What does the future hold for Judge Gull, Richard Allen, and the entire case of the Delphi murders? This question looms large as the case, already shrouded in mystery and tragedy, spirals into a complex legal quagmire. The latest twist involves Judge Gull's contentious response to the defense of Richard Allen, raising critical questions about the judicial process and the rights of the accused. Attorney and former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani sheds light on this convoluted situation in a candid discussion with Tony Brueski on the "Hidden Killers" podcast.
 
 Rahmani's take on Judge Gull's stance and the response from Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita is one of bewilderment and concern. He highlights the oddity of the case, noting, "You have Judge Gull who's doubling down... but you didn't have a hearing. You didn't give them notice. You didn't give them an opportunity to present their case." Rahmani argues that Judge Gull's decision to disqualify Allen's lawyers without proper procedural steps is a significant misstep, potentially impacting the outcome of the case.
 
 The core issue revolves around whether the actions of Allen's attorneys, Rozzi and Baldwin, constituted incompetence, as Judge Gull suggests. Rahmani questions the basis for this accusation, emphasizing the need for an evidentiary hearing to substantiate such claims. He points out that merely having sensitive material on a conference table in a private office doesn't inherently imply incompetence. The attorneys' failure to secure the materials more rigorously, while unfortunate, doesn't automatically equate to malpractice.
 
 Moreover, Rahmani criticizes Judge Gull's approach to addressing the potential conflict of interest. He contends that a more prudent path would have been focusing on the potential conflict, rather than alleging incompetence without a thorough investigation. This misstep by Judge Gull not only complicates the case but also opens the door for potential appeals and further legal entanglements.
 
 Rahmani delves into the intricacies of the writ of mandamus filed by Allen’s defense. He explains that this extraordinary writ, typically used to direct a higher judge to compel a judge to follow the law, may not have been the appropriate procedural route. This choice, he suggests, could lead to an appellate issue, providing Allen a significant basis for appeal should he be convicted.
 
 The former prosecutor also reflects on the broader implications of the case, particularly in light of the response from the Attorney General's office. The suggestion to follow the normal appellate process, rather than pursuing a writ of mandamus, indicates a concern for maintaining procedural integrity. Rahmani observes, "You want to create that record on appeal," underscoring the importance of building a robust legal foundation to withstand potential appeals.
 
 The conversation with Rahmani concludes with a critical look at the future of the case. He warns of the possibility that procedural missteps could lead to a retrial, a scenario that would be a nightmare for prosecutors and further prolong the agony for all involved. As the case unfolds, the quest for justice for Abby and Libby, the young victims in the Delphi murders, becomes entangled in a web of legal complexities.
 
 As the Delphi murder case continues to evolve, it raises fundamental questions about the balance of justice, the rights of the accused, and the competency of the judicial system. The discussion with Neama Rahmani on "Hidden Killers" provides a sobering glimpse into the legal labyrinth surrounding Richard Allen's case, leaving observers to ponder: Can justice be served amid such judicial turmoil?
Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj
Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
The latest on Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK’s Unconfessed Crimes