Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #105

[missingm]

I'm curious what makes LE say he got around quickly after the murders. The meaning of that statement is elusive. Did they mean get out of the woods quickly, by foot? Out of the trail area completely, by vehicle?

How do they know for sure he didn't hike downstream, through the woods, or find a hole to hide in? I'm not saying I think this is what happened, but I do think LE has information that tells them more about his mode of escape that day.

To me that says he had an emergency vehicle that would allow him to go faster, but in plain sight. Police, fire, emt, maybe even parks department or public works.

 

[tresir2012]

To me that says he had an emergency vehicle that would allow him to go faster, but in plain sight. Police, fire, emt, maybe even parks department or public works.

Yes I think this is the hiding in plain sight that LE are alluding to.

 

[JMT1008]

I'm attempting not to have my post here turn into a silly word salad, but a lot of everyone's posts have really got my gears turning on this. All below is my opinion, and is worth exactly what you paid for it.

First, to address the notion of it being inappropriate to drop a 13 and 14 year old into a public nature area together. IMO, and as a parent, this is not at all inappropriate. Half of society decries younger people's dependence on devices, and laments their lack of "experiencing the world around them", here we have two young people that wanted to get out and enjoy a relatively warm day on a school holiday. Perfectly fine. And, what's more, ironically, it was one of these young people's devices that provided the most solid (such as it is) evidence of the perpetrator. These kids did everything right. The person that killed them is solely to blame. Everything else is hindsight, and quite unfair to the families, who are also victims in this. It heartens me to read much of the same from all of you.

Second, I waffle back and forth on what LE knows about the suspect. As much as I want to believe they have narrowed it down to a select few people, I'm more inclined to think they have a solid profile of the suspect. This case has led me down rabbit holes of academic papers, and interviews with criminal profilers, none of which was about this case directly. And from all PUBLICLY available information, what info they have released about the suspect (sketches aside) fits the data of the type of person who commits this type of crime. Their age, gender (which, aside from video and audio is a statistical given), and their social/career circumstances all point to a probability of it being a certain type of person. I think LE is starting from square one, based on eliminating things that would deviate from the statistics. Now they're going back over everything with fresh eyes and a better (albeit, maybe strictly data driven) profile of who committed the crime. To add my own speculation, it would probably be a safe bet for LE to claim that the person was familiar with the immediate area of the crime, probably more so than the average resident. Think about it. If someone has made up their mind to commit an act such as this, and they don't want to get caught, they'd have to be very comfortable in their environment. There's been discussion about organized and disorganized criminals, and I'm going to set the textbook definitions aside for a moment. This crime required a high degree of control over the situation. Wherever it was going to take place, had to be a location that gave the perpetrator a degree of confidence. Even if the act of the crime was a new experience for him, wouldn't he likely want everything else to be as familiar, and comfortable as possible? If he were an outwardly psychopathic mad man (for instance, the disturbed person who killed and injured the hikers on the AT last month), he would have been VERY noticed, before and after, and would have been likely to be quickly caught, either for this crime, or other reasons. This crime took a degree of control (mistakes of allowing himself to be recorded aside)... and to have control, he needed to know his surroundings to get it in, do what he wanted to do, and get out.

Third, as for why, and I hesitate to write this. But I think "the why", is because it was his time to do what he did. It sounds callous, but, Libby and Abby, IMO, were circumstantial to him. If the opportunity didn't present itself then and there, then it would have been later. And who knows, maybe there were other times he waited, and the opportunity never presented itself.

I am not at all an expert. I have ideas that further the idea of the type of person who did this, but I am going to keep them to myself, because they are just guesses, and they don't further the discussion. Again, none of us know all of the facts. It would be safe to say that LE has a lot close to the vest on this for investigative, and privacy purposes. Everything I said, and the conjecture that stemmed from it, is just that, conjecture, based solely on what we know publicly, put through the lens of things I researched, mostly out of curiosity.

On a personal note, thank you websleuths for bringing together a bunch of insightful, respectful, and diligent people. I hope this gets solved. I hope the families get closer to having a little bit of peace. And I hope the community gets a chance to heal once the killer meets with justice.

J.

 

[JnRyan]

I'm beginning to suspect there is NO DNA And, some perps will NEVER confess. What LE need is someone, anyone who knows something to get a conscience and "do the right thing," despite their fear. I'm guessing someone has in the past supplied an anonymous tip that was either ignored or could not be corroborated for one reason or other. They need that person or persons to come in and actually show their face. I suspect that individual/s is/are scared $hitless to do so. All MOO.

I have no doubt they have DNA. There is probably what is referred to as touch DNA all over their coats. And LE has very likely eliminated family DNA on the garments. Then there are those persons who have innocently picked up a coat if it was dropped, touched them to avoid bumping into one of them or touched the coat if they walked past them while it was draped over the back of a chair. I don't know how sensitive DNA tests are so I don't know about 'transfer' DNA - e.g., one of the girls uses a chair previously used by someone else. Examples of innocent DNA are probably endless. Imagine a murder committed in a public restroom and LE has many fingerprints but no way to know if they have the killer's.
LE probably has DNA. They just may not know WHICH DNA is the murderer's or even IF they have it. Of the stranger DNA only that belonging to a female can be eliminated.
This guy doesn't look like he was wearing gloves. (Although he could put some after he went off the video.) If he didn't touch either girl then it is likely there is no DNA from the killer. My personal opinion, though, is he may killed one of the girls by strangling, stabbing or using a blunt object and if that is the case then there is DNA.

 

[Boxer]

why does this guy have to be from Delphi?

plenty of other small towns nearby.....if you are all looking at the males of Delphi and concentrating on that vicinity then yes, he could well be just strolling around in plain sight

Absolutely agree, even what is considered Delphi farming area is actually full of really small communities, like Ockley and Radnor.

If YBG sketch portrait was not a wanted poster, but a instead presented as a drawing from a portrait booth at a county fair, he would just look like the 'average' Indiana young man.

 

[JnRyan]

I've believed from early on that this murderer was familiar with the trail AND the surrounding area like going off the end of the bridge and down to the creek. I can't help but think LE did as well. This guy lived within 20-30 miles of Delphi OR had lived there in the past OR visited a grandparent, aunt/uncle or divorced parent in the past. Of course there is always the possibility he never lived within 50 or 100 miles of Delphi, but his mother or father did and his knowledge may have been the result of day trips on weekends.

I firmly believe there is more than one person out there that can make a connection to him from the sketch. But as I said before those of us on here are in the minority as most of the public doesn't follow crimes closely. I have relatives in that region who stated they had forgotten about the crime and knew nothing of the new sketch. Then there are those that will look at the killer - perhaps even work with him - and pass it off as unlikely. They look at him and think, 'He sure looks similar, but no, couldn't be him.' The example I give often is Morgan Harrington's killer, Jesse Matthew. The sketch of her killer was distributed all over Charlottesville VA and the other employees of the cab company where Matthew worked not only saw the resemblance, they made jokes about he looked like the killer. None of them wondered if he was driving his cab that night. Matthew would go on to kill again.

Somewhere someone has seen the resemblance. They just haven't convinced themselves to pick up the phone and call it in.

 

[Boxer]

Yeah, I'm really curious about what makes them positive. How do they know, for instance, that he actually left the park at all? That he didn't just hang around and then later join the search party? (I don't think he did that, but how do they KNOW he didn't?) They also made the comment about how they know he parked at the old govt building. How do they know that was him?

I like knowing stuff.

MOO MOO MOO he entered he park and left the park from the south side even if parked at the CPS - this would indicate
intensive local knowledge, the kind of knowledge that teens growing up in an area have. The MHB bridge is just two miles from high school on the south side -
MOO again, looking at the area I think the snowbirds at the end of CR625 might regularly had to battle teens wanting to park at their place when they were gone and walk down to the bridge area.
Maybe the snowbirds solved their parking issue with a barrier or cameras, but the killer knowing the area still wanted the cover for his approach possible by coming from the south side of the park.

 

[susiQ]

I have no doubt they have DNA. There is probably what is referred to as touch DNA all over their coats. And LE has very likely eliminated family DNA on the garments. Then there are those persons who have innocently picked up a coat if it was dropped, touched them to avoid bumping into one of them or touched the coat if they walked past them while it was draped over the back of a chair. I don't know how sensitive DNA tests are so I don't know about 'transfer' DNA - e.g., one of the girls uses a chair previously used by someone else. Examples of innocent DNA are probably endless. Imagine a murder committed in a public restroom and LE has many fingerprints but no way to know if they have the killer's.
LE probably has DNA. They just may not know WHICH DNA is the murderer's or even IF they have it. Of the stranger DNA only that belonging to a female can be eliminated.
This guy doesn't look like he was wearing gloves. (Although he could put some after he went off the video.) If he didn't touch either girl then it is likely there is no DNA from the killer. My personal opinion, though, is he may killed one of the girls by strangling, stabbing or using a blunt object and if that is the case then there is DNA.

I guess that's the question: is any of the DNA they have from the killer and if there is, can they link it to him? He may have had on tight fitting vinyl gloves like the one used in hospital. They are more clear than the latex ones. He could also have knocked one of the girls out with blunt force trauma and then strangled the other, then gone back to strangle the one unconscious. I hate typing that I admit, it could have gone down completely different. I'm just not convinced they have DNA from the killer.

 

[JnRyan]

Yeah, I'm really curious about what makes them positive. How do they know, for instance, that he actually left the park at all? That he didn't just hang around and then later join the search party? (I don't think he did that, but how do they KNOW he didn't?) They also made the comment about how they know he parked at the old govt building. How do they know that was him?

I like knowing stuff.

I don't remember if LE stated that the murderer was driving the vehicle that was seen at the abandoned building. (Although, I don't believe it was coincidence that at the same time we have a new sketch, we have new concern for a previously undisclosed vehicle.) LE may accounted for almost all of the owners of vehicles parked in the regular parking lots that afternoon. I believe the murderer probably had the girls sometime between 2:30 and 3:00 and that they were dead by 3:30. If that is so he likely left the area VERY soon after and was gone by 4:00, if not a half hour earlier. I don't see him still parked there at 5:00. Of course, (1) the 5:00 time may include a 'fudge factor' by LE OR (2) he stuck around briefly to see if there was any commotion by a parent or parents - i.e., to gloat to himself.

 

[cluciano63]

Jmo but usually when there is a suspect but not enough to charge, everyone in town “knows” who did it. Not getting that impression here at all.

 

[JnRyan]

Jmo but usually when there is a suspect but not enough to charge, everyone in town “knows” who did it. Not getting that impression here at all.

Yeah, I'm thinking when the arrest comes, we may likely hear from LE, 'He wasn't even on our radar.' or words to that effect. The sheriff stated he 'knows' that voice. But he has probably heard so many voices his mind may be playing tricks on him. Like deer hunting on a stand on a still morning and every rustle of dry leaves is a deer - and not that hog, squirrel or armadillo that it turns out to be.

 

[Boxer]

I guess that's the question: is any of the DNA they have from the killer and if there is, can they link it to him? He may have had on tight fitting vinyl gloves like the one used in hospital. They are more clear than the latex ones. He could also have knocked one of the girls out with blunt force trauma and then strangled the other, then gone back to strangle the one unconscious. I hate typing that I admit, it could have gone down completely different. I'm just not convinced they have DNA from the killer.

MOO that is why processing the scene took at least till August of 2017.
They picked up all the leaf litter to process.

MOO at the end of that processing they have DNA, maybe multiple or tens of DNA profiles waiting for the individual to match.
Waiting for someone to say
something like my cousin walks like that, unsettled, glancing around yet agile, and he looks somewhat like the sketch.

MOO knowing who generally has gone in that particular area is the starting point. Who knows that area? Who would be attracted to commit either an impulsive or planned crime in that area.

I think the main groups that know that area are kids that live very close and their friends, teens, ex-teens still "hanging out", and the young adults who were once those kids or teens, and hunters.
MOO it is among these groups there is one killer, a young man with no felonies in CODIS which would have to had to be from DNA taken in an "on felony arrest DNA" collecting state in and or before 2017, which seems unlikely with young local person.

MOO the legal hunters can be excluded by them coming forward getting a swab, usually everyone in the family would know who they are. Hunters there earlier that week probably would no have felony criminal DNA on file, due to their firearms purchases. I assume they all came forward, but if not, their unclaimed DNA profile might be pending along with the others and the killer waiting for an individual to match it to.

 

[susiQ]

MOO that is why processing the scene took at least till August of 2017.
They picked up all the leaf litter to process.

MOO at the end of that processing they have DNA, maybe multiple or tens of DNA profiles waiting for the individual to match.
Waiting for someone to say
something like my cousin walks like that, unsettled, glancing around yet agile, and he looks somewhat like the sketch.

MOO knowing who generally has gone in that particular area is the starting point. Who knows that area? Who would be attracted to commit either an impulsive or planned crime in that area.

I think the main groups that know that area are kids that live very close and their friends, teens, ex-teens still "hanging out", and the young adults who were once those kids or teens, and hunters.
MOO it is among these groups there is one killer, a young man with no felonies in CODIS which would have to had to be from DNA taken in an "on felony arrest DNA" collecting state in and or before 2017, which seems unlikely with young local person.

MOO the legal hunters can be excluded by them coming forward getting a swab, usually everyone in the family would know who they are. Hunters there earlier that week probably would no have felony criminal DNA on file, due to their firearms purchases. I assume they all came forward, but if not, their unclaimed DNA profile might be pending along with the others and the killer waiting for an individual to match it to.

Anything is possible, but remember, there are 20's & 30's something "FORMER" teens that know that area just as well. That's the age group I'd be looking at. I'd also be looking at a possible drug connection. But that's me. And there's nothing we've been told to convince me they have DNA from the killer. Other DNA, absolutely!
JMO

 

[FleurQualia]

Jmo but usually when there is a suspect but not enough to charge, everyone in town “knows” who did it. Not getting that impression here at all.

Same. It's like he vanished into thin air.

I wonder if he has no close living relatives, and is a recluse with no friends or even acquaintances. His neighbors might think he's just kind of weird guy, if they even think of him at all (or have even ever seen him out and about).

JMO (or random thoughts, I should say)

 

[Boxer]

Yeah, I'm thinking when the arrest comes, we may likely hear from LE, 'He wasn't even on our radar.' or words to that effect. The sheriff stated he 'knows' that voice. But he has probably heard so many voices his mind may be playing tricks on him. Like deer hunting on a stand on a still morning and every rustle of dry leaves is a deer - and not that hog, squirrel or armadillo that it turns out to be.

I never heard that the sheriff felt he had heard that voice before.
That is very interesting. Maybe if the sheriff set himself to thinking about all the regular younger male community members he comes into contact with, church, school, SAR training etc. his memory would deliver.
I am sure he already set himself to review his recollection of all the voices of older male speeders, DWIs, witnesses, victims and criminals that he ever came into contact with.

 

[sleuther0192837465]

What are everyone’s opinions/thoughts on this: Did BG return to the crime scene from the time of the murders until LE finished processing it?
If so, when do you think he has revisited?
MOO

 

[janesmith787]

I’m just grateful LE knows more than any of us do. I truly believe this case will be solved, and when it is...we’ll all breathe a sigh of relief and also be surprised at how much we didn’t know. JMO (brought over from previous thread)

But, I'd also add I think they've probably received even more information after the last PC, and are even closer...timing is everything. AGAIN, ALL JMO.

 

[FleurQualia]

What are everyone’s opinions/thoughts on this: Did BG return to the crime scene from the time of the murders until LE finished processing it?
If so, when do you think he has revisited?
MOO

I think he frequented the area before the murders, but has avoided since for fear his car might be recognized.

I am surprised he hasn't attacked again, unless it just hasn't been connected. I think he may have left the area completely, is possibly a transient, but LE seems to disagree with that.

MOO

ETA: LE knows more than I do, so they're probably right

 

[Boxer]

What are everyone’s opinions/thoughts on this: Did BG return to the crime scene from the time of the murders until LE finished processing it?
If so, when do you think he has revisited?
MOO

MOO no. I think he got out and went about his business, possibly if his peer group participated in the search, he did too to avoid suspicion, but MOO away from the scene. MOO he seems to be bold and cautious, wary.

 

[Angelcat13]

I'm attempting not to have my post here turn into a silly word salad, but a lot of everyone's posts have really got my gears turning on this. All below is my opinion, and is worth exactly what you paid for it.

First, to address the notion of it being inappropriate to drop a 13 and 14 year old into a public nature area together. IMO, and as a parent, this is not at all inappropriate. Half of society decries younger people's dependence on devices, and laments their lack of "experiencing the world around them", here we have two young people that wanted to get out and enjoy a relatively warm day on a school holiday. Perfectly fine. And, what's more, ironically, it was one of these young people's devices that provided the most solid (such as it is) evidence of the perpetrator. These kids did everything right. The person that killed them is solely to blame. Everything else is hindsight, and quite unfair to the families, who are also victims in this. It heartens me to read much of the same from all of you.

Second, I waffle back and forth on what LE knows about the suspect. As much as I want to believe they have narrowed it down to a select few people, I'm more inclined to think they have a solid profile of the suspect. This case has led me down rabbit holes of academic papers, and interviews with criminal profilers, none of which was about this case directly. And from all PUBLICLY available information, what info they have released about the suspect (sketches aside) fits the data of the type of person who commits this type of crime. Their age, gender (which, aside from video and audio is a statistical given), and their social/career circumstances all point to a probability of it being a certain type of person. I think LE is starting from square one, based on eliminating things that would deviate from the statistics. Now they're going back over everything with fresh eyes and a better (albeit, maybe strictly data driven) profile of who committed the crime. To add my own speculation, it would probably be a safe bet for LE to claim that the person was familiar with the immediate area of the crime, probably more so than the average resident. Think about it. If someone has made up their mind to commit an act such as this, and they don't want to get caught, they'd have to be very comfortable in their environment. There's been discussion about organized and disorganized criminals, and I'm going to set the textbook definitions aside for a moment. This crime required a high degree of control over the situation. Wherever it was going to take place, had to be a location that gave the perpetrator a degree of confidence. Even if the act of the crime was a new experience for him, wouldn't he likely want everything else to be as familiar, and comfortable as possible? If he were an outwardly psychopathic mad man (for instance, the disturbed person who killed and injured the hikers on the AT last month), he would have been VERY noticed, before and after, and would have been likely to be quickly caught, either for this crime, or other reasons. This crime took a degree of control (mistakes of allowing himself to be recorded aside)... and to have control, he needed to know his surroundings to get it in, do what he wanted to do, and get out.

Third, as for why, and I hesitate to write this. But I think "the why", is because it was his time to do what he did. It sounds callous, but, Libby and Abby, IMO, were circumstantial to him. If the opportunity didn't present itself then and there, then it would have been later. And who knows, maybe there were other times he waited, and the opportunity never presented itself.

I am not at all an expert. I have ideas that further the idea of the type of person who did this, but I am going to keep them to myself, because they are just guesses, and they don't further the discussion. Again, none of us know all of the facts. It would be safe to say that LE has a lot close to the vest on this for investigative, and privacy purposes. Everything I said, and the conjecture that stemmed from it, is just that, conjecture, based solely on what we know publicly, put through the lens of things I researched, mostly out of curiosity.

On a personal note, thank you websleuths for bringing together a bunch of insightful, respectful, and diligent people. I hope this gets solved. I hope the families get closer to having a little bit of peace. And I hope the community gets a chance to heal once the killer meets with justice.

J.

EXCELLENT POST!!