Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #121

[Charlot123]

Deleted

 

[Kittybunny]

I agree, the use of the term 'hill' is in the majority with only two people reporting knowledge / usage of either the formal word or specialized slang terms.

Just out of curiosity, I am presuming that your are female, but what is your socio economic background? Also, have you ever heard friends and family members using the formal word or specialized slang?

Yes, female. Grew up in small town outside Pittsburgh (which is very hilly, BTW) but after college lived only in large urban cities. MBA with mostly professional jobs. In general do not spend much time outdoors.

 

[Ozoner]

I am thinking about that glitch and factory reset.
Libby was teachno-savvy. And made photos. And made movies. No chance she did not save them on the stick.
I think that she reset it because she was told/coaxed/threatened/asked to, but she took precautions.
So did the murderer. Something was in her phone that was threatening to him.
So could the planned meeting (with someone) be a transaction. Libby, per her grandmother, discovered shopping. And that morning, girls made some money filing.
So either they wanted to buy something (why not?), or sell something (the stick), or the guy wanted to be sure there was nothing left in her phone.
I think the meeting was for “a transaction agreement”. But she did expect to meet someone different. Hence when the weirdo appeared, she got scared and started videotaping it.
He got what he came for.
And it was not some “souvenir”. It was some information saved somewhere.
He wanted to be sure he wiped off whatever she had.

A reset is very common, especially if a device has slowed due to a virus. It's very unlikely that there's a connection between the reset and the murders.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I am thinking about that glitch and factory reset.
Libby was teachno-savvy. And made photos. And made movies. No chance she did not save them on the stick.
I think that she reset it because she was told/coaxed/threatened/asked to, but she took precautions.
So did the murderer. Something was in her phone that was threatening to him.
So could the planned meeting (with someone) be a transaction. Libby, per her grandmother, discovered shopping. And that morning, girls made some money filing.
So either they wanted to buy something (why not?), or sell something (the stick), or the guy wanted to be sure there was nothing left in her phone.
I think the meeting was for “a transaction agreement”. But she did expect to meet someone different. Hence when the weirdo appeared, she got scared and started videotaping it.
He got what he came for.
And it was not some “souvenir”. It was some information saved somewhere.
He wanted to be sure he wiped off whatever she had.

Interesting idea.

 

[sunshineray]

Here's a quote from Shakespeare's Richard III, one of the best know psychopaths in dramatic literature:
"And this word 'love,' which graybeards call divine,
Be resident in men like one another
And not in me: I am myself alone."
I doubt that anyone is covering for BG; he doesn't have a confidante. Like all psychopaths, he trusts no one; he is himself alone.

I think it could have been a situation that just the fact of his circumstances family wise, that may have "covered" for him, possibly made him seem less likely a suspect to local LE.

The influence on the sketch being release first could have been FBI related. I think it was a case of thinking it was not a local, it must be a random stranger from another area. Two people were publically reported as being searched right away, one who's land the girls were found and another from a family close by.

After that I think the FBI profilers may have steered the direction of things to more a drifter suspect with the old BG sketch. Then something happened in early 2019 that changed that back to more local suspect. I think it might have been that man, CE, was arrested for crimes against children. He was a dead ringer for the first sketch. I don't just all conjecture and AJMO.

 

[Cryptic]

I've worked in the construction/civil engineering field for over 20 years.

Generally, I almost exclusively call everything a "hill." Basically any kind of fairly steeply sloped ground that takes effort and/or caution to walk up or down on, I will almost always call it a hill. To me, it is kind of a "catch all."

Thanks for your input and also a thank you to everyone who responded. Of the people who responded:

- 4 knew of either formal words or construction slang terms for the feature.

Knowing did not mean always using: 1 would have used either a formal word (embankment) or slang term (grade). 1 might have used a slang term (grade, slope). 1 individual (yourself) currently works in construction, knows the other terms, but would have used 'hill'.

- 4 people had no knowledge of formal or slang terms and would have said 'hill'.

So... Even if BG works or has worked in construction, it appears fairly likely that he would have used 'hill'. Thus, there are no effective indicators to BG's probable socio economic or employment background through his use of the word 'hill' instead of formal terms or slang.

To me personally, slope and grade are almost exclusively used in a technical sense. I.E. That is a 4% grade. Or that is a 3 to 1 slope.

I may have heard grade used to express degrees of incline. I also remember it being used to express quality / strength of material (either an exact rating, say, "grade 4" or more generic "high grade".

I am starting to think that common use of the term 'grade' as slang for road or track was local and not national. In my area (Texas) it was even used on occasion by construction workers to describe car accidents: "He tried to turn left across the 'grade, and got hit by another car".

 

[MaJor Tom]

I pretty much agree with all of this.
I wonder how long it will be before they go to Plan C?

And Plan C would be? At the risk of sounding like a cracked record, how about going public with selected items of information about the cause of death, scene of crime etc.? We can but hope.

BTW I'm not knocking LE over this, they have put every resource they have into this crime. But I believe they have become bogged down in the details (which probably comes from working through thousand of dead end tips) and the whole desire for secrecy required in the early days has taken root, a policy that has not changed as the case stagnated.

Of course if BG was close to the investigation but not actually LE that could be why they adopted the strict embargo on news leaking out in the first place. Supt. DC 'You want to know what we know...' Idle speculation naturally and MOO

 

[JnRyan]

I am listening to the podcast as I am typing this. If the hosts' theory of BG being someone who planned the killing before 2017 and had rehearsed his plan, practised his methods and was waiting for an opportunity and victims, even his escape after the murder terrifies me. I hope they catch this guy soon. He seems to be too dangerous to be walking free out there planning his next kill.

Several of us on here have thought this killer had at least done some recon on the trails if not rehearsing the plan. I believe it is very possible he did rehearse his crime prior to that day. That would mean he might have been seen there before although most of us are not observant enough to note others and remember them.

I also thought it was interesting that the profiler stated he would likely have not been noticeably different to those around him after the crime. The word she used was he was a psychopath and he would not be bothered by the crime. I need to go back and listen to that portion of the episode as I found it very enlightening.

 

[JnRyan]

I went back and listened to the podcast again. Specifically the former FBI profiler (appox. 12 min. mark to 46 min mark). For me this is most interesting part of the series outside of what Ives reveals about the crime scene. I can't recall a more in depth analysis by anyone else in the field of LE on this killer. According to her this guy planned the crime based on the area and any victim would be a target of opportunity - i.e., he did not know the victims. A cold killer who has no remorse for his actions. (As an example she stated he could have done this and then gone home to have hamburgers and fries with the family and act perfectly normal.) She said he didn't sound nervous or anxious based on his voice. He was in control of not only the scene but his emotions as well. That maybe why is so difficult for witnesses to pin point this guy. He appeared just as normal as anyone else out there that day.

I heard the scenario posed by the hosts and while it is possible, I don't believe it is likely. I believe it is likely he was behind and watching them when the snap chat photo of Abby was taken. Probably just out of sight around a curve in the trail leaning against a tree. As soon as both girls faced forward he headed out across the bridge and while they took their time snapping photos and looking the scenery he was moving purposely down the bridge. I believe he did it like this because he probably took in who was in the parking lots and who was on the trails. By watching them from that area he could not only see them but also see who might come up behind him in case he had to abort. Probably just before he comes up on the girls he takes a few glances behind him again. If the girls noted him part way across and were aware of the so-called unwritten rule to wait for others to come off the bridge that fact alone might have disturbed them. But that is just my take on it.

Most killers want someplace where they isolate their victims and decrease the chance of being seen. In the dark in a secluded area or inside the home of a victim living alone. Late at night or very early in the morning. This guy was VERY bold, if not very confident. I can't get over that part of the crime. Confidence can be built by rehearsing the event and I can see that possibility here.

 

[rosesfromangels]

Locals, on average, how many people would have hiked to the point on the bridge the girls did that day? Seems hard to believe he would lay in wait in such an untraveled (?) location?

amateur opinion and speculation

 

[minazoe]

also a car. they can control a victim in a car. it's like a cage. I don't think its so much rehearsal as it is a recurring fantasy that he works through... I also don't think he gives
a s--! and that is why he has a flat demeanor. He is flat. he's a psychopath and has little or no fear, little to less than zero compassion. Such a loser.
mOO

 

[MistyWaters]

I went back and listened to the podcast again. Specifically the former FBI profiler (appox. 12 min. mark to 46 min mark). For me this is most interesting part of the series outside of what Ives reveals about the crime scene. I can't recall a more in depth analysis by anyone else in the field of LE on this killer. According to her this guy planned the crime based on the area and any victim would be a target of opportunity - i.e., he did not know the victims. A cold killer who has no remorse for his actions. (As an example she stated he could have done this and then gone home to have hamburgers and fries with the family and act perfectly normal.) She said he didn't sound nervous or anxious based on his voice. He was in control of not only the scene but his emotions as well. That maybe why is so difficult for witnesses to pin point this guy. He appeared just as normal as anyone else out there that day.

I heard the scenario posed by the hosts and while it is possible, I don't believe it is likely. I believe it is likely he was behind and watching them when the snap chat photo of Abby was taken. Probably just out of sight around a curve in the trail leaning against a tree. As soon as both girls faced forward he headed out across the bridge and while they took their time snapping photos and looking the scenery he was moving purposely down the bridge. I believe he did it like this because he probably took in who was in the parking lots and who was on the trails. By watching them from that area he could not only see them but also see who might come up behind him in case he had to abort. Probably just before he comes up on the girls he takes a few glances behind him again. If the girls noted him part way across and were aware of the so-called unwritten rule to wait for others to come off the bridge that fact alone might have disturbed them. But that is just my take on it.

Most killers want someplace where they isolate their victims and decrease the chance of being seen. In the dark in a secluded area or inside the home of a victim living alone. Late at night or very early in the morning. This guy was VERY bold, if not very confident. I can't get over that part of the crime. Confidence can be built by rehearsing the event and I can see that possibility here.

I’ve thought a lot about that private drive running under the bridge as well. Early on it was repeatedly remarked here that the occupants of the home were not home as they were snowbirds but I don’t recall the source. Other locals posting here early on said parking off the side of that road near the bridge was a common for fisherman.

According to media reports the intersection providing access to the private road was blocked during the initial investigation but it didn’t receive nearly as much attention by the media as the cemetery. IMO it makes sense the cemetery became the staging/parking lot for investigators because it was of no interest to investigators as opposed to the opposite. What investigative happenings were going on in the area of the private road, we don’t know. It was later closed off to all but private traffic iirc.

My speculation is on the possibility the murders occurred during a botched kidnapping and instructions to go “down the hill” was the direct route to a parked vehicle, clearly visible from the end of the bridge. The target could’ve been both girls or only one, depending on the level of premeditation. I have great difficulty imaging anyone choosing the bridge location as a targeted SA and kill site of two victims. Too many variables and risks including other people walking around on a warm February afternoon. I think the murders occurred after the girls refused to follow instructions and so the perpetrator panicked and chased them, choosing not to leave any witnesses particularly if he could later be identified by one or both. It’s widely publicized victims stand a greater chance of escaping with their lives if they refuse to co-operate rather than getting taken to another location during the course of an abduction and I doubt Abby and Libby were oblivious to this known fact.

One other comment that fits my theory is reportedly family members said the two stuck together. This scenario would fit even if only one of the two was the abduction target and instead both fled together across the river, in an attempt to protect each other by a frantic escape.

All my opinion....

 

[PaulaDC]

Did anyone see Kelsi's tweet? Just wondering if something is going on or just gossip? Anyone have any idea?

 

[cujenn81]

I went back and listened to the podcast again. Specifically the former FBI profiler (appox. 12 min. mark to 46 min mark). For me this is most interesting part of the series outside of what Ives reveals about the crime scene. I can't recall a more in depth analysis by anyone else in the field of LE on this killer. According to her this guy planned the crime based on the area and any victim would be a target of opportunity - i.e., he did not know the victims. A cold killer who has no remorse for his actions. (As an example she stated he could have done this and then gone home to have hamburgers and fries with the family and act perfectly normal.) She said he didn't sound nervous or anxious based on his voice. He was in control of not only the scene but his emotions as well. That maybe why is so difficult for witnesses to pin point this guy. He appeared just as normal as anyone else out there that day.

I heard the scenario posed by the hosts and while it is possible, I don't believe it is likely. I believe it is likely he was behind and watching them when the snap chat photo of Abby was taken. Probably just out of sight around a curve in the trail leaning against a tree. As soon as both girls faced forward he headed out across the bridge and while they took their time snapping photos and looking the scenery he was moving purposely down the bridge. I believe he did it like this because he probably took in who was in the parking lots and who was on the trails. By watching them from that area he could not only see them but also see who might come up behind him in case he had to abort. Probably just before he comes up on the girls he takes a few glances behind him again. If the girls noted him part way across and were aware of the so-called unwritten rule to wait for others to come off the bridge that fact alone might have disturbed them. But that is just my take on it.

Most killers want someplace where they isolate their victims and decrease the chance of being seen. In the dark in a secluded area or inside the home of a victim living alone. Late at night or very early in the morning. This guy was VERY bold, if not very confident. I can't get over that part of the crime. Confidence can be built by rehearsing the event and I can see that possibility here.

I agree. I think the profiler part was the most interesting info provided by the podcast (except for the information about the crime scene and signatures left behind, as you mentioned). I had not considered BG’s confidence prior to her mentioning it, but she’s absolutely right—he doesn’t appear to be the least bit anxious. This further supports my theory that BG is likely a psychopath/serial killer.

 

[Alethea]

Did anyone see Kelsi's tweet? Just wondering if something is going on or just gossip? Anyone have any idea?

Just came here to ask that. Any news?

 

[Charlot123]

Several of us on here have thought this killer had at least done some recon on the trails if not rehearsing the plan. I believe it is very possible he did rehearse his crime prior to that day. That would mean he might have been seen there before although most of us are not observant enough to note others and remember them.

I also thought it was interesting that the profiler stated he would likely have not been noticeably different to those around him after the crime. The word she used was he was a psychopath and he would not be bothered by the crime. I need to go back and listen to that portion of the episode as I found it very enlightening.

One doesn’t need to be a psychopath to kill.

Humankind has been existing for millions of years, and the first prohibitions for human sacrifices emerged around the times of Isaak, or Iphigenia. It is a tiny time as compared to human history.

So maybe, like some people are born with ability to alphabetic reading, and some need years to learn it, some people might kill and even enjoy it, and others have this inner barrier.

Think of it as hunting. I’d probably be hysterical and refuse to eat the meat had I killed the animal, but some people hunt, enjoy it and feed their families with the meat. Do they look visibly “shaken” at the dinnertable? Hardly likely.

When all is said and done, because I hope he will be arrested, I wonder how his story would sound. Did he plan to kill them to start with, or did he get the instinct when they were trying to run away?

 

[rosesfromangels]

One doesn’t need to be a psychopath to kill.

Humankind has been existing for millions of years, and the first prohibitions for human sacrifices emerged around the times of Isaak, or Iphigenia. It is a tiny time as compared to human history.

So maybe, like some people are born with ability to alphabetic reading, and some need years to learn it, some people might kill and even enjoy it, and others have this inner barrier.

Think of it as hunting. I’d probably be hysterical and refuse to eat the meat had I killed the animal, but some people hunt, enjoy it and feed their families with the meat. Do they look visibly “shaken” at the dinnertable? Hardly likely.

When all is said and done, because I hope he will be arrested, I wonder how his story would sound. Did he plan to kill them to start with, or did he get the instinct when they were trying to run away?

I have no doubt in my mind the miscreant in question went there that day with murderous intent. To satisfy a compulsion. Too bad he didn’t turn that on himself instead of two innocent girls.

His flat affect speaks to a complete lack of empathy. Clearly defective, and one the world would be better off without. He’s a waste of good oxygen. Pathetic loser.

amateur opinion and speculation

 

[JnRyan]

One doesn’t need to be a psychopath to kill.

Humankind has been existing for millions of years, and the first prohibitions for human sacrifices emerged around the times of Isaak, or Iphigenia. It is a tiny time as compared to human history.

So maybe, like some people are born with ability to alphabetic reading, and some need years to learn it, some people might kill and even enjoy it, and others have this inner barrier.

Think of it as hunting. I’d probably be hysterical and refuse to eat the meat had I killed the animal, but some people hunt, enjoy it and feed their families with the meat. Do they look visibly “shaken” at the dinnertable? Hardly likely.

When all is said and done, because I hope he will be arrested, I wonder how his story would sound. Did he plan to kill them to start with, or did he get the instinct when they were trying to run away?

I can see some of the points, but not all. I hunted for years in LA, VA and MO. I hunted squirrels, rabbits, quail, dove, turkey, duck and deer mostly. We cleaned and ate the wild game. HOWEVER, shooting another human being is something I would find difficult even in self-defense or in war. And I was in the military, knowing the later was a possibility. I've read at least account by a SWAT sniper who used to be a hunter and after having to kill another person he stated he knew at the time it would take a while to get over it. At the time, he stated that he thought to himself he might never go deer hunting again after seeing what he did to another person.

I had differing thoughts on what was in this killer's mind that day. After hearing the profiler, I'm leaning more toward a psychopath. To be sure not all psychopaths are killers. For that I would recommend "Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work" by Paul Babiak and Robert Hare. I've heard Babiak speak at a conference and it was interesting.

 

[somequestions]

Hey everybody!
I was sitting and trying to think how to spend some time while social distancing. I thought it might be interesting to ask some questions about different aspects of this case...that we’ve all been talking about for 3 years...and get a feel how we think about things as a group. I thought I would ask about ten questions a day...I got a lot of questions...and tally up the answers/ thoughts and report back in a few days or weeks. Some are yes/no questions. Some require more. I hope you think this sounds interesting too! Thanks to all who answer.

Day One

1) Were the girls being “catfished” and/or were they at the trails to meet someone?
2) Do you think the girls had a negative encounter with BG on the trails that day?
3) How did BG get to the trails?
4) How long had BG been at the trails that day?
5) Was BG at the trails looking for someone to kill?
6) Is BG wearing a cap in the bridge photo/video?
7) Is BG younger or older than 40?
8) Is the gap in the audio clip between “guys” and “down the hill” hiding sounds or conversation of evidentiary value or is it just smoothed over garble?
9) If you think it is of value, what do you suspect it is? Be as specific as possible.
10) Were the girl’s ordered down the hill after being shown a weapon or were they ordered down the hill as part of an authority figure ruse? Or what other scenario do you think might have happened?

My answers.

1. No because in my opinion there is no evidence to suggest that.
2. Yes, the girls were murdered.
3. He drove and then probably walked.
4. I would guess long enough, but do not know. In my opinion it was a crime of opportunity so he had some time on his hands.
5. I do not think most criminals plan their crimes. I think this was a crime of opportunity.
6. I think it is a Swiss army type hat or also known as a "floppy" ear hat or Russian hat.
7. I think his age is at least 55.
8. The two phrases may not be consecutive but no one knows. I think the police want people to be able to clearly hear his voice so someone turns him in.
9. I think the police are trying to give everyone an example of what he sounds like without playing other parts of the audio that are probably a lot more indicative of what happened to Abby and Libby.
10. I would guess he pulled a weapon and forced them to walk. I think he forced them to walk along the shoreline until they got to a point where the shoreline ended. At this point he had them cross the creek because he is out in the open. I think he did this so as not to be seen by anyone. This is what I got from watching all the videos people have put out about the Monon High Bridge area. It also indicates to me that the killer, while he might be familiar with the Monon High Bridge is not as familiar with the area surrounding it. I doubt he even knew he was on someone's private property.

I think the killer is some type of transient like a truck driver who walked in there, saw an opportunity, committed the crime, and left.

 

[ReadySet]

I hadn't looked at Twitter for quite awhile for Delphi Murders. How did they finally get rid of the poster who continually and probably slanderously insisted it was certain people , and posted their pictures?

Did anyone see Kelsi's tweet? Just wondering if something is going on or just gossip? Anyone have any idea?