IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #48

[WickedLester]

It is not unusual for LE not to name a suspect until an arrest.

Agreed. Only thing accomplished by naming suspect is giving a defense attorney fodder to say the client was targeted by police and they didn't look elsewhere.

 

[Burnt Toast]

Some are talking about RL's talking to the press and wondering why he spoke openly and some said without feeling when he mentioned someone being killed on his property.

i don't think he showed one ounce of empathy for the girls or their family.

 

[WickedLester]

i don't think he showed one ounce of empathy for the girls or their family.

Agreed.

 

[MistyWaters]

It is not unusual for LE not to name a suspect until an arrest.

Did you read the Feb 23 media report that I posted a few minutes ago regarding the timeline of fast tracked DNA results requiring only a matter of days? That differs quite a lot from 4 to 6 weeks.

 

[Jethro4WS]

Why would she record in the direction of BG?

It doesn't seem like that was the intent to me. For example, it wasn't aimed at BG and zoomed. That second still of BG is at an angle. The folks here that worked on those stills to align them properly believe that the phone was in motion at the time. I think that is likely the case.

So, my guess is Libby had the quick thought of turning on the video and then hiding the phone. In that process of movement she happened to get a view or two of BG. Otherwise I would think that if Libby were actively aiming that camera and recording LE could release a longer video of BG walking. He had some distance to go before getting to the girls.

 

[WildWild_West]

For those of you who said BG sounds oddly familiar, I was watching the Walking Dead the other night with my husband and my eyes widened when I heard Daryl's voice. BG sounds like Daryl, y'all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[otto]

Well, here is my current thinking for a female in a multi-perpetrator scenario. Libby was concerned enough to start recording video. BG was quite a distance away. We have gotten to see a clipped and enlarged (effectively zoomed plus some other adjustments) view of BG. Libby and possibly Abby would have seen him differently and certainly not as well as we see in those not so good images. There isn't any indication of anything in BG's possession threatening the girls from that distance - not in his hands for sure since we can't even see them. Also, if Libby was concerned enough to start a video I would think that level of concern would be enough to make them want to get out of there. Yet, that does not appear to be what happened. For some reason the girls could not get out of where they were.

So, my working theory is that there were one or more perpetrators near or behind the girls and that meant they were effectively, if not actually, trapped in place. If there were another perpetrator and it was a lone male that was near or behind the girls that would likely be enough to raise the concern to start recording. But, given that there aren't dense woods in the immediate area of where the girls were (per GH) at the south end of the bridge and no leaves or foliage then their view of the immediate area would be pretty good so it would not be as if someone could easily sneak up on them. However, if that other person were a lone female or a male/female couple then that might not raise the alarm that caused Libby to start recording until something started happening closer to the girls. Either way, I believe something occurred prior to BG getting anywhere close to the girls and that is what caused LIbby to start recording.

I'm not willing to go with a 'second abductor' without something to base it on.

First, we have video of the suspect taken from many feet away and there is no second suspect.
Second, we have a predator who is not calling out to a second suspect to see if that person is "down the hill". Instead, we have an authoritative directive to the children to go down the hill. I think he was quite capable of commandeering the children after they were down the hill ... no reason to assume another person was present during the abduction, assault, and murder of these children ... is there?

 

[gitana1]

Agreed Clu. March 2016 little Shaylene Ammerman was murdered in Indiana. What LE disclosed as to her COD is completely different than we are hearing here. LE gave full graphic details as to how she was killed. I am positive the officers who found her have the same heartbreaking nightmares as the Carroll County officers. What could be the difference now?

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/...arged-rape-murder-1-year-olds-death/82336526/

"More than 30 hours later, Shaylyn's body would be found next to a tree in an isolated, rural patch of land where the White River and Indian Creek meet, just outside of Gosport. She was suffocated, an autopsy showed, and badly bruised.

It was the "worst case of sexual trauma" forensic pathologist Donna Stewart had seen in her career. Stewart, who conducted the autopsy in Louisville, Ky., specializes in pediatric autopsies with sexual battery and molestation.

Shaylyn had "numerous very apparent injuries sustained in a sexual assault," the autopsy found, according to an affidavit filed Monday."

The difference is that the killer confessed and took the police to her little body BEFORE the COD was publicized. That is a huge, massive, incredible, momentously significant difference between that case and this. What is quoted there is the arrest affidavit. We don;t have an arrest here.

Did you read the Feb 23 media report that I posted a few minutes ago regarding the timeline of fast tracked DNA results requiring only a matter of days? That differs quite a lot from 4 to 6 weeks.

I know. Can't some reporter simply ask them if they have the results back and if not, why?

 

[ImnoSherlock]

i don't think he showed one ounce of empathy for the girls or their family.

Being a dick don't make him a killer.....

What are the reasons he would be involved,but not a suspect? Isn't an accomplice considered a suspect as well?That's an honest question,not sarcasm.Do we know what the obstruction charge was for?Maybe he did witness something and the police asked him to help such as gaining information from a potential suspect but the for whatever reason he wouldn't.Could have been he was just more scared of the killer rather than the police which is why he opted to stay inside when he could have been out for a week.It would have to be some scary chit for me to want to stay in jail for any longer than necesary .Not defending him and not condemning him,just looking at why he would have wanted to stay in and be involved but not suspected.Would the sheriff be doin all the transportin of him to send a message that this is a very important person to us....but not a suspect.Tired of these cryptic messages from law enforcement.

 

[Confusion]

I'm not willing to go with a 'second abductor' without something to base it on.

First, we have video of the suspect taken from many feet away and there is no second suspect.
Second, we have a predator who is not calling out to a second suspect to see if that person is "down the hill". Instead, we have an authoritative directive to the children to go down the hill. I think he was quite capable of commandeering the children after they were down the hill ... no reason to assume another person was present during the abduction, assault, and murder of these children ... is there?

There may or may not be any reason to assume there was another person present, but there are reasons to consider it to be a possibility. If things always went exactly as we'd expect them to, there'd be no need for sleuthing at all. "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth." - Arthur Conan Doyle.

MOO

 

[otto]

Delphi, Indiana: Indiana Landmarks to repair Delphi's Monon High Bridge


http://www.theindychannel.com/news/...landmarks-to-repair-delphis-monon-high-bridge

There's been an effort for the last couple of years to make that trail safer, including the addition of rails on the bridge.

That would spruce things up to hopefully prevent an abduction of two children, but it's too late for them.

How would sprucing up the bridge prevent this possibility ... of a suspect following the pink line and accosting children on the green line:

 

[otto]

Please don't shut down and lock the thread this evening. I need to think it through with the help of others who are interested, and I think it's fair to say that the thread has completely settled down in the last few weeks. We are now two months post-murders ... please take a chance and leave the discussion open for those who are up later for whatever reason ... be it overseas or insomnia.

Thanks

 

[St. Anthony2017]

Why would she record in the direction of BG?

Maybe he gave the all clear sign .

 

[Hazelnutty]

I'm not willing to go with a 'second abductor' without something to base it on.

First, we have video of the suspect taken from many feet away and there is no second suspect.
Second, we have a predator who is not calling out to a second suspect to see if that person is "down the hill". Instead, we have an authoritative directive to the children to go down the hill. I think he was quite capable of commandeering the children after they were down the hill ... no reason to assume another person was present during the abduction, assault, and murder of these children ... is there?

I appreciate your post.

Do we know for sure it's BG's voice we're Hearing?

Could it not be another male not seen by us that says those words?

Could BG not even be speaking to the girls, but to someone off camera as to where to take the girls?

Just speculating. Not arguing. Jmoo

 

[jillycat]

It doesn't seem like that was the intent to me. For example, it wasn't aimed at BG and zoomed. That second still of BG is at an angle. The folks here that worked on those stills to align them properly believe that the phone was in motion at the time. I think that is likely the case.

So, my guess is Libby had the quick thought of turning on the video and then hiding the phone. In that process of movement she happened to get a view or two of BG. Otherwise I would think that if Libby were actively aiming that camera and recording LE could release a longer video of BG walking. He had some distance to go before getting to the girls.

That makes perfect sense that the phone was in motion.

 

[Yvettea]

Many things are possible here, but not all are true. That's why we keep talking and talking and

 

[Burnt Toast]

Please don't shut down and lock the thread this evening. I need to think it through with the help of others who are interested, and I think it's fair to say that the thread has completely settled down in the last few weeks. We are now two months post-murders ... please take a chance and leave the discussion open for those who are up later for whatever reason ... be it overseas or insomnia.

Thanks

settled down? The thread got locked yesterday....

 

[MHCH]

In the initial reporting of the search warrant at RL's it was only one reporter there. All other search warrants were served with no reporting by media at all.

Kinda jumping in here... Started on this page (45) to catch up. So sorry if this has been discussed before or after. But the first search warrant on bicycle bridge had a huge media presence.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

 

[MHCH]

i think that the fact that LE spoke to reporters on the day of the search at RL's speaks volumes. They spelled out exactly why they were there. They had not done that at any other search, even with media present. How LE handled this search was much different.

Again catching up. In my opinion they did this because the social media fiasco during and that followed the bicycle bridge search warrant. They wanted to get in front of all the speculation.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

 

[Hazelnutty]

Kinda jumping in here... Started on this page (45) to catch up. So sorry if this has been discussed before or after. But the first search warrant on bicycle bridge had a huge media presence.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

I wasn't aware there was a huge media presence. And I thought I read everything. Did they share the name of the person who lived there? Thank you for your post.