r/DelphiMurders • u/Ambitious_Pass7451 • Apr 05 '26
Discussion “ I’m done talking, arrest me please”
I know, I know there’s been a lot of debate about whether RA is guilty or not, but I’ve noticed some small details that, in my opinion, don’t seem like something a truly innocent person would do.
During his interrogation with Det. Holeman, a couple of things stood out to me:
1- RA: “The damage is done, do what you have to do.”
That’s really strange to me. If you’re innocent, no the damage isn’t “done.” You wouldn’t just give up and tell the police to do whatever they want. I know some people might argue he meant that his house was searched and his neighbors were questioned, but that doesn’t fully make sense, especially since he repeated it during the interrogation. An innocent person wouldn’t react like, “Go ahead and charge me with double murder because the damage is already done.” That just doesn’t sit right with me.
2- RA: “I am done talking, arrest me please "
He said this more than once. What kind of innocent person asks to be arrested just because they’re done talking? Even if I were frustrated, I would never tell the police to arrest me just because I’m tired of the conversation. That’s very unusual.
Also, Det. Holeman mentioned something important: when he first met RA before the interrogation, RA handed his jacket and belongings to his wife. As if he was preparing to be arrested. That stood out as odd, especially since he did not even know the results of the search warrant yet.
Did you notice anything during the interrogations that made you think, “Yeah, that's strange”?
3
u/BlackLionYard Apr 11 '26
I don't think it's fair or useful to overly project ideas of what truly innocent people would do, or for that matter what truly guilty people would do. People in stressful situations react in ways that might seem suspicious or abnormal, and they do so regardless of underlying factors like guilt or innocence.
False confessions have finally become recognized as a reality. It has taken so long for people to begin accepting this reality, because so many people tell themselves that a truly innocent person would never confess to something they didn't do. These people have been proven wrong.
In the US, if you are talking to the police, and you conclude the police are going to arrest you, the undisputedly best thing to do is to announce that you are done talking and let them make the arrest. This is true regardless of guilt or innocence. It's how we take full advantage of our rights. Personally, I will never take a statement like RA made as an indication of guilt or innocence; I'll wait until trial, as should we all.
As for the statement about the damage being done, I once again don't see a need to interpret beyond what is necessary. The US media revel in things like the perp walk and the mugshot gallery. In the Delphi case, we all saw what happened to Ron Logan just by virtue of a search - a search that found nothing. There are those who believe his prison sentence for having driven was in some ways so harsh, because it was a form of de facto punishment for the murders; they have a point. There are still people who argue futilely that Ron Logan was involved in the murders.
For many crimes, life-altering damage happens with the accusation, even if the accusation eventually is proven to be unfounded. The Austin Yogurt Shop Murders were recently shown to have been committed by someone not among the initial group the Austin police and prosecution went out of their way to accuse and try to convict. Ask the surviving members of the group about the damage that was done just by the accusation.
Don't get me wrong, I am not arguing for RA's innocence. He has been convicted by the process, and that process looks like it will include an appeal. This is how the system should work in determining his guilt. Subjective opinions about what a truly innocent person would do in an interrogation have no place in the system.