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

[Cryptic]

I think there would be some record of any contact to either girl by anyone they could not identify...jmo.

Yes, I agree, that is the detractor to a 'planned meeting' scenario.

Searches of the girls social media communication were supported by the FBI. Needless to say, that brings a lot of resources and expertise.

At the same time, even the FBI has limitations. Evidently some forms of social media communication (Snapchat or Instagram?) are not "saved" and simply cannot be reviewed later- no matter how much expertise is brought to bear.

In the end, the viability of a 'planned meeting' scenario could well depend on whether or not there are forms of social media communication which "disappear" permanently upon being read.

 

[Cryptic]

I agree. There's no evidence whatsoever for any "meeting," .

There is no available evidence of a meeting. There is a possibility that some forms of social media communication simply cannot be later reviewed.

and every profile by a professional says that this was a crime of opportunity-

The actual police have stated emphatically that no scenario has been ruled out.

BG didn't address the girls by name (which he almost certainly would have done if he had known their names)

I meet people I know everyday (well I did, prior to Covid-19).

On many occasions, I do not state their names before discussing the subject of the meeting. Similarly, people who used to speak to me before Covid-19 may or may not have stated my name prior to speaking.

On the most of the occasions there is no need to state names. Likewise, on some other occasions, I know who the person is and why I need to speak to them. I just don't know their name.

yet some people continue to blather about previous contact between BG and the girls; it reads like victim blaming to me.

A bad straw man argument.

 

[sunshineray]

I understand that's what the profiler on the podcast was saying. I was responding to that specific post -- the user I replied to said. They believe the community tends to lean more towards BG being someone who lives in Delphi and who may be popular or a pillar of the community. I agreed with them because this is also how I perceive the community.

I only added that I don't understand why the community would be leaning in that direction because it doesn't make any sense to me (at least, based on the small bit of info that has been provided to the public).

I thinks it's the "hiding in plain sight" and "could be in this room" comments. Maybe they don't expect someone untrusted by locals or a standout recluse oddball type to show up at those press conferences, while a more respected member of the community would? Just my thoughts on it.

 

[sunshineray]

I do not understand how no one heard the crime being committed and how BG wouldn’t have worried that someone would hear the girls screaming. Were they really that far away from all others?

This has always bothered me also. Some say the lay of the land in the area of the crime scene is gully-like. It still doesnt explain why the chase was hear and I do believe there was a bit of a chase for the girls to wind up on the other side of a very cold freek. I don't believe BG planned on getting wet up to his waist. JMO

 

[TTF14]

This is a link to a story not at all related to Abby and Libby, although it is a good outcome of justice for this little baby. However, for reasons I can't quite seem to be able to put into words (without sounding crass or unsympathetic), reading this story gives me almost zero hope that LE is using familial DNA in Abby and Libby's case, and even that they have any usable DNA at all.

Mother of Ga. baby found dead in cooler identified 14 months later

 

[Yemelyan]

This is a link to a story not at all related to Abby and Libby, although it is a good outcome of justice for this little baby. However, for reasons I can't quite seem to be able to put into words (without sounding crass or unsympathetic), reading this story gives me almost zero hope that LE is using familial DNA in Abby and Libby's case, and even that they have any usable DNA at all.

Mother of Ga. baby found dead in cooler identified 14 months later

Trying to understand why you feel this way. Is it because for the crime described in the article, familial DNA analysis was "straightforward," yielding a definitive answer in about a year? Whereas Abby and Libby's case has no apparent progress for 3 times as long?

I wouldn't give up all hope. There are so many things that can complicate the type of family tree analysis that is required.

 

[Yemelyan]

For anyone out there who is hung up on the short amount of time that this crime apparently took and what that might or might not mean about motive, check out the sad facts that surround the murder of Shelbey Thornburgh (I'm NOT suggesting her case is related to the Delphi murders). But it's a similar case in many ways and shows that for a lot of details in the Delphi murders where you might think "how could there be only touch DNA in a crime like this" "how could the whole thing be over in a half an hour" "how can the suspect be clearly depicted in video and still get away with it"....well, in 2015 it already happened:

1. Suspect was only in Shelbey's apartment for 23 minutes
2. Sexual contact occurred but no DNA was left behind from this
3. Hair evidence did leave DNA but it's not a match to anyone in CODIS
4. Suspect used burner phone and deactivated it immediately afterwards
5. Suspect is on video arriving and leaving, is walking quite calmly with no trace of blood on him after killing Shelbey. His face and gait are clearly depicted.

Shelbey's killer seems to have highly organized predatory behavior that has kept his identity secret so far in spite of the risks he took to commit the crime. Same thing may be at work in the Delphi case.

PS - Shelbey's murder deserves more attention. Her thread here on Websleuths is light but there is an episode of The Murder Squad podcast which gives many details.

 

[rosesfromangels]

My response to Starrystarrynight got embedded in the quote. So here are my responses again:

1) Were one or two people involved in the killing of the girls?
I flip-flop on this. I have wondered if the second sketch was an accomplice. However, if forced to choose one or the other, I will say solo.

2) Was anyone else at the trails with the killer but did not participate in the killings?
No

3) Assuming there is only one killer, did the killer lead the girls across the creek or did the girls run across the creek to try and escape?
My guess is that he had a knife to one of their throats, or a gun to one of their heads. He held on to one and instructed the other to proceed forward, with the Perp and the girl he held following. I think he grabbed Abby.

4) Do you think the girls were sexually assaulted?
One of them

5) Do you think the crime was interrupted and cut short by DG’s call to Libby that caused her phone to ring?
No

6) What weapon do you believe was used to kill the girls?
Combination of strangulation/hanging & knife wounds

7) Were the girls killed in the woods where they were found?
yes

8) If killed elsewhere, where do you think that was?
N/A

9) LE said the killer made a mistake. What do you think that might have been?
Left something behind; a receipt, a lighter, a cigarette butt, an empty pint bottle, zip ties, etc. or very distinct boot prints

10) LE said there was a witness. What do you think the witness saw?
The Perp lurking off trail or the Perp leaving and looking suspicious enough to catch the attention of the Witness.

Amateur opinion and speculation

 

[MingyMoo]

I am still struggling with this case and must admit my little gray cells have almost given up. To that end I simply think the following happened. The girls were at the wrong place at the wrong time and crossed paths with someone who was possibly in a bad mental state, for what ever reason.

As someone higher up the thread has said I really don't think it is beyond the realms of possibility that perhaps an innocent comment was made by the girls whilst passing or encountering him on the trails or the bridge.

I think he flipped it pushed a button.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if he was planning the end of his own life that day for what ever reason and he was interupted and did what ever he did because someone or snowday messed his own plans up and the selfish Barsteward took his rage out on LG & AW for messing his own plans up.

I think he maybe already be dead, I think LE know who, That he had a sentimental attachment to the area and two young ladies fcked his own selfish suicidal
plans up on that day by just being there. thats one of my own opinions as to the Why Abby Why Libby, Why Delphi, Why the County
-
One of us somewhere has to be correct or partially with our theories.

As Always
MingyMoo *advertiser censored*

 

[Michigan]

My thoughts (opinion only):

+ I think the victims of this crime were random (although fit a rough profile of the kind of victim that he wanted: female, young, etc). He knew the woods and he likely knew there would be young victims out on a nice day and he waited. Abby and Libby fell into his trap sadly.

+ he is local or was local or someone who frequents Delphi. He knows those woods.

+ I think he is a sexual predator and sex assault was a motive in the killing. Police have seemed to focus on looking into sex offenders.

+ I think he used a gun to control them on the bridge and I feel like the killing was extremely violent. Possibly with a knife or hatchet. (LE seemed to get very interested in that suspect who was a sexual predator who was threatening people with an axe.)

+ They said that the girls wouldn’t leave each other. Don’t know how they know this. Maybe they have audio of something that indicates this? What else could it be?

+ still completely confused how he wasn’t afraid of them screaming. Did he gag them somehow?

+ I get confused about the theory of the crime put forth by the “Down The Hill” podcast (that he went by them and turned back) but I definitely think since Libby had crossed the bridge before and Abby hadn’t, Libby is ahead of Abby in the photos in whichever direction they were going. If you had a friend who was scared to cross I don’t think they would be the first to cross.

+ I hope and pray they have DNA. Some things LE have done seem to point to this (semi elimination of early suspects after checking them out) and other things seem to point to them not having DNA (lack of progress in the case).

+ I am totally confused by the two sketches. The second sketch looks nothing like the guy in the video (to me). I wonder if the revised age could have been from DNA profile?

+ They keep saying they just need that one clue. I wish they would say what it is! Do they need to find familial dna, do they have a suspect and they need someone to poke a hole in his alibi, or do they literally have no clue about any of it.

+ we have GOT to catch this predator. I can’t stop thinking about this case. I am hoping so much for justice for these two sweet girls.

All MOO and speculation

 

[curiousgene]

Thanks to everybody who responded to the Day One questions!
Here’s some more questions if anyone would like to answer them.

Day Two

1) Were one or two people involved in the killing of the girls?
2) Was anyone else at the trails with the killer but did not participate in the killings?
3) Assuming there is only one killer, did the killer lead the girls across the creek or did the girls run across the creek to try and escape?
4) Do you think the girls were sexually assaulted?
5) Do you think the crime was interrupted and cut short by DG’s call to Libby that caused her phone to ring?
6) What weapon do you believe was used to kill the girls?
7) Were the girls killed in the woods where they were found?
8) If killed elsewhere, where do you think that was?
9) LE said the killer made a mistake. What do you think that might have been?
10) LE said there was a witness. What do you think the witness saw?

Thanks!

1. One
2. No.
3. The girls saw an opportunity and tried to escape and he caught up with one of them. I think the comment that one of them could have escaped but decided to stick together supports this. I also believe in the scuffle that happened Libby's shoes came off.
4. One of them was.
5. No, I think the crime was over before that.
6. Knife or a very sharp object as I read somewhere there were stab wounds. strangulation with rope is also a possibility along with a sharp object.
7. Yes.
8. N/A.
9. He dropped something at the crime scene. It could be a piece of clothing with his DNA. or he may have tried to get rid of the murder weapon by throwing it into the river which was found.
10. Someone may have seen him loitering in the trail in the early morning or someone saw him soaked wet while he was exiting the trail after the crime.
All My speculation only.

 

[Gardenkeep]

The questions, Day 2
1) One very well prepared predator. I believe they were stalked. I believe that this was an opportunity that was being waited for.

2) No.

3) They were led.

4) Yes.

5) No.

6) Weapon or weapons that the predator had with them, and took with them. It would have been silent; likely stabbing and/or strangulation. If there was a gun in their possession, it was used purely as intimidation to force the children at a distance to follow instructions.."down the hill".

7) I wonder about this. I wonder about the neighbors out-building, and the interest there was in it. Likely it was on site, given the terrain. But that building nags me.

8) Kind of what I was speculating about in question 7.

9) Perhaps that the scene wasn't clean of DNA, or perhaps the phone...leaving clothing behind, or part of the kill kit. It's hard to say what it may have been.

10) A not familiar person behaving suspiciously at the location during that crucial part of the timeline.

 

[JnRyan]

I heard something interesting on the podcast, "The Murder Squad", the episode on Ted Bundy/Santa Rosa Hitchhiker Murders. Paul Holes, who worked the Golden State Killer (also called the East Area Rapist/Original Night Stalker) case, discusses how cases can be linked and how a serial killer selects his target. He notes that LE may miss a link because the victims are not similar in age or appearance. As an example he states such a killer gets the urge and may select his target from a good distance away. He stated that in his example his killer may be looking for an older woman, say, in the 20's or 30's when he selects his target from a distance. However, when the killer gets closer he discovers that instead of a 20 something woman he has targeted a 12-13 year old girl. Because he already has built himself up for the murder and is already in process he continues with his murder plan. He gives examples of the Boston Strangler who had victims ranging from college student age to those in the 70's. He stated that because of the diverse type of victims LE did not really link the murders to the same killer for quite a while.

Based on what he stated, it is possible the killer here could have killed other victims but they might be older females. And LE has not made the link. They stated in another podcast links through MO is usually made through the ViCAP database and because ViCAP case entry is not mandatory other murders may not be entered in ViCAP.

 

[somequestions]

Thanks to everybody who responded to the Day One questions!
Here’s some more questions if anyone would like to answer them.

Day Two

1) Were one or two people involved in the killing of the girls?
2) Was anyone else at the trails with the killer but did not participate in the killings?
3) Assuming there is only one killer, did the killer lead the girls across the creek or did the girls run across the creek to try and escape?
4) Do you think the girls were sexually assaulted?
5) Do you think the crime was interrupted and cut short by DG’s call to Libby that caused her phone to ring?
6) What weapon do you believe was used to kill the girls?
7) Were the girls killed in the woods where they were found?
8) If killed elsewhere, where do you think that was?
9) LE said the killer made a mistake. What do you think that might have been?
10) LE said there was a witness. What do you think the witness saw?

Thanks!

Answers to the questions based on my opinion.

1. One person since there is no evidence of a second person either through video or from forensic evidence police would have identified at the crime scene.
2. No, again like question 1 no evidence of that.
3. We can only theorize but if they had run across the creek and tried to escape, and he simply either shot them(if a gun was used) or caught up to them and murdered them in some other way, then it would be a bit unusual at least according to the Down The Hill podcast that the killer left signatures of his crime behind. So my guess is he forced them across.
4. Statistically speaking I think that is a good guess since what other motive could there have been that makes sense. But why 2 victims? So my guess would be some type of sadomasochistic sexual crime with either sexual activity or wounds that are of that nature.
5. If the phone did ring it does not seem like the killer must have realized it. But this could also be the case if Libby did not have clothes on. Or maybe Libby conveniently dropped it for LE to find in case the killer tried to look for it.
6. Complete speculation, but I would guess a gun only because of the uniqueness of 2 victims. But the fact that the Down the Hill podcast said 3 signatures were left at the crime scene makes it possible a knife or his hands could have been used as well.
7. Yes, I think so.
8. I do not think they were killed elsewhere.
9. I think a killer like this looks at his victims as objects. So I think police probably have a lot of forensic evidence like DNA, crime scene analysis, etc that they can use. But they first have to find this person.
10. I do not put much faith in any of the witnesses in this case, especially the ones used to create the sketches. As far as I have heard none of the witnesses saw the crime. They only saw someone who they think could be involved out on the trails. It is just like all these people who unfortunately go online and put up side-by-side comparisons with absolutely no evidence whatsoever of their person's involvement in the murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German. Why not give the information to police instead? At least the people out on the trails that day can say they saw someone who they think might be involved because they were actually there.

The only witness who provided any sort of solid leads in this case is named Liberty German. Everyone else is trying to connect the dots after the fact.

 

[BradB]

Whatever theory anybody throws out there, you would be hard pressed to convince me some random guy was just waiting out there for some random female or person to take advantage of. Its not possible in my book. It is but you have better odds of getting struck by lightning.

IMO there has to be some connection before hand.

 

[HockeyMom330]

My Speculation to Day 2 Questions:

1. Statistically speaking it is mostly likely only one killer. Also, if more than one was involved I think there would be more forensic evidence and it would be much harder to keep things quiet. LE should know from the video/recording if there is more than one person/voice. Based on evidence released it seems like only one.

2. No - Similar reasoning to above.

3. I think the girls ran across the creek trying to escape. I don't think BG would have purposely planned to get his shoes, socks, and pants wet/mucky as it would draw attention to himself as he was leaving the scene of the crime. Knowing a vehicle could not access the area, he would have had to walk back out on the trail/roadway.

4. I think the motive was sexual, but I don't think either girl was raped. I think being forced to disrobe can be considered a sexual assault, and it is possible that he violated their bodies with an object, possibly after death.

5. No, I believe that the crime was over before DG tried calling and that BG was long gone. We have been told this crime occurred immediately following Libby's video and that it was over quickly.

6. I waver back and forth on weapon. Sometimes I lean towards hunting knife, but then other times I think strangulation, because that would be less likely to leave BG's clothing soiled. I do think its possible each girl was killed in a different manner which could account for the many signatures.

7. I feel like the girls were killed where they were found, or very close by. Their combined weight was over 300 pounds. I don't see how BG could have maneuvered the bodies very far.

8. N/A

9. I feel like BG make lots of mistakes, such as leaving the bodies in a place where they could be found relatively quickly (which increases chances of determining COD, TOD, and collecting forensics). Allowing his voice and image on Libby's phone is a huge mistake, and not destroying/taking the phone away. Being seen by at least one witness is a mistake. What the 'mistake' LE is referring to, I'm not sure. Maybe they just publicised that to scare BG and play with his mind.

10. I think the witness saw something/someone near the CPS building,

 

[JnRyan]

Thanks to everybody who responded to the Day One questions!
Here’s some more questions if anyone would like to answer them.

Day Two

1) Were one or two people involved in the killing of the girls?
2) Was anyone else at the trails with the killer but did not participate in the killings?
3) Assuming there is only one killer, did the killer lead the girls across the creek or did the girls run across the creek to try and escape?
4) Do you think the girls were sexually assaulted?
5) Do you think the crime was interrupted and cut short by DG’s call to Libby that caused her phone to ring?
6) What weapon do you believe was used to kill the girls?
7) Were the girls killed in the woods where they were found?
8) If killed elsewhere, where do you think that was?
9) LE said the killer made a mistake. What do you think that might have been?
10) LE said there was a witness. What do you think the witness saw?

Thanks!

1 and 2. I firmly believe only one person is involved. Killings like this with multiple persons are not that common and we only have one person in the video.
3. I'm 50-50 on this one. Having been a hunter and gotten wet for one reason or another I learned what my tolerance level is for that situation in my mid to late teens. If he planned to kill them quickly and then keep moving he was certainly close enough to his vehicle if it was in one of the parking places or CPS building. If this is an experienced hiker or hunter he could very well have crossed that creek with confidence.
4. I believe there was a sexual motivation to the crime, but I don't believe he sexually assaulted either of them.
5. No. I believe there is strong possibility the girls were deceased by 3:11 PM and he was on his way out of the area.
6. I believe a gun was used to control them, but I believe a more 'hands on' method - strangling, use of a knife or blunt instrument - was used. I believe one girl was likely killed very quickly and the other with less urgency on his part. I believe he disabled or injured the 2nd girl and took more time with her. (I really struggle thinking and writing that part.)
7. and 8. No. I believe they were killed where they were found.
9. A number of mistakes are possible. Touch DNA if he killed them with a 'hands on' method or touching the material to cover them if he tried to conceal them. Footprints on the creek bank. Then the audio, of course.
10. I doubt there is a witness in the sense that someone saw him commit the crime, saw him near the bodies or with the girls. I have my doubts that he was even seen leaving the woods where the crime scene was or walking from the cemetery to the road. If there is a witness maybe it was someone saw him walking down 300 or getting in his vehicle (at the CPS building?) between 3:00 PM and 3:15 PM.

 

[JnRyan]

For anyone out there who is hung up on the short amount of time that this crime apparently took and what that might or might not mean about motive, check out the sad facts that surround the murder of Shelbey Thornburgh (I'm NOT suggesting her case is related to the Delphi murders). But it's a similar case in many ways and shows that for a lot of details in the Delphi murders where you might think "how could there be only touch DNA in a crime like this" "how could the whole thing be over in a half an hour" "how can the suspect be clearly depicted in video and still get away with it"....well, in 2015 it already happened:

1. Suspect was only in Shelbey's apartment for 23 minutes
2. Sexual contact occurred but no DNA was left behind from this
3. Hair evidence did leave DNA but it's not a match to anyone in CODIS
4. Suspect used burner phone and deactivated it immediately afterwards
5. Suspect is on video arriving and leaving, is walking quite calmly with no trace of blood on him after killing Shelbey. His face and gait are clearly depicted.

Shelbey's killer seems to have highly organized predatory behavior that has kept his identity secret so far in spite of the risks he took to commit the crime. Same thing may be at work in the Delphi case.

PS - Shelbey's murder deserves more attention. Her thread here on Websleuths is light but there is an episode of The Murder Squad podcast which gives many details.

I had to look that one up. Shelby's case is chilling.

 

[distracted]

Thanks to everybody who responded to the Day One questions!
Here’s some more questions if anyone would like to answer them.

Day Two

1) Were one or two people involved in the killing of the girls?
2) Was anyone else at the trails with the killer but did not participate in the killings?
3) Assuming there is only one killer, did the killer lead the girls across the creek or did the girls run across the creek to try and escape?
4) Do you think the girls were sexually assaulted?
5) Do you think the crime was interrupted and cut short by DG’s call to Libby that caused her phone to ring?
6) What weapon do you believe was used to kill the girls?
7) Were the girls killed in the woods where they were found?
8) If killed elsewhere, where do you think that was?
9) LE said the killer made a mistake. What do you think that might have been?
10) LE said there was a witness. What do you think the witness saw?

Thanks!

1) I don't think so.
2) I don't think so.
3) I think they ran based on a shoe being found some distance away.
4) Perhaps one.
5) No.
6) No idea. Leaning toward strangulation, though.
7) Yes.
8) n/a
9) No idea.
10) Just saw him on the trails.

 

[ab01]

Whatever theory anybody throws out there, you would be hard pressed to convince me some random guy was just waiting out there for some random female or person to take advantage of. Its not possible in my book. It is but you have better odds of getting struck by lightning.

IMO there has to be some connection before hand.

And yet those are the cases that often are hardest to solve.