IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #58

[FrostedGlass]

he is the one i was thinking about...a couple of searches.

http://fox59.com/2017/03/14/prosecu...r-received-crucial-tip-due-to-scope-of-probe/

Not exactly a couple of searches; as per the link, it's a couple of searches signed by Carroll County Prosecutor Robert Ives. The last total number I saw was about 15; that was somewhere around a month after RL's SW.

Is it common for prosecutors to sign SWs? I read that impartial judges were the ones who signed warrants.
If Ives only signed a couple, then who signed the others? And were they outside of Carroll County?

 

[Jethro4WS]

Jethro, I've intended to respond to this post several times because your response has me confused.

The Petition to Seal Autopsy Report was presented to the Court by the County Prosecutor AFTER the Autopsy Report was completed by the Carroll County Coroner. The Autopsy Report concerns WHAT caused the loss of life, but not who is responsible.

Can you give a specific example of why an Autopsy Report would later be required to be changed (aside from a total incompetence situation which in this case is doubtful considering the high level attention) as I have never heard of that occurring. Because my point is unless the Autopsy Report is required to be changed, the few details mentioned in Petition to Seal can be considered facts of the case as presented by the prosecution. "On February 13, 2017 Abigail Williams and Liberty German were killed just outside of Delphi in Carroll County, Indiana."

The Autopsy Report does not concern itself with WHO caused the death, which of course is when LE steps in. The connection you're making to LE Search Warrants executed prior to an autopsy being completed in another case really has no bearing on an Autopsy Report in this case that's signed and sealed. If I totally missed the point you're attempting to offer, then I apologize.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Why would the autopsy report change? I don't expect it to.

However, the Petition to Seal the autopsy report does not require that any facts stated in the affidavit have to come from the autopsy report itself. The reason to seal the autopsy report is to preserve the integrity of the investigation. These are two different things. The autopsy report is one thing. The Petition to Seal is another.

I highly doubt that the prosecutor was required to restate the autopsy report findings in the actual Petition in order to seal it. I expect that the prosecutor used as few facts as necessary to convince a judge to seal the autopsy report. Those facts, as I have said, only have the requirement that they are not knowingly false at the time they are presented. That is, the standard is, to the best of their knowledge at the time. The standard for such affidavits is not that facts stated are provable beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a much lower barrier.

So, it is not uncommon to read affidavits of various kinds that assert facts in cases that at the time they were true to the best of the Affiant's knowledge at the time they presented it but turned out not to be the case later on or that they turned out not to be relevant to the case at all.

The coroner doesn't identify the specific location where a murder occurred but does record where the body was located when they arrived at the scene. It is not the coroner's job to identify the specific location where a murder took place, as that is the job of investigators.

 

[Burnt Toast]

I should've added that I guess my point on that is that it makes me think that they'd surely have found footprints from his house to where they were found and back to his house. I guess it isn't totally impossible but I'd think they'd have been much more interested in *only* him and people known to him and it makes me wonder if we'd be seeing billboards so far away if that were the case.. Who knows.. I feel like all I can do is guess at this point.

his footprints and DNA are all over his property. He has lived there for eons. They would need lot more than that for a conviction. I think most of the billboards have been down for some time now.

 

[Burnt Toast]

RL's probation terms said he wasn't to have access to a vehicle. In one of the search videos I thought I saw his truck being removed from the Mears' barn (at the time I thought it was RL's barn) so I kinda assume he was storing it across the road from his house. Perhaps that's why the barn was searched. Another reason could be just the close proximity to his house. He could easily put something there.

Of course not accusing RL of a crime, :blushing: just sharing my thoughts of why LE searched there.

Yes, LE had to know it belonged to him immediately following the murders. LE knew then it was his and that he was in violation of his probation, yet they did not arrest him until weeks later. It makes me wonder why they wanted him in jail on march 10th but not before. Was something found during the grain bin search that implicated him?

 

[ab01]

Yes, LE had to know it belonged to him immediately following the murders. LE knew then it was his and that he was in violation of his probation, yet they did not arrest him until weeks later. It makes me wonder why they wanted him in jail on march 10th but not before. Was something found during the grain bin search that implicated him?

The timing of everything and how it was all handled in regards to RL has always seemed fishy to me. Unfortunately i'm not sure at this point any further insight can be garnered until LE explains it and maybe they never will. MOO

 

[Brighty]

A little off subject but I came across a statistic today on the NPR website that really surprised me. Evidently 1/3 of murders in the US go unsolved. In 2015 the FBI national clearance rate for homicide was 64.1%, and even worse 'clearance' does not equal conviction, it merely means the case ended in an arrest. Criminologists estimate that 200,000 murders have gone unsolved since the 1960s.

This really surprised me. I thought with the rapid advances in technology and security cameras everywhere that catching killers was easier than ever, but somehow the clearance rate is only 64% and fifty years ago it was over 90%. This seems irrational. I guess the standards for charging people are much higher now and prosecutors demand open-and-shut cases. Regardless, 1/3 of murders going unsolved really surprised me and I thought I'd share.

http://www.npr.org/2015/03/30/395069137/open-cases-why-one-third-of-murders-in-america-go-unresolved

It also contains a link to a different page where you can search how many crimes the police 'cleared' by a specific town or city. It appears to work and brings up a lot of information when you search a municipality.

I do not want to mislead anyone with this post that I am any sort of expert or trying to claim to be- I did get a degree in Police Science in the 1970s because I wanted to go into LE. The thing is where I lived women in LE were still given desk jobs or meter maid jobs and that was not for me. I never worked in LE; the total of my experience is classroom, from back in the day. I have no actual experience. What follows is what I learned then in the classroom and what I have been told and heard in media interviews with current LE.

I took Police Science classes in the 1970s before most technology we have now. Most murder and other cases then were solved and tried based on circumstantial evidence. Fingerprints were great but hard to match without computers to do the matching. Fingerprints were not commonly found either. We were blown away by luminol showing blood in lab classes it was so impressive at the time. Cases were solved by what they used to call good old fashioned detective work, figuring out what most likely happened and then figuring out who most likely did it and a prosecutor convincing the jury. If a defendant did not have an ironclad alibi it was hard for them not to be convicted. Juries wanted to believe officials.

What I hear from people currently in LE is because of technology, and crime shows that are not completely realistic juries will likely not convict someone without something like DNA, and/or other impressive forensic evidence. Juries don't like circumstantial evidence and don't trust officials to always be truthful. LE also says most jurors expect things to be wrapped up and backed up by technology and if not they won't convict. LE blames this on "CSI" and similar shows.

Prosecutors do not like cases that juries won't like so it is harder to get suspects charged now, and even harder to get a conviction.

This is good and bad, more bad people get away with murder and other serious crimes. Very frustrating for LE, victims, families, and all of us. We do have to remember though that when DNA has been used on some past cases with convictions (think innocence project or appeals on old cases) it has often shown not to match the person convicted for the crime.

I wish there was a happy in between; we need to get the bad guys off the street. By the same token it is horrific to convict an innocent person. I don't know what the answer is, but in my opinion it explains the seemingly low rate of murders being solved or people convicted.

 

[BoggLed in Ohio]

A little off subject but I came across a statistic today on the NPR website that really surprised me. Evidently 1/3 of murders in the US go unsolved. In 2015 the FBI national clearance rate for homicide was 64.1%, and even worse 'clearance' does not equal conviction, it merely means the case ended in an arrest. Criminologists estimate that 200,000 murders have gone unsolved since the 1960s.

This really surprised me. I thought with the rapid advances in technology and security cameras everywhere that catching killers was easier than ever, but somehow the clearance rate is only 64% and fifty years ago it was over 90%. This seems irrational. I guess the standards for charging people are much higher now and prosecutors demand open-and-shut cases. Regardless, 1/3 of murders going unsolved really surprised me and I thought I'd share.

http://www.npr.org/2015/03/30/395069137/open-cases-why-one-third-of-murders-in-america-go-unresolved

It also contains a link to a different page where you can search how many crimes the police 'cleared' by a specific town or city. It appears to work and brings up a lot of information when you search a municipality.

Those stats do indeed seem crazily out of balance...maybe it means back in the old days before DNA and cameras that a lot of innocent people were convicted of crimes they didnt commit ?

 

[MistyWaters]

Why would the autopsy report change? I don't expect it to.

However, the Petition to Seal the autopsy report does not require that any facts stated in the affidavit have to come from the autopsy report itself. The reason to seal the autopsy report is to preserve the integrity of the investigation. These are two different things. The autopsy report is one thing. The Petition to Seal is another.

I highly doubt that the prosecutor was required to restate the autopsy report findings in the actual Petition in order to seal it. I expect that the prosecutor used as few facts as necessary to convince a judge to seal the autopsy report. Those facts, as I have said, only have the requirement that they are not knowingly false at the time they are presented. That is, the standard is, to the best of their knowledge at the time. The standard for such affidavits is not that facts stated are provable beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a much lower barrier.

So, it is not uncommon to read affidavits of various kinds that assert facts in cases that at the time they were true to the best of the Affiant's knowledge at the time they presented it but turned out not to be the case later on or that they turned out not to be relevant to the case at all.

The coroner doesn't identify the specific location where a murder occurred but does record where the body was located when they arrived at the scene. It is not the coroner's job to identify the specific location where a murder took place, as that is the job of investigators.

Just a couple of comments. It's the role of the Coroner to determine when death occurred and therefore evidence at the crime scene of a homicide is very material to their conclusion. In every other case and I'm certain this one as well, LE stands back until medical examiners have had an opportunity to view the victims and evidence around them in the exact way they were found. Based on evidence including for example blood loss, the Coroner may draw the professional conclusion that death occured on site. If it didn't then the location of death would be undetermined. Only if it were undetermined does LE commence an investigation in an attempt to identify the actual murder location.

The Petition to Seal an Autopsy isn't just an affidavid. A few days ago a WS member posted the Legislated Procedure and conditions whereby the request to Seal an Autopsy may be heard by the Court.

I can think of absolutely no reason to even question if the Prosecution has strayed from information he's determined to be factual, considering he is privy to the Coroner's Autopsy Report. We are merely interested observers who don't yet know even basic information such as the cause of death. MOO

 

[MistyWaters]

I do not want to mislead anyone with this post that I am any sort of expert or trying to claim to be- I did get a degree in Police Science in the 1970s because I wanted to go into LE. The thing is where I lived women in LE were still given desk jobs or meter maid jobs and that was not for me. I never worked in LE; the total of my experience is classroom, from back in the day. I have no actual experience. What follows is what I learned then in the classroom and what I have been told and heard in media interviews with current LE.

I took Police Science classes in the 1970s before most technology we have now. Most murder and other cases then were solved and tried based on circumstantial evidence. Fingerprints were great but hard to match without computers to do the matching. Fingerprints were not commonly found either. We were blown away by luminol showing blood in lab classes it was so impressive at the time. Cases were solved by what they used to call good old fashioned detective work, figuring out what most likely happened and then figuring out who most likely did it and a prosecutor convincing the jury. If a defendant did not have an ironclad alibi it was hard for them not to be convicted. Juries wanted to believe officials.

What I hear from people currently in LE is because of technology, and crime shows that are not completely realistic juries will likely not convict someone without something like DNA, and/or other impressive forensic evidence. Juries don't like circumstantial evidence and don't trust officials to always be truthful. LE also says most jurors expect things to be wrapped up and backed up by technology and if not they won't convict. LE blames this on "CSI" and similar shows.

Prosecutors do not like cases that juries won't like so it is harder to get suspects charged now, and even harder to get a conviction.

This is good and bad, more bad people get away with murder and other serious crimes. Very frustrating for LE, victims, families, and all of us. We do have to remember though that when DNA has been used on some past cases with convictions (think innocence project or appeals on old cases) it has often shown not to match the person convicted for the crime.

I wish there was a happy in between; we need to get the bad guys off the street. By the same token it is horrific to convict an innocent person. I don't know what the answer is, but in my opinion it explains the seemingly low rate of murders being solved or people convicted.

My "like" button has disappeared and refreshing is to no avail but your observations are very interesting. I can understand how the CSI effect can creates false expectations within juries.

 

[kat913]

Anyone think BG may be 6'0 tall and 201 lbs by any chance?

Just curious because I think most were leaning towards someone shorter 5'9-5'10?

 

[Burnt Toast]

Just a couple of comments. It's the role of the Coroner to determine when death occurred and therefore evidence at the crime scene of a homicide is very material to their conclusion. In every other case and I'm certain this one as well, LE stands back until medical examiners have had an opportunity to view the victims and evidence around them in the exact way they were found. Based on evidence including for example blood loss, the Coroner may draw the professional conclusion that death occured on site. If it didn't then the location of death would be undetermined. Only if it were undetermined does LE commence an investigation in an attempt to identify the actual murder location.

The Petition to Seal an Autopsy isn't just an affidavid. A few days ago a WS member posted the Legislated Procedure and conditions whereby the request to Seal an Autopsy may be heard by the Court.

I can think of absolutely no reason to even question if the Prosecution has strayed from information he's determined to be factual, considering he is privy to the Coroner's Autopsy Report. We are merely interested observers who don't yet know even basic information such as the cause of death. MOO

I don't think a coroner needs evidence from a CS to determine the time of death. rigor mortis and algor mortis can determine that.

 

[Burnt Toast]

Anyone think BG may be 6'0 tall and 201 lbs by any chance?

Got someone in mind and just wondering what ya'll think is plausible.

if you have someone in mind you should call the tip line. Let LE determine if it is plausible. yes, he is about that size, although maybe a bit heavier.

 

[crhedBngr]

Anyone think BG may be 6'0 tall and 201 lbs by any chance?

Got someone in mind and just wondering what ya'll think is plausible.

Sure, it's possible. As Burnt Toast said, please follow through and call the tip line.

 

[rosesfromangels]

A little off subject but I came across a statistic today on the NPR website that really surprised me. Evidently 1/3 of murders in the US go unsolved. In 2015 the FBI national clearance rate for homicide was 64.1%, and even worse 'clearance' does not equal conviction, it merely means the case ended in an arrest. Criminologists estimate that 200,000 murders have gone unsolved since the 1960s.

This really surprised me. I thought with the rapid advances in technology and security cameras everywhere that catching killers was easier than ever, but somehow the clearance rate is only 64% and fifty years ago it was over 90%. This seems irrational. I guess the standards for charging people are much higher now and prosecutors demand open-and-shut cases. Regardless, 1/3 of murders going unsolved really surprised me and I thought I'd share.

http://www.npr.org/2015/03/30/395069137/open-cases-why-one-third-of-murders-in-america-go-unresolved

It also contains a link to a different page where you can search how many crimes the police 'cleared' by a specific town or city. It appears to work and brings up a lot of information when you search a municipality.

Its not a technology issue, its a resource issue. LE is grossly underfunded, understaffed, and undersupported.

 

[Wild Rose]

The topic of cellphone pings has been discussed many times within these 58 threads by technical folks who understand how they work but iirc the gist of it is a cellphone does not have to travelling in order to ping different nearby cell towers and doing so is a normal function. My understanding is that it has to do with capacity of any one tower at any given time.

My phone pings sometimes on a cell tower thirty miles away! And there are multiple cell towers between me and that tower.

 

[MistyWaters]

I don't think a coroner needs evidence from a CS to determine the time of death. rigor mortis and algor mortis can determine that.

I wasn't referring to time of death, at best that's an opinion but greatly influenced by cause of death. By "When death occurred", is there supporting evidence on site to support the cause of death depending on what it is ( ie relating to blood loss, stabbing, gunshot etc). If not, the bodies were obviously moved after death took place. Rigid mortis is not an exact science but sure, it's a factor thats considered however not the only one.

 

[MistyWaters]

My phone pings sometimes on a cell tower thirty miles away! And there are multiple cell towers between me and that tower.

Very interesting! Then the closer towers must often reach capacity, lots of blabbing happening in your area. lol!

 

[Wild Rose]

But how do you get TWO girls into a car like that? Threaten one with being shot or stabbed? Then, when they are in the car, how do you drive and then also control them???? This just doesn't seem likely to me. And why would anyone risk bringing girls back that they know someone is looking for?

IMO if you impersonated LE, many young and old would acquiesce. Don't know if that happened here. Hopefully audio caught whatever happened here.

 

[Bird of Paradise]

I wasn't referring to time of death, at best that's an opinion but greatly influenced by cause of death. By "When death occurred", is there supporting evidence on site to support the cause of death depending on what it is ( ie relating to blood loss, stabbing, gunshot etc). If not, the bodies were obviously moved after death took place. Rigid mortis is not an exact science but sure, it's a factor thats considered however not the only one.

Curious, I looked up some articles on determining time of death.

Here's one:

http://www.practicalhomicide.com/Research/LOmar2007.htm

The quote below is most likely in reference to someone who may have been missing as opposed to the girls where LE knew the general timeline. Informative all the same.

[SIZE=+1]Information Derived from the Scene[/SIZE]

Information obtained by the investigator relative to events associated with the deceased is of utmost importance. This is where the work of the homicide detective really comes into play. I have been personally involved in many homicide investigations where the determination of the approximate time of death was directly related to the information retrieved from the crime scene and the neighborhood canvass.

 

[Wild Rose]

Thanks Margarita! :blushing: I am really excited with how this latest experiment turned out.

To those who have not been to the image thread and seen it, I wondered how BG was actually carrying various items in his coat (if that is what is going on there). I started looking for hunting vests. Normally you would wear them outside but I thought "what if he were wearing it inside his jacket?"

People have brough up tactical type vests but to me they rest too high up on the chest. The pictures of BG, imo, show his carrying bulky weight at the bottom of his jacket, pulling down from the shoulders. The area across the chest appears hollow to me. So I started looking for hunting vest that hung low and I found several, but the one I chose lines up, again imo, perfectly with the bulk in his coat.

I superimposed the two images to line up how the vest would fit on BG underneath the jacket. It was a perfect fit. Is he actually wearing one? I cannot say of course, so pure speculation, but for me, if he is this would answer alot of questions about that jacket. I am not allowed to post the images here so if you are interested in how it all fit together, the images are in posts #577 and #579 on the image thread:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...erty-German-14-Delphi&p=13375060#post13375060

I would be very honored if anyone here would have a look and share your thoughts? As always, feel free to okeoke holes.

Fishermen by me wear those jackets. I know that bridges are very attractive to fishermen, fish lay low under structures like deadfall trees and the like. LE should check fishing licenses in Indiana!