Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #113

[Cutiekitty]

The video of BG is analysed separately to the SC photos Libby took. The video did not upload via SC so GH independently checked the time of that to compare it to the time LE had put on the billboards.

With Libby's SC pics, how could you tell there was no lag, just out of interest?

Actually I take the lag time comment back. I was thinking of posting from camera roll to SC and that lag. Her pic was not taken with the camera it was taken via SC.

If you take a SC photo and it doesn’t post to your story because of lack of wifi, but posts say 20 minutes later there will be lag time. It just happened to me. The post time (7 hours ago) will still be when the pic was taken not necessarily the time it actually posted.

Bbm - Haven’t listened to GHs video on this yet, but are you saying he looked at the time on the billboards and determined that BGs shadow was at 2:30 verifying the billboard time?

Edit: just watched the BG video and I just heard him using shadowtime based on the video to determine the time. He said between 2:20 and 2:30. He adjusts the bridge orientation in a north south fashion, but the bridge actually runs NW to SE. I think you actually have to determine where true north is in the pic and measure the shadow from there to guesstimate the hour. I could be wrong though.

 

[Cutiekitty]

I have always assumed this has been discussed, but do any of you see the shadow in the trees in the picture of Abby on the bridge that appears to be a dark blue/black jacket and jeans that appears just to the right of the north end of the bridge trail (not the posts in front of the bridge access) when you're looking at the picture. The shadow would be just off to the left of the trail if you were standing at the trail looking south at the bridge. I know the shadow is pretty tall to be a person considering perspective, but it is very weird how it's in the shape of a tall person with the same clothes BG is wearing. Also, in reference to the posts at the bridge head, the legs of the shadow are actually in perspective size-wise. I think this is BG coming out of the woods and entering the bridge. It's not the shadow by the first platform that has been discussed. It's right by the bridge entrance.

It’s weird, but it’s just a shadow. BG would have to be crazy tall for it to be him. The tree shadows I was looking at were all of the ones not obscured by other trees (I wasn’t successful BTW).

 

[Krwiley60]

BG, wasn't under the bridge with two girls, OMG, c'mon..

Think i should stop posting here at this point there's always a line of absurdity that's close by in a case without a resolution and clearly to continue posting here i'd need to cross it which i'm not willing to do, good luck and i'll see you guys when he's caught!

Please be respectful of other posters opinions.

 

[Krwiley60]

This theory is not hard to follow at all !! It makes sense to me. The girls Knew or saw something they weren't supposed to.

I have said this a hundred times before. What could they have possibly seen that warranted him to kill two girls? I find the simplest explanation to be the best one. They went to the bridge, he saw two young girls, targeted them, took them to the crime scene and killed them. I think it also could have been a botched abduction. I also think he is a serial killer. I do not believe they saw anything nor did they know of him through any type of website including Kik or Snapchat. I’m sure LE would have heard the chatter on Libby’s phone. Your theory sounds to me like a murder mystery TV show. No disrespect to your opinion.

 

[Krwiley60]

My thoughts my opinion.
What seems to make you so certain it wasn't?

Everyone is entitled to their opinion

You are right. No one knows that it was or wasn’t them. My advice, ignore the power posters that have an answer for everything.

 

[tresir2012]

Love reading your all analysis.

Stepping back, I wonder if the perpetrator is in sort of a list of 5 suspects not able to be cleared yet that have been implicated but that they don't have a physical link to the crime scene.

I mean How can you NOT have suspects.. when you have video snapshots and his voice???!!!!

I think quite a few of us wonder that but waiting on DNA possibly November MOO.

 

[Cutiekitty]

I have said this a hundred times before. What could they have possibly seen that warranted him to kill two girls? I find the simplest explanation to be the best one. They went to the bridge, he saw two young girls, targeted them, took them to the crime scene and killed them. I think it also could have been a botched abduction. I also think he is a serial killer. I do not believe they saw anything nor did they know of him through any type of website including Kik or Snapchat. I’m sure LE would have heard the chatter on Libby’s phone. Your theory sounds to me like a murder mystery TV show. No disrespect to your opinion.

They could’ve seen something completely innocuous, but they saw an unstable person doing it. People do irrational things for very little reason sometimes. Not very long ago I remember seeing a news story about a juvenile that killed another juvenile over a video game.

The answers will come in time because it really does take time in these types of cases. Personally I think it will be sooner than later, but I don’t have access to the case file so this is JMO.

 

[tresir2012]

Quoted BBM

JMO and lots of 'ifs' here....

It may be that the attack immediately begins to take place after they have cropped the video and LE doesn't want to show it.....especially if Abby is still on the bridge heading toward Libby when BG pulls out a weapon (if that's the case.)

If he is approx 60-70 feet away when the video is shot, then there is still likely at least 5-10 seconds of video footage if Libby continued videoing before hiding her phone away.

I agree with your last sentence. He should be wearing an orange jumpsuit and getting ready for a needle to go in his arm.

I think this too otherwise why not show more video? I agree he likely pulls out a weapon which would give away COD. E.g. a knife or (more likely) a gun IMO. Another reason I believe a gun is because of the Colorado killing deemed by LE to have similarities to these murders. That was a .22 calibre weapon IIRC and is still unsolved.

 

[Krwiley60]

I don't have faith in LE's sketch(es) or stats! I wish this could somehow get solved ASAP.

A witness came forward to report strange behavior of a man. This person would have a far more reliable memory since the encounter was recent for them. Whatever was reported, was relevant enough that LE took the time to create a sketch. If you weigh the two witnesses/sketches, everything about the sketch made on 2/17, appears more reliable than the one released 5 months later in July. Hoping this gets solved ASAP too!!

 

[tresir2012]

I have said this a hundred times before. What could they have possibly seen that warranted him to kill two girls? I find the simplest explanation to be the best one. They went to the bridge, he saw two young girls, targeted them, took them to the crime scene and killed them. I think it also could have been a botched abduction. I also think he is a serial killer. I do not believe they saw anything nor did they know of him through any type of website including Kik or Snapchat. I’m sure LE would have heard the chatter on Libby’s phone. Your theory sounds to me like a murder mystery TV show. No disrespect to your opinion.

I do think SM could have had something to do with it, and I do believe they could have been catfished or they knew about something, for example, some serious sexual assaults were around at that time as well as the Plainfield incident. So I think comparing someone's opinion to a TV murder mystery is unnecessarily rude, but that's JMO. No disrespect intended at all.

 

[tresir2012]

A witness came forward to report strange behavior of a man. This person would have a far more reliable memory since the encounter was recent for them. Whatever was reported, was relevant enough that LE took the time to create a sketch. If you weigh the two witnesses/sketches, everything about the sketch made on 2/17, appears more reliable than the one released 5 months later in July. Hoping this gets solved ASAP too!!

With benefit of hindsight, LE only realised this in April 2019 though, so that is what is giving doubt and confusion to posters now. It appears from what LE stated, that they were misled in some way. "We are only just beginning" and "have patience with us". There was a reason for this but they cannot share it AFAICS.

 

[tresir2012]

Actually I take the lag time comment back. I was thinking of posting from camera roll to SC and that lag. Her pic was not taken with the camera it was taken via SC.

If you take a SC photo and it doesn’t post to your story because of lack of wifi, but posts say 20 minutes later there will be lag time. It just happened to me. The post time (7 hours ago) will still be when the pic was taken not necessarily the time it actually posted.

Bbm - Haven’t listened to GHs video on this yet, but are you saying he looked at the time on the billboards and determined that BGs shadow was at 2:30 verifying the billboard time?

Edit: just watched the BG video and I just heard him using shadowtime based on the video to determine the time. He said between 2:20 and 2:30. He adjusts the bridge orientation in a north south fashion, but the bridge actually runs NW to SE. I think you actually have to determine where true north is in the pic and measure the shadow from there to guesstimate the hour. I could be wrong though.

Yes he did determine true north and mentions that in the video I believe. He determined the BG time as between 2.20 and 2.30 based on the shadows in the BG video.
And yes, it was his intention to check the accuracy of the billboard "last seen" time IMO.

 

[Charlot123]

You know I never really thought of that, the curly/wavy hair depicted in the sketch. I wonder if that is what that witness described or artistic liberty taken by the sketch artist? That is a big characteristic if true. The depicted thick wavy hair is distinctive and unless the guy has shaven his head would be a real identifying feature.

I don't think I've heard or read LE describe this guy as having wavy hair. Interesting though that it is what is shown in the sketch!

1) he was probably covering his hair under that stuff he is wearing on the video, so I doubt anyone saw it
2) On the other hand - if anyone did, such hair is a trait, so it would get on a sketch, and it is a very specific trait
3) but just because Libby and Abby did not recognize him, maybe someone else did? Then, regardless of what they saw, they described him as they knew him.

 

[Charlot123]

Yes it is, isn't it. We have to assume they were killed before 3 p.m. based on that and not answering DG's call at 3.11 p.m don't we IMO?

and doesn’t it indicate that he is a professional in this game?

There was a lot of activity going on, and yet no one saw or heard anything.

 

[Cutiekitty]

Yes he did determine true north and mentions that in the video I believe. He determined the BG time as between 2.20 and 2.30 based on the shadows in the BG video.
And yes, it was his intention to check the accuracy of the billboard "last seen" time IMO.

I’ll rewatch, but I was waiting for him to say it and didn’t hear it. He mentioned BGs shadow was not perpendicular and was more north, but not as north as AWs shadow. If I find it I’ll post the time in the video for anyone else that is curious. I give him credit...it was clever to look at the shadows.

 

[heartgoesout]

Perhaps the “creepy guy” wasn’t in reference to BG at all. They may have seen someone else along the trail they thought was creepy. JMO

BP used the word creepy. There is nothing that indicates the girls used the word creepy.

 

[moonlessnight]

I guess so.

Yes it is, isn't it. We have to assume they were killed before 3 p.m. based on that and not answering DG's call at 3.11 p.m don't we IMO?

 

[Cutiekitty]

Yes he did determine true north and mentions that in the video I believe. He determined the BG time as between 2.20 and 2.30 based on the shadows in the BG video.
And yes, it was his intention to check the accuracy of the billboard "last seen" time IMO.

He didn’t not identify true north in the BG video. At approx 5:45 he states that BG is at the SE end of the bridge and the shadow angle is more north than straight across which would’ve been more 3 o’clock. At approx 7:05 he states that BGs shadow is more north than the lines on the bridge.

The bridge runs NW to SE according google earth. LG is taking the pic at a funky angle so it looks like the bridge runs NE to SW. the AW pic is more the way the bridge is oriented, but the angle LG took it is funky too.

I don’t think you can just orient the photos to point N and S and get accurate info. If he placed the bridge in its true orientation and determined north in relation to the bridge then assessed the shadow I think it would be more accurate. I do not have a program easily accessible that would allow me to manipulate the photo like his does. I do have an associate that does and I might have to hit him up. Kind of a unnecessary really because I’m confident LE knows the actual times.

I give him loads of credit for coming up with this. The theory is clever, I’m just not sure about the execution. Maybe his program somehow does all of this for him? Idk.

Edit: this is based on my understanding of how sundials work. They have to be oriented a certain way and 12 faces north

 

[tresir2012]

I’ll rewatch, but I was waiting for him to say it and didn’t hear it. He mentioned BGs shadow was not perpendicular and was more north, but not as north as AWs shadow. If I find it I’ll post the time in the video for anyone else that is curious. I give him credit...it was clever to look at the shadows.

Look at all 3 videos I posted. He may have explained the north orientation on one of the other videos and I am misremembering.

 

[8771]

I was just thinking back to the possibility that they knew BG. Remember how it was brought up that they mentioned a “creepy guy”? I think that they would be referring him as to “isn’t that so & so’s dad/uncle/dude from etc”? Instead of just some creepy guy? If they knew him I think they would least say that but if they didn’t I’m sure they would call him creepy guy, weirdo etc.
just thinking girl talk back in the day and how my niece talks
Speculation imo moo etc

I have made this exact same point! However, I can't find any MSM to back this up.

Here is an article in which it is confirmed that the girls mention someone, but no indication they called him "creepy."

To bolster your opinion, I would assume that yes, if in fact they were speaking of someone they recognized, a name or something would have come up to put LE on the right track. Needless to say, I too believe his identity was unknown to them at least until the attack occurred.