Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #116

[busymcmoody]

Good post...IMO the reason for no arrest while knowing all these things you've listed can only mean DNA evidence cannot absolutely, beyond a reasonable doubt, physically place him at the murder scene.

And they may have nothing to compare it with.

 

[busymcmoody]

Admitting indirectly that they were wrong the first time with the first sketch is a very good point. I will admit that we do not know what information law enforcement has that caused them to come out with the second sketch. Time will tell whether they are correct.

When Abigail William's mother said on Dr. Phil that no one has been able to enhance the video enough to get a good description of the bridge guy suspect, I could not understand how law enforcement could claim the second sketch description was representative of the man in the video. It looks like law enforcement had only two choices with their investigation:

1. Put out eyewitness description sketches and hope they end up matching the bridge guy suspect when they find the man in the sketch. OR

2. Wait for years until technology can advance to the point where the video Liberty German captured with her cell phone can be enhanced enough to give them a good physical description of their bridge guy suspect. Then use that description to create an accurate sketch based off the video and not an eyewitness.

So, from my understanding of the investigation, I can understand why they did what they did.

And since they may know who BG is they had to choose between the two sketches they had and determined that the 04/22 sketch resembles him more. So basically, what I'm saying is, if they know who he is, they could have gone and have a third sketch made, based on their knowledge, but that would compromise their investigation I think. So they had to introduce that sketch to keep the tips coming. Not saying that it was like that but it is a possibility. JMO.

 

[Charlot123]

The confusion between the 2 sketches has really created a mess and absolutely slowed things down. But I do not agree that LE just took a guess with the NBG sketch hoping to get lucky. No no, not at all IMO.

LE has stated the new sketch is the face of BG. The face to the body we see on the bridge. Now I know there are some on here who say that LE actually is just expressing an opinion, but I don’t agree that’s all it is- at some point, when LE states things as fact, we need to accept them as fact.

The “at some point” for me was during this April presser. They had to come out to the public and admit they got things wrong. That cannot be easy. They swallowed their pride and said “please be patient with us, please. We are only beginning”. So while I’m slow to accept LE statements as pure fact since they are only human and make mistakes (um, most likely in this case!), I strongly believe they are right this time. They wouldn’t have come out and shown humility and admitted having gone down the wrong path if they weren’t certain of the facts they are now putting forth.

All MOO.

(sorry all, no links to the statements by LE. They’ve been posted a bazillion times so I assume they are relatively memorized )

They (LE, DC) said, they believe he might have spoke n to someone about the murder. My feeling is, they got a “tip” from that someone, but the person who tipped them is not willing to testify (for understandable reasons). Then the LEOs rushed to look at the initial interviews, and (Lord!) noticed the car that they might have forgotten about (I honestly think they forgot about own scanner info). So now they either need a witness who would independently place this person on the bridge around the time of murders, or someone who is close to him crack up and shell out the information, or something else that would be a proof.

Because what they heard from someone BG confided in is not direct information, DNA buried in 20+ others is good but not enough, so they need something more direct.

 

[Charlot123]

I've been compiling a list of possible scenarios. Does anyone have others to add to the list?

Planned attack premeditated
Robbery gone bad
Saw something and killed girls to keep them from talking
On-line meetup gone wrong
Mental illness crisis escalated
Target shooting then decided to attack girls
Drug triggered rage
Suicidal and decided to take girls with him but after attacks suicidal ideation subsided

All of these, and then, some.
Robbery - unlikely
I think he is mental but the rage could have been provoked by meth, too. Dual diagnosis, so to say.
Suicidal is possible. He is probably not far from it even now.
I think that since the girls had active online life, a mere mistake could have caused it all. He was keeping two chats open and by mistake, sent someone meant for another person, to Libby. Libby, being sharp, immediately guessed who the other person was, but it was meant to be a huge secret. So the perp first begged her and pleaded and made her reset the phone (erasing the chat). But he was still unsure that his secret was safe, so he decided to erase the witness, so to say.

 

[Charlot123]

This read is longer but, scroll down to number 9.
I'm hopeful this is what's happening in this case. If it is, they know who he is.
15 Secrets of Forensic Artists

I am hopeful it is not. I hope that LE used true sketch made in 2017.

However, about sketches and witnesses. How do we account and correct for this?

Prosopagnosia - Wikipedia

“Prosopagnosia, also called face blindness,[2] is a cognitive disorder of face perception in which the ability to recognize familiar faces, including one's own face (self-recognition), is impaired, while other aspects of visual processing (e.g., object discrimination) and intellectual functioning (e.g., decision-making) remain intact. “

They say now, about 3% people have it. And some may never know. These are horrible witnesses.
I believe no one knows the percent of super-recognizers, but probably, much less.

 

[tresir2012]

I've thought someone could have the car as an alibi and LE wants to know if anyone else saw it there.
For example, LE asks why were you walking? And person answers because my car broke down. LE where did you park? (knowing they've had no reports of a car there.)

Good point. So they need a confirmation the car was there perhaps. Interesting thought.

 

[tresir2012]

Here is what I think:

I have always thought the man Liberty German videotaped on the Monon High Bridge is the killer. It would be relatively easy for law enforcement to figure that out with a reasonable amount of certainty. The distance and speed from where he was videotaped to when his voice first appears on Liberty German's recording would be easy to conclude that either he is the killer or he was very near the area where the girls and the bridge guy were talking.

As for the second sketch released on April 22, 2019, I do not think that sketch is at all representative of the description of the man on Liberty German's video. I think because law enforcement is as lost as the rest of us and all the youtubers who zoom in and have created their own personal sketches of bridge guy, they just decided to take a guess that a witness who gave a description of a man from February 2017 might be the killer. So they put that out for the public in the hope that maybe they get lucky.

I think when the man who murdered Liberty German and Abigail Williams gets caught that he will look nothing like the second sketch released on April 22, 2019. And I think it is the confusion between the second released sketch and the Liberty German video that is the reason this case is taking such a long time to solve.

TY for explaining. So you think this sketch of someone seen by a witness may be another unidentified person wandering around the trails. That is possible by why has he not come forward to clear himself? I think that LE have somehow worked out that this NBG sketch is the guy on the bridge and confidently are now saying this. They must have other evidence that they have not released to be so confident IMO. "You want to know what we know and someday you will"
Spooky really.

 

[tresir2012]

Good post...IMO the reason for no arrest while knowing all these things you've listed can only mean DNA evidence cannot absolutely, beyond a reasonable doubt, physically place him at the murder scene.

Or, if his DNA is there it is only touch DNA and can be explained away as he is known to one of the victims and someone is giving him an alibi IMO.

 

[tresir2012]

What’s he say?

"Gives a feel of what the person may look like".

 

[Deleted member 102539]

All of these, and then, some.
Robbery - unlikely
I think he is mental but the rage could have been provoked by meth, too. Dual diagnosis, so to say.
Suicidal is possible. He is probably not far from it even now.
I think that since the girls had active online life, a mere mistake could have caused it all. He was keeping two chats open and by mistake, sent someone meant for another person, to Libby. Libby, being sharp, immediately guessed who the other person was, but it was meant to be a huge secret. So the perp first begged her and pleaded and made her reset the phone (erasing the chat). But he was still unsure that his secret was safe, so he decided to erase the witness, so to say.

Maybe, it was like you say. But what if Iowa and Delphi are connected indeed (we don't know atm): did the killer send by chance a "wrong intimate mail" to an underage girl each time and had each time to erase the witness including a respective girlfriend?

As soon as both crimes were committed by the same killer, this reason (wrong SM contact) sounds somehow outlandish, IMO. Less outlandish would sound to me, that he was on a hunt and did something like an "adventure-thrill-kill", which doesn't exclude a lot of stalking via SM previously.
Maybe, the killer searched via SM for female victims out of a vulnerable family: kids growing up NOT with their parents; drug relations of family members; parents, who were cheating on each other; law violations by family members; and so on.
Perhaps that was/is the basis for the monster to choose his victims (in different states maybe), because finding the murderer would be the more difficult for LE, the more problems there are in a family from the outset.
When I mention parents, who were cheating on each other, I think of the Tx case (murder in a flash in church in 2016, unsolved). I imagine meanwhile, the killer (as a SK) could even have chosen the mother of 2 teenage girls as his next victim instead of the teenage girls, this one time. Stalking the girls, he would have found out something about the parents and some problems in the family, which would complicate police investigation after murder (too many suspects). Maybe, that was/is his preferred initial situation for planning a thrill-kill? Idk and only MOO and thoughts.

 

[stattlich1]

Good post...IMO the reason for no arrest while knowing all these things you've listed can only mean DNA evidence cannot absolutely, beyond a reasonable doubt, physically place him at the murder scene.

Excellent question, how could they have the DNA, present at the scene, proving who he is, yet not be able to prove he was at the scene?

 

[Vesta66S]

Was the hair brown-red, or dark? This is what baffles me.

I don’t know.

 

[tresir2012]

Excellent question, how could they have the DNA, present at the scene, proving who he is, yet not be able to prove he was at the scene?

A recent GH video, posted on the last thread, discusses DNA on the shoulder of a sweatshirt. If that DNA is from someone known to the girls or to Kelsi (whose sweatshirt it was) then that could be difficult to place that person at the scene, if that was the only DNA found. Especially so if that person also has an alibi. MOO.

 

[chaz]

Does anyone know if there is a database of reported stolen vehicles in Delphi? Would love to know if any were reported missing around the time frame of the crime.

IMO There are a lot of ways a vehicle could be classified as abandoned.

Will the vehicle be relevant....who knows!

I often use this site but i don't know if every stolen vehicle is registered here: Stolen Car

 

[stattlich1]

A recent GH video, posted on the last thread, discusses DNA on the shoulder of a sweatshirt. If that DNA is from someone known to the girls or to Kelsi (whose sweatshirt it was) then that could be difficult to place that person at the scene, if that was the only DNA found. Especially so if that person also has an alibi. MOO.

Following is all speculation on my part....

I agree. Unless, of course, that person would be tied to that car at the abandoned building in some way.

I think they had a minimum of two sketches of potential suspects from the start. For reasons unknown they went with BG sketch 1, until such time evidence came forth that convinced them they were wrong, and it is BG sketch 2 who is now their primary suspect.

BG sketch 2's DNA was at the scene, and has been tied to him, through methods at this time unknown.

The car is the missing piece of the puzzle. BG sketch 2's alibi early on, through means unknown, has been debunked.

BG sketch 2 either owns the car, is familiar with, related to, or knows the owner of the car, stole the car, is known to have been in that car, or otherwise.

 

[tresir2012]

I am thinking the car had several people associated with it, all meeting at the trail for illegal purposes. One of them is BG and the others know it but they are alibis for each other and frightened of BG. LE know the car but need to know all the occupants and associates.

MOO.

 

[JnRyan]

Excellent question, how could they have the DNA, present at the scene, proving who he is, yet not be able to prove he was at the scene?

The only explanation I can think of is 'touch' DNA. With DNA from semen LE can prove the person was there. From DNA found under a victim's fingernails LE can place a person at the scene if there was a struggle. But it is much harder with touch DNA as it could have been left on the victim long before the crime was committed and therefore can't be determined through the touch DNA alone that the person was at the crime scene.

 

[JnRyan]

They have a video of the suspect.
They have recording of his voice.
They have a crime scene.
They say they know the second sketch is the man responsible for the murders.
They say they know the person talking in the recording is the person on the bridge with the girls.
They say they believe he is from Delphi.
They say he "was" hiding in plain sight.
The say they have likely interviewed him, or someone close to him.
Local, State, and Federal law enforcement has been on the case for nearly 3 years.

I do not profess to be the sharpest tack in the drawer, but these facts lead me to believe they know who BG is.

Yet we have no arrest.

Why?

Just through the first 2 and the 4th alone - which was made known to the public very early on - I thought with all the LE resources thrown at this case an arrest was imminent. I couldn't believe I was so wrong on that point. That he is likely from Delphi at some time in the past is something I've believed from the beginning. I say 'likely', because a person who is very comfortable in a wooded or forest environment could have been well acquainted with the area in one or two prior trips. I believe the problem with 'from Delphi' is that a person could have lived or visited there when in the 6th, 7th or 8th grades and became very familiar with the trail, but as an adult he is not readily recognized. 'Hiding in plain sight' (which I doubt based on what info we have) and "likely" interviewed him are what I believe are educated guesses at best from LE. With the exception of crime lab work (e.g., DNA) I don't believe LE is not much closer to an answer than they were a week after the murders.

 

[Charlot123]

TY for explaining. So you think this sketch of someone seen by a witness may be another unidentified person wandering around the trails. That is possible by why has he not come forward to clear himself? I think that LE have somehow worked out that this NBG sketch is the guy on the bridge and confidently are now saying this. They must have other evidence that they have not released to be so confident IMO. "You want to know what we know and someday you will"
Spooky really.

I was thinking that maybe, the reason that he drove to the trails was not so innocent (but not murders), and he does not want that reason to be known, or the person he was meeting with to give him in alibi. In his situation, any date - a married woman, a girlfriend of another GK, teenage girl or a boy - everything is bad. So if he knows that he was not close to the girls down, and merely passed them on the bridge, he does not need to step out. Because the first thing the police is going to do is deconstruct his alibi, and if they can not, they will be angry with him for not being the BG, and they will give him very hard time. JMO

I don’t know if the man they think was the BG whose sketch they are using was the killer, or not. My opinion, 50/50 and it depends on his level of narcissism. I feel that the girls were killed in a narcissistic rage. Not every man is capable of it.

 

[Charlot123]

Maybe, it was like you say. But what if Iowa and Delphi are connected indeed (we don't know atm): did the killer send by chance a "wrong intimate mail" to an underage girl each time and had each time to erase the witness including a respective girlfriend?

As soon as both crimes were committed by the same killer, this reason (wrong SM contact) sounds somehow outlandish, IMO. Less outlandish would sound to me, that he was on a hunt and did something like an "adventure-thrill-kill", which doesn't exclude a lot of stalking via SM previously.
Maybe, the killer searched via SM for female victims out of a vulnerable family: kids growing up NOT with their parents; drug relations of family members; parents, who were cheating on each other; law violations by family members; and so on.
Perhaps that was/is the basis for the monster to choose his victims (in different states maybe), because finding the murderer would be the more difficult for LE, the more problems there are in a family from the outset.
When I mention parents, who were cheating on each other, I think of the Tx case (murder in a flash in church in 2016, unsolved). I imagine meanwhile, the killer (as a SK) could even have chosen the mother of 2 teenage girls as his next victim instead of the teenage girls, this one time. Stalking the girls, he would have found out something about the parents and some problems in the family, which would complicate police investigation after murder (too many suspects). Maybe, that was/is his preferred initial situation for planning a thrill-kill? Idk and only MOO and thoughts.

Well, we don’t know about IA. It is just a working hypothesis, an idea, that eliminates most of our POIs. IA killings linked to Delphi ones leave only one explanation: a SK. This we don’t know yet.