Prosecutors ripped into the latest attempt by attorneys for convicted Delphi killer Richard Allen to have his conviction set aside, saying in their response to the defense’s “motion to correct errors” that  none of the information they included was new and all had been in the hands of defense since well before the trial.

Allen was convicted last year of killing Indiana teenagers Abby Williams and Libby German in 2017 and sentenced to 130 years in prison.

Last month, his attorneys pushed to have the conviction vacated, filing a motion that included a purported “confession” from a man who has since died and challenges to the state’s timeline of the murder.

CArroll County Prosecutor Nicholas McLeland said the defense attempt to present the information as “new evidence” just wasn’t so. The alleged confession, he said, had been in the attorneys hands since last January.

A man named Ron Logan, who owned the land where the teens bodies were found and died in January 2022, reportedly told a fellow inmate that he had killed the girls. But, McLeland said, the defense failed to mention in its motion that the inmate who reported the alleged confession “miserably” failed a polygraph examination when investigators looked deeper into the story.

Further, McLeland noted, the defense “made a choice not to fully explore or present” the claim during trial.

McLeland also noted that several of the details in the confession were directly contradicted by the evidence.

The defense also challenged the state’s contention of a white van that prosecutors said had spooked Allen, prompting him to kill the girls. They claimed that surveillance footage showed that van in the area several minutes after the state said, but McLeland countered that the defense attorneys had come up with their timeline “unverified by legitimate means as to date and time.” He said they offered “zero evidence” to back up their version of the timeline.

McLeland called on the court to reject the defense motion.

“The simplest answer is that a Motion to Correct Error only applies to newly discovered evidence,” he said. “From the Defense’s own admissions this is not newly discovered evidence but rather evidence they had been provided long before trial.”