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

[Steleheart]

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

I think so. That's what I was asking upthread.

Q: Did DNA "on file" bring Ca.Co. to CO? IIRC the "tip" was actually from LE in CO. IE: the reason they went there was because CO called Delphi about DN..

I have faulty memory, remember.

JMO

 

[kizzykat]

Chicago station carrying the interview story this morning.
http://wgntv.com/2017/10/12/wife-of-person-of-interest-in-delphi-murders-speaks-out/

 

[Rossymom]

Question for my fellow WS’s: How do you think LE felt about KN giving a television interview?
Why do you feel that way?

 

[Shiressleuth]

I think so. That's what I was asking upthread.

Q: Did DNA "on file" bring Ca.Co. to CO? IIRC the "tip" was actually from LE in CO. IE: the reason they went there was because CO called Delphi about DN..

I have faulty memory, remember.

JMO

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:

 

[Tlynn83]

Thank you so much! That's very sweet and thoughtful of you to take the time to explain that to me! I appreciate it greatly

 

[Shiressleuth]

Question for my fellow WS’s: How do you think LE felt about KN giving a television interview?
Why do you feel that way?

ullhair:

raying:

:waiting:

:cow:

 

[Tlynn83]

Just a note here. You don't have to copy and paste anyone's post that you wish to reply to. At the bottom of each post in the right hand corner, just click on 'Reply With Quote' button. That pulls up the post. Then just type underneath the other person's quote.

Learning how all this works is not easy. We've all been there and can relate. Please feel free to ask for any help.

Oh and welcome to the discussion!

ok I got it now ! Lol I just hit reply the first time and threw out a random comment a couple pages ahead. I followed instructions a little better this time!
thank you so much for taking the time to explain that to me that is very sweet and thoughtful !

 

[Steleheart]

http://fox59.com/2017/09/29/man-cal...same-week-girls-bodies-were-found-police-say/

So, KN states he may or may not have been with her at the OB appointment on the 13th, and she did take him to his registration on the 14th. DN states he is living "under a bridge" when he checked in for his weekly registrations , yet KN states they watched the news together after the girls were murdered. You can't have it both ways! Either he was homeless or not, OR she was with him or not. Someone is not telling the truth!

Well you can, IMO.
call her and beg can you come over, it's cold yada yada. she's a pregnant conflicted battered woman. I can see it in her reported FB post and the interview with Alexis. While Alexis has a way of getting info - KN wavered in what she said.

I was not on board with DN being BG because they look nothing alike, but listening to and reading KN's words and her non-committal attitude, I think she's hiding the facts. Otherwise why would she bother? Just to say he might be and might not be?

While the sketch is excellent quality it's not a photo. There are so many degrees of proportional differences starting with one is an egg-shape and one is a balloon head... LOL

Don't get me started...

JMO

 

[margarita25]

Thanks Area52 and everyone for bringing the interview link forward. I was hoping there was a video of this, just an article right?

 

[Jax49]

Thanks Area52 and everyone for bringing the interview link forward. I was hoping there was a video of this, just an article right?

There is audio and a bit of video in this link:

http://fox59.com/2017/10/11/wife-of...rs-says-daniel-nations-watched-news-coverage/

 

[Boxer]

Boxer do you have the article?
Tanks.

Oops. Here is what I was looking at.

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

 

[deugirtni]

I for one can not see anyone recognizing DN as the BG without at minimum knowing his background. He had lost weight since February (which for me was when he looked most like the sketch). But that precludes the fact that something may have been said to inidicate involvement. Looks alone, no. MOO

If I, not knowing DN or ever having seen or heard him in real life, saw the sketch, or the BG still photo, and then I saw DN's photo, I don't think I would immediately put two and two together.... *however*.. when you put DN's photo beside each of those others, it sure matches, imho. I was shocked when I put them side by side on my computer screen. I showed someone, and they (without knowing anything about who it was, or what the case was, etc), immediately said, 'yeah, same person' - there wasn't a doubt in that person's mind, just looking at them compared together, out of the blue. For *both* the sketch and the BG photo. And then looking at the pic of what we *know* to be DN inside the red vehicle, wearing the hat, and then look at the hat in the BG sketch.. wow! On its own, the sketch may not seem like an exact replica of what one might have in their head as DN's image, but when compared together, there are SO many likenesses... mouth, nose, eyebrows, facial hair.. and if one thinks that this was just a drawing based on perhaps a *few* peoples' memories.. it seems like a darned good likeness, imho. Composite drawings are never going to look like the actual person, but would give a person who knew the person and saw the drawing, with the possibility that it *could* be that person, it sure gives reason for pause. jmo.

 

[JazzTune]

ok I got it now ! Lol I just hit reply the first time and threw out a random comment a couple pages ahead. I followed instructions a little better this time!
thank you so much for taking the time to explain that to me that is very sweet and thoughtful !

Good job. You did just fine! When I started posting, someone explained it to me. Someday, you'll be explaining it to the next person too.

That's how it goes. We're all in this together...

Glad you joined us!

 

[sleuther0192837465]

Oops. Here is what I was looking at.

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

If this is the case, then wouldn’t IN LE have the results back from testing DN’s DNA against BG’s DNA by now? How long would that process take? Wouldn’t IN LE already have both samples available for comparison?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[her]

This is MOO, I find it weird KN remembers so much of those dates, ask me what I did on a date I'd have no idea. If you asked me who came to my pregnancy scans I'd 100% know.

IMO she knows the answer to whether he was or wasn't involved, she's trying to protect herself.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Perhaps the date is easy to remember because of Valentines Day?

 

[Boxer]

If this is the case, then wouldn’t IN LE have the results back from testing DN’s DNA against BG’s DNA by now? How long would that process take? Wouldn’t IN LE already have both samples available for comparison?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes they have his DNA - there is no way they don't - the crime scene DNA either doesnt match or their DNA sample is not high enough quality to be use as evidence.

 

[TTF14]

Perhaps the date is easy to remember because of Valentines Day?

She probably simply had it on her calendar. No clue why she wouldn't remember if he was there or not, though!

 

[deugirtni]

Is LE (or anyone) going to believe that KN's memory of his check-in is more clear than her memory of her ultrasound?
Really. Does a pregnant woman care more about driving her man to his Sex Offender appointment than the baby in her womb?
I can't see it.

JMO

Especially when one considers their daughter.. this pregnancy would be an exciting time for her to consider that she would soon have a little sibling.. where was *she* during the appointment? All of these little things make for a rather easy-to-remember ultrasound event, imho. I mean, maybe not months later right off the top of one's head, but after thinking about... oh yeah, we saw the on-screen images of the baby, and showed our daughter, and DN had a question, or DN held our daughter while the tech scanned my tummy.. or 'we joked about how full my bladder was'.. or.. 'yeah, I remember, I had to pick him up from under the bridge to take him to the appointment'.. or 'he couldn't go with me because I couldn't reach him, or he was not there for me to pick up as expected, or .... '.. so many things could spark the memory of that particular day.. it's not like it was just any old day, it was ultrasound day, and the day before the SO checkin, which she DID remember.. just too hard to believe. Is there even proof that she had such an ultrasound appointment?

 

[Boxer]

She probably simply had it on her calendar. No clue why she wouldn't remember if he was there or not, though!

She will drive him to the county sherrifs to check in as an RSO, but not have him live with her? Sounds like possibly there was a financial benefit to them or her for him not living with her. Maybe he got a general assistance check as long as he was homeless. Morgan county will need to figure it out.

His presence at the U/S on 2/13 is his alibi if it can be confirmed and is in the time frame. Seems like that will be known soon.

 

[Inthedetails]

Yes they have his DNA - there is no way they don't - the crime scene DNA either doesnt match or their DNA sample is not high enough quality to be use as evidence.

I think you're right. I am hoping it's that the quality isn't good enough to make a match, but that are other pieces of evidence that link to a perp. Please let there be other evidence that links to a perp!

It is frustrating.

jmopinion