IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #49

[Sir WiggleBottom III]

I said this last night , does anybody find it odd that LE to my knowledge has not said how Abby was feeling ?

They have gone out their way to say what a hero Libby was and how she was scared but used her wits and had the fore-site to record him.

Is it at all possible he had already done something to Abby at this stage ?

I do find the lack of references to Abby slightly odd.

 

[Bird of Paradise]

Well, okay then. How does a theory about a lunatic pedophile become plausible especially if kids were up there all the time?

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

I suppose if we had that answer we'd know why serial killers and murderers killed.

I merely pointed out that the bridge was indeed used by people. There were teens there earlier in the day.
I'm not discounting you coming up with a theory or thinking outside the box. I'm pointing out why I don't see it plausible.

 

[Bemused]

Well, my theory suggests neither.
He wasn't a pedophile, wasn't violent but angry, and his motive wasn't to hurt them. Until..the
unspeakable happened.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

Yes, there is likely to be court records of issues with anger and possible drugs or alcohol in the killer's past, IMO. I agree with you on many things.

 

[asyousay]

I do find the lack of references to Abby slightly odd.

Me too , it jumped out at me last night suddenly.

It is quite strange imo

 

[Bird of Paradise]

Yes, there is likely to be court records of issues with anger and possible drugs or alcohol in the killer's past, IMO. I agree with you on many things.

Not necessarily so. This person may have slid under the radar until now.

 

[Razz]

While you may be correct, I don't see much support for your theory.

Motive is not intent, so, his motive is what caused the event. What do you suggest would be his motive? It seems from your post, you believe anger is part of the motivation.

His intent, you suggest, was not to hurt them. However, you suggest an event "the unspeakable" happened. What event happened that would change the intent?

I am just not following you theory. Can you help?

The above is my opinion only.

I think his motive was to give them a piece of his mind. I think they may have poopooed him and that really ticked him off.

If you reread my theory , he didn't
go up there to hurt them. I believe the part on the bridge was an accident.

This above is only my wild speculation but it answers some
of the questions asked and how,
in my own mind I can explain it.

No screaming, no gunshots, no lugging both girls across the creek (only one), never had to subdue them because one was hurt and the other was terribly concerned about her friend.



Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

 

[Hatfield]

Of course I dare say we all have, not to the point where I would kill someone. No person with again 0 history of violence is going to risk everything they hold dear to kill two people for the audacity of annoyance. Beyond possible annoyance this theory had no other motive. Anger killings are instant, not thought out if blinded by anger he would have just killed them then and there.

JMO
Ive often wondered if some other kids had been there that day and maybe even trespassed on someones land and maybe even vandalized someones property by throwing beer bottles or throwing rocks at someones barn windows or something along those lines.

If something like that happened and lets say it even happened when the person wasnt even home.

Then lets say the person gets home and see the vandalized damage and gets a gun and goes out to the one area where he thinks the persons that did the vandalizing could maybe still be there.

And BG runs into the girls and makes the mistake of thinking they were the ones who caused the damage to his property. When maybe the real vandals had already left right before the girls got there.

So many possibles that it is hard to pick any one theory in this case.

 

[hilary1617]

Anything is possible IMO, and some prior harm befalling Abby certainly would account for LE's view that Libby was heroic in her filming.

As a mom, absent all other factors, I would have serious safety concerns about children and teens crossing the high bridge because of the lack of a safety railing and the state of the trestle itself - with some missing cross bars. MOO, It would be a fairly easy matter for someone to fall off, particularly if moving to the side to allow another to cross or to try to capture a photo or just being distracted by another child. I could see a tragic accident occurring there, even under the most benign of circumstances.

It would be even more dangerous to cross at a fast pace under threat or chase.

 

[stellamickey]

As someone said a thread or two ago, put a gold star on your head and give you a cookie.

That is the most refreshing bit of sleuthing..we are here to sleuth correct?? that I've seen posted in many threads.

For the life of me I do not understand what the point is to continually push one's own agenda here instead of looking at other avenues such as you have done. Excellent observation. Thank you.

Thank you...Also something in the scanner thread is stuck in my head.

 

[Mainemom76]

IMO if it was RL we would have had an arrest by now. Not EVERYTHING from the sw takes 6 weeks. And the evidence at cs has been collected for 8. This was a planned, targeted murder. Someone (or more) knows what happened. This reminds me so much of the Rhoden family. If someone does not come forward this will not be solved. JMO

 

[heaterann]

IMO if it was RL we would have had an arrest by now. Not EVERYTHING from the sw takes 6 weeks. And the evidence at cs has been collected for 8. This was a planned, targeted murder. Someone (or more) knows what happened. This reminds me so much of the Rhoden family. If someone does not come forward this will not be solved. JMO

Thats interesting, after reading your post I just googled Rhoden family and found this article about the murders, this statement by Pike County LE jumped out at me:

[FONT=&quot]"There is absolutely no doubt in my mind or in any investigator's mind, that there's information that may be part truth, but not all the way true," said Pike County Sheriff Charles Reader.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Witnesses with such fears who come forward will be treated fairly, added Attorney General Mike DeWine, whose office is leading the investigation. The focus is on the homicide, not those individuals' crimes, he said.

http://www.10tv.com/article/officials-provide-update-rhoden-family-murder-investigation

So my question is how come this LE feels it is more important to gets leads that could possibly solve this case then to discourage people from coming forward because they are going to get charged for everything and anything they may have ever done wrong.... that IMO is the message Delphi LE sent out especially with everything that has happened to RL... if anyone has any information but may have any doubt about their own criminal past even if its something minor they are never going to come forward now. Why didnt Delphi LE take the same approach as Pike County LE?[/FONT]

 

[zencompass]

I think his motive was to give them a piece of his mind. I think they may have poopooed him and that really ticked him off.

If you reread my theory , he didn't
go up there to hurt them. I believe the part on the bridge was an accident.

This above is only my wild speculation but it answers some
of the questions asked and how,
in my own mind I can explain it.

No screaming, no gunshots, no lugging both girls across the creek (only one), never had to subdue them because one was hurt and the other was terribly concerned about her friend.



Hi Razz,

Please correct me if I am not understanding your working theory.

B.G. appears on bridge
One of the girls falls or is pushed off bridge either purposefully or accidentally
The other girl is hysterical
He says "go down the hill"
The girl who fell is dead
He kills the other girl
He removes their clothes to make it look like sexual assault/murders
All of this because he won't risk going to jail because he "blames" them - if they weren't on bridge this wouldn't have happened.

Am I getting it, Razz?

 

[Hatfield]

I said this last night , does anybody find it odd that LE to my knowledge has not said how Abby was feeling ?

They have gone out their way to say what a hero Libby was and how she was scared but used her wits and had the fore-site to record him.

Is it at all possible he had already done something to Abby at this stage ?


ETA - we already know that some kind of alteration had already happened as well hence Libby being so scared!

It is an interesting observation. Thanks for pointing it out.

If one of the two girls were thrown off the bridge either accidentally or on purpose I do have a tough time seeing how even the other two could drag the person all the way where the girls ended up though.

Now if the other person was only injured and could still limp then that is plausble that they managed to walk some on their own.

For some reason I do seem to hold onto a theory that the killer did not originally intend to kill them and just wanted to teach them a lesson and things went really bad. Probably just wishful thinking on my part.

I think I hold onto that theory because of the lack of news about any gunshot wounds. It is so hard to come up with any one theory that is the right one because we really do not know the cause of death of the victims and we have no real answer as to what the motive really was.

The one early reporter that allegedly saw clothes in the river has me thinking a sexual motive which tends to go one way towards a motive and yet there is nothing to really support that except for what the reporter claimed to have seen.

And the BG video and his actions on the bridge has me thinking a different motive.

 

[Mainemom76]

Thats interesting, after reading your post I just googled Rhoden family and found this article about the murders, this statement by Pike County LE jumped out at me:
Exactly. So odd. JMO
[FONT=&amp]"There is absolutely no doubt in my mind or in any investigator's mind, that there's information that may be part truth, but not all the way true," said Pike County Sheriff Charles Reader.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Witnesses with such fears who come forward will be treated fairly, added Attorney General Mike DeWine, whose office is leading the investigation. The focus is on the homicide, not those individuals' crimes, he said.

http://www.10tv.com/article/officials-provide-update-rhoden-family-murder-investigation

So my question is how come this LE feels it is more important to gets leads that could possibly solve this case then to discourage people from coming forward because they are going to get charged for everything and anything they may have ever done wrong.... that IMO is the message Delphi LE sent out especially with everything that has happened to RL... if anyone has any information but may have any doubt about their own criminal past even if its something minor they are never going to come forward now. Why didnt Delphi LE take the same approach as Pike County LE?[/FONT]

Exactly. So odd. JMO

 

[Sir WiggleBottom III]

It is an interesting observation. Thanks for pointing it out.

If one of the two girls were thrown off the bridge either accidentally or on purpose I do have a tough time seeing how even the other two could drag the person all the way where the girls ended up though.

Now if the other person was only injured and could still limp then that is plausble that they managed to walk some on their own.

For some reason I do seem to hold onto a theory that the killer did not originally intend to kill them and just wanted to teach them a lesson and things went really bad. Probably just wishful thinking on my part.

I think I hold onto that theory because of the lack of news about any gunshot wounds. It is so hard to come up with any one theory that is the right one because we really do not know the cause of death of the victims and we have no real answer as to what the motive really was.

The one early reporter that allegedly saw clothes in the river has me thinking a sexual motive which tends to go one way towards a motive and yet there is nothing to really support that except for what the reporter claimed to have seen.

And the BG video and his actions on the bridge has me thinking a different motive.

What video? What actions? The only "video" released were stills. We are not aware of his actions on the bridge. How can one tell motive from a still photo with 0 context?

 

[OtisC]

I think his motive was to give them a piece of his mind. I think they may have poopooed him and that really ticked him off.

If you reread my theory , he didn't
go up there to hurt them. I believe the part on the bridge was an accident.

This above is only my wild speculation but it answers some
of the questions asked and how,
in my own mind I can explain it.

No screaming, no gunshots, no lugging both girls across the creek (only one), never had to subdue them because one was hurt and the other was terribly concerned about her friend.



Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

If I am reading your post correctly, your theory is that his motive was being angry at them. Is that correct? If so, what was he angry about?

Again, if I am reading your post correctly, his intent was not to harm them. Was his intent to scare them through a harsh verbal warning? Again, what was he warning them about?

It seems you are implying that the "unspeakable" was a fall from the bridge. Is that correct? If so, do you think physical contact from him attributed to that fall?

You also seem to imply that after one fell from the bridge that he "disposed" of the other in order to cover up the initial event. Is that true?

I just want to make sure that I am understanding your thoughts on this.

I appreciate the discussion.

The above is my opinion only.

 

[AmateurAnalyst73]

And, if we're considering RL here, was it not confirmed awhile back that there had been a protective order issued against him in the past? There usually has to be some documentation of aggressive/violent behavior for a judge to issue a PO.Again...I'm not in the camp that is sold on RL being the guy here, but am open to the possibility still.

Well, my theory suggests neither.
He wasn't a pedophile, wasn't violent but angry, and his motive wasn't to hurt them. Until..the
unspeakable happened.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

 

[Bently]

As someone said a thread or two ago, put a gold star on your head and give you a cookie.

That is the most refreshing bit of sleuthing..we are here to sleuth correct?? that I've seen posted in many threads.

For the life of me I do not understand what the point is to continually push one's own agenda here instead of looking at other avenues such as you have done. Excellent observation. Thank you.

Something I found of Interest was a train was blocking downtown two days afterwards at 7:30 a.m. and there was an tweet iirc on it. It sounded to me like the train was stopped for some reason for 30 minutes or moreunexpectedly.

I have tried to find that again but I cannot. I think it was a local tweet from govmt or le, but I cannot find it now.

 

[Burnt Toast]

Why yes, an elderly man with 0 history of violent crimes, pedophilic crime or no motive what so ever.

"probably the property owner" was in response to someone asking who would they be looking at had they not released the video still or audio. I think the PO would still have gone through everything they have since this crime happened, even without the release of either. I think he still would have lied about what he was doing that day with or without it.

 

[expatCanada]

LE in this case have arrested numerous people not just RL.

http://fox59.com/2017/03/01/arrests-made-in-delphi-not-connected-to-murder-investigation/

Thats interesting, after reading your post I just googled Rhoden family and found this article about the murders, this statement by Pike County LE jumped out at me:

[FONT=&amp]"There is absolutely no doubt in my mind or in any investigator's mind, that there's information that may be part truth, but not all the way true," said Pike County Sheriff Charles Reader.[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Witnesses with such fears who come forward will be treated fairly, added Attorney General Mike DeWine, whose office is leading the investigation. The focus is on the homicide, not those individuals' crimes, he said.

http://www.10tv.com/article/officials-provide-update-rhoden-family-murder-investigation

So my question is how come this LE feels it is more important to gets leads that could possibly solve this case then to discourage people from coming forward because they are going to get charged for everything and anything they may have ever done wrong.... that IMO is the message Delphi LE sent out especially with everything that has happened to RL... if anyone has any information but may have any doubt about their own criminal past even if its something minor they are never going to come forward now. Why didnt Delphi LE take the same approach as Pike County LE?[/FONT]