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

[pearl]

Sorry but I can't see that stuff at all. The primary reason I remained in Las Vegas for 24 years was that I encountered an incredibly sharp group of people in the sports betting realm, far beyond anything I have every experienced elsewhere, before or since. Tremendous grasp of probability, as opposed to succumbing to low percentage conventional wisdom. None of us were surprised when a member of that realm dominated Jeopardy to such extent, racking up previously unheard of digits. For decades we'd always said members of our group should go on Jeopardy. But nobody had the guts or stray to do it until he did. Immense kudos. Frankly for all the smarts there is also a smug stodginess in that setting that detracts from outside experiences. The belief is that sports betting is the exhilaration and opportunity all year long, so why waste time doing anything else? Consequently I was always chastised when I would leave town to visit family for several weeks at Christmas time, and leave town for 3 months every summer. Even when I was doing something like attending the Barcelona Olympics in 1992 none of the local guys could believe I would prefer that as opposed to 115 degree days of wagering on baseball.

Anyway, as Falling Down posted here recently, the walk to the crime scene from end of the bridge is roughly 4 minutes. The odds of an armed perpetrator losing control during that time frame are exceptionally low. Far more likely he had a spot in mind and methodically directed them there. That spot bought 21 hours via the simple crossing of Deer Creek. The notion of dashing across the creek plays into the same hero angle as Libby taking the video. It is a convenient wannabelieve adjustment away from the norm. I'm not buying it. Once he has them in control every interpretation has to be in favor of the killer, not the victims. Anthony Greeno presented a standard recreation of the trek across the creek. The hero version has the girls taking off. Far more likely, the killer inflicted evil during the trek itself, whether physical or language or both. These guys prioritize fear and savor the fear.

Besides, if they are going to take off, why do it across a creek with a 4 foot bank on the opposite side? That is the definition of no sense. They had already been on a perfectly level gravel access road after descending the first stage of down the hill. They had also been on perfectly level wide open terrain after descending second stage. The flee across the creek mode somehow prefers waiting until the worst possible time and topography. Even if they made it across the creek it is severely uphill to get out of there. And that is blatantly obvious.

Abducting to his car is so absurd I'm not going to address it at length. If he wanted to do that then the car would have been along the gravel access road. Any other spot is so far removed with such great risk he'd have to be a dunce to even contemplate it.

I'll be blunt. I have emphasized this countless times on various sites. I do not believe law enforcement has adequate training in terms of probability. I have seen it in this case and tons of cases. Instead of making that aspect a prerequisite during training and while ascending the ladder, the profession merely inherits standard evaluation and then expects it to do great things upon reaching top level, even as they are interpreting a 2% likelihood as a 60% likelihood. Instead of defunding anything we need specialization from the outset. Nobody should advance or be allowed to apply at all unless they can ace a related probability test. The sportsbook manager at the Horseshoe in 1989 gave every applicant that type of test before even hiring them to do basic tasks. There are many versions online. The best ones combine mathematical and situational variables.

In my profession, chaos, such as that visited upon Abby and Libby, will overcome probability, odds, and statistics every time.

 

[Yemelyan]

I wonder when it was torn down. Maybe some construction worker from out of town working on demolition?

According to an article in the Carroll County Comet, INDOT had the building torn down after 11/27/17. So it would have been abandoned but not in the process of demolition at the time of the murders.

 

[Rush4087]

I was impressed by the related quotes during the HLN special. Mike and Becky had no problem conceding that they stare people down. I experienced that immediately in Delphi within 2 minutes of arriving. I was pumping gas at the Shell station downtown when an older guy also pumping gas basically demanded to know what I was doing there. I walked main street where there are several small local restaurants. A group waiting for a table stopped their conversation cold and stared at me as I walked past. A woman at the Dairy Queen counter blatantly stared me down head to toe with a stern expression. Then at Trailhead Park an older couple obviously got scared of me and immediately drove away once they saw my Florida tag.

Good thing I was aware of the inevitability before arriving in Delphi. But I have to say it was beyond my anticipation. I thought my 6-3 height might provide some quick dismissive ability. Seemingly not in the slightest. I got the full treatment.

However, as I've mentioned here and elsewhere, the glaring exception was among young people. Teenagers didn't care at all. I was so impressed with that. They seemingly had such a tremendous grasp of probability, as opposed to overthinking anything and everything. That age group walked past me without second thought every single time.

No offense Awsi, but I don't think that the reason the teenagers you observed weren't glaring at you was because they had "such a tremendous grasp of probability". Jmo

 

[Angels27]

I don’t think it’s human nature to stay and help. I think most humans would run for their own life. At least then there might be a CHANCE u can save both of you. Imagine u are about to crash bc an oncoming truck is now in your lane to your left, you will naturally turn wheel to right to save your own life even if someone is walking with a baby stroller to your right, bc the baby stroller can’t kill u but the oncoming truck can. With only a second to make the decision u turn into the baby stroller. I think Abby was immobilized almost immediately and the killer went for Libby, or vice versa.

I've been of the opinion that BG had a lot of variables that he needed to have work in his favor, since early on in this case. I'm also of the opinion that this guy is very observant, and is adept at reading people. May even have a much higher ability to "read people", than most people do, generally. No doubt in my mind he'd been to MHB before, perhaps many times beforehand. Observing adults, observing juveniles, etc.

I think that his going after unaccompanied juveniles was his ultimate prize, and in this case he had the upper hand because the only people there during a set period of time were BG and two girls. Girls he could more easily control than an adult or adults. It makes perfect sense the girls would have stayed together, rather then one taking off and leaving the other behind. This is human nature, and BG knows this.

He forced them down to an area they really couldn't escape from, there was nowhere to go, really. I watched both episodes of the HLN special about the case. Anna Williams says in one episode the girls were not good with directions (paraphrasing). Now put yourselves in their shoes, you're at the end of the bridge, even if you take off running, which direction do you go in? BG forcing them down into the gorge was a crucial thing he had to set in motion, in order to control them and get them on the way to his pre-picked crime scene. He's a predator of humans, and as anyone with a hunting and/or military background knows, you have the upper hand if you can trap animals or humans in a spot they would have to struggle to get, or in this case climb, out of. As Awsi Dooger mentioned, there is probability involved in a lot of crimes, a perp has to take this into serious consideration. He had enough variables to consider before even parking his vehicle and observing people that day, and BG would have had a desire to prevent more variables from being thrown in his way. I believe that by attacking juveniles that day, with no witnesses around who saw the girls after they were dropped off, eliminated variables for him, which I could explain but I think a lot of it makes perfect sense to anyone who has followed the case.

I'm also of the opinion, and people have argued with me about this but I'll let it fly, the girls most likely did not know where the gravel road led to, where it becomes C.R. 625. Which happens to be where Abby lived at the time. Maybe a quarter of a mile or so from the bridge. Again, I can picture myself, put myself in their shoes, at their age. Of course pre-internet and smart phones, but at any rate if I've never been to that bridge before, like in Abby's case, how would I know where I am in relation to anything besides County Road 300, at age 13? Or why would I even care, at that age? Throw in Anna's comment above, and one can see how they would have been at that SE end of the bridge, with no idea which direction to head in walking away from that end of the bridge, which by the way is on private property.

Now picture BG, hanging back a bit on the trail, observing the girls. At some point he notices Abby, who had never crossed the bridge, walking more slowly than the more sure-footed Libby. What would you (WS members) think seeing that? Again, we have to think of this individual as a predator. Two innocent children out for a walk on a trail and an old bridge, carefree and not concerned with much anything beyond the moment, and that beautiful gorge, just talking and enjoying themselves. This was the monster's ultimate moment to strike. He had them trapped at the SE end of the bridge, and like Awsi Dooger mentioned, we don't know what happened to them around that time and between there and the CS. Assault(s), restraints, etc., we don't know.

JMO

 

[pearl]

On the DNA subject and I do believe they have DNA. He did not sexually assault the girls as far as I’m aware.

So assuming it’s touch DNA which I believe it is the police have to thread very carefully here. If he knew girls and had access to them he can explain the DNA away very easily.

I’ve watched every press conference from start to finish multiple times. And from my experience working in LE as a detective I understand the words he is using.

Why mention the movie The Shack......there is a couple of reasons but the main reason I would take away from it is, either they are watching BG and witnessed him purchasing it, or when doing door to door enquiries it was on the Tv, this tells BG we are speaking to you.
If they show their hand with the DNA and that’s all they have and he explains it away easily, LE will be in a world of trouble.

The car is huge for me as by now if there was an innocent reason for that car been there the owner would have come forward.

I am under no illusion they know who BG is and they are watching him like a hawk waiting for that 1 mistake, and guys with egos like this always make mistakes eventually.

I do believe his partner/family suspect something and they should come forward but loyalty/fear will not allow them to.
The car is that important to the investigation that they have never given colour make or model despite having it on cctv and witnesses putting it there. Why hold back this you ask, I will tell you why if they reveal it everyone in small towns know what everybody else drives and it will identify the person to the town of Delphi.

You also have to consider there may be a father in his 50s involved or a son in his 20s or 30s involved. They both live in the same house have access to the same car and both share similar DNA that is not in the system.

Both are suspects but only 1 is the killer and he is keeping the dirty secret to himself.

Identify the driver of the car that particular day and you have your killer.

Given everything you can understand why LE in Delphi are so cautious. They have 1 shot at this and have to get it right 1st time. There is no 2nd chances in this one.

Bolded by me.
Irishdetective, Welcome to Abby and Libby's thread. Thank you for your insight. I am one of the posters who believe that ever since the 2019 PC where The Shack was mentioned that LE has the killer in their sights. I also think every word that LE says to the public and/or press is directed by the killer's criminal profile. Law enforcement is not, so to speak, flying blind here. They know what they are doing. After hearing about The Shack during the PC, I ran upon the book for less than a dollar at Goodwill and read it. It is not the type reading I would normally choose, and somewhat difficult to fit into the murders of these two girls. You have provided a totally new way for me to think about the book's title. I spent some time trying to fit the book's message to this horrible crime. I never looked at it as being something the suspected killer might have in his possession or in his living space that LE observed him with. A welcome addition to thoughts about this perp. Thanks again.

 

[stattlich1]

You also have to consider there may be a father in his 50s involved or a son in his 20s or 30s involved. They both live in the same house have access to the same car and both share similar DNA that is not in the system.

Both are suspects but only 1 is the killer and he is keeping the dirty secret to himself.

I've kept this scenario in mind for the past several years. It fits with the, paraphrased, LE statement, that said 'evidence that normally would lead to one person, or another, never led to one particular person'.

Having read the past few pages, I still strongly believe, for simplicity sake, and to increase his probability of success, that BG cornered the girls at the end of the bridge, and forced them to the CS, thereby moving/isolating them/him further away from the bridge and others, and moving them/him closer to his escape route, which logically, for me, would be a parked car in the cemetery.

If one wishes to talk logic, and probability, I ask this.

What is more probable in departing the crime scene?

Back across the creek, across the bridge from whence you came, and back down that trail, to the main road, to a parked car in the CPS building lot?

Through the woods on the CS side of the creek, to emerge on the road, or emerge back on to a trail, then to the road, then back to the CPS building lot?

Or up that hill, to the cemetery, and drive away from there?

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I remember LE saying they had a ton of bodily fluids saliva, urine etc from the searchers.

I don’t seem to remember them ever saying that.

 

[stattlich1]

I don’t seem to remember them ever saying that.

That comment about body fluids, saliva, urine etc. was made to describe possible scene contamination by the searchers in the woods.

 

[ReadySet]

On the HLN special it talked about bodily fluids from searchers in the general area, NOT at the crime scene.

I don’t seem to remember them ever saying that.

 

[Awsi Dooger]

I realize everyone loves the notion that the girls tried to flee across the creek. But let me try to demonstrate why it is unlikely. In sports and specifically American football there is something called the backdoor cover. That is when the underdog seizes advantage late and scores to finish inside the pointspread. It is an oft discussed scenario.

However, it is quite another matter when you are actually depending on it to happen. All perspective is lost. My friends and I used to take advantage of sucker tourists all the time in that situation, in man to man wagers. For example, let's say a 30 point favorite in college football got ahead by 35 in the middle of the 4th quarter. We'd hear the tourists chirping, "Here comes the backdoor cover. I guarantee it." This is when the big favorite has pulled all of its starters and is playing with reserves, while the heavy underdog is still using its top players.

It is incredible how often those sucker tourists would lose sight of big picture reality. We would wager on the remainder of the game. They would actually take the 30 point underdog at Even points for the remainder of the game, counting on that backdoor cover. I felt so sorry for them time and again, even as I was taking their money. That 30 point favorite has such manpower advantage that they were favored to score the first touchdown, favored to score the second touchdown, and so forth. They are still favored to score the eighth touchdown and the ninth touchdown.

Only warped perspective considers the huge underdog now the brief favorite, due to situational variance. And in a roundabout way that's how I'm trying to describe Delphi as the girls approached the creek. We know they lost big at the top of the bridge. Otherwise they wouldn't be down the hill and heading toward Deer Creek. We know they lost their lives atop the opposite bank within minutes. All of this makes perfect sense because once that bad guy pulled a weapon the girls became massive underdogs.

Yet somehow we want to pretend they suddenly seized advantage as they reached the creek. Meanwhile, nothing has logically changed. The killer hasn't dropped the weapon. He hasn't collapsed to the ground. He hasn't changed his mind. Only the fanciful notion of applying hero mode wants to make the girls the favorite for those next 15 or 20 seconds, or whatever.

It simply is not a good way to think. You are wagering on the big underdog, for no reason whatsoever. Kidding yourself due to flimsy subjectivity. And if law enforcement had sufficient training in probability they would fully understand this type of thing. They'd have experts describing it to them before they ever reached junior level, let alone anything beyond that. Jolt, jolt and more jolt. Flush out the group embrace of 2% scenarios.

I'll be blunt again. We need more women out there in these roles. Delphi suffers partially because males are occupying all the top spots. Law enforcement everywhere is hindered by gender distribution. I've done this long enough to recognize that females have greater grasp of probability than men, largely because they aren't as stubbornly dense and don't fall in love with preposterous scenarios merely because they align with every bias.

 

[Charlot123]

Sorry but I can't see that stuff at all. The primary reason I remained in Las Vegas for 24 years was that I encountered an incredibly sharp group of people in the sports betting realm, far beyond anything I have every experienced elsewhere, before or since. Tremendous grasp of probability, as opposed to succumbing to low percentage conventional wisdom. None of us were surprised when a member of that realm dominated Jeopardy to such extent, racking up previously unheard of digits. For decades we'd always said members of our group should go on Jeopardy. But nobody had the guts or stray to do it until he did. Immense kudos. Frankly for all the smarts there is also a smug stodginess in that setting that detracts from outside experiences. The belief is that sports betting is the exhilaration and opportunity all year long, so why waste time doing anything else? Consequently I was always chastised when I would leave town to visit family for several weeks at Christmas time, and leave town for 3 months every summer. Even when I was doing something like attending the Barcelona Olympics in 1992 none of the local guys could believe I would prefer that as opposed to 115 degree days of wagering on baseball.

Anyway, as Falling Down posted here recently, the walk to the crime scene from end of the bridge is roughly 4 minutes. The odds of an armed perpetrator losing control during that time frame are exceptionally low. Far more likely he had a spot in mind and methodically directed them there. That spot bought 21 hours via the simple crossing of Deer Creek. The notion of dashing across the creek plays into the same hero angle as Libby taking the video. It is a convenient wannabelieve adjustment away from the norm. I'm not buying it. Once he has them in control every interpretation has to be in favor of the killer, not the victims. Anthony Greeno presented a standard recreation of the trek across the creek. The hero version has the girls taking off. Far more likely, the killer inflicted evil during the trek itself, whether physical or language or both. These guys prioritize fear and savor the fear.

Besides, if they are going to take off, why do it across a creek with a 4 foot bank on the opposite side? That is the definition of no sense. They had already been on a perfectly level gravel access road after descending the first stage of down the hill. They had also been on perfectly level wide open terrain after descending second stage. The flee across the creek mode somehow prefers waiting until the worst possible time and topography. Even if they made it across the creek it is severely uphill to get out of there. And that is blatantly obvious.

Abducting to his car is so absurd I'm not going to address it at length. If he wanted to do that then the car would have been along the gravel access road. Any other spot is so far removed with such great risk he'd have to be a dunce to even contemplate it.

I'll be blunt. I have emphasized this countless times on various sites. I do not believe law enforcement has adequate training in terms of probability. I have seen it in this case and tons of cases. Instead of making that aspect a prerequisite during training and while ascending the ladder, the profession merely inherits standard evaluation and then expects it to do great things upon reaching top level, even as they are interpreting a 2% likelihood as a 60% likelihood. Instead of defunding anything we need specialization from the outset. Nobody should advance or be allowed to apply at all unless they can ace a related probability test. The sportsbook manager at the Horseshoe in 1989 gave every applicant that type of test before even hiring them to do basic tasks. There are many versions online. The best ones combine mathematical and situational variables.

You are mentioning one trait of gamblers, and it is strictly logic-based. Estimating the probability. The other one I have observed, as I know the family (the descendants of a Wikipidia-name scientist, so, logic abound), where both the uncle and the nephew were gamblers.

I saw passion one could see only around their vocation. There was logic, a lot, but the same people are tremendous risk-takers, and not all risk one can calculate. Otherwise, my friends were calm, humorous, even, lazy, pretty helpful. But that passion inside, it was inherited, as I played preference (Russian card game) with other members of that family, and what made me a lousy player was that I didn't care if I won or lost. This fun is not hard-wired into me. They were passionate about winning.

(Everyone is wired for own drug, though. I know that hoarders, overeaters and alcoholics often cluster in families, it would be interesting to understand what other traits are typical for gamblers' families.)

I wonder if you think if there is something of a gambler in a killer, but I think, much as he takes a gamble on a hunt, what drives him to his ecstasy is very different. Hence, you can not accurately estimate the probability of his actions, ultimately, they are driven by emotions. And these emotions - they are probably very different from the ones that made you stay in LV.

As to calculating probabilities in such a business, no one can. The one infamous gambler-turned-killer, he seemingly calculated everything, too. Forgot - or didn’t realize - one trivial thing. Because, his first experience. That thing that he missed...he would have known about it if it were his second time.

This is why I don’t feel it is the first time for the Delphi killer.

 

[Falling Down]

This is a complex legal issue and the law actually changed on this in 2018. Prior to 2018, with a warrant, LE could get geofence cell phone data for all phones in an area or lists of all cell phones pinging off certain towers. After 2018 the law became much more circumscribed - warrants had to show justification for looking for a specific number linked to a particular name/person, they were time limited (to hours, not weeks) and LE had to show probable cause that the cell phone number they hoped to find was at a location because of provable criminal activity (previously it was enough just to show that it was around in the general time frame). Perhaps more importantly, any investigation that had developed leads from information collected pre-2018 might now have "fruit of the poison tree"- aka information that showed potential involvement of suspects that, due to timing, possibly is no longer admissible. MOO

This was done at least partly because LE in various jurisdictions were using surveillance tech which violated the privacy rights of people with wireless phones. Put another way, they were surveilling people without a warrant, which is a big no-no.

 

[JnRyan]

I've been of the opinion that BG had a lot of variables that he needed to have work in his favor, since early on in this case. I'm also of the opinion that this guy is very observant, and is adept at reading people. May even have a much higher ability to "read people", than most people do, generally. No doubt in my mind he'd been to MHB before, perhaps many times beforehand. Observing adults, observing juveniles, etc.

I guess in the back of my mind I saw this, but never really nailed it down like this. Adept at observing and reading people. Like a con artist looking for their next mark.

I've often thought this guy had been there sometime in his past, say, 10-15 years ago. And then, maybe, he comes around the trails sometime a few weeks or months before for a few times. This is likely a guy that doesn't stand out. He is not really short like 5'3" or really tall like 6'5". Probably average size, average looks and probably even drives a vehicle that doesn't draw attention. He might have been there in August, September, October and no one paid any particular attention to him. As @Awsi Dooger points out, he probably can't do that now.

 

[Angels27]

I don’t seem to remember them ever saying that.

In an interview I think it was on the podcast DTH with one of the LE members he said the searchers didn’t have time to leave to find a restroom so there was all kinds of bodily fluids around there including spit. They didn’t specify where, and they wouldn’t have mentioned it if it was a non-issue.

 

[DevilDog31]

Just too many blank spots for me to settle on some things. Like is he a serial killer? Either in the HLN broadcast or the YouTube video where the HLN hosts talk about the case they mention using the FBI's ViCAP (Violent Criminal Apprehension Program). ViCAP is not even utilized by a majority of LE agencies, so this guy could have killed using a similar signature and a search of ViCAP would not turn up anything. Trying to control two victims, in a public place (e.g., not inside a private residence) and during the day almost makes me think he had the confidence he could do this. How? One obvious thought is that he has killed before, but where it was easier to conceal his actions from others and it was a single victim? Of course, he could have rehearsed this over and over in his mind and during a walk in that area or similar area and he drew his confidence from there. It didn't likely take him very long as he had probably confronted the girls around 2:20-2:30 PM (my estimate) and killed them before Liberty's father called around 3:00 PM. He did it quickly because he has done it before?

In addition to checking other murders I hope LE has checked into what might be botched abduction attempts. That is, this guy tried to do this before but using his vehicle or from another type of location like a mall parking lot. IOW, he figures this didn't work I need to try something else. Jesse Matthew killed two girls, Morgan Harrington and Hannah Graham in Virginia, but years earlier he attempted to rape another woman and this attempt failed. Even if such a person wasn't caught there might be other information such a description or a vehicle used.

Of course, another of the possibilities I've thought of is if his victim(s), previously or subsequently, are only listed as missing and LE hasn't found them in order to make the connection. This guy could have killed before, but only single victims. Also, just because he killed two young girls here doesn't mean that matches the type he has gone after before. Robert Brashers first known victim was a 28 yo woman in SC and two of his subsequent known victims were girls younger than 15.

Good points. But, I think another viable option is that BG knew A&L. By knowing A&L it would afford him an easier time handling 2 athletic girls. Its hard for me to think that they didn't know the person because they could have ran, even if it was down the hill or through some tuff terrain. If you knew your life was in danger you would do anything to get away. Then I think about the rumor that BG had a gun. This could also be an option but I still believe there was opportunity of some sort to try and get away. The last idea is that there is 2 perps. This is hard for me to believe as well. because, like another person said earlier, with the amount of evidence that LE has lead us to believe they have, I would think LE would have caught at least one by now. Delphi is a small town and I think something would have turned up by now. IMO it is someone they knew and also some that used to / or currently lives there. IMO

 

[Falling Down]

I guess in the back of my mind I saw this, but never really nailed it down like this. Adept at observing and reading people. Like a con artist looking for their next mark.

I've often thought this guy had been there sometime in his past, say, 10-15 years ago. And then, maybe, he comes around the trails sometime a few weeks or months before for a few times. This is likely a guy that doesn't stand out. He is not really short like 5'3" or really tall like 6'5". Probably average size, average looks and probably even drives a vehicle that doesn't draw attention. He might have been there in August, September, October and no one paid any particular attention to him. As @Awsi Dooger points out, he probably can't do that now.

Pretty much my train of thought since early on.

I keep going back to the woman interviewed that week on the main street there in Delphi, she explained how she knew there was a "bridge out there", but had never been to it and couldn't give directions on how to get there.

The highway was built in 2013/2014, that general timeframe. Does BG know that area well enough to have known it before the highway went through? Before the main trail was cleared and made nice like it is, now?

I've thought since early on he went out there during other times of the year. The vegetation of the warmer months had to be gone in order for him to be able to pull this off. Two mild Winters in a row here in Indiana would have given him plenty of opportunities to see what it's like there at MHB at some point during the season.

JMO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I realize everyone loves the notion that the girls tried to flee across the creek. But let me try to demonstrate why it is unlikely. In sports and specifically American football there is something called the backdoor cover. That is when the underdog seizes advantage late and scores to finish inside the pointspread. It is an oft discussed scenario.

However, it is quite another matter when you are actually depending on it to happen. All perspective is lost. My friends and I used to take advantage of sucker tourists all the time in that situation, in man to man wagers. For example, let's say a 30 point favorite in college football got ahead by 35 in the middle of the 4th quarter. We'd hear the tourists chirping, "Here comes the backdoor cover. I guarantee it." This is when the big favorite has pulled all of its starters and is playing with reserves, while the heavy underdog is still using its top players.

It is incredible how often those sucker tourists would lose sight of big picture reality. We would wager on the remainder of the game. They would actually take the 30 point underdog at Even points for the remainder of the game, counting on that backdoor cover. I felt so sorry for them time and again, even as I was taking their money. That 30 point favorite has such manpower advantage that they were favored to score the first touchdown, favored to score the second touchdown, and so forth. They are still favored to score the eighth touchdown and the ninth touchdown.

Only warped perspective considers the huge underdog now the brief favorite, due to situational variance. And in a roundabout way that's how I'm trying to describe Delphi as the girls approached the creek. We know they lost big at the top of the bridge. Otherwise they wouldn't be down the hill and heading toward Deer Creek. We know they lost their lives atop the opposite bank within minutes. All of this makes perfect sense because once that bad guy pulled a weapon the girls became massive underdogs.

Yet somehow we want to pretend they suddenly seized advantage as they reached the creek. Meanwhile, nothing has logically changed. The killer hasn't dropped the weapon. He hasn't collapsed to the ground. He hasn't changed his mind. Only the fanciful notion of applying hero mode wants to make the girls the favorite for those next 15 or 20 seconds, or whatever.

It simply is not a good way to think. You are wagering on the big underdog, for no reason whatsoever. Kidding yourself due to flimsy subjectivity. And if law enforcement had sufficient training in probability they would fully understand this type of thing. They'd have experts describing it to them before they ever reached junior level, let alone anything beyond that. Jolt, jolt and more jolt. Flush out the group embrace of 2% scenarios.

I'll be blunt again. We need more women out there in these roles. Delphi suffers partially because males are occupying all the top spots. Law enforcement everywhere is hindered by gender distribution. I've done this long enough to recognize that females have greater grasp of probability than men, largely because they aren't as stubbornly dense and don't fall in love with preposterous scenarios merely because they align with every bias.

I don’t think anyone thinks the girls suddenly seized the advantage if they made a break for it across the creek. They would have simply been trying to save their lives. Even if the probability was only .000000031% that they would succeed, it was a chance. Any human being in a hopelessly dangerous situation would take those odds every time.
For some reason, I just don’t get your point I guess. So I’ll move on.

 

[Yemelyan]

This was done at least partly because LE in various jurisdictions were using surveillance tech which violated the privacy rights of people with wireless phones. Put another way, they were surveilling people without a warrant, which is a big no-no.

Absolutely they were.

Most of the results or leads that developed from these actions ended up being not legally admissible if the cases were not in the process of adjudication when it changed. We don't know if the changes in the law affected anything to do with the Delphi case. As RI put it, it was an evolving area of law.

 

[Charlot123]

I guess in the back of my mind I saw this, but never really nailed it down like this. Adept at observing and reading people. Like a con artist looking for their next mark.

I've often thought this guy had been there sometime in his past, say, 10-15 years ago. And then, maybe, he comes around the trails sometime a few weeks or months before for a few times. This is likely a guy that doesn't stand out. He is not really short like 5'3" or really tall like 6'5". Probably average size, average looks and probably even drives a vehicle that doesn't draw attention. He might have been there in August, September, October and no one paid any particular attention to him. As @Awsi Dooger points out, he probably can't do that now.

I wonder if he originally was NOT good at reading people - I mean, not a nerd who would stand out, but slightly shy, maybe, and very self-controlled.

But in his life, he worked in the area where one had to observe patterns of human behaviors in groups. Not a psychologist with an office or a client, but someone working with groups. A teacher, maybe, but more likely, a coach, an army mayor, a fireman, a paramedic, or, a LE, maybe even working in a jail. A pastor working with men’s AA group would suit, too.

(It is more about handling groups with naturally antisocial behavior and turning them into something productive. A coach: “you do this s**t one more time, and you are out”).

The fact that he used these skills against two scared teenage girls is random, but I would not be surprised if he can not read individuals that well. He is probably cynical, “everything has its price” type, but I am not quite sure he reads individual people well in micro situations,

 

[Charlot123]

I don’t think anyone thinks the girls suddenly seized the advantage if they made a break for it across the creek. They would have simply been trying to save their lives. Even if the probability was only .000000031% that they would succeed, it was a chance. Any human being in a hopelessly dangerous situation would take those odds every time.
For some reason, I just don’t get your point I guess. So I’ll move on.

I think a lot depended on the fact that there were two of them, and each one felt responsible for the friend. Group behaviors in such situations might be more predictable that individual ones. I am beginning to feel that he definitely worked with groups, and is not a teenager.