IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #72

[kkdj]

Someone had asked earlier what others thought LE might be thinking about KN FB posts and her latest interview.She has been living and travelling with him.If she was going to be any kind of witness against Daniel,they would have told her specifically not to make public statements or even talk about it period.I think they don't stop her because they actually want to hear what she slips up and says.For all we know,the Alexis McAdams interview was edited by the ISP which might explain it's "weirdness".

Oh, she's not going to testify against DN, her husband. My hinky meter is going off big time! tbc

 

[minazoe]

I'm not going to say half all what i want to, i watched the brief moment of video and she is ride or die. this woman is willing to live by hook or by crook with this man. LE knows this. and many times one lie will unravel and all the supporting lies will follow suit and pretty soon you are standing over dead bodies at a murder scene leaving your DNA. ( I am not accusing her of anything)

I think LE has her number. an idiot would know to destroy those clothes and deny those clothes. so I'm not impressed by this revelation,

that's my impression.

MOO

 

[minazoe]

as for wondering what will compel someone to murder abruptly and violently...there are people that chances are if they threaten you with something like a shiv or a hatchet they might be willing to kill you with it. Look at this guy..

https://www.yahoo.com/news/texas-executes-man-convicted-murdering-guard-shank-000056605.html

 

[sleuther0192837465]

I'm not going to say half all what i want to, i watched the brief moment of video and she is ride or die. this woman is willing to live by hook or by crook with this man. LE knows this. and many times one lie will unravel and all the supporting lies will follow suit and pretty soon you are standing over dead bodies at a murder scene leaving your DNA. ( I am not accusing her of anything)

I think LE has her number. an idiot would know to destroy those clothes and deny those clothes. so I'm not impressed by this revelation,

that's my impression.

MOO

I’m surprised none of these reporters asked any of these people (ex boss, the Bortner’s, etc) if they ever saw DN wearing that jacket. I mean, he worked on farms, correct?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[minazoe]

he could have found that stuff in a shed fir all we know...maybe he was cold.

 

[carbuff]

Someone had asked earlier what others thought LE might be thinking about KN FB posts and her latest interview.She has been living and travelling with him.If she was going to be any kind of witness against Daniel,they would have told her specifically not to make public statements or even talk about it period.I think they don't stop her because they actually want to hear what she slips up and says.For all we know,the Alexis McAdams interview was edited by the ISP which might explain it's "weirdness".

They don't stop her because they can't stop her. The police do not have the authority to stop anybody from talking about whatever they want to whomever they want. They can request silence but unless they can convince a judge there's compelling reason to keep information close, and have a gag order issued, there is nothing whatsoever they can do. They can't even make her talk to them if she doesn't want to.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

 

[ImnoSherlock]

They don't stop her because they can't stop her. The police do not have the authority to stop anybody from talking about whatever they want to whomever they want. They can request silence but unless they can convince a judge there's compelling reason to keep information close, and have a gag order issued, there is nothing whatsoever they can do. They can't even make her talk to them if she doesn't want to.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

That's my point bud.Anyone sincere about helping LE wouldn't need to have a judge to tell them.I think we know that LE doesn't like anything discussed about this case in the public except what they put out.As far as gag orders and suppression go,things have been sealed so if they wanted to they could seal her up tf course if she chose to disregard the order,she'd face charges for it.Almost everything in this case has been kept close.

 

[kkdj]

he could have found that stuff in a shed fir all we know...maybe he was cold.

Or someone's car........

 

[sleuther0192837465]

he could have found that stuff in a shed fir all we know...maybe he was cold.

That’s true[emoji53] This is so frustrating IMO I hope we find out soon about DN. I think it’s driving us all crazy & I can’t even imagine what the girls families are going through☹️


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Realistically, it seems like three quarters of rural Indianan men wore jackets like that, imo.

I’m surprised none of these reporters asked any of these people (ex boss, the Bortner’s, etc) if they ever saw DN wearing that jacket. I mean, he worked on farms, correct?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kkdj]

Realistically, it seems like three quarters of rural Indianan men wore jackets like that, imo.

Again, I question the truth of KN saying DN didn't own a jacket like that. But I do believe he no longer has one!

 

[Inthedetails]

Again, I question the truth of KN saying DN didn't own a jacket like that. But I do believe he no longer has one!

It's odd that she says she doesn't know if he could commit those murders, but he for sure doesn't wear clothes like that.

What to think of that? It's strange, imo.

jmo

 

[kkdj]

It's odd that she says she doesn't know if he could commit those murders, but he for sure doesn't wear clothes like that.

What to think of that? It's strange, imo.

jmo

I hope she keeps talking!

 

[Shiressleuth]

he could have found that stuff in a shed fir all we know...maybe he was cold.

The homeless under the bridge where DN was living would have all sorts of donated clothes available which is likely what he was wearing on the 13th. Many said they looked like thrift shop clothes . They would have gone straight onto that evening's fire. JMO.

 

[Shiressleuth]

DN was living in someone's car under a bridge the week of 7-14 Feb. Was that car a runner? Like they were living out of a car and driving it around in Colorado, was he doing the same that week? I.e Living in and driving the car around? Has that been clarified anywhere? Obviously they (DN and KN) would not admit to it because he didn't have a licence but that did not stop him driving in Colorado or Indiana .

 

[deugirtni]

It's odd that she says she doesn't know if he could commit those murders, but he for sure doesn't wear clothes like that.

What to think of that? It's strange, imo.

jmo

Yes, interesting. She's not sure if he attended the ultrasound on the day of the murders, and doesn't know if she thinks he could have committed the murders, but she's sure he doesn't wear a hat like the one in the BG photo (even tho he's been photographed wearing a pretty danged similar hat), and she's sure he didn't wear clothes like that, even though they weren't apparently living together. hmm

 

[Justice101]

Has someone given him an alibi for the 13th? I must have missed that. We now know how he got to his check in appointment which makes him more of a POI not less IMO. I think he hitched to Lafayette (possibly RL) and called her to come and pick him up somewhere between Lafayette and Martinsville. She will now have to tell police where and when she picked him up - that is clear as a bell. She cannot keep giving snippets to press (probably for cash) in a murder investigation. It is disgusting iMO, in her own words, there are two families waiting to find out.

In a previous case I think that I remember seeing that it can take up to a month to legally get cell phone records/cell tower ping data on a person once the search warrant is issued.

It looks like it's been about 2 weeks since this arrest... so it might take a bit more time for LE to sequence the phone location data with the events that KN and DN have said they were doing.

So, I am saying we have about a week or two left before LE knows for sure what is true and what is a lie... .and where one and?or the other was during the critical days and time.

Again, 4 weeks for a warrant to get phone records and location data.

 

[Justice101]

Yes, interesting. She's not sure if he attended the ultrasound on the day of the murders, and doesn't know if she thinks he could have committed the murders, but she's sure he doesn't wear a hat like the one in the BG photo (even tho he's been photographed wearing a pretty danged similar hat), and she's sure he didn't wear clothes like that, even though they weren't apparently living together. hmm

Sorry I am lagging way behind you all... but her "not remembering" if your "man" came to you ultrasound or not??? Come on.

 

[Steleheart]

Q: As a Felon in Indiana, isn't DN required to have DNA on file? I know we discussed this in the past re another person who wasn't a suspect but was "involved in the investigation" and I remember that the law was changed recently in IN. I do not remember the details/ dates.
DN had a Felony F6, 9/27/17 Failure To Register Charge.
Also an F6, 12/14/15, Domestic Battery (270 days sentence)

I believe the DNA requirement for Felony was effective before his 2015 case.
Is DNA required only upon conviction or at time of charge?
Does anyone remember?

TIA

Unless I read this article wrong at least they took his DNA as soon as he was arrested in CO. He was charged with a felony (access to a weapon.)

Aren't RSO's DNA already on file? Also isn't DNA swab taken on arrest anyway?

Oops. Here is what I was looking at.

http://www.denverpost.com/2013/06/03/supreme-court-affirms-colorado-dna-collection-laws/

So from the link "Morrissey cheered the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on Monday to uphold a Maryland law that allows police to routinely take DNA from people they arrest without first seeking a warrant.
The court’s ruling affirms a similar Colorado law requiring DNA testing for felony suspects that Morrissey said has helped solve hundreds of cases since it took effect in September 2010. Police in 28 states can take DNA swabs after arrests — Colorado officers can analyze the sample only after a suspect has been charged with a felony — " <read more>

We keep asking these questions don't we? I think it only became law in Indiana in July '17 for swabs to be taken on arrest. Previously it was only taken on conviction of a felony. Is exposing oneself a felony? DV is a felony surely, so his DNA must be on file for that conviction, at the very least. He hasn't been arrested in Indiana since July has he ? So maybe IN do not have it but should be able to get it from CODIS. Seems to be a confusing subject. :thinking:

BBM;
Yes, exactly right and on point as always SS. Thank you.
It seems that law will take effect in 2018:

"Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb on Friday signed into law Senate Enrolled Act 322 requiring police to take a cheek swab DNA sample from every person arrested for a felony, starting in 2018.
Currently, only individuals convicted of felonies have their DNA records permanently entered into a state police database."
http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/...cle_c5bb69f0-6d66-5db9-bc2f-3db09d67fccd.html


So it looks this way... "It's complicated" :biggrin:

Frequently Asked Questions on CODIS and NDIS

<snip>
"The National DNA Index System or NDIS is considered one part of CODIS, the national level, containing the DNA profiles contributed by federal, state, and local participating forensic laboratories."
<snip>
" What if a state’s law on access to the DNA samples and profiles is different from the federal provisions?
If a state has signed the Memorandum of Understanding with the FBI to participate in NDIS, that state has agreed to comply with the Federal DNA Identification Act, including the limited access requirements. To the extent that these access and disclosure provisions of the Federal DNA Act conflict with a state’s DNA database law, the state has agreed to the provisions of the Federal DNA Act superseding the state law for purposes of NDIS participation. That is, if a state DNA database law permits access to the DNA samples and analyses in the state DNA database for purposes not contained in the Federal DNA Act (i.e., humanitarian purposes), and that state is participating in NDIS, then the state has agreed to comply with the more restrictive federal access provisions."

https://www.fbi.gov/services/laboratory/biometric-analysis/codis/codis-and-ndis-fact-sheet

Sooo..... What I do not know 'yet' is if CO and IN are participating in CODIS/NDIS because if they are then the "5000 billboards in 46 states" would have a huge impact on the ability of all those states to run DNA on a tip in any one state. I realize that has not happened yet but (I know this hurts) It's only been 8 months.

If I am not making sense blame my meds, LOL.
(got a boo boo)

All JMO except for links.

 

[Steleheart]

Has someone given him an alibi for the 13th? I must have missed that. We now know how he got to his check in appointment which makes him more of a POI not less IMO. I think he hitched to Lafayette (possibly RL) and called her to come and pick him up somewhere between Lafayette and Martinsville. She will now have to tell police where and when she picked him up - that is clear as a bell. She cannot keep giving snippets to press (probably for cash) in a murder investigation. It is disgusting iMO, in her own words, there are two families waiting to find out.

BBM:

Agree. I might hazard a guess, though that LE does not need either of them to tell where they were and when based on the recent cell company subpoenas. It would be some pretty good evidence though.
Also they could see if any of that matches up to a person who "is involved in the investigation but not a suspect".
It would not surprise me if she has been under surveillance all this time. :bodyguard: