Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #145

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don’t think LE “know” the identity of the killer, and are simply fabricating the seeking of tips about online communication with anthony_shots if it’s of absolutely no interest to them. What would be the point in collecting and investigating useless tips, considering they obviously don’t have sufficient evidence against the unknown person they supposedly “know” is guilty or charges would’ve been laid by now. That would make no sense and it’s not how LE manage investigations IMO.

I can’t recall even one single prior case where LE gives false information to the public to attempt to locate a possible suspect who is not the focus of their investigation at the time. It would do great harm to any future prosecution as well, there’s only a fine line between LE operating with integrity or not, and it’s juries who make the call. LE does not have the ability to convict, they merely gather evidence. JMO
 
Last edited:
I don’t think LE “know” the identity of the killer, and are simply fabricating the seeking of tips about online communication with anthony_shots if it’s of absolutely no interest to them. What would be the point in collecting and investigating useless tips, considering they obviously don’t have sufficient evidence against the unknown person they supposedly “know” is guilty or charges would’ve been laid by now. That would make no sense and it’s not how LE manage investigations IMO.

I can’t recall even one single prior case where LE gives false information to the public to attempt to locate a possible suspect who is not the focus of their investigation at the time. It would do great harm to any future prosecution as well, there’s only a fine line between LE operating with integrity or not, and it’s juries who make the call. LE does not have the ability to convict, they merely gather evidence. JMO

While it is in the realm of possibility, there is little chance that the FBI and ISP did not know about, let alone vet all of the social media accounts in communication with the girls leading up to the day. As a counterpoint, can you name a murder case in which so little outwardly "relevant" info was held so closely to the vest for so long? Upon initial investigation, I thought it was due to a widespread coverup at worst or incompetence at best. I leaned heavily to the former at first, but I also know they would not keep this case as a centerpiece if they wanted to sweep it away for these past five years. That being said, it would not surprise me if an informant or other LE angle is a part of this and a key reason for secrecy, but as I hope to lay out, I believe the reason is that there are multiple individuals they know are involved in the crime, and HAVE to establish a case that brings them all to justice, which complicates it exponentially compared to prosecution of one person.
 
W
I believe the reason is that there are multiple individuals they know are involved in the crime, and HAVE to establish a case that brings them all to justice, which complicates it exponentially compared to prosecution of one person.
Snipped.

I think it's far more likely that there are multiple suspects, and they aren't sure which one is BG, if one of them even is. If LE "knew" who BG was, he would've been charged by now.

If BG is not connected to the anthony_shots accounts, then he might not even be on LE's radar screen, which means LE is still chasing its tail.
 
Since nobody has been charged with the murders yet, I cannot completely dismiss any theories. The number of people who have entered the picture, and who are seemingly capable of a double homicide, is astonishing. But I have to admit, while there could be multiple players involved, it's difficult for me to plug in outside names when the two parties directly linked to the house, which in turn is directly linked to the a_shots account, are also seemingly capable of a double homicide (imo, one of them is capable, for sure).

An admitted CSAM operator? A known violent, abusive stalker? It seems like a fair place to start. JMO.
 
I don’t think LE “know” the identity of the killer, and are simply fabricating the seeking of tips about online communication with anthony_shots if it’s of absolutely no interest to them. What would be the point in collecting and investigating useless tips, considering they obviously don’t have sufficient evidence against the unknown person they supposedly “know” is guilty or charges would’ve been laid by now. That would make no sense and it’s not how LE manage investigations IMO.

I can’t recall even one single prior case where LE gives false information to the public to attempt to locate a possible suspect who is not the focus of their investigation at the time. It would do great harm to any future prosecution as well, there’s only a fine line between LE operating with integrity or not, and it’s juries who make the call. LE does not have the ability to convict, they merely gather evidence. JMO

I think you're right. the a_shots profile MIGHT be related to this case, and might not. But given what we know about his activities, whether it's related to this case or not, it's certainly worth pulling the thread if it gathers in more victims (and possibly more perpetrators) to build that case independently. I think the important thing to watch is specifically who's doing the asking, and whether they associate the ask with the Delphi case. I don't think it's a smokescreen. I think it has legs of its own. But stranger things have happened.
 
how can they know that this account is related to the murder ? if they don't have the communication that proves that libby has arranged a secret meeting ..
they cant as far as i am concerned..
 
While it is in the realm of possibility, there is little chance that the FBI and ISP did not know about, let alone vet all of the social media accounts in communication with the girls leading up to the day. As a counterpoint, can you name a murder case in which so little outwardly "relevant" info was held so closely to the vest for so long? Upon initial investigation, I thought it was due to a widespread coverup at worst or incompetence at best. I leaned heavily to the former at first, but I also know they would not keep this case as a centerpiece if they wanted to sweep it away for these past five years. That being said, it would not surprise me if an informant or other LE angle is a part of this and a key reason for secrecy, but as I hope to lay out, I believe the reason is that there are multiple individuals they know are involved in the crime, and HAVE to establish a case that brings them all to justice, which complicates it exponentially compared to prosecution of one person.

I think LE is withholding information out of necessity. This case has already received at least 50,000 tips at last count, far more than any other that I can recall, and if anything that it gained such widespread attention of SM may be what’s partially working against it being solved. Imagine the resources it requires to investigate all those tips. It seems everybody has a pet POI so the only means LE is left with in vetting that huge volume of tips is not releasing everything they know. At the same time I’ve long believed this case will not be solved by any person who does not have or had personal involvement directly with the killer.

I think it’s become a broad misconception that LE have some kind of obligation to inform the public of murder details, even before a case goes to trial. That may come from the “CSI effect”. But they do have the right to ask the public for assistance in helping solve crime and so they do. JMO
 
how can they know that this account is related to the murder ? if they don't have the communication that proves that libby has arranged a secret meeting ..
they cant as far as i am concerned..

I do agree that LE can’t know it’s related to the Delphi murders, even if somebody comes forward and says they communicated with anthony_shots who requested their address to meet up. No jury is going to convict on say-so that’s not directly connected, especially without data to prove the witness is telling the truth. But LE may be seeking to find an IP address from that type of communication which could lead them onward to another user. If KAK shared passwords online for the profile he created, it’s probable other pedophiles were only using a screen name. Maybe the true identity behind that type of connection is the missing link?
 
Did BP ever say if Apple was able to help retrieve Libby's data from her cell phone?

No I don’t believe so but I don’t know that Apple is even involved in retrieving data for police departments. IIRC prior news stories pertained to their refusal to assist in unlocking locked phones.

There’s a blurb of a news broadcast starting at 3:43 talking about the involvement of Indiana Computer Crimes Against Children Taskforce. It seems agencies routinely utilize data recovery software during the course of an investigation.

 
I do agree that LE can’t know it’s related to the Delphi murders, even if somebody comes forward and says they communicated with anthony_shots who requested their address to meet up. No jury is going to convict on say-so that’s not directly connected, especially without data to prove the witness is telling the truth. But LE may be seeking to find an IP address from that type of communication which could lead them onward to another user. If KAK shared passwords online for the profile he created, it’s probable other pedophiles were only using a screen name. Maybe the true identity behind that type of connection is the missing link?
Yes, it's all a guessing game as to what digital evidence LE has regarding a_shots, the murders, and other CSAM activity. The entire Aug. 2020 interview felt, to me, to be an effort to identify the user or users of KAK's devices. The pressure was on KAK to either cough up the names or take the fall.

But never did they ask about who he gave his account information to, to be used on other people's devices. And never did they ask about other locations he might have been to regularly with his own devices. Maybe LE was lying, but they say it all originated at the Peru house IP address, over hours, days, and months.

I kind of wonder if they do have proof of a planned meeting, or even just L giving her address to a_shots, or her sharing with a_shots that they were going to the bridge, etc., but all LE can definitively link it to is KAK's device, the iPhone 5 probably, but not the person who was using it at that time.

And again, unless LE is lying, they have evidence that a_shots was grooming L (and maybe other girls), in the days leading up to the murders. The days that were then wiped from the iPhone 5 after the search warrant was served and KAK was interviewed and polygraphed. After a_shots was communicating with L, who was already dead, from Vegas.
 
Last edited:
The movie on Netflix “Lost Girls” has renewed my interest in LISK, and I was going back through some old information on that case.

I came across the part where he called one of the victim’s sisters and terrorized her, and said really nasty things to her. This reminded me of TK and his nasty phone calls. This clearly shows his inclination to “taunt”. Also, he has the inclination to “stalk”, as stated by the cheerleader in the MS podcast.

Another thing about LISK, there are a few formidable suspects/POIs who have been ruled out. LE also thinks it’s possible these could the the work of more than one killer. My point here is it always amazes me how many people can fit the bill in any given situation, as we’ve seen here.

—-

Also, I’ve been thinking about the “Peeping Tom” thing. Remember early on there were those flasher(s) on nearby other trails, unconnected to A & L? If TK is a peeping Tom, maybe there are some other incidents of this, exposure, etc., that have not been attributed to him, perhaps unsolved. There was a lot of discussion about these flashers in the first few days of the case, iirc, so I thought it might be worthwhile to go back and have a look at these incidents, based on what we know now about TK. I don’t think he was a jogger though. I remember I was stunned when so many WS members had come forth to say that at some time in their lives a man had exposed themselves to them (I think that was in A & L’s threads, but could have been another case).
 
Last edited:
If I step back for a moment and consider that neither KAK nor his dad is the killer, then that means I have to explain LE's line of questioning back in 2017, 2020, and the current a_shots asks. Because LE has specifically asked about information on the "creator" of a_shots, and they said in the interview that the IP source was the Peru house, then the only way I can make it work is if KAK or his dad were indeed the ones communicating with L, but those exchanges were then being shared to a private individual. LE would likely have digital evidence of this exchange, as well, imo.

So if KAK or his dad are worried about being connected to the murders through their a_shots communications with L (and possible CSAM connected to her), plus the sharing to whomever ended up killing the girls, then that might explain why KAK or his dad were communicating with L after the murders (like they didn't know she was dead), looking up if IP addresses could be traced through SM, etc. That could all be fear of being connected to the murderer himself. BUT, if that's the case...why look up how long DNA lasts?
 
No I don’t believe so but I don’t know that Apple is even involved in retrieving data for police departments. IIRC prior news stories pertained to their refusal to assist in unlocking locked phones.

There’s a blurb of a news broadcast starting at 3:43 talking about the involvement of Indiana Computer Crimes Against Children Taskforce. It seems agencies routinely utilize data recovery software during the course of an investigation.

Thanks for the video. On 10/24/2017 BP did get a court order directing Apple to assist in the recovery of Libby's data but there's no indication that they were able to help.
I came across an Apple communication from 2016 talking about security issues regarding the San Bernardino terrorists cell phones.
Customer Letter - FAQ - Apple
[snips]
For devices running the iPhone operating systems prior to iOS 8 and under a lawful court order, we have extracted data from an iPhone.
We’ve built progressively stronger protections into our products with each new software release, including passcode-based data encryption, because cyberattacks have only become more frequent and more sophisticated. As a result of these stronger protections that require data encryption, we are no longer able to use the data extraction process on an iPhone running iOS 8 or later.
One of the strongest suggestions we offered was that they pair the phone to a previously joined network, which would allow them to back up the phone and get the data they are now asking for. Unfortunately, we learned that while the attacker’s iPhone was in FBI custody the Apple ID password associated with the phone was changed. Changing this password meant the phone could no longer access iCloud services.
 
No I don’t believe so but I don’t know that Apple is even involved in retrieving data for police departments. IIRC prior news stories pertained to their refusal to assist in unlocking locked phones.

There’s a blurb of a news broadcast starting at 3:43 talking about the involvement of Indiana Computer Crimes Against Children Taskforce. It seems agencies routinely utilize data recovery software during the course of an investigation.


I’m a remembering a video now that you mention of it of LE talking about retrieval. I thought it was this case, but maybe I’m thinking of another case. The video showed a man sitting at a desk in front of a computer. He was the tech expert on the department, iirc. Maybe I’m thinking of another case. He had the phone in his possession, iirc.

But yes, as far as the csam thing, this would include a multitude of agencies. So actually, if anyone doubts that local or state LE has done a thorough job on this, they can rest assured knowing that the csam thing would have brought this case to the attention of the highest of national, and international, agencies as related to the csam. Again, here are the entities that are usually involved. Note we have ICAC, DOJ, Interpol, FBI/CETF, ICE/CEIU...

Disclaimer, this post was made in 2018 before they called it CSAM, hence CP in this post from the databases thread.
Citizen's Guide To U.S. Federal Law On Child *advertiser censored*

“18 U.S.C. § 2251- Sexual Exploitation of Children
(Production of child *advertiser censored*)
18 U.S.C. § 2251A- Selling and Buying of Children
18 U.S.C. § 2252- Certain activities relating to material involving the sexual exploitation of minors
(Possession, distribution and receipt of child *advertiser censored*)
18 U.S.C. § 2252A- certain activities relating to material constituting or containing child *advertiser censored*
18 U.S.C. § 2256- Definitions
18 U.S.C. § 2260- Production of sexually explicit depictions of a minor for importation into the United States

Images of child *advertiser censored* are not protected under First Amendment rights, and are illegal contraband under federal law. Section 2256 of Title 18, United States Code, defines child *advertiser censored* as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone under 18 years of age). Visual depictions include photographs, videos, digital or computer generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor, and images created, adapted, or modified, but appear to depict an identifiable, actual minor. Undeveloped film, undeveloped videotape, and electronically stored data that can be converted into a visual image of child *advertiser censored* are also deemed illegal visual depictions under federal law.

Notably, the legal definition of sexually explicit conduct does not require that an image depict a child engaging in sexual activity. A picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child *advertiser censored* if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive. Additionally, the age of consent for sexual activity in a given state is irrelevant; any depiction of a minor under 18 years of age engaging in sexually explicit conduct is illegal.

Federal law prohibits the production, distribution, reception, and possession of an image of child *advertiser censored* using or affecting any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce (See 18 U.S.C. § 2251; 18 U.S.C. § 2252; 18 U.S.C. § 2252A). Specifically, Section 2251 makes it illegal to persuade, induce, entice, or coerce a minor to engage in sexually explicit conduct for purposes of producing visual depictions of that conduct. Any individual who attempts or conspires to commit a child *advertiser censored* offense is also subject to prosecution under federal law.

Federal jurisdiction is implicated if the child *advertiser censored* offense occurred in interstate or foreign commerce. This includes, for example, using the U.S. Mails or common carriers to transport child *advertiser censored* across state or international borders. Additionally, federal jurisdiction almost always applies when the Internet is used to commit a child *advertiser censored* violation. Even if the child *advertiser censored* image itself did not travel across state or international borders, federal law may be implicated if the materials, such as the computer used to download the image or the CD-ROM used to store the image, originated or previously traveled in interstate or foreign commerce.

In addition, Section 2251A of Title 18, United States Code, specifically prohibits any parent, legal guardian or other person in custody or control of a minor under the age of 18, to buy, sell, or transfer custody of that minor for purposes of producing child *advertiser censored*.

Lastly, Section 2260 of Title 18, United States Code, prohibits any persons outside of the United States to knowingly produce, receive, transport, ship, or distribute child *advertiser censored* with intent to import or transmit the visual depiction into the United States.

Any violation of federal child *advertiser censored* law is a serious crime, and convicted offenders face severe statutory penalties. For example, a first time offender convicted of producing child *advertiser censored* under 18 U.S.C. § 2251, face fines and a statutory minimum of 15 years to 30 years maximum in prison. A first time offender convicted of transporting child *advertiser censored* in interstate or foreign commerce under 18 U.S.C. § 2252, faces fines and a statutory minimum of 5 years to 20 years maximum in prison. Convicted offenders may face harsher penalties if the offender has prior convictions or if the child *advertiser censored* offense occurred in aggravated situations defined as (i) the images are violent, sadistic, or masochistic in nature, (ii) the minor was sexually abused, or (iii) the offender has prior convictions for child sexual exploitation. In these circumstances, a convicted offender may face up to life imprisonment.

It is important to note that an offender can be prosecuted under state child *advertiser censored* laws in addition to, or instead of, federal law.”

—-

Child *advertiser censored*

“Child *advertiser censored* Today

Because the term “child *advertiser censored*” is used in federal statutes, it is also commonly used by lawmakers, prosecutors, investigators, and the public to describe this form of sexual exploitation of children. However, this term fails to describe the true horror that is faced by countless children every year. The production of child *advertiser censored* creates a permanent record of a child’s sexual abuse. When these images are placed on the Internet and disseminated online, the victimization of the children continues in perpetuity. Experts and victims agree that victims depicted in child *advertiser censored* often suffer a lifetime of re-victimization by knowing the images of their sexual abuse are on the Internet forever. The children exploited in these images must live with the permanency, longevity, and circulation of such a record of their sexual victimization. This often creates lasting psychological damage to the child, including disruptions in sexual development, self-image, and developing trusting relationships with others in the future.

The expansion of the Internet and advanced digital technology lies parallel to the explosion of the child *advertiser censored* market. Child *advertiser censored* images are readily available through virtually every Internet technology, including social networking websites, file-sharing sites, photo-sharing sites, gaming devices, and even mobile apps. Child *advertiser censored* offenders can also connect on Internet forums and networks to share their interests, desires, and experiences abusing children, in addition to selling, sharing, and trading images.

These online communities have promoted communication and collaboration between child *advertiser censored* offenders, thereby fostering a larger relationship premised on a shared sexual interest in children. This has the effect of eroding the shame that typically would accompany this behavior, as well as desensitizing those involved to the physical and psychological damage caused to the child victims. For this reason, online communities attract and encourage new individuals to join them in the sexual exploitation of children.

The methods many offenders use to evade law enforcement detection have also become increasingly sophisticated. Purveyors of child *advertiser censored* continue to use various encryption techniques and anonymous networks on “The Dark Internet”, attempting to hide their amassed collections of illicit child abuse images. Several sophisticated online criminal organizations have even written security manuals to ensure that their members follow preferred security protocols and encryption techniques in an attempt to evade law enforcement and facilitate the sexual abuse of children.

Unfortunately, no area of the United States or country in the world is immune from individuals who seek to sexually exploit children through child *advertiser censored*. The continuous production and distribution of child *advertiser censored* increases the demand for new and more egregious images, perpetuating the continued molestation of child victims, as well as the abuse of new children.”
-more at link

—-

ICAC Task Force
Home

“The Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Program is a national network of 61 coordinated task forces representing over 4,500 federal, state, and local law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies. These agencies are continually engaged in proactive and reactive investigations and prosecutions of persons involved in child abuse and exploitation involving the Internet.”

——

Violent Crimes Against Children/Online Predators — FBI

“Investigations
Child Sexual Exploitation Investigations

Child sexual exploitation investigations—many of them undercover—are conducted in FBI field offices by Child Exploitation Task Forces (CETFs), which combine the resources of the FBI with those of other federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. Each of the FBI’s 56 field offices has worked investigations developed by the VCAC program, and many of our Legal Attaché offices have coordinated with appropriate foreign law enforcement partners on international investigations. Several of these investigations are also worked in coordination with Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Forces, which are funded by the Department of Justice. Furthermore, training is provided to all law enforcement involved in these investigations, including federal, state, local, and foreign law enforcement agencies.“

Snip

“Investigative Priorities

Child abductions—child abductions, including domestic and international parental kidnapping
Child sexual exploitation enterprises—domestic child sex trafficking organizations; online networks and enterprises manufacturing, trading, distributing, and/or selling child *advertiser censored*
Contact offenses against children—domestic travel with intent to engage in illegal sexual activity with children; child sex tourism (international travel to engage in sexual activity with children); production of child *advertiser censored*, including “sextortion” involving children who are extorted into producing child *advertiser censored*; and coercion/enticement of a minor
Trafficking of child *advertiser censored*—distribution of child *advertiser censored*; possession of child *advertiser censored*.”

——

Crimes against children / Crimes against children / Crime areas / Internet / Home - INTERPOL

“Crimes against children

Crimes against children tend to be local crimes with the vast majority taking place within the home or family circle. There are, however, a number of areas where there is an international angle:
Internet crimes: crimes against children are facilitated by the Internet, the increased use of which in recent years has led to a huge rise in offending. Not only can offenders distribute and access child abuse material more easily, but they can also come into direct contact with children – via chatrooms and social networking sites. We run a project in conjunction with Internet Access Service Providers to block access to child abuse material online. “

Access blocking / Crimes against children / Crime areas / Internet / Home - INTERPOL

“The "Worst of"-list
INTERPOL has taken responsibility for providing a list of domains containing child sexual abuse content to any (Internet) Access Service Provider (ASP) willing to participate in reducing the availability of such material on the Web.
INTERPOL's "Worst of"-list includes those domains that contain the most severe child sexual abuse material, according to defined criteria.“

——

Child Exploitation Investigations Unit

“As part of ICE’s Cyber Crimes Center (C3), the CEIU uses cutting edge investigative techniques to bring justice to consumers, producers and distributors of child *advertiser censored*, as well as to predators engaging in child sex tourism. The efforts of the CEIU, in addition to ICE’s participation in national programs like Operation Predator and international partnerships like the Virtual Global Taskforce, have resulted in the rescue of thousands of children.“

———

US DOJ
Report a Crime

Child *advertiser censored* and/or sexual exploitation of children
Call your local FBI field office or Legal Attache' Office
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
800-THE-LOST (800-843-5678)
For more information see the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section

—-

Child *advertiser censored* Victim Assistance (CPVA)

“The FBI’s Child *advertiser censored* Victim Assistance (CPVA) program serves as the central repository for information on identified victims of child *advertiser censored*. Pursuant to federal statutes, law enforcement may be required to notify victims each time images of their victimization are seized as part of an investigation. The amount and frequency of notifications can be overwhelming, especially as victims may have difficulty coping with the impact of the crime and its ongoing aftermath.

To help streamline the notification process, CPVA attempts to minimize any additional trauma by limiting unnecessary contact with victims through utilization of the centralized and automated DOJ Victim Notification System. Through this system, CPVA continues to ensure victims are advised of the rights and services they may be entitled to as a result of any federal cases opened against offenders found in possession of their images, regardless of how much time has passed since the original exploitation took place.

CPVA is a joint initiative and coordinates directly with law enforcement or victim/witness personnel at various federal agencies, U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, and the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children.“

—-

National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
Home
 
Last edited:
A big portion of the 'value' of a website when change of owners or names is the user base. Whoever was using the Yellow/Yubo on Feb 3, 2017 as Anothony_Shots (or some variation) deleted the account on or around Feb 14, 2017. So THAT would be the LE issue regarding finding info. MOO

From above: “Whoever was using the Yellow/Yubo on Feb 3, 2017 as Anothony_Shots (or some variation) deleted the account on or around Feb 14, 2017”

Hi, I am so behind as usual, and trying to get caught up here on everyone’s insightful posts and msm (which I will update in media thread whatever is not added when I get a chance).

My question is, really, was that account deleted on Feb 14, 2017? Do we have a link for this? If this is true, wow that would be quite a “coincidence”...



So, KAK initially said “they didn’t show up”. Do we know exactly what the supposed plan was for the meeting, exact location, time, etc.? What all do we know about this? What was the “reason” for the meeting? Also, did KAK later deny this? I seem to be remembering some possible discrepancy/conflict relating to KK’s admission of this, but I can’t remember what it is right now, maybe it’s a brain fart. Thanks for your feedback, I haven’t had time to go through the transcripts.
 
Last edited:
If I step back for a moment and consider that neither KAK nor his dad is the killer, then that means I have to explain LE's line of questioning back in 2017, 2020, and the current a_shots asks. Because LE has specifically asked about information on the "creator" of a_shots, and they said in the interview that the IP source was the Peru house, then the only way I can make it work is if KAK or his dad were indeed the ones communicating with L, but those exchanges were then being shared to a private individual. LE would likely have digital evidence of this exchange, as well, imo.

So if KAK or his dad are worried about being connected to the murders through their a_shots communications with L (and possible CSAM connected to her), plus the sharing to whomever ended up killing the girls, then that might explain why KAK or his dad were communicating with L after the murders (like they didn't know she was dead), looking up if IP addresses could be traced through SM, etc. That could all be fear of being connected to the murderer himself. BUT, if that's the case...why look up how long DNA lasts?
If the person they were sharing with were a relative or local they wouldn't leave a digital trail of that particular 'transaction' MOO
 
From above: “Whoever was using the Yellow/Yubo on Feb 3, 2017 as Anothony_Shots (or some variation) deleted the account on or around Feb 14, 2017”

Hi, I am so behind as usual, and trying to get caught up here on everyone’s insightful posts and msm (which I will update in media thread when I get a chance).

My question is, really, was that account deleted on Feb 14, 2017? Do we have a link for this? If this is true, wow that would be quite a “coincidence”...



So, KAK initially said “they didn’t show up”. Do we know exactly what the supposed plan was for the meeting, exact location, time, etc.? What all do we know about this? What was the “reason” for the meeting? What time did he arrive, how long did he wait, etc. Also, did KAK later deny this? I seem to be remembering some possible discrepancy/conflict relating to KK’s admission of this, but I can’t remember what it is right now, may/e it’s a brain fart. Thanks for your feedback, I haven’t had time to go through the transcripts.
I'm sorry. It's just MOO that the account was deleted. I tried to sign up to Yubo to have a look around, but decided I did not want to explain to my spouse why I was signing up for this :-/
 
The movie on Netflix “Lost Girls” has renewed my interest in LISK, and I was going back through some old information on that case.

I came across the part where he called one of the victim’s sisters and terrorized her, and said really nasty things to her. This reminded me of TK and his nasty phone calls. This clearly shows his inclination to “taunt”. Also, he has the inclination to “stalk”, as stated by the cheerleader in the MS podcast.

Another thing about LISK, there are a few formidable suspects/POIs who have been ruled out. LE also thinks it’s possible these could the the work of more than one killer. My point here is it always amazes me how many people can fit the bill in any given situation, as we’ve seen here.

—-

Also, I’ve been thinking about the “Peeping Tom” thing. Remember early on there were those flasher(s) on nearby other trails, unconnected to A & L? If TK is a peeping Tom, maybe there are some other incidents of this, exposure, etc., that have not been attributed to him, perhaps unsolved. There was a lot of discussion about these flashers in the first few days of the case, iirc, so I thought it might be worthwhile to go back and have a look at these incidents, based on what we know now about TK. I don’t think he was a jogger though. I remember I was stunned when so many WS members had come forth to say that at some time in their lives a man had exposed themselves to them (I think that was in A & L’s threads, but could have been another case).
I wonder what pepper spray would do to such tender skin as they expose?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
66
Guests online
3,455
Total visitors
3,521

Forum statistics

Threads
604,422
Messages
18,171,836
Members
232,557
Latest member
Velvetshadow
Back
Top