IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 - #33

[Deleted member 278]

Normally no. And there were 40 law enforcement/forensic vehicles at the time of the search warrant.

40?! Link, please.

 

[Justice101]

This is how I believe LE established probable cause for the search, all MOO:

On Feb 13 RL drove into Lafayette to buy his now infamous tropical fish (I'm just glad it wasn't a catfish). Under the terms of his probation he was not supposed to drive. Given his fairly remote location I assume he routinely drives anyway, and if local LE was aware they probably turned a blind eye.

He returns from his trip and is blindsided by the news of the missing girls and discovery of their bodies.

Being that the bodies were found on his property LE questions him. When they ask about his whereabouts he's stuck between a rock and a hard place. If he is truthful and tells them he drove into Lafayette himself then he admits to a probation violation. So instead he tells them a friend (lets call him Mr. X) gave him a ride. He probably then calls that friend and asks him to back him up if police ask. His friend agrees thinking that it's not that big of a deal since he's only covering for a simple probation violation, not a murder. LE talk to Mr. X, he "confirms" that he drove RL to Lafayette, and that establishes RL's alibi, and they clear him "at this time".

A few weeks later (and the investigation going nowhere) one of two things could have happened:
Either LE re-checked alibis and discovered evidence that Mr. X did not drive RL that day (could have talked to the store owner or checked security cameras). Or they talk to Mr. X again and put some pressure on him about lying to LE, and he admits it. Or maybe Mr. X got cold feet and realized that lying to LE in a murder investigation could land HIM in a lot of trouble, and he contacts LE to tell them he did NOT drive RL.

In any event, LE now knows that RL lied about his alibi. They don't know for certain if it was simply to cover up the probation violation (which IMO is all it was), or if there is something more sinister going on and RL might be somehow involved in the murders. The probation violation is enough to arrest him, and with the 15 day hold it gives them plenty of time to figure out their next steps. I believe all they had to do to get the search warrant for RL's home was to tell the judge that RL lied about his alibi (backed up by a written statement from Mr. X that he did not drive RL). RL may have lied only to avoid getting busted for driving, but it also is plausible that there is more to it, thereby justifying the search warrant.

Bottom line is I believe RL opened himself up to all this scrutiny by lying about his alibi. It's unfortunate that his "little lie" got him tangled up even more in a murder investigation...but I guess that can happen if you continually break the rules and skirt responsibility for your actions. Having a killer dump bodies on his property wasn't his fault, but he's made plenty of poor decisions, and he's paying a very steep price for it now.

ALL MOO.

This high level of thoughtful post is why I come on this site! Love the clarity in your diction. Thanks KenzieK!

 

[iten]

Thanks for all that work! So from what I am reading from your post here is this is if he violates while on probation, which I get now. But as I was waiting for your input I read your previous post which quoted the law and I think that answered my question:

Sec. 3. (a) The court may revoke a person's probation if:

(1) the person has violated a condition of probation during the probationary period;  and

(2) the petition to revoke probation is filed during the probationary period or before the earlier of the following:

(A) One (1) year after the termination of probation.

And, hey, I had actually already read your post before you deleted that part about it coming back to haunt you.

So, it seems, then, that he has violated the terms of his probation which has actually ended but because he has violated them within a year of his probation ending, they can charge him for violation of the terms as if he was still on probation.

Or it was extended as some point which would explain why a probation officer would suggest revoking. If it been extended once, then they would not be inclined to extend again.

PHEW!! Thanks GGE, you are a real sport!

No.

He has to violate a condition of probation during the probationary period.

The petition to revoke the probation must be filed within a certain time -- one year after probation terminates being one of the time limits.

Hope that makes sense.

 

[jenthern]

You didn't offend but i think numerology is banned on ws. Unless someone knows better....

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

Completely different to say that the significance of those sets of numbers strikes someone as interesting vs. researching the "evil" number they add up to. I don't believe in numerology, but the murderer could have. Therefore the fact that the numbers are mirror images intrigues me. (FWIW, I don't think the two crimes are connected. Still, this piqued my interest.)

 

[Justice101]

Note to self: If I ever have bodies found on my property, 1) refuse all media interview requests 2) refuse all media requests to access the site 3) refer all media questions to law enforcement. (even if I can verify that I was ten time zones away at the time of the crime).

But you don't have to do act that way if you lead an honest law abiding life.

 

[GGE]

The 2 year suspended sentence was to run consecutively with a 2008 case he was already serving a sentence on. So the sentence began when the 2008 case sentence ended.

The 2 year license suspension was entirely separate and ran concurrently. It started immediately at the time of the sentencing and likely ended within the past few months.

a suspended sentence is not consecutively running with anything - it is suspended pending successful completion of probation. If at any time the probation officer recommends probation is revoked and the judge agrees, that sentence that has been suspended is reinstated. That "2 year suspended sentence" means that he has 2 years jail time hanging over his head if he violates.

The information can be found here for anyone who wants to understand more:
http://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-35-criminal-law-and-procedure/in-code-sect-35-38-2-3.html

 

[SomeoneElse333]

I've seen in my house to be used as a euphemism for in my domain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed. I take it as a figure of speech that refers to a person and their space.

I think some people are deeply attached to their land.and commune with it. IMO, it wouldn't be odd at all for someone to refer to the sum total of it as their house. They might cherish the land more than the physical buildings on it.

____________
The above is just my opinion.

 

[Ashley95]

Completely different to say that the significance of those sets of numbers strikes someone as interesting vs. researching the "evil" number they add up to. I don't believe in numerology, but the murderer could have. Therefore the fact that the numbers are mirror images intrigues me. (FWIW, I don't think the two crimes are connected. Still, this piqued my interest.)

Good point i take it back.

Numerology is insane and so are killers so could link up.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

[GGE]

But you don't have to do act that way if you lead an honest law abiding life.

Yes you do, if you live in the USA and have an understanding of the criminal justice system and a care about the rest of your life.

JMO lawyers are not just for the guilty. JMO I've hired a lawyer before because someone WASN'T guilty and their freedom hung in the balance.

Victim-friendly doesn't mean "everyone but the victim is a criminal" IMO. Some innocent people might get accused and they deserve their rights to be looked after by a professional IMO.

 

[Sunday]

Does anyone know if they can/will impound your vehicle if caught driving on a suspended license? If so, this could be one reason for hauling RLs truck off on the flatbed (that would be separate from the search of the property).

Nope, only if you're on the road and no one else to drive it (unless it's illegal to operate for some reason). It will NOT be towed after the fact from your property.

 

[ninij9]

Sorry to have offended.

____________
The above is just my opinion.

You haven't offended. You are fine [emoji4]

I do think some new users need to scroll and roll and not insult others for their opinion. They will either learn this, or probably alot of members will block them for being rude.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[Yellow Rose]

Im not drawing a conclusion, his speech would need full analysis.

But i do think there is a big difference between saying "on" vs "in", and saying something happened in your house rather than on your property. I don't know what happened, I can only go by what he said.

He he said something happened in his house.

EVen though I don't believe RL is the BG I think this is the exact quote from RL that is causing him to be investigated to the hilt. I just think no matter where you are from that it sounds very odd. To me there will ALWAYS be a difference in "house" vs "Property." Property to me has always been the land upon which the house sits.

 

[Bird of Paradise]

Agree. Or, he refused to talk initially and began talking after the arrest. Maybe they have evidence to suspect he knew more than he was saying, not necessarily that he was directly involved in the crime.

I'm still really struggling to understand the amount of sympathy for him when we honestly know nothing other than bodies found on his land, history of DUIs, currently incarcerated for probation violation, potential issues with his alibi, a search warrant executed with probable cause on his home, which lead to removal of a truck and "armful" of stuff, and LE saying they are looking to clear him or move him higher as a suspect than originally thought.

I have only followed one other case here I which foul play is suspected and after almost 3 months following a search warrant of one home, there have been no arrests but nearly everyone believes him to be involved and any sympathy given toward him for possibly being innocent is jumped on. I hate to keep harping on this and I realize the cases are very different but this is driving me crazy.

I'm holding to my view for now that IMO, BG and RL are not the same person but it is very obvious the police are looking at him closely for some reason and I'm going to trust they have solid reason for that. JMO.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

As a fellow Danielle Stislicki case follower from day one, I understand. I am one that got clobbered on that thread for sticking up for the suspect who has never been named a suspect. Sticking up for his right not to speak and have a lawyer, etc.

I feel the same way with this homeowner. Perhaps it's just one's nature--not sure. I don't like to assume anything unless it's based on fact. But that's me.

I wonder too, with the physical interviews of the landowner if it doesn't bring some empathy because well heck, most all of us have or had a grandfather and maybe it's hard to imagine someone like him who has trouble breathing, someone who's family has owned the land for decades is now suddenly a murderer.

Just as with Danielle's case, the massive media push with her sweet natured image tugged at people's hearts. The person who's house was searched has remained silent. For people here and on that thread who say they woud never be silent...they would want to clear their name no matter what they have to do...isn't this all coming from a different perspesctive from you or I or anyone else? I chalk the differences up to life experiences. To the way we process information.

Have you ever wondered how a jury is unable to come to a unanimous decision? Especially when all the facts were laid out pointing towards guilt? Or so we thought in our minds?

So maybe it's part personal, part life experience, part right to innocence until proven guilty that feeds which way we lean.

Questions were rhetorical and MOO :fence:

 

[SilentRogue]

That wasn't numerology saying the DATES mirror each other. We talked at length back in February that both murders (these girls and Lyric and Elizabeth) both occured on the 13th of the month. Dates are hugely important to some SK. JMO.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Yes, namely, the fictional ones we see in movies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Burnt Toast]

What if RL learned something that happened on his property (the girls) involving someone he knew well. He tells the police and for his protection they "arrest" him and put him in jail for breaking his probation so they can investigate further. They get the search warrants etc. and decide to move him to a different county because of an impending arrest they are about to make? Maybe they don't want RL there when they bring the suspect in? Just a thought I had while drinking my morning coffee....MOO....

i think it would have been much easier to simply post a officer outside at home 24/7 if he needed protection.

 

[CrimeDawg123]

IMO!

Just wanted to throw my two cents in on some things
<snip>
2. People wondering why the girls wouldn't have said his name if it happens to be him in the photo - perhaps he knew the family but that doesn't mean the girls in particular. In smaller towns, people know of everyone but it doesn't mean they personally know everyone or have met everyone. Perhaps he had met Libby's grandparents once at a town event or been introduced to Abby's mum by a friend or something. This could've also been years ago but people still describe that as 'knowing' because they do know them... but not necessarily personally. The girls may not have met him before.
<snip>

Snipped by me, BBM. Exactly. Small town doesn't mean everyone literally knows everyone. They may know people by sight, by association, etc. For example, the girls may have known RL as "the old guy who lives in the white house by the cemetery" rather than as Mr. L.

 

[Burnt Toast]

and seriously if the girls knew him and they were smart to video etc they would have said OH MY GOD MR LOGAN please don't do this

i can't imagine them addressing him as mr logan...

 

[ninij9]

Im not team RL did it yet, however I also don't get the whole feeling bad for him because he's 77. Age is just a number. If you've got it in you it just doesn't go away when you qualify for AARP or anything lol.

I trust LE. They themselves have said that rumors are jamming up their ability to work this case. Yet why would they choose NOW to deal with a harmless old man, who violated his probation, drag him off to jail, then a week later conduct a HUGE raid style search warrant on is House, his Home? Because they said the investigation has lead to them now having "PROBABLE CAUSE".

To me that speaks volumes. Couldn't tell you if RL is BG. Maybe BG is a big fat red herring? But they aren't going to absolutely ruin a man's life in a small town because he drove on a suspended license, or had a drink. JMO.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[Etilema]

To have anyone murdered on your property … I don't know what my feelings are right now. It caught me by surprise,” Logan said, recalling how the past two days have been filled with people

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/crime/2017/02/15/police-tracking-down-100s-tips/97940616/

“Who would have thought someone would have been murdered in my backyard,” said Delphi resident Ron Logan, the owner of the property where the bodies were discovered.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

I keep seeing references to RL having said that the murders happened "in his house". Is there a quote somewhere of him saying that? Because "in my backyard" and "on my property" are completely normal things to say. If he said "in my house", that WOULD be beyond strange.

JMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ninij9]

Yes, namely, the fictional ones we see in movies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are numerous serial killers that are triggered by dates and times of year etc. I don't watch TV so I wouldn't know of which you speak.

And there isn't any need to talk down to me.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk