IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #66

[GMF3]

Hey, so I haven't posted for quite a while. In fact, I've only posted once. I still think there's a strong possibility that this is a local issue. Problem is, nobody recognizes the sketch etc. So, I'm losing hope to some extent.

The other half of me thinks this guy is likely a truck driver. And as I've kept that in the back of my mind, a couple things have supported that thought:

1. In the last major update, the lead detective said they were still tracking people down. Some of which were in Delphi "at the time."

2. LE must have at least initially thought it was a truck driver because of the 6000 billboards across the country.

3. I'm pretty sure I read here that some people think he's wearing a sweatshirt that has the "Browning" logo on it. Which, if you look at the logo could sorta make sense. I was driving on a major trucking highway in Utah the other day. It was actually right on the border, so it could have been Wyoming. Anyways, there was a Browning outlet on the side of the highway, basically next to a 24 adult video arcade. Which is obviously there for truckers. Any real connection, no, but, it made sense if he is actually wearing a Browning sweatshirt and is a truck driver. It is likely a route he's been through.

4. Lastly, yesterday, I saw a long haul trucker that had a special mount behind the cab for his motorcycle. I'm not talking about a moped, like a real deal Harley. I bring this up because there was some recent discussion as to how he would have gotten to the bridge area without being seen in a large semi, if he does in fact drive one.

I could be completely off base and I'm really just talking out loud. But, I wanted to add some things that support the trucker theory.

 

[Falling Down]

Hey, so I haven't posted for quite a while. In fact, I've only posted once. I still think there's a strong possibility that this is a local issue. Problem is, nobody recognizes the sketch etc. So, I'm losing hope to some extent.

The other half of me thinks this guy is likely a truck driver. And as I've kept that in the back of my mind, a couple things have supported that thought:

1. In the last major update, the lead detective said they were still tracking people down. Some of which were in Delphi "at the time."

2. LE must have at least initially thought it was a truck driver because of the 6000 billboards across the country.

3. I'm pretty sure I read here that some people think he's wearing a sweatshirt that has the "Browning" logo on it. Which, if you look at the logo could sorta make sense. I was driving on a major trucking highway in Utah the other day. It was actually right on the border, so it could have been Wyoming. Anyways, there was a Browning outlet on the side of the highway, basically next to a 24 adult video arcade. Which is obviously there for truckers. Any real connection, no, but, it made sense if he is actually wearing a Browning sweatshirt and is a truck driver. It is likely a route he's been through.

4. Lastly, yesterday, I saw a long haul trucker that had a special mount behind the cab for his motorcycle. I'm not talking about a moped, like a real deal Harley. I bring this up because there was some recent discussion as to how he would have gotten to the bridge area without being seen in a large semi, if he does in fact drive one.

I could be completely off base and I'm really just talking out loud. But, I wanted to add some things that support the trucker theory.

Thanks for sharing.

I'd wondered if such mounts existed, a mount for a motorcycle. A motorcycle would have been easier to conceal than a car or truck.

 

[DarkSkink]

Who are you asking or is it rhetorical?
We can factually state the water was higher on the 13th than in the drone video and higher also than on the 14th and definitely much higher than in JM March video based on the flow data. That's as good as it gets.

It's in response to the idea the creek was higher that day. Accepted. When someone points out in a picture that it's shallower near the crime scene, that is also a fact, and will remain a fact regardless of the depth of the water.

The likely scenario, is that they crossed the creek on foot, rather than go around or over it, and that they chose the shallowest area to do so. That's all I read into that person's post. I found the lecture on facts and mic dropping a bit beyond the pale.

 

[her]

It's in response to the idea the creek was higher that day. Accepted. When someone points out in a picture that it's shallower near the crime scene, that is also a fact, and will remain a fact regardless of the depth of the water.

The likely scenario, is that they crossed the creek on foot, rather than go around or over it, and that they chose the shallowest area to do so. That's all I read into that person's post. I found the lecture on facts and mic dropping a bit beyond the pale.

What's beyond the pale is refusing stated and proven data so that we can further create confusion to make things more difficult.

Nobody said a sandbar doesn't exist, it's common sense it would be more shallow while passing over one. What's your point? That was never anything disputed nor where there any lectures. When proof was given showing a video over two weeks later the water levels are low, that's not proof. Twice the water tablet was given today alone...that's governmental data.

Also how do you know the girls would know what's the shallowest area if it's all under water and also not thinking clearly if bg is with them?

An open mind to data, to proof is a good thing, imo.

 

[DarkSkink]

What's beyond the pale is refusing stated and proven data so that we can further create confusion to make things more difficult.

Nobody said a sandbar doesn't exist, it's common sense it would be more shallow while passing over one. What's your point? That was never anything disputed nor where there any lectures. When proof was given showing a video over two weeks later the water levels are low, that's not proof. Twice the water tablet was given today alone...that's governmental data.

Also how do you know the girls would know what's the shallowest area if it's all under water and also not thinking clearly if bg is with them?

An open mind to data, to proof is a good thing, imo.

Say what?

Someone pointed out that the creek is shallower right near the crime scene... Then they got lectured on facts in a rather strange manner. I'm not the only one that found it odd that they pointed out the fact the creek is more shallow there, then was told to stick to the facts.

Fact is, since no one was washed away by the alleged raging river, video or no video, they likely crossed the creek, and perhaps looked for the shallowest spot possible to cross. Fact is, water only a few feet deep is quite transparent as to see the ground.

 

[terpstra1]

Post #307 in the media thread (link on page one of every thread)

Q. In the release you mentioned some things exactly such as the hair color, can you talk about this at this time

A. Basically, the hair color is a reddish brown. She was, the person was not clear on the color of the eyes, but sh.., the person said it was definitely not blue. She was very obvious..., the person was very obviously not blue eyes, but they did mention that they were not clear on what color it was.

Q. So there are people out there who are sure that are sure they saw this guy walking around this day and they helped you out, it that?

A. Pretty much that's what it is, yes.

Q. Did those people come forward right away, or did it take a little time for those people to come forward.

A. It's been a while. It took a little bit, people are scared, they are afraid to be recognized by the subject, so, it just takes a while for these things to happened. Like I said, the picture did not come overnight, we've been working on this for a while

I'm not sure what you're point is here. He's not exactly saying if the witness to the eye color was on the trail or not. My apologies if I'm missing something.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

[her]

Say what?

Someone pointed out that the creek is shallower right near the crime scene... Then they got lectured on facts in a rather strange manner. I'm not the only one that found it odd that they pointed out the fact the creek is more shallow there, then was told to stick to the facts.

Fact is, since no one was washed away by the alleged raging river, video or no video, they likely crossed the creek, and perhaps looked for the shallowest spot possible to cross. Fact is, water only a few feet deep is quite transparent as to see the ground.

It was not presented that way.
That is the last I'm going to say on this, if people want to be purposely obtuse it's not my business anymore. I do think they crossed the river exactly where the police where in the water. A creek that is proven could be up to 4' deep and running rather fast where there is disruption on the surface is not very visible.

 

[her]

I'm not sure what you're point is here. He's not exactly saying if the witness to the eye color was on the trail or not. My apologies if I'm missing something.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

I think that was in response to a theory that the witness was from a past crime by bg from matched DNA. Which wasn't what LE said.

 

[TheVisual]

Say what?

Someone pointed out that the creek is shallower right near the crime scene... Then they got lectured on facts in a rather strange manner. I'm not the only one that found it odd that they pointed out the fact the creek is more shallow there, then was told to stick to the facts.

Fact is, since no one was washed away by the alleged raging river, video or no video, they likely crossed the creek, and perhaps looked for the shallowest spot possible to cross. Fact is, water only a few feet deep is quite transparent as to see the ground.

Regardless of how high or low the water was that day it appears the kids knew the area well ( from going there often)and maybe would know where the sandbars were(providing that is something that would not change). JMO

 

[terpstra1]

I think that was in response to a theory that the witness was from a past crime by bg from matched DNA. Which wasn't what LE said.

True but he wasn't asked that question. The answers he gave didn't confirm it either way. Just curious. The idea does intrigue me.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

[mrtnira]

The DNA might have been logged from a past crime, but if the criminal had not been arrested and swabbed before there would be no name-to-DNA association.

It does sound like they had a DNA match to a previous crime. But, it also sounds like there is no association of the DNA to a known person yet.

 

[tmar]

Hey, so I haven't posted for quite a while. In fact, I've only posted once. I still think there's a strong possibility that this is a local issue. Problem is, nobody recognizes the sketch etc. So, I'm losing hope to some extent.

The other half of me thinks this guy is likely a truck driver. And as I've kept that in the back of my mind, a couple things have supported that thought:

1. In the last major update, the lead detective said they were still tracking people down. Some of which were in Delphi "at the time."

2. LE must have at least initially thought it was a truck driver because of the 6000 billboards across the country.

3. I'm pretty sure I read here that some people think he's wearing a sweatshirt that has the "Browning" logo on it. Which, if you look at the logo could sorta make sense. I was driving on a major trucking highway in Utah the other day. It was actually right on the border, so it could have been Wyoming. Anyways, there was a Browning outlet on the side of the highway, basically next to a 24 adult video arcade. Which is obviously there for truckers. Any real connection, no, but, it made sense if he is actually wearing a Browning sweatshirt and is a truck driver. It is likely a route he's been through.

4. Lastly, yesterday, I saw a long haul trucker that had a special mount behind the cab for his motorcycle. I'm not talking about a moped, like a real deal Harley. I bring this up because there was some recent discussion as to how he would have gotten to the bridge area without being seen in a large semi, if he does in fact drive one.

I could be completely off base and I'm really just talking out loud. But, I wanted to add some things that support the trucker theory.

Welcome GMF3. :happydance:
Pleased to hear your thoughts.

I also agree with Truckie idea. moo.
Of course now he will avoid Delphi, and near by areas.
Because of the Billboards, a great change in his appearance to lessen recognition.

 

[terpstra1]

The DNA might have been logged from a past crime, but if the criminal had not been arrested and swabbed before there would be no name-to-DNA association.

It does sound like they had a DNA match to a previous crime. But, it also sounds like there is no association of the DNA to a known person yet.

I'm intrigued. I hadn't heard or thought about it before. Imo it's possible.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

[Jethro4WS]

Say what?

Someone pointed out that the creek is shallower right near the crime scene... Then they got lectured on facts in a rather strange manner. I'm not the only one that found it odd that they pointed out the fact the creek is more shallow there, then was told to stick to the facts.

Fact is, since no one was washed away by the alleged raging river, video or no video, they likely crossed the creek, and perhaps looked for the shallowest spot possible to cross. Fact is, water only a few feet deep is quite transparent as to see the ground.

That isn't a fact. At no point ever has it been reported that the girls and BG crossed through the creek. For all we know they could have been marched back across the bridge and through the woods on the North side to where the girls were found. For all we know the girls could have been taken elsewhere and then returned later. All are valid. It is only a matter of one's opinion as to which one they believe is the case. This is something that is unknown, though LE could clear it up at any time.

But, if someone is going to go with the theory that the girls were marched through the creek then they should take into consideration the conditions of the creek at the time. The one theory we can actually test, the one we do have information about that we can apply to it, is the theory the girls were marched across the creek.

The main problem is it leads to the notion that BG had some kind of "perfect knowledge" of the way to march the girls to the creek, exactly the best place the cross, and on to where the girls would later be found. It suggests a high degree of familiarity of the area and the creek. However, if that is the case then it should also be the case that BG would recognize that the creek is running over 4 times above normal and that the water is very cold. And that would suggest at least a few other considerations.

The first is that BG, as part of how he wanted to do things, was going to cross that creek come hell or high water. That is, the water - depth, current, nor temperature - was of no consideration whatsoever. Which then would lead me to question (don't know about anyone else) why it would matter at all where they crossed. And that also suggests some importance to requiring the crossing through the creek. This is despite there are also areas that are just as secluded (if not more) on the South side of the creek West of the bridge where this crime could have been completed without crossing through the creek at all.

The second thing is that this would suggest that BG had one consideration - finding an available victim(s). Nothing else mattered. Seemingly, no barrier that would make him think twice - like crossing a very cold creek running 4 times above normal. If there was a victim(s) he would just figure it out as he went using his "perfect knowledge". No matter what, BG was committed to driving home cold and soaking wet (likely up over his waist based on his height) as a result of his requirement to march across the creek.

It seems to me that the desire to march through the creek was paramount above all other things. He wasn't forced to do it. It wasn't the best of all bad options because there were all kinds of options available that do not include marching through the creek. I am hard pressed to figure out someone that has a mandatory requirement to cross a cold creek running well above normal in 43 degree weather in February that hasn't been caught yet.

The important thing is there is no proof we have been given whatsoever that BG and the girls marched through the creek just as there is no proof given whatsoever that they didn't march through the creek. Only one of those theories is testable. Hence, the back and forth on this subject and not just on the basis of water conditions of the creek. Just because something can be done doesn't mean it was. Just because someone thinks it is most likely doesn't mean it happened.

I know I never said it was impossible to cross through the creek but I do point out the realities of doing so.

 

[Steleheart]

Thanks, Steleheart. I'm not convinced, though. LE isn't above putting out misinformation to the news media if it suits their own purpose. Besides, a witness coming forward months later with perfect recollection as to the color of someone's eyes? There's a recent link posted here to an article detailing the unreliability of eyewitness accounts. Additionally, anyone passing BG on the trail isn't thinking, "I better take note of this random guy's eye color because months from now I'm going to be asked to recall everything I can about him".]

BBM

- What is their purpose for the misinformation?

- The witness did not have perfect recollection according to the article referenced. Only that they were not blue.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...Delphi-13-Feb-2017-66&p=13589807#post13589807

- If you say there is a link please post the link or the post number. Otherwise it is rumor or opinion and should be referenced as such.

Thanks.

 

[Rott Mom]

I haven't posted in a while - but, IMO, we're grasping at straws. There is nothing new from LE - we're approaching seven months, and LE has not released anything new. I don't understand LE's motive.

 

[BIC]

That isn't a fact. At no point ever has it been reported that the girls and BG crossed through the creek. For all we know they could have been marched back across the bridge and through the woods on the North side to where the girls were found. For all we know the girls could have been taken elsewhere and then returned later. All are valid. It is only a matter of one's opinion as to which one they believe is the case. This is something that is unknown, though LE could clear it up at any time.

But, if someone is going to go with the theory that the girls were marched through the creek then they should take into consideration the conditions of the creek at the time. The one theory we can actually test, the one we do have information about that we can apply to it, is the theory the girls were marched across the creek.

The main problem is it leads to the notion that BG had some kind of "perfect knowledge" of the way to march the girls to the creek, exactly the best place the cross, and on to where the girls would later be found. It suggests a high degree of familiarity of the area and the creek. However, if that is the case then it should also be the case that BG would recognize that the creek is running over 4 times above normal and that the water is very cold. And that would suggest at least a few other considerations.

The first is that BG, as part of how he wanted to do things, was going to cross that creek come hell or high water. That is, the water - depth, current, nor temperature - was of no consideration whatsoever. Which then would lead me to question (don't know about anyone else) why it would matter at all where they crossed. And that also suggests some importance to requiring the crossing through the creek. This is despite there are also areas that are just as secluded (if not more) on the South side of the creek West of the bridge where this crime could have been completed without crossing through the creek at all.

The second thing is that this would suggest that BG had one consideration - finding an available victim(s). Nothing else mattered. Seemingly, no barrier that would make him think twice - like crossing a very cold creek running 4 times above normal. If there was a victim(s) he would just figure it out as he went using his "perfect knowledge". No matter what, BG was committed to driving home cold and soaking wet (likely up over his waist based on his height) as a result of his requirement to march across the creek.

It seems to me that the desire to march through the creek was paramount above all other things. He wasn't forced to do it. It wasn't the best of all bad options because there were all kinds of options available that do not include marching through the creek. I am hard pressed to figure out someone that has a mandatory requirement to cross a cold creek running well above normal in 43 degree weather in February that hasn't been caught yet.

The important thing is there is no proof we have been given whatsoever that BG and the girls marched through the creek just as there is no proof given whatsoever that they didn't march through the creek. Only one of those theories is testable. Hence, the back and forth on this subject and not just on the basis of water conditions of the creek. Just because something can be done doesn't mean it was. Just because someone thinks it is most likely doesn't mean it happened.

I know I never said it was impossible to cross through the creek but I do point out the realities of doing so.

BBM
It was clearly stated in one of the recent interviews with LE that they crossed the creek. POST #186 Thread 65. Spellbounds transcription.

 

[Jo in Calif]

BBM
It was clearly stated in one of the recent interviews with LE that they crossed the creek. POST #186 Thread 65. Spellbounds transcription.

The bottom video.
http://fox59.com/2017/08/14/lead-de...ave-more-audio-from-teens-phone-dna-evidence/

 

[Steleheart]

I haven't posted in a while - but, IMO, we're grasping at straws. There is nothing new from LE - we're approaching seven months, and LE has not released anything new. I don't understand LE's motive.

We share your sorrow RM. The sketch revived interest in the case but that is all we have now.

7 months is far too long for such a blatant crime to remain unsolved. Every night I pray let today be the day. Are straws all we have? No. We have faith.

RM, it will happen. I think it will. I believe that.

 

[BIC]

The bottom video.
http://fox59.com/2017/08/14/lead-de...ave-more-audio-from-teens-phone-dna-evidence/

Thank you. He couldn't be any more clear on that.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk