Manwel
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 7, 2020
- Messages
- 301
- Reaction score
- 1,768
I automatically thought of the Zodiac sketches when I saw they redid the first and came up with something wildly different. GSK was similar. And I'm assuming a lot of this is based on LE finding someone who was in the woods that day who claimed to see the same person up close and their up-close description just doesn't, to me, line up with the voice we hear. The voice we hear is, to me, in his 40s. The person in the second sketch is in his 20s. I automatically don't trust the source of the second sketch based on the voice.The sketches only matter in this case if they are the right sketches. It does not matter if someone finds a person who looks nearly identical to either sketch #1, sketch #2(young bridge guy), or Liberty German's video.
Even if the police found the person responsible, they better have something like DNA or fingerprints to connect the person to the girls. Liberty German's video or any of the sketches will never hold up in court. I think a defense attorney would laugh at the idea. I do not even think you could find twelve people on this forum that would agree that what they see(concerning the video or sketches) is the same thing. So why do people do comparisons of the police sketches or Liberty German's video to actual people? I don't know.
Liberty German's video was always the truest description of the man on the bridge. Sketch #2 of the young bridge guy looks nothing like the video to me. But since the case is not solved the argument can be made that the investigation is going in the right direction with the right sketch.
We will never know. For all we know one of them sensed mortal danger and they couldn't agree how to handle it. There were two of them. No doubt they were thinking about each other. It's easy to just take off and run on your own but if you're concerned about a friend? It's unclear from evidence shared so far what prompted them to begin filming, what led to the exchange recorded and shared by police, and what may have happened that prevented them from running. I'm going to assume the perp had a gun and got close enough to threaten them with it.It’s horrifying that although they sensed danger, these 2 girls obviously still never thought they were in serious, mortal danger.
You just want to rewind to that point in time, and have them run.
RE: the school day off, this is uncommon where I lived in Midwest as a child, we never had snow days banked and then used when there wasn't snow. We got snow days only if there was a major snow. So I have to assume this unused snow day would have been announced on the school website at least at some point in advance? Two weeks? One week? Or was it not an used snow day but rather a planned mini-break during winter? I'd be interested to learn more about this detail just to consider how much it would have benefitted the perp. I'm certainly in the camp that BG could be associated with schools, athletics, or adjacent, so the day off would apply to him, too. I agree with the room that a certain amount of the murder was likely planned, but the choosing of the victims was more random. If so, could he have targeted older women? Were his intended targets children?I watched the recent docu on SL on the ID Channel. I agree, looks like he left very little evidence in the vast majority of those cases.
MOO about BG is he went after A&L because of their age(s), they were there alone/nobody else was there except BG and them, and he knew there was a high likelihood he could corner them at the end of the bridge, again taking into consideration their age(s).
He saw them right after they were dropped off, that's the only valid explanation for the initial "contact". The contact was most likely from a short distance, and he knew nobody else was there, after all he'd been lurking for a considerable amount of time. Which tells me, too, this was not his first time there, he may have done "dry runs" in the past.
The age group of the girls also complicated the search, after seeing them initially I can guarantee that all went through his mind, in fact he may have planned that well beforehand. Juveniles=no vehicle parked there. A&L missing=nobody could figure out where they went later in that afternoon, all they knew was they had gotten on to the bridge per the SnapChat images.
I think BG had all of that mapped out in his head well beforehand, and he waited until there was a mild Winter day during the work week that juveniles had off from school.
JMO
I do not believe that LG would already have been experimenting, nothing about her backstory says she was there, and AW was for surebut you would be surprised what age some teens start exploring. I will always remember back in the day sitting in my ninth grade classroom horrified to hear a girl talking openly about her condom preferences. She was just 14 then and I fully believe she wasn't making it up to be spicy for the boys listening. I remember her getting picked up from softball practices by a 16-year-old in a car. Once kids hit high school, having older siblings or friends with older siblings means kids hit the gas pedal.I agree with all you have said.
Given their age, there can be no consensual sex.
I would not even believe they were sexually active to begin with.
Can we not comment on the "attractive" level of a 13-year-old child who was murdered and likely sexually assaulted by an adult male? This is beyond distasteful for this forum. If a grown woman referred to a 13-year-old boy as "masculine and attractive" or "a beautiful, graceful, young stud" do you think you would comfortably accept that compliment or find it weird as hell? Because it's weird as hell.She looks feminine, and attractive. In fact, this (possibly, last) photo of her life reflects the moment when a funny duckling grew into a beautiful, graceful, young swan. Such a tragedy that the girls were not given the time to enjoy being young and attractive.
You'd think, but Snapchat stuff is hard to crack. There's a missing girl in Canada where it was obvious she was using untrackable communication with someone that nobody in her family could figure out. She was 16. She's caught on a bunch of security footage at a fast food breakfast place texting and texting and texting but she had no outgoing messages from her phone service. It was all through an app. She disappeared after leaving a truck stop diner restaurant where she had lunch and potentially met up with a man. She had brought a backpack with her which was uncharacteristic apparently. (Her friends said she only carried a purse around normally.)I think, (and my ideas have no special worth,) that a crime connected to online communication wouldn’t have been this difficult to solve.
It’s, in my opinion, the random stranger murders that can be so completely frustrating to LE, if the murderer is lucky.