IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #41

[Oregonmama]

Wouldn't they have to cross it to get to where they were found.

They were taken else where and dumped later where they were found, JMO

 

[Burnt Toast]

I believe the photo was probably deliberately skewed and blurred. The person who was there would recognize himself. IMO it was deliberate strategy by LE to rattle BG.

interesting. i had never thought of that.

 

[KyMom]

This is my theory and it may totally be wrong or only partially correct.

Anger>confrontation>accident>murder>cover up

That's my theory if I'm suspicious of a particular person. IMO

Curious, by 'accident' do you mean like he accidentally killed one of the girls then felt he had to murder the other?

Btw, If you'd rather not go into your theory any farther that's ok, I'll understand.

jmo

 

[ninij9]

What's the.motive?

If there was a sexual assault I'd think the cops would have this town on high alert.
Not know what your children up to speech.

I don't think they have DNA or the DNA they do have does not match anyone.

So why kill 2 young girls?

Right? The burning question. I think alot of us would see RL as maybe less of a POI if we know for sure SA was a component. Not that he couldn't do certain things (Viagra), but still would lessen the suspicions a bit, of course JMO. So many times LE does release the fact that people were SA during the assault, but here, on this case we hear nothing. Makes you really wonder about motive doesn't it? It he raped the girls you would think that would have been a component to the BOLO during the press conference to drive the point home just how dangerous a predator he is. So hmmmm. Hmmm. And hmmm.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[Burnt Toast]

Then why bother releasing it?

to "rattle BG". it makes sense.

 

[expatCanada]

Everyone knew they were deceased on the 14th and where ... helicopter is flying over the area/scenes on the 14th...
https://www.facebook.com/WRTV6/videos/10154523478509092/

Except, we still don't have a time of death and they weren't found until around 12 noon on the 14th. He could just be innocently assuming along with the rest of us that the crime was over and done with by the time the police were called at around 530p on the 13th. But I could see where that statement could come back to haunt him in the future if...

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[sbaughman]

There was mention of a witness who saw Abby's Snapchat photo and who walked the trail/bridge. It was posted as a woman IIRC with initials CE on one post and CME on another post. Something that she was quoted did not sound quite right IMO. She said that she went alone and saw "another couple" and a "man in black ". I thought it was strange because AFAIK one would only say "another couple" if you yourself were a couple. If you were there on your own, you would say "I saw a couple" not " I saw another couple" wouldn't you? If anyone remembers this being posted is this my suspicious mind or have I remembered it incorrectly or what? JMO

"I saw another couple" could also mean she saw a couple in addition the couple she is talking about, or perhaps she means a couple in addition to Libby and Abby? I think couple usually applies to male/female but I've heard it used just to refer to two people in general.

I think that the way it would be most commonly used would be to refer to another couple in addition to yourself, however. I didn't see the post, but if that is what she said that is interesting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bemused]

Curious, by 'accident' do you mean like he accidentally killed one of the girls then felt he had to murder the other?

Btw, If you'd rather not go into your theory any farther that's ok, I'll understand.

jmo

IMO, yes.

Not to say it couldn't have been intentional for both because I just don't know. That's assuming it's who I suspect, but I may be wrong. I actually hope I am because it is even darker to me. IMO

 

[cluciano63]

Curious, by 'accident' do you mean like he accidentally killed one of the girls then felt he had to murder the other?

Btw, If you'd rather not go into your theory any farther that's ok, I'll understand.

jmo

This is what the killer in the Soham murders claimed happened when he finally confessed.

 

[Elley Mae]

Have a quick question. trying to get my bearings.... does anyone remember the exact day BG's Bridge Photo was released to the public?
Thanks!

Iirc 15th feb

 

[expatCanada]

He's in jail.

Was JW positively ruled out? I don't remember reading if he was or wasn't.

 

[RIP Meagan + Johnny]

Wow, you are right. How could he know that crime was completed by 6:30pm. You think like a prosecutor!!! Nice catch

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

JMO...
What if he knew by the time he did the interview they'd been missing since 3:30 when they were supposed to be picked up or 5:30 when the police were contacted? IIRC, this info was released when the girls were still believed to be "missing". (Links should be in the media thread.) Maybe he figured it would have been over by the time the searchers were canvassing the area. The search was going on at least an hour before he was contacted at 6:30 about searching his property. He likely would have known this before the interview.
JMO.

 

[expatCanada]

I'm alone on this, but I don't believe that person. She put it on FB and that stinks to high heaven. She may have talked to LE and then just disregarded their wishes to hush up? Just seems like attention seeking to me. JMOnly.

There was mention of a witness who saw Abby's Snapchat photo and who walked the trail/bridge. It was posted as a woman IIRC with initials CE on one post and CME on another post. Something that she was quoted did not sound quite right IMO. She said that she went alone and saw "another couple" and a "man in black ". I thought it was strange because AFAIK one would only say "another couple" if you yourself were a couple. If you were there on your own, you would say "I saw a couple" not " I saw another couple" wouldn't you? If anyone remembers this being posted is this my suspicious mind or have I remembered it incorrectly or what? JMO

 

[Billy Mabou]

I believe the photo was probably deliberately skewed and blurred. The person who was there would recognize himself. IMO it was deliberate strategy by LE to rattle BG.

Based on my experience, I disagree with this. If they deliberately blurred it, the artifacts would be blurred, also, but they aren't. This just looks like compressed smart phone video to me. Video is not nearly as detailed as a photo (Full HD video is only 1920 by 1080 pixels and then it's long-GOP, which means a lot of information is being tossed away to save bandwidth). So the picture would be plenty muddy enough already, even more so when it's a crop.

Video compression is pretty ugly when you pause a frame and look at it closely.

 

[DeDee]

Maybe-- but a fear of heights is not a guarantee in my opinion. I am deathly afraid of heights but only of certain heights. For example, I cannot ride roller coasters or go on zip-lines but I would be comfortable walking on that bridge.

We've studied nearly a thousand pictures of High Bridge. Rare is the image showing people walking on that 82' High Bridge. I am not convinced that walking across the trestle is frequently done. The walking trails are super nice and, with Stellar grants, preparations are underway for them to become better.

 

[deugirtni]

Just some thoughts:

-LE said that photo 'was the best they had' - initially we were under the impression that the BG shown in the pic captured from the video taken on Libby's phone was farrrrr away. I'm not sure how that impression changed to being much closer, or that it should've been better quality, less distorted, etc. LE pulled out the best they could from the video they had. If it was someone I knew, I would be able to recognize that.. I may not be 100% certain it was the person I knew, but if I knew someone who looked just like that, I would report him as a tip, and let the chips fall where they may. (The other morning I could swear I saw my own husband a distance away from where I was driving.. it was in a location where he wouldn't have been at that time, but the fellow was talking to a tool truck dealer, and so if my husband may have needed a tool, it *could* have been him.. I was just getting coffee at a drive-through, and once I got out on the road and closer to where he was, I could finally see that it *wasn't* him.. but that experience showed me that from a distance, that BG is more apt to look like many people, than just the ONE person. I don't think it would work in reverse, though. If someone looks like him, he looks like him, and the people who are close enough to that person are going to know it, and hopefully report it.)

-I am getting the impression through what I've heard police say, (and NOT say), that these murders were not sexual assaults. Maybe it is a mistaken impression, time will tell. But if not sexual, then what would be the motive? And further, what would be a motive that is so great, it would make someone take the risk of murdering 2 teen girls in probably broad daylight in a place accessible to the public, for sound and for sight.. and knowing that such a crime carries a death penalty, etc?

-In regard to the anonymity of the person who was to pick the girls up after their hike, I am thinking LE isn't specifying who because that person will eventually be a witness at a trial. That person may have seen an individual(s) in the area, or vehicle(s), which at this point in time may be uncertain as to their meaningfulness. LE would not want to risk that person's identity in the event they hold some kind of potentially incriminating evidence, in case the murderer may want to get rid of that. That is jmo.

-Someone earlier on the thread mentioned about FBI's 10 most-wanted list.. so I went and had a look over there. It shows Abby's photo and a separate one with Libby's photo, under the seeking information section of the most wanted section.. I found it odd that they were not instead showing the grainy image of the BG?

-In regard to RL's property being searched... considering that he owns the land on which the bodies were found.. and adding to that that it seems he may have lied in regard to his alibi.. I think it makes sense that LE would be doing an all-out search on him. Perhaps he can't come up with a 'provable' alibi for a certain time period the police are most interested in. Would that not invoke such a search? I don't believe that it necessarily means that police have something on him in that regard. I'm sure MSM has been keeping tabs as much as possible on any police activity in relation to this crime, and RL would be one to watch, considering his status as property owner of that particular location. Or a neighbour could have seen a parade of police vehicles going down the road and tipped them off. I don't believe it is particularly meaningful that MSM knows about the search, and police aren't going to lie about it once they know that MSM knows. I think we would know by now if something was found. JMO again.

 

[Bemused]

How does an assumption most anyone would make, including us, suddenly become suspicious just because RL made it? IMO, this is an example of trying awfully hard to turn RL into the main suspect. Maybe there are reasons to be suspicious of him, but this ain't one of 'em, IMO.

IMO any one thing doesn't make me suspicious, but everything together does.

 

[Darriel5]

I seriously doubt that. I read all these post and some are good and some are far fetched. I know how them girls felt, I myself crossed paths with that piece of worthless scum and his buddy. We were lucky to have escaped. For the record BG is one of the murderers. The girls were not targeted or stalked. Wrong place wrong time.

 

[Billy Mabou]

http://www.insideedition.com/headli...rty-where-bodies-of-indiana-hikers-were-found

at 47 seconds...RL states " I was not home during the time all this was happening, I was in Lafayette, and I didn't get home until approx 6:30 in the evening....."

How does he know what time 'this was happening'

SBM

Because he's talking in retrospect?

 

[Jethro4WS]

Iirc 15th feb

Yes, you are correct. The first posts here started about 8pm on the 15th. Way back in thread #1.