Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #107

[Rocky1]

I'm sure that everyone has a pet theory, and I do too.

They were dropped off at the start of the trail, the now closed parking area. I think it's quite possible that the suspect saw them at the parking lot. That person then went to the nearby cemetery and parked in the trees, out of view. It's a short hike to the start of the bridge. He waited until the girls were on the bridge and everyone was off the bridge, and then cornered them at the end of the bridge. He ordered them to go down the hill, to cross the creek, and there they were murdered. He then walked up the hill, got in his vehicle, and left.

My question is why they went to that park that day. Sure, it's a party spot, but not that day. The fact that they did not have full parental permission suggests they didn't want their parents to ask all the questions about why they were going to the park.

I still wonder if there was a digital connection that led them to think they would meet someone their age at the park, but it was instead the murderer. One of the reasons I lean this way is that the suspect was well disguised, in a sense anticipating that the girls were taking photos of him and recording him - something they would be more inclined to do if they were meeting someone and were wary of whether he was really their age.

Good points.
Snipped:
My question is why they went to that park that day. Sure, it's a party spot, but not that day. The fact that they did not have full parental permission suggests they didn't want their parents to ask all the questions about why they were going to the park.

It's been a while since I have read the details, so someone please correct me if I am wrong, but, they had the day off from school, and I believe Libby's sister had someplace to go and offered them a ride to the park. They left within a half hour or so, it was a spur of the moment thing, and I believe Libby called her father on the way to the park, to ask permission.

Snipped:
I still wonder if there was a digital connection that led them to think they would meet someone their age at the park, but it was instead the murderer. One of the reasons I lean this way is that the suspect was well disguised, in a sense anticipating that the girls were taking photos of him and recording him - something they would be more inclined to do if they were meeting someone and were wary of whether he was really their age.

My thoughts are that if there were any "digital connections," LE would know where they came from by now. JMO.

 

[Jax49]

Except at least one interview LE stated the girls crossed the creek (sorry, I don't have link), I think.

Link to interview (2nd video on page). About the 10 minute mark.

Lead detective in Delphi murders confirms police have more audio from phone, DNA evidence

 

[Rocky1]

And that complicates matters. What if our killer used a gun to kill both of them and never touched the girls, then they don't have his DNA at all. However, I've noted in most murders by a firearm, LE usually states this but just withholds the caliber or type of firearm so I am doubting this is the situation here.

I believe it was a Sargent that said they had DNA in a news interview?
If the guy used a gun, he took a huge risk seeing as there were houses close by.

 

[k-mac]

I have to say that considering the wrong reenactments, the fast time that this went down, a VOI and no one hearing anything or seeing a wet muddy BG makes me think there was a vehicle at the end of the bridge. MOO

yes this works for me too.
the home owners of that private road were not home at the time. did he know that?? incredible luck??
its not impossible.

moo

 

[kkdj]

Are we certain the perp was well disguised? I've never quite been sold on that, just there isn't a close enough, clear enough picture of his features.

 

[TL4S]

Link to interview (2nd video on page). About the 10 minute mark.

Lead detective in Delphi murders confirms police have more audio from phone, DNA evidence

Thank you!

 

[CSIDreamer]

Are we certain the perp was well disguised? I've never quite been sold on that, just there isn't a close enough, clear enough picture of his features.

I am absolutely convinced he wasn't disguised.

 

[Rocky1]

yes this works for me too.
the home owners of that private road were not home at the time. did he know that?? incredible luck??
its not impossible.

moo

JMO, but I believe BG didn't know if anyone was home or not, and he didn't want to take a chance of being seen walking by on that side of the creek. That's why they crossed. Once they crossed he was boxed in with no place to go due to the road and other houses on that side of the creek, so he panicked and killed them.
I believe if there were no houses, and he had planned this out more, he would have still killed them, but not as fast.

 

[JnRyan]

I believe it was a Sargent that said they had DNA in a news interview?
If the guy used a gun, he took a huge risk seeing as there were houses close by.

A small caliber pistol such as .22 or .25 probably not have been given that much attention when you consider (1) everyone's windows and doors would be closed and the HVAC systems would be running and (2) such small caliber shooting is not uncommon in a rural midwestern area. I spent summers in the midwest shooting a .22 and even a 12 gauge shotgun on a farm and no one paid it any mind. With shut up houses and HVAC running it would be difficult to tell which direction the shot came from. I suspect a scream or a cry for help would likely be as loud as a .22 and would likely be more cause for alarm. Yet no one heard any screams or cries for help that we know of.

1st Sgt Holeman said they had DNA, but he qualified that by saying they had not necessarily isolated the killer's DNA.

 

[kkdj]

I am absolutely convinced he wasn't disguised.

Thank you. I've never seen it verified BG was disguised and it never made that much sense to me that he was. So, i've always thought he more than likely wasn't. We just don't have a good enough pic of his facial features. The two composite drawings back this up too.

 

[Rocky1]

DC tends to be melodramatic. That, coupled with the conviction with which he speaks, not to mention the hype created for the PC, led people to believe LE was closing in on someone. But when you strip away all the "sound and fury," there wasn't much left. An extra word, a brief animation, some working theories that might or might not be accurate, a plea for info about a possible car (as if someone will remember it after 2+ years), and a sketch that wasn't deemed worth even mentioning for 2+ years. Plus, DC's gobbledygook since the PC when talking about the two sketches. They're grasping at straws, IMO.

I couldn't agree more.
Here's a perfect example of some of the "sound and fury being stripped away and there wasn't much left."
Time stamp@2:40- 3:32.

 

[JnRyan]

DC tends to be melodramatic. That, coupled with the conviction with which he speaks, not to mention the hype created for the PC, led people to believe LE was closing in on someone. But when you strip away all the "sound and fury," there wasn't much left. An extra word, a brief animation, some working theories that might or might not be accurate, a plea for info about a possible car (as if someone will remember it after 2+ years), and a sketch that wasn't deemed worth even mentioning for 2+ years. Plus, DC's gobbledygook since the PC when talking about the two sketches. They're grasping at straws, IMO.

Yes, I want to hope LE has some idea of who this might be. Unfortunately, I'm like you. I still believe LE isn't much farther along than they were by the end of February 2017.

 

[mtnlites]

Good points.
Snipped:
My question is why they went to that park that day. Sure, it's a party spot, but not that day. The fact that they did not have full parental permission suggests they didn't want their parents to ask all the questions about why they were going to the park.

It's been a while since I have read the details, so someone please correct me if I am wrong, but, they had the day off from school, and I believe Libby's sister had someplace to go and offered them a ride to the park. They left within a half hour or so, it was a spur of the moment thing, and I believe Libby called her father on the way to the park, to ask permission.

Snipped:
I still wonder if there was a digital connection that led them to think they would meet someone their age at the park, but it was instead the murderer. One of the reasons I lean this way is that the suspect was well disguised, in a sense anticipating that the girls were taking photos of him and recording him - something they would be more inclined to do if they were meeting someone and were wary of whether he was really their age.

My thoughts are that if there were any "digital connections," LE would know where they came from by now. JMO.

While it may be a "party spot" for some, I don't believe it held this meaning for Abby and Libby. There are other reasons why people visit the park. There's been nothing reported to suggest that A or L liked to "party." Much has been reported, however, about Libby's passion for photography. It is said that she and Abby went there that day to take pictures-something that's very common in that area. Many people go there to take pictures. It's become a popular spot for amateur photographers as well as for prom and graduation portraits. Why that day? Possibly because it was a day off from school and they'd spent the other two days doing other things. IMO they were just looking for something to do. It was sunny. Libby had been there on multiple occasions. When Abby's mother spoke out about her being at the park, she wasn't commenting on Abby being there in general, but the fact that Abby had crossed the bridge. And why not? That sucker is 50 feet high and doesn't have any rails. I'd be upset if my kid went across it without me-and I say this as someone who used to cross it as a kid without my parents.

 

[mtnlites]

I believe it was a Sargent that said they had DNA in a news interview?
If the guy used a gun, he took a huge risk seeing as there were houses close by.

A gun could've been used to control them, but that doesn't mean shots were ever fired.

 

[JnRyan]

I couldn't agree more.
Here's a perfect example of some of the "sound and fury being stripped away and there wasn't much left."
Time stamp@2:40- 3:32.

Yes, his explanation of the two sketches at the April PC and this interview is really about as clear as mud when you compare the two.

 

[borndem]

I believe it was a Sargent that said they had DNA in a news interview?
If the guy used a gun, he took a huge risk seeing as there were houses close by.

He may have had a gun to threaten them and make them do what he said, but after what he did to them, silent deaths are the only "safe" way out -- he had to have tied them up initially, IMO, so that he could deal with one sweet little victim at a time. Then he used ropes or cords or belts, or just his hands to strangle them, or he may have just battered them with his gun or a rock, etc., to make sure they were dead before he left.

And, IMO, the more LE talks about this person -- "We know who you are," here is his pic, etc. etc., the farther away he goes, no matter how he has to do it. He's already kidnapped, sexually abused, and killed two people -- stealing a car in a dark parking lot using a gun would be no big deal -- or robbing someone and jumping on a bus to Whoknowswhere.

 

[Rocky1]

He may have had a gun to threaten them and make them do what he said, but after what he did to them, silent deaths are the only "safe" way out -- he had to have tied them up initially, IMO, so that he could deal with one sweet little victim at a time. Then he used ropes or cords or belts, or just his hands to strangle them, or he may have just battered them with his gun or a rock, etc., to make sure they were dead before he left.

And, IMO, the more LE talks about this person -- "We know who you are," here is his pic, etc. etc., the farther away he goes, no matter how he has to do it. He's already kidnapped, sexually abused, and killed two people -- stealing a car in a dark parking lot using a gun would be no big deal -- or robbing someone and jumping on a bus to Whoknowswhere.

I believe he used a gun to control them, and I believe the gun was in his right jacket pocket. If you pause @ timestamp 1.23 in the video above that I posted, you can see the outline. I guess that LE can eliminate leftys?
The question was whether or not DNA was left at the scene, because if he used a gun to kill them, he may have not left any. We don't know but if he did, he took a big chance IMO.

 

[MistyWaters]

I believe he used a gun to control them, and I believe the gun was in his right jacket pocket. If you pause @ timestamp 1.23 in the video above that I posted, you can see the outline. I guess that LE can eliminate leftys?
The question was whether or not DNA was left at the scene, because if he used a gun to kill them, he may have not left any. We don't know but if he did, he took a big chance IMO.

I certainly hope LE have his DNA. One thing though, most of the old cold cases that have been recently solved occurred in the days prior to awareness of DNA. SA occurred without concern over leaving sperm behind, cigarette butts with saliva were dropped etc because the perp had no idea of future forensic progress in the field of DNA. But all that has changed and the awareness of DNA is commonplace now so I’d imagine criminals must take that into account as well, especially in premeditated scenarios.

 

[MJPeony]

Has there been anything fact-based that says we know for sure the girls were not brought back to the crime scene site either late at night or early the next morning? I know this has been brought up before, but I’ve missed the definitive answer as to whether that’s been put to bed.

Are we assuming they were murdered just in that short window from about 2:30-3:15, or is that for sure?

LE’s comment in the April presser about the car, between 12-5, may indicate they think the perp was gone by 5, but it doesn’t necessarily mean the girls were not with him. Or is there something that nixes that supposition?

As I’ve mentioned before, I keep getting stuck on the comments by LE that we’ve got it all wrong (the YouTube re enactments, etc). The whole DTH at the end of the bridge and back across the creek to crime site seems like it just can’t be what really happened. That’s like the only thing that’s been re enacted! So I’m really starting to entertain other scenarios and one of them is that he took the girls somewhere else and brought them back. Pondering.

 

[mtnlites]

Has there been anything fact-based that says we know for sure the girls were not brought back to the crime scene site either late at night or early the next morning?

Are we assuming they were murdered just in that short window from about 2:30-3:15, or is that for sure?

LE’s comment in the April presser about the car, between 12-5, may indicate they think the perp was gone by 5, but it doesn’t necessarily mean the girls were not with him. Or is there something that nixes that supposition?

As I’ve mentioned before, I keep getting stuck on the comments by LE that we’ve got it all wrong (the YouTube re enactments, etc). The whole DTH at the end of the bridge and back across the creek to crime site seems like it just can’t be what really happened. That’s like the only thing that’s been re enacted! So I’m really starting to entertain other scenarios and one of them is that he took the girls somewhere else and brought them back. Pondering.

At one point, in one of the pressers, it was stated that the whole crime took place in a matter of minutes. It's in one of those links on the media pages.

IMO he was out of there quickly after killing them and didn't risk bringing them back. There were people out searching all night, even with the "official" search called off. If he'd killed them offsite, it seems more logical for him to place their bodies someplace else. What purpose would bringing them back serve?