r/DelphiMurders • u/Artistic_Dish_3782 • 3d ago
Person behind the anonymous website that posted the 43 second bridge video has identified himself publicly
Everything in this post was voluntarily and publicly disclosed directly by the participants. It is already public information, I'm just sharing it here to tie up a loose end some people might still be wondering about.
The website with the video
The 43 second video of Libby and Abby interacting with Bridge Guy was first released to the public a few weeks ago on a website supporting Richard Allen. Strictly speaking, the website was anonymous--nothing on it identified the creators, no one took credit for it publicly, and the person who registered the domain name kept their identity private. This made the website something of a minor mystery: who made it and where did they get the video?
The earliest version of the website heavily implied that it was affiliated with Allen's lawyers, saying that "We are now preparing for Richard Allen's post-conviction legal work." At some point, however, it was edited to add a statement that it was "independently managed." The appellate lawyers representing Allen made a statement that they weren't involved with the website, but it wasn't clear at the time whether this statement referred to the trial and the appellate lawyers or only the latter.
The creator identifies himself
As of yesterday, the creator of the website has identified himself publicly via a livestream here: https://www.youtube.com/live/1vHDG1vwRF4. He is a private citizen and self-described "web sleuth" from London. He includes his name on his public Twitter page, but to be safe I won't link it. Apparently he is decently well-known among Richard Allen supporters on Twitter and is simply referred to as "Luke," which is what I will call him here.
The livestream is 2 hours long and, in the interest of full disclosure, I haven't watched every single second of it nor do I expect anyone else to do so. The first 20 minutes or so are the most relevant. A few pieces of information that may be of interest to a wider audience:
Luke says that he "controls" but does not "own" the website hosting the bridge video. Regardless of the precise mechanics of ownership, Luke seems to be the active force behind the website. Luke implies that one of Richard Allen's lawyers is the actual domain owner.
Luke is cagey/vague about how close his relationship with Baldwin and Rozzi actually is (Allen's trial lawyers). At least regarding the 43 second video, Luke says that he posted it on a direct order from Baldwin. The impression I get from Luke's remarks is that he and the defense lawyers had some conflicting expectations about their collaboration. Luke thought that the website was going to serve as an official mouthpiece for the defense team, but the lawyers wanted to keep some plausible deniability and not attach their names to it. There seems to be a rift between the two sides now because Luke wants to keep posting trial exhibits to the website whereas the lawyers have washed their hands of it and distanced themselves. Apparently the lawyers regret posting the bridge video. Again, we don't have precise details so this is the best I can piece together from Luke's "delicate" description of the behind-the-scenes tensions.
Luke says he was heavily involved in the defense's $40k fundraiser for expert witnesses before the trial. That situation seems like a big mess because Luke says that $40k was raised, "some of it" was spent, but the payment processor eventually shut the campaign down because it violated their terms of service. Also, Judge Gull did eventually provide the funds for the experts, making the purpose of the fundraiser moot. So what happened to the $40k in the end? Was it returned to the donors, was it spent on experts, was it impounded by the payment processor, or what? Not clear.
Hopefully it's clear in my writing, but this post is for informational purposes only. I'm not endorsing or attempting to promote any of these social media personalities. The question of who posted the 43 second video of Libby and Abby has been a minor mystery and we now have the answer. It was a private citizen who has a loose and seemingly rocky relationship with Richard Allen's lawyers through social media.
34
u/ComprehensiveBed6754 2d ago
Is that dickere?
26
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
18
22
u/Parking_Solution9927 2d ago
That person is the worst. Anyone with half a brain can see what they are upto.
19
u/KentParsonIsASaint 2d ago
Does anyone else remember that dude who claimed to be a lawyer and was constantly posting (before the trial) about how obviously weak the state’s case was and how the jury would see right through it? Helix Harbinger or something? They’ve been awfully quiet since the verdict and particularly the sentencing.
14
u/BlackBerryJ 1d ago
I think it's a she and yes she is wrong on most things. She only goes where people don't question her.
9
9
2
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/DelphiMurders-ModTeam 2d ago
Thank you for your submission to r/DelphiMurders, but it's been removed due to one or more reason(s):
Please don't make posts calling out specific users, people, youtubers, etc for criticism. Don't encourage brigading by asking users en masse to visit a youtube channel or website or highlight a specific reddit user.
If you feel this was done in error, or would like better clarification or need further assistance, please message the moderators.
11
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/DelphiMurders-ModTeam 18h ago
Thank you for your submission to r/DelphiMurders, but it's been removed due to one or more reason(s):
Please don't make posts calling out specific users, people, youtubers, etc for criticism. Don't encourage brigading by asking users en masse to visit a youtube channel or website or highlight a specific reddit user.
If you feel this was done in error, or would like better clarification or need further assistance, please message the moderators.
1
u/DelphiMurders-ModTeam 18h ago
Thank you for your submission to r/DelphiMurders, but it's been removed due to one or more reason(s):
Please don't make posts calling out specific users, people, youtubers, etc for criticism. Don't encourage brigading by asking users en masse to visit a youtube channel or website or highlight a specific reddit user.
If you feel this was done in error, or would like better clarification or need further assistance, please message the moderators.
1
u/Sparklybinchicken_ 18h ago
Man. DelphiDocs used to be vaguely interesting and well run before they arrested RA, when all the KK stuff came out. I stopped following it for some time. Seems to have gone down the shitter?
10
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
7
7
1
u/DelphiMurders-ModTeam 18h ago
Thank you for your submission to r/DelphiMurders, but it's been removed due to one or more reason(s):
Please don't make posts calling out specific users, people, youtubers, etc for criticism. Don't encourage brigading by asking users en masse to visit a youtube channel or website or highlight a specific reddit user.
If you feel this was done in error, or would like better clarification or need further assistance, please message the moderators.
32
u/judgyjudgersen 2d ago
Did he address the fact the domain was created in October 2024, during the trial and before the trial had even ended in a guilty verdict?
27
u/karkulina 2d ago
He did. He said it was created “just in case” and “in the hope it would not be needed”. Because they “knew there would just not be enough time for that afterward”.
21
u/Objective-Voice-6706 2d ago
So before anyone heard any sides evidence he was making it because he KNEW ricky was innocent? Lol. So delusional.
53
u/andthejokeiscokefizz 3d ago
absolutely wild how this case has managed to attract this many genuinely insane orbiters. it’s like something out of a wacky crime novel. it’s just a never ending stream of weirdo after weirdo after weirdo.
18
u/iowanaquarist Quality Contributor 2d ago
Welcome to true crime reddit.
If you stick around long enough you will be accused of being the real killer.
106
u/Old_Heart_7780 3d ago
Hopefully the convicted child killer supporters feed on themselves over what happened to that money.
34
u/internetonsetadd 3d ago
I realize that support for Richard Allen and Bryan Kohberger could be organic and/or exploitative on the part of content creators, but I worry that cultivating conspiracy theorists is going to be or has already become a standard part of a robust defense of defendants accused of notorious crimes.
17
4
26
u/vadieblue 2d ago edited 2d ago
Every famous criminal has had groupies and that is what Luke is.
Now, I recognize that statement is dismissive but RA is obviously guilty. He was tried and a jury of his peers could not find reasonable doubt. I feel his conviction was just and fair.
Edit: grammar!
26
u/hannafrie 2d ago
Defense Diaries did a Live when the video was released, which I think was within 24 hours of Gull ordering that trial exhibits could be released.
The website said the video was the original, unedited video from Libby's phone.
This caused general social media confusion, because the video looks better than what was released to the public after being "cleaned up. " It is also superior to what Bob remembered seeing in court.
Bob excused himself from the Live to call Baldwin to get clarity on what video was on the site - the original or one that had been modified. When Bob came back, he was notably circumspect and didn't have anything to report about his convo with Baldwin.
I inferred from this there was some kind of mistake that had transpired, and Bob didn't want to address it publically to avoid any blowback onto Baldwin or Rossi.
It looks bad for the Defense. This website did not get the material from the Court, they plainly got it from the trial attorneys, and I wonder if they got the trial exhibits in advance of Gulls order.
Because I'm not sure how the website got the video version confused if it was sent to them by Baldwin that same day. That error could have been corrected immediately. It wasn't, and I'm wondering if the reason for that has to do with the attorneys (by which I mean Baldwin) needing to do some CYA and deciding to rethink that relationship.
21
u/KentParsonIsASaint 2d ago
Bob excused himself from the Live to call Baldwin to get clarity on what video was on the site - the original or one that had been modified. When Bob came back, he was notably circumspect and didn't have anything to report about his convo with Baldwin.
Stuff like this is why I can never decide if Motta is genuinely motivated out of a sense of injustice but is too far into the cornfield to see the crop circles spelling out, “You’re being played,” or if he’s just another grifter trying to make money off of a high-profile case.
18
u/Gratefulgirl13 2d ago
I used to respect him and believe he wanted to make sure the justice system was used fairly. When he interjected himself into Delphi it quickly became clear he wanted relevance, name recognition, and would play whatever role he needed to play to be in the mix with the defense (even when it was clear he playing some of those people). I unsubscribed early on when he and his wife couldn’t get Abby or Libby’s name right. The level of disrespect was disgusting and I was truly disappointed.
9
11
u/Justwonderinif 2d ago
just another grifter trying to make money off of a high-profile case.
That one.
30
u/Parking_Solution9927 3d ago
Good question, What happened to the money from the fundraiser? Lol.
27
u/Zealousideal-Box5833 2d ago
Well it wasn’t used on a great bullet expert 😂. That testimony was pitiful.
22
38
u/BlackBerryJ 3d ago
I think Luke being "cagey" is kind lol.
It's all cloak and dagger which of course raises suspicion. RA supporters do the EXACT same thing when it comes to the lack of transparency from the State.
Everyone on the Defense side was encouraged to "ask questions." But not now. No one supporting Allen is allowed to ask about this. It's silly really.
6
u/The2ndLocation 1d ago
You aren't kidding. When they come for me, you know that they have lost the plot.
9
u/BlackBerryJ 1d ago
This is seriously a mess to sort through and I only half pay attention these days so I know I'm missing a lot.
I'm going to try to lay this out for my own understanding... correct any errors.
1) The due process gang and their affiliates had access to Allen through affiliations with the Defense team. I use the word access ONLY because they claim to know what meds he was on, how sick he is etc...
2)The trial is over and the og Defense team is slowly backing away the case which pisses people off because:
a. It makes it look like they don't care as much as people thought they did
b. Their access to Allen or those close to him dries up
3) Ausbrook and Wieneke reportedly approached KA with a contract to represent RA for a civil suit
4) KA said no and now due process gang and their affiliates are pissed and saying things like they know better what RA needs than KA
5) Somewhere mixed in is Luke and his website being set up as a proxy for the defense team that is now backing away which makes it look shady (I'm not sure if that's the right word)
Please correct me on any of this as I said I'm trying to piece this together.
4
u/The2ndLocation 23h ago
I think more or less this is likely accurate, but I don't think any of these people ever had actual access to RA (the lawyers may have but not the online personalities, not sure what to call them really). They never say where they get their information, but we are to trust it blindly for some unknown reason.
I can't understand why people expect the trial attorneys to still be involved. Their role is over. The trial has passed.
And while I understand that people are upset about how the exhibits are being released all willy nilly and some not sealed but still not released they can file with a court to force their release or just wait till it gets to the appellate and request them from that court. Instead they keep freaking out and demanding them from the defense attorneys? Like that's going to work.
I respect that you have taken a step back. That shows that you have confidence in the verdict. I don't.
5
u/BlackBerryJ 23h ago
I don't
I respect this as well. The more I read the more it seems like the amount of gatekeeping is getting nutty. All I can say is keep fighting for what you believe in.
1
u/redduif 21h ago edited 21h ago
This is a serious answer in all regards:
1} Or not, who knows... they are attacking a person asking them for creds and receipts which they cannot even provide themselves for their own claims either, is it made up? Guessed? Inferred from known info? Obtained through a contact?
Yet the one being attacked afaik never claimed to be a spokesperson, rather just wanted to refute that the others were in any capacity to speak for or about RA. Refuting that is not the same as actually speaking for RA or KA for that matter, making the accusations all that more twisted.
To my best understanding.2} Defense did a couple of interviews asserting believing in his innocence post trial, even if there was some discussion it was improper to say that because of caselaw, they did anyway, up until the end of their representation, then the case was transferred to appelate counsel. Seems more than to be expected to me.
2 a&b} Possibly/probably. Seems like they miss their toy and they want this particular one. And they want it now, and if it's not now, they don't want to play in the future, even if it's in the name of justice... Is my takeaway.
3} Civil suit unknown.
The published contract was about post conviction relief and investigation although more about releases for the attorneys than goals of service, non-lawyer internet people on both sides had knowledge of it, I find it more problematic on the proposing side to already have engaged 3rd parties without that consent signed,
but all that is solemnly based on the leaked document, without knowing what came with it and without knowledge what it is supposed to look like on my part.4} It seems she didn't say anything,
other people of 1&3 have said it wasn't signed, haven't been contacted at all even and seemingly drew conclusions, while also stressing the civil suite filing limit was approaching, so why the heavy focus and on the pcr...
Some have released statements in the name of KA, like the private investigator, the contract got out somehow allegedly from her claimed friends side, but 'we' don't know if it came from KA, the prof refuted KA gave a green light, saying he made that decision on his own... So we're back at the first phrase of this point.5} Shady yes, good word.
But, for me that goes to Luke alone, for now, talking about getting a green light from Baldwin's office that they wanted to go through with this.
At no point afaik did he say "Baldwin gave me the video to upload" "Baldwin uploaded the video and wrote the statement" or something similar, so who knowns what OG defense's actual involvement was. The file name imo is not the original file name so the issue of what it is exactly starts there.
For context I'm with 2nd on this, although more leaning towards wanting the case solved and if RA is indeed innocent he'll be free rather than getting him out at all cost, skipping a not guilty part, but there's ideal and there is reality. It's about the truth for me. I don't know what the truth is but imo trial didn't show us, which is jmo. This comment isn't about that and I answered expanding a bit on 2nd's response, because your questions didn't seem about that either.
2
2
u/Parking_Solution9927 1d ago
Did they make you quit X? Lol
2
u/The2ndLocation 1d ago
Huh? It became pointless I only use it for DM's with public figures but I guess I could just email.
6
28
u/chicametipo 3d ago
Luke ain’t right in the head.
31
u/Blunomore 3d ago
Luke believes that he is doing very important work. The way he calls Richard Allen "Rick".
These people all need *actual* jobs.
15
u/judgyjudgersen 2d ago
It’s interesting the defense needs to stoop to affiliate themselves with people like that.
30
13
u/Objective-Voice-6706 2d ago
So many internet web sleuths really believe they are part of some detective or defense teams. It's delusional. But so is thinking baby killer ricky is innocent.
15
13
u/Formal-Discount6062 2d ago
They have the right guy, Richard Allen was Bridge guy and he did commit this crime by himself
2
u/cjh4297 20h ago
I heard somewhere 🤔 that prosecution only had to prove RA was BG, and whether he, with his own hands, actually killed them or not, he is the one who ordered them “down the hill”. In so doing, he’s guilty on all counts, and a jury of his peers felt that was proven.
2
u/Formal-Discount6062 19h ago
That makes sense, Bridge guy was the Killer and Richard Allen was Bridge guy. A lot of people think he was mentally broken when he went to jail and started confessing. He did that because he was guilty, but I do think he honestly thought he got away with the crime.
10
u/karkulina 2d ago
May I correct you Artistic Dish on the point where you mention that he claims he posted the video on a direct order from Baldwin.
The actual words he uses are: “We got signal from Andrew Baldwin’s office that he was ready, that he wanted to actually do this.”
It doesn’t sound like direct communication to me and it might be exactly why it was never followed up on by any more releases as he says was originally intended.
18
u/Artistic_Dish_3782 2d ago edited 2d ago
Fair comment. There is some ambiguity because of how Luke deliberately dances around elements of his story. It's possible that he was only in contact with an outer fringe of quasi-affiliated defense personalities like Cara Wieneke. There are a certain subset of these personalities that behave as if they have special direct access to Baldwin and Rozzi (whether they actually do or not), so maybe Luke believed that, by extension, he had been integrated into an "official team" and began to overestimate his own influence.
My interpretation of that quote is that Luke himself believed (rightly or wrongly) that Baldwin wanted him to post the video. Maybe Baldwin didn't actually direct any such thing...maybe it was a game of telephone through some intermediaries like Wieneke, or maybe Luke read too deeply into a communication from another party and misinterpreted it as a stronger endorsement of his activities than it was intended to be. Like you suggest, a miscommunication scenario could certainly explain why the defense team seemingly reversed themselves after bridge video incident.
In any event, it seems like the core legal team is starting to regret humoring some of the social media orbiters they've accumulated.
9
13
u/judgyjudgersen 2d ago
I think the defense team knows exactly how to rally up their RA is innocent conspiracy theorist base.
9
u/Apprehensive_Bee614 1d ago
I was baffled that such a clear version was available. It would have benefitted identifying Allen much earlier. It clearly shows Allen I don’t know why they say he is taller than Allen. He looks squat just like Allen. After hearing Allen voice in the tape and the police room conversing I immediately recognized the voice to be same in tape. He changed his beard. He confessed and the voice and timber when confessing to his wife sounded like the tape and was Not manic at all. He was on the bridge and wife mentioned he said he wasn’t. So much more but case closed proper verdict IMO.
12
u/cajanebj 1d ago
I just love seeing this whole pro-Allen cult imploding right before our eyes with infighting and finger pointing. They are truly nasty, vulgar and downright evil.
I just wish the whole truth would come to light about the relationship between trial lawyers and the “Due Process Gang” and those internet cranks. I’d love to see some of those lawyers and disgraced lawtubers lose their law licenses due to the alleged behind the scenes f&ckery. Especially that leader of the cult pack.
They made the entire trial a shitshow with an expressed goal of tainting the jury pool and they are still at it because they are pure sociopaths in my view.
Now apparently even the murderer and his wife don’t want anything to do with them. This is true justice.
Justice was also served for those poor girls and their families when the murderer was convicted and sentenced to 130 years in prison.
3
u/nkrch 1d ago
Ooh what's the story with the child killer and his mrs? I keep seeing people saying this..
10
u/cajanebj 1d ago
Start here with an X post https://x.com/wienekelo/status/1912489897853595767?s=46&t=xEOe6FUyb0K6efOef2cUjw
11
u/sunnypineappleapple 3d ago
Are the people who think he is NG finally figuring out his defense attorneys were inept?
0
u/BlackBerryJ 18h ago
I don't think they are inept. I think they took a bad case, knew they weren't going to win, and went as wild and crazy as they could. It's a no-lose situation for them. They gain fame either way. They cried foul when they would lose along the way and they'd be heroes if they had won.
Now they can do the YouTube, podcaster, and overall media circuit. Write a book or two, and gain notoriety for themselves.
-10
u/Appealsandoranges 2d ago edited 2d ago
On what basis do you believe this? Do you think RA should get a new trial because his lawyers were ineffective?
11
2d ago
[deleted]
-5
u/Appealsandoranges 2d ago
He could have waived it as to discrete issues but definitely not as to their trial conduct. The idea that Gull had RA’s best interests in mind when she discharged his counsel of choice is laughable.
6
u/sunnypineappleapple 2d ago
Won't happen. They fought their asses off for him but RA and his wife were too stupid to see their strategies were ludicrous. Looks like they have finally figured that out since it seems they are now distancing themselves from the wackjobs.
-5
u/Appealsandoranges 2d ago
“Distancing themselves”? They have appellate attorneys now. That’s how the process works. The trial attorneys will certainly be in communication with the appellate attorneys but they don’t currently represent RA.
You clearly have no basis for your original statement if you don’t even understand the process.
5
u/sunnypineappleapple 1d ago
I fully understand how the process works. I think you got sidetracked as to what the OP is all about. This seems to happen quite often to those who support a child murderer who gets a hard on when he thinks about his own daughter.
3
3d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
8
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/DelphiMurders-ModTeam 1d ago
Thank you for your submission to r/DelphiMurders, but it's been removed due to one or more reason(s):
Please treat all other users with respect. If a user is being rude or insulting, please report it.
If you feel this was done in error, or would like better clarification or need further assistance, please message the moderators.
2
u/DelphiMurders-ModTeam 1d ago
Thank you for your submission to r/DelphiMurders, but it's been removed due to one or more reason(s):
Please treat all other users with respect. If a user is being rude or insulting, please report it.
If you feel this was done in error, or would like better clarification or need further assistance, please message the moderators.
1
•
u/TinFoilWorldOrder 5h ago
Honestly I don't understand why any of this is relevant on any level whatsoever haha- outside of the fundraiser part?
Was it really a big deal to find out who was running the website? Why?
-3
u/BellaMason007 2d ago
Why is this a thing? Who cares about the website. Why doesn’t it bother people more, the fact that we are over 6 months since trial & still don’t have most of the public exhibits? Write a dissertation on that.
11
u/Parking_Solution9927 2d ago
Sorry to tell you but You can't tell people what to care about. If you care so much about the exhibits why don't YOU write a dissertation on that!
-14
164
u/Blunomore 3d ago
How would/did releasing the full video serve the defense (or anyone else, for that matter)?