Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #127

[minazoe]

I sorta feel like dual victims are a personal challenge for the killer, and he begins to incorporate an additional victim into his fantasy. mOO

 

[Bethan]

this one
FBI: Keyes not likely involved in 2006 Snohomish County mother-daughter deaths

I’m a little behind on reading this thread, but thank you for sharing this case, which I didn’t know about until now. How tragic.

Is there a Websleuths thread for this mother & daughter?

 

[sandy_80]

I agree, and the suspect may bear a strong resemblance to the sketch or the sketch might not accurately depict the facial appearance of suspect at all. Until an arrest and conviction occur, who’s to say.

Just my thoughts - the first sketch wasn’t released until 5 months following the murders, reportedly as tips were beginning to dwindle. But if LE had strong confidence in any witnesses who claimed to have sighted the murderer that day, why didn’t they release a sketch within those first few days as it was quite evident the face of the man on the bridge in the photo was quite blurry, plus looking downward?

Is the release of more evidence required - or has the heavy emphasis on both sketches at different times led potential tipsters astray, if the potential suspect didn’t bear any similarity?

CAUSE the witnesses apparently only came forward later because of fear or other factors
but the question is this
the second sketch was drawn before the first and within days but it wasnt released ...why ? cause they apparently didn't think its the same bg in the video
cause what else

 

[JStarling10]

CAUSE the witnesses apparently only came forward later because of fear or other factors
but the question is this
the second sketch was drawn before the first and within days but it wasnt released ...why ? cause they apparently didn't think its the same bg in the video
cause what else

I've wondered the same thing. It might be because LE want to have a more narrowed approach? (MOO - just open up the floodgates. Bring in more manpower. Let's SOLVE THIS)
It could be that the sketches were so dissimilar that they thought they couldn't be the same person?

 

[St. Anthony2017]

fp;;pwomb

What does this mean?

 

[Diddian]

What does this mean?

I think that person often types "following," and that is my guess for what was intended here, but fingers of the right hand were slightly too far to the right on the keyboard.

 

[mom2chloe]

What does this mean?

Likely they’re following and pocket or butt dialed. Hopefully they had their heart set on an applicable thought. MOO And wishful thinking!

 

[zencompass]

Some random thoughts:

I wish I had something new to contribute. I have zilch. Kudos to all of you who are keeping these threads and discussions going.

I am firmly in the camp there is only one killer, jmo. But then again who knows anything, right?

I cleaned out a closet and have several old computers, devices, that don’t work for whatever reason. On some of them, I have all kinds of sleuthing and files and messages, those which couldn’t be posted here within TOS. I was thinking to myself, how in cold case investigations, when the detectives revisit the case years later, often the perp is somewhere in their early notes. I wonder if anyone here has ever come across the real perp. It would be interesting to know if he turns out to be someone that somebody did indeed take a look at, or if it is someone that nobody has ever came across. I think about how in UIDs, sometimes the victim is someone not ever known previously or appearing on someone’s radar.

Additionally, wrt the discussion about the perp specifically being interested in or targeting pairs: this so something I’ve said before (again nothing new to contribute)- obviously, if there is a dual homicide of two young girls, it requires a comparison to this case, as it is somewhat unique. However, I learned that there are actually other dual homicides over the years, 70’s, 80’s, etc., and in those cases, the perp was not specifically targeting pairs; rather they were victims of opportunity. So, again imo, I don’t think a dual homicide is necessarily a unique MO or interest of the perp, and that if there are other victims, they could be single victims.

Dear @margarita25 ,

Your post brings up many interesting facts of this case and I always appreciate your insight.

The following, of course, are only my own thoughts and opinions.

There is a possibility that there was something stated in interviews and tips noted over the years of this investigation that points to the perpetrator.

My feeling is that it was a vague "tip"and that the person decided not to proceed with divulging identifying details because of fear of the person they believed did this. Perhaps this is even the one "tip" that the L.E. say they need because they felt the person did know something. The person changed their mind over fear and this may have frustrated the L.E. because they believed this person had solid information to give them.

I believe the perpetrator chose that particular day because he was aware that their school was closed for a snow day.

As it was a snow day and not a holiday for parents to be off, there likely would mostly be pre-teens and teens in that area ( Kelsi German has stated it was common knowledge in Delphi that the young people tended to go there). These reasons would be part of why L.E. stated strongly that they believed the perpetrator was from that area.

From the video photo of the man on the bridge, he does appear to be all bundled up on a fairly mild day, and appears to be somewhat "disguised". This leads me to believe that he planned to kill a pre-teen or teen on that day and was prepared with, what many call a "kill kit" or something similar.

He knew he could overcome both girls because he was well-prepared to do so, and while he may not have killed two before - it is likely that he had killed one girl before. There is a high chance that he is a serial killer. He was familiar with the area and had a solid plan.

Serial killers come from somewhere and although he may have killed girls in other areas, this time he decided to kill a girl in his area of Delphi.

I agree with you that this was a crime of opportunity and the perpetrator was well prepared and confident with his plan.

My belief is that he left from the wooded area after the murders and no one saw him. This would be because he had everything planned out - right to how he would leave without being noticed.

It is very possible that he waited on that side of the bridge (the woods side) for his opportunity. I agree with some others here that he walked past them (from the wooded side of the bridge) and then turned around and that's when Libby turned her phone on and began recording the video of him.

I continue to believe that this perpetrator will eventually be caught. Perhaps he will be identified as the murderer in this case from "signatures" he has left at other crime scenes.

There will be something that leads the L.E. to him and I share the hope with others : "May today be the day".



These are my own opinions and thoughts.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

CAUSE the witnesses apparently only came forward later because of fear or other factors
but the question is this
the second sketch was drawn before the first and within days but it wasnt released ...why ? cause they apparently didn't think its the same bg in the video
cause what else

Maybe, the sketch #2 (which was drawn first after the murders) looked just like a certain person, LE had contact to right after the killing. The person was at the area at the questionable time, but "played" witness, who hadn't witnessed anything and perhaps was accompanied by another person, who said the same. LE thought only the best of this person of integrity, and when the first sketch was created and looked just like him, they put it in a file and didn't use it, convinced of the sketch #2 being a "nice" observation but a completely wrong one. Something must have occurred end of 2018, beginning of 2019, which made clear to LE/FBI, that the person and sketch #2 should have been their POI from the start.

You know, this is only my personally impression and are my assumptions. IMO and MOO and all things as always.
Of course I maybe wrong all the time, although I don't believe it.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

fp;;pwomb

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Somewhere in Indiana there might be co-workers, customers and/or acquaintances that might be having what they consider harmless fun making jokes about someone who looks like the sketch and that someone might be the killer.
I seriously doubt this killer has told anyone and after almost 4 years no one probably has any recollection of where he was on 13 February 2017. I wouldn’t doubt, though, that somewhere someone looks at the sketch or sketches and says to themself, ‘’That looks a bit like _______. Hmmm, close but not close enough and besides _______ lives here and not in Delphi.”

bbm
^^ This exactly! IMO

 

[Deleted member 102539]

The Delphi case is likely similar. Somewhere in the 42,000+ tips is something with a thread that leads to his identity. It's probably from his neighbor, coworker, family member - someone who knows him. It's likely not from someone several states away watching Dr Phil and comparing facebook profiles to the sketches. JMO

bbm

That won't work, you are right. It works without watching all the shows and without looking at tens of Fb. profiles, IF one brief media thing in 2017 drew attention immediately (gut feeling with ALARM!). You can be overseas, sometimes it works. Doesn't mean, that you have sent in the right tip to LE (because of certain circumstances). Could mean, you know, that others did and you can stay hopeful.

 

[Matthoughton]

Respectfully snipped to just this part - absolutely agreed. Thinking that two victims was a necessary part of the crime, based on what is publicly known right now - that's way too narrow of a focus considering how opportunistic these offenders are.

But then you have to ask yourself why did he go for two people that day? There was apparently a fair few people on the park /trails that day. Didn’t an apparent witness walk onto the bridge (on her own) at like 10 past 3 and saw a couple arguing? Imo for the sake of the argument we need to keep some relevance to the fact there was two victims. It speaks on his personality, a lot. Yes they may and probably was random but all that means imo is that he was confident in what he was doing. (It’s a gamble assuming that two people who you do not know are going to listen to what you say under panic/stress..fair enough you can take a certain % out of that via fear and threat to life, but assuming that happened the adrenaline would start kicking in no? They’d be very scared and looking for a way out..?imo only thing that makes sense is he handcuffed/tied them together via leg or arm)

 

[sandy_80]

I agree, and the suspect may bear a strong resemblance to the sketch or the sketch might not accurately depict the facial appearance of suspect at all. Until an arrest and conviction occur, who’s to say.

Just my thoughts - the first sketch wasn’t released until 5 months following the murders, reportedly as tips were beginning to dwindle. But if LE had strong confidence in any witnesses who claimed to have sighted the murderer that day, why didn’t they release a sketch within those first few days as it was quite evident the face of the man on the bridge in the photo was quite blurry, plus looking downward?

Is the release of more evidence required - or has the heavy emphasis on both sketches at different times led potential tipsters astray, if the potential suspect didn’t bear any similarity?

I've wondered the same thing. It might be because LE want to have a more narrowed approach? (MOO - just open up the floodgates. Bring in more manpower. Let's SOLVE THIS)
It could be that the sketches were so dissimilar that they thought they couldn't be the same person?

what possibly happened

younger sketch made within days of murder from a witness who thought something was suspicious ...this doesn't mean this individual was seen near crime scene..on the trails or even near crime time
so they thought ...we need something better
a few months after...come the first sketch witnesses to report on seeing BG and creating sketch 1..... which was created from witnesses plus artist interpretations of the video .......
after releasing it...nothing came and they might have identified a suspect that they thought looked like the sketch so they decided we will go with the other one then ....

thoughts
this stays just witness statements and we know that can be completely unreliable
according to a british recent study..the sketches in cases have a success rate about 9% ...
they can not identify a suspect and rule him out without those witnesses actually making that identification ? which I don't believe has happened
what are the odds that a possible suspect was on the trails but was not BG ....its not really a popular area or a busy one

 

[Yemelyan]

But then you have to ask yourself why did he go for two people that day? There was apparently a fair few people on the park /trails that day. Didn’t an apparent witness walk onto the bridge (on her own) at like 10 past 3 and saw a couple arguing? Imo for the sake of the argument we need to keep some relevance to the fact there was two victims. It speaks on his personality, a lot. Yes they may and probably was random but all that means imo is that he was confident in what he was doing. (It’s a gamble assuming that two people who you do not know are going to listen to what you say under panic/stress..fair enough you can take a certain % out of that via fear and threat to life, but assuming that happened the adrenaline would start kicking in no? They’d be very scared and looking for a way out..?imo only thing that makes sense is he handcuffed/tied them together via leg or arm)

I didn't say there was NO relevance to the fact that there were two victims. Obviously he had to feel comfortable doing that, it does speak to his assessment of how he could control them. But what I was saying is that it is too narrow a focus to target in on just that fact above all others in the entire victimology.

The specific context of what I was replying to, was the original poster @margarita25 making the point that IF he has other victims, we can't assume that he always has or always will go for two at the same time, which I was strongly agreeing with.

IMO he hung around the bridge that day observing people. Not everybody crossed the bridge the way Abby and Libby did. Maybe he did see potential victims he would have preferred but the timing wasn't right (other people around, they stayed away from the area he targeted to make his approach). He couldn't predict that a "better" victim would come along later so when he saw he could overtake them, he went with it.

 

[JStarling10]

I'd agree with this. I think Abby and Libby was an uncommon instance for this guy, but maybe due to their age/size he felt capable of subduing both of them.

 

[Matthoughton]

I didn't say there was NO relevance to the fact that there were two victims. Obviously he had to feel comfortable doing that, it does speak to his assessment of how he could control them. But what I was saying is that it is too narrow a focus to target in on just that fact above all others in the entire victimology.

The specific context of what I was replying to, was the original poster @margarita25 making the point that IF he has other victims, we can't assume that he always has or always will go for two at the same time, which I was strongly agreeing with.

IMO he hung around the bridge that day observing people. Not everybody crossed the bridge the way Abby and Libby did. Maybe he did see potential victims he would have preferred but the timing wasn't right (other people around, they stayed away from the area he targeted to make his approach). He couldn't predict that a "better" victim would come along later so when he saw he could overtake them, he went with it.

I see now, sorry I sometimes get ahead of myself whilst typing replies. To the point I end up rewriting it numerous times.

I don’t know if anyone can clear up if LE said for certain they crossed the creek? (I’ve seen a Facebook photo, not sure if I can post?) of search areas and where things got found and the more I look at it (it’s got DTH? marked in two spots) but they both seem to be northern sides. Which would imply they’ve crossed the creek, gone up somewhere and then came back down. (A person on Reddit I believe crossed the bridge but didn’t want to go back over it and said it took them around a hour to get back to there car and came out like 15 minutes west) sort of tells me either 1) it isn’t easy to get back up the creek or 2) you really do need to know where your going; further implying he’s local or been local at some point. (Locals would know the way up to save walking all the way around, obviously.) Fairly sure you guys managed to prove he was walking north to south in the photo/video though right? There’s just so many rumours floating around it’s hard to figure out what’s true.

 

[Yemelyan]

I see now, sorry I sometimes get ahead of myself whilst typing replies. To the point I end up rewriting it numerous times.

I don’t know if anyone can clear up if LE said for certain they crossed the creek? (I’ve seen a Facebook photo, not sure if I can post?) of search areas and where things got found and the more I look at it (it’s got DTH? marked in two spots) but they both seem to be northern sides. Which would imply they’ve crossed the creek, gone up somewhere and then came back down. (A person on Reddit I believe crossed the bridge but didn’t want to go back over it and said it took them around a hour to get back to there car and came out like 15 minutes west) sort of tells me either 1) it isn’t easy to get back up the creek or 2) you really do need to know where your going; further implying he’s local or been local at some point. (Locals would know the way up to save walking all the way around, obviously.) Fairly sure you guys managed to prove he was walking north to south in the photo/video though right? There’s just so many rumours floating around it’s hard to figure out what’s true.

There was an interview with lead investigator Sgt. Jerry Holeman with Fox59 News in (I believe) August of 2017 where he talked about them crossing the creek. What he doesn't indicate in his remarks is if they crossed under duress or if they were fleeing at the time, so that part isn't known (investigators may know).

This is the same interview where he revealed there was more audio as yet unreleased. The video of his interview has been removed from the news article it was attached to but I think the whole thing was transcribed by one of the posters here, @Spellbound, so you should still be able to read it in the media links thread.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Maybe, the sketch #2 (which was drawn first after the murders) looked just like a certain person, LE had contact to right after the killing. The person was at the area at the questionable time, but "played" witness, who hadn't witnessed anything and perhaps was accompanied by another person, who said the same. LE thought only the best of this person of integrity, and when the first sketch was created and looked just like him, they put it in a file and didn't use it, convinced of the sketch #2 being a "nice" observation but a completely wrong one. Something must have occurred end of 2018, beginning of 2019, which made clear to LE/FBI, that the person and sketch #2 should have been their POI from the start.

You know, this is only my personally impression and are my assumptions. IMO and MOO and all things as always.
Of course I maybe wrong all the time, although I don't believe it.

I have always pretty much thought the same thing. LE stated when the second sketch came out that it was done a couple days after the murders when someone came to them and reported they had seen someone doing something they thought needed reporting.(I don’t remember the exact words, but that’s the gist of it). So, at that time, LE apparently thought whatever this guy had been seen doing, was suspicious enough, odd enough, important enough to send this witness to the sketch artist. But then it’s not released for two years. The question is why. My thoughts were...LE looked at it and said “oh that’s just “Bob”. He’s been around trying to help. He’s fine. Don’t need to worry about him” and into a drawer the sketch went.
But something, as you said, made them rethink it all, I think between the two year anniversary press conference(which was a huge snorefest) and the April 2019 presser. The only problem in my mind about this scenario is, to me, it indicates LE knows who the guy is. And I’m not really sure I think they do.
I know LE is never going to reveal why they changed direction in the investigation unless there is an arrest. And they are awfully quiet so I doubt any knew info is going to be released anytime soon if ever. But I sure would appreciate it if they would have a press conference to clear up all the conflicting and confusing things they have said about sooooo many things, but especially the sketches.

 

[Peppery]

IMO, we’re putting way too much thought into why there are two victims. I think it’s as simple as there probably weren’t any single people there that day and he was able to trap them on the bridge.

Also there are often stories in the news about victims who were able to trick their captor to get away. Maybe the girls thought if they followed his instructions he wouldn’t hurt them; he may have even said that to them. Or if he showed a gun or even just said he had one, I can see them being compliant. You can’t outrun a bullet. JMO