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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
kizzykat said:
This is not Dr Oz show's photo, but it is the location they showed saying that is BG in the background. I will say their zoom in image appeared to be much crisper on the show than what I've seen online.
attachment.php
Click to expand...


Oh boy.... how bizarre. Hard to imagine why LE would change their minds on this after so much time. My memory seems to be they heavily refuted this way back in the beginning... I imagine we are going to start talking about that car again... It really does appear to me to be BG... and I hate to say it but if they are going after DN's phone records could we be back to a cat fishing scenario?
 
I don't get it. If they have a good DNA sample from there crime scene, why did the double talking investigator just say last week, something about ' 'not being able to rule anyone in or out?'
 
newredtabby said:
ISP have always said they have DNA, but they have also said they are not sure if it's the killer's DNA. So, this isn't put to bed any more than it was before, unfortunately.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Right, otherwise it makes no sense as to why we don't have an answer about DN yet. 2 days for fast track and it's been a couple weeks and still no news.
 
newredtabby said:
ISP have always said they have DNA, but they have also said they are not sure if it's the killer's DNA. So, this isn't put to bed any more than it was before, unfortunately.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I'm confused by your response. They have at least twice said they have DNA, and they have been taking swabs since the beginning. Who else's DNA would they have besides the killer and why test it? Why tell us they have DNA unless it was killer? I'm not sure what you are getting at. IMO, Tia.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Rewatch the part before the audio, dr oz clearly says "the possibility he was hiding in trees behind abby". We do not know if he was in that pic or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Megster024 said:
I'm confused by your response. They have at least twice said they have DNA, and they have been taking swabs since the beginning. Who else's DNA would they have besides the killer and why test it? Why tell us they have DNA unless it was killer? I'm not sure what you are getting at. IMO, Tia.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Sorry, your post was not addressed to me, but I think I can answer. The idea is that while they have said they have DNA from the crime scene, they may not have DNA from the girls' bodies. So if they found DNA on a cigarette butt, or a piece of hair on a leaf, they can't determine if it came from the killer. If the crime scene includes not only where the bodies were found, but actually the whole bridge and surrounding trail, there is more than likely all kinds of DNA around. So, really there would be no way to know if the DNA they have is actually from the killer. So just because a POI doesn't match what they have doesn't mean they aren't the killer. Hope that helps. They are hoping they find a POI that matches the DNA that they have because that at least places them at the scene and then they can use other evidence to establish their case...MOO
 
I apologize, I am a stickler for using sources and trying to not put erroneous info out there. I just did a rewind on Dr Oz show. He did NOT say it's BG or suspect standing behind a tree in the snapchat photo, he said "this is what police noticed...there's a man there.."
I've edited my earlier posts to reflect the correction. Sorry guys :(
 
tokyorose said:
Sorry, your post was not addressed to me, but I think I can answer. The idea is that while they have said they have DNA from the crime scene, they may not have DNA from the girls' bodies. So if they found DNA on a cigarette butt, or a piece of hair on a leaf, they can't determine if it came from the killer. If the crime scene includes not only where the bodies were found, but actually the whole bridge and surrounding trail, there is more than likely all kinds of DNA around. So, really there would be no way to know if the DNA they have is actually from the killer. So just because a POI doesn't match what they have doesn't mean they aren't the killer. Hope that helps. They are hoping they find a POI that matches the DNA that they have because that at least places them at the scene and then they can use other evidence to establish their case...MOO
Click to expand...

Thank you for your response. I guess my opinion is if they do not believe they have the killer's DNA they wouldn't be taking swabs or announcing they have DNA. If they only DNA they have was on cig butts and random objects then they probably have hundreds of different peoples touch DNA and imo it would not be worth mentioning to the public. I feel like everything they have stated clearly means they have the killer's DNA and are test against it. Jmo!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
cluciano63 said:
If they have DNA why are they unable to clear people? Are lots of suspects refusing to give a sample? WTH is going on?
Click to expand...
I think it has been explained earlier today that the dna could be from a discarded item like chewng tobacco or a cigarette butt which could be difficult to specifically say for certain it belonged to the murderer. However, if the DNA was hair found on one or both of the girls that could be more convincing. If there was a sexual assault or a struggle there could be DNA from skin under finger nails. Did N.Grace say what type of DNA? I bet not..
Eta I see tokyorose has addresed this too.
 
tokyorose said:
Oh boy.... how bizarre. Hard to imagine why LE would change their minds on this after so much time. My memory seems to be they heavily refuted this way back in the beginning... I imagine we are going to start talking about that car again... It really does appear to me to be BG... and I hate to say it but if they are going after DN's phone records could we be back to a cat fishing scenario?
Click to expand...

OMG. That zoomed-in photo with what appears to be a man (BG or otherwise) is making my stomach flip.

jmo
 
tokyorose said:
Oh boy.... how bizarre. Hard to imagine why LE would change their minds on this after so much time. My memory seems to be they heavily refuted this way back in the beginning... I imagine we are going to start talking about that car again... It really does appear to me to be BG... and I hate to say it but if they are going after DN's phone records could we be back to a cat fishing scenario?
Click to expand...

Is that tree chopped? Like with a hatchet?

??
 
tokyorose said:
Right, otherwise it makes no sense as to why we don't have an answer about DN yet. 2 days for fast track and it's been a couple weeks and still no news.
Click to expand...
Could he have refused a swab and his sex offence was too early for his DNA to be on file? Indiana has only been taking DNA on conviction up to now. He may have slipped thru the net and maybe the sealed subpoena WAS to take his DNA and get his phone data..
 
tokyorose said:
Sorry, your post was not addressed to me, but I think I can answer. The idea is that while they have said they have DNA from the crime scene, they may not have DNA from the girls' bodies. So if they found DNA on a cigarette butt, or a piece of hair on a leaf, they can't determine if it came from the killer. If the crime scene includes not only where the bodies were found, but actually the whole bridge and surrounding trail, there is more than likely all kinds of DNA around. So, really there would be no way to know if the DNA they have is actually from the killer. So just because a POI doesn't match what they have doesn't mean they aren't the killer. Hope that helps. They are hoping they find a POI that matches the DNA that they have because that at least places them at the scene and then they can use other evidence to establish their case...MOO
Click to expand...

Yes, I think you’re right. LE has DNA evidence from the crime scene. The DNA doesn’t match anyone yet. It could very well be the killer’s DNA (and LE seems to think it is, based on some of their statements). But they can’t be 100% sure. So, it’s not possible to rule someone out just because their DNA doesn’t match.
 
FromGermany said:
Once I received a birthday gift: the perp in a double murder suddenly got charged (Daniel James H., Karlie/Khandalyce). The name! Now my birthday will come again and I'm curious ....... :jail: or not for someone?
Click to expand...
How long till your birthday?
 
“Delphi is decorated for Halloween, but many people already thinking about Christmas and how they remember the lives of Libby German and Abby Williams.

“This project is keeping me really busy,” said Anna Williams, Abby’s mom. “And I think it is going to keep the family moving through the holidays.”

Anna is leading Abby’s Angels, filling shoe-sized boxes full of little things that can make a big difference in kids' lives. School supplies, small toys, personal care items and other things many under privileged children often do without.”

https://www.wthr.com/article/mother...gift-boxes-in-memory-of-murdered-delphi-girls

I’m going to fill some shoe boxes here in Scotland in memory of Abigail and Liberty. https://www.samaritans-purse.org.uk...utm_campaign=Operation Christmas Child/locate
 
At this point, I would need a confession and DNA to believe a suspect is BG.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 162 more.
Total: 2,144 (members: 163, guests: 1,981)

Online statistics

Members online
163
Guests online
1,981
Total visitors
2,144
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,125
Messages
18,104,259
Members
230,991
Latest member
lyle.person1
Back
Top