Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #122

[book-thinker]

Falling Down had a great point recently that Abby and Libby had probably never been down the hill. Absolutely. Kelsi has not helped matters with several bizarre comments. The first one was that 20 kids were there at the drop off point. That is patently ridiculous. The second patently ridiculous comment was Kelsi's quote during a podcast series that "everybody goes down the hill."

As Falling Down astutely described, the reality is closer to nobody than everybody. Watch that bridge area day after day prior to the murders and very, very few people would show up. Then only a fraction of that number would actually cross the bridge. Then virtually nobody among that segment would go down the hill, or into the yards behind, as opposed to merely traipsing back across the bridge.

I am always impressed when true crime analysts can ignore all the anecdotes and all the patently ridiculous comments and rely on big picture logic.

Unfortunately it is ultra rare. Kelsi's unfortunate comments have allowed people who follow this case to believe the bridge trail is more populated than actual, and that down the hill was a known possibility instead of virtually unheard of.

Regarding another recent topic, yes things are difficult to locate in Delphi. It is not a sophisticated GPS town or area. You discover that in a hurry. My first destination on Friday afternoon was Canal Park. That went okay. But then when I sat in the parking lot and decided to program to Monon High Bridge Trail for Sunday, it spit out the exact address as Canal Park. I still see that Canal Park address specified for Monon High even though the two areas are not even close to each other. I guess that official headquarters that operates the trail system is headquartered right there at Canal Park. Hence the official address.

Likewise when I wanted to walk the nearby Moyer Goulds trail the GPS address was wrong. Also the Trailhead Park GPS address was not good. Fortunately after the Friday experience I researched from my hotel room in Monticello and found old fashioned summaries from people toward how to find those two areas. They had already experienced the lousy GPS experiences. I remember the guy who detailed how to get to Moyer Gould Woods gave a distance from a specific intersection and then said to look for a long row of high trees. Bingo. That worked flawlessly.

If Bridge Guy targeted trails or was an aspiring killer, then none of that matters in the slightest. It's like the "Field of Dreams" quote of build it and they will come. These guys need an ideal area without surveillance, and just the right blend of occasionally somebody there but no worries of a flurry. They won't give a flip about difficulty of finding the area based on Google Maps or any other source. Legwork is still required in that racket. Frustration is required. Patience is required. As always, there is a determination to overplay the result. Bridge Guy killed on February 13th so that's what he intended. It was two girls so that's what he intended. Meanwhile there were almost certainly example after example of not everything unfolding perfectly for him, at Monon High or somewhere else. Potential targets slipped away without slightest indication or knowledge that they were ever in jeopardy.

Your comment how potential targets slipped away without the slightest indication they were in danger. I agree Monon High trail was a less populated trail. Did Bridge Guy think ahead of time, this was the place he would kill two young girls. I have always believed he’s from the area and still has family living in a nearby town. I don’t believe this the first time he’s done this.

 

[Jabarn]

Your comment how potential targets slipped away without the slightest indication they were in danger. I agree Monon High trail was a less populated trail. Did Bridge Guy think ahead of time, this was the place he would kill two young girls. I have always believed he’s from the area and still has family living in a nearby town. I don’t believe this the first time he’s done this.

If the parked car at the abandoned building angle is truly something to consider, BG may have been out of there before the search started and on the interstate or state road to who knows where, but could be within the area of small towns around West Lafayette. On the other hand, if he was a transient without transportation, he may have lurking around in RL’s outbuildings or hiding out watching what would unfold. The latter was my initial feeling three years ago. Did he stay or did he go?

 

[rosesfromangels]

If the parked car at the abandoned building angle is truly something to consider, BG may have been out of there before the search started and on the interstate or state road to who knows where, but could be within the area of small towns around West Lafayette. On the other hand, if he was a transient without transportation, he may have lurking around in RL’s outbuildings or hiding out watching what would unfold. The latter was my initial feeling three years ago. Did he stay or did he go?

Either scenario you suggest is possible, IMO. However, based on some of the comments LE has made suggesting he may be in briefings and so forth, leads me to lean towards the "lurking about" possibility. Perps often get their kicks closely watching or participating in the aftermath, it would seem.
I think the most likely scenario is that he lives in a neighboring town and comes in to Delphi for work frequently. (Deliveries, etc.).

Amateur opinion and speculation

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Local LE may have thought early on that the killer was local but somebody(FBI perhaps) with some clout and access to purse strings obviously thought otherwise, evidenced by all the billboards and flyers distributed nationwide. Nobody pulled the families aside and said, “that’s a waste of time appearing on talkshows and mailing out flyers, because he’s local”.
My own opinion is that he is not local. I cannot ignore the fact that after three years nobody has recognized the guy in that very small town or area, including the police who know all the bad actors. I refuse to think the whole town is covering for someone. Add to that recent statements about “signatures” at the crime scene and it doesn’t sound local.
The argument that the killer is local because he knew the trails and the terrain means nothing in my opinion. The killer could have been there one time, been there just that day and strolled around, and figured out where to trap victims, figured out the cemetery was a good place to conceal a parked car, etc. Did he get lucky because everything went his way? Yes. Does that happen sometimes for criminals? Sadly, yes.
I have wandered all over the speculation map for these murders. I have been down that road thinking everything was very complicated. But, right now, and it will probably change, I’m thinking the simplest thought is more likely correct. Not a local. Killer picked his ground for that day. Parked at the cemetery. Eyed the trail looking for an opportunity. Saw it. Accosted the girls. Was attempting to walk them to his car. They made a run for it. He killed them. Walked to his car, unseen. By the time DG was calling family saying he couldn’t find the girls, the killer was way on down the road. Just my thoughts.

 

[Yemelyan]

Local LE may have thought early on that the killer was local but somebody(FBI perhaps) with some clout and access to purse strings obviously thought otherwise, evidenced by all the billboards and flyers distributed nationwide. Nobody pulled the families aside and said, “that’s a waste of time appearing on talkshows and mailing out flyers, because he’s local”.
My own opinion is that he is not local. I cannot ignore the fact that after three years nobody has recognized the guy in that very small town or area, including the police who know all the bad actors. I refuse to think the whole town is covering for someone. Add to that recent statements about “signatures” at the crime scene and it doesn’t sound local.
The argument that the killer is local because he knew the trails and the terrain means nothing in my opinion. The killer could have been there one time, been there just that day and strolled around, and figured out where to trap victims, figured out the cemetery was a good place to conceal a parked car, etc. Did he get lucky because everything went his way? Yes. Does that happen sometimes for criminals? Sadly, yes.
I have wandered all over the speculation map for these murders. I have been down that road thinking everything was very complicated. But, right now, and it will probably change, I’m thinking the simplest thought is more likely correct. Not a local. Killer picked his ground for that day. Parked at the cemetery. Eyed the trail looking for an opportunity. Saw it. Accosted the girls. Was attempting to walk them to his car. They made a run for it. He killed them. Walked to his car, unseen. By the time DG was calling family saying he couldn’t find the girls, the killer was way on down the road. Just my thoughts.

I agree with everything you've said except for one detail. If what Robert Ives said about two or three signatures is valid (meaning, he used this term as a profiler would), then BG didn't just kill them because his ultimate plan of abduction went astray. If he left signatures, which are the things done that were wholly unnecessary to the murder itself yet fulfil deep psychological needs of the offender, then he accomplished what he set out to do in that clearing. He didn't kill in a rage, just because they laughed at him, filmed him, or tried to escape from him. If he left signatures, he had the time to satisfy his urge.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Local LE may have thought early on that the killer was local but somebody(FBI perhaps) with some clout and access to purse strings obviously thought otherwise, evidenced by all the billboards and flyers distributed nationwide. Nobody pulled the families aside and said, “that’s a waste of time appearing on talkshows and mailing out flyers, because he’s local”.
My own opinion is that he is not local. I cannot ignore the fact that after three years nobody has recognized the guy in that very small town or area, including the police who know all the bad actors. I refuse to think the whole town is covering for someone. Add to that recent statements about “signatures” at the crime scene and it doesn’t sound local.
The argument that the killer is local because he knew the trails and the terrain means nothing in my opinion. The killer could have been there one time, been there just that day and strolled around, and figured out where to trap victims, figured out the cemetery was a good place to conceal a parked car, etc. Did he get lucky because everything went his way? Yes. Does that happen sometimes for criminals? Sadly, yes.
I have wandered all over the speculation map for these murders. I have been down that road thinking everything was very complicated. But, right now, and it will probably change, I’m thinking the simplest thought is more likely correct. Not a local. Killer picked his ground for that day. Parked at the cemetery. Eyed the trail looking for an opportunity. Saw it. Accosted the girls. Was attempting to walk them to his car. They made a run for it. He killed them. Walked to his car, unseen. By the time DG was calling family saying he couldn’t find the girls, the killer was way on down the road. Just my thoughts.

Maybe, BG is from Indiana (not necessarily born there, but living in IN) and had murdered before in other states only. This time he did his first (double) murder in his (second) home state, because he felt safe enough to have another thrill-kill finally, maybe after waiting for 10 months to do it again. IF BG was of the age of around 29 yo perhaps (in 2017), he could have done these thrill-kills for an amount of time already, out of view from the sight of Delphi, never connected seriously until now. Maybe the signatures caused LE/FBI to install 6000 billboards in 46 states (grandma will never forget these numbers ). He IS a SK, IMO, and he had a certain goal to reach for. Today I'm thinking of the possibility, whether BG earned a lot of money as a sadistic, unscrupulous hitman perhaps ..... MOO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I agree with everything you've said except for one detail. If what Robert Ives said about two or three signatures is valid (meaning, he used this term as a profiler would), then BG didn't just kill them because his ultimate plan of abduction went astray. If he left signatures, which are the things done that were wholly unnecessary to the murder itself yet fulfil deep psychological needs of the offender, then he accomplished what he set out to do in that clearing. He didn't kill in a rage, just because they laughed at him, filmed him, or tried to escape from him. If he left signatures, he had the time to satisfy his urge.

I agree with this. It explains the “signatures”.
I think whether he killed them as they tried to escape, or just as he planned, as you pointed out, he was there only for himself and he would make sure he left those signatures. Totally agree.

 

[Justice101]

Very interesting comments and lines of thinking from the posters here. Kudos!

My take on the matter is that this was a crime of opportunity. The dude had not been back to this trail for sometime. If he was stalking day after day, he would have been recognized and pointed out from multiple witnesses.

I think he was a drifter/truck driver who knew the area from his childhood (grandparents lived there, etc.).

He is very cautious and calculating and had the perfect set up for an ambush and abduction down the hill. The perfect setup was 2 young girls with no one else on that bridge...no way for other people to come from the other side of the girls since that was the end of the trail. He could also look back over his shoulder before starting on the bridge to make sure nobody else was on the main trail.

Here's my wild prediction:
1) He's a Truck Driver (or companion to truck driver)
2) Parents or Grandparents (Uncle, etc) lived there in the 1980s. Spent lots of time wandering around alone on that trail/bridge area alone. Probably had the secluded low spot place on the north bank of the creek in his mind where he went to really be alone.
3) At least one of the girls was sexually assaulted. The other was killed immediately before that.
4) He will not resist the urge to at least drive back and be within seeing distance of the trail head.

OK, thanks again... over and out.. look forward to seeing an arrest someday.

 

[rosesfromangels]

Very interesting comments and lines of thinking from the posters here. Kudos!

My take on the matter is that this was a crime of opportunity. The dude had not been back to this trail for sometime. If he was stalking day after day, he would have been recognized and pointed out from multiple witnesses.

I think he was a drifter/truck driver who knew the area from his childhood (grandparents lived there, etc.).

He is very cautious and calculating and had the perfect set up for an ambush and abduction down the hill. The perfect setup was 2 young girls with no one else on that bridge...no way for other people to come from the other side of the girls since that was the end of the trail. He could also look back over his shoulder before starting on the bridge to make sure nobody else was on the main trail.

Here's my wild prediction:
1) He's a Truck Driver (or companion to truck driver)
2) Parents or Grandparents (Uncle, etc) lived there in the 1980s. Spent lots of time wandering around alone on that trail/bridge area alone. Probably had the secluded low spot place on the north bank of the creek in his mind where he went to really be alone.
3) At least one of the girls was sexually assaulted. The other was killed immediately before that.
4) He will not resist the urge to at least drive back and be within seeing distance of the trail head.

OK, thanks again... over and out.. look forward to seeing an arrest someday.

Your speculation sounds very plausible

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Very interesting comments and lines of thinking from the posters here. Kudos!

My take on the matter is that this was a crime of opportunity. The dude had not been back to this trail for sometime. If he was stalking day after day, he would have been recognized and pointed out from multiple witnesses.

I think he was a drifter/truck driver who knew the area from his childhood (grandparents lived there, etc.).

He is very cautious and calculating and had the perfect set up for an ambush and abduction down the hill. The perfect setup was 2 young girls with no one else on that bridge...no way for other people to come from the other side of the girls since that was the end of the trail. He could also look back over his shoulder before starting on the bridge to make sure nobody else was on the main trail.

Here's my wild prediction:
1) He's a Truck Driver (or companion to truck driver)
2) Parents or Grandparents (Uncle, etc) lived there in the 1980s. Spent lots of time wandering around alone on that trail/bridge area alone. Probably had the secluded low spot place on the north bank of the creek in his mind where he went to really be alone.
3) At least one of the girls was sexually assaulted. The other was killed immediately before that.
4) He will not resist the urge to at least drive back and be within seeing distance of the trail head.

OK, thanks again... over and out.. look forward to seeing an arrest someday.

Your words “He could also look back over his shoulder before starting on the bridge to make sure nobody else was on the main trail” shows the simplicity that could be involved here. Without the very simple ability to check the trail before he ventured onto the bridge, the killer might not have been able to pull it off. This is something I think we all have forgotten as time went on and our theories got more and more complicated and complex.

 

[Yemelyan]

Your words “He could also look back over his shoulder before starting on the bridge to make sure nobody else was on the main trail” shows the simplicity that could be involved here. Without the very simple ability to check the trail before he ventured onto the bridge, the killer might not have been able to pull it off. This is something I think we all have forgotten as time went on and our theories got more and more complicated and complex.

Agreed, and if he had been there before (which I personally believe he might have been, at least once), this fact did not escape him and probably formed a central part of his fantasy about committing a crime there. I'm sure he went over it many times in his mind before and since and derives a great deal of pleasure from it.

 

[carbuff]

Agreed, and if he had been there before (which I personally believe he might have been, at least once), this fact did not escape him and probably formed a central part of his fantasy about committing a crime there. I'm sure he went over it many times in his mind before and since and derives a great deal of pleasure from it.

He could be that kind, or he could be the predator kind, always thinking about prey and ready to pounce when it crosses his path, and not thinking any more about it than about last night's supper.

 

[rypj84]

Thinking along the lines of occupation - has an insurance appraiser ever been discussed? Whether auto or home, I know that some do travel within a region to asses damages and cost of repairs, often being on the road for 2-3 days at a time so paying for hotel/motel rooms is common.

 

[mom2chloe]

Didn't Libby call around trying to find a ride to the trails? I swear I either read that or heard it on a podcast. I keep wondering if a dad/uncle/brother was asked or overheard the conversation and was alerted to girls going to the bridge.

Or shared the info with a friend or coworker. It was a nice February day weather wise why not mention it innocently?! IMO
Eta anyone with knowledge of the girls planned visit could have unknowingly mentioned it to a friend or coworker and might have been overheard discussing such via social media, a phone conversation or one on one conversation. Again all MOO.

 

[Torch Carrier]

Regarding the couple arguing at bridge (he says he saw BG, she says she...preoccupied with arguing?...did not. ) Maybe he IS BG? Maybe she is afraid to come forward and say so?

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Regarding the couple arguing at bridge (he says he saw BG, she says she...preoccupied with arguing?...did not. ) Maybe he IS BG? Maybe she is afraid to come forward and say so?

Problem would be his clothing. At this point I don't think, he had changed already (Jeans, blue jacket, shoes). So, if it was BG, LE would have known after looking at Libby's video. IMO

 

[carbuff]

I'd be willing to bet quite a large sum of money that at least half the adult males that go to that park are wearing jeans, a blue jacket (probably Carhartt), and either work boots or athletic shoes.

 

[California Sunset]

Very interesting comments and lines of thinking from the posters here. Kudos!

My take on the matter is that this was a crime of opportunity. The dude had not been back to this trail for sometime. If he was stalking day after day, he would have been recognized and pointed out from multiple witnesses.

I think he was a drifter/truck driver who knew the area from his childhood (grandparents lived there, etc.).

He is very cautious and calculating and had the perfect set up for an ambush and abduction down the hill. The perfect setup was 2 young girls with no one else on that bridge...no way for other people to come from the other side of the girls since that was the end of the trail. He could also look back over his shoulder before starting on the bridge to make sure nobody else was on the main trail.

Here's my wild prediction:
1) He's a Truck Driver (or companion to truck driver)
2) Parents or Grandparents (Uncle, etc) lived there in the 1980s. Spent lots of time wandering around alone on that trail/bridge area alone. Probably had the secluded low spot place on the north bank of the creek in his mind where he went to really be alone.
3) At least one of the girls was sexually assaulted. The other was killed immediately before that.
4) He will not resist the urge to at least drive back and be within seeing distance of the trail head.

OK, thanks again... over and out.. look forward to seeing an arrest someday.

How often do you make predictions and how often are you correct? I do this, but only in my head.
6 year old Michele Dorr's case should have been solved almost right away. There was a witness, a repair guy at the house where the killer lived. He saw Michele come to the door looking for the killer's niece. (I can't find the witness information now.) LE focused on the little girl's dad right away, and he didn't do it. That little girl lay buried for 12 years. Her murder was unsolved for too long. SMH.

 

[sunshineray]

Regarding the couple arguing at bridge (he says he saw BG, she says she...preoccupied with arguing?...did not. ) Maybe he IS BG? Maybe she is afraid to come forward and say so?

Where did you read this information? I don't recall this in any articles, just mention of FSG hearing a couple arguing. If you have a link? Was it in one of the podcasts? TIA

 

[MistyWaters]

Where did you read this information? I don't recall this in any articles, just mention of FSG hearing a couple arguing. If you have a link? Was it in one of the podcasts? TIA

Is there even a reliable source for a couple “arguing” under the bridge or has it gotten repeated so often it’s become fact? The first time I ever recall hearing of arguing was connected to a wild, speculative theory that “the couple” was actually the killer and one of the two girls.

See post #767, no mention of FSG witnessing an argument.
IN - Abigail Williams & Liberty German, Delphi, Media, Maps, Timelines NO DISCUSSION