Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #131

[MistyWaters]

a bad camera... cant see the face properly

Libby was only 14 years old. I’d sure hope you’re not blaming her for not having state of the art equipment to capture the image.

 

[Charlot123]

I don’t blame anyone for not capturing the image, but I am beginning to doubt whether the image has anything to do with their deaths. After the sketches change, everything loses sense, sorry. I don’t know anymore what happened at the bridge, and refuse to even understand.

 

[Ursamajr]

the case would have been an open and shut case if the video was not taken on a potato.

If Libby could have recorded her own killer in higher resolution I am sure she would have. She did what she could and I applaud her for it. So brave of her.

 

[Yemelyan]

Touch (or transfer) DNA is always partial. It’s not necessarily indicative of somebody (ie the killer) actually touching the girls. DNA particles (from shed skin, hair etc) are everywhere and can attach themselves to clothing just by sitting where someone else has sat, being in somebody’s vehicle, wearing somebody else’s clothing who was near someone etc. Touch DNA would not convict anyone without other additional evidence to identify any one suspect actually committed the murders.

LE have said they don’t know if they have the killers DNA. They’ve also stated DNA can be found at every crime scene.

An outdoor crime scene accessible by anyone who walked there, bodies not found until the following day, would be different in expectations than say, finding than a killer’s DNA in a house on such things as doorknobs, on the floor or on other hard objects especially if the accused had no justifiable reason for being in that home.

DNA isn’t required to successfully prosecute when other incriminating evidence is present. I’ve gotten the strong feeling all along, this case isn’t going to solved by DNA alone and that’s why LE have consistently asked for that one important tip from somebody who knows who the killer is.

JMO

I might be misinterpreting what you wrote, but touch or transfer DNA is not always partial. Even one skin cell (theoretically) if transferred to, say, a victim's sweater, contains 100% of the contributing individual's genetic makeup as long as the cell nucleus is there. So you absolutely can get the "full" 13 or 20 loci sample used by LE from touch DNA after amplification. Commonly the sample is around 8-10 cells.

So in the sense of genetic completeness it's not necessarily "always partial" but I'm wondering if what you mean is that it can only be partially used to prosecute someone because of the nature of touch DNA being: 1. easily transferred from totally innocent activities, such as sitting on the same seat in a car, etc and 2. Easily contaminated/mixed with DNA from other contributors, and 3. Present in very small quantities?

 

[Charlot123]

I might be misinterpreting what you wrote, but touch or transfer DNA is not always partial. Even one skin cell (theoretically) if transferred to, say, a victim's sweater, contains 100% of the contributing individual's genetic makeup as long as the cell nucleus is there. So you absolutely can get the "full" 13 or 20 loci sample used by LE from touch DNA after amplification. Commonly the sample is around 8-10 cells.

So in the sense of genetic completeness it's not necessarily "always partial" but I'm wondering if what you mean is that it can only be partially used to prosecute someone because of the nature of touch DNA being: 1. easily transferred from totally innocent activities, such as sitting on the same seat in a car, etc and 2. Easily contaminated/mixed with DNA from other contributors, and 3. Present in very small quantities?

Unless touch DNA is very local, and there is something proving how it ended on a girl, I doubt it is a proof. In the unlikely case LE is, indeed, preparing a case, I am not explaining, why.

 

[MistyWaters]

I might be misinterpreting what you wrote, but touch or transfer DNA is not always partial. Even one skin cell (theoretically) if transferred to, say, a victim's sweater, contains 100% of the contributing individual's genetic makeup as long as the cell nucleus is there. So you absolutely can get the "full" 13 or 20 loci sample used by LE from touch DNA after amplification. Commonly the sample is around 8-10 cells.

So in the sense of genetic completeness it's not necessarily "always partial" but I'm wondering if what you mean is that it can only be partially used to prosecute someone because of the nature of touch DNA being: 1. easily transferred from totally innocent activities, such as sitting on the same seat in a car, etc and 2. Easily contaminated/mixed with DNA from other contributors, and 3. Present in very small quantities?

Thank you for clarifying, yes you’re right touch DNA may be a full profile, although even then it doesn’t necessarily place a suspect at the crime scene.

Touch DNA

 

[Yemelyan]

Unless touch DNA is very local, and there is something proving how it ended on a girl, I doubt it is a proof. In the unlikely case LE is, indeed, preparing a case, I am not explaining, why.

Yes, I think this was @MistyWaters point, that by itself touch DNA is not a strong piece of evidence due to the very nature of what it is and how it is deposited.

My point was just that it is not necessarily partial in the genetic sense. It could be - as it is normally a very very tiny amount of cells that may be more or less degraded - but it's not always so or defined as such.

 

[MistyWaters]

I have to say this isn’t an optimistic response to the question, however we don’t know, he might intentionally be low keying it.

Sheriff Leazenby continues to answer double homicide questions | Carroll County Comet
Q. What elements of this case make it so difficult to solve?

A. Several, however the presiding factor seems to be that whomever is responsible has never discussed it with anyone.

 

[Beachlife926]

“Leazenby said polygraphs have been administered on some who have been interviewed. However, no information about the polygraphs, or who was polygraphed, is being released because investigators want to protect the integrity of the information collected for prosecution.”
BBM it could be nothing but the word choice is interesting
Article from April 2020:
Lots of tips, no arrest in 2017 double homicide | Carroll County Comet

 

[OverTheRhine]

“Leazenby said polygraphs have been administered on some who have been interviewed. However, no information about the polygraphs, or who was polygraphed, is being released because investigators want to protect the integrity of the information collected for prosecution.”
BBM it could be nothing but the word choice is interesting
Article from April 2020:
Lots of tips, no arrest in 2017 double homicide | Carroll County Comet

Also in Tobe's Q&A last month he was asked why more information hasn't been released. He didn't say a single thing about "false confessions" which everyone keeps speculating is the reason. He says

"...the integrity of the investigation must be preserved and to release additional information may damage that integrity which must, in my opinion, be maintained for the courtroom."

 

[Beachlife926]

I have to say this isn’t an optimistic response to the question, however we don’t know, he might intentionally be low keying it.
Sheriff Leazenby continues to answer double homicide questions | Carroll County Comet
Q. What elements of this case make it so difficult to solve?
A. Several, however the presiding factor seems to be that whomever is responsible has never discussed it with anyone.

You bring up a really good point.
IMO LE has to assume BG is reading this so why would they inform BG the presiding factor in his non-arrest? It would just make BG continue not talking.
I could think of a few amateur possibilities but didn’t think I should post in case BG is here and the slim chance my speculation is accurate

 

[Ozoner]

Isolated to the victims + Abby/Libby not targeted

^^What's wrong with that?^^

(My logical thinking fails ....)

The claim that it was isolated to the victims certainly seems irresponsible, doesn't it?

Based on the interview, they wanted to keep the public calm, and they didn't have any evidence that they were in the midst of a killing spree.

It seems reckless for their default position to be that the community is safe. Most serial killers enter a cooling-off period after each murder, but they had no way of knowing whether that cooling-off period would be a year or a week. We still don't know; BG may have had other victims since February of 2017, but he may have relocated to another area, made other killings look like accidents or suicides, etc.

I just viewed a two-hour special about serial killer John Ackroyd. There was an incident in his youth where he hacked a litter of puppies to death with a machete. A neighbor who came over to look into adopting one of the puppies saw puppy body parts scattered around the yard. Apparently Ackroyd said that the puppies were his and that no one else could have them. It was a reminder that many of these guys exhibit the signs of psychopathy early in life even if their criminal records don't show it.

People who are calling in tips should think back to anyone from the Delphi area who may have had a reputation for killing or torturing animals. Most of these guys start with animals before they graduate to people. (If there were more protections in place for animals, Ackroyd might have gotten life in prison for killing those puppies, and his murder victims—four known and many, many others suspected—would still be alive.)

 

[photographer4]

I noticed on other cases that LE isn’t afraid to release information so why are they here? I know the reason they gave but couldn’t they release certain aspects of FBI profile etc
IMO I strongly believe they have a suspect in mind and that’s why they haven’t called a press conference, asked for our help, or released valuable information that could help solve the case.
If that’s not the case then I wonder if the online groups that don’t require valid sources, are the reason they haven’t released anymore.
Also, since the prosecution has to prove they examined every tip but they are still receiving them daily could this prolong an arrest?

So ya know how when police tell the general public they want help finding THIS car, or THAT make and model with X color, how we all go insane and hive mind takes over as we attempt to be helpful? I wonder if releasing that info and asking for help sometimes ends up causing more trouble for them than it might be worth? They probably get hundreds of tips / leads to follow up on, often from people hundreds of miles away who can't really know for sure if X car was where they need to place it etc... and it probably makes a whole lotta extra work for them. I wouldn't release anything more either if I were them on that basis alone!

 

[photographer4]

I noticed on other cases that LE isn’t afraid to release information so why are they here? I know the reason they gave but couldn’t they release certain aspects of FBI profile etc
IMO I strongly believe they have a suspect in mind and that’s why they haven’t called a press conference, asked for our help, or released valuable information that could help solve the case.
If that’s not the case then I wonder if the online groups that don’t require valid sources, are the reason they haven’t released anymore.
Also, since the prosecution has to prove they examined every tip but they are still receiving them daily could this prolong an arrest?

Also, the prosecution does not have to prove they followed up every tip. Rather, they have to prove the suspect they charge is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That might mean they omit a ton of tips / following up if they have info that proves their case and do not need to follow the rest.

 

[Falling Down]

Also, the prosecution does not have to prove they followed up every tip. Rather, they have to prove the suspect they charge is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That might mean they omit a ton of tips / following up if they have info that proves their case and do not need to follow the rest.

They'd have to prove who they're seeking to prosecute was actually there that day, at that time.

Good points.

JMO

 

[photographer4]

I have to say this isn’t an optimistic response to the question, however we don’t know, he might intentionally be low keying it.

Sheriff Leazenby continues to answer double homicide questions | Carroll County Comet
Q. What elements of this case make it so difficult to solve?

A. Several, however the presiding factor seems to be that whomever is responsible has never discussed it with anyone.

This quote you posted makes me think they're pretty sure they know who is responsible, but they need something more to corroborate their theory on it in order to nail the guy. It sounds like they've talked to someone / persons close to the killer and they know they have done so, but the person(s) they've spoken with either aren't giving up information, or do not *have* information to give LE.

Perhaps the killer hasn't yet told anyone about his crimes. I wonder what the police hope that someone will tell them that would let them know for sure their suspect is the right one??

 

[Jerrod]

Carroll County Comet:

Q. "What elements of this case make it so difficult to solve?"
Leazenby: "Several, however the presiding factor seems to be that whomever is responsible has never discussed it with anyone."

April '19 Press Conference:

Carter: "We are confident that you have told someone what you have done ......"

 

[MistyWaters]

Also, the prosecution does not have to prove they followed up every tip. Rather, they have to prove the suspect they charge is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That might mean they omit a ton of tips / following up if they have info that proves their case and do not need to follow the rest.

I agree. As it’s now been four years and we do know substantial resourcing has been in place all along so I don’t think any defence team would have much success in convincing a jury that LE had tunnel vision and were fixated on only drumming up guilt to falsely frame their innocent client. That’s usually what’s behind any allegations by the defence on the topic of ignoring other tips, especially when an arrest is made quickly. JMO

 

[FrostedGlass]

Carroll County Comet:

Q. "What elements of this case make it so difficult to solve?"
Leazenby: "Several, however the presiding factor seems to be that whomever is responsible has never discussed it with anyone."

April '19 Press Conference:

Carter: "We are confident that you have told someone what you have done ......"

I found that slightly amusing.

Leazenby: Never discussed it
Carter: You have told someone
Us: We just don't know

 

[MistyWaters]

This quote you posted makes me think they're pretty sure they know who is responsible, but they need something more to corroborate their theory on it in order to nail the guy. It sounds like they've talked to someone / persons close to the killer and they know they have done so, but the person(s) they've spoken with either aren't giving up information, or do not *have* information to give LE.

Perhaps the killer hasn't yet told anyone about his crimes. I wonder what the police hope that someone will tell them that would let them know for sure their suspect is the right one??

I don’t have the quote at hand but didn’t one of them say quite recently that they’ll know it’s the right tip when they receive it? Something about it’ll connect with information they already know? I don’t think I dreamt it but....? But when I initially read that comment I thought it was interestingly precise.

If anyone knows what I’m referring to kindly post it up because I’ve searched a couple times and can’t find it anywhere.