Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #142

[sandy_80]

A man targeting two young girls indicates a sexual motive, imo. But then would he choose to walk through frigid water right before a SA? I mean...

And if he committed any kind of act on the south side of the creek, why bother taking them across to the other side to kill them?

I don't even know what to think.

possibly they tried to run away across the greek is one way of looking at it...the show was found somewhere else ...or he wanted a very secluded spot

 

[sandy_80]

A man targeting two young girls indicates a sexual motive, imo. But then would he choose to walk through frigid water right before a SA? I mean...

And if he committed any kind of act on the south side of the creek, why bother taking them across to the other side to kill them?

I don't even know what to think.

possibly they tried to run away across the greek is one way of looking at it...the show was found somewhere else ...or he wanted a very secluded spot

 

[AC4RD]

I've said it often before, but with BG on the bridge, the creek really cut off the girls' route back from where they came. ...
I always think that if he calculated the crime beforehand, he would have led his victim(s) southwest of the bridge, ....

Very true; very plausible. My own most recent guess (and this is JUST a guess, and an uninformed one at that) is that BG was intending to get the girls to this area, on the south side of the creek ...
https://kuzenski.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/bluffslocation1.jpg
... and that one or both of the girls tried to circumvent the barrier by sprinting for a shallow spot in the creek, presumably to escape up toward the cemetery. BG was forced either to abandon the 'hunt' and flee, or to follow and silence the girls. That sounds like a reasonable possibility to ME; your own gas mileage may vary, offer void where prohibited by law.

 

[TL4S]

Very true; very plausible. My own most recent guess (and this is JUST a guess, and an uninformed one at that) is that BG was intending to get the girls to this area, on the south side of the creek ...
https://kuzenski.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/bluffslocation1.jpg
... and that one or both of the girls tried to circumvent the barrier by sprinting for a shallow spot in the creek, presumably to escape up toward the cemetery. BG was forced either to abandon the 'hunt' and flee, or to follow and silence the girls. That sounds like a reasonable possibility to ME; your own gas mileage may vary, offer void where prohibited by law.

That spot circled on your map is EXACTLY the spot I think they might have crossed heading to the north bank. But again, I think they ended up farther east (and on that I think my gas mileage might be WAY off...). The steep bank along the south side (under that house) is very steep, and I can't tell if there would have even been enough land to walk along between that bank and the water, without actually walking IN the water, to get to that natural crossing. I've always wondered that...

 

[JnRyan]

I don't see how LE thinks holding back details of what condition the bodies were in and how are hey we're killed. Thats why it's hard for us to figure out a possible motive. I could see LE holding back in the beginning but 5yrs later it's time to give the public more.

I wonder about that aspect. I've seen cases where some info on that is released. That said though, if the victim was shot five times with a .32 you don't release that much detail. Just state gunshot. You can state the victim was killed with a knife, BUT you don't have to reveal they were stabbed 13 times as that would be something the killer would know - or someone who heard the killer state it.

I suppose it all comes down to the judgement of the particular LE agency. We have an unsolved murder out west of here, Heidi Childs and David Metzler. We not only know they were shot, but that they were shot with a .30-30 rifle. BUT we don't know how many times or where on their bodies they were hit.

 

[UnapologeticallyAspie]

On thread 10, page 18, post #346, on 2/24/2017, @rpgman posted “one of the wanted billboards states the suspect was last seen at 2:30pm...when was that snapchat pic taken again?”
And he attached this photo.

I never knew that BG was last seen at 2:30 PM.

Do any of you remember this?

ETA: Is this even the truth?

 

[sunshineray]

I recently heard an expert speak about fingerprints and it was really eye-opening as to what surfaces are best for prints and how fragile they can be. Basically, there are three types of prints: impression (imagine the three dimensional print left behind if you pressed your finger into a soft, moldable surface like clay or wax), patent (visible prints - imagine a finger coated in blood that pressed against a windowpane), or latent (invisible to the naked eye - these are left behind because the ridges of your fingers, palms, and soles of your feet have organic oils and sweat that can be invisibly left on certain surfaces). Because these latent prints are just made up of oils from your skin, on any surface they will break down over time and on certain surfaces they can be extremely fragile.

Forensic examiners classify surfaces in three ways - porous, non-porous and semi-porous. Porous surfaces are absorbent and would be materials like paper, cardboard, untreated wood, money, etc. Fingerprints deposited onto this type of surface are considered pretty durable and there is a high probability of collecting them, especially if the surface is smooth and non-textured. Non-porous surfaces , especially if smooth and non-textured, are also conducive for the deposition of prints, but because they do not absorb the oils and actually repel the moisture from a print as it's deposited, prints from these surfaces are more fragile and can be easily damaged by environmental factors (precipitation, heat, etc). These surfaces are glass, metal, plastics, painted wood, and rubber, for example. Semi-porous surfaces would be things like cellophane, glossy paper or treated cardboard/wood. This type of surface has to be processed using techniques adapted for both porous and non-porous surfaces. As with the other two types of surfaces, texture is a problem for print recovery because textured surfaces do not allow complete contact between the ridges of the skin and the surface being touched.

Some additional factors - surfaces that have become wet can be particularly challenging and require special techniques. Surfaces that themselves already have grease or oil are not great for the deposition of prints (some parts of firearms and human skin would be examples of this - in addition, human skin is not rigid and deforms under pressure so this can obscure print detail). Can you still get prints from these challenging surfaces? Yes, sometimes - but the probability is low and the detail, even if you succeed, is often not good enough for comparison.

TL said in the HLN special that they had evidence "suggestive" of a print but they did not know if it was the murderer's print. So we don't know if that was a patent (visible) or latent (invisible) print but it sounds as if it was perhaps not in the best condition when recovered or maybe a partial.

Here's more info about latent prints that covers what I shared above:
https://dofs-gbi.georgia.gov/document/publication/180850381gbi-latentprintspdf/download


https://dofs-gbi.georgia.gov/document/publication/180850381gbi-latentprintspdf/download

Yenmelyan thanks yet again, great info!

So a cigarette butt, if it stayed dry, could possibly retain a good print.

Branches would mostly depend on the growth age for smoothness and logs with developed bark, not a good chance of a print.

Leaves, I'm guessing, would depend on newly fallen, not so good versus dry being a better possible.

Litter would depend on whether porous or not and all the above depends so very much on the weather overnight.

It's all facinating, thanks again

 

[MistyWaters]

On thread 10, page 18, post #346, on 2/24/2017, @rpgman posted “one of the wanted billboards states the suspect was last seen at 2:30pm...when was that snapchat pic taken again?”
And he attached this photo.

I never knew that BG was last seen at 2:30 PM.

Do any of you remember this?

ETA: Is this even the truth?

Yes but I don’t think the time had any connection to the SC photos. Indeed 2:30pm was the “last seen” time recorded and photographed on the FBI billboards and also when DC and the family appeared on Dr Phil, it was the time used to calculate when Libby’s video of BG was taken (last seen) and the estimation of the crime occurring, all happening within a short 41 minute window (between 2:30pm and Libby’s dad first failed attempt to contact her by cellphone at 3:11pm).

 

[UnapologeticallyAspie]

Thread 10, #495, on 2/24/17, @Momma2cam said “I have almost the same exact theory. I'm conflicted, though, if it were a true crime of random opportunity or if there was a stalking/catfish type situation on SM that lead to them all being there that day.“, which was before the search warrant was even executed for KAK/JK’s home.
I think she was definitely into something. Great mind you have, M2c!

moo

 

[MistyWaters]

Thread 10, #495, on 2/24/17, @Momma2cam said “I have almost the same exact theory. I'm conflicted, though, if it were a true crime of random opportunity or if there was a stalking/catfish type situation on SM that lead to them all being there that day.“, which was before the search warrant was even executed for KAK/JK’s home.
I think she was definitely into something. Great mind you have, M2c!

moo

Yes it was a popular theory early on. You might’ve noticed some MSM links where it was referred to as “The Snapchat Murders”. As that theory slowly diminished in popularity, so did that label.

 

[Charlot123]

..

That's what I wonder about. Somewhere there might be a missing girl or girls and he might be the abductor and killer. Or there is possibly an unidentified body that LE can neither ID or determine the cause of death and he is responsible. The Delphi murders here might be his one act that didn't go as planned. He might have learned from his mistakes here and changed his approach/technique. Samuel Little committed murders all across the country for 30+ years and from all across the country from CA to FL and LE didn't make the connection. (He is believed to have a victim in the area where I grew up.) For all I know is if this killer lived in Delphi 10-15 years ago these murders might be outliers if he is a serial killer, while the remainder occur closer to where he lives now.

(Even I know a missing girl in my state, trying to keep her thread alive.)

I always wonder if the connection to Delphi is very flimsy. I doubt it is "lived here in childhood" as he is not an idiot, this man.

Maybe "visited", and everyone related to the place has died.

As to the "lay of land", people constantly show Google Maps on SM. I saw one yesterday. If the man is into them, he could have seen the bridge, the lay of land, and maybe, even some of the people we know?

In short, we have to stop pretending that he is dumb. If we see him for who he is, pretty closed to the world but good with technology, and visio/spatial orientation, we might get an idea, how he is related to the girls, and to the place.

What I see - so far, he can think how LE thinks, not to be caught. LE, I suspect, has no clue how he thinks.

How does one find out about LE's mode of thinking? Maybe he had a father or relative in the LE area, listens to a scanner, or simply read a lot of true crime. Maybe something else.

If we try to understand how come he is one step ahead of LE, we can understand what is in his head better.

 

[TL4S]

Yes but I don’t think the time had any connection to the SC photos. Indeed 2:30pm was the “last seen” time recorded and photographed on the FBI billboards and also when DC and the family appeared on Dr Phil, it was the time used to calculate when Libby’s video of BG was taken (last seen) and the estimation of the crime occurring, all happening within a short 41 minute window (between 2:30pm and Libby’s dad first failed attempt to contact her by cellphone at 3:11pm).

So if the snapchat time stamp of 2:07 is accurate, and they were already over halfway across the bridge, what were they doing for nearly 20 minutes?

Clearly, considering the timeline from drop-off (1:30ish) to bridge video (2:30ish), the girls were just dawdling around that day, which is to be expected for the age, but once across, what did they do? Did they go down below the bridge for awhile? Was the bridge video started after they came back up and were going to head across but saw him on the bridge? Or did they spend all 20 minutes on the bridge?

It sort of makes me wonder if BG wasn't hanging around on the north end of the bridge, waiting for them to come back across to abduct them from there through the woods east, somewhere out of sight. Maybe the creek crossing was not planned at all, but decided on after he got sick of waiting and had to cross the bridge himself?

 

[MistyWaters]

So if the snapchat time stamp of 2:07 is accurate, and they were already over halfway across the bridge, what were they doing for nearly 20 minutes? Clearly, considering the timeline from drop-off to bridge video, the girls were just dawdling around that day, which is to be expected for the age, but once across, what did they do? Did they go down below the bridge for awhile?

It sort of makes me wonder if BG wasn't hanging around on the north end of the bridge, waiting for them to come back across to abduct them from there through the woods east to where he took them. Maybe the creek crossing was not planned at all, but decided on after he got sick of waiting and had to cross the bridge himself?

The contents of Libby’s cellphone camera has never been released, in fact the SC photos initially weren’t released by LE at all, they were discovered by the media on a friend’s FB as I recall. So it’s possible the girls spent time taking more photos on the bridge and goofing around as teen girls are known to do, but they didn’t realize all the while they were being watched? If BG was on the south end of the bridge, once he started across I imagine that would’ve force the girls to move on the far end, to avoid meeting him mid-way and crossing paths especially since the bridge had no railings. At about that point Libby captured his image on video. After that, as there was no further trail to follow, their chosen option might’ve been to just wait at the end, expecting for him to turn back rather than approach them. JMO

 

[Deerrun]

On thread 10, page 18, post #346, on 2/24/2017, @rpgman posted “one of the wanted billboards states the suspect was last seen at 2:30pm...when was that snapchat pic taken again?”
And he attached this photo.

I never knew that BG was last seen at 2:30 PM.

Do any of you remember this?

ETA: Is this even the truth?

Does the 2:30 last seen apply to the video Libby took? I think that is prob what it means imo

 

[FrostedGlass]

So if the snapchat time stamp of 2:07 is accurate, and they were already over halfway across the bridge, what were they doing for nearly 20 minutes?

Clearly, considering the timeline from drop-off (1:30ish) to bridge video (2:30ish), the girls were just dawdling around that day, which is to be expected for the age, but once across, what did they do? Did they go down below the bridge for awhile? Was the bridge video started after they came back up and were going to head across but saw him on the bridge? Or did they spend all 20 minutes on the bridge?

It sort of makes me wonder if BG wasn't hanging around on the north end of the bridge, waiting for them to come back across to abduct them from there through the woods east, somewhere out of sight. Maybe the creek crossing was not planned at all, but decided on after he got sick of waiting and had to cross the bridge himself?

I think they went down under the bridge; maybe they took the easier way that AD found when he visited the area. It's the one by the rail at the end of the trail. In the beginning, I thought under the bridge was where they encountered BG... until LE released the bit of him walking on the bridge.

 

[acutename]

You're very welcome margarita. I was also thinking, people smoke outside and discard litter...so who know where the fingerprints cane from. I'm not really knowledgeable about prints, can they be lifted from wood...branches, logs or even leaves?

wasn't the slope where the bodies were found steep, secluded and not very comfortable for "hanging around?" If that is the case, it increases the likelihood that anything left very close to the bodies was not left by "just anyone," as might be likely on the actual trails. IMO.

 

[acutename]

"Mixed chimerism"--in allo transplants, there are sometimes two sets of DNA living inside a person; more are possible in multiple transplants from different stem-cell sources (donated bone marrow, donated peripheral stem cells, cord blood cells, etc.) The doctors test for chimerism to see if a graft has been 100% successful--if a person's immune system is now 100% from the donor's cells. AFAIK the cells don't locate in different places, though patients may have tests run on blood, marrow, or presumably some other cell types. For an ablative prep regimen, one in which the sick person's entire marrow is killed and replaced, 100% chimerism is considered a success. Not all transplants aim for this, though.

"Be The Match" is a really wonderful organization that can provide more and better information. Just my own experience is that if somebody is 98% donor chimerism (or whatever), it's pretty much all over, not localized to feet or earlobes or whatever.

read up on this topic because of a friend's transplant and guess what? moms sometimes retain some fetal DNA for decades.... sounds crazy and not sure where it resides, but:

The fetal cells have been found to stay in the mother's body beyond the time of pregnancy, and in some cases for as long as decades after the birth of the baby. ... Because some fetal cells stay in the mom's body for years, they are also sometimes transferred to future brothers and sisters of the first child.
Mother's Day Genetics: How long does a mother “carry” a child?

 

[Megnut]

Yes but I don’t think the time had any connection to the SC photos. Indeed 2:30pm was the “last seen” time recorded and photographed on the FBI billboards and also when DC and the family appeared on Dr Phil, it was the time used to calculate when Libby’s video of BG was taken (last seen) and the estimation of the crime occurring, all happening within a short 41 minute window (between 2:30pm and Libby’s dad first failed attempt to contact her by cellphone at 3:11pm).

This gave me ugly chills.

Libby's dad, trying to reach her at 3:11.

IMO BG was already out of the area.

Or he'd have destroyed her phone.

Do we know from where LE recovered it? Was it still in her pocket?

JMO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I just saw this a few minutes ago.
HLN at least is planning something for the fifth anniversary.

 

[carbuff]

A man targeting two young girls indicates a sexual motive, imo. But then would he choose to walk through frigid water right before a SA? I mean...

And if he committed any kind of act on the south side of the creek, why bother taking them across to the other side to kill them?

I don't even know what to think.

Murders can be sexually motivated without involving sexual assault. Sometimes it gets expressed as rage rather than lust.