Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #131

[Boxer]

I agree that LE is holding things tight, that there is a lot that we don't know, and it makes it more difficult for those of us trying to help. But I have come to see through so many much better informed people (than myself) on here, that it is necessary in order to make sure that the case is tight to ensure the MONSTER is convicted.

MOO appears what they have is needed to convict, so they will not release.

 

[Pyschsandi]

Wow, I've never seen this before. That could really put a lot in context with regards to the girls' awareness of what was happening and their actions that may have followed. Does anyone remember someone close to the case- possibly a relative- saying that in the audio one of the girls says "He's behind you" at some point about BG? I feel like I remember hearing it on one of the YouTube interviews or something but I could just be misremembering something I read here that people were discussing as a possibility.

It makes more sense that Libby would video BG over her shoulder more than putting the phone so low. If one of the girls said he’s behind you, then it seems more plausible that she wouldn’t want to look at him and just use her phone to look.

 

[MistyWaters]

I agree that LE is holding things tight, that there is a lot that we don't know, and it makes it more difficult for those of us trying to help. But I have come to see through so many much better informed people (than myself) on here, that it is necessary in order to make sure that the case is tight to ensure the MONSTER is convicted.

In regard to people trying to help, I think the way to help is for anyone who believes they know who the suspect is to send in a tip hoping it’s that last piece of the puzzle LE is seeking - based on his appearance, association to Delphi and/or things he’s said. Otherwise LE has stated several times they don’t require investigation suggestions from the general public to help them solve the case.

You’re right, I agree that releasing evidence to the public would prove counter-productive prior to an arrest and trial occurring. If, as LE would like to believe, he’s told others about this crime then it would become impossible to differentiate between the source of the information - the suspect or the media.

 

[Wolverbear]

I think that if LE had meant the latter definition they might have called it "force" instead of "manipulation" but of course, we have no real way of knowing.

I would propose that one could also probably use manipulation to describe a scenario where BG initially gains compliance without force under the guise of an authority figure (bridge worker/employee, security guard/LE, property owner). For example if BG were to initially present as someone who works for the owner of the bridge and is there to inspect it, if he is able to get them fully off the bridge voluntarily using feigned concern for their safety. I wouldn't be surprised to hear LE describe it as manipulation if something like that were to have happened, and I'm not really making the case it did just sharing how my mind processes the use of manipulation in this context.

 

[Nancy1954]

I have wondered from the beginning if Libby might have cleverly taken the picture of Abby on the bridge, and then the black and white picture of the bridge facing in the other direction, to get a good look as to whether they were possibly being followed by the "weird guy." As we can clearly see he wasn't in sight in either picture, yet he soon was. For the girls to be discussing him tells me that they had at least seen him before getting on the bridge. Perhaps they thought the bridge would be the safest place to hang out while waiting for Libby's dad with the MONSTER lurking around. With the condition of the bridge they didn't think he'd get on it.

JMO

 

[photographer4]

Anything that is not seen under the clothes, I assume.
- skin disease (e.g. psoriasis)
- tattoos
- scars
- Maybe, evidence of a certain prior illness?
- or some problem leading to unusual gait?
- certain asymmetry of R and L foot?
- he spat on the bridge. We don’t know what was in the sputum (Tb? Lung cancer?)
- last but not least, vasectomy, or issues causing impotence?



I can only imagine (and the easiest answer is obvious - whoever the witnesses saw was so high on stimulants that his pupils were wide).

However, I hope, and hence, imagine. In Parabon’s phenotypic analysis, if the eye color would come as “green/hazel”, as it sometimes happens, they’d have to say, “unknown”.

DNA. A case in Ontario, Canada spanning back to the mid 80's was solved in Oct 2020 due to the perp having committed suicide. Police found his blood was still retained at the place that did his autopsy and used the blood to match him to someone in his family tree online... when they found out who his family was, they were able to figure out who he was. He had been a friend of the family at the time, and this was a horrific murder. The way he left his victim is unbelievable! I'm skipping the gory details but if you google Christine Jessop, you'll learn just how awful this case was! Incidentally, this appears to have been his only murder (that police know of so far), and it doesn't appear that he ever told a soul, including his wife whom he had been married to at the time of the crime. She didn't even seem to suspect him, and was shocked when police told her.
How DNA and a genealogy website helped lead to the killer of Christine Jessop

 

[MistyWaters]

I would propose that one could also probably use manipulation to describe a scenario where BG initially gains compliance without force under the guise of an authority figure (bridge worker/employee, security guard/LE, property owner). For example if BG were to initially present as someone who works for the owner of the bridge and is there to inspect it, if he is able to get them fully off the bridge voluntarily using feigned concern for their safety. I wouldn't be surprised to hear LE describe it as manipulation if something like that were to have happened, and I'm not really making the case it did just sharing how my mind processes the use of manipulation in this context.

IMO Leazenby was provided the list of Comet questions in advance and his responses were very carefully crafted. I agree, for the questions he did answer, his responses seem as intentionally ambiguous as possible, within the confines of the English language.

 

[photographer4]

IMO Leazenby was provided the list of Comet questions in advance and his responses were very carefully crafted. I agree, for the questions he did answer, his responses seem as intentionally ambiguous as possible, within the confines of the English language.

I wonder if the offer to answer questions at all was with the hope that some of the questions submitted might be of interest to investigators. LE have stated the killer wants to know what they know. Its possible they were looking for something specific in the submissions. Who knows? If so, I wonder what they thought they might get, and whether or not the tactic worked (if it was a tactic at all)?

 

[Boxer]

I would propose that one could also probably use manipulation to describe a scenario where BG initially gains compliance without force under the guise of an authority figure (bridge worker/employee, security guard/LE, property owner). For example if BG were to initially present as someone who works for the owner of the bridge and is there to inspect it, if he is able to get them fully off the bridge voluntarily using feigned concern for their safety. I wouldn't be surprised to hear LE describe it as manipulation if something like that were to have happened, and I'm not really making the case it did just sharing how my mind processes the use of manipulation in this context.

Sheriff has said the crime begs. Immediately after the video taken.
Lying to gain control or producing a weapon to compel compliance would both fit.

 

[Deerrun]

I wonder if the offer to answer questions at all was with the hope that some of the questions submitted might be of interest to investigators. LE have stated the killer wants to know what they know. Its possible they were looking for something specific in the submissions. Who knows? If so, I wonder what they thought they might get, and whether or not the tactic worked (if it was a tactic at all)?

I wondered with Leazenvy's Q&A if LE was hoping BG would communicate with a question(s) Maybe LE thinks BG wants to know what they know bad enough to do this. Jmo

 

[sunshineray]

That would probably made the most sense to me as to why filming him if his behavior was instead of threatening to rather strange or talking to himself loudly.
I of course understand that the girls couldn't have known the danger they would be in. But for some reason I find that recording someone when you feel something feels off about them is a strange course of action. But yet im not a teen and I'm from different continent so maybe that is why I find it strange.

I, like others have also mentioned, think Libby's reason may have been to show her Dad or Grandpa the weird guy that was on the trails that day.

 

[sunshineray]

Or: something / someone distracted her and she may have simply been unable to stop the recording, or she may have forgotten to. Interestingly, we're not shown any video with the audio of "guys", "down the hill". We don't know at what point this happened. It could have been right off the side of the bridge as portrayed in so many news stories / youtube videos, or it may have been some other place in their abduction. Why have police not shown the accompanying video for the audio they've released?

Maybe Libby had slipped her phone in her pocket by then?

 

[Fika]

I would propose that one could also probably use manipulation to describe a scenario where BG initially gains compliance without force under the guise of an authority figure (bridge worker/employee, security guard/LE, property owner). For example if BG were to initially present as someone who works for the owner of the bridge and is there to inspect it, if he is able to get them fully off the bridge voluntarily using feigned concern for their safety. I wouldn't be surprised to hear LE describe it as manipulation if something like that were to have happened, and I'm not really making the case it did just sharing how my mind processes the use of manipulation in this context.

I think of manipulation in the same context. If he pretended to be someone working for some authority would he aproach them with basically an order guys down the hill? Seems a bit rough way as authority to aproach someone and would immediately ring bells in my head this is wrong. I would expect he would pretend better to be an authority to get them down in a nicer way for them to be manipulated and follow him because they believed him.

 

[TL4S]

I think of manipulation in the same context. If he pretended to be someone working for some authority would he aproach them with basically an order guys down the hill? Seems a bit rough way as authority to aproach someone and would immediately ring bells in my head this is wrong. I would expect he would pretend better to be an authority to get them down in a nicer way for them to be manipulated and follow him because they believed him.

Yeah, I agree. I have trouble picturing him trying to pretend to be a bridge worker or whatever. I see the "manipulation and intimidation" as more likely the threat of harm than the threat of getting in trouble. JMO

Q. Do you know how the murderer was able to gain control of both girls at once?

A. It is believed by manipulation and intimidation factors.

 

[Fika]

Yeah, I agree. I have trouble picturing him trying to pretend to be a bridge worker or whatever. I see the "manipulation and intimidation" as more likely the threat of harm than the threat of getting in trouble. JMO

Q. Do you know how the murderer was able to gain control of both girls at once?

A. It is believed by manipulation and intimidation factors.

It's very easy to to intimidate someone who is in vulnerable position. For example being alone in isolated area it's a very vulnerable position. Someone doesn't need to have a weapon to have victims comply with fear. And all happens in seconds its hard to understand what is really happening until it's too late.

 

[Inthedetails]

It's very easy to to intimidate someone who is in vulnerable position. For example being alone in isolated area it's a very vulnerable position. Someone doesn't need to have a weapon to have victims comply with fear. And all happens in seconds its hard to understand what is really happening until it's too late.

I envision something like this at the end of the bridge, when they realized he was gaining control of them:

Libby: My dad is here - he's waiting for us
BG: This won't take long. Guys....
Girls: Huh?
BG: ...down the hill.

Speculation, of course.

jmo

 

[Fika]

I envision something like this at the end of the bridge, when they realized he was gaining control of them:

Libby: My dad is here - he's waiting for us
BG: This won't take long. Guys....
Girls: Huh?
BG: ...down the hill.

Speculation, of course.

jmo

I imagine something like that. He came towards them blocked their way and said guys down the hill.. It happened really fast. They probably didn't understand at first what he wants or what is going on. I believe it settled after a while when they realized they are in real danger but it was too late to do anything at this point. Its my opinion of course anything could have happened.

 

[Inthedetails]

I imagine something like that. He came towards them blocked their way and said guys down the hill.. It happened really fast. They probably didn't understand at first what he wants or what is going on. I believe it settled after a while when they realized they are in real danger but it was too late to do anything at this point. Its my opinion of course anything could have happened.

Yes, and as they got off the trail, he might have then grabbed one of them - saying if they screamed, he would hurt the friend. He likely reassured them - manipulated them - by telling them they could go soon if they cooperated.

Once they were down the hill, it was much harder to run away, too.

I don't think a weapon was required. Speculation.

jmo

 

[Fika]

Yes, and as they got off the trail, he might have then grabbed one of them - saying if they screamed, he would hurt the friend. He likely reassured them - manipulated them - by telling them they could go soon if they cooperated.

Once they were down the hill, it was much harder to run away, too.

I don't think a weapon was required. Speculation.

jmo

I agree. In my opinion he had a hold of one of them and other one listened because she was scared her friend will be hurt. Often this itself works to gain hold of two or more people. He might have also mentioned he has a weapon but didn't. Often the unknown of what other person might do is enough to listen to them. I also don't think he used a weapon to get them down the hill but rather used their fear and their friendship against them. my opinion.

 

[TL4S]

I envision something like this at the end of the bridge, when they realized he was gaining control of them:

Libby: My dad is here - he's waiting for us
BG: This won't take long. Guys....
Girls: Huh?
BG: ...down the hill.

Speculation, of course.

jmo

It's impossible to know, but I've always imagined right after the video, the girls stepped a little away from the bridge and sort of tried to avoid him in the hopes he was going to turn around and go back across while they waited. Maybe even avoiding eye contact. So when he reaches the end, he says, "Guys...," they look over at him, he has a weapon, or he grabs one, "down the hill." Just my thoughts.