely out of that location than just about
(18:50):
anywhere in the body. There would be blood trails leading
to specific locations that would have been very recognizable. I mean,
are they postulating that he goes up with clorox and
cleans up the bridge so that you can't identify this
on the cross ties or any other location. I just
don't think this is plausible based upon these injuries.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
Nancy to Susan Hendrix joining us in investigative journalists, who
literally has written the book on the Delphi murders of
Abby and Libby. People gasped, started crying, grabbed each other, hugging.
Speaker 3 (19:30):
Girars tried to look away from the shots of Abby
and Libby. They were displayed for anyone in the courtroom
to see. And isn't it true?
Speaker 1 (19:41):
Susan that the ground around the girls was still saturated
in blood.
Speaker 3 (19:49):
When their bodies were found.
Speaker 9 (19:51):
Yeah, just huge puddles of blood. And you're right, there
were gasps in that courtroom. And I remember Natcy during
the victim impact statement the day he was sentenced, Diane,
Abby's grandmother, and Abby's grandfather, Eric, they read their victim
impact statements and I remember Diane saying, look, Abby wasn't
a daredevil. She was worried, she was concerned. Don't leave
(20:14):
me up here. And then seeing the crime scene photos,
it was horrific to see and knowing the long term
effects on the family members and what those girls went
through in the last moments. But the victim impacts statements
to me were so powerful, saying we sat through this
every day. We can't imagine what the girls went through,
and this is generational the pain inflicted on us. But
(20:36):
you were right seeing those and Eric said, Abby's grandfather,
they're worse than I even thought they could.
Speaker 3 (20:49):
Crime Stories with Nancy Grace.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
Two, doctor Bethony Marshall joining us, renowned psychoanalyst out of
the LA jurisdiction, author of deal Breaker.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
You can see her.
Speaker 1 (21:02):
On Peacock now at Dr Bethany Marshall dot com, Doctor Bethany.
The fact that Richard Allen and his defense team are
raising these four issues, ron Logan.
Speaker 3 (21:15):
Being one of them, as a bid.
Speaker 1 (21:17):
For freedom or a new trial, how does that affect
Abby and Libby's family?
Speaker 16 (21:25):
Nancy? The fact that Richard Allen could be roaming public
around that town where there are other children, other families,
and putting girls at risk is absolutely terrifying, first of all,
secondarily unfair, Nancy. What I want to contrast is what
the families saw in court, the blood, the lacerations, the cuts,
(21:51):
their daughters and granddaughters dead, compared to Logan and Alan
and the inmate who were talking about it, the incarcerated guy.
Those men are bragging. It's become an urban myth for them.
I did it, No I did it, No I did it.
It's like these guys are allegedly asserting themselves into the
(22:12):
notoriety of the crime, reliving the sexual excitement, turning it
over in their head, and talking about it like a
great movie that they all went to together, whereas the
family and the people in the court will have those
images seared into their mind forever. As a secondary post
traumatic stress response, looking at those images. They'll never be
(22:34):
able to get the images out.
Speaker 9 (22:35):
Of their mind.
Speaker 16 (22:35):
Nancy, I just feel that there's so many sex predators
in the general public that you have one crime near
another person's property, who, now all of a sudden, says
he committed the crime allegedly will never know he's dead now.
Speaker 9 (22:48):
And it makes me think about how pedophiles.
Speaker 16 (22:50):
Congregate and share stories, and how the defense has sort
of taken that up as a strategy to point the
blame towards yet another pedophile alleged patophle file, whereas in fact,
we know Allan did it. That's all already been proven.
Speaker 1 (23:04):
In a Nutshelle Susan Hendricks explain the significance of the
white van.
Speaker 9 (23:09):
Brad Weber was on the stand two times and he
said he left work, and it aligned with the confessions
of Richard Allen. If he was spooked, we believed his
story he looked at a white van. It's only something
he would know he crossed the creek and killed the girls.
So what they're saying is the defense that Libby's phone
stopped moving at a particular time. Well, now from surveillance footage,
(23:30):
it appears that the time is off a bit, so
I thought about this a lot less than I think.
We're listening to Richard Allen and everything. He says, what
if he was spooked by the white van but near
where the bodies were found? I was there after he
was sentenced. I went to where the bodies were found,
and coincidentally you could hear a car. It was Brad
Weber's car, not the white van. Another one, and it
(23:51):
is loud, and it's right there.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
Convicted child killer Richard Allen back in court with his
defense team demanding either freedom or when trial based on
four newly discovered pieces of evidence.
Speaker 3 (24:06):
All along there was an online tied a tsunami wave
against the state.
Speaker 7 (24:15):
Listen some people paying attention to the Richard Allen Delphi
murder trial or taking to social media to pass judgment
on the prosecution and support for the man accused of
killing Libby Jerman and Abbie Williams autumn on ex post.
I reserve the right to be wrong, but I'm absolutely
not seeing how anyone has convinced Richard Allen committed the murders.
Luke Nicholas on X says time for a motion for
(24:36):
directed verdict in the Delphi case. Put it to the jury.
Now the state no longer has enough evidence to overcome
the sculpatory evidence already presented, and Theresa chimes in with
this needs to stop. This has been a huge cover
up from day one. Free Richard Allen and arrest the
real killers already and all involved in the cover up.
Speaker 1 (24:54):
Straight out to Joe Scott Morgan who lived the case
along with many of us. Joscott, you have studied the
physics so carefully. What do you believe is the strongest
evidence against Allen?
Speaker 15 (25:07):
Well, I think that probably for me at least, one
of the things that really stands out, and you kind
of touched on it just a moment ago, Nancy, was
this expended round that was found at the scene. If
you can throw this up on the camera, this is
actually a forty caliber round right here. This is what
it would have looked like. This is in pristine shape.
(25:29):
This scene has been ejected from a weapon which was
actually a six hour so that when this thing is
racked back, it leaves these little striations on the external
portion of the round. That round is tied back to
the weapon that he possessed. Nancy. That's one of the
really big pieces for me relative to relative to the
(25:51):
physical evidence. It's not pure ballistic evidence because this is
an unfired round. However, this is accepted science, Nancy. So
that's one of the big pieces here from me.
Speaker 1 (26:02):
You know, the ballistics evidence cannot be ignored, but the
defense is conveniently doing that, Joe Scott, and they are
focusing on not only Ron Logan's false confession, they are
focusing on the timing of the van as it relates
(26:24):
to the last time the girl's phone was used. And
they are also arguing about Libby Germans cell phone being
used after the state says she's dead.
Speaker 8 (26:40):
Listen shocking moment in the courtroom when former FBI forensic
examiner Stacy Eldridge says Libby Germans phone received a call
at five forty five pm February thirteenth, twenty seventeen, and
within milliseconds a headphone jack was inserted into the phone.
Eldridge says. The headphone jack was removed nearly five hours
lea at ten thirty two pm. Eldridge says, I cannot
(27:04):
think of any explanation that doesn't involve human interaction.
Speaker 1 (27:08):
Joining Scott Iiker, a founding member of the FBI Cellular
Analysis Team, former FBI Scott.
Speaker 3 (27:15):
What are they saying exactly.
Speaker 13 (27:17):
Well, it sounds like they're saying that there was a
headphone plugged into the phone and then removed right after
a call that occurred. It's hard to tell from you know,
the was it not looking at the actual phone and
the extraction of the phone. Why they're saying that. I mean,
there could be several different things that occur. A device
(27:40):
was plugged in, or was somehow the insertion point filled
with dirt or something that allowed it to think that
something was plugged into it.
Speaker 1 (27:51):
Well, the state responded the defense emotion that we're looking
at today demanding either freedom or a new trial.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
Us on to say that.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
Dirt or water could not have clogged the phone. So
what does dirt or water clogging the phone have to
do with this?
Speaker 3 (28:14):
Listen?
Speaker 7 (28:15):
After the shocking news that a headphone jack had been
plugged into Libby Jerman's phone milliseconds after receiving a call
at five point forty five pm February thirteen, the defense
calls back to the stand State Police digital forensic expert
Chris Cecil and asks about the lack of reporting about
the headphone jack data. Cecil said he did a Google
Search and found a headphone jack could register as being
(28:37):
used if water or dirt is in the port. The
defense counter is asking, Cecil, do you normally Google search
when conducting a criminal investigation. Defense attorney Jennifer Auger presses further, saying,
you and the state have had seven and a half
years to research and you came in here with a
Google search.
Speaker 1 (28:56):
The defense is climbing that the girls sell phone was used,
was plugged into a jack after they're dead, clearly arguing
that someone was manipulating the phone, okay, or even the
girls manipulating the phone, which would throw off the state's
(29:17):
timeline because they claimed the phone was used.
Speaker 3 (29:21):
Got it so far?
Speaker 1 (29:23):
Yes, no, I got it and that's the true okay,
So in their motion is the headphone jack?
Speaker 3 (29:29):
Let me tell you the rest.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
So the state brings on so this is not newly discovered,
by the way, again, because that came up at trial
and the state brought on an expert to counter it, claiming, hey,
it got clogged with water and dirt which was at
the scene he alan forced the girls through a creek,
and the defense attorney says, well, what do you have
(29:54):
to support that, and the state's expert said a Google search.
Speaker 3 (30:00):
Story short.
Speaker 1 (30:01):
The defense said, after this long, all you got is
a Google search. I would have said, well, after this long,
why didn't you do a Google search?
Speaker 11 (30:07):
Well, it's not the defense's job to prove their innocence.
That's on the prosecution. And I wish I worked in
a county where experts get on the stand for the
prosecution and rely on Google searches. You know what we've
all seen the mugs. Don't mistake my law degree for
a Google search. Same thing with science. That is appalling
Palmage County. The prosecutors are much better.
Speaker 13 (30:29):
I don't know, I don't know.
Speaker 7 (30:30):
No one else.
Speaker 1 (30:31):
Now you got a totally bass Ackwards Morse. The defense
should have done a Google search and figured out you
can get the same reaction from a cell phone if
it's clogged with dirt or water. You know what, if
you have a question, cell analysis expert, here's your chance.
What about it, Scott, could you explain two Morse? The
(30:55):
state's theory that the reason it looked like her phone
had been plugged into a jack was because it.
Speaker 3 (31:01):
Was clagged with dirt and water, which it.
Speaker 13 (31:03):
Was most definitely. I mean that water is a conductor
of electricity, and it is a very small pound of
electricity when the phone like a phone jack, is plugged
into the bottom of the phone, and it allows that connection.
Right allows that electrical connection to being made waters just
like that right that allows electricital electricity to go through.
(31:28):
Should that have been a Google search on during the trial?
Speaker 1 (31:32):
No?
Speaker 13 (31:32):
Should it have been something that they looked at prior
to going to trial and had an expert come in,
Or shouldn't they have tried that on another phone? I
agree they should definitely should have done that prior to
having this brought up.
Speaker 1 (31:44):
When a minute, Scott iiker, the defense can do it too.
Speaker 3 (31:48):
The defense has subpoena power.
Speaker 1 (31:50):
They're getting paid investigators paid for by you and me
the state for the defense. Yes, we pay for his defense.
So you and Morse are arguing the state should have
done this, and that yes, the defense could have done
it themselves.
Speaker 3 (32:05):
Why didn't they do it?
Speaker 13 (32:06):
I agree, they definitely could have done it themselves too.
That would have been a big thing to bring up
by the defense if they had done that on their own,
but they didn't.
Speaker 3 (32:14):
What about that, Morse?
Speaker 11 (32:15):
Well, again, prosecution has to prove someone is guilty. However,
it sounds like all these issues that you're looking at
to affect the verdict sounds like they really lead to
an ineffective council claim. That's what these issues are. Those
are notoriously last ditch efforts that people convicted file. They
have less than ten percent chance to propose.
Speaker 1 (32:35):
Say you're giving up on the cell phone. You're giving
up on the cell phone giving I know what you're doing.
Speaker 11 (32:45):
You can't have an expert get on the stand and
say they researched Google. This is a court of law,
this is people's lives. We have a constitution that has
a standard. It's not for social media consumption.
Speaker 14 (32:57):
Standing.
Speaker 3 (33:00):
They can't. They can't.
Speaker 11 (33:01):
Well they did in twenty in twenty five years I have.
I would be appalled and I do serious cases like this.
If a prosecutor got up and said, well my expert
did a Google search, that's it. That person is they
have zero credibility.
Speaker 1 (33:18):
Zero susan And what happened? This expert testified and was
on cross exam and I was asked, well, how do
you know that water or dirt can cause the same result?
Speaker 9 (33:31):
They went Google, absolutely absolutely, And Rosie mentioned it in closing.
Speaker 3 (33:36):
What happened? What happened.
Speaker 9 (33:39):
Was they alluded to the fact. The defense is saying, hey,
someone was there, or move Libby because her phone someone
plugs something in. But that doesn't really make sense if
be thinking about it. So the prosecution was saying, yes,
this could happen because of dirt and water, and it
was I was in the courtroom, yes, if I could
see the defense, I looked right at Rosy and Baldwin
and they went like that. They googled it. He googled it.
(34:01):
They mentioned it in the closing argument. He googled this.
Turns out one of the jurors was interviewed on murder
sheet and they said that they kind of put aside.
What they really focused on was Richard Allen, his voice
and putting himself there an interrogation video where his wife
walks in and says, you didn't tell me you were
at the bridge that day. That's what it boiled down to.
(34:22):
But you're right, the.
Speaker 1 (34:23):
Defense they use that attacking the state's witness because they
used to Google search. Everybody on that jury probably relies
on Google, so they're balking up the wrong tree with this.
Speaker 2 (34:34):
We also know by three o'clock nobody's hearing them they're
nobody's screaming, nobody's running, nobody's calling on their phones. Again,
this was a very fast deal, and y'all, here's the
reality most children that are going to be murdered or
murdered in the first three hours.
Speaker 3 (35:03):
Crime stories with Nancy Grace.
Speaker 1 (35:10):
Joining me is former FBI investigator and expert in forensic photography,
Bill Daily, Bill, thank you for being with us. We
were talking earlier about those crime scene photos that made
people start crying in the courtroom, gasp, grab each other
(35:30):
for support. One of your expertise is forensic photography. How
do you get through taking the photographs of crime scenes,
for instance, where two little girls are brutally murdered.
Speaker 3 (35:47):
Well, that's I can tell you.
Speaker 17 (35:47):
You know, the times I've gone to crime scenes where
have been bombings and kidnappings, bank robberies, where people have
been killed, you really have to remove yourself. You really
have to get a step back and say you're doing
it for the victims, You're doing it for the betterment
of society, that you're going to find out who's responsible
for these heenous crimes. And so you kind of look
through the viewfinders you're photographing and documenting the area to
(36:10):
kind of say, this is going to go towards making
justice happen, So you kind of need to put a
bit of a shield.
Speaker 3 (36:17):
Up to protect yourself.
Speaker 17 (36:18):
Otherwise, like you said, here, people looking at it from
the jury box are going to be overwhelmed with the
emotion because you picture yourself. If you start imagining that
those are your children, your nieces and nephews, or mother
or father or sister, brother, it will be too overwhelming.
So that's what you really need to do. You need
to kind of distance yourself and look at it through
the kind of empirical view of a lens to hope
(36:41):
to get to the truth.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
The last major point the defense is bringing up is
the fact that Richard Allen was kept in DSA Department
of Corrections as opposed to another jail. Why do they
care because it was there he was placed in solitary.
Speaker 3 (36:57):
Confinement and gave.
Speaker 1 (37:00):
I think it was sixty one confessions that he murdered
Abby and Lebby Listen.
Speaker 7 (37:07):
The defense also claimed Alan had no absolute right to
refuse being transferred into state custody since the safekeeping order
wasn't served to Allan or his attorney, Breg Gibson. They
never argued against the transfer.
Speaker 3 (37:18):
So another thing that was never brought up. Susan Hendrix.
Speaker 1 (37:22):
The significance of arguing about where he was housed is
because they cannot suppress those statements he gave. Statement after
you can't suppress sixty one confessions right including to your wife,
over the phone, being recorded, to other inmates, to the wardens,
to everybody.
Speaker 3 (37:41):
He told everybody, I did it, so okay, can't suppress those,
So argue the fact that he was in.
Speaker 1 (37:51):
The wrong facility. In a nutshell, explain this argument, I.
Speaker 9 (37:56):
Think, Nancy, this is their strongest point for possibility of
an appeal, which is right after he was arrested, Sheriff
tob Lesbie at the time it was a safe keeping
order said look he won't be safe at Carroll County,
so we have to send him to another prison. Well,
they're saying he should not have been there, of course,
innocent until proven guilty, and they're saying, as you mentioned,
(38:17):
it drove him crazy, so to speak. So that's why
he confessed because of where he was. But the state says,
look he was treated better than other inmates. Get an iPad,
he had a lot more than he would have had,
meaning the psychologist, doctor Walla, he wouldn't have had at
Carroll County, and I bet they're wishing he didn't have
that because that's who he confessed.
Speaker 1 (38:36):
To, so essentially to you, Cheryl McCollum, they're arguing he
was in the wrong facility. I think as a bid
to get the statements thrown out.
Speaker 3 (38:46):
You sat in court with me.
Speaker 1 (38:48):
What do you make of the doctor claiming Richard Allen
was faking it? I mean he looked sane in the courtroom.
Speaker 10 (38:56):
I agree with the doctor. First of all. I believe
he's still confessing today, and I believe if you listen
to what he confessed to. He tells the story in
chronological order. Somebody that is delusional cannot do that. He
starts where he went to his parents, He got beer,
He went home and changed clothes. That is also key.
(39:19):
Why are you changing clothes and putting on more layers
on a warm day. He tells exactly where he went,
where he parked his car far away, He went to
the trail, He went to the bridge, He saw the girls,
he followed him. He tells you in order that this
crime occurred later. He also tells you the motive and
(39:39):
the reason he did not complete the sexual assault because
of the white.
Speaker 1 (39:43):
Man Greg Morris joining US renowned trial lawyer Greg Morse.
Maybe suppressing one confession, but sixty one confessions not.
Speaker 3 (39:55):
Going to happen.
Speaker 11 (39:56):
Well, you're right, that's a lot to overcome, especially when
they're on j a phone call speaking with family. However,
the more difficult thing here, or the issue is this
person had a lawyer. They contacted the police department, and
I guess he was under a different name. You know,
there's a reason why in cases the second thought, I'm retained,
(40:16):
we file an invocation of rights. It doesn't matter if
the police or people go talk to the person. So
their issue is trying to use he didn't get counsel
when he had one, they used a different name, and
detail that into is this decompensated psychosis that led him
to a confession. He's probably not going to get on
those grounds. But not putting him in touch with the
(40:37):
lawyer who contacted and was hired for him, that's particularly
troubling under the sixth Amendment to the Constitution.
Speaker 1 (40:44):
Troubled you may be, but does it warrant a new trial?
Much lesser reversal in freedom.
Speaker 3 (40:51):
No, well, I think all the mission into naturrial.
Speaker 11 (40:54):
The standard is not innocence. It is there a possibility
the result would have been different. That's all it is.
So the prosecution stuck to a timeline here. Then it
turns out not all of the evidence that they found,
whether it's related to the logan person or the headphone,
doesn't fit into their own narrative, and these create issues
(41:16):
that this guy should get a new trial. He may
be convicted again with the other evidence, but these issues
taken together are to not warrant a new trial here
for ineffective or for the core allowing some of this
stuff in with the Google search.
Speaker 1 (41:30):
We wait as justice unfolds in that del Fi courthouse,
And now we remember an American hero, Sergeant Chris Jenkins,
Lowden County Sheriff, Tennessee, struck and killed in a line
of duty. US Air Force vet twenty years with Louden County.
Survived by grieving children Clay and Chloe, mourning fiance Christy
(41:52):
and canine partner. Deja vu American hero Sergeant Chris Jenkins.
Nancy signing off goodbye friend,
Host
Nancy Grace
Popular Podcasts
United States of Kennedy
United States of Kennedy is a podcast about our cultural fascination with the Kennedy dynasty. Every week, hosts Lyra Smith and George Civeris go into one aspect of the Kennedy story.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.