Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #142

[Lavender Moon]

Once again I assume that to be a religious reference by DC because “what are they experiencing today”, rather than revealing evidence in a round about way. As they’re deceased some would say nada, what do dead people experience? My translation of what he said is the killer left them dead but now they’re with god in heaven. The killer would know how he left them, so what other reason would DC have for saying that? I think only in our imagination is anything said to drop hints or clue to benefit the curious general public.

This is what I think about that comment , too. I believe he meant they are in Heaven now.

 

[Lavender Moon]

Once again I assume that to be a religious reference by DC because “what are they experiencing today”, rather than revealing evidence in a round about way. As they’re deceased some would say nada, what do dead people experience? My translation of what he said is the killer left them dead but now they’re with god in heaven. The killer would know how he left them, so what other reason would DC have for saying that? I think only in our imagination is anything said to drop hints or clue to benefit the curious general public.

This is what I think about that comment , too. I believe he meant they are in Heaven now.

 

[Lavender Moon]

Ita. This is what leads me to believe that these gruesome murders were premeditated, and that he spent time with them after the fact.
JMVHO. m()(). ymmv

I agree. I do not think this was a spontaneous, blitz attack. At the same time, although I believe it's possible, I really don't think these dear girls were stalked before they were dropped off by Libby's sister. MOO

 

[AC4RD]

... who knows enough about DNA and forensics to not leave DNA at the scene.

JnR, you'll forgive me if I bring up one rather pedantic point, that we might consider: "Did not leave DNA evidence" and "no DNA evidence was found" are two different matters.

I'm sure the police did the best job they were able, searching for physical evidence. But if BG cut his hand chasing the girls through the brush (as an example) and left drops of his blood 60 feet away, or his skin cells were on dozens of sapling trunks from using them as handholds (as another example): he may well have LEFT some physical DNA evidence, without that evidence's being FOUND.

 

[AC4RD]

Unclear, except he may have heard from LE or the cellular carrier that Libby's phone pinged at different times off different towers near Delphi and assumed this meant movement. In fact, the tower that the phone connects with at any given time can change even while the phone is stationary - it's more complicated than just connecting to the nearest one. MOO

... and as another point of discussion, as you know, Libby's grandfather wouldn't have any way of knowing what cell towers were pinged and when, on the day they disappeared. LE wouldn't have had the information from the cellular provider until late on the 13th at the soonest, and nobody would know without the provider's information To paraphrase Nigel Tufnel, "You can't really dust for cellphone pings." So people may well have been searching all through the town that evening, among other search locations, but it could hardly have been because somebody knew what towers were pinged.

 

[sandy_80]

what if the first sketch witnesses refused to accept and back the first sketch ..for ex saying ( his face was covered and this is not ) or he didnt wear a hat like that..or they didnt agree on a certain aspect
this made le lose interest in the first sketch ( combined with other elements ) and go back for the second just because ( the witness was positive about it or somthin )..
there is one thing that is def...they have two sets of witnesses
and deciding to take someone's word over another ..even though they are eventually just witnesses and no one knows whom or what they saw

 

[JnRyan]

JnR, you'll forgive me if I bring up one rather pedantic point, that we might consider: "Did not leave DNA evidence" and "no DNA evidence was found" are two different matters.

I'm sure the police did the best job they were able, searching for physical evidence. But if BG cut his hand chasing the girls through the brush (as an example) and left drops of his blood 60 feet away, or his skin cells were on dozens of sapling trunks from using them as handholds (as another example): he may well have LEFT some physical DNA evidence, without that evidence's being FOUND.

Which goes back to my statement before that.....Was he REALLY that good OR was he really VERY lucky?

 

[Peppery]

Which goes back to my statement before that.....Was he REALLY that good OR was he really VERY lucky?

I think it’s a lot of both

 

[FromGermany1]

not if the abduction and the murder were fast..
i think the abduction happened around 2:15 or a lil more ..the arguing couple or others at the scene would start to arrive after 3 ..so i would say thats round a 40 minutes window which isnt very limited

I meant an abduction for several hours to a different place.

 

[MollyDDD]

I completely agree, I’m sure nothing less than horrific describes such a discovery regarding murdered children regardless of the circumstances. It need not refer to anything more. I don’t think anyone would expect LE to normalize the finding of two dead teens and if they had, we’d be criticizing them for that as well. Sometimes I wonder, by extensively focusing on this case, if we become desensitized towards the human trauma which occurred after discovery of the two victims. Nobody has mentioned PTSD but it still must’ve been a horrible shock. JMO

Naturally, finding a murdered child or adult is a horrific, shocking and traumatic experience, for anyone, that goes without saying. IMO, LE adding the word “brutally” murdered rather than “murdered”, implies to me only apparently, that the method and weapon used to kill them was especially brutal. For example, rather then a single gun shot wound to the head, causing instant death, they may have suffered immensely before they died. Tortured, beaten, repeatedly stabbed, their bodies brutalized, in other words. That scene, IMO, would describe a “brutal murder”, regardless of the age of the victim.

 

[sunshineray]

Once again I assume that to be a religious reference by DC because “what are they experiencing today”, rather than revealing evidence in a round about way. As they’re deceased some would say nada, what do dead people experience? My translation of what he said is the killer left them dead but now they’re with god in heaven. The killer would know how he left them, so what other reason would DC have for saying that? I think only in our imagination is anything said to drop hints or clue to benefit the curious general public.

MistyWaters, I respectfully disagree with you. I get a strong feeling that the things he said, after saying he wanted to directly address the killer who could be in the room, were said to BG about what he actually did to his victims. I think those things said weren't just generically religious nor for the public's benefit.

I've always felt there was a betrayal of sorts involved in some way between LE and the killer. It's the main reason I can't fully get on board with JBC. I think the killer involved himself within the investigative machine somehow and was trusted in some way.

I feel ISP Carter wasn't just making a religious statement. He was too vehement and direct. Those words to the killer weren't meant to comfort the public, they were meant to rile a monster. AJMO

 

[sunshineray]

I meant an abduction for several hours to a different place.

I'm curious. Do you think the girls were removed and then brought back when all the searchers were out and about at the Delphi trails? There were so many people how would the killer have returned them unnoticed?

 

[bradfordsleuth]

Anytime you can bring publicity to a case that needs it, that is probably a good thing. However, in this case, I have a hard time understanding what people are going to be looking for to help solve the case.

Are people supposed to be on the lookout for the most recent description of the suspect, the sketch #2 from April 2019 press conference or are they supposed to be on the lookout for the person from the video? Are they supposed to be looking for both? How are people going to differentiate between the two? According to the 2019 press conference, the person depicted in that sketch "is the person responsible for the murders of these two little girls." If the person in the video is the suspect on the bridge, but the person from the second sketch is the person responsible for the murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German, how can that be?

I think the police are wrong about the description and age of the suspect in this case, but I think many other people will circulate the second sketch because why wouldn't they? What if the reason this person is not caught is because even with circulating sketches, going on tv programs, and discussing this case publicly, the picture everyone has in their head about the suspect is wrong.

I think that first and foremost that the video and the audio that Libby recorded need to be shown everywhere possible.
That's what needs to be in the spotlight.

The focus doesn't even have to be on the second sketch being the person in the video, because the audio and video speak for themselves.

People just need to know that the audio and the video are the same person.

To put it bluntly, I feel like saying *advertiser censored** the stupid blasted confusing sketches.

According to what LE says, the second sketch (April 22, 2019) and the most recent description are what people need to look for, but I think that those sketches are only a valuable tool for a very minimal number of people.

Namely, those who were right in proximity of the bridge that day who actually saw someone on February 13, 2017.
Those are the people who need to ask themselves whom they saw that day.

It's too bad those (IMO) vastly different sketches turned this case into such a s**t show, and as a result, many people have lost confidence in what LE says when they release information now. I can certainly see why.....and it is so darn frustrating.

I wonder how many people saw the first sketch released on July 17, 2017 and decided it didn't resemble anyone whom they saw that day so they never came forward when it was released?

Alternatively, I also wonder if the person who helped create the second sketch released on April 22, 2019 ever saw the person depicted in that drawing ever again before, or even after, it was released? What a complete jolt of terror they must have felt when they saw it unveiled that day...knowing that LE took over two years to publicly associate the face they saw with the terrible crimes committed that day.

Quoted bbm. You've been very consistent in your opinion about this pretty much from when you first started posting on this case. I think you have even mentioned previously that you believe that LE was guessing with the sketches.

I am curious if it is because your sure that BG is the refrigerator truck driver that you saw who dressed and looked just like the person in the video, or if it is because you lost confidence in LE when they released the second sketch and it didn't fit the face of the person you pictured who was in the video?

JMO

 

[MollyDDD]

Hello, im a new poster here and recent follower of the thread, although i have a fairly good knowledge of the case.
Anyway.. i was wondering how often the theory of more perpetrators has been discussed, and why it might have been discredited?
Just speculating, it could help explain how A and L were coerced, and maybe even the two different sketches..

On a second note, i was wondering if there is a rumor masterpost, i know we're not to spread or link to rumors and such, but i have seen discussion of ie scarves and text messages before.
I heard SO many different things taken for "true" that i struggle to figure out what was fake and what "just might be real but probably not"

Thanks!

Welcome Claudia. I too have read other sources and the rampant rumors, dare I say we probably all have. However, you can gain a little better understanding about the family dynamics and their history, not to mention interesting information about the possible suspects.
Things you won’t necessarily find on WS due to TOS.
It can help you get a better overall picture and make it easier to decipher what’s possible, what’s probable and what’s plausible. IMO

 

[bradfordsleuth]

The first audio that the police released was not cleaned up--I only discovered that a month ago listening to podcasts on a trip. The original audio was very muffled and it was nearly impossible for me to tell what was being said. The version we are familiar with ("Guys ...") has been cleaned of noise by a very skilled lab process. I'm a bit under the weather and can't offer to find the original audio but I'm sure it's available--and you're right, the original is very different. For all we know, the speaker's actual voice differs from what we've heard in some ways--IMO.

Just before the 29 minute mark at this February 22, 2017 press conference is the first time the 'down the hill' audio was released.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?ref=watch_permalink&v=10154728963476130

It does sound quite different than the audio released on April 22, 2019

At around the 9 minute mark is the first time we hear the 'guys......down the hill' audio.

Quoted bbm.
Made me think that lots of things can effect the way a persons' voice changes over the years.

I have a family member who's voice later changed significantly after she was intubated during a surgery.

JMO

 

[MollyDDD]

It's been said by some former LE (3 former FBI Special Agents on a podcast) that they thought BG had prepared a lair ahead of time. I'm not a regular podcast listener so trying to find the correct one in so many is difficult. Maybe someone knows the one I'm referencing? TIA if anyone knows offhand.

It's also been mentioned that BG was still there when Libby's Dad arrived and started looking for the girls.

Timestamp 2:04:20 discussing the killer still being there after DG was there looking for the girls. So it seems, for whatever reasons, the Delphi killer could have hung around well after DG began looking for the girls. Quite chilling to consider.

Add into that the Abby photo time (was it 2:07?) and how quickly BG probably made it across the bridge. I'm thinking he most likely had quite a bit of time at the scene. AJMO

I just can’t imagine the killer sticking around afterwards.
He may be covered in blood, or in soaking wet and/or torn clothing, muddy, disheveled, anxious from the adrenaline,
or been seen! Why would anyone risk standing out and possibly being discovered? IMO

 

[MollyDDD]

The first audio that the police released was not cleaned up--I only discovered that a month ago listening to podcasts on a trip. The original audio was very muffled and it was nearly impossible for me to tell what was being said. The version we are familiar with ("Guys ...") has been cleaned of noise by a very skilled lab process. I'm a bit under the weather and can't offer to find the original audio but I'm sure it's available--and you're right, the original is very different. For all we know, the speaker's actual voice differs from what we've heard in some ways--IMO.

I hope you feel better soon.

 

[sunshineray]

I just can’t imagine the killer sticking around afterwards.
He may be covered in blood, or in soaking wet and/or torn clothing, muddy, disheveled, anxious from the adrenaline,
or been seen! Why would anyone risk standing out and possibly being discovered? IMO

I think he was cleaning up. Making sure about not leaving evidence of himself. He probably didn't realize the girls were missed until DG and other family started calling Libby's phone. Maybe he was looking for it? Maybe he got spooked an was scared of being seen and hunkered down for some time, until the coast was clear in the direction his exit strategy?

 

[MollyDDD]

MistyWaters, I respectfully disagree with you. I get a strong feeling that the things he said, after saying he wanted to directly address the killer who could be in the room, were said to BG about what he actually did to his victims. I think those things said weren't just generically religious nor for the public's benefit.

I've always felt there was a betrayal of sorts involved in some way between LE and the killer. It's the main reason I can't fully get on board with JBC. I think the killer involved himself within the investigative machine somehow and was trusted in some way.

I feel ISP Carter wasn't just making a religious statement. He was too vehement and direct. Those words to the killer weren't meant to comfort the public, they were meant to rile a monster. AJMO

Ugh, I just got chills reading that.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

We all have done a lot of complaining about LE not releasing information in this case, but how they have presented the evidence is part of the problem.

…LE releases a still photo of BG but with little context, not even saying it is from Libby’s phone.
…LE releases an audio clip. It’s only three words long.
…Sketch of OBG is released followed by multiple stories on how it came about, and “don’t look at the hat”, etc
…LE asks for help finding a car by the CPS building again with zero context and two years after the murders.
…LE releases video of BG on the bridge. A mere two seconds worth.
…LE releases more audio. They add a word.
…Sketch of YBG is released followed by tortured corrections and explanations and changing stories on what to do with the old sketch, and multiple suggestions on how to properly take the new sketch. Other than a story of how the sketch is two years old, there is no context on why the sketches changed.
…LE releases information about anthony_shots profile. No context. We learn from a four year old affadavit what it might be about.

Is there any wonder we are confused? None of this is real evidence. A blurry two second video, a four word audio clip, those are the only things released by LE that could be close to evidence.
Most of what we have discussed here we have extrapolated out of thin air. Things we hear and read in other places are really not much better.