Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #124

[K.jill]

From what I've read, most people who go to the MHB walk to the bridge, them turn around and go back the way they came. It's a short trail. Maybe some folks walk both trails, I know i would have previous to that day.

BG knew he had to get his prey to the end of the bridge in order for his abduction and murder fantasy to play out, I don't think he could have done it at the other end of the bridge and thus through the woods on the north side of the creek. Too risky.

The CS cannot be seen from the bridge, even in February. He knew this from his previous visits. He also knew how to get to the CS from the SE end of the bridge, taking the path they took gave him some concealment.

Except for one thing, and it's a big thing...

The house along the creek. He had to have known nobody was home, and in fact may have known the occupant is not there that time of year.

I've mentioned "variables" over the last almost three years here about this case. So many variables had to be thought about by BG before he even got to the trails that day. Some of those variables had to be in his favor in order for him to finally strike, as in choice of victim(s). Another huge variable, the house by the creek, which had a clear line-of-sight with where they crossed the creek.

JMO

Lately I have been thinking BG may have known that the house with a sight line was empty, known the area and trails well and could have known RL was away that afternoon. And knew a way to get out of there unnoticed.
If this is true it points to someone very local, imo. Someone who was overlooked? Had a good alibi?

 

[K.jill]

Thanks for clarifying. I thought that might be the case. I have seen some of the files. Guess I need to check them again.

I do not know what to think of those files...and am not sure I fully understand them.

 

[JnRyan]

I believe it is likely this killer had a general target in mind. IOW, he was looking for a certain victim at a specific time and place. And not necessarily targeting Abigail and Liberty specifically. For all I know he did go to the trails that day - or even previous trips - hunting for a victim. His primary target may have been a lone woman, on the bridge and with no one else around. If he were hunting - and I believe he was - he probably had walked over the entire area an hour or two before Abigail and Liberty showed up. He had a rough idea of how many were on the trails and who was where, in a general sense. For example, he probably knew there was no one under the bridge prior to seeing the girls and checked it again as he walked across. If he was searching for lone adult female, preferably petite, he might have realized the two girls were going to be his best opportunity.

As I stated earlier, I watched both seasons of "Mindhunter". One of the comments by the Son of Sam, David Berkowitz, is that he went out hunting almost every night looking for his victims. And this was in NYC where he would see more situations in one night than this killer would see on the trails in numerous trips. And yet, out of all nightly attempts, he had 8 attacks. He had a specific victim and set of circumstances in mind and if they weren't met he simply kept going. I wonder if this killer had not been to the trails in the weeks or months prior to the killings.

If this guy has killed before and/or since, what are the chances Abigail and Liberty are his youngest victims. If all of his other victims were single females, the situation may have dictated that he alter his methods. If he has killed since, maybe he decided multiple victims are not ideal and his others are late teen or adult women by themselves. What if his victim(s) were runaways classed as missing and no one has a clue as to their fate? What if his other victim went to another set of trails and walked or biked there without telling anyone where they were going? (As a teenager I had a set of wooded trails I would hike and many times I took off on them without telling anyone. To this day, if my parents were alive they would have no idea how many times I did that, with a pellet gun, .22 or no gun at all.) Such a person might be another victim and no one is aware of what happened or even that they went out on trails.

In other words if we or even LE are trying to make a connection to another crime it might not be readily apparent in any LE database. If he is a serial killer, Abigail and Liberty might be a one off crime for him. His other victims exhibit an entirely different type of victim and set of circumstances.

 

[rosesfromangels]

For @stattlich1 and others who want to understand the viewpoint of someone who thinks the Delphi murders was a crime perpetrated by a stranger/not targeted in advance: the first thing that you'd need to see/agree on with me is that this crime was one of a unique subset of murders called a child abduction murder. If you don't agree with this basic premise, then I think you'd have trouble seeing my perspective.

Child abduction murders occur when a victim or victims under the age of 18 are transported ANY distance for the purpose of the commission of a crime. So I believe the murders of Abby and Libby meet this definition.

Child abduction murders are statistically quite different from regular child murders. Regular child murders, without the abduction component, are overwhelmingly likely to be committed by a family member or intimate. When abduction is involved, family is only responsible for the murder about 14% of the time. Strangers and acquaintances are about equally responsible for the rest of the cases (strangers account for about 44% of child abduction murders). However, the age of the victim heavily skews this data. Victims age 1-5 are mostly abducted and murdered by acquaintances. As the age of the victim goes up, strangers account for the majority of offenders.

Acquaintances are likely to abduct from the victim's home or another residence. Strangers account for most abductions from public places.

Now you might be seeing how I'm determining that Abby and Libby's case looks more like a stranger child abduction murder than an acquaintance one. But you might be wondering where I'm getting my information. In 2006 a very comprehensive study of child murder was published. You can find this online, it runs about 103 pages and it's the definitive manual used by law enforcement to investigate these types of crimes. It was linked in the previous thread by @margarita25 . The whole purpose of this study, which took 3 and 1/2 years and comprised almost 800 solved cases, was to show that 1. Child abduction murders are very different than regular child murders, and 2. To dispel common misconceptions held by law enforcement that was preventing them from making good decisions when investigating this type of case.

According to this study, child abduction killers overwhelmingly choose their victims because the opportunity presented itself. They rarely choose based on physical characteristics or prior knowledge of the victim. These types of killers had a motive to murder a specific victim in just 12% of cases.

Here is a quote from the Child Abduction Murder Study: " There is a misconception that child abduction murder killers are looking for a child with a certain appearance. Contrary to murders in general, CAM killers were much less likely to select a victim based on a personal characteristic."

The data DO support that CAM killers have a higher likelihood of using the same MO across multiple offenses and that there is a greater predisposition to serial offending. What this means is that child abduction killers are MORE like serial killers - even if they've only committed one offense - than like "regular" murderers.

Also like serial killers, child abduction killers have an overwhelming sexual component in their motivation to kill. 70% of child abduction murders involved a sexual component, compared to 5% of all murders and 14% of non-abduction child murders.

It is rare for what happened to Abby and Libby to happen at all. Only about 1 out of 10,000 reports of a missing child end up with the outcome they had. However, if it DOES happen - then it is slightly more likely than not that a stranger was involved, and it's highly likely that the victim selection was not based on appearance or prior knowledge of the victim. So that's how I reached the conclusions I do. Anything COULD be, as this crime isn't solved, but I'm looking at what history tells us is more likely than not.

Thoughts?

Thank you for all your insightful posts - you've been posting alot of great info and points to ponder.
The majority of us on this thread are falling in to two speculative camps: (1) - Prior contact/catfished (2) Randomly selected Victims based on proximity/availability.

I've been posting enough for folks to know that my *primary* theory falls in category (1). However, those of us who have been posting on these threads for any amount of time know that it's foolish to dig in on any one theory. We know so little about the case, and we can only make deductions based on research/stats/and the limited details we know.

As such, I want to emphasize that while I'm partial to theory (1), I do agree that there is just as good a possibility that these children were picked at random.

I learned this "random" lesson when I was following the Jane Britton thread. Jane was a Harvard doctorate candidate in anthropology, murdered in 1969. She was left in a rather bizarre arrangement of items around and on top of her. Many of us hypothesized the way Jane was found aligned with some anthropological burial rite....and our speculations only grew wilder from there. We had some pretty "interesting" theories...all very complex after hours upon hours of studies of various burial rites and rituals.

Jane's case was ice cold. Fast forward to 2017 and DNA advances. Jane's case was finally solved and those that were held in greatest suspicion were exonerated. Jane's Perp was some random guy walking past her dorm/apartment, and was fixated on her from her 2nd floor window. He climbed up the fire escape, entered her room, and murdered her. Well there went all those wild theories!!!!

So yes, we must always consider randomness. Many Perps operate at a low level of the human spectrum, focused only on the most basic of human urges.

Amateur opinion and speculation

 

[K.jill]

For those who know the area around the bridge:
If RL was home 2/13/2017 and working outside is it likely he would have seen BG or been able to hear if someone screamed?

 

[Yemelyan]

Thank you for all your insightful posts - you've been posting alot of great info and points to ponder.
The majority of us on this thread are falling in to two speculative camps: (1) - Prior contact/catfished (2) Randomly selected Victims based on proximity/availability.

I've been posting enough for folks to know that my *primary* theory falls in category (1). However, those of us who have been posting on these threads for any amount of time know that it's foolish to dig in on any one theory. We know so little about the case, and we can only make deductions based on research/stats/and the limited details we know.

As such, I want to emphasize that while I'm partial to theory (1), I do agree that there is just as good a possibility that these children were picked at random.

I learned this "random" lesson when I was following the Jane Britton thread. Jane was a Harvard doctorate candidate in anthropology, murdered in 1969. She was left in a rather bizarre arrangement of items around and on top of her. Many of us hypothesized the way Jane was found aligned with some anthropological burial rite....and our speculations only grew wilder from there. We had some pretty "interesting" theories...all very complex after hours upon hours of studies of various burial rites and rituals.

Jane's case was ice cold. Fast forward to 2017 and DNA advances. Jane's case was finally solved and those that were held in greatest suspicion were exonerated. Jane's Perp was some random guy walking past her dorm/apartment, and was fixated on her from her 2nd floor window. He climbed up the fire escape, entered her room, and murdered her. Well there went all those wild theories!!!!

So yes, we must always consider randomness. Many Perps operate at a low level of the human spectrum, focused only on the most basic of human urges.

Amateur opinion and speculation

Thanks for your perspective and openness. I think one of the most important parts of your post is the recognition that when we think about crimes and crime patterns, we take into account the research that is known about these offenders to inform our theories and opinions.

 

[Tiger Stripes]

(RSBBM)

It is possible that this killer doesn't necessarily have extensive field experience but rather extensive experience with this particular set of trails. Perhaps in middle or high school years either as a prior resident or frequent visitor in the past.

"Like, like, like!", @JnRyan

 

[Spartygirl]

Just watching the local news and a woman was assaulted on a river trail. The perp was medium build and departed on a bicycle. YIKES
Police searching for suspect in Lansing River Trail Assault

 

[rosesfromangels]

For those who know the area around the bridge:
If RL was home 2/13/2017 and working outside is it likely he would have seen BG or been able to hear if someone screamed?

Such an important question, and one I think many of us have wondered about.
Did the Perp know RL always ran a tractor at that day/time or had other routines that would drown out noise?
So many questions about why this property was chosen. Or, was it random?

Amateur opinion and speculation

 

[JnRyan]

Such an important question, and one I think many of us have wondered about.
Did the Perp know RL always ran a tractor at that day/time or had other routines that would drown out noise?
So many questions about why this property was chosen. Or, was it random?

Amateur opinion and speculation

I tend to believe his victims were random that day, but I do believe he specifically choose that locale because he either scouted it out sometime prior or had been there several times in the past or both. I just get the feeling he was confident in operating in that locale. But again, that is my gut reaction to this and I don't have concrete evidence to support it. Other opinions may differ.

 

[Spartygirl]

For those who know the area around the bridge:
If RL was home 2/13/2017 and working outside is it likely he would have seen BG or been able to hear if someone screamed?

I am not from around there, but I have been to the bridge/trails a few times and at the cemetery by RL' property and where the girls were found.
If he was out working outside, I would think he could hear someone screaming if he didn't have a lawn mower or tractor running.
He may not have SEEN anyone depending on where in the yard he was working because it is a pretty large area.
But he wasn't home anyway so he didn't see or hear anything. JMO

 

[Spartygirl]

I tend to believe his victims were random that day, but I do believe he specifically choose that locale because he either scouted it out sometime prior or had been there several times in the past or both. I just get the feeling he was confident in operating in that locale. But again, that is my gut reaction to this and I don't have concrete evidence to support it. Other opinions may differ.

BBM
I am going to agree to disagree and I also have no evidence to support it, just my gut feeling since the very beginning.
I think they (or one) were targeted and not random
JMO

 

[Yemelyan]

For those who know the area around the bridge:
If RL was home 2/13/2017 and working outside is it likely he would have seen BG or been able to hear if someone screamed?

Was he even home that afternoon? Remembering all the way back to the beginning of this, I feel like he said he was out running errands including buying tropical fish?!

 

[Spartygirl]

Was he even home that afternoon? Remembering all the way back to the beginning of this, I feel like he said he was out running errands including buying tropical fish?!

No--he was not home that day

 

[K.jill]

Was he even home that afternoon? Remembering all the way back to the beginning of this, I feel like he said he was out running errands including buying tropical fish?!

He was not Home that day.
I was speculating: did BG get lucky that no one spotted him with the girls or heard any screaming.
or
Did BG Somehow know that RL was not home To hear or see anything. Did BG know no one was at home at the house that has a line of sight to the creek? Did he know the area so well he could get out of there without being seen or was it a random crime and he just got lucky.

 

[sunshineray]

My intention wasn't to offend anyone. But if you saw yourself in what I wrote about decent people....I was trying to say that it's normal to try to "normalize" these acts of extreme evil. You may be one of the people who are thinking, if I can figure out the "why Abby, why Libby" then I can protect myself/my loved ones from this type of horrible scenario.

Let's say they were killed because they investigated and were about to expose a sex ring in Carroll County. To me this is absolutely preposterous but to some, it's a "better" answer than the alternative, which is that there is a really evil person out there who killed only to appease his own desires and used two other basically randomly chosen humans in the most depraved of ways.

I understand what you're saying and sometimes, not always, the simplest answer is correct. I think being human and caring does lead to wanting to know what made them so vulnerable. Why Abby and Libby? Evil waiting that day on the trails and the girls just being kids and not thinking as an adult woman might about avenues of escape, could be the answer as to why they were preyed upon. It could also though be they made themselves vulnerable in another area of their young lives. Kids share way too much online with strangers and without the hindsight of age can be singled out and targeted. It happens more times than any of us care to recognize for various reasons.

I and my siblings were fortunate, in my adult eyes, for having personal safety issues pounded into us early. Did it make me more fearful than most kids...probably but as an adult I thank my Dad for enlightening me early. A little sad for my childhood carefreeness but it made me feel more aware and dare I say powerful.

I just wish Abby would have said to Libby's remark about the trail ending and nowhere to go, come on lets just run through the woods to the nearest house/road, I'm scared. God Bless them both.

 

[sunshineray]

Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe that LE said it was a targeted attack-
Yes?

Sheriff Leazenby said he had a feeling then and still does now that this incident was isolated to the victims and not an ongoing threat to public.

 

[mom2chloe]

Was he even home that afternoon? Remembering all the way back to the beginning of this, I feel like he said he was out running errands including buying tropical fish?!

He was allegedly going to the dump which means he likely was loading a truck or trailer with items to take to the dump. I wonder who knew he left or would be gone awhile. I also wonder about the other property where the alleged snowbirds were away. Surely someone was checking on their property from time to time. Whoever BG is IMO knew there would be no one home during the time to commit the crime. Again IMO

 

[sunshineray]

FEAR.

The locals and the LE.

They hate him but can't touch him.
I hope if/when the situation changes, he won't wait for the arrest.

Threats and fear talked about here.

"Carter said that he believes that since the killer’s image and voice were publicized, and they have not been able to identify a suspect, someone knows who he is but is keeping quiet because of “extreme fear.”

“There is obviously someone withholding information,” added Carroll County Sheriff Tobe Leazenby. “It could very well be somewhere along the lines someone was even threatened not to reveal the identity of the killer.”

“Please, please, come forward and let us know what you know,” Carter pleaded"

'Epitome of evil': Delphi double murder still a mystery three years later | X101 Always Classic

 

[K.jill]

If Abby and Libby had not walked across the bridge that day would he have abducted them from a trail?
If the girls were targeted specifically I guess he would have taken them from any location he could have gotten them when they were away from other people.

I think it is possible that they were targeted and BG knew that they would be there that afternoon. But there’s no way he could’ve known they would cross the bridge and he could take them from the end of it. And, they very well could have ran into friends and been with them. Or, someone else could have been at the end of the bridge. If these girls were targeted specifically what would he have done if he could not isolate them on the bridge?...Just thinking out loud.