IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #12

[eekasaur]

If I'm wrong about everything else, then so be it. But that thing looks like a plastic grocery bag handle.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

I saw this suggested in one of the earlier threads. I think it's a good guess.

 

[Imvp2]

Yikes, I just noticed something (I haaaaate staring at this pic, need brain and eye bleach)...it seems the white sticking out of the top seems to move, the bottom part, maybe it's my eyes playing tricks on me. Need more coffee... I've always maintained I think this is very possibly a coil of white rope, jmo, moo.

Eta: is there a way to make this slow motion?

Eta: what is the white at his right wrist cuff, is that his clothing underneath? Or maybe the rope sticking out the bottom, gah...

Eta: I'm also seeing his hand come out of his pocket, right hand, again, looks like a brown glove. Jmo moo imo. Nevermind scratch that, might just be the"tail of his shirt", or hoodie, or brown pouch, or skin of his hand...

:banghead:

Eta: what if we can somehow add the audio loop to this animation? Nevermind, LE said they might not be the same person, thinking out loud...

I'm thinking he's got a tan butcher's apron on with his hand wrapped up in it holding something and the white coming out of the top of the jacket could be zip ties. It makes me sick

 

[margarita25]

WOW. Yes, I see that, also.

Now I need a shower.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

That looks malliable or pliable or whatever the word is for rope that moves, imo. For it to move, assuming so, does this indicate a high level of accelaration...man...no, it would indicate movement against the clothes, rubbing against, hard to explain, something is causing it to change postion...movement inside the jacket...

 

[naz]

My belief is that it was a tactical decision aimed at people who would recognize BG. I remember reading somewhere about former FBI profiler Jim Clemente using this strategy on one of his cases, asking people to identify a "witness" vs a "suspect" based on the psychology that people will be more hesitant to identify someone if they're getting them in trouble.

IMO this type of thinking likely played into the decision not to ID him as a suspect from the beginning.

And if the man was not a suspect he most likely would have come forward already ...And if he was named a suspect he would have come forward also to claim his innocence

 

[JLM307]

In my overactive imagination it was the FBI as a ruse to get into the plant and plant some bugs because they may have their eye on possible suspect. I know I watch too much TV...

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

That's a pretty cool thought.

Here's something interesting about the plant - they have their own health clinic for employees and their families, for primary care. It's staffed by a FNP who treats the routine stuff, and then if the patient needs further care (diagnostic imaging, etc) they are referred out.... to where I work. They have Advantage 360º insurance, which is administered by Dunn & Associates.

Wow, what a lot of useless information, eh?

I guess my point is, if the killer works at the plant, someone there would have recognized him by now.

 

[aquamarine]

That's not always the case. I've had android phone's that take amazing photos, far better than iphones even. Imo.

As another user stated, I'm specifically talking about Snapchat. I know that Androids can take great photos, and with photos taken outside the app I most likely wouldn't be able to spot the difference. However, through the Snapchat app it becomes very clear, almost always, which device it was taken on, and Libby's Snapchats look like ones which were taken from an iPhone IMOO. It's difficult to understand exactly the way an Android Snapchat vs. an iPhone Snapchat looks unless you've seen it I guess, but I will say that across SM it has become a running joke/meme that Android has inferior Snapchat quality.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

We don't know that they have *the phone*.
We know that they have data from the phone, which could have been recovered from cloud storage. It's likely Libby had auto back-up turned on, as I believe that is the default setting on most phones now-a-days.

True, but many have said the coverage there isn't good, and I don't think the phone would be able to back up a video with poor coverage. And they were moving downhill, making the signal even weaker.

 

[margarita25]

I am not going to say what I am referring to but has anyone else seen the comments under the Youtube videos about these murders?
Some very interesting things being said. Go to youtube and type in Delphi murders update.

(I can't stand to read any disgusting troll comments...but I guess I'll go read if there's something maybe of value, sigh)

 

[heidi76]

...

I'm seeing lots of posts mentioning -- in general -- that this perp is an idiot for leaving Liberty's phone behind. (Still no definitive answer whether LE has the physical device or not, is there?)

I know (imo) that these phones can be slippery, sneaky little buggers. More than once I have had difficulty locating mine within a two-foot radius of my own sofa. ...kinda like the TV remote.

One of the innumerable possible scenarios: perhaps the perp didn't choose to leave it behind, but at some point it slid down the slope around the crime scene. If so, it would probably be tough to find within all the leaves and twigs, especially while wanting to abscond before being seen by anyone.

But then again, perhaps he really is a dumbaxx as well as a mortifyingly filthy .

jmo

...it isn't against TOS to insult the perps, is it?

Or perhaps he did do something with the phone. He might have attempted to destroy the phone. LE can comb through a phone pretty easily, especially if the photos/vids at stored on a micro SD.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

 

[MzOpinion8d]

Can you explain how he could have "easily" hidden them? I can't think of an easy way. Bury them? Takes too much time. Carry them somewhere else? There were other people in the park, too risky. TIA!

I'm thinking he could have at least covered them with branches and leaves, possibly put them in or under a log, not necessarily hiding them so well they wouldn't be found, but enough to delay finding them. And why leave them out in an open field when you've got tons of woods all around?

 

[*Verdigris]

I am not going to say what I am referring to but has anyone else seen the comments under the Youtube videos about these murders?
Some very interesting things being said. Go to youtube and type in Delphi murders update.

arrgghh

I wish I could access YouTube!

 

[Imvp2]

Did they ever find out who made the threat? Sounds like someone was trying to create a distraction IMO

Exactly what I was thinking.....

 

[eekasaur]

(I can't stand to read any disgusting troll comments...but I guess I'll go read if there's something maybe of value, sigh)

IMO, they aren't of any worth. I saw a few *interesting* ones and the person they are accusing would have been checked out to the MAX. There's no way LE would have overlooked that person, no way.

 

[sideob]

Let's talk about why this killer left the girls in an area where they'd be easily discovered, and didn't take or destroy the cell phone.

Even if he didn't have much time, he could have easily hidden them to make it more difficult to find them. Leaving them out in the open seems to say the killer doesn't care about them being found. It also implies he didn't have a personal relationship with them. I've heard Jim Clemente say several times that a murderer who has a personal relationship with the victim will cover the victim or bury the victim.

He left the phone. He almost certainly had to have known Libby had a phone. To me this seems like more evidence that he wanted the girls found soon. He probably didn't realize there was video of him on the phone - or like the killer of Missy Bevers, didn't care.

So, thoughts?

I'm not sure that the bodies were left in the open or easily discoverable, but maybe the answer as to why the bodies were left there has to do with the manner in which the perpetrator arrived and exited the area. I note that the ISP previously stated the following:

“We are asking people that were driving through the Hoosier heartland that might have seen a hitchhiker or saw somebody walking. We are asking people in Logansport all the way to Lafayette if they saw somebody around that late afternoon on February 13 walking down the roadway. We would like to know about that person,” said Indiana State Police Sgt. Kim Riley.

That suggests LE believes he did not arrive at the scene via vehicle. Thus, the possibilities that he entered/exited the area on foot (which suggests he may live in close proximity) or that he used some other means to arrive/exit, such as a canoe/kayak. I'm not sure what the water levels are at this time of year are in the creek, but leaving the bodies within 50 yards of the water would support this hypothesis. We also know that there was a search of the river and it is standard practice for LE to not only search the crime scene but routes of ingress/egress. Lastly, if the perpetrator crossed the river, being wet and on foot or a vehicle would attract attention. Being wet in a boat would not necessarily attract suspicion.

Food for thought, but as we have limited information about the crime scene it is rank speculation.

 

[klind55]

Let's talk about why this killer left the girls in an area where they'd be easily discovered, and didn't take or destroy the cell phone.

Even if he didn't have much time, he could have easily hidden them to make it more difficult to find them. Leaving them out in the open seems to say the killer doesn't care about them being found. It also implies he didn't have a personal relationship with them. I've heard Jim Clemente say several times that a murderer who has a personal relationship with the victim will cover the victim or bury the victim.

He left the phone. He almost certainly had to have known Libby had a phone. To me this seems like more evidence that he wanted the girls found soon. He probably didn't realize there was video of him on the phone - or like the killer of Missy Bevers, didn't care.

So, thoughts?

Does LE have Libby's phone? If so, did he get spooked by the searches and forgot to grab her phone? Is that why he couldn't hide them as well?
But another question.....was that area searched at all Monday? I know the family continued searching Monday night. Did the BG move the girls there in the wee hours or has LE said that they had been there the whole time?
I don't think the girls had really any intentions on going off the bridge or the main trail. Abigail looks to be wearing canvas converse shoes, definitely not something you would be going geocaching or down by the wet muddy river in.

 

[margarita25]

(Not that a connection has been confirmed, but was there every any mention of rope in L and L's case? Tia...)

 

[JLM307]

Thus, the possibilities that he entered/exited the area on foot (which suggests he may live in close proximity) or that he used some other means to arrive/exit, such as a canoe/kayak. I'm not sure what the water levels are at this time of year are in the creek, but leaving the bodies within 50 yards of the water would support this hypothesis. We also know that there was a search of the river and it is standard practice for LE to not only search the crime scene but routes of ingress/egress. Lastly, if the perpetrator crossed the river, being wet and on foot or a vehicle would attract attention. Being wet in a boat would not necessarily attract suspicion.

Food for thought, but as we have limited information about the crime scene it is rank speculation.

If he had a boat of some sort he could have easily gone downstream Deer Creek into the Wabash River, which is a MAJOR waterway.

 

[Beer]

Let's talk about why this killer left the girls in an area where they'd be easily discovered, and didn't take or destroy the cell phone.

Even if he didn't have much time, he could have easily hidden them to make it more difficult to find them. Leaving them out in the open seems to say the killer doesn't care about them being found. It also implies he didn't have a personal relationship with them. I've heard Jim Clemente say several times that a murderer who has a personal relationship with the victim will cover the victim or bury the victim.

He left the phone. He almost certainly had to have known Libby had a phone. To me this seems like more evidence that he wanted the girls found soon. He probably didn't realize there was video of him on the phone - or like the killer of Missy Bevers, didn't care.

So, thoughts?

After looking at Google maps, my opinion is he was parked at the cemetery which is why he made them cross the river. He could access the front of the bridge through the woods and then make it back to his car without raising suspicion with wet or bloody clothes.

I am sticking with my original theory that he was following their snapchat and knew that they were out there alone.

Did someone mention the BG shoe laces were only tied halfway? Sounds like he was in a hurry to get dressed and not necessarily prepared for a hike in rough terrain.

All my opinion.

 

[margarita25]

So, thinking out loud, let's say this IS L and L's guy...almost 5 years is a long cooling off period...again, wish I could ask Foxfire about this...

So, if he's the same guy, then what else has occurred in between, from 2012 to 2017? Something already in an escalated phase, murder, not just SA.

Also, I was thinking about if some killers only kill off site from their residence, like truckers, etc because they have a wife, etc at home vs ones who take them back to their homes, and do some do both...

 

[margarita25]

(Man, I can't get that .gif animation out of my head now...it is reaaallly something. Really excellent job, thanks so much for doing that.)