Yeah, I thought FBI usually don't get involved in murder cases unless local authorities ask for help, or if a federal crime as been committed.
I think those lines are becoming more and more blurred these days.
Yeah, I thought FBI usually don't get involved in murder cases unless local authorities ask for help, or if a federal crime as been committed.
Thoughts if anyone would like to discuss-
First off, these girls look their age. 13 or 14, not young girls easily mistaken to be 3 or 4 years older. The photos of them online are of girls that also appear comfortable acting their age. I feel this provides a little insight into the idea that the perp, if he sought them out, was seeking out children, not women. Even if he didn't seek them out, they weren't the only girls in the park that day. He chose them, even though it may have been riskier to do so because there were two of them together. Based on this, I would be shocked if he hasn't, at least, committed a crime against a child before.
I also feel like committing a crime against 2 girls as opposed to 1 in an environment he couldn't totally control speaks to the idea that he may be criminally experienced and could have done something like this before. This may be why LE has made suggestions to public asking about people seen from 65/Lafayette up the Hoosier Heartland to Logansport. I think they may have strong reason to believe that there is just a very low likelihood that he could have been in the area for any considerable length of time without anything else serious like this happening.
In the news helicopter video, there were searchers wading the creek in-line near the scene and well below the bridge. I am wondering if it was readily apparent that things were missing from the scene where they were found that they felt could drift downstream. A cell phone or a knife/gun, wouldn't likely travel too far, but then again, they could have been checking near the scene and again below the bridge to rule out him returning to the bridge and throwing something off. Of course, they could have just been being very thorough in collecting everything possible.
As to whether or not it was an arranged/planned meeting or just a chance encounter with a perp in the park that day waiting for the right opportunity, I believe they have reason to believe he came prepared to commit a crime. I think he had items with him to control them and do whatever he did. I've felt strongly that he had to have some significant means of controlling TWO of them over such an area with many possible avenues for things to go wrong for him. He also didn't leave the overall area with them, which I'd bet is uncommon when a perp takes control of 2 or more victims. I figure that cases of multiple victims typically involve a quick act of subduing victims and relocating them as quickly as possible to an environment that can be controlled. The fact that he could never have total control of the environment out there either speaks to his confidence or either low criminal sophistication. I don't think it is the latter, and like I mentioned above, it is hard for me to see him having that without some sort of prior experience. Just a huge leap to go from nothing to taking two girls hostage in an open area visited by the public in broad daylight. It is this fact that makes me wonder if this is why they are having a hard time ruling out an additional perp.
Anyone have thoughts on these things?
So he's within 2 hours of Delphi and he hitchhikes from his house to Delphi? Because didn't the investigators kinda stress if any one saw him maybe on the main road? Wouldn't that imply he was walking or trying to hitch a ride?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
I don't know why you would do that. Town of Delphi is population 3,000. Don't you think someone would have fingered him by now?
I'll go with the 38-year law enforcement officer on this one.
I guess she was on the bridge videoing and taking photos as he initially approached and may have felt uneasy and kept recording or even left a video recording inadvertently out of nervousness. I figure by the time they realized the scope of the danger they were in, it wasn't possible. I can't believe she managed to get what she did. Incredible, really.I don't understand why they wouldn't have called 911 if they had at least one working phone?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They will assist with cases that deal with childlren, national serial killers and/or if they believe the use of cyber internet was involved. The local police stations don't have the necessities and resources for those situations.Yeah, I thought FBI usually don't get involved in murder cases unless local authorities ask for help, or if a federal crime as been committed.
Why are people getting worked up about how we are discussing his accent?? That's basically what sleuthers do and also people actually dedicate professions to researching dialects. It's incredibly important.
Also since I'm only today jumping in here today, is it possible a family friend or older male relative knew where they would be? I'm leaning towards social media contact they hoped to meet, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was someone they actually knew in real life.
I don't understand why they wouldn't have called 911 if they had at least one working phone?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Funny, I was just posting an FBI question myself. Is it due to local authorities not having the resources?
I agree with you. And to me it seems he would have to be a local to be at this particular location. They've probably gotten a ton of tips but they need more evidence. That said, there has got to be a ton of his DNA at the scene, right? Head scratch.
I think they chose the soundbyte because it was clear what he was saying. Not just a tone of a voice, but a voice saying specific words. I also think they chose this because it is just him and it doesn't give away much. I hate thinking about it, but I'm betting they used what they could play for the public as in without the girls' voices on it to distract from his.
Maybe because the situation went from OK to weird to scary to terrifying very quickly, and she didn't have time to.I don't understand why they wouldn't have called 911 if they had at least one working phone?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't understand why they wouldn't have called 911 if they had at least one working phone?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not very good cell reception in the woods plus fear probably set in. we all can have our game plans before a situation but when faced with it, our plans change. The girls must have been in total fear, who could blame them.I would be scared $hitless too.
OK. So by the time the crime was occurring, the phone was in her pocket? She got video of the man on the bridge, but later it was only audio. That makes sense.
If they do have copious DNA, it makes no sense whatsoever (to me) to be so coy with their audio and video evidence being released to the public. They're not trying to do this double blind thing, where they hold evidence back from the public. DNA is DNA. They need to find this guy, take his DNA, it matches or it doesn't case closed. I do understand not wanting to release audio or video that would be horrible to hear and watch, but surely they have lots that isn't distressing to hear that would be helpful in identifying this guy.
It's not like releasing all the they know will damage the case because the "real killer" wouldn't know these specific things like in other cases. DNA would match or not.
Then I'd think if Liberty were going to the effort of trying to apparently leave clues as to what happened, that she'd probably have tried to find a way to say the name of whomever was involved, no?
And if it were someone known to them / family friend or whatever, surely he'd have been ID'd long before now, wouldn't he?
:grouphug: Oh, Hoosier. I am so sorry. We are one. What happens to one of us, happens to all.I think the rapid change from "we have a smart community" to "there's a crazed lunatic out there that's going to do this again" is interesting.
It makes me wonder what was said on the recording. Maybe mentioning a prior crime in an effort to scare the girls into complying? Maybe something found at the scene that hints at another unsolved crime? DNA that matches a rape kit, but not a murder?
Or was it just that originally they were optimistic they would have the guy in a few days and now that they don't, they are forced to be a bit more realistic?
Or were they pleading to those that may be second guessing if their husband/brother/cousin could have been the one that did this? Basically, guilting them into turning in a possible suspect.
I really want to watch the presser again, but I'm already an emotional wreck. It's all over my FB now and I just keep hearing that voice.