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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
In reply to LeBlack's "But did anyone else see a disguise?" Yuletide said:
I ... he could have flashed a badge and ordered them off the bridge to gain control.
YT, absolutely, that's a very plausible-sounding method of making the girls believe he was an authority figure. LeBlack, that's a great question and of course, we know almost nothing about what others saw at the trails that day; LE is keeping the cards close to the vest. "Did anyone else see a disguise?" suggests the counterquestion, "Or perhaps did someone see BG and not realize it was a disguise?"

This case has unanswered questions the way an old barn has mice.
 
Are we allowed to post a picture speculating about what the bridge guy had on him in the photo? I photoshopped what I think is under his coat on top of his photo and show how I believe his hand is holding it. I’d love to hear at least one persons opinion. ... Is anyone up for speculating about what I recently noticed in the photo?

I'm not very good at the rules (ask the moderators!) ;-) but my understanding is that sheer speculation is fine as long as it's clearly marked as your opinion, does not blame victims and families, and does not accuse any particular person unjustly.

That being said, if what you think is under his coat is a taser, a pistol, or a puppy, those have been discussed before. :) Though there's no problem with bringing points up multiple times--it's more for us to respectfully consider and think about. And AFAIK there hasn't been any discussion of what *breed* of puppy it was under his coat. ;-)
 
Merry Christmas to all fellow members! :)

Merry Christmas to all of you.

I am thinking of Abigail and Liberty’s families and all the families who have loved ones who are missing or who have been killed today. I can’t imagine how difficult it must be for them today and every day.

Hopefully this will be the last Christmas BG has without being charged and facing spending the rest of their life behind bars for what they did to Abigail and Liberty.
 
I think that all the wild speculation on this case is something akin to "background static" that prosecutors may effectually use to demonstrate that online discussion did not amount to any particular bias and in that sense it is good.

Some things, to me, seem extremely obvious like that the girls video recorded a little digitally zoomed in clip of this (suspicious) guy approaching them then there was some kind of interaction that led to him telling them to come down the hill, which they caught on audio. I initially was inclined to think some kind of threat was involved despite the casual tone but since the catfishing profile's official association with the case I've come to believe that deception is more likely to have been the tool than intimidation.

I think that some other posters are taking what law enforcement has said and more importantly what they've not said as being gospel truth. There is definitely a lot more to the case than what we're being told and it seems silly to argue that what we haven't been told is definitely not there. The catfishing thing and teenage girl hormones make perfect sense as to why entire key elements of the case are not officially known.

Are we allowed to post a picture speculating about what the bridge guy had on him in the photo? I photoshopped what I think is under his coat on top of his photo and show how I believe his hand is holding it. I’d love to hear at least one persons opinion.

Is anyone up for speculating about what I recently noticed in the photo?
I feel bad that your photoshop appealed to my dark sense of humor on several levels, the idea of someone carrying a small-medium sized dog under his coat across an unrailed 50+ foot high wooden foot bridge to pull out and lure teenage girls with. The shoop itself also lended to the image although it also clearly illustrated exactly what you were looking at to see that. I hate to find any amusement in this case but it did amuse me.
 
GH says that Abby's mother told him that in the extended audio the parents were allowed to hear the girls said "he's got a gun" and there was the audible cocking of a gun and the recording they listened to cut off at that point.
MOO the threat was immediate and overwhelming.
 
GH says that Abby's mother told him that in the extended audio the parents were allowed to hear the girls said "he's got a gun" and there was the audible cocking of a gun and the recording they listened to cut off at that point.
MOO the threat was immediate and overwhelming.
Yeah I don't listen to podcasts so I had to Google who "GH" is and the information to which you are referring. From what I gather, this person "Gray Hughes" says he is corresponding with someone who claims to know someone pseudonymously referred to as "Annie" and he says on his podcast that his unnamed correspondent source was told by "Annie" that "Annie" was allowed by police to listen to more of the audio in which she heard Abby say "He's got a gun". Is that accurate?

If so I'm a little surprised this is considered a credible source by the standards of this site but I didn't check his credentials so giving him the benefit of the doubt, from the tone I personally hear in the "Guys - Down the hill" audio, I think they probably had not yet seen a gun at that point.
 
Yeah I don't listen to podcasts so I had to Google who "GH" is and the information to which you are referring. From what I gather, this person "Gray Hughes" says he is corresponding with someone who claims to know someone pseudonymously referred to as "Annie" and he says on his podcast that his unnamed correspondent source was told by "Annie" that "Annie" was allowed by police to listen to more of the audio in which she heard Abby say "He's got a gun". Is that accurate?

If so I'm a little surprised this is considered a credible source by the standards of this site but I didn't check his credentials so giving him the benefit of the doubt, from the tone I personally hear in the "Guys - Down the hill" audio, I think they probably had not yet seen a gun at that point.
Well he is so far an approved WS source and has had a lot of personal contact with the families on this case.

I do see what you mean about his tone.
 
I still see the possibility the killer knew the girls were to be at the bridge, but not necessarily was it a planned meetup.

Anyway, the idea that there is nothing of importance on the rest of the recording taken that day, well, this old boy has considered that notion a bit lately.

If so, if there's nothing there, then why not release it? Is it because it's too terrifying for our fragile minds to handle? Or out of respect for the families, because of the horror that's contained thereon?

Or is it that there IS evidence of importance on the rest of that recording, far and beyond girls talking girl stuff?
I think I remember something being said about the audio was the stuff that nightmares are made of...or something to that effect. Am I dreaming this???
 
I think I remember something being said about the audio was the stuff that nightmares are made of...or something to that effect. Am I dreaming this???

No, you're not dreaming. We discussed that statement at length. I did find it in an Inside Edition article, but unfortunately not a direct quote from LE.

A source familiar with the investigation described the full cell phone recording as "the stuff of nightmares."

Citizen Sleuths Spring Into Action in Indiana Murder Mystery as Reward Reaches $50G

bbm
 
I think I remember something being said about the audio was the stuff that nightmares are made of...or something to that effect. Am I dreaming this???

I don't think we can read anything specific into this statement, especially since, like @Jax49 pointed out, it was not a direct quote. I think someone's opinion of "stuff of nightmares" - if something like this was actually said - could range in extremes from "the audio was exactly like what you'd hear during a murder scene in a horror movie" all the way to "the audio depicts a man using quiet coercion/tricking two girls into being under his control." For a parent, for example, the latter is just as much "the stuff of nightmares" as the former. JMO
 
I don't think we can read anything specific into this statement, especially since, like @Jax49 pointed out, it was not a direct quote. I think someone's opinion of "stuff of nightmares" - if something like this was actually said - could range in extremes from "the audio was exactly like what you'd hear during a murder scene in a horror movie" all the way to "the audio depicts a man using quiet coercion/tricking two girls into being under his control." For a parent, for example, the latter is just as much "the stuff of nightmares" as the former. JMO

Since the encounter and subsequent recording ended in a double murder, that recording would be the stuff of nightmares no matter what it contained in my opinion. I agree with you. It could be a wide range of sounds and dialogue. I do believe he initially tricked them, so he could get them off the beaten path. I thought I had remembered someone indicating one or both girls fought fiercely. It would be my opinion that once his trickery was exposed is when they fought so hard. It makes my blood boil.

<modsnip: rumor>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Since the encounter and subsequent recording ended in a double murder, that recording would be the stuff of nightmares no matter what it contained in my opinion. I agree with you. It could be a wide range of sounds and dialogue. I do believe he initially tricked them, so he could get them off the beaten path. I thought I had remembered someone indicating one or both girls fought fiercely. It would be my opinion that once his trickery was exposed is when they fought so hard. It makes my blood boil.

I recall a reporter mentioning what looked like a stuffed animal at the crime scene. This could be gossip or wild speculation, but could a stuffed animal be in his jacket?

i don’t recall anywhere seeing anything of a stuffed animal
 
...From what I gather, this person "Gray Hughes" says he is corresponding with someone who claims to know someone pseudonymously referred to as "Annie" and he says on his podcast that his unnamed correspondent source was told by "Annie" that "Annie" was allowed by police to listen to more of the audio in which she heard Abby say "He's got a gun". Is that accurate?

I've brought this issue up, too. I wondered about the "X's mom heard a gun being cocked!" claim and a couple of people were nice enough to find the GH podcast for me and even provide a time to start listening. The GH podcasts I've heard tend to have a lot of wasted time IMO.

So what I heard on that podcast was GH apparently speaking to someone, "Y," on the phone. We don't know who Y is and we don't hear his or her voice. We are told that Y knows X, and X is significantly related to one of the girls, and that X saw or heard more of Libby's footage, and then we are told Y says that X told her that there was the sound of a gun cocking, or something else or might have been a gun cocking or whatever. I didn't pay much attention to the details because thirdhand unattributed material doesn't sound very significant to me. GH may be certain the source is sound and the stated observations are correct, but IMO that's too far from the audit trail FOR ME to be very certain of anything--your mileage may vary.

One side issue: We've talked here many times about how impressive it is that the family & friends of the girls weren't leaking inside information, right? (EW, I don't mean you and I have talked personally, just that it's been discussed here on WS.) So *if* this source is correct, and X told Y what she heard, and then Y told GH, and the information is correct--isn't that some of that "insider information leakage" that we've previously admired the delphi residents for NOT doing? (I've admired it; don't know about others.)

GH did a *really* nice job on a crime-scene walkthrough video, I found it fascinating and informative. But that was 17 minutes, not two hours of "jail cam" and "get a life" and "thank you for the donation!" and so on. MOO.
(edited to clarify we admire locals for NOT leaking info, sorry. My English is, how you say, inelegant.)
 
Last edited:
Since the encounter and subsequent recording ended in a double murder, that recording would be the stuff of nightmares no matter what it contained in my opinion. I agree with you. It could be a wide range of sounds and dialogue. I do believe he initially tricked them, so he could get them off the beaten path. I thought I had remembered someone indicating one or both girls fought fiercely. It would be my opinion that once his trickery was exposed is when they fought so hard. It makes my blood boil.

<modsnip: rumor> /QUOTE]
Agree. Knowing what came after makes anything said or done beforehand, whether soft and polite or harsh and threatening a sad and scary nightmare.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MOO BG has the print of a deep grip hand gun like a Glock or 1911 in his right hand pocket.
A gun makes sense of his immediate control in making the girls move.

MOO I don't think the girls would respond to a request for any reason, with or without the color of authority to move off the bridge end to private property without a direct threat.
 
1. If Carter was deliberately invoking religion and conscience I think we can agree that he did not likely have Chadwell or KAK in mind?

2. If a reporter on a bridge reported what they saw (re the previous post) it would be very slightly better than speculation. Does anyone have a link to that?

3. If the crime scene was strange then the crime is strange in the sense the particular desire to do X, whatever, at the crime scene should have been more easily achieved in some other way.

4. I do think it is possible (yes more speculation)the crime needed to be performed THERE for some reason known only to the killer and the victims needed to be these two girls in particular.

5. To throw in one more probably useless opinion I don't think the crime was done by Chadwell or KAK either directly or indirectly. The Anthony Shots profile was likely hi-jacked IMO and that is why LE are asking for anyone who responded or met with someone using that profile. I think it is likely that the perpetrator is more intelligent than Chadwell or KAK and that the location especially , also the appearance or name (or really anything we are not inside the killer's mind) of the girls, and the date close to February 14th Valentine's is likely VERY important.

6. Phone: is seems likely that there was not much more on the girls phones but we don't know that for sure I think? IF the crime was recorded the phone could have been left for the viewing 'pleasure' and shock of the police having to review. We actually do have evidence of something like this: LE seem to have been unusually disturbed by the crime scene beyond the obvious horror. There are endless examples like this of course one that comes to my mind is of a man wo killed a young woman in her bedroom on her birthday did all kinds of horrible things like wrapping her intestines around her head and then wrote a note on her door saying come in it's my birthday.

7. So again playing amateur psychologist I think an additional part of the crime is voyeuristic in the sense that he is getting pleasure from the crime scene discovery and likely has had a relationship with police in the past.

8. And look it obviously has worked Carter et al and we here on WS are fully in his net. Like the girls.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
217
Guests online
669
Total visitors
886

Forum statistics

Threads
607,961
Messages
18,232,059
Members
234,255
Latest member
Zxywvut
Back
Top