IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #60

[yupikgirl]

Libby had two Facebook pages if I remember right. It's probably linked in the first post- let me look. I'm not aware of a flicker account, but if so I'm sure someone will link it. I may have missed it in so many threads.

Their Facebook pages:

Liberty:
https://m.facebook.com/liberty.german

Abigail:
https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100010623611166&pn_ref=friends_search

Edit- if I remember correctly Libby's twitter lists some of her accounts in her bio. Her twitter handle is @libby1227



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Libby had two Facebook pages if I remember right. It's probably linked in the first post- let me look. I'm not aware of a flicker account, but if so I'm sure someone will link it. I may have missed it in so many threads.

Their Facebook pages:

Liberty:
https://m.facebook.com/liberty.german

Abigail:
https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100010623611166&pn_ref=friends_search

Edit- if I remember correctly Libby's twitter lists some of her accounts in her bio. Her twitter handle is @libby1227



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kik lrlgerman snapchat. libbybaby1227. and instagram Its_A_German_Thing

Beigetreten August 2014

I found something.

 

[Sapere aude]

Not if he changed his number right after.Then he's back to being anonymous.

I don´t agree with this. If they have the phone number of the perp., they can ask his telecommunication providers, where the cell phone was "logged in" most of the time. This information will indicate, where the man lives or works.

 

[Jethro4WS]

If Libby's phone automatically updated cloud, why didn't someone look on it straight away? Wouldn't the video have been right there then?

It would depend on a few things. In particular, the make and model of the phone. If the file were being sent while the video was in progress and the phone shut off abruptly then the file in the cloud would be incomplete and likely unplayable as a video. The file may or may not even have a file extension or type that indicates it is a video - for example, with Google you end up with a file with a ".part" extension or file type when a file is uploading. When finished it gets the appropriate extension. This is done so that if you stop an upload you can continue the upload later on. And the result if it is not finished is a file that would mostly be a video file but would have other things in saved within it that would make it not playable - the information for later continuation of the upload for example.

The only way to recover the partial video and play it would be to have software that can process such incomplete files, identify what it is supposed to be and attempt to make it a valid playable video. Forensic recovery software can do this. If the phone in question is an iPhone there was a known issue where a video recording would only display a black screen on playback but the audio was just fine. In some cases it is possible to actually fix the issues in the video portion so that you could see the video or parts of the video or just recover some of the frames. This is why we would need to know more about the model of the phone and the IOS version and what patches/updates were applied.

The above example issue could be in play regardless of whether the phone was recovered or the video was on the cloud. This too would require software that can try to fix the issue and is another thing that can be found in forensic recovery software. The video or the frames may not be recoverable and all you would have is audio.

So the short answer is that, in the scenario where the video was on the cloud, the file might not have been recognized as a video and/or was unplayable.

 

[ImnoSherlock]

I don´t agree with this. If they have the phone number of the perp., they can ask his telecommunication providers, where the cell phone was "logged in" most of the time. This information will indicate, where the man lives or works.

I'm not sure that's how it works with burners.

 

[Jethro4WS]

I thought it had been confirmed the Face time was because L had an iphone and A had an ipad. No link so MOO.

It doesn't have to be FaceTime, it could be Skype, or PalTalk, or any other video chat apps that exist.

 

[Jethro4WS]

Yes I think I know why having the physical phone is important. Is it because of Apps like Kik and Whatsapp that are encrypted and don't save anywhere? So if LE have Libby's phone could they see her Kik history for example?

The most important thing about having the phone is that messages would exist somewhere in memory and possibly in an unencrypted form. At a minimum the built-in key logger - every keystroke in an iPhone is recorded (and likely the case with Android as well) - would be helpful in that regard. Other things might exist in the memory of the phone such as deleted contacts, web pages visited, photos, videos, etc. Or partial information related to those things I just mentioned. There are a number of activities that can occur in Wi-Fi mode that would not be easily obtained via the phone carrier. Of course, there is also any trace evidence that may be on that phone.

So, having the phone would be very important for a number of reasons.

 

[MistyWaters]

I found something.

On this page from February I notice a WS member has listed all the SM links for both Libby and Abby.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...17-*media-maps-amp-timelines/page4&styleid=21

 

[Sapere aude]

Sorry, I´m no native speaker. What does you mean with "burners" ?

Thankxxx.

 

[ImnoSherlock]

Sorry, I´m no native speaker. What does you mean with "burners" ?

Thankxxx.

Like the prepaid phones.No accounts.

 

[Sapere aude]

Like the prepaid phones.No accounts.

Ok, I never heard that word before.

In Austria you only need the number. The so named "prefix" (first three numbers) indicates the telecommunication provider. Usually there is no difference between prepaid or other accounts. A cell phone number is a cell phone number and you would need for both products the so named "network addressing". That means, each cell phone is registered on its "geo locations" to route an incoming call to the correct telecommunication tower (wherever the cell phone is).

The data are usually stored for 6 months and LE can get data according to a judge order.

 

[LaneGirl]

Ok, I never heard that word before.

In Austria you only need the number. The so named "prefix" (first three numbers) indicates the telecommunication provider. Usually there is no difference between prepaid or other accounts. A cell phone number is a cell phone number and you would need for both products the so named "network addressing". That means, each cell phone is registered on its "geo locations" to route an incoming call to the correct telecommunication tower (wherever the cell phone is).

The data are usually stored for 6 months and LE can get data according to a judge order.

Pretty much same here except that phone number has no name attached to it.

ETA - No personal information is needed to buy these burner or prepaid phones.

 

[Henry2326]

Yes, the girls were in accompaniment of each other. Now a "light bulb": there was some period of time - around 30 min. - we didn't know where the girls were and what they did (some posters mentioned it). Could it be they voluntary separated for a short time for an unknown (to us) reason? Could it be BG from far saw only one of the two at first?
If one girl wanted to meet someone (male) at the end of the bridge and the other girl didn't want to be also present they may have separated perhaps? Teenies do such things if I remember right and because of my age a touch vague ....

Would it make sense to anybody??

Makes sense to me....one of the most plausable theories I've heard in a couple of weeks. Heck, women do it all the time. They hang around close by to save the day if something goes awry. Moving that theory along, is it possible that he grabs Abby first and is walking with her to the edge of the bridge and that's why the picture is so blurry from the video because parts of this has been taken out of it?. But he didn't know that she was with Libby. So it gave Libby time to video it before they go close enough to see she had a phone? I'm a newbie to the site. Thanks for letting me participate. This crime is horrible and I hope for an arrest soon.

 

[LaneGirl]

Makes sense to me....one of the most plausable theories I've heard in a couple of weeks. Heck, women do it all the time. They hang around close by to save the day if something goes awry. Moving that theory along, is it possible that he grabs Abby first and is walking with her to the edge of the bridge and that's why the picture is so blurry from the video because parts of this has been taken out of it?. But he didn't know that she was with Libby. So it gave Libby time to video it before they go close enough to see she had a phone? I'm a newbie to the site. Thanks for letting me participate. This crime is horrible and I hope for an arrest soon.

BBM - From the experts here on WS nothing has been altered in the photographs from the video.

 

[MistyWaters]

BBM - From the experts here on WS nothing has been altered in the photographs from the video.

Maybe Websight will comment, who conducted the very interesting experiment regarding her daughter standing 70 feet in the distance. That's believed to be the same distance between Libby and BG when she captured his image on video. There's a lot of background due to the far off distance that appears LE also would've cropped in order to produce the grainy closeup BG in the centre of the released photo. MOO

 

[Trino]

BBM - From the experts here on WS nothing has been altered in the photographs from the video.

It's a real mystery as to why Libby took the photo. Is there still concern about the purple jacket sleeve, making it seem there was a second person in the photo? It certainly is not Abby, since her jacket was white.

Thinking outside the box completely... It has been assumed the killer made the girls walk down the hill at the far end of the bridge. What if... what if... there was more than one culprit, that the girls were directed back across the bridge before the recording of, "Get down the hill?" This means the girls/killer did not wade the creek. Assault them, kill them, then be on the way to a parked car at the back of the cemetery. Not at all on the trail.

The photo and recording are separate. Do we have a time elapse between the photo and video?

 

[LaneGirl]

Maybe Websight will comment, who conducted the very interesting experiment regarding her daughter standing 70 feet in the distance. That's believed to be the same distance between Libby and BG when she captured his image on video. There's a lot of background due to the far off distance that appears LE also would've cropped in order to produce the grainy closeup BG in the centre of the released photo. MOO

Yes you are correct. Cropping in order to get a closer look at BG.

My apologies I meant altered in that nothing has been blurred out or changed on BG himself.

 

[Steleheart]

Maybe Websight will comment, who conducted the very interesting experiment regarding her daughter standing 70 feet in the distance. That's believed to be the same distance between Libby and BG when she captured his image on video. There's a lot of background due to the far off distance that appears LE also would've cropped in order to produce the grainy closeup BG in the centre of the released photo. MOO

Maybe Webby should try to do a video at the same distance, take stills from the vid and blow them up. I understand that video caps are smaller size wise but that could depend on settings.

 

[Steleheart]

It's a real mystery as to why Libby took the photo. Is there still concern about the purple jacket sleeve, making it seem there was a second person in the photo? It certainly is not Abby, since her jacket was white.

Thinking outside the box completely... It has been assumed the killer made the girls walk down the hill at the far end of the bridge. What if... what if... there was more than one culprit, that the girls were directed back across the bridge before the recording of, "Get down the hill?" This means the girls/killer did not wade the creek. Assault them, kill them, then be on the way to a parked car at the back of the cemetery. Not at all on the trail.

The photo and recording are separate. Do we have a time elapse between the photo and video?

We have not been given time stamps on the stills of BG nor on the audio recording. It is my view that IF the photo and audio were simultaneous then LE would have had no question whether BG was the voice. I also think they left from the Northwest end.

JMO

 

[mtnlites]

About 15 years ago there was a Lifetime movie about a killer in an apartment complex. I think it was called something like "The Deadly Complex" or "Death at the Condos." You know, something silly. Anyhoo. The only thing they had to go on was the fact that the guy was blonde and had blue eyes. So of course, every single man that the viewers met in the apartment complex had blonde hair and blue eyes.

I am starting to feel that way about this case. We have an image of BG but it is so generic that clothing, height, body type, and facial hair could literally apply to half the men in the area. (Heck, it could apply to half the men in MY area and I am 4 hours away.) Worse, the image resembles, in one way or another, almost every key player that pops up in the case-even those people that we KNOW are not involved.

Poor Libby. She did a great thing by taking that video and providing some evidence. What a tragedy, and luck on HIS part, that the POI is generic and blurry enough that he could be just about anyone.

I still think that LE released that photo NOT for people to use the image and apply it to people they see on the street, but for someone to use it as an additional piece to the puzzle. Someone out there is suspicious of someone in their life. They came home late that day, had unexplained wounds, took off from work when they usually don't, had torn clothing, unexplained blood on them, have taken an inexplicable interest in the case, etc. Someone out there isn't feeling "right" about a person they know. I believe LE is capitalizing on that and released the photo as a little nudge to give them that extra piece to make them feel confident in their suspicions.