Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #137

[JnRyan]

snipped by me.
A lot of statements coming from LE in this case to me seems to be hints of some kind. I am constantly analysing what they may mean, and at the same time worried that I read way to much into them.
LE has also Said something along the line that they wish they could tell all they know, as if all their weird statements will make sense to us, once they are able to share everything. That makes me Think that maybe they are hints.
I have heard this statement over and over again about “we are one tip away” with emphasis on “one”. I wonder if that means that they do know who BG is, but something or someone is preventing them from making the arrest, could be someone providing a false alibi.
LE has also stated that someone out there may be afraid to come forward. all of the above makes me wonder if they do know, who BG is, he is protected by someone providing an alibi, who is afraid to come forward, and by emphasising that the are “one” tip away, they are trying to speak to that person reasuring them that if they come forward and speak they have enough to arrest and convict BG for sure, so the person do not have to fear that what they know, will not be enough to arrest BG.

I Think the theory about one witness lying and derailing the investigation is very interesting. When reviewing all the weird statements from LE in that light, especially the 2019 presser, it all makes sense. I just keep reminding myself that this is one way of connecting the dots and get a meaningful picture, but that there are probably several ways to connect the dots and still get a meaningful picture.

The "We only need one tip..." is a theme I see every now and then in unsolved cases. There is another case I'm following, the murders of Heidi Childs and David Metzler, from 12 years ago. LE said something similar at the 12 year mark last week. Police continue to seek justice in Childs-Metzler cold case

“You know we only need really one and that if that one piece of information is what we need, then that’s success,” Geller said.

Of course, in the above case many in that area believe someone knows but is unwilling or afraid to come forward. And maybe in Abigail and Liberty's case that is what LE believes here.

 

[distracted]

this theory would just die
the witness in question was never a main witness... there were several witnesses and the main one is a FEMALE
so the idea that a witness invented the first sketch is nonsense...made up by the ever creative theorists

There are a number of reasons people insert themselves into a case - notoriety, information gathering, distraction, diversion, etc. There's a reason that LE return to a crime scene often, attend funerals and interview anyone who is connected whether intimately or peripherally. And the reason is that sometimes a person connected to a crime inserts himself into the investigation or family members' lives for access or in an effort to protect himself or someone else who is involved.

At this point, I can't dismiss anything.

 

[distracted]

Forget the sketches. LE has muddled them both up so badly they mean nothing. Who knows if even they ever meant anything.
July 2017 sketch was from multiple people who saw this guy on the trails that day including a woman who came forward belatedly who supposedly got a real good look at him. The guy wore a hat, but not like the one in the sketch. He did not have blue eyes. This sketch was put out on thousands of flyers nationwide.
April 2019 sketch was made approx three days after the murders from someone who came to police to “report something they felt needed reporting”. No idea what that was. LE at the time said the 2017 sketch was now secondary...whatever that means. Later LE deemed 2019 sketch as the killer and who they were looking for, saying forget the 2017 sketch. LE over the next few months, tried to explain the sketches suggesting we should sorta kinda think of maybe perhaps they were both a little bit possibly correct. As LE sank farther into this swamp, for me at least, their credibility and the sketches’ merit completely disappeared.
More important I think than the sketches LE released at the April 2019 presser was the two second video. If you look at it frame by frame it becomes pretty apparent that BG is much younger and much thinner than the middle aged or older pot bellied guy we were led to believe he was. The question then is why LE allowed the public for two years to believe that.


Edit: typo

Completely agree with you. I have never understood why they used a sketch at all when they have the guy on video. I can understand why they had the sketches drawn, but I would have expected them to be kept as part of the file and not shown to the public.

 

[heartgoesout]

honestly I just take the two sketches to mean he may look older with facial hair, and may at times wear a hat. but, he can also look clean shaven and younger..they know the suspect has two looks..at least that's how I take it. mOO

Yes, two looks. One that he was covered up with a disguise if you will, and one as himself. Speculating the white image coming out of his jacket could possibly be the duffle bag handles he put the BG clothes, hat, scarf in.

Remember when they were asking about a duffle bag?
"We're trying to get people that were driving down the Hoosier Heartland, that were on the interstate, that were in Logansport that might have saw somebody walking, hitchhiking-- if they saw a duffle bag laying somewhere, anything. We're just reaching out for people that saw anything within that distance," Riley said.
Tips pour in after suspect identified in Delphi double homicide | wthr.com

 

[heartgoesout]

Yeah, I agree it would probably need some tweaking and the output would never be as good, but just anything on the actual facial features would be interesting.



It concerns me that they've come up with the sketch 2 years after the fact based on witness input. Memory is not fixed and it's been pretty well proven it degrades over time and memory accuracy gets worse.

The Neuroscience of Memory: Implications for the Courtroom

Keep in mind the second sketch released was actually done three days after the murders but not released until April 2019.
The first sketch released in August 2017 and took a long 6 months. Speculating that they were going back and forth between disagreeing witnesses.

 

[heartgoesout]

snipped by me.
A lot of statements coming from LE in this case to me seems to be hints of some kind. I am constantly analysing what they may mean, and at the same time worried that I read way to much into them.
LE has also Said something along the line that they wish they could tell all they know, as if all their weird statements will make sense to us, once they are able to share everything. That makes me Think that maybe they are hints.
I have heard this statement over and over again about “we are one tip away” with emphasis on “one”. I wonder if that means that they do know who BG is, but something or someone is preventing them from making the arrest, could be someone providing a false alibi.
LE has also stated that someone out there may be afraid to come forward. all of the above makes me wonder if they do know, who BG is, he is protected by someone providing an alibi, who is afraid to come forward, and by emphasising that the are “one” tip away, they are trying to speak to that person reasuring them that if they come forward and speak they have enough to arrest and convict BG for sure, so the person do not have to fear that what they know, will not be enough to arrest BG.

I Think the theory about one witness lying and derailing the investigation is very interesting. When reviewing all the weird statements from LE in that light, especially the 2019 presser, it all makes sense. I just keep reminding myself that this is one way of connecting the dots and get a meaningful picture, but that there are probably several ways to connect the dots and still get a meaningful picture.

Nicely said. There may be some tweaks to the dots, but at the end of the day there were only so many people there that day.

 

[heartgoesout]

The below are just my initial thoughts on a witness being the actual suspect:

TL has said he knows the voice from the very beginning. If one of the witnesses was actually the man from the bridge video, I think TL (or any of the many other LE people involved) would be able to connect the voice to that witness.

Also, after seeing the bridge video, DG would have possibly noted a resemblance to clothing, etc. from people he'd talked to on the trail that day. Or remembered someone who was wet or muddy.

And I agree with the post above about the witnesses being checked and double checked (probably triple checked and so on). LE's most recent statements about the sketches have been more along the lines of not dismissing either sketch entirely, which does not sound like they think they were lied to by those who participated in either sketch. Jmo.

Great thoughts and questions. As someone said above I know that voice, is a hint. He's telling BG we know.
LE cannot come out and say it's so and so. So they tell it subtly. They also cannot come out and explain that the POI lied about the sketch, hence the confusing statements on the sketches. IMO
LE can triple check on witnesses. They can triple check witnesses friends and family. Doesn't matter if they are lying and holding strong to that lie.

 

[Ekliptika]

Wonder if they have made voice recordings of the people they know were there that day. And compared with Libbys recording. I do not know if there are forensic methods for comparing voices. But if so I would assume that must have been done in this case. I trust that the police have used every tool they have in the box to solve this case.

 

[Spartygirl]

snipped by me.
A lot of statements coming from LE in this case to me seems to be hints of some kind. I am constantly analysing what they may mean, and at the same time worried that I read way to much into them.
LE has also Said something along the line that they wish they could tell all they know, as if all their weird statements will make sense to us, once they are able to share everything. That makes me Think that maybe they are hints.
I have heard this statement over and over again about “we are one tip away” with emphasis on “one”. I wonder if that means that they do know who BG is, but something or someone is preventing them from making the arrest, could be someone providing a false alibi.
LE has also stated that someone out there may be afraid to come forward. all of the above makes me wonder if they do know, who BG is, he is protected by someone providing an alibi, who is afraid to come forward, and by emphasising that the are “one” tip away, they are trying to speak to that person reasuring them that if they come forward and speak they have enough to arrest and convict BG for sure, so the person do not have to fear that what they know, will not be enough to arrest BG.

I Think the theory about one witness lying and derailing the investigation is very interesting. When reviewing all the weird statements from LE in that light, especially the 2019 presser, it all makes sense. I just keep reminding myself that this is one way of connecting the dots and get a meaningful picture, but that there are probably several ways to connect the dots and still get a meaningful picture.

Well Said !!!! (or written, LOL)

Yes, anything is a possibility after 4+ years.

That one tip, that One piece of the puzzle.

Hopefully, LE will have that soon.

 

[JnRyan]

Keep in mind the second sketch released was actually done three days after the murders but not released until April 2019.
The first sketch released in August 2017 and took a long 6 months. Speculating that they were going back and forth between disagreeing witnesses.

You're really very close with your speculation per ISP 1st Sgt Jerry Holeman at the 2018 CrimeCon: Delphi Murders CrimeCon Interview Transcript - CrimeLights
SGT. HOLEMAN: You can ask the tough questions, I’ll answer them. Again, it takes a lot of time. I’m not a sketch artist. The FBI actually–an agent from the FBI–did the sketch. And you know, I think when somebody sketches it takes like, 10 minutes [shakes head ‘no’]. It takes several weeks. But to get the information, to find the people that we believe saw that person that day near the time of the murders, that takes months. So we had to locate these people, interview them, find out who they really saw. Did they really see the guy on the bridge from the video, or did they see Mike out there helping search, or did they see somebody else out there helping with the search? So we had to identify those people, and once we felt like we identified the people that actually saw the guy on the bridge, then the sketch itself took, again, several weeks. They sketched it, looked at it, “No…that’s not correct”. I will say that she still–[Clarification note: he quickly corrects his use of ‘she’ to ‘they’]—they, there’s a couple people— still aren’t convinced that’s the proper hat, but that’s the hat that the sketch artist could come up with as close to what the witnesses were describing. And I know the Superintendent [Doug Carter] said “Don’t focus on the sketch”, and we got a lot of calls on that. I think what he meant to say was…you know, where there’s four or five of us up here right now and if we pick somebody out of room right now and identify them to a sketch artist, there would be five different sketches. They’d have the similar features, as we believe this sketch has of the guy on the bridge, but they’d be a little different.

 

[distracted]

You're really very close with your speculation per ISP 1st Sgt Jerry Holeman at the 2018 CrimeCon: Delphi Murders CrimeCon Interview Transcript - CrimeLights
SGT. HOLEMAN: You can ask the tough questions, I’ll answer them. Again, it takes a lot of time. I’m not a sketch artist. The FBI actually–an agent from the FBI–did the sketch. And you know, I think when somebody sketches it takes like, 10 minutes [shakes head ‘no’]. It takes several weeks. But to get the information, to find the people that we believe saw that person that day near the time of the murders, that takes months. So we had to locate these people, interview them, find out who they really saw. Did they really see the guy on the bridge from the video, or did they see Mike out there helping search, or did they see somebody else out there helping with the search? So we had to identify those people, and once we felt like we identified the people that actually saw the guy on the bridge, then the sketch itself took, again, several weeks. They sketched it, looked at it, “No…that’s not correct”. I will say that she still–[Clarification note: he quickly corrects his use of ‘she’ to ‘they’]—they, there’s a couple people— still aren’t convinced that’s the proper hat, but that’s the hat that the sketch artist could come up with as close to what the witnesses were describing. And I know the Superintendent [Doug Carter] said “Don’t focus on the sketch”, and we got a lot of calls on that. I think what he meant to say was…you know, where there’s four or five of us up here right now and if we pick somebody out of room right now and identify them to a sketch artist, there would be five different sketches. They’d have the similar features, as we believe this sketch has of the guy on the bridge, but they’d be a little different.

Quite telling, IMO.

 

[TL4S]

You're really very close with your speculation per ISP 1st Sgt Jerry Holeman at the 2018 CrimeCon: Delphi Murders CrimeCon Interview Transcript - CrimeLights
SGT. HOLEMAN: You can ask the tough questions, I’ll answer them. Again, it takes a lot of time. I’m not a sketch artist. The FBI actually–an agent from the FBI–did the sketch. And you know, I think when somebody sketches it takes like, 10 minutes [shakes head ‘no’]. It takes several weeks. But to get the information, to find the people that we believe saw that person that day near the time of the murders, that takes months. So we had to locate these people, interview them, find out who they really saw. Did they really see the guy on the bridge from the video, or did they see Mike out there helping search, or did they see somebody else out there helping with the search? So we had to identify those people, and once we felt like we identified the people that actually saw the guy on the bridge, then the sketch itself took, again, several weeks. They sketched it, looked at it, “No…that’s not correct”. I will say that she still–[Clarification note: he quickly corrects his use of ‘she’ to ‘they’]—they, there’s a couple people— still aren’t convinced that’s the proper hat, but that’s the hat that the sketch artist could come up with as close to what the witnesses were describing. And I know the Superintendent [Doug Carter] said “Don’t focus on the sketch”, and we got a lot of calls on that. I think what he meant to say was…you know, where there’s four or five of us up here right now and if we pick somebody out of room right now and identify them to a sketch artist, there would be five different sketches. They’d have the similar features, as we believe this sketch has of the guy on the bridge, but they’d be a little different.

No wonder Carter was pi**ed at the April PC...

After all that work talking to multiple witnesses, spending weeks and months reviewing the sketch, changing details, and corroborating stories, LE then changes course. Just how many witnesses gave input into that sketch? Surely they weren't all lying, so who did they see? From Holeman's quote, it sounds like at least some of them saw this person after the murders ("...did they see Mike out there searching..."), so did LE assume the killer did not try to stay hidden afterwards? Did the witnesses see someone wet and muddy? Or not? How could the killer not be wet and muddy at that point? Why would LE veer course away from someone who was seen to be wet and muddy? But I'm assuming...

So now they go with a sketch that took hours to days instead of weeks to months. Three days at the most. Not an FBI, multiple sourced, thoroughly reviewed sketch with a hat (because clearly the witnesses described seeing a hat, even if not in agreement to the sketch result). A sketch which is not to be dismissed, but is of secondary importance now. Okay...

Unless the witnesses were in cahoots while describing hat guy, something else is going on here. That man, killer or not, seemed to be there that day. He is of secondary importance and the killer will look like a combination of the two sketches. What? Man, I'm nearly almost, but not quite, ready to buy the disguise theory I've always despised...

 

[heartgoesout]

We know of three people who saw BG. The witness he scowled at, the one who saw something he felt needed to be reported and said witness.
We have a before siting (up close) and we have an after siting (distance). Those are going to be different since BG disguised himself with a scarf to hide his face. Then IMO hid the original clothes in a duffel bag. (You can see the bag handles coming out of the jacket in the BG pic IMO).

Carter said "looking for a driver between the hours of noon and 5:00". By 5:00 the clothes would have been dry.
This all makes sense.
Now the last witness, since they were there, is able to agree but throw in the wrong hat, or the wrong eye color, change the hair, make it older, etc... he's there to help right?! he's the nice, local, good looking guy, why would he lie.
All IMO.

 

[TL4S]

We know of three people who saw BG. The witness he scowled at, the one who saw something he felt needed to be reported and said witness.
We have a before siting (up close) and we have an after siting (distance). Those are going to be different since BG disguised himself with a scarf to hide his face. Then IMO hid the original clothes in a duffel bag. (You can see the bag handles coming out of the jacket in the BG pic IMO).

Carter said "looking for a driver between the hours of noon and 5:00". By 5:00 the clothes would have been dry.
This all makes sense.
Now the last witness, since they were there, is able to agree but throw in the wrong hat, or the wrong eye color, change the hair, make it older, etc... he's there to help right?! he's the nice, local, good looking guy, why would he lie.
All IMO.

I suppose my hesitation with the disguise idea comes from my personal feeling that this crime was most likely impulsive. To have a disguise and duffel bag would mean a planned attack, but I suppose he could have carried that stuff around in his vehicle for whenever the right moment came about. So in a way, he still could have seen them dropped off, or whatever, and saw the opportunity to put his plan into action. IDK. For this killer to then change clothing, hang around the trail, and interact with other people, would make him a completely different kind of killer than the opportunistic, in and out quickly, striving to leave unseen kind of killer I've always imagined.

I guess LE might be more apt to speak in code to a killer who immerses himself into the investigation in that way, as well. I'm willing to consider this scenario for awhile, but I have to be honest that it feels too Phantom of the Opera for me. That said, there are a lot of unhinged people in the world that do a lot of odd things...

 

[minazoe]

I can totally see JBC going to the search or presser even...talking to cops or neighbors to suck in the horror and reaction to his accomplishment. He is completely shameless, I think it's not unusual...it's part of the pathology, like the staging..as a sadist he gets secondary supply from this. mOO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

....—they, there’s a couple people— still aren’t convinced that’s the proper hat, but that’s the hat that the sketch artist could come up with as close to what the witnesses were describing.

I snipped some of your post.

The hat is important. I think it is a welder’s hat people couldn’t quite describe to the sketch artist. And Chadwell is a welder.

 

[heartgoesout]

I suppose my hesitation with the disguise idea comes from my personal feeling that this crime was most likely impulsive. To have a disguise and duffel bag would mean a planned attack, but I suppose he could have carried that stuff around in his vehicle for whenever the right moment came about. So in a way, he still could have seen them dropped off, or whatever, and saw the opportunity to put his plan into action. IDK. For this killer to then change clothing, hang around the trail, and interact with other people, would make him a completely different kind of killer than the opportunistic, in and out quickly, striving to leave unseen kind of killer I've always imagined.

I guess LE might be more apt to speak in code to a killer who immerses himself into the investigation in that way, as well. I'm willing to consider this scenario for awhile, but I have to be honest that it feels too Phantom of the Opera for me. That said, there are a lot of unhinged people in the world that do a lot of odd things...

The human brain tries to understand why this happened. The unimaginable! We tend to think this is someone who looks like a monster. That'd we'd be able to pick him out. Many killers are attractive and charming.

The disguise is simply heavy clothing and a scarf over his face. Not a halloween mask. The speculatory duffel bag has hunting stuff in it. Typical stuff. The disguise wasn't really a disguise, as he was hiding in plain sight.

There was very little interaction. BG scowled at a girl on his way in. Then was seen, IMO, post crime out of the BG clothing.

If he needed to hide behind the forestry or the shack on the trail in his escape, he had the patience to do that. Carter said the car was there until 5:00

I don't think this was random. It was certainly opportunistic, hedonistic and about power.

 

[heartgoesout]

Another thing to consider is that BG was very direct. "Down the hill".
I don't know what would have been down the hill. There could have been a police training camp down the hill.
He knew exactly where he was taking them.
This was not random, this was planned IMO.

 

[waltzingmatilda]

Good call on the welders hat,@StarryStarryNight I looked on Amazon and had no idea there were so many styles.

 

[carbuff]

You're really very close with your speculation per ISP 1st Sgt Jerry Holeman at the 2018 CrimeCon: Delphi Murders CrimeCon Interview Transcript - CrimeLights
SGT. HOLEMAN: You can ask the tough questions, I’ll answer them. Again, it takes a lot of time. I’m not a sketch artist. The FBI actually–an agent from the FBI–did the sketch. And you know, I think when somebody sketches it takes like, 10 minutes [shakes head ‘no’]. It takes several weeks. But to get the information, to find the people that we believe saw that person that day near the time of the murders, that takes months. So we had to locate these people, interview them, find out who they really saw. Did they really see the guy on the bridge from the video, or did they see Mike out there helping search, or did they see somebody else out there helping with the search? So we had to identify those people, and once we felt like we identified the people that actually saw the guy on the bridge, then the sketch itself took, again, several weeks. They sketched it, looked at it, “No…that’s not correct”. I will say that she still–[Clarification note: he quickly corrects his use of ‘she’ to ‘they’]—they, there’s a couple people— still aren’t convinced that’s the proper hat, but that’s the hat that the sketch artist could come up with as close to what the witnesses were describing. And I know the Superintendent [Doug Carter] said “Don’t focus on the sketch”, and we got a lot of calls on that. I think what he meant to say was…you know, where there’s four or five of us up here right now and if we pick somebody out of room right now and identify them to a sketch artist, there would be five different sketches. They’d have the similar features, as we believe this sketch has of the guy on the bridge, but they’d be a little different.

Thanks. I must have seen this before, but I had forgotten it.