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

[Charlot123]

I'm very new to this case, so I've had to spend a good deal of time looking back. It's hard to try to process everything, while not being influenced by all the unconfirmed information. So, trying to just stay with facts of the case, I still find a few things puzzling:
- Abby had a sleeveless shirt, why didn't she just take her own jacket?
- Why would Libby post the photo of Abby on the bridge, to Snapchat, if Abby was going to get grounded for it?
- Did anyone, in the immediate search, know about the snapchat photo of Abby on the bridge, before the police were called?
- Since iPhone recordings are ended by incoming calls, what does that tell us about the audio/video found on Libby's phone?

I'd love to hear other's thoughts about this.
All my posts are just my opinions.

1) Some of these questions never occurred to me. But Abby’s jacket is either her own, or belongs to a girl WAY more petite that the German family. There are enough photos of Libby of Kelsi from available to understand how their clothes would look on Abby. My opinion: Abby’s own hoodie, maybe the photo is from another day.
2) two versions:
- they were at a different place, and the photo was meant to prove they were on the MHB.
- or, the photo was sent to someone’s phone later, and by a different entity
3) unclear;
4) depending on the length of the audio/video. Either it is very short and the call interrupted it
Or, it the recording is long, it means, the call never came...
Or, very likely, DG called Libby’s phone, but the video/audio are from another phone. Was it intentionally planted by the third party? Or did Abby, too, have a cellphone, and the recording was on hers? She could have borrowed the phone from the Germans, for example.


Another version - since no one saw the girls on the trails/bridge, could they run into someone they knew there, could this person walk with them for a while, and then make a recording? In other words, could they walk with one of the killers? (Who was in cahoots with BG, but BG was not known to the girls?)

 

[Charlot123]

This is all my opinion and interpretation.

They are just random points on a map. There is no meaning to it, not in the movie and not in real life. It is interesting how people interpret the movie "Silence of the Lambs". There is a part where Dr. Lecter tells Clarice where the bodies were found is desperately "random", but I think the meaning is different from how a lot of people interpret it. Many of the victims were strangers to the killer. I wonder how a real criminal profiler would interpret the "map points" in the movie?

Many times when criminals begin any type of crime scenario they start close to their home base. So the points on the map that Clarice is later clued into by Dr. Lecter are nothing but points on the map. They are indeed random. What Dr. Lecter is trying to get her to clue in on is that the killer is trying to hide his association to one of the earliest victims. And usually when criminals try to hide something there is a reason. She eventually figures it out by the order of how the victims were found. So the randomness meant absolutely nothing. It is a killer's way of trying to fool police. The FBI and Clarice were completely fooled by it. They went in the wrong direction trying to locate where the killer lived. Clarice ended up finding the killer by accident when, if I recall correctly, she went to visit the home of the woman the victim worked for as a follow up to her investigation once she realized the victim probably knew the killer. That is my interpretation of the map points in the movie.

Italicized by me.

Here is an idea, totally new to me. Delphi police assumes the perp has some connection with Delphi since...he knows some details that would not be known to strangers (and what he knew, we are unaware of, btw. It is not about MHB being poorly known. It is about some details of Delphi geography that must be unique - MOO).

Imagine this. Two men meet online by chance. Maybe some forum, some group. They discuss the crime, whether it would be possible to do something in broad daylight... And one, a younger one, PMs the other one and says, yes, I know such a place, close to where I live/hunt/fish/jog, it could be easy if we...look here...

And then they make a plan, together. For the older man, it is not the first crime. For the younger one, it surely is. But he is more of a voyeur. His advantage - he knows the place, and the people.

Where the older one stays for a few days, I don’t know. In someone’s backyard? In the young guy’s house? But he is far away now, as he is not local at all. This is the presumed “truck driver”. He is not a truck driver, but to Delphi, he is a passerby. The younger one is more or less local. But he did not kill. He watched, maybe, made a movie?

The twist of this situation is, they parted forever. Arresting either of them won’t lead to the other one. They are not interested in one another. One is a SK, the other one dreams of being a producer.

That could very well explain seeings of two people, and why one of them can not be linked to the crime (filming - no DNA), and the other can, but he is not from Indiana. And his DNA is not local.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I'm very new to this case, so I've had to spend a good deal of time looking back. It's hard to try to process everything, while not being influenced by all the unconfirmed information. So, trying to just stay with facts of the case, I still find a few things puzzling:
- Abby had a sleeveless shirt, why didn't she just take her own jacket?
- Why would Libby post the photo of Abby on the bridge, to Snapchat, if Abby was going to get grounded for it?
- Did anyone, in the immediate search, know about the snapchat photo of Abby on the bridge, before the police were called?
- Since iPhone recordings are ended by incoming calls, what does that tell us about the audio/video found on Libby's phone?

I'd love to hear other's thoughts about this.
All my posts are just my opinions.

Just my opinion, but here’s my thoughts on these questions.
1) I’ve never heard Abby was wearing a sleeveless shirt but I don’t think it really matters. Maybe she wore it because it was “unseasonably warm” for an Indiana February and she took that a little too far, and that’s why Kelsi offered them jackets, because she realized they were underdressed. Her jacket or Kelsi’s, I don’t think it matters.
2) I doubt Libby knew Abby might be grounded if she was caught on the bridge. It’s possible Abby didn’t know either, but if she did, kids do thinks all the time that they know will get them in trouble if their parents find out.
3) I don’t remember at exactly what point in the search people became aware of the Snapchat photo.
4) If LE knows the video/audio was ended by a phone call, and they know it was Libby’s Dad calling, they would know what exactly was going on with the girls at an exact time. But this is all unknown to us. We don’t know the length of the recording at all.

 

[St. Anthony2017]

1) Some of these questions never occurred to me. But Abby’s jacket is either her own, or belongs to a girl WAY more petite that the German family. There are enough photos of Libby of Kelsi from available to understand how their clothes would look on Abby. My opinion: Abby’s own hoodie, maybe the photo is from another day.
2) two versions:
- they were at a different place, and the photo was meant to prove they were on the MHB.
- or, the photo was sent to someone’s phone later, and by a different entity
3) unclear;
4) depending on the length of the audio/video. Either it is very short and the call interrupted it
Or, it the recording is long, it means, the call never came...
Or, very likely, DG called Libby’s phone, but the video/audio are from another phone. Was it intentionally planted by the third party? Or did Abby, too, have a cellphone, and the recording was on hers? She could have borrowed the phone from the Germans, for example.


Another version - since no one saw the girls on the trails/bridge, could they run into someone they knew there, could this person walk with them for a while, and then make a recording? In other words, could they walk with one of the killers? (Who was in cahoots with BG, but BG was not known to the girls?)

Very good points to think about! It really is a true mystery to us but hopefully soon we will get some answers.

 

[somequestions]

I think you're missing the point, pun intended. For example, Luka Magnotta confessed that he idolized Patrick Bateman and mimicked his behavior after him. That movie is an ode to serial killers and if there is a point on a map to Delphi, along with bodies recovered at those other points, things could get interesting.

If the map points in the movie did actually correspond to where bodies were found in real life, what would that prove? The only thing it would suggest is the killer has a fascination with the movie "The Silence of the Lambs". About the only thing that might help is if bodies were not left at a certain point on the map and police were able to get there to stake out the area beforehand. But this is just a movie.

Anything is possible though, but in my opinion, not very likely.

 

[JimmyWells]

This is all my opinion and interpretation.

They are just random points on a map. There is no meaning to it, not in the movie and not in real life. It is interesting how people interpret the movie "Silence of the Lambs". There is a part where Dr. Lecter tells Clarice where the bodies were found is desperately "random", but I think the meaning is different from how a lot of people interpret it. Many of the victims were strangers to the killer. I wonder how a real criminal profiler would interpret the "map points" in the movie?

Many times when criminals begin any type of crime scenario they start close to their home base. So the points on the map that Clarice is later clued into by Dr. Lecter are nothing but points on the map. They are indeed random. What Dr. Lecter is trying to get her to clue in on is that the killer is trying to hide his association to one of the earliest victims. And usually when criminals try to hide something there is a reason. She eventually figures it out by the order of how the victims were found. So the randomness meant absolutely nothing. It is a killer's way of trying to fool police. The FBI and Clarice were completely fooled by it. They went in the wrong direction trying to locate where the killer lived. Clarice ended up finding the killer by accident when, if I recall correctly, she went to visit the home of the woman the victim worked for as a follow up to her investigation once she realized the victim probably knew the killer. That is my interpretation of the map points in the movie.

I think you're missing the point, pun intended. For example, Luka Magnotta confessed that he idolized Patrick Bateman and mimicked his behavior after him. That movie is an ode to serial killers and if there is a point on a map to Delphi, along with bodies recovered at those other points, things could get interesting.

If the map points in the movie did actually correspond to where bodies were found in real life, what would that prove? The only thing it would suggest is the killer has a fascination with the movie "The Silence of the Lambs". About the only thing that might help is if bodies were not left at a certain point on the map and police were able to get there to stake out the area beforehand. But this is just a movie.

Anything is possible though, but in my opinion, not very likely.

The point is, let's say this witch hunt bore fruit and he is a movie buff, that there may be other bodies. On those bodies may be evidence linking the cases. Once you link the cases, you can narrow your search.

 

[girlfriday]

I can’t remember specifics but I believe Abby spent time that weekend with her grandfather. I think they went and bought her some softball equipment. I think on Sunday the girls hung out together. Someone took them to the ballfield and they practiced softball for a while. Then Libby invited Abby to sleepover and BP and Anna said OK. That’s how I remember it being relayed. Feel free to correct whatever might be wrong.

During a TV station interview with Abby's Grandfather, a photo of Abby holding a baseball and glove is shown. Abby is wearing a sleeveless shirt. There is, what appears to be, a black and bright pink jacket resting on the base of the light standard. To me, the shirt looks like the same one shown in the bridge photo. (1:47 video - WRTV Indianapolis - Abby Williams' Grandfather: "I still don't know how to live with out her").

Just my personal observations/opinions

 

[Yemelyan]

I'm very new to this case, so I've had to spend a good deal of time looking back. It's hard to try to process everything, while not being influenced by all the unconfirmed information. So, trying to just stay with facts of the case, I still find a few things puzzling:
- Abby had a sleeveless shirt, why didn't she just take her own jacket?
- Why would Libby post the photo of Abby on the bridge, to Snapchat, if Abby was going to get grounded for it?
- Did anyone, in the immediate search, know about the snapchat photo of Abby on the bridge, before the police were called?
- Since iPhone recordings are ended by incoming calls, what does that tell us about the audio/video found on Libby's phone?

I'd love to hear other's thoughts about this.
All my posts are just my opinions.

I think I can add a few points to these questions. When Anna Williams was interviewed for the podcast Scene of the Crime, she spoke extensively about her thoughts during the time when the girls were missing but before their bodies were found. Police and other official searchers assured her that it was most likely the girls were just being kids and were likely off with friends. She said she remembers thinking "oh they are so grounded." So the grounding was in reference to the scenario of being gone without telling anyone where they were.

She did speak about Abby and the bridge and she said very specifically that while she would have been angry if she knew Abby was on the bridge, she had never told Abby she was not allowed to cross it. The reason she never had told her this explicitly, she says, was because she did not believe there was even a tiny chance that Abby would want to cross it or would try.

So to the question of, why was the photo on SnapChat if Libby knew it would get Abby in trouble - there's a possibility that the girls had not been told they were not allowed to do it.

When did searchers know about the SnapChat photo? We know two things: 1. Police canvassed social media accounts and devices the night the girls went missing.
2. In news articles that came out while the girls were still missing, Mike Patty gave an interview where he talked about the SnapChat photo. Discussion of the photo is from the same interview where he talked about the phone "pinging around." So it was known fairly early in the search, as trying to ping the phone was one of the first things the family tried to do that night (According to Scene of the Crime MP had a LE friend who advised him to get the ISP involved so that this could be done asap). A lot of these earlier articles have been removed as the information was all updated after they were found murdered. But if you look in thread #1 here on Websleuths, early posters quoted some of this information from articles as they were first posted and you can read it there.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Why with a male sibling? I’m always interested in sibling and sibling order theories but know nothing about how they apply in criminology. Would love to learn.

It's MOO, nothing to do with theories in criminology. My poi has a brother, that's all. The personality of both to me seems, as if it would be possible for the 2 men to have built a killing team.
Now, that I know, the sketch #1 (OBG) has been identified long ago, my imagination falters a little bit though.

 

[Paige Franklin]

I have been observing this thread here and there for a few months now. I'm sure I've missed a lot not following from the beginning but it seems there are some very interested aspects of the crime scene that could move this case forward if LE would reveal a few more details. Have there been any recent requests by reporters or anyone for more info? Maybe they would be more motivated to share with the amount of time passed. It's a very intriguing case and I love all of the theorizing here!

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I have been observing this thread here and there for a few months now. I'm sure I've missed a lot not following from the beginning but it seems there are some very interested aspects of the crime scene that could move this case forward if LE would reveal a few more details. Have there been any recent requests by reporters or anyone for more info? Maybe they would be more motivated to share with the amount of time passed. It's a very intriguing case and I love all of the theorizing here!

Everybody....except LE....seems to agree that a little more information would be a helpful thing after almost four years. I personally cannot fathom why they won’t release more at this point. So we wait.

 

[Justice101]

Yes, agree. I probably know twice what some know on here... and only half what the rest know.

I can't devote as many hours as Id like to since I have a full time job.. and then some! LOL

But I can say, that my experience with LE is they let the evidence lead them to the suspect. They had A LOT of evidence. And that's just what we know of:

1) Video of someone involved.
2) Audio of the killer
3) footprints of killer
4) Knowledge that due to the route and crime scene location, the killer(s) knew the area very well. You can't get that lucky. He knew where to go.

Sometimes crimes are difficult to solve.. for any group. Sometimes IMPOSSIBLE based on the lack of the right kind of evidence and search tools.

However, I do think with the local police, Indiana State Police, the FBI etc that IF IT CAN be solved based on what evidence was left there, then it will be.

but if not, it will take a move/mistake by the killer(s) to create the break they need.

 

[gitana1]

Yes, agree. I probably know twice what some know on here... and only half what the rest know.

I can't devote as many hours as Id like to since I have a full time job.. and then some! LOL

But I can say, that my experience with LE is they let the evidence lead them to the suspect. They had A LOT of evidence. And that's just what we know of:

1) Video of someone involved.
2) Audio of the killer
3) footprints of killer
4) Knowledge that due to the route and crime scene location, the killer(s) knew the area very well. You can't get that lucky. He knew where to go.

Sometimes crimes are difficult to solve.. for any group. Sometimes IMPOSSIBLE based on the lack of the right kind of evidence and search tools.

However, I do think with the local police, Indiana State Police, the FBI etc that IF IT CAN be solved based on what evidence was left there, then it will be.

but if not, it will take a move/mistake by the killer(s) to create the break they need.

Maybe what will happen is the perp will get caught for another crime and it will be similar enough that they can link him. (And yes, I think it’s a him).

I feel he was hunting and found some “prey”. But to maneuver two teens in that way and be able to kill them both after they were already aware of him and on guard, is pretty amazing and it makes me think he has done this before and feels confident.

It will happen again.

I just hope they have some shred of DNA to work with. Otherwise it may be a long time.

 

[Falling Down]

Snipped by me.

IMO we don't need to speculate on why the FBI became involved immediately because it was explained to us by FBI Special Agent in Charge Greg Massa at one of the first Delphi press conferences. The FBI's initial involvement was entirely personal in context. As he related it, an FBI agent happened to be visiting family or friends locally and came out to assist in the search when word spread of two missing girls. This was before any foul play was known to be involved or really was even suspected. As he stated in the press conference, from that time forward the FBI vowed to stand shoulder to shoulder with the ISP and lend as many of their resources as possible, which included their evidence response team once the bodies were found.

So no, the FBI didn't become involved after the fact simply or only because the scene was bizarre, complicated, or gruesome, though it may have been all of these things.

Keep in mind too that many of the fire department searchers, who we learned were highly affected by what they saw at the scene, were described as personal friends of Libby's family. For them, seeing the granddaughter of a good friend killed by any means, including an accident, would have been understandably traumatic.

IMO we need to look at the context of these personal statements that the participants of the search and investigation have actually told us instead of creating scenarios to explain them.

Correct. An FBI employee happened to be in the area that evening.

The FBI became officially involved when the bodies were found, same as other homicides involving juveniles, I'm not sure about the exact criteria however I'd imagine a set of crimes involving abduction and then murder would fit.

JMO

 

[Ravenmoon]

Here's my rub: why did LE say unequivocally that the public did not need to fear, that the murders of Abby & Libby were specific to them - that suggests LE is saying: there is no serial killer on the loose......
It also suggests they know the motive - in fact, they MUST know the motive to even say such a thing...right???
Otherwise, how the heck do they know if this is NOT a serial killer, 'thrill kill' or what not...?
JMO

When LE made the statement that the public need not fear whoever did this- it was early on in the investigation.

It could be that with the involvement of the FBI, the things they held as evidence- the recording, the voice, and other things unknown to us- they assumed an arrest would be made quickly. As a matter of fact, they said they expected a quick resolution.

Their tune and their tone started to change before long. This case was NOT what they thought in the beginning. Everything changed.

AMOO JMO MOO

 

[Charlot123]

It's MOO, nothing to do with theories in criminology. My poi has a brother, that's all. The personality of both to me seems, as if it would be possible for the 2 men to have built a killing team.
Now, that I know, the sketch #1 (OBG) has been identified long ago, my imagination falters a little bit though.

To me, the brothers do not matter. But I think the only situation that could explain the hate would be - if someone had a child/brother that committed suicide, and then the relatives would be blaming the girl who he was in love with, or someone else, who, because of young age and naiveté (they thought), might have spread some rumors. This is the situation when normal parents and siblings could totally flip out. But I don't think it is the case as it does not call for some elements mentioned in this crime (bizarre, grotesque, odd, etc). Such revenge would be very straightforward.

 

[girlfriday]

It's MOO, nothing to do with theories in criminology. My poi has a brother, that's all. The personality of both to me seems, as if it would be possible for the 2 men to have built a killing team.
Now, that I know, the sketch #1 (OBG) has been identified long ago, my imagination falters a little bit though.

BBM

I wasn't aware of that, can you please provide your source. It also changes my poi.

Thank you!

 

[Charlot123]

Yes, agree. I probably know twice what some know on here... and only half what the rest know.

I can't devote as many hours as Id like to since I have a full time job.. and then some! LOL

But I can say, that my experience with LE is they let the evidence lead them to the suspect. They had A LOT of evidence. And that's just what we know of:

1) Video of someone involved.
2) Audio of the killer
3) footprints of killer
4) Knowledge that due to the route and crime scene location, the killer(s) knew the area very well. You can't get that lucky. He knew where to go.

Sometimes crimes are difficult to solve.. for any group. Sometimes IMPOSSIBLE based on the lack of the right kind of evidence and search tools.

However, I do think with the local police, Indiana State Police, the FBI etc that IF IT CAN be solved based on what evidence was left there, then it will be.

but if not, it will take a move/mistake by the killer(s) to create the break they need.

Thank you. Let us hope it can, now or in the nearest future.

 

[sunshineray]

I think you have to, at least a little bit, consider the source on "bizarre," "complicated," etc. The members of LE who have opened to us their thoughts on this crime also told us that in the course of their careers the type of crimes they typically saw were domestic violence that went bad or drug related crime. They told us they were used to uncomplicated murder scenes where the minute you walk in as an investigator it's obvious who did what and why. These individuals weren't part of the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit, who see the most gruesome and depraved of murderers, the most bizarre of signatures, the most demeaned and used of victims. It doesn't mean the girls' deaths weren't absolutely nightmarish, bizarre, and personally devastating to them, but I think we have to keep their experience in law enforcement in context.

I think brainstorming is great and fine for a forum like this as long as the ideas presented are respectful to the victims (that is, after all, why Websleuths has rules about victim blaming etc that we follow) but is "brainstorming" the strategy LE uses to solve crimes? I'd say that while it works well in other industries/situations, it's probably not what LE do behind the scenes. I don't think they come up with speculative scenarios and then try to make the evidence fit. I think they work only from the evidence outwards but that's MOO.

I get that if we discussed only what was known this forum would not be as entertaining for some. But please, let's not go back to the dog in the coat speculation days. Truly, not all brainstorming is useful or respectful to the victims and their families.

Even with words being used that led everyone to believe the crime scene must of been especially awful, a well seasoned prosecutor said early on it was expected by most to be solved quickly.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I don’t think it was ever as wide open and wild as we think. At least not in the last 50 years.

They give us info when they believe doing so will lead to tips they can use. Otherwise, cases have indeed been ruined by releasing info to the public.

I'm excited because ......
(Off topic: PE guys are beginning work on the Delphi case (btw, state police have asked them to pull back for a bit, but they will move forward soon)!! Thursday, Rebecca Zahau case will be discussed, and tomorrow they are on Court TV).

Starts at 1:35: 30. (...... video follows)
Post #185 on SM thread
CO - CO - Suzanne Morphew, 49, did not return from bike ride, Chaffee County, 10 May 2020 #46
PE= Profiling Evil