Podcast Summary: Murder Sheet Episode: The Delphi Murders: Richard Allen on Trial: Jury Deliberations: Days One Through Three
Release Date: November 10, 2024

Hosts:

• Áine Cain - Journalist
• Kevin Greenlee - Attorney

1. Introduction and Context

The episode opens with a content warning due to the sensitive nature of the discussion: "This episode contains discussion of the brutal murder of two girls as well as issues around mental health, including suicide." ([00:58])

Áine Cain and Kevin Greenlee delve into the ongoing trial of Richard Allen, who stands accused of the Delphi murders—the brutal killing of Liberty German and Abigail Williams.

2. Overview of Jury Deliberations

As the jury has been deliberating for three days, Áine and Kevin explore what this period signifies in the judicial process.

Kevin Greenlee remarks:
"As we all know, the jury in the murder case against Richard Allen for the murders of Liberty German Abigail Williams has been deliberating for all or parts of three days and we're all eagerly awaiting what their decision may be. And we're all eagerly hoping they do in fact make a decision. And so we're Going to be talking about it." ([02:07])

3. Possible Outcomes

a. Conviction

If Richard Allen is convicted, the process moves towards sentencing. Kevin explains:

"If he was convicted, she would likely set a date for him to be formally sentenced, and that would likely be, say, 30 days or so from now... These pre-sentence reports are not made public. So you and I will not be permitted to see that. And that's not unusual, that's not unique to this case. That's just the norm." ([24:05])

Potential Next Steps Post-Conviction:

• Preparation of a pre-sentence report detailing mitigating and aggravating factors.
• Possibility of appeals by the defense to challenge the conviction based on alleged trial errors.

b. Acquittal

An acquittal would mean Richard Allen is found not guilty, invoking the principle of double jeopardy—preventing the state from retrying him for the same crime.

Áine Cain highlights:
"If Richard Allen is acquitted, he could still face civil liability from the families." ([12:17])

Kevin Greenlee adds historical context:
"O.J. Simpson is acquitted of the murders... but subsequently, the families of the victims filed a civil suit against him for wrongful death." ([12:17])

c. Mistrial (Hung Jury)

A hung jury occurs when jurors cannot reach a unanimous decision, leading to a mistrial. This outcome allows the prosecution the option to retry the case.

Kevin Greenlee explains unanimity requirements:
"In the United States, we require of our juries that they must be unanimous in their verdict... If they reach a deadlock, they will typically go to the judge and say, hey, we've reached a deadlock." ([15:12])

Kevin further discusses implications of a mistrial:
"If he got acquitted, they would not be investigating other people because in their mind, the case is solved... I imagine we would do this all over again... I hope that the jury does what it's there to do and reaches a verdict." ([19:34])

4. Public Speculation and Misconceptions

The hosts address common public misconceptions regarding jury deliberation times and outcomes.

Áine Cain notes:
"Everyone wants a cookbook recipe for this thing. Like, how did the jurors look? Were they smiling? Were they frowning?" ([19:57])

Kevin Greenlee counters the notion of interpreting jury behavior:
"There's no way we can know what's going on in that jury room at all." ([34:39])

5. Legal Insights and Jury Dynamics

The discussion delves into the nature of jury decision-making and potential reversible errors that could influence appeals.

Kevin Greenlee discusses reversible errors:
"These are errors that are so major that they would affect the outcome of a trial." ([27:37])

He provides an example involving the admissibility of certain videos:
"If the judge allowed videos that didn’t directly pertain to the crime but painted the defendant in a negative light, the appellate team could argue for a new trial based on this being a reversible error." ([29:49])

6. Appeals Process

In the event of a conviction, the defense may pursue an appeal to challenge the trial's outcome.

Kevin Greenlee outlines the appeals process:
"When someone is convicted, especially of a major crime, there is almost always some sort of an appeal... They would look for things that they think were done incorrectly and things that were done incorrectly that were serious enough to affect the outcome of the trial." ([25:21])

Áine Cain clarifies the rarity and challenges of successful appeals:
"It's not super common." ([32:28])

7. Concluding Thoughts and Future Episodes

The hosts express their anticipation for the jury's verdict and acknowledge the uncertainty surrounding the deliberation process.

Áine Cain reflects on the emotional weight of the trial:
"When you have a big case like this, emotions are high... It’s impossible to do so." ([19:57])

They also tease future episodes that will address topics like jury nullification, aiming to answer listener questions and provide deeper legal insights.

Kevin Greenlee suggests:
"Let's do jury notification our next episode." ([33:50])

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

• Kevin Greenlee ([02:07]):
  "We're a true crime podcast focused on original reporting, interviews, and deep dives into murder cases."

• Áine Cain ([11:02]):
  "I've been made aware by people sending me various links that there have been a lot of high profile acquittals that occur quickly and high profile convictions that take a long time."

• Kevin Greenlee ([27:37]):
  "No such thing as a perfect trial. Anything that human beings do has errors in it."

• Áine Cain ([19:57]):
  "I'm not convinced that’s what's going to happen, to be honest... Employers trying to read into everything and it's impossible to do so."

• Kevin Greenlee ([34:39]):
  "There's no way we can know what's going on in that jury room at all."

Conclusion

In this episode of Murder Sheet, Áine Cain and Kevin Greenlee provide a thorough examination of the jury deliberations in the Richard Allen Delphi murder trial. They unpack the potential outcomes—conviction, acquittal, or mistrial—and delve into the legal nuances that accompany each scenario. By addressing public misconceptions and offering legal insights, the hosts equip listeners with a deeper understanding of the justice system's complexities. The episode serves as both an informative piece for true crime enthusiasts and a thoughtful analysis for those interested in the intricacies of legal proceedings.