Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #130

[St. Anthony2017]

Probably. From the views in Julie Melvin's videos, I was having a hard time accepting the idea that someone on the bridge side could see bodies flat on the ground.

In the beginning we read that a set of footprints led them to the victims, which made sense to me except I wondered why there weren't 3 sets.

Good point!

 

[stattlich1]

The cemetery might’ve been the easiest access point to the crime scene for LE but we don’t know if the killer went from the cemetery to the bridge, expecting the girls or anyone else to be walking along it that afternoon since recent comments indicate the girls weren’t targeted in advance He may’ve sighted them somewhere around where they were dropped off and simply followed them.

Yes, this is the realm of speculation. LE also said BG1 was the killer, until it was BG2.

I stand by my statement that the path from the cemetery to the crime scene is indeed the easiest way to access it. It is the shortest route, and it provides access without crossing the bridge, or the creek. That cemetery must have been important for a reason. It obviously provided LE easy access to the crime scene, and I would surmise, it, and the path down to the crime scene, were likely looked over with a fine toothed comb, evidenced by the number of LE vehicles parked there. Did the killer park at the cemetery, and access the trails and/or bridge from there? Who knows? That does, indeed, enter the realm of speculation.

 

[No it's not]

Just a refresher..could get quite confusing to navigate around the drop off / Bridge area:

(click to enlarge)

 

[No it's not]

..and the bridge

 

[Yemelyan]

Apologies, but I do not really understand your comment? Could you please elaborate?
I am not claiming there is a connection, just asking if it has ever been discussed in here? Because if it has I would like to read up on that. So what’s up with the huge break comment?

A witness has recently come forward in the AM case who police believe is credible: https://www.news5cleveland.com/news...pments-in-amy-mihaljevic-murder-investigation

I don't think a connection between this case and Delphi has been much discussed in this forum, likely because of distance, differences in MO, and the fact that the offender in the AM case was thought to be in his 30s at the time of her disappearance in 1989 which would likely, though not definitely, place him out of range of the person suspected in the Delphi murders. Even if AM's abductor was 20 in 1989 instead of 30-35 as eyewitnesses estimated, he'd still be almost a decade older than the age range LE have given for Libby and Abby's killer.

 

[JnRyan]

Regarding where the killer parked, how they entered and left the area. I suppose he could have parked at the cemetery. But in looking at the aerial shots from a helo the next day there were multiple LE vehicles parking in the vicinity of the cemetery. If the killer parked there or even if they parked elsewhere and walked out through the cemetery wouldn't the cemetery be part of the crime scene? I'd like to believe LE would not have parked there if there was a chance that evidence could be found without being driven over and walked over. Of course, I suppose LE may have parked there and didn't consider this and evidence was lost or compromised.

 

[Falling Down]

Yes, this is the realm of speculation. LE also said BG1 was the killer, until it was BG2.

I stand by my statement that the path from the cemetery to the crime scene is indeed the easiest way to access it. It is the shortest route, and it provides access without crossing the bridge, or the creek. That cemetery must have been important for a reason. It obviously provided LE easy access to the crime scene, and I would surmise, it, and the path down to the crime scene, were likely looked over with a fine toothed comb, evidenced by the number of LE vehicles parked there. Did the killer park at the cemetery, and access the trails and/or bridge from there? Who knows? That does, indeed, enter the realm of speculation.

I drove the perimeter road at the cemetery in 2017 and added BG parking there to my theory about what he was up to before the murders. A sedan or other car, not a truck or SUV, could be at the back of the cemetery where it slopes down some and not be seen from C.R. 300. That said, I'm of the opinion BG planned to park his vehicle where others wouldn't park next to it.

So it makes sense he may have parked at the now gone CPS building. His only other choices would have been to park at the cemetery, the spot where the girls were dropped off, or across IN 25 where most people park. I parked there in October, you park there then walk over 25 via the Freedom Bridge to get to the Monon Trail which leads to the bridge. IMO he wanted to park where people would be just driving by and not paying attention to a vehicle parked off a lightly-traveled road like C.R. 300.

JMO

 

[Skully]

Regarding where the killer parked, how they entered and left the area. I suppose he could have parked at the cemetery. But in looking at the aerial shots from a helo the next day there were multiple LE vehicles parking in the vicinity of the cemetery. If the killer parked there or even if they parked elsewhere and walked out through the cemetery wouldn't the cemetery be part of the crime scene? I'd like to believe LE would not have parked there if there was a chance that evidence could be found without being driven over and walked over. Of course, I suppose LE may have parked there and didn't consider this and evidence was lost or compromised.

So early on, do you think they had an idea of where he came in or left? I don't think they knew about the vehicle at the CPS building the first day or so. My guess is that people found out about the murders and then started calling in tips or things they saw that day, alone with LE interviewing anyone at the reserve of course. I think the may concern at that point was to get all the different agencies in and around and to the crime scene. I know they didn't realize that it was so large, up to the bridge until they found the phone and then enlarged it. It really chaotic and intense when you first start analyzing your crime scene, there are so many factors and people and they had how many agencies there.... So if it was a mistake, it was hindsight and you go with what you have. I don't know what they would have gleaned from the cemetery in the way of evidence, maybe a tire track, or foot impressions, but foot impressions would be at the crime scene too.

 

[FrostedGlass]

This is from the media thread pg 45, transcribed by cujenn81:

"Kelsi’s group goes searching under the bridge, and Kelsi brings a blanket and granola bars with her. Another search group nearby is searching across the private driveway, near Deer Creek.

When Kelsi’s group starts back towards the driveway, a man yells up that he's found a shoe close to the edge of the creek. He yells up to ask Kelsi what kind of shoes the girls were wearing. The shoe was a black Nike sneaker and belongs to Libby. Other items belonging to the girls are also found by searchers, but that information has not been released publicly.

Police recordings tell us that a deputy searching the banks of Deer Creek, under the bridge, found girls clothing (specifically undergarments) in the shallow water. A photographer from a local newspaper posted photos of the search activity on FB. She commented that the clothing in the creek could even be seen from 75 yards away.

LE also finds and bags a cigarette butt they deem relatively fresh. It was found on the edge of Deer Creek or in the water — it’s unclear which.

A short time later, the same searcher who found the shoe, spots something out of the corner of his eye down the left side of the bridge — it was movement across the creek. Looking with his phone camera, he zooms in on the area and sees two deer standing in the woods. When he pans down with his phone camera, he finds the two bodies at approximately 12:15 pm. Kelsi commented that if the deer hadn’t moved, he never would have seen them."

 

[Skully]

I also don't rule out the possibility that he didn't leave the area, that he may have hung around to see the after math of what he had done. He took so many chances and more than most, so he may have taken the chance to watch them at the crime scene or at least hear others reacting. Just a thought to think about. I would also say he was most likely "high" on meth or crack, something that would make him so aggressive and take those chances and kills like he did.

 

[Falling Down]

The cemetery might’ve been the easiest access point to the crime scene for LE but we don’t know if the killer went from the cemetery to the bridge, expecting the girls or anyone else to be walking along it that afternoon since recent comments indicate the girls weren’t targeted in advance He may’ve sighted them somewhere around where they were dropped off and simply followed them.

That's my theory re: initial sighting. He saw them shortly after they were dropped off, realized they were unaccompanied minors and no vehicle was parked there, and started to put the wheels in motion to carry out his sick fantasy.

JMO

 

[Beachlife926]

Does anyone know where I can view Kelsi’s live stream on July 9, 2019?
It’s listed in articles on the media thread but when I click the link it says the video is now private. Interesting IMO

 

[photographer4]

This is from the media thread pg 45, transcribed by cujenn81:

"Kelsi’s group goes searching under the bridge, and Kelsi brings a blanket and granola bars with her. Another search group nearby is searching across the private driveway, near Deer Creek.

When Kelsi’s group starts back towards the driveway, a man yells up that he's found a shoe close to the edge of the creek. He yells up to ask Kelsi what kind of shoes the girls were wearing. The shoe was a black Nike sneaker and belongs to Libby. Other items belonging to the girls are also found by searchers, but that information has not been released publicly.

Police recordings tell us that a deputy searching the banks of Deer Creek, under the bridge, found girls clothing (specifically undergarments) in the shallow water. A photographer from a local newspaper posted photos of the search activity on FB. She commented that the clothing in the creek could even be seen from 75 yards away.

LE also finds and bags a cigarette butt they deem relatively fresh. It was found on the edge of Deer Creek or in the water — it’s unclear which.

A short time later, the same searcher who found the shoe, spots something out of the corner of his eye down the left side of the bridge — it was movement across the creek. Looking with his phone camera, he zooms in on the area and sees two deer standing in the woods. When he pans down with his phone camera, he finds the two bodies at approximately 12:15 pm. Kelsi commented that if the deer hadn’t moved, he never would have seen them."

Ok, now I wonder, what made the deer move? How close were the deer to the bodies? This might be super important because to my knowledge, deer do not eat carrion and are fairly weary of humans. I wonder, was some sort of attractant left near the bodies to entice animals to visit the scene? That is probably far fetched - but otherwise, how likely is it the deer would go near a scene that may have smelled like human activity or... unpleasant to wildlife? So how close were the deer to the bodies?

 

[photographer4]

I also don't rule out the possibility that he didn't leave the area, that he may have hung around to see the after math of what he had done. He took so many chances and more than most, so he may have taken the chance to watch them at the crime scene or at least hear others reacting. Just a thought to think about. I would also say he was most likely "high" on meth or crack, something that would make him so aggressive and take those chances and kills like he did.

I had a thought that maybe he put up trail cams (possibly post mortem) and sat back and watched it unfold live or relived it later on. I wonder if he did that if he could watch it live from a remote location? He might wonder if police ever found his trail cam. My understanding is they can be super well concealed and you wouldn't notice them unless you were right on top of them sometimes.

 

[Yemelyan]

So early on, do you think they had an idea of where he came in or left? I don't think they knew about the vehicle at the CPS building the first day or so. My guess is that people found out about the murders and then started calling in tips or things they saw that day, alone with LE interviewing anyone at the reserve of course. I think the may concern at that point was to get all the different agencies in and around and to the crime scene. I know they didn't realize that it was so large, up to the bridge until they found the phone and then enlarged it. It really chaotic and intense when you first start analyzing your crime scene, there are so many factors and people and they had how many agencies there.... So if it was a mistake, it was hindsight and you go with what you have. I don't know what they would have gleaned from the cemetery in the way of evidence, maybe a tire track, or foot impressions, but foot impressions would be at the crime scene too.

We don't need to guess about this - early on in the investigation LE did not know how the killer left, and they still don't know to this very day! Check out TL's words to the reporter in episode 10 of Down the Hill, this comes at minute 10:14:

Reporter: "Do you know for certain which way this killer left?"
TL: "I guess the way I’ll respond to that is, there is speculation but nothing factual developed at this point."

See also this exchange from the Carroll County Comet Q&A with TL:
Q. Are there regrets about not securing the Morning Heights Cemetery as a possible part of the crime scene (i.e. possible exit route of the killer(s)?
A. At the time, it was uncertain exactly what the “totality of the circumstances” were.

 

[Diddian]

I read late last night, it is something they could usually trace back to someone specific, but haven't been able to do so in this case... so what could that physical evidence be? The specific quote from the article I've linked below is as follows: " Ives said: 'Even though at the crime scene there was a lot of physical evidence of one sort of another which would lead logically to one person or another, it never led to one particular person.'

So? What could or should have logically led to one person or another, but didn't? Theories?
-> Did he leave (intentionally or not), a device of some sort at the scene? Electronic device? Prosthetic device (serial numbers can be used to trace these to maker etc). Was he diabetic and left something related to that there?
-> what could he have done that they thought they should have been able to trace back to someone specific?
-> some hint of employment?

2. We've only heard about Libby's phone having taken the video / audio evidence. Did Abby have a phone? If so, where was it? Who has it now?

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

When I view the video of the suspect included in that article, I notice something that I hadn't noticed before: the shadow cast right in the center of the suspect's forehead from something he is wearing on his head is small and tight and it looks like whatever is casting that shadow is pulling the hood tight at top center.

I'd always thought the suspect appeared to be wearing a short brim cap and had trouble seeing what others said they saw - that what he had on his head is the hood of a hoodie pulled up. I think the reason I had trouble seeing it is because the headwear seemed firmly planted and stable like a cap, rather than looser and slipping around like the hood on a hoodie sweatshirt might. In addition, it has always looked to me like there is a shadow on the center of his forehead, like might be cast from the bill of a cap.

Now as I view this video, I notice that the shadow doesn't look right - it is too narrow and concentrated at the middle, rather than wide like a cap brim. That makes me wonder whether the suspect might have been wearing something narrower than a cap under that hood, like a GoPro camera on headgear, and THAT is what made the hood fit tightly enough not to shift and is also what casts that concentrated shadow on his forehead.

 

[Beachlife926]

I had a thought that maybe he put up trail cams (possibly post mortem) and sat back and watched it unfold live or relived it later on. I wonder if he did that if he could watch it live from a remote location? He might wonder if police ever found his trail cam. My understanding is they can be super well concealed and you wouldn't notice them unless you were right on top of them sometimes.

Interesting point.
I also thought of deer decoys used for hunting since some include motion. When I heard the comments about CS from LE - I tried to think of everything we know for sure about the CS and deer at the beginning is one of the only. IMO I remember hearing about a tree stand nearby but doubt it was that close or else it would be a bigger piece of convo.
IMO I think they were real deer. I live in a city with woods nearby and we always see deer when we go into the woods as well as when they come into the city at night

 

[Andreee]

The guy who was looking at the deer, was he looking at them through his phone (camera / zoom)? If so, he may not have seen the bodies, or realized what he was seeing at that point? Someone apparently hollered up to KG to ask her about the girl's shoes and then the bodies were found, so to me, that would be someone closer to the actual bodies on the other side of the creek found them, no?

What I've read all along is that he spotted movement and saw the deer, then took his camera and zoomed in and then saw the girls. He was on bridge side.

 

[Andreee]

Unfortunately the paragraph before states it was speculation and not from LE:
“DTH speculates the man rehearsed his plan, walked the route and was ready to act whenever suitable victims appeared.
He passed the girls on the bridge, then turned back and when the girls noticed him walking back in their direction, Libby started recording.
Gaining control of them with a knife or gun, he forced them to turn northward – and down the hill.”

I'm wondering how wide the bridge was, does anyone know? All along I've thought that he must've just followed across the bridge from the get-go, and speed up to catch up to them. But some do think he passed by them on the bridge, and I just think that would be tricky to do. Hard to say!

 

[MistyWaters]

That's my theory re: initial sighting. He saw them shortly after they were dropped off, realized they were unaccompanied minors and no vehicle was parked there, and started to put the wheels in motion to carry out his sick fantasy.

JMO

Yes, that’s what I’m thinking. I was leaning towards the bridge as being part of a predetermined homicide site but now I’m beginning to wonder if instead it was a case of him hunting for a vulnerable victim (or two) in any part of the 10 mile historic trail system, anywhere that afforded a certain amount of privacy with nobody around. And he just happened to have walked toward the NE end of it that day and unfortunately Libby and Abby just happened to be there too. Fantasies don’t involve homicide at one sole location, particularly not if he is or has the potential of becoming a serial killer.

At the lowest point of the sand bar iirc it’s been said the water was only a few inches deep so he wouldn’t have been wet from head to toe, had he walked out to any place he parked his car. If LE knew he’d been cut or scratched then a full DNA profile would not be in doubt.

He could’ve been long gone at least 1/2 hour before the pickup time if, as ISP have said, the killings occurred within minutes of the video. I can’t think of how they’d know that other than cellphone audio recordings. But still, there’s much we don’t know and those questions won’t be answered until an arrest and trial occurs, adding into the picture the “who”. Soon, I hope.

JMO