Note from Bradley Rozzi's Interview on DD

The third installment in my note-taking so you don't have to watch it series features Brad Rozzi, who will be back on the program in the next couple of weeks to talk about the trial. This interview was shorter than the previous installments, and focuses on the events leading up to the trial. I will document and post that future episode.

- The hosts introduce the podcast, inform everyone that they have a limited amount of time for this interview.

- Bradley Rozzi joins the podcast and pleasantries are exchanged.

- Bob asks if he was able to watch his colleagues on the previous two episodes.

- Rozzi says that he was able to watch the early part of Auger’s interview, and tuned out during the digital forensics discussion.

- He compliments Auger for her amazing work with technical and dry subject matter, and highlights how important understanding that data is to the future of criminal defense work.

- Turning to Baldwin’s interview, he said he saw most of it. Rozzi describes him as an orator and a brilliant guy who talks from the heart, and in his opinion sometimes talks too much.

- He mentions briefly some of the key differences between their styles and motivations.

- Bob asks about Rozzi’s family and work history.

- Rozzi spends several minutes talking about his wife, and how incredibly supportive she was during the previous two years.

- He details how he joined his current firm, and explains that he is a small-town lawyer that usually deals with a large volume of common legal matters.

- Rozzi says that Baldwin is more of a litigator and project attorney who will scour documents and meticulously analyze them.

- He says that he and Auger have very similar practices.

- Ali asks if Rozzi is aware of how much attention his fashion choices garnered during the trial.

- He says that, respectfully, he was not aware of the interest on social media regarding the case prior to trial.

- Rozzi says that he first met Bob at the Supreme Court hearing for Allen, and that they later had lunch.

- He remarks that he appreciated hearing his feedback as a lawyer more than a lay person.

- Rozzi’s wife did tell him that there was interest in his fashion choices, but he said he was focused on the trial. He specifies that he buys and selects his own clothing, and he thinks that a sharp look is important for making a positive first impression.

- Bob shares an adage about disheveled-looking lawyers not having attention to detail.

- Bob asks if Richard Allen was already in Westville when he and Baldwin entered their appearance as his attorneys.

- Rozzi replies that he believes Allen was in transition but not yet there.

- He stops to point out that he is not good with dates and will likely be giving approximations, but that Baldwin can recall them accurately.

- Ali remarks that Baldwin had encyclopedic knowledge of various subjects, and then asks about the first meeting the defense team had with Allen.

- Rozzi confirms that their first meeting took place at Westville.

- Ali asks what his first impression of their client was.

- He replies that he is very task-oriented, and emotionally reserved in his approach to his work.

- In their first meeting with Allen, he observed that he was “bound and gagged if you will.” Rozzi elaborates that he was shackled, belly chained, and his client was physically over-secured in the most secure unit in the State of Indiana. He said it was similar to conditions he’s seen for housing Death Row inmates.

- He corroborates Baldwin’s story about having to lift a bottle of water to Allen’s lips since he did not have the freedom of movement to do so himself.

- Rozzi remarks that the meeting took place in an office, and that the door had to be left open and a guard was immediately outside. He points out that this is unusual.

- Ali asks whether the in-facility camera included audio.

- He explains that he was aware that there was audio on the camcorder footage, and he was not concerned about any “reindeer games” with that. They didn’t discover that there was audio on some of the footage until months after Allen was initially housed in Westville.

- Ali reminds him that at the time of the safekeeping hearing that Bob also attended, John Galipeau (the former warden) testified that there was no audio recording on the camcorder.

- Bob explains that his perspective as a criminal defense attorney. He was offended by the concept that Allen would be recorded in any way while speaking to his legal counsel, and he assumes that government employees are always listening in even if they are not supposed to. He found it shocking at trial to learn that audio had been recorded at all.

- Rozzi comments that initially the camcorder was not present, that it was introduced sometime in early 2023 when “things started going really South for Rick at the DOC.” He believes there was no recording of any type for several months, but they were not allowed confidentiality and privacy with their client.

- He highlights that the concept of attorney-client privilege is one of the most significant aspects of this case that was unusual and burdensome to navigate.

- He claims that from when they began their representation of Allen in October 2022 all the way until his sentencing, they never had privacy with their client. He believes this will matter at the appellate level.

- Rozzi explains that at the prison there was always a door cracked with a guard located right next to it, or a camcorder was placed in the window with Allen facing it with possibly one exception.

- Then with respect to court appearances, prison guards and the SRT (Strategic or Special Response Team) was responsible for transporting him. During transportation, Allen was in full-harness transport restraints with a restraint belt. When they would have conferences with him in the courthouse, they were in a hallway with five to six tactical officers standing directly behind them. At Carroll County, four deputies were assigned to Allen and were always present in the room with him and his attorneys.

- Rozzi states that he does not believe it is right or fair that conversations with a client in any circumstance were not confidential. He made requests regarding these unusual circumstances, and no changes were made.

- Bob asks Rozzi if there was a safekeeping hearing with regards to Allen being moved from the local jail into the prison system or just an order issued by the judge.

- He replies that his understanding is that shortly after his arrest, Sheriff Tobe Leazenby took the position that Allen needed to be removed from their facility due to safety issues, a petition motion was filed with the judge, who signed off on it due to the situation being “a shitshow.”

- Rozzi continues that according to his understanding there was never a due process hearing with regard to Allen, and there is a burden in the safekeeping statute regarding exceptional detention circumstances.

- Bob says the end result of the condition of his client’s incarceration cannot be ignored, and produced confessions for the State. His interpretation in his “conspiracy brain” is that after emotionally manipulative interrogations failed to elicit a response from Richard Allen, Holeman decided to send the suspect to a maximum-security prison in Indiana, implying the intent was to pressure or coerce a confession through harsh conditions.

- Bob asks Rozzi if, prior to the safekeeping hearing (which Bob also attended), he was able to view the videos. Or if Allen conveyed the conditions and he made his own observations.

- Rozzi clarifies that Allen communicated concerns, and that as a practice he presumes all clients exaggerate complaints while incarcerated to a certain degree, and they relied on their own observations while in the same facility.

- At one point Rozzi asked to see Allen’s cell, which was located nearby. He points out that he was once an IDOC employee, and he has also been in many detention facilities as a legal professional. He claims that he was prevented from viewing the cell, and that whoever stopped him radioed to the warden who denied them permission to view the cell.

- So he summarizes that it was a combination of what Allen communicated to them, their own observations, and information from other inmates such as Robert Baston (note: convicted of a Class A Felony - Child Molesting of a 6 year old victim). He says that despite the reputation that lawyers have the tendency to over-sensationalize, he strives to be conservative and accurate in his documentation.

- He comments that during the trial, when the Defense wanted to continue showing footage of Allen’s incarceration, they were told enough had been seen.

- He describes Allen was sleeping on the ground, he was in a “caveman gown” (likely a suicide gown), in a cell that was either 8’ x 12’ or 10’ x 4.’

- Ali asks him to talk about learning about the guard’s connection to either Vinlanders or Odinism, and if he was aware of the report on Odinism prepared by ISP.

- Rozzi says that in terms of chronology, Baldwin is able to better answer that question. But he generally recalls traveling to Westville, being vaguely aware of Odinist ties to the case and the Vinlanders or Pagan Norse activity in prisons. Baldwin took photos or videos of the patches, then researched them later. As they became more familiar with the discovery provided, he had difficulty believing that it was a coincidence that LE had seriously investigated the possibility of an obscure ritualistic killing tied to Odinism, and there were also DOC employees wearing patches indicating they were practitioners of the same niche religion.

- He says that it took him a very long time to come to that realization, he doesn’t believe in conspiracies, but thinks it likely Baldwin understood it much earlier than he did. He was faintly aware that there were white supremacists in prison that had an affiliated religion, but he wasn’t aware of the prevalence, and thought it was practiced by inmates only, not DOC employees.

- Ali asks if they ever intended to convert the Franks memo (or facts contained in the memo) into a motion to let bond.

- Rozzi says that his recollection is that they filed the motion to let bail because they knew the PCA was lean, but they weren’t quite prepared for the first bail hearing due to the volume of discovery. They were still organizing and consuming the discovery from the Prosecution when they learned about the statements Allen was making and the disturbing circumstances at Westville. They opted not to exhaust time or resources on a bail hearing, knowing that there were at least 30 incriminating statements.

- Ali clarifies that she was not aware that the confessions existed for the time period she was asking about, and remarks that they will speak in detail about the confessions next time Rozzi appears on the program.

- Bob points out that the public was not aware of those confessions, and he had traveled up for the bond hearing. But then they learned the situation had evolved into a different type of hearing, and that is when the public first learned about the inculpatory statements made by Allen. Bob suggests that because the public was present for that hearing, there was some gamesmanship by McLeland when he suggested that the Franks memo was a way to circumvent the gag order.

- Bob asks Rozzi to return to the statement he made about not being a conspiracy theorist, and asks how he received the Franks memo, since it was so unconventional.

- Rozzi laughs and explains that he is aware that when Baldwin is emotionally invested, he channels that energy into writing. He says that one of the most valuable skills as a lawyer is to be able to take a fact and expound on it to reveal why it is meaningful. He says that Baldwin excels in this area, and he was able to consume a vast amount of information and then order it on paper.

- He recalls receiving multiple drafts of the Franks memo per day, reviewing them, and giving feedback that it felt more like a book than a legal pleading. There was a revision process where Rozzi would pare down the document, and Baldwin would add to it.

- He insists that he is not distancing himself from the pleading, he does not file junk pleadings and he stands behind everything that was filed. However, he feels that filing is more reflecting of Baldwin’s way of practicing law over the last few decades than his own.

- He said there were many discussions regarding the Franks memo, what impact it would have, and how it might be viewed. Rozzi remarks that he drastically trimmed some content from the document, and he takes accountability for the final product.

- Rozzi suggests that they can have a conversation that explores what would have been done differently at his next appearance on the program.

- Bob discusses the division of labor, and how Rozzi took point on the unspent bullet casing and confessions, because he excels at technical arguments. Bob compliments him on his handling of the ballistic evidence, and says that in their next conversation they will discuss the trial.

- Bob communicates his surprise that Judge Gull did not immediately relocate Allen after the safekeeping hearing, and asks how he felt leaving that day.

- Rozzi indicates that at that time of the safekeeping hearing he did not have a sense of how the judge was feeling, but that they had a cordial interaction.

- He says he wants to halt, and point out that in November or December of 2022 he recognized that the circumstances in Westville and the isolation were very detrimental to a pretrial detainee. He emphasizes that there was no suggestion of abuse by IDOC staff. But he understood that the circumstances of Allen’s confinement, the distance for legal counsel to travel, and inconsistent enforcement of prison policies posed considerable challenges when trying to foster the attorney-client relationship.

- Rozzi explains that one of the top priorities in any case he handles is to have a solid attorney-client relationship, and that is facilitated by having contact with your client and listening to them. He felt that the circumstances in Westville created barriers to accomplishing this, so he lobbied the judge and prosecutor, to relocate Allen.

- Rozzi approached the Cass County Sheriff to ask if he would be willing to house him. Although the Sheriff was apprehensive, he agreed to do so. Rozzi states that he has a good working relationship with McLeland, and has known him for a long time. Judge Gull and McLeland agreed to the transfer.

- He says that he then received a message that the Sheriff is not really interested and has concerns about transporting Allen from Logansport to Delphi. Rozzi pointed out that resources existed to transport Allen from Westville to Delphi, but he was perplexed that transport from the Cass County Jail to Carroll County was an issue.

- Up until that point, Rozzi says he was resistant to the idea of any conspiracy. But the sudden change of heart from the Sheriff coupled with the complexity of the surveillance and monitoring of his client persuaded him that something was amiss.

- He states that Allen was isolated, and the only human contact he had was with a four-time convicted felon housed next door to him that had “raped and pillaged his whole life.” He claims that Allen would yell at that inmate, and then he would yell back at Allen that he was a “baby killer.”

- Bob asks Rozzi what his knowledge of the Delphi case was before being appointed to handle it.

- He replies that he knew very little.

- Rozzi discusses that he has a brother who is a chief detective at the local post, he has numerous relatives in LE, his father was a police chief, and his stepfather was a police officer for 40 years. From them he learned that it is healthy to compartmentalize your work, and then when you are away, not to consume anything related to crime.

- His experience with friends and family in law enforcement highlighted the differences between good and bad cops, and he is committed to holding the latter accountable for their actions.

- He clearly states “I do not have time to have personal vendettas against the Jerry Holemans of the world...but I do have time to hold them accountable.”

- Ali asks if Judge Gull's negative comments about the defense, including calling them liars for misrepresenting confinement conditions, were the first indication that Rozzi believed the judge held a negative view of them. She also inquires how those statements impacted his representation of the client.

- Rozzi expressed concern over how Judge Gull characterized him in response to the safekeeping motion, but was unsure if he provided enough evidence to support his case. He took some responsibility for the final product's quality and wished he had known the video was likely in their possession. He clarified that, if they had the video, it was still part of the discovery awaiting screening, of which he was unaware.

- He is upset that he was not able to provide more evidence at that hearing, either in the form of video, audio, or testimony from IDOC employees.

- He says that October 19, 2023 was the worst day of his professional life, and he felt like from that point forward they were fighting a losing battle.

- Ali asks if that was the day the State sent the email about 3^rd party witnesses, and Rozzi says that it was the day they were in chambers in Fort Wayne.

- Bob interrupts and describes it as “The Ambush.”

- Rozzi concluded that Judge Gull was determined to remove them from the case, and would use any legal means at her disposal. While he disagreed, he understood it was her prerogative. At that moment, he realized the defense team wouldn't receive a fair trial, and his suspicions on bias solidified into a belief.

- Bob asks Rozzi to elaborate on what he believes are the judge's questionable actions on the day, and about the events leading up to 10/19/2023.

- He replies that he has trouble remembering the exact chronology but the gist is that “whenever the leak occurred or whatever you want to call it, I don’t know what the right word for it is. The circumstance occurred, um, Andy, I think Andy said when I was watching him last night that he reported to the judge and generally that’s accurate. But what he actually did was call me.”

- Rozzi indicates that Baldwin explained what happened and asked him what they were going to do, and Rozzi replied that he told them that they are going to report it to the judge. He canceled his calendar for the day and drove down to Baldwin’s office and they called Judge Gull together.

- He says that the judge was unhappy and called the situation disturbing. Then he believes the prosecutor insinuated that recusal might be the best approach, and Judge Gull schedule a hearing.

- Between the phone call and the hearing, they worked to determine what happened, what Mitch Westerman did, and how it all unfolded. They were unclear on the template or ground rules for the hearing, and were uncomfortable because their experience differed from the typical disqualifying process.

- He recalls being in chambers, and then he realized there was a plan with an intended outcome and neither defense attorney can dictate anything about the experience. He firmly believed that the intended outcome was the worst in terms of their client’s advocacy.

- Rozzi asked for some time to weigh the options given to them, they discussed them and formulated a plan. Rozzi opted to be the one to speak, since he had no geographic connection and had never met Mitch Westerman. It’s implied that he proposed that Baldwin would recuse, but that Rozzi would remain on the case. That solution was rejected, and Rozzi understood that the intended outcome was to remove both attorneys from the defense team. He realized that because they were in chambers, that they needed to make an official record of what was occurring and requested that the recorder for the court reporter be turned on.

- He points out that building transcripts and other small details makes a big difference at the appellate level, and he feels like they handled the situation in the best way possible given the circumstances. He posits that if they had allowed the judge to publicly scold them, then that would impact the optics of Richard Allen’s defense.

- Bob says that part of 'the Ambush' was that it was the one and only day cameras were approved in the courtroom.

- Rozzi says when he entered the courtroom, he realized that there was an excessive police presence that would be very intimidating to a defendant. He articulates that a defendant should not be intimidated by the environment in the courtroom, but by the facts and evidence the prosecution puts forth.

- Ali says she doesn’t see how her refusal to let just Rozzi stay on aligns with her stated concerns. She suggests it raises serious questions about Judge Gull’s true intent and motivation.

- Bob speculates that Judge Gull’s hidden distaste for the Franks memo is what compelled her to remove them from the case.

- Rozzi said he’s not going to opine on Judge Gull’s decisions.

- Ali asks if Indiana lawyers reached out in support.

- He explains that lawyers and judges pulled him aside to offer words of encouragement.

- Rozzi says that one attorney stopped him at the door of his practice and wanted to do some CLEs (Continuing Legal Education) to raise some money to get them put back on the case. He also had several members of the local Bar reach out, and although he appreciated those messages, none of that were helpful to Richard Allen.

- He points out that the legal professionals most helpful to Richard Allen were those that were willing to offer actionable solutions and advice to take on the unique challenges of this case.

- Ali pauses to ask when Rozzi needs to end the interview, and he says he can continue for a short time.

- Bob asks about the awkward hearing where they entered their appearance pro bono, but two other attorneys were assigned.

- Rozzi says that there was a plan that day to insert themselves back into the case, and they felt that the new attorneys were not forthcoming with information. Rozzi told Baldwin that they should go take their place in the courtroom, and were subsequently ignored by Judge Gull - as he expected.

- He mentions that while he was waiting in the judge's chambers (it is unclear if during this hearing or at a prior time), he saw that she had prepared notes in advance about removing both of them from the case.

- Bob asks if the writ of mandamus was planned, and Rozzi replies that it was not, it was formulated after consulting other legal professionals from Baldwin’s extensive connections and resources.

- Ali explains that the resources that they drew upon in order to escalate the situation to the Indiana Supreme Court helped Richard Allen very much.

- Rozzi counters that it is a bad situation because they have a guilty verdict.

- He suggests that he believes the recusal issue will be important at the appellate level, and says they can discuss that further next week, hinting at a future appearance on the program.

- Bob says he is ending the interview so Rozzi can keep his scheduled plans. He points out that the defense team will be on Lawyer Lee on Friday.

- Rozzi thanks the hosts for their time and advocacy, and says he will speak to them soon.

- Bob points out that the next interview with Rozzi will cover the specifics of the trial.

- Ali thanks all the donors, and the hosts make their closing remarks.

Let me know if there are any typos or errors so that I can make corrections.

Edit: Spelling. Words are hard.