Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #128

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
from what surface would the possible partial fingerprint come from..I wonder..I don't think that they have a weapon ..
could it have come from a victim body .hmm

LE also has the phone.

Lifting fingerprints from human skin is difficult because the elastic nature of human skin makes it an imperfect surface for preserving them accurately. Also, fingerprints on human skin just do not last very long. One study found that the most useful prints were recovered in the first hour after deposition, with only a little over 1% able to be recovered after two hours.
Fingerprint recovery from human skin surfaces - PubMed

Since Abby and Libby were outside exposed to the elements all night and most of the next morning, I'd think it unlikely that any prints were recovered directly from skin. JMO
 
I agree, IMO it's most likely a solo crime. My post was simply to address the question of whether an accomplice also can be considered a perpetrator (yes, in certain circumstances) and what is the difference between an accomplice and am accessory to a crime.
Good points.
Especially there being no being "partly in" on a murder.

Does anyone know if they ever investigated the kid who "accidently" shot and killed his HS girlfriend the day the video or audio was released?
CCSO Deputy responding to the shooting didn't pursue the matter of her death. Accepted his story of an unwitnessed - gun accident

He later was arrested for a different crime, and convicted for exploitation. His home was the scene of animal cruelty complaints by neighbors.
 
It appears that fingerprints can be lifted from all most any surface. Including cloth material. Rubber gloves inside or palm prints or at the top of the glove when pulling them on. It's truly amazing. I hope BG's mistakes hang him.
 
I don’t know if it is a serial killer, or, like one LEO said, the case is more “person-specific”, but I am positive that the person is connected to Delphi and not a mere transient.

I remember how in the very beginning, TL mentioned “the twist” of the plot. It tell me that somehow, from the start, they were more sure of the POI, and thought they knew. Why?

The same TL, I think (or some other LE, sorry, 4 years is quite a time) said that the community would be (surprised? Shocked?) when people find out. I don’t care in what way surprised, but obviously, the perp had to be someone well-known to them.

And then very early into the case, LE searched the house.

Regardless of what exactly they thought, one thing is obvious - they thought they would have enough to solve this case.

They are looking for a very specific weapon, and hone in on a guy who was homeless in Indiana at that time. His wife is not sure, agrees that he looks like the sketch but here is what she says:

Wife of person of interest in Delphi murders says Daniel Nations watched news coverage

LE is obviously eager to wrap up the case.

And then there is silence, but it doesn’t feel hopeless. Like in other well-known cases, there is a certain hiatus of silence, but usually it is not a bad sign.

In the beginning of 2019, the talks come back to the DNA. There are even questions why not use GSK approach. Paul Holes is consulted. It is sent to Quantico.

And then this PC of 2019. Curtain closes. That’s it. A new suspect, we are following the new leads, read the shack. (But with this phrase, “we were onto something in the beginning” - what does that mean? That they had a lead? What happened to it?).

And this is when the internet explodes. DN is cleared, other possible poi’s are cleared, LE’s comments are confusing, but personally, at this stage, I don’t believe they are clueless. I feel LE took the scent, but it was lost for some reason unrelated to them.

3 years unsolved: A look back at the Delphi murder case

So today, I have questions. All those clues indicating it was someone known to the community. What happened to those clues? Were they planted? But planting a clue pointing at someone still means, having certain local experience. What happened to the knowledge accrued during the first months of the investigation? Are some alibis unshakeable?

Periodically, I wonder if something totally random happened. Perhaps certain evidence disappeared, or was lost? It happens. From time to time, in different states, the whole cases have to be thrown out of court because something was not done right, some procedure not abided by, or material lost. So I think, maybe there was some mess in some lab, and Delphi got into that pack of cases affected? But this is just one idea.

And I also think of several cases, high-profile ones, JBR and Moxley’s ones come to mind, probably because they are so messed up that we shall never know the truth, but the lives of all potentially involved are ruined anyhow. Some weird cases of comeuppance, the cases that would suddenly pop up and down, but never go down in history? Is Delphi going that route?

And also...There were many people around the case in the beginning. Some being close friends of the girls, some living close to the bridge, witnesses, some hearing from them on that day. Now, four years later, witnesses move away, friends grow up and move on in life, there is more and more difficult to get the information. Where is this all going?
 
MOO To me it seems like a solo crime.
More MOO, I think the police looked at the younger sketch done immediately after the crime and also the video.

Making a decision they went with the video appearance for their suspect sketch.
After two years of nothing working they back tracked hoping to raise more tips.
I believe, LE looked at the first made sketch (#2) after the crime and most of them knew someone, who looked like that. This someone (well-known to many, it seems) was in the vicinity of the crime scene/on the trails that day, but had a convincing explanation for being there and was someone without any tiny reason, why he should have done such a double murder. They questioned him with due respect, because he was in the MHB area, but couldn't really believe, he had anything to do with it. Maybe, after that even a LE related person (out of Delphi) got involved for a distracting or an also affirmative telephon call, and LE relieved swung away from their first sketch of YBG. - Sometime later LE had another sketch #1 (OBG) from witnesses, which could have been a pic of BG in video too and it made much more sense for LE to choose this sketch. - Then in early 2019 there must have appeared unambiguous news/investigation results/tips to the surface, and since then LE suddenly knew, they were totally mislead all the time and YBG would have been their right poi since start. OBG is perhaps an accomplice (because this unknown person was also seen on the trails that day by several people). If LE will get caught their YBG, they will get caught the OBG too - and I for my part am thinking: the BGs will be looking similar, the age difference not more than 3-4 years. IMO, manifested speculation, you may say: as always.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
the choice of victims can be random..but often victims are stalked ,targeted and murdered based on their features etc. not everyone believes this was random. mOO
On the weekend, completely against my habit, I saw a TV movie: Mr. Brooks - Wikipedia. This serial killer was among other things cruising around in his car, looking for his next victim/s, cleared his victim's license plate and thus had a clue to follow.
Whether looking for the owner of a certain license plate or looking within the internet/SM - I think, victims (of a thrill-kill) are often chosen for the one or another reason before the murder and don't become victim quite out of the blue. IMO
 
How do we know there weren't two killers involved? One could have been waiting at the crime scene for BG#1 to bring the girls to him. BG#2 is never seen on camera so people just assume it's only 1 BG who has done it. Have police ruled out 2 killers?? It could be why the crime scene looks so suspect, two people staged it and planted seeds to distract LE.
 
We know so little about the scene that there are many possibilities where fingerprints could be found.

my top suspicion is a partial bloody fingerprint on skin or clothing.

Other possibilities are:
Libby’s phone
duct tape
Zip ties
Their shoes, especially on rubber areas
Clothing zipper
Rope or material used to bind
Cigarette butt
Girls may have had paper, keys, or other item in pockets he may have touched
We’ve long debated the staging vs signature a lot-he may have moved a body into a specific position, so maybe in her clothing
Other items left not directly used in murder (water bottle, food wrapper, trash) that may or may not belong to BG
 
Stumbled upon a really unnerving Facebook page last night where a guy was making some pretty big accusations against someone he knew, stating they were the killer. From the posts, I think it’s more likely it’s just a mental illness situation but I submitted it to the tip email. Hopefully they read those!
 
How do we know there weren't two killers involved? One could have been waiting at the crime scene for BG#1 to bring the girls to him. BG#2 is never seen on camera so people just assume it's only 1 BG who has done it. Have police ruled out 2 killers?? It could be why the crime scene looks so suspect, two people staged it and planted seeds to distract LE.
because.. they have more audio
the other person would have appeared on the recording and we would have been informed ..
also...these sexual motivated or thrill kill crimes doesnt take two usually
 
I have never given up the thought that the killer lost his hat. There was discussion about it at one time but I can't exactly recall it. I do know it stuck with me. Old bridge guy with hat...young bridge guy without a hat. I do remember somewhere LE said to not focus on the hat or something to that effect. JMHO
 
I have never given up the thought that the killer lost his hat. There was discussion about it at one time but I can't exactly recall it. I do know it stuck with me. Old bridge guy with hat...young bridge guy without a hat. I do remember somewhere LE said to not focus on the hat or something to that effect. JMHO
I've always wondered if his hat came off during the events and left behind reddish-brown hair evidence. I think he likely took the hat with him, though, if it did. Jmo.
 
Last edited:
I have never given up the thought that the killer lost his hat. There was discussion about it at one time but I can't exactly recall it. I do know it stuck with me. Old bridge guy with hat...young bridge guy without a hat. I do remember somewhere LE said to not focus on the hat or something to that effect. JMHO

I thought about that too. But if he did have a hat or really any other clothing item that was accidentally left at the scene, there would be a very good chance of getting an exact DNA profile. I know the hair follicle is needed but if he lost a hat/other item, I'd assume it was during a struggle and likely there were multiple hairs in and on the item. That would be a fantastic find.
 
I agree, and would add that on my end they didn't want to come right out and say they fudged some of the investigation early on.

My hunch is they disregarded a witness' words early on in the case, which is how we now have the sketch of a young-ish male. That witness and that sketch are linked, and while I don't think a sketch of our suspect necessarily will lead to identifying him, I think that what the witness told investigators was crucial to putting together a timeline. I also think it was crucial to ruling out/disregarding some things LE said early on, such as "could be a drifter", things along those lines. Like Awsi Dooger, I've been to the trails and the surrounding area. People just don't walk along and stumble upon Monon High Bridge and the trail connected to it.

JMO

That's right, however 'something' we aren't permitted to discuss here put that bridge and park on the map for a lot of people who otherwise wouldn't know about it. And those people come from different counties, states and even countries.
 
Train's off the rails.

Best get her back on :)

I speculate the killer to have parked at the cemetery, checked the kill site to ensure it was ready and no one was around, moved to a perch that gave a clear sight to the bridge, and the trail approaching it, watched the girls pass, followed them across the bridge, down the hill, over the creek, committed the murders, and left via the cemetery.

I don't think anyone saw him that day. The sketches at this point are useless, MOO.

Might there be two? Yeah, I've always had this possibility open in my speculation. Why not? LE does.

Might the killer have planted evidence to mislead LE? I think yes. I think they were duped. And I don't think they know who killed the girls, the same person who fooled them.

Much of the discussion prior to the venture over the abyss, for me, gives credence to, and points to, what I believe to be one of the most revealing interviews:

ROBERT IVES: (clipped from down the hill podcast)

"Well, in one sense, any murder scene is probably odd. But again this is where I have difficulty because I’m not sure what all has been released. There were a variety of things at the scene of the crime where I guess I would ask you to talk to the State Police about that. They have to decide what’s going to be released was not going to be released. It was just not your normal ‘a person was killed here’ crime scene. That’s probably all I can say about it."

"All I can say about the situation with Abby and Libby is that there was a lot more physical evidence than at that crime scene."

"even though at the crime scene there was a lot of physical evidence of one sort or another– which would lead normally to logical paths of investigation– it never led to a particular person."
 
MOD REMINDER

Speculation is permitted ONLY if it is based in FACT that can be linked to MSM or LE published statements. Websleuths has INTENTIONALLY set high standards in the Terms of Service that all of us agreed to when we joined. There are countless other sites on the internet where anything goes. This is not one of them. Posts that violate the TOS will be removed, as will replies to those posts. It is extremely helpful to familiarize yourself with the TOS when joining, and to periodically review them as time goes on.

Your efforts to post respectfully and responsibly according to the TOS are greatly appreciated!

Faithfully,
CocoChanel
Moderator
 
Train's off the rails.

Best get her back on :)

I speculate the killer to have parked at the cemetery, checked the kill site to ensure it was ready and no one was around, moved to a perch that gave a clear sight to the bridge, and the trail approaching it, watched the girls pass, followed them across the bridge, down the hill, over the creek, committed the murders, and left via the cemetery.

I don't think anyone saw him that day. The sketches at this point are useless, MOO.

Might there be two? Yeah, I've always had this possibility open in my speculation. Why not? LE does.

Might the killer have planted evidence to mislead LE? I think yes. I think they were duped. And I don't think they know who killed the girls, the same person who fooled them.

Much of the discussion prior to the venture over the abyss, for me, gives credence to, and points to, what I believe to be one of the most revealing interviews:

ROBERT IVES: (clipped from down the hill podcast)

"Well, in one sense, any murder scene is probably odd. But again this is where I have difficulty because I’m not sure what all has been released. There were a variety of things at the scene of the crime where I guess I would ask you to talk to the State Police about that. They have to decide what’s going to be released was not going to be released. It was just not your normal ‘a person was killed here’ crime scene. That’s probably all I can say about it."

"All I can say about the situation with Abby and Libby is that there was a lot more physical evidence than at that crime scene."

"even though at the crime scene there was a lot of physical evidence of one sort or another– which would lead normally to logical paths of investigation– it never led to a particular person."

This is my idea of what happened also.
My thoughts have certainly evolved, changed and swung back and forth over the last four years. After really looking at what is actually known, which is very little no doubt, and trying to tamp down speculation as close to reality as possible, simplicity wins out. The crime scene might be complicated but the actual crime was not. Park at cemetery, surveil the area, wait, accost, kill, leave.
I also doubt he was seen on the trails either. No way, after brutally killing two young girls, someone walks back along a trail he knows other people are on, back to his car. He was parked at the cemetery in my opinion.
Just my thoughts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
206
Guests online
271
Total visitors
477

Forum statistics

Threads
608,482
Messages
18,240,232
Members
234,385
Latest member
johnwich
Back
Top