Found Deceased IN - Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #156

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
What about DNA from under the girl/s' fingernails?
Maybe they both or one of them fought for their life?

Moo
The search warrant for Ron Logan's property prepared by the FBI (See link below) specifically says the girls bodies showed no sign of a struggle or fight. So I assume that would mean no skin of the murderer under their fingernails, as well as no defensive wounds on their hands and arms. Also, I think the murderous attack on the girls was very fast, so they had no opportunity to resist, MOO

 
Last edited:
I don’t want to search for that interview, just because we are all overwhelmed with them, all these years. So I can’t quote him. But if he said, I saw it and immediately felt like vomiting, I would not be surprised. So either it was shockingly nasty, or maybe religiously indecent. Both would cause such a reaction in DC, I assume, but I imagine BG, a man who goes to church with his wife and deep inside, ridicules religion? But deep inside, as he is “on the good side of the law and religion”.
No need to search for the interview IMO. We’ve had speculation that the scene was shocking and some folks speculating something less abhorrent. I don’t know what to think but if DC found the scene nauseating after many years in law enforcement it must have been especially bad.
 
I wonder the conservation officer dropped the ball? Maybe wrote something that BG said he was on the trail the day before or the day after?

You know, humans are flawed and do make mistakes.

The "fact" that he told a conservation officer and not an official member of LE was actually pretty clever in that respect
In the state of Indiana, Conservation Officers are fully sworn officers and considered members of LE.
 
I didn't mean to write so much on sketches as I know a tired topic and with RA now arrested they mean very little compared to evidence! I just found these articles a good refresher on their details...and then apparently couldn't help myself.

About the first sketch: Witness aided in sketch of suspect in Indiana teens' deaths

Second sketch: 'New' Delphi suspect sketch was drawn days after murders of 2 Indiana girls, artist says

The YBG sketch was drawn February 17th and there are almost no details besides the witness "seeing something that they felt needed to be reported." No date, no time, no clue as to the activity YBG was doing, which leads me to believe that whatever he was doing and when became *very* relevant and right in line with the investigation.

I am thinking that OBG is RA the day of the murders and YBG is a RA sighting on a later day or later in the day?

Up until today I thought no way was RA that YBG sketch. I had no doubt RA was BG, but just not that sketch. But I changed my mind really looking at RA pictures today. I am kind of embarrassed that I didn't notice earlier, but that hairline of his - even if just a shadow as shaved - is actually not very receded and in a few pictures when his hair is longer I think I can see a thick, wavy texture. The eyelids are a perfect match in the side by side photos. It's not the kind of sketch that would catch him alone - I still think the physical only tips were mostly 20 yr olds - and obviously he can order a beer and hand over a prescription next to it, lol, but I see how it was made now.
 
Last edited:
New interview with Doug Carter (bless him) pushing the KAK connection further...
The article does say that. But this is when I get frustrated with the media, because in that paragraph where it talks about how LE is still investigating KAK, it isn't an actual quote from DC, so we don't know if DC literally said anything about KAK, or if the person reporting added that. If DC said it, I wish they would quote it...would be much more persuasive.
 
The search warrant for Ron Logan's property prepared by the FBI (See link below) specifically says the girls bodies showed no sign of a struggle or fight. So I assume that would mean no skin of the murderer under their fingernails, as well as no defensive wounds on their hands and arms. Also, I think the murderous attack on the girls was very fast, so they had no opportunity to resist, MOO

Unfortunately, it’s as if Abby and Libby had no chance to defend themselves.
 
I’ve wondered why two deer would be attracted to the area where two bodies were lying at all? Honestly that is just so bizarre to me. I’m no expert on animal behaviour but it just seems odd to me. Deer are not going to eat the remains. Would the bodies smell odd to them and keep them away generally? Would the presence of so many people in the general area in the time before the girls were found keep them away? Apparently not - but why not? Was there a station set up to draw deer into that general area? If so, why? So weird. Maybe its not as odd as I think it is…
I live in a pretty rural area with trails etc and I see deer all the time when I am out walking my dogs. Some of the deer tend to run away immediately but others will stand and watch and be very curious about us. For me them being around is not an overly odd thing but that's just my own experience.
 
I've read several times recently that this investigation is still open. If they have their suspect, I wonder what they are still investigating.
This is just standard LE and prosecutor lingo they always say this right up till they get a conviction. if they didn't the defense can use it against them. Defense could say you focused in on my client and quit looking at anyone else blah blah blah. I wouldn't read anything in to it.
 
The whole thing is spooky to me. The killer sounds like someone who, at the time of the killings, was zoned into his own little world behaving oddly and acting out beyond the means necessary.

One wonders. With serial killers, they describe detachment and strange feeling of dissociation that happens before the episode. This guy was in his own word, as you correctly said.
<modsnip: no supporting links>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have wild deer (turkeys, etc.) here. The turkey and deer are used to people since they live in/on the edge of the city. They don't run off as you might imagine. They just strut on by going from point A to point B if they aren't feeling threatened. And oddly, cars aren't threatening to them. I sure wish they were. They'll slowly strut on across a 4 lane road with no fear. I just don't think their brains have evolved with things like humans and cars can pose a threat to them and they need to run off and hide. Also, birds (jay's towhee's, etc.) are getting used to people as well. I've had jay's hop by doing bird business literally 1' from where I was sitting and reading. I had one land 3 ' from me as I was watering. It cocked its head and stared up at me as I stood frozen holding a hose. It watched me for a moment, then hopped a foot away to eat blueberries while I was standing 3' away. Now if I had flapped my arms around or yelled I know it would have flown off because it felt threatened. Now if only that would work with the darn woodpeckers. I can get within a foot from them and they won't fly off, not matter how much yelling and arm flapping I'm doing. I'm also hitting the pole they are on with a broom handle and they will simply move to the side opposite of me. They are eye level! Not like they are 15' up from where I am.

JMO but I think since some wild animals live in close proximity to us they are relaxed about humans more than I wish they were.

When I am returning home, I often see deers waiting till I drive closer, light the pass, and then they cross the road. Bunnies do the same. Once, in winter, I was slowly driving up the hill, and a moose herd crossed the snowy path, in front of my car. <modsnip: quoted post removed>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I didn't mean to write so much on sketches as I know a tired topic and with RA now arrested they mean very little compared to evidence! I just found these articles a good refresher on their details...and then apparently couldn't help myself.

About the first sketch: Witness aided in sketch of suspect in Indiana teens' deaths

Second sketch: 'New' Delphi suspect sketch was drawn days after murders of 2 Indiana girls, artist says

The YBG sketch was drawn February 17th and there are almost no details besides the witness "seeing something that they felt needed to be reported." No date, no time, no clue as to the activity YBG was doing, which leads me to believe that whatever he was doing and when became *very* relevant and right in line with the investigation.

I am thinking that OBG is RA the day of the murders and YBG is a RA sighting on a later day or later in the day?

Up until today I thought no way was RA that YBG sketch. I had no doubt RA was BG, but just not that sketch. But I changed my mind really looking at RA pictures today. I am kind of embarrassed that I didn't notice earlier, but that hairline of his - even if just a shadow as shaved - is actually not very receded and in a few pictures when his hair is longer I think I can see a thick, wavy texture. The eyelids are a perfect match in the side by side photos. It's not the kind of sketch that would catch him alone - I still think the physical only tips were mostly 20 yr olds - and obviously he can order a beer and hand over a prescription next to it, lol, but I see how it was made now.
The YBG could be someone in the search party that was standing out to someone and thus they felt the need to report it.
 
AAgree.
I feel like we should steer away from imagining a religious component until we hear more..it doesn't really change anything, except as to how it may figure into the killer's psychology...this isn't a horror movie , it's real life..we owe it to the girls to stick to facts until we know more...obviously RA isn't that religious or he would not kill..so if he hates God that is no surprise.

with these details you are just speculating on the gore factor and the salacious details of a murder..did they run? did they scream? were they posed with crosses ? were they humiliated..? was it sexual? how? how did they die?

does it matter much ? in the end they were brutally murdered and the full details will come in time. mOO
I meant no disrespect.
 
I didn’t realize the bridge was so dangerous! I’d imagined it as a common challenge for local kids that maybe parents would roll their eyes at, but not such a dangerous spot as all this!

So maybe kids hanging out at the bridge wasn’t as normal as I always figured … if that’s right, what was BG doing hanging around there…. what made him think he’d be able trap a victim on it?? Or did he just get “lucky”

And given this new insight…. if the bridge was this dangerous, how many people were likely to walk on it on a Monday afternoon in February?? Makes it all that much crazier that RA told LE he was “on the bridge” & there was no followup!!

JMO
Lots of kids used to hang out near the bridge but very few crossed it. It is very dangerous and there's a part where you'd have to take a giant step over a missing tie it and if you weren't looking you'd fall 63' feet to the ground.

Monon High Bridge.JPG
 
Lots of kids used to hang out near the bridge but very few crossed it. It is very dangerous and there's a part where you'd have to take a giant step over a missing tie it and if you weren't looking you'd fall 63' feet to the ground.

View attachment 380542
Was it like this back in February 2017, or has it become more run down over the years since then so it got to this state after the incident. Because there is absolutely NO way I'd be that high up, crossing a bridge that looked like that. Especially with no side rails to hold onto. It's just hard to imagine that the 3 of them did that IMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
172
Guests online
1,724
Total visitors
1,896

Forum statistics

Threads
606,846
Messages
18,211,965
Members
233,983
Latest member
nocturnal1
Back
Top