Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #141

[Shanabanana]

if the phone was preset days before.. you still have the same issue ( how did he know they will be there specifically at that time ) ?
its not possible this was agreed on days before when the sister took the decision herself right before the trip was made..

This is why I think that he is a killer/murderer of opportunity and that they where victims because they where the right victims at the right spot at the right time/circumstance for the murderer. I do not follow the web-grooming-planned meeting at all.

 

[Lavender Moon]

This is why I think that he is a killer/murderer of opportunity and that they where victims because they where the right victims at the right spot at the right time/circumstance for the murderer. I do not follow the web-grooming-planned meeting at all.

I've been thinking along these lines myself.

 

[iamnotagolem]

Thoughts in no particular order…

1. BGs alibi, someone may know it is a lie but don’t want to destroy someone’s life/reputation without proof

2. Means, motive, opportunity…something discussed in every case. In this case it’s predominantly alluded to being the motive is sexual, they’re teen girls, so it seems logical. But what if the motive isn’t sexual. What if it’s something else, which is why BG hasn’t been identified, everyone is looking for a sexual predator.

3. I don’t think I have a 3rd thing to address but it feels like a list should have 3 points. I just want justice for these sweet girls.

 

[mom2chloe]

Regarding your opinion about the alibi scenario, do you think this possible alibi knows that they are the alibi? And that LE is just waiting on them to come out and tell them?
Also what kind of person would do this on purpose? And why?

I have thought about this scenario before, and I think it makes the most amount of sense. But I am still unsure because of the contradicting statements LE has made over the years.
This case is so frustrating. And baffling.

MOO. JMVHO.

Hypothetically speaking, if BG’s family member was/is his alibi and said family member is into CSAM, *advertiser censored* or catfishing among other things, if BG is incarcerated they would lose access to all those types of privileges. IMO Might be perceived as a grave loss to someone who cannot live without continued access. IMO

 

[MistyWaters]

Hypothetically speaking, if BG’s family member was/is his alibi and said family member is into CSAM, *advertiser censored* or catfishing among other things, if BG is incarcerated they would lose access to all those types of privileges. IMO Might be perceived as a grave loss to someone who cannot live without continued access. IMO

I wonder if anyone would ever be charged for a criminal offence if all it took was for someone to say “he was with me”?

If there’s evidence against an accused, it’s up to the jury to weigh a say-so alibi and IMO typically it’s pretty weak.

JMO

 

[Caylee Advocate]

as far as we know, no one else has been killed in Delphi.... so this person: 1. died 2. is in jail 3. moved on somewhere distant 4. completely changed? ... maybe got seriously injured and cannot commit this sort of offense? anyone have any thoughts on what has become of BG?

JMO, my thoughts are that (1) This was pre-planned and the perp achieved what he set out to do which was to silence the girls FOREVER... why else would he carry a murder kit?

(2) The perp /(perps) are lying low fearing that LE is onto them but LE hasn't been able to disprove their alibi. Remember the statement that the public will be shocked when the perp/perps are revealed *not verbatim* Again, JMO.

 

[Boxer]

I’ve wondered that too for a long time. I finally came to the conclusion that it was a one piece puzzle.

Yes. The missing is: Who done it?

 

[Charlot123]

That's an interesting take. I'm not adept at psychology or profiling, so I have nothing to offer on any of it, but my personal thought has been that the killer was perhaps triggered by another event in his life (a death, divorce, whatever) and maybe acted out in a more profound way than he normally would have. He might have already had these tendencies, but something specifically snapped that day? Idk...

JMO - wife or gf yelled at him in the morning, and he understood that instead of a romantic Valentine dinner, he’ll have to watch TV alone. Got angry with “them wenches” and went out to look for someone to take it on.

 

[Charlot123]

A retired FBI agent I heard on a podcast suggested that some people try recreational murder, but instead of becoming regular serial killers, they find the experience unpleasant or frightening or not as satisfying as they expected. So in her suggestion: BG might have wanted to be a killer-for-pleasure but tried (Abby & Libby) it and didn't want to do it again, for whatever reason. That was this agent's belief: I'm not endorsing the idea, though it sounds plausible.

My personal opinion: the guy’s body, walk, clothes and voice were broadcasted all over. He has to lie very low to be undetected, probably, among people who never heard about Delphi murder. So it is not that he found the experience unpleasant, he was simply scared, and lying low. And now, perhaps, Covid offered its corrections. Also, he has to be asking himself, how soon will science advance to the level when that DNA will be more than enough.

 

[MollyDDD]

That knock at the door can be long delayed. In 1974 a young woman named Arlis Perry was found dead in a chapel on the Stanford University campus. A campus security guard named Stephen Crawford was on duty that night and claimed to have found the body. I would like to think Crawford, the murderer in that case, lived in absolute fear of that knock for over 40 years. He certainly didn't waste any time when the knock came: (wikipedia provides the quoted material)
----------------------------------
Murder of Arlis Perry - Wikipedia
... reviewed as a cold case ... In 2018, however, [Stephen] Crawford was definitively linked to the murder following a more advanced DNA test. On June 28, as police arrived at Crawford's residence ... with a search warrant, Crawford locked his door and committed suicide with a pistol before he could be arrested.

That’s good. So he imprisoned himself for 40 years.

 

[Charlot123]

Are you referring to the old saying, "I don't have to outrun the predator, I just have to outrun one of you"? Whereas, A&L loyalty caused them to try to help each other escape? MOO

I would think that there would have been evidence of a 3rd person, frightened and trying to run to get away. Maybe not. The searchers could have trambled the evidence enough to make that difficult to find. I guess it's possible...

Yes, remember how in the beginning they said, one of the girls had the chance to escape? It was loyalty and friendship.

Agree about the search.

 

[Charlot123]

That’s good. So he imprisoned himself for 40 years.

He lived and enjoyed life for 40 years.

But the story itself is very interesting. In so many planes.

 

[sandy_80]

I was watching an episode on ( the grim sleeper )..and the detective was saying ( we need just one phone call ) to connect the dots and the domino effect will happen or something like that ..
needless to say that never happened.. and the case took three decades to be solved thru DNA ..
it seems like a stock le phrase...

 

[FromGermany1]

What would draw a serial killer anywhere? Maybe he used up way too many killings in his home area and wasn't caught and sought areas away from his home area. Why would he have to know someone or worked or lived in the area? Think of Israel Keyes.

I believe, the killer is used to "one crime per state" perhaps. As an outdoor fan (?) he gets to know new areas (during vacation, business, events), finds them ideal or not, inspects the land immediately or later on, then plans his thrill kill (??) with the help of all sorts of maps in front of his computer - until one day the opportunity is favorable: he has returned to this explored place (for vacation, business, events), has an alibi on hand (if an important person, he might have the privilege to appear for meetings a bit late, not in time), then he does, what he planned all along. His victims may have got stalked online before or are chance victims. IMO MOO

 

[Marlo56]

Just musing here but I've been wondering for awhile how much of the "conventional wisdom" about the behavior of killers, including what we think we know about cooling off periods and re-offending, will be turned on its head by the number of cold cases that will continue to be solved by genetic genealogy. It seems to me that one unanticipated result could be finding out that a greater number of killers than previously thought do just simply stop offending due to life circumstances or are one and done. This may trigger a re-evaluation of theories on the behavior of serial killers in particular.

I have thought this about the conventional wisdom for a long time. All of the data available to us about murderers are from the ones that have been caught. We obviously have no data from the ones that get away with it.

 

[Marlo56]

Can we talk about the possibility that the killer engages in online discussions of the case?

I would think it's not an unpopular theory and I have seen it mentioned many times before, but it's problematic in that killers no longer need to use the telephone or write a physical letter - easily traceable methods of communication - to taunt LE / the media / online commentators.

I bring this up because I have found a handful of suspicious accounts over the years, particularly in YouTube comments, that I've tipped in to LE, but I imagine that they're either filtered into the crazy pile or met with a shrug, simply because I think they'd need something really strong to go on to justify requesting user information from Google, etc.

I don't know if posting screenshots of online profiles violates WS rules, so I won't - maybe it's a grey area. But I recently found an account on YT leaving an offensive remark about Abby's mother back in 2017. When I looked into the profile, I found three obvious cryptic allusions to the murders.

As I said, I tipped it in, as I did with a few others, but it's immensely frustrating because the likelihood is that LE can do nothing with this information. But my belief is that the killer will be behind at least one of these accounts, because if he's commenting on the crime, how would he be commenting? He's not going to call too much attention to himself by trolling too hard; he's not going to be offering genuinely helpful information. I believe the most likely scenario is the types of accounts I've come across - clues designed to frustrate us and lead us nowhere.

Just my opinion and something I wanted to get off my chest. I'd be grateful for any other thoughts and opinions on this, particularly if anyone knows for sure how seriously LE look at tips like this.

 

[kai]

My theory for today is that either A or L were in contact or "friends" with BG (who is/was local) online. The profile they thought they were talking to was not true in looks/location etc... They didn't go to the bridge to meet with BG. A or L shared a photo from their walk on the trail to a social media site while they were there. BG recognized where they were and saw an opportunity and arrived and then killed the girls.
Jmo and really, it's just today's theory. My ideas have changed from the beginning of this evilness often.

 

[JnRyan]

Can we talk about the possibility that the killer engages in online discussions of the case?

I would think it's not an unpopular theory and I have seen it mentioned many times before, but it's problematic in that killers no longer need to use the telephone or write a physical letter - easily traceable methods of communication - to taunt LE / the media / online commentators.

I bring this up because I have found a handful of suspicious accounts over the years, particularly in YouTube comments, that I've tipped in to LE, but I imagine that they're either filtered into the crazy pile or met with a shrug, simply because I think they'd need something really strong to go on to justify requesting user information from Google, etc.

I don't know if posting screenshots of online profiles violates WS rules, so I won't - maybe it's a grey area. But I recently found an account on YT leaving an offensive remark about Abby's mother back in 2017. When I looked into the profile, I found three obvious cryptic allusions to the murders.

As I said, I tipped it in, as I did with a few others, but it's immensely frustrating because the likelihood is that LE can do nothing with this information. But my belief is that the killer will be behind at least one of these accounts, because if he's commenting on the crime, how would he be commenting? He's not going to call too much attention to himself by trolling too hard; he's not going to be offering genuinely helpful information. I believe the most likely scenario is the types of accounts I've come across - clues designed to frustrate us and lead us nowhere.

Just my opinion and something I wanted to get off my chest. I'd be grateful for any other thoughts and opinions on this, particularly if anyone knows for sure how seriously LE look at tips like this.

It wouldn't surprise me if he visits here and Reddit as a guest and not a member.

 

[Yemelyan]

Can we talk about the possibility that the killer engages in online discussions of the case?

I would think it's not an unpopular theory and I have seen it mentioned many times before, but it's problematic in that killers no longer need to use the telephone or write a physical letter - easily traceable methods of communication - to taunt LE / the media / online commentators.

I bring this up because I have found a handful of suspicious accounts over the years, particularly in YouTube comments, that I've tipped in to LE, but I imagine that they're either filtered into the crazy pile or met with a shrug, simply because I think they'd need something really strong to go on to justify requesting user information from Google, etc.

I don't know if posting screenshots of online profiles violates WS rules, so I won't - maybe it's a grey area. But I recently found an account on YT leaving an offensive remark about Abby's mother back in 2017. When I looked into the profile, I found three obvious cryptic allusions to the murders.

As I said, I tipped it in, as I did with a few others, but it's immensely frustrating because the likelihood is that LE can do nothing with this information. But my belief is that the killer will be behind at least one of these accounts, because if he's commenting on the crime, how would he be commenting? He's not going to call too much attention to himself by trolling too hard; he's not going to be offering genuinely helpful information. I believe the most likely scenario is the types of accounts I've come across - clues designed to frustrate us and lead us nowhere.

Just my opinion and something I wanted to get off my chest. I'd be grateful for any other thoughts and opinions on this, particularly if anyone knows for sure how seriously LE look at tips like this.

Just an opinion but in this day and age I imagine it would be nearly impossible for him not to want to keep some sort of eye on what people are saying about the case online. So yes - in some capacity I would think he is watching or keeping tabs at the very least.

 

[infinit]

Can we talk about the possibility that the killer engages in online discussions of the case?

I would think it's not an unpopular theory and I have seen it mentioned many times before, but it's problematic in that killers no longer need to use the telephone or write a physical letter - easily traceable methods of communication - to taunt LE / the media / online commentators.

I bring this up because I have found a handful of suspicious accounts over the years, particularly in YouTube comments, that I've tipped in to LE, but I imagine that they're either filtered into the crazy pile or met with a shrug, simply because I think they'd need something really strong to go on to justify requesting user information from Google, etc.

I don't know if posting screenshots of online profiles violates WS rules, so I won't - maybe it's a grey area. But I recently found an account on YT leaving an offensive remark about Abby's mother back in 2017. When I looked into the profile, I found three obvious cryptic allusions to the murders.

As I said, I tipped it in, as I did with a few others, but it's immensely frustrating because the likelihood is that LE can do nothing with this information. But my belief is that the killer will be behind at least one of these accounts, because if he's commenting on the crime, how would he be commenting? He's not going to call too much attention to himself by trolling too hard; he's not going to be offering genuinely helpful information. I believe the most likely scenario is the types of accounts I've come across - clues designed to frustrate us and lead us nowhere.

Just my opinion and something I wanted to get off my chest. I'd be grateful for any other thoughts and opinions on this, particularly if anyone knows for sure how seriously LE look at tips like this.

I guess there's a whole spectrum of possibilities from him not wanting to see/read anything about it, through to him keeping track of media/online silently to then actively participating.

If they were actively participating I do wonder how their activity would correlate to events over the years e.g. would they be less active after events like the press conferences when images/video/audio got released due to a fear of the game being close to up when perhaps you'd expect a neutral user to be more interested at those times? Or would they revel in it?

Honestly I'd be surprised if he was going around leaving clues over the public internet, I'd more expect him to slip up in dark web chatrooms and the like. But I guess stranger things have happened...

JMO.