Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #138

[AC4RD]

... ... is there any sort of device that can infiltrate a SnapChat conversation? A scanner, HAM radio, that sort of thing? ...

Finally, here's a question I can answer with absolute certainty: 99% "no."

If this snapchat is done via cellphone, some LE agencies can intercept it with $12K devices and a warrant. That device is illegal to own, otherwise. No ordinary "radio scanner" (also called a "police scanner") could do it, and it would be illegal to own one if it could. And no ham radio equipment could do it; simply impossible. I call it "99%" because it's possible someone might have bought a black-market cellphone interceptor, though it's IMO very very unlikely.

If the snapchat data is sent over wifi, then it *might* be possible to eavesdrop, for someone in wifi range with your router's password. I don't know about that, and 'might be possible' is just a guess.

I've held the highest class of FCC amateur radio license for most of my life, build some of my own equipment, and routinely contact other hams all around the world, from Palmyra Atoll to Swaziland, using less transmitter power than a small lightbulb. "AC4RD," my screen name, is my FCC-issued callsign. A lot of us hams use our callsigns for online ID because in theory, they are absolutely the only such callsign in the world, so it's a unique ID. 73! dit-dit

 

[JnRyan]

It can, if we consider what a young mother AW was, for example. It could hint at the guy's age, too. If he considers both 30+ year-old moms, and their teenage daughters, attractive, then he is probably in late 20es - early 30es, and probably suffering from hebephilia, but not necessarily pedophilia.

I don't really have any thoughts as to age. Our second sketch looks like someone who could be as young as 17 or 18. (But then ISP Superintendent Carter said he could be someone who just looks young for his age.) Robert Brashers was assaulting women when he was in his mid 20's, committed his first murder - that we know of - when he was 32. BUT he was 39-40 when he was assaulting young teens and preteens and 40 when he murdered/assaulted the mother and 12 yo daughter. And back to the sketches, we again have ISP's Carter saying he could look like a combination of the older looking first sketch and the younger sketch. I'd be interested to hear what the FBI's BAU thinks. I also wonder if the profilers had an influence in the decision to go with the younger looking 2nd sketch.

 

[JnRyan]

this snapchat is done via cellphone, some LE agencies can intercept it with $12K devices and a warrant. That device is illegal to own, otherwise. No ordinary "radio scanner" (also called a "police scanner") could do it, and it would be illegal to own one if it could. And no ham radio equipment could do it; simply impossible. I call it "99%" because it's possible someone might have bought a black-market cellphone interceptor, though it's IMO very very unlikely.

If the snapchat data is sent over wifi, then it *might* be possible to eavesdrop, for someone in wifi range with your router's password. I don't know about that, and 'might be possible' is just a guess.

I've held the highest class of FCC amateur radio license for most of my life, build some of my own equipment, and routinely contact other hams all around the world, from Palmyra Atoll to Swaziland, using less transmitter power than a small lightbulb. "AC4RD," my screen name, is my FCC-issued callsign. A lot of us hams use our callsigns for online ID because in theory, they are absolutely the only such callsign in the world, so it's a unique ID. 73! dit-dit

Are these what has come to be known as Stingrays?

 

[jg580]

Over the years, I've wavered back and forth on what I thought happened and why. Who could be to blame and was it random or something more calculated. One thing I've wondered, and please don't get upset at me for asking, I'm truly just curious. But why does it seem the prevailing view is that it was a random crime and not at all connected to any of the shady things happening with members of that community (i.e. drugs for example or other criminal activity)? Has LE directly stated that they believe it was random? I'm assuming the first thing LE does is look to the "obvious" answers but then I think isn't it usually the simplest answer that ends up being correct? Sorry for the rambling...so hard to make sense out of this terrible case

 

[TTF14]

Over the years, I've wavered back and forth on what I thought happened and why. Who could be to blame and was it random or something more calculated. One thing I've wondered, and please don't get upset at me for asking, I'm truly just curious. But why does it seem the prevailing view is that it was a random crime and not at all connected to any of the shady things happening with members of that community (i.e. drugs for example or other criminal activity)? Has LE directly stated that they believe it was random? I'm assuming the first thing LE does is look to the "obvious" answers but then I think isn't it usually the simplest answer that ends up being correct? Sorry for the rambling...so hard to make sense out of this terrible case

No, they have not said that, and I am in agreement with you, that it is not random.

 

[photographer4]

How do we know that the police recovered everything from Libby's phone? Maybe it was a screenshot and he did make her delete it? In any case, this scenario requires a totally different criminal, less psychotic and more socially elevated.

There is commercially available software out there that you can buy cheaply enough online that will allow you to connect any cell phone and recover the entire contents, EVEN the stuff that has been deleted. It will find texts from both sides, photos, videos... And I know its been available at least a few years, so I imagine police could have had earlier access to it than the general public. This would be a link to the software in general...
Tenorshare UltData (iPhone Data Recovery Software) - 100% Recover Lost iPhone/iPad Data

 

[Yemelyan]

Over the years, I've wavered back and forth on what I thought happened and why. Who could be to blame and was it random or something more calculated. One thing I've wondered, and please don't get upset at me for asking, I'm truly just curious. But why does it seem the prevailing view is that it was a random crime and not at all connected to any of the shady things happening with members of that community (i.e. drugs for example or other criminal activity)? Has LE directly stated that they believe it was random? I'm assuming the first thing LE does is look to the "obvious" answers but then I think isn't it usually the simplest answer that ends up being correct? Sorry for the rambling...so hard to make sense out of this terrible case

I think some people believe that had the victims been targeted specifically (as opposed to randomly), the case might have moved along a little further than it apparently has done. After all, in a small town it is easier to investigate the drug connections, etc.

Some people believe that as the FBI and other outside agencies with expertise (such as the GBI) have been involved in this case, some since the beginning, it would be hard to imagine a situation where all electronic communication has not been thoroughly scrutinized by LE.

And some people believe that as far as what is known about the circumstances of the crime, it has some traits that just look more like predatory/hunting behavior on the part of the man responsible, which just feels more like a random crime. Of course, if we knew more about the crime scene and movements of the man and the victims, a different scenario may seem more likely.

Have LE ever directly stated that it's "random?" This statement was published in February in The Carroll County Comet by Leazenby (the "six females" are Abby and Libby plus the victims of the Flora Fire):

Q In your professional opinion, would you describe the deaths of the six females as “planned”?

A. No. Rather, “victims of circumstance or opportunity.”

Source: County Sheriff answers double homicide questions from readers | Carroll County Comet

This statement, too, can be debated as to his meaning.

To me, a "victim of circumstance or opportunity" points directly to a theory held by LE of a random crime, but others interpret differently.

 

[JnRyan]

Over the years, I've wavered back and forth on what I thought happened and why. Who could be to blame and was it random or something more calculated. One thing I've wondered, and please don't get upset at me for asking, I'm truly just curious. But why does it seem the prevailing view is that it was a random crime and not at all connected to any of the shady things happening with members of that community (i.e. drugs for example or other criminal activity)? Has LE directly stated that they believe it was random? I'm assuming the first thing LE does is look to the "obvious" answers but then I think isn't it usually the simplest answer that ends up being correct? Sorry for the rambling...so hard to make sense out of this terrible case

By "prevailing view" do you mean LE, the media and their talking head experts or here...or all of the above. If you're talking about here that maybe the case although I don't believe we've ever done a poll. (I believe it was likely random, but I'm just one person with an opinion only. And still I haven't ruled out other than random.) Heck, for at least two years LE was coy about whether or not they had DNA, let alone whether or not the crime was random. And LE evidently can't agree on the sketch. Then there is the statement that he is local and yet I saw billboards with the photo of the killer here in VA. (That he would be "local" and residing here in VA is a REAL stretch.)

And yet I can see one scenario for targeting, in a manner of speaking. If this killer - who might not live in the Delphi area - has seen the girls in town or on the trail before and sees them there that day. Then seizes the opportunity. Kind of targeted and, yet, kind of random if he didn't know in advance they would be there at that day and time.

 

[Charlot123]

Are these what has come to be known as Stingrays?

@JnRyan, can you change the name on the post you cited? I am NOT that experienced in radio devices, so whoever made the initial post was not me! ))

PS it was @AC4RD who wrote the post. Just change the name in quotation, or ask the mods to do it, please.

 

[Georgia8]

@JnRyan, can you change the name on the post you cited? I am NOT that experienced in radio devices, so whoever made the initial post was not me! ))

PS it was @AC4RD who wrote the post. Just change the name in quotation, or ask the mods to do it, please.

A poll on random vs. planned would be interesting - I am new to posting about this case but would vote planned

 

[minazoe]

A poll on random vs. planned would be interesting - I am new to posting about this case but would vote planned

planned can be pretty subjective..do you mean planned for days or planned in the parking lot? serial killers can be equipped and always in a state of planning ..I do feel like he was stalking them prior and without anyone's knowledge..I feel he had a bead on them and was going to get them somewhere as soon as they were alone.

I don't think they knew him at all and I don't think they knew they had attracted a killer.

mOO

 

[MollyDDD]

Finally, here's a question I can answer with absolute certainty: 99% "no."

If this snapchat is done via cellphone, some LE agencies can intercept it with $12K devices and a warrant. That device is illegal to own, otherwise. No ordinary "radio scanner" (also called a "police scanner") could do it, and it would be illegal to own one if it could. And no ham radio equipment could do it; simply impossible. I call it "99%" because it's possible someone might have bought a black-market cellphone interceptor, though it's IMO very very unlikely.

If the snapchat data is sent over wifi, then it *might* be possible to eavesdrop, for someone in wifi range with your router's password. I don't know about that, and 'might be possible' is just a guess.

I've held the highest class of FCC amateur radio license for most of my life, build some of my own equipment, and routinely contact other hams all around the world, from Palmyra Atoll to Swaziland, using less transmitter power than a small lightbulb. "AC4RD," my screen name, is my FCC-issued callsign. A lot of us hams use our callsigns for online ID because in theory, they are absolutely the only such callsign in the world, so it's a unique ID. 73! dit-dit

Wow! Very impressive AC4RD! One day if the power grid in this county is destroyed, YOU and others like you, will still be connected. Thanks for your feedback. IMO

 

[minazoe]

No, they have not said that, and I am in agreement with you, that it is not random.

Drugs are bad and cause a lot of bad stuff...and definitely many criminals have drug problems..BUT....bizarre sex murders of young girls in the woods are rarely associated to drugs..sure..traffiking and other kinds of sex murders do happen but this is much different..and drug people have one motivation and thats to get drugs..

a crime like this is not a drug crime, gang crime, retribution crime over drug dealing..no way...

if there's a snitch or a rip off they don't run out and kill the children.

would be a very rare case.

mOO

 

[TTF14]

Drugs are bad and cause a lot of bad stuff...and definitely many criminals have drug problems..BUT....bizarre sex murders of young girls in the woods are rarely associated to drugs..sure..traffiking and other kinds of sex murders do happen but this is much different..and drug people have one motivation and thats to get drugs..

a crime like this is not a drug crime, gang crime, retribution crime over drug dealing..no way...

if there's a snitch or a rip off they don't run out and kill the children.

would be a very rare case.

mOO

Agree. I don't think this is about a drug debt.

 

[Charlot123]

From time to time I think it was targeted, and honestly, these are small phrases uttered in the very beginning, such as “one girl could have escaped”, or “the girls had no business to be on the bridge”, or even TL’s “victim-specific”, that make me wonder if there was a concrete reason to kill at least one of them.

At other times, I feel that LE themselves are oblivious as to who and why, and the murders are random.

The psychological portrait of the killer in each version is different.

(But in neither is the murderer JBC…nor is he a local druglord.)

My feeling - if targeted, this case will either be solved, or, if not, ten years from now, the true version will be mentioned as one of the possibilities.

If random, the case has all the potential of never being solved.

 

[FromGermany1]

Agree. I don't think this is about a drug debt.

Haven't to be debts. What, if someone was seen dealing with drugs (dealer and buyer), who doesn't want to be associated with drugs, because of his status or more important reasons. Questions remains: Why did he know, he was seen??

 

[AC4RD]

... One thing I've wondered, and please don't get upset at me for asking, I'm truly just curious. But why does it seem the prevailing view is that it was a random crime and not at all connected to any of the shady things happening with members of that community ...

JG, nobody is upset, amigo! We are all here to discuss opinions and ideas! Random vs targeted is an ongoing issue and there are (IMO) good arguments for both. I'm on the "random" side for several reasons; minazoe's "druggies don't kill children over other people's arguments" is a good one. I also suspect that it would be less likely to *plan* to kill two healthy young women than it would be to do it (instead of finding just one target of opportunity) on the spur of the moment. But we all respect differing opinions, and welcome having another person participating in the discussion!

BTW, Mollie, we hams practice every year, 3/4s of the hams in the US and many overseas, operating with emergency power and emergency antennas, for just that "grid down" event. We also help several times a year in the US when communications are out after a hurricane or tornado. The Red Cross and most state emergency agencies are participants in exercises, too. Most of us do it for fun, but serving in emergencies is also one of the reasons we do it. Thanks for the nice words!

 

[Shanabanana]

Not MO. Signatures. The story of Bitsa maniac was an eye-opener to me, maybe because they provided so much information. He was active from 2001 to 2006, while his first killing he committed in 1992 at the age of 18. All in all, 49 victims. MO stayed the same for a while, then changed. Victim profile was predominantly the same, but some victims were younger.

About signatures. In Bitsa case, I think, writing a number on a chessboard square and covering that square with paper after each murder could be definitely viewed as a signature. But since 2005, he developed another signature (certain pm manipulation with the bodies, always the same, not posing or staging, not necessarily at all and not MO). So I would assume that signatures can emerge in the course of the killer’s activity, and new signatures can be added to old ones. I think he even explained why he did it the first time, and then, he continued.

But about them being unchanged. Bitsa maniac was asked whether he would have stopped killing, having filled in all 64 squares of his board. The maniac replied that he had thought about it and decided to buy a 100-square checkerboard and just continue after the 64-square board would be filled in. So, perhaps, this testifies to some possible margin of variations in signatures?

TY for explaining this. It is definitely new to me and I had to update my knowledge. It is not as common as for MO to change tho, if the information I found about this is up to date?

 

[MollyDDD]

A poll on random vs. planned would be interesting - I am new to posting about this case but would vote planned

Me too.

 

[MollyDDD]

JG, nobody is upset, amigo! We are all here to discuss opinions and ideas! Random vs targeted is an ongoing issue and there are (IMO) good arguments for both. I'm on the "random" side for several reasons; minazoe's "druggies don't kill children over other people's arguments" is a good one. I also suspect that it would be less likely to *plan* to kill two healthy young women than it would be to do it (instead of finding just one target of opportunity) on the spur of the moment. But we all respect differing opinions, and welcome having another person participating in the discussion!

BTW, Mollie, we hams practice every year, 3/4s of the hams in the US and many overseas, operating with emergency power and emergency antennas, for just that "grid down" event. We also help several times a year in the US when communications are out after a hurricane or tornado. The Red Cross and most state emergency agencies are participants in exercises, too. Most of us do it for fun, but serving in emergencies is also one of the reasons we do it. Thanks for the nice words!

You are quite welcome. Keep up the good work.