Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #126

[Yemelyan]

Hi everyone.. first time posting and I apologize in advance if this has been covered in a different thread but I am curious if anyone has any theories regarding the crime scene being compared to the movie "The Shack"? I remember watching a YouTube video taking the same path believed to have been taken by the killer and the girls and as he was walking the woods close to where the bodies were believed to have been recovered, there was a little wooden shack there, to the left of the path and Im just wondering if this is what he was referring to? The killer in the movie also left odd signatures at the scene:
1) He left a ladybug pin at the abduction sight
2) He left what appeared to be an upside down smile drawn in blood on a
wooden beam inside the shack, before you came upon the murder sight
(and it again appeared at the burial sight)
3) He left her dress, but took the body to another location for burial

or at least those were the 3 things I considered to be "the signature" and with it being stated that the evidence isn't what we would typically see, i wonder if BG didnt use the elements around him, like a halo made of leaves, or some type of rock or limb formations to mark the sight of the murder? and I really, really wonder if that little wooden shack didnt come into play somehow?!?!?! Just trying to think outside the box and im really interested to see what yall think??

TIA for any responses!

In the podcast Scene of the Crime, Kelsi German asks Carter to explain his reference to The Shack and he says it's just a movie he happened to see that spoke to him about themes of despair and forgiveness. He asks Kelsi if she's seen the movie and she says yes, and that after viewing it more than once she can also relate to those themes.

That's all. It's not a coded message IMO.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Hi everyone.. first time posting and I apologize in advance if this has been covered in a different thread but I am curious if anyone has any theories regarding the crime scene being compared to the movie "The Shack"? I remember watching a YouTube video taking the same path believed to have been taken by the killer and the girls and as he was walking the woods close to where the bodies were believed to have been recovered, there was a little wooden shack there, to the left of the path and Im just wondering if this is what he was referring to? The killer in the movie also left odd signatures at the scene:
1) He left a ladybug pin at the abduction sight
2) He left what appeared to be an upside down smile drawn in blood on a
wooden beam inside the shack, before you came upon the murder sight
(and it again appeared at the burial sight)
3) He left her dress, but took the body to another location for burial

or at least those were the 3 things I considered to be "the signature" and with it being stated that the evidence isn't what we would typically see, i wonder if BG didnt use the elements around him, like a halo made of leaves, or some type of rock or limb formations to mark the sight of the murder? and I really, really wonder if that little wooden shack didnt come into play somehow?!?!?! Just trying to think outside the box and im really interested to see what yall think??

TIA for any responses!

Welcome to the discussion, @_Gypsy_Soul! Glad you are joining us!

You are right that we have discussed “The Shack” reference and there are a lot of different thoughts on it. For me, I tend to think this was just a movie that touched Carter and he brought it up at the press conference when his emotions were getting the most of him. Hopefully you will get some responses from some other folks with different ideas.

 

[stattlich1]

Is this quote from the Daily Mail article? Because I have some serious issues with their interpretations. They took every single one of their quotes from Ives directly from his podcast interviews...verbatim. So I don't think they had a new interview with him. And never once in the podcasts did Ives ever say he thought the scene was staged. Lots of physical evidence, yes. Odd evidence, yes. Two or three signatures, yes. Staging - no, that's something very specific and he never said or implied this.

Staging is something completely separate from signatures or personation.

Yes, the article linked two pages back. I'll post it again.

Even if you remove the staging aspect, IMO, there is much to consider relative to his words.

Could staging, in general, or the specifics thereof, be something LE would keep to themselves as part of an investigation?

Former prosecutor in unsolved Delphi murders of two teens says they had signature elements | Daily Mail Online

 

[Yemelyan]

Yes, the article linked two pages back. I'll post it again.

Even if you remove the staging aspect, IMO, there is much to consider relative to his words.

Could staging, in general, or the specifics thereof, be something LE would keep to themselves as part of an investigation?

Former prosecutor in unsolved Delphi murders of two teens says they had signature elements | Daily Mail Online

Staging a scene, if they had a strong belief that it took place, would be almost the most important evidence they would have outside of DNA evidence. If they really felt there was evidence of staging, there's no way they would release this info so cavalierly IMO as it would reveal the exact direction of their investigation.

Remember staging is not the same as posing. Posing is a signature behavior where the victim would be manipulated into particular positions (usually sexual or demeaning). This is either for the sexual pleasure of the offender or the psychological thrill of knowing their positioning will shock the person discovering them.

Staging is different...it is done purely to misdirect the investigation. So a common example of this would be, a man kills his wife in a domestic violence situation. He then stages the house to look like a break-in happened and she died in the commission of a robbery or a sexual assault. And there are many other scenarios.

But whenever staging occurs, it often points directly to the offender's familiarity with the victim or perhaps familiarity the situation under which the victim and offender came in contact. The offender is attempting to obscure logical links to the victim, the situation, or his motive that LE can use to reveal his identity.

So to answer your question, at this stage of the investigation evidence of staging would be kept close to the vest by LE, on par with keeping sealed the method used to kill them. It wouldn't be released to the Daily Mail or a podcast and nowhere else. IMO

 

[Justice101]

Staging a scene, if they had a strong belief that it took place, would be almost the most important evidence they would have outside of DNA evidence. If they really felt there was evidence of staging, there's no way they would release this info so cavalierly IMO as it would reveal the exact direction of their investigation.

Remember staging is not the same as posing. Posing is a signature behavior where the victim would be manipulated into particular positions (usually sexual or demeaning). This is either for the sexual pleasure of the offender or the psychological thrill of knowing their positioning will shock the person discovering them.

Staging is different...it is done purely to misdirect the investigation. So a common example of this would be, a man kills his wife in a domestic violence situation. He then stages the house to look like a break-in happened and she died in the commission of a robbery or a sexual assault. And there are many other scenarios.

But whenever staging occurs, it often points directly to the offender's familiarity with the victim or perhaps familiarity the situation under which the victim and offender came in contact. The offender is attempting to obscure logical links to the victim, the situation, or his motive that LE can use to reveal his identity.

So to answer your question, at this stage of the investigation evidence of staging would be kept close to the vest by LE, on par with keeping sealed the method used to kill them. It wouldn't be released to the Daily Mail or a podcast and nowhere else. IMO

Best post of the day! Thanks Yem!!!

 

[Tiger Stripes]

I don't find the Judge's misconduct particularly interesting or relevant to this case, but I *do* find the allegations against the former Professor *extremely* interesting. After all, Libby took courses there. We need to dig deeper in to this.

Amateur opinion and speculation

Yes -- finding it veeery interesting indeed. Especially since one of the courses Libby took was...a forensics course. JMOO

 

[_Gypsy_Soul]

Welcome to the discussion, @_Gypsy_Soul! Glad you are joining us!

You are right that we have discussed “The Shack” reference and there are a lot of different thoughts on it. For me, I tend to think this was just a movie that touched Carter and he brought it up at the press conference when his emotions were getting the most of him. Hopefully you will get some responses from some other folks with different ideas.

Thanks for the warm welcome, Starry

 

[_Gypsy_Soul]

Staging a scene, if they had a strong belief that it took place, would be almost the most important evidence they would have outside of DNA evidence. If they really felt there was evidence of staging, there's no way they would release this info so cavalierly IMO as it would reveal the exact direction of their investigation.

Remember staging is not the same as posing. Posing is a signature behavior where the victim would be manipulated into particular positions (usually sexual or demeaning). This is either for the sexual pleasure of the offender or the psychological thrill of knowing their positioning will shock the person discovering them.

Staging is different...it is done purely to misdirect the investigation. So a common example of this would be, a man kills his wife in a domestic violence situation. He then stages the house to look like a break-in happened and she died in the commission of a robbery or a sexual assault. And there are many other scenarios.

But whenever staging occurs, it often points directly to the offender's familiarity with the victim or perhaps familiarity the situation under which the victim and offender came in contact. The offender is attempting to obscure logical links to the victim, the situation, or his motive that LE can use to reveal his identity.

So to answer your question, at this stage of the investigation evidence of staging would be kept close to the vest by LE, on par with keeping sealed the method used to kill them. It wouldn't be released to the Daily Mail or a podcast and nowhere else. IMO

Hi Yem and thanks for replying..Yes I am aware of the differences between the 2 and why I believe that both were done... the fire chief was quoted as saying that his men were deeply affected by what they seen at the recovery sight. Im sure it was more horrific than just the mere fact that the girls were gone as i dont see seasoned first responders being traumatized by that fact alone..that tells me that it had to be the manner in which they were found.
i also wonder if staging wasnt done in this case, bc we all know that it has been over 2 years now without anymore answers than what we appeared to have after the first month. Something is the reason why this case has stalled and it couldve been easily caused by going down the wrong road.
all my own ideas... not DM or podcast....just an insomniac LOL

 

[_Gypsy_Soul]

In the podcast Scene of the Crime, Kelsi German asks Carter to explain his reference to The Shack and he says it's just a movie he happened to see that spoke to him about themes of despair and forgiveness. He asks Kelsi if she's seen the movie and she says yes, and that after viewing it more than once she can also relate to those themes.

That's all. It's not a coded message IMO.

I would expect that to be his answer, honestly. I dont think he would give any other, at this point and time.

Thanks for the heads up..I'll have to check out her podcast.

 

[Charlot123]

I don't find the Judge's misconduct particularly interesting or relevant to this case, but I *do* find the allegations against the former Professor *extremely* interesting. After all, Libby took courses there. We need to dig deeper in to this.

Amateur opinion and speculation

I don't think it is relevant at all, and the ex-Judge was never ever close to my POIs. However, the Judge's behavior says something about the moral climate around, especially him preaching to RL comes to mind.

As to the other person, not sure. My inner voice is 50/50 on "no", and, "if yes, then, was helped by someone". And that someone would be the true surprise... MOO

 

[_Gypsy_Soul]

I agree with you, Charlot123, regarding the judge and the climate and it is eye raising when put into context with everything else, or should I say lack of anything else.

I honestly don't think that their was more than 1 killer and I could be completely wrong about it, but it just doesn't feel that there was more than 1 involved, but, I like you, go back and fourth bc if there was more than 1, maybe that would explain the different "signatures" left.

I just go around in circles in my mind. i really hope that DNA was recovered and they are able to send it for testing at Paramor or a lab of similar quality.

 

[_Gypsy_Soul]

Admin:
can you please direct me to a thread regarding suspects?
please and TIA
been searching and i cannot find

 

[sunshineray]

Is this quote from the Daily Mail article? Because I have some serious issues with their interpretations. They took every single one of their quotes from Ives directly from his podcast interviews...verbatim. So I don't think they had a new interview with him. And never once in the podcasts did Ives ever say he thought the scene was staged. Lots of physical evidence, yes. Odd evidence, yes. Two or three signatures, yes. Staging - no, that's something very specific and he never said or implied this.

Staging is something completely separate from signatures or personation.

I believe in that podcast he said, he actually phrased part of it that...there were a lot of unique facts there (at the crime scene). That could be another way of saying a signature that's unique to that killer. It's all about semantics sometimes with prosecutors, with lawyers. IMO

 

[Charlot123]

I agree with you, Charlot123, regarding the judge and the climate and it is eye raising when put into context with everything else, or should I say lack of anything else.

I honestly don't think that their was more than 1 killer and I could be completely wrong about it, but it just doesn't feel that there was more than 1 involved, but, I like you, go back and fourth bc if there was more than 1, maybe that would explain the different "signatures" left.

I just go around in circles in my mind. i really hope that DNA was recovered and they are able to send it for testing at Paramor or a lab of similar quality.

I am almost positive that there is DNA, but if it was a pro, he might have placed it intentionally. Or, there might be several DNAs, the "real" one hidden between others. The biggest ruse might be in the DNAs.

 

[_Gypsy_Soul]

I'm convinced that after the new IN 25/HHH opened in 2014, BG put the wheels in motion to carry out a fantasy at the MHB area. Add in the mild Winters of 2016 and 2017, and we have a perfect recipe for disaster there. The foliage was down on the ground, he had perfect lines-of-sight at a sparsely-traveled spot that people of all ages enjoy.

Now here's "my thing" regarding my opinion of where he lives. He lives close enough to where he could monitor the search. That's part of his fantasy, his ultimate control over the situation. Ideally, he figured the girls would not be found before, say, mid-evening. The girls simply disappeared, even with the evidence of two SnapChat images Libby uploaded and were later shared among the searchers.

BG is an extremely dangerous individual and a control freak of the worst kind. His fantasy came true and he had to monitor it. He lives close enough to have monitored it on TV, it continues the fantasy for him and, again, is the ultimate form of control for him, as he has not been caught, yet.

He gets off on the horror and terror he has perpetrated against his victims, their families, their communities, and for that matter, the world. The story is known world-wide, he's a celebrity and he gets off on it.

My guess is he was home by supper time.

JMO

^^^^Absolutely everything you said is what I've thought from the beginning as well!! You summed it up beautifully!!

Do you believe that LE knows who it is, and there's just not enough evidence to move forward or do you think they are Stumped? I also believe with everything inside me that the little wood shed on the path was used somehow..

 

[_Gypsy_Soul]

I am almost positive that there is DNA, but if it was a pro, he might have placed it intentionally. Or, there might be several DNAs, the "real" one hidden between others. The biggest ruse might be in the DNAs.

ITA and I think it was used to throw off LE and I also believe that if they released cause of death, it would be very telling and thats why they have kept that hush hush

 

[Andreee]

Yes -- finding it veeery interesting indeed. Especially since one of the courses Libby took was...a forensics course. JMOO

which professor? dm me if necessary. i had thought it was just the former judge who did a class there and was being looked at.

 

[_Gypsy_Soul]

I believe in that podcast he said, he actually phrased part of it that...there were a lot of unique facts there (at the crime scene). That could be another way of saying a signature that's unique to that killer. It's all about semantics sometimes with prosecutors, with lawyers. IMO

I know personally from being married to an LEO and having a couple detectives in my family, that they are very "literal" people by nature when they speak. When I have spoken to them about things happening in their jobs, and they can't be specific, they will find a way to answer without putting anything at risk.. and this is what I believe he was doing here.

AJMO

 

[Charlot123]

I have a question. If from the get go DC was saying, high probability of being a fisherman/hunter, and the person is afraid to attack since he is being viewed, can he “revert” to animals with some telling elements? And would these hunting/fishing elements be something LE could discuss without dwelling on humans?

 

[Yemelyan]

I believe in that podcast he said, he actually phrased part of it that...there were a lot of unique facts there (at the crime scene). That could be another way of saying a signature that's unique to that killer. It's all about semantics sometimes with prosecutors, with lawyers. IMO

I've listened to the podcast several times (both of them actually). Ives was actually quite clear that he thought there were things about the scene that were unique to this killer, no semantics involved.

Ives said there was: a lot of physical evidence and it wasn't what you might think; that some if it was odd; and that there were two or possibly three "signatures" that he might expect could come up again. Though he used the term signatures he later backpedaled a bit and said "I'm not an expert on serial killers." He did NOT say there was staging, which the Daily Mail article says he did.

In the Down the Hill podcast, the only mention of staging was when reporters interviewed the FBI profiler Mary Ellen O'Toole to ask her to clarify what Ives is talking about with regard to "signatures." And she, who clarifies that she's NOT part of the Delphi investigation but is speaking generally about signatures and the behavior of offenders who leave them, explains the difference between signatures (such as posing) and staging.

But she never says that she knows staging to have occurred at Delphi or that she suspects it based on what is generally known about the case. She's just educating the audience on what these terms involve.

So if Ives gave a brand new interview to the DM in which he says the scene was staged...okay. That would be incredibly weird IMO as he was so careful otherwise and respectful of the investigators in all his other statements. I don't think this was a new interview though. I think this was creative license on the DM's part done by someone who just cobbled together Ives' quotes from the podcasts (they are used literally word for word like a transcript) and other stuff mentioned in the podcast episode on "Signatures."