Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #124

[MistyWaters]

I am NEW to this Site so my apologies if I do something wrong. But I have been looking at the pictures posted about this case. The photos to me look like the suspect is wearing a fur lined hooded jacket and possibly a sock hat. I have looked on a EBay and there are several blue fur jackets that could be very similar. Also it appears that he is wearing a sock hat with a reddish logo in the middle. And a red plaid shirt under the jacket. Does anyone know what the temperature was on this day? Also. How many High Schools are there in the area? Going thru some of the High School year books might be helpful.

LE have stated they believe the suspect was wearing a hoodie, whether they’re right or wrong. As this crime was committed over 3 years ago, what the suspect was wearing on that particular day is probably less important than it would’ve been in the immediate days following the murders.

LE has also asked several times for the public to not post side-by-side photos anywhere merely based on resemblance, if you were thinking we should sleuth yearbooks here.
Police urge public to stop posting photos of people who look like Delphi suspect

 

[SMK777]

When will this nightmare end for those poor families. Justice and closure.

In your professional opinion, do you think it’s likely to be solved in the near future?
In the past I’ve read of cases that had really reached a dead end and seemed like they’d never be solved, when suddenly a big break turned them around completely. I keep hoping for similar to happen here.

 

[SMK777]

You can definitely see many photos of the crowd/audience at that press conference. Google "Delphi April press conference" and select "images."

Edit to add: I did this recently and didn't see anyone who resembled either sketch really. There were a lot of women in attendance.

When they said “he may be in this room” and that they’d probably interviewed him, was that just a technique or strategy, or did they mean it? ( I guess it was Carter who said this?)

I still believe that if/when the killer is caught, he’ll be middle aged and resemble sketch #1.

 

[Yemelyan]

When they said “he may be in this room” and that they’d probably interviewed him, was that just a technique or strategy, or did they mean it? ( I guess it was Carter who said this?)

I still believe that if/when the killer is caught, he’ll be middle aged and resemble sketch #1.

It was Carter who said it. He apparently went off script a bit in the press conference (based on the published remarks that came out later) so I really have no idea if that was an ad lib.

My feeling, and I know this will be unpopular, is that Carter didn't mean just the particular room they were standing in. I think what he hoped would happen is that when that remark was aired in news stories some parent, wife, or other family member watching the nightly news would look over at BG calmly eating dinner or sitting in a recliner and think hmmmmm...could be.

 

[Yemelyan]

In your professional opinion, do you think it’s likely to be solved in the near future?
In the past I’ve read of cases that had really reached a dead end and seemed like they’d never be solved, when suddenly a big break turned them around completely. I keep hoping for similar to happen here.

JMO, I don't think this case is anywhere close to a dead end. I think when they catch this person we will all be shocked at how much they already had on him.

 

[Area52]

JMO, I don't think this case is anywhere close to a dead end. I think when they catch this person we will all be shocked at how much they already had on him.

From your lips to Gods ears!

 

[Angleterre]

@Charlot123 Like it or not, this was a child (because they were under 18) abduction (because he coerced or forced them off the bridge to the place where he committed another crime against them) murder (because they died). It does not matter how short or far he made them go, any distance is considered an abduction in these circumstances. This is how the US Justice Department, who commissioned the study, defines it and investigatory agencies also designate child abduction murders as different from the bulk of child murders but...feel free to lump this case in with the domestic violence cases and adult gang violence if you like, and see if that framework gets you anywhere.

The study is retrospective because this type of crime does not occur at the rate regular murders do. If you used just the child abduction murders that happened in 2006 (or any given modern year), you would have a tiny sample to look at and any conclusion you drew from it would be meaningless. This study looked at 775 cases stretching years back. And I really don't think that the actual motivations that drive a predator like this have changed that much.

I do think that advances in technology are going to have an influence on predatory behaviors but I also don't think the online behavior of two 13 year olds can stump the whole FBI and leave no trace of what they were doing. Phone reset or no. So I have to take that into consideration when I look at scenarios that are more likely than not.

To answer your question, what I posted was that the single factor that impacts a child abduction murder's solvability the most was LE being able to figure out the relationship between victim and offender. And if they couldn't do that, it made the case extremely hard (but not impossible) to solve, in spite of how much physical forensic evidence existed. If there's a way for LE to discover an offender's legal identity from their Kik profile, then yes, I guess it would help increase the case's chance of being solved? I'm not sure if you are talking about child exploitation cases (which is not what the data I'm quoting refer to at all) or abductions followed by murders, though.

Good luck.

May I ask and I apologise in advance for my naivety/ignorance where technology is concerned but what is KIK or a KIK PROFILE ?
Thanks in advance

 

[SMK777]

JMO, I don't think this case is anywhere close to a dead end. I think when they catch this person we will all be shocked at how much they already had on him.

That’s encouraging. Thanks. So basically they may already have a suspect, and a lot on him, but only with his arrest will they make it all public?

 

[Yemelyan]

May I ask and I apologise in advance for my naivety/ignorance where technology is concerned but what is KIK or a KIK PROFILE ?
Thanks in advance

Kik is a messaging app, it's known for its anonymity features (for example, unlike Facebook, which asks you for a valid phone number and email address, Kik lets you register as a user without providing your phone number). However, IP addresses are logged by the company to the best of my knowledge.

 

[Angleterre]

'Epitome of evil': Delphi double murder still a mystery three years later | X101 Always Classic

What do you think is so unusual about the manner of death that would result in statements such as these?

"a crime Indiana State Police Superintendent Doug Carter calls “the epitome of evil.”

“I’m in my 35th year and I’ve never experienced anything quite like it,” Carter told ABC News.

And then, this following statement from that article. What specifically do you think he refers to when he talks about "certain things"?

“Unless someone absolutely somehow studied that [trail] in great depth, they would not know specifically where certain things were,”

Clearly, I agree they were abducted. I also believe the killer was familiar with the trail, had been there before, likely several times, if not many.

And this idea of "extreme fear" being the reason one would not come forward, or even a "threat" to not reveal the killers identity, I've read this type of reasoning from LE before on this case.

What would be the reason for a person who knew the truth in this case to not speak it? Fear of being killed by the killer? Would it be a wife, son, or daughter? Would a friend keep that confidence? Wow. If true, someone lives a terrible, terrible life with this murderer on the loose.

I like asking questions, when y'all answer them, you teach me And I think it leads us ever so slightly closer to the truth.

To try and answer your question
BBM ....


What would be the reason for a person who knew the truth in this case to not speak it?

You are correct when you cite ‘fear’
as the motivating factor to hide something of such mammoth proportions that could, over a period of time, make the ‘secret keeper’ so ill with the weight and magnitude of that knowledge sitting on their shoulders, however ....
As a retired Detective Police Chief Inspector with responsibilities for managing crime within an inner city area, working with my team of 80+ Detectives spread across 5 CID areas of investigation and also responsible for the management of Murder enquiries as the SIO ( Senior Investigative Officer), I have had experience of this ‘real’ fear and the way in which it can stop one of the most law abiding, community minded individuals with the utmost integrity and never normally shying away from their responsibilities to their community, purely by the threat made against them and/or their families and friends etc .. It becomes massive, shouldering that burden and it’s potential ramifications to not only oneself but more importantly to their families and the weight of the burden when , like weighing scales, they tip on a daily basis from one weight bearing side to the other . That fear is very real and not just in terms of it taking up space and growing exponentially within your own headspace daily but the realisation that this fear and what comes with it if you ‘do the right thing’ by society and more importantly, by your own conscience and imparting what you know, what you have witnessed , who you believe to be responsible for the brutal murder of two young , innocent children/ young ladies , just out in the brisk fresh air, sharing fun and innocent laughter together without a care in the world and enjoying their childhood as they should as they stand on the precipice of life and all its delights ... VERSUS taking all of this knowledge to your grave, going against every fibre of your own moral compass and denying your integrity and honesty which has been your backbone throughout life and has underpinned all of what you do and say on a daily basis and more importantly, denying these two young innocent children and their families, justice ! Can you imagine ? I suspect that you can’t . Imagine waking up that day and your own life being forever changed and not for the better, in fact , for the worse and effectively not only ruining the life of Libby and Abby , not only ruining the life of their families and friends BUT ruining the life of your children,yourwife/husband/partner,
your parents and friends? Because that is exactly what would have happened that day to a person who witnessed BGs interactions with Libby and Abby ( or whatever’s it is that they do know and can state categorically thereby rendering them a state witness ).
BG could be a major prominent member of the community, someone with power and influence to destroy the life of the witness, both theoretically and in reality ( yes I mean murder ). BG could be a police chief or a solicitor or a Judge .... BG could be a hells angel or the leader of MS13 or some other violent gang . BG May have the motive means and opportunity to destroy the life of the witness and their nearest and dearest , strongly enough that even witness protection is not enough . This is real fear and I have personally witnessed and been involved in such within my career as LE.
Edited to finish writing my post and to remove the pesky emoji attachments that I don’t understand how they became attached in the first instance- my apologies x

 

[somequestions]

JMO, I don't think this case is anywhere close to a dead end. I think when they catch this person we will all be shocked at how much they already had on him.

In my opinion, I think this case is at a dead end without any new information from tips that lead to identifying the man on the bridge. I think when this case is solved we will all be shocked at how little they had on him. Wrong age, wrong sketch description, wrong location emphasis, etc.
Then everything will start to fall into place when people look back and realize why it was so hard to find the bridge guy in the first place. That is the way the investigation in this case feels like it is going. But I admit we do not know what the police know and have to trust the information they provide to the public. Maybe they know more than I think, but the time that has passed has now led me to believe they have nothing.

I think if this case is ever solved the investigation will look back and realize all of it was wrong, except for one piece of evidence. After all this time I do not think the investigators have anything in this case except for tips to continually review over and over.

 

[Angleterre]

I don't think this is likely at all. Every child and especially girls are taught, from a fairly early age, not to go wurh strangers. It has been said that Libby and Abby discussed BG and Libby felt the need to film him, so I really don't think they would go with him in this scenario.

Abby and Libby may have known not to go with BG but they may not have felt able to go against his instruction, so they went with him, albeit not willingly ,so in the true sense of the word, they did go with him and may have even thought that it was safety in numbers . This is somewhat different from being taught at an early age , not to go with strangers ( plus, your assumption that this was in fact taught at a young age , and ergo was taught to Abby and Libby is just that, an assumption and although it’s something that you would likely do or have done and that I have done too with my children, as possibly have the majority of sleuths here on WS , doesn’t necessarily mean that all children are in fact taught this , which is a sad fact of life that I have unfortunately come across during my career and in particular the ‘safeguarding’ part of my career ).

 

[Angleterre]

Sorry, a long post. I'm not very good at being succinct!

I think it's separate. I think it could something along the lines of "Guys, do your parents know you're on the bridge", or "Guys, you shouldn't be on the bridge, it's dangerous." At which point Abby and Libby look around and see how steep it is and/or have always gone back across the bridge and say "How do we get back from here?" His reply is "Down the hill".

If they did recognise him, or just followed his instructions because he's older than them and is a sort of authority figure, they could have reluctantly, but willingly gone down the hill. It may be that he didn't start the attack until they were at the bottom of the hill. At that point it was much easier to control the situation.

It's occurred to me that, despite filming BG, the girls could have felt more comfortable at this point. This would work particularly well if they did know him, or if he did look like the sketch of the younger man. If he did, then he's relatively attractive and it wouldn't be that surprising if the girls consequently dropped their guard.

Could he have pretended to hurt himself going down the slope? The girls could have felt compelled to help him. He could then could have grabbed Abby and put a knife or gun at, for example Abby's throat, or even knocked her out. If this happened, the shock would possibly silence Libby, long enough for him to tell her if she screams he will kill Abby.

Some of you may think this sounds unlikely. But I am 40 and if I was in the scenario I have described, I would be very likely to do just what I have suggested Libby and Abby did. Not because I trust everyone, but out of politeness. That sounds ridiculous and maybe it's because I'm English and we're renowned for our manners, but I think it's possible that this happened.

One final thing to mention. If I have understood things accurately, everyone else who has admitted to be at the trails that day was local. Maybe Abby and Libby had never seen anyone there, on any of their visits, who wasn't local. I live in a reasonably small place (though larger than Delphi) and I have a sort of assumption of trust regarding people round here.

If I was 20 miles from home I would be more on my guard, but at nearby beauty spots, I would feel safer. It's a combination of a familiar place, years of visits, always seeing locals and the fact that nothing bad has ever happened there. I'm really not as naive as I sound, but round here strangers say hello and exchange a few words. Remember Cheyanne said hello to BG. My final thought is that did BG look at her in a scary way because he didn't want to be seen, or is he not used to complete strangers saying hello? If it's the latter, I'd guess he doesn't live locally. It's simplistic, but sometimes things aren't as complicated as we try to make them.

JMO MOO

My apologies but who is Cheyenne?

 

[SMK777]

In my opinion, I think this case is at a dead end without any new information from tips that lead to identifying the man on the bridge. I think when this case is solved we will all be shocked at how little they had on him. Wrong age, wrong sketch description, wrong location emphasis, etc.
Then everything will start to fall into place when people look back and realize why it was so hard to find the bridge guy in the first place. That is the way the investigation in this case feels like it is going. But I admit we do not know what the police know and have to trust the information they provide to the public. Maybe they know more than I think, but the time that has passed has now led me to believe they have nothing.

I think if this case is ever solved the investigation will look back and realize all of it was wrong, except for one piece of evidence. After all this time I do not think the investigators have anything in this case except for tips to continually review over and over.

Thanks for this, because I’ve had a strong sense of this all along, but felt I was going crazy. I guess I need to trust my own mind more. 3 1/2 years with a person walking free who did a crime of this nature really does not look good.

 

[Angleterre]

Sorry, a long post. I'm not very good at being succinct!

I think it's separate. I think it could something along the lines of "Guys, do your parents know you're on the bridge", or "Guys, you shouldn't be on the bridge, it's dangerous." At which point Abby and Libby look around and see how steep it is and/or have always gone back across the bridge and say "How do we get back from here?" His reply is "Down the hill".

If they did recognise him, or just followed his instructions because he's older than them and is a sort of authority figure, they could have reluctantly, but willingly gone down the hill. It may be that he didn't start the attack until they were at the bottom of the hill. At that point it was much easier to control the situation.

It's occurred to me that, despite filming BG, the girls could have felt more comfortable at this point. This would work particularly well if they did know him, or if he did look like the sketch of the younger man. If he did, then he's relatively attractive and it wouldn't be that surprising if the girls consequently dropped their guard.

Could he have pretended to hurt himself going down the slope? The girls could have felt compelled to help him. He could then could have grabbed Abby and put a knife or gun at, for example Abby's throat, or even knocked her out. If this happened, the shock would possibly silence Libby, long enough for him to tell her if she screams he will kill Abby.

Some of you may think this sounds unlikely. But I am 40 and if I was in the scenario I have described, I would be very likely to do just what I have suggested Libby and Abby did. Not because I trust everyone, but out of politeness. That sounds ridiculous and maybe it's because I'm English and we're renowned for our manners, but I think it's possible that this happened.

One final thing to mention. If I have understood things accurately, everyone else who has admitted to be at the trails that day was local. Maybe Abby and Libby had never seen anyone there, on any of their visits, who wasn't local. I live in a reasonably small place (though larger than Delphi) and I have a sort of assumption of trust regarding people round here.

If I was 20 miles from home I would be more on my guard, but at nearby beauty spots, I would feel safer. It's a combination of a familiar place, years of visits, always seeing locals and the fact that nothing bad has ever happened there. I'm really not as naive as I sound, but round here strangers say hello and exchange a few words. Remember Cheyanne said hello to BG. My final thought is that did BG look at her in a scary way because he didn't want to be seen, or is he not used to complete strangers saying hello? If it's the latter, I'd guess he doesn't live locally. It's simplistic, but sometimes things aren't as complicated as we try to make them.

JMO MOO

My apologies but who is Cheyenne?

I've never taken the comment that BG may be at the press conference literally. I think it's more that someone who was there, has a link to him. So, BG is attending metaphorically. Alternatively, he was watching online or on television.

Either way, I feel it is likely to be an acknowledgement from LE that BG is following the case closely. It may be that LE/the FBI believe it is actually BG's view that he is 'there' for every press conference and every interview.

Obviously many criminals watch press conferences, but I think the way the communication to him changed, suggests an awareness that BG views this as being 'all because of and about him.'

I mean this in a more nuanced way, in that BG feels in some way that he is 'running the show' so to speak. This may be because he is feeling powerful because he hasn't been caught, but also it may be linked to the fact that so little information is being released.

There is clearly/presumably a very good reason why the amount of information given to the general public is so small. If BG is aware of this reason, (particularly if it is specific), it makes sense (to me at least), that he may enjoy watching LE stage press conferences, aware that the public are desperately hoping for progress to have been made, but confident that, for whatever reason, they will be disappointed. The resulting criticism of LE and more specifically Doug Carter, is likely to be the icing on the cake for BG.

It may be that Doug Carter is as useless as many people perceive him to be. He should have read a prepared speech at the last press conference, but he went off grid. He cries, mentions films and is arguably all over the place emotionally. Why? Is it because he is stubborn and doesn't like being told what to do, is he being unprofessional, or is it that he wants to catch BG and doesn't want to play the game (whatever it is) anymore? Could it be that we should be concentrating on what Carter does AND doesn't say, that he is the truth teller?
JMO MOO

Can I ask, how do you know that the Police Chief went off script ? I am not being snarky but I am genuinely interested if you know that for a fact and if so , where it was reported? I ask because it could be that the Police Chief was communicating with the killer. In previous hi profile cases, the narcissist within the perpetrator has created a need to have his ego stroked and himself elevated to a role of importance and more importantly, the need to feel that he is far superior intelligence wise . This was seen during the BTK investigation and ultimately led to Dennis Radars downfall . So I ask the question, in generalised terms and not directly to you obviously, could the Police Chief have been communicating with BG through his press conference? It’s a thought that I am not willing to dismiss easily out of hand.

 

[somequestions]

There are so many cases today that get solved with science and technology. But when people start acting like the detectives did so much work, I think otherwise. I think investigators in the 1970's and 1980's would have used the same technology if it had been available to them at that time. This case has the potential to become a case study for why good detective work still matters. Not every case can be solved with science.

If the case turns out the way I think it is headed, I think the biggest shock to everyone will be how far off the police were when it came to the direction of their investigation. If it turns out the way police think, that the killer has probably already been talked to by LE, and is probably known to someone in Delphi or around the local area who just is not talking, then it will look like the investigation was indeed headed in the right direction the entire time.

The quote that really made me think the investigation has nothing came from the superintendent in one of the news interviews on the 3rd anniversary of the crime. The quote was, "If we hit year 4 I hope we are sitting here again." That quote made me think the investigation has gone as far as it can go with the information that has been released to the public, and the only thing left to do is wait.

 

[MistyWaters]

It was Carter who said it. He apparently went off script a bit in the press conference (based on the published remarks that came out later) so I really have no idea if that was an ad lib.

My feeling, and I know this will be unpopular, is that Carter didn't mean just the particular room they were standing in. I think what he hoped would happen is that when that remark was aired in news stories some parent, wife, or other family member watching the nightly news would look over at BG calmly eating dinner or sitting in a recliner and think hmmmmm...could be.

That’s similar to how I understood Leazenby when he remarked “I know that voice”. IIRC he was asking for tips and verbally demonstrating the thought process of somebody who really did know that voice along with all the rest of it, hoping it would yield results.

 

[Angleterre]

<modsnip>

I have spent my whole career relying on my intuition and gut feeling and it has been right in 99.9% of cases that I have investigated or that I have merely taken an interest in and have thought to myself and those thoughts have been proven correct . I think I was born with it to begin with and it’s been honed and cultivated over many years as a Detective. In fact, only a few weeks ago, I used my intuition to save a persons life when they became so desperate that they were in the process of committing suicide , climbing over the bridge barrier that straddles the motorway , when they were spotted by police officers who thankfully took my call seriously when I merely told them that I was aware that this person had told a third party that they felt hopeless about a situation that they were in and consequently upon being told this and having never met this person, albeit I had given them advice over the phone, I had tried to call them on the phone and it wasn’t being answered. That’s it ! That’s all I could tell LE but I said that my gut feeling was that this person was in trouble and I couldn’t explain why I thought that other than what I have said above. I don’t tell this for recognition but to say that some people do have an intuitive ability that can be used for the greater good and I am thankful that it worked on this occasion and coupled with the fantastic service that LE gave and how they trusted my intuition , collectively we saved a life !

 

[sunshineray]

When they said “he may be in this room” and that they’d probably interviewed him, was that just a technique or strategy, or did they mean it? ( I guess it was Carter who said this?)

I still believe that if/when the killer is caught, he’ll be middle aged and resemble sketch #1.

All I know is, to me, ISP Carter was about on edge as a spokesperson could be and he was glaring out into the room as he said some of the more accusatory things he said that day. His body language was shouting of unease and his delivery reeked of betrayal. This is AJMO, that is how I ingested it.

 

[sunshineray]

Abby and Libby may have known not to go with BG but they may not have felt able to go against his instruction, so they went with him, albeit not willingly ,so in the true sense of the word, they did go with him and may have even thought that it was safety in numbers . This is somewhat different from being taught at an early age , not to go with strangers ( plus, your assumption that this was in fact taught at a young age , and ergo was taught to Abby and Libby is just that, an assumption and although it’s something that you would likely do or have done and that I have done too with my children, as possibly have the majority of sleuths here on WS , doesn’t necessarily mean that all children are in fact taught this , which is a sad fact of life that I have unfortunately come across during my career and in particular the ‘safeguarding’ part of my career ).

There are ways in which exactly what you said mostly likely came into play. He could have grabbed one of the girls making the other girl frightened into following orders. He could have brandished a weapon striking total fear into them. Most adult minds wouldn't work on the spot, with all their knowledge, with either of those, let alone two young girls thrust into a nightmare in broad daylight. It tears the heart out.