GUILTY IN - Kegan Anthony Kline, 27, arrested Aug 29, 2020, 30 Counts associated with CSAM

  • #301
One thing that is interesting to me is how back on 2/25/17, KAK said he thought he was "f'ed" and was basically going to go back to Vegas when his dad fell asleep. He also said that the woman officer (TrK - ISP) told him he needed to change his ways and delete his apps, which the MS suspects is why TrK is listed as a witness, to refute KAK's claim of her telling him to more or less destroy evidence. But that aside, if for days before the search, KAK thought he was "f'ed," why did he not delete his other devices? Obviously he could only delete the one he had in his possession after LE searched their house, but he did nothing to cover his tracks for his years of CSAM activity before the search, when he was already worried? Was he only worried about being a suspect in a double homicide, even if he wasn't involved, but because he had communicated with L? Was he not even thinking about his CSAM? In what way did he think he was "f'ed"? It's just a curiosity to me.
Maybe because he wasn't arrested at that time, he figured he was off the hook? If he wasn't going to be charged, why not just leave them on the devices? I can't remember what dates those devices stopped being used.
 
  • #302
Maybe because he wasn't arrested at that time, he figured he was off the hook? If he wasn't going to be charged, why not just leave them on the devices? I can't remember what dates those devices stopped being used.
I could definitely see some of them being sort of forgotten about, maybe because they hadn't been used in a year or more, but I'm still curious why he thought he was "f'ed."
 
  • #303
I could definitely see some of them being sort of forgotten about, maybe because they hadn't been used in a year or more, but I'm still curious why he thought he was "f'ed."
Maybe when he came back, he found out someone in his sphere was arrested; someone we don't know about. The apparent over-charging him, coupled with the trip with the FBI and the river search... it almost has to be more than just KAK.
 
  • #304
Maybe when he came back, he found out someone in his sphere was arrested; someone we don't know about. The apparent over-charging him, coupled with the trip with the FBI and the river search... it almost has to be more than just KAK.
He brought an extra bag with him to Vegas so that when he came home with his dad, he could go back when his dad fell asleep. Or so KAK claimed. I wonder how he planned to do that?

Anyway, that means he had some reason to think he was "f'ed" before around 2/21/17. It's an interesting thought that maybe someone in his sphere was arrested (or talked to by LE) . Maybe he heard it through the grapevine of his catfish victims that LE was asking about a_shots. Hmm...
 
  • #305
MOO I can think of several things they can use TK for but nothing critical to the case because I don't see a bombshell of him actively testifying "against" KK.
He could establish KK's places of residence for the years involved, did he have internet service, get him to say he, TK, didn't do any of the image collecting, communicating and other mundane info. Things that would make it look like it just KK had the access to do what he did. Probably something else I haven't thought of.
Could TK sue KAK over this? A lot of damage has been done to an innocent guy.

Normally I'd say something like "to a (likely) innocent guy" but I don't think TK would be stupid enough to use his OWN pics for catfishing, so I'm thinking it's 0% likely he had anything to do with KAK & CSAM.
 
  • #306
Could TK sue KAK over this? A lot of damage has been done to an innocent guy.

Normally I'd say something like "to a (likely) innocent guy" but I don't think TK would be stupid enough to use his OWN pics for catfishing, so I'm thinking it's 0% likely he had anything to do with KAK & CSAM.
I think only a civil litigation attorney in Indiana could answer your question.

Although Indiana allows lawsuits for emotional distress and recently updated part of their statute, in reading the details, I have no idea. There's no money to be had so I doubt anyone would do it.

 
  • #307
Just bringing this forward to refresh our memories.

From the KAK interrogation:

Pg 52
DC: Bud, from your drop box account off your phone, we have started one of the largest child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 investigations ever under taken in the State of Indiana.

Pg 57
DC: And you know what we're actually had some people look at that and they believe there are two people routinely speaking on multiple devices that are in your house. 'Cause the, the phonetics are different, the phrasings different, but this is over a period of time. We're not talking like this is isolated, like - a week here and not here and not here -we're talking over a period of time.
...
Well I'm telling you right now that it's connected to that, the house that you lived in with you dad.
 
  • #308
Just bringing this forward to refresh our memories.

From the KAK interrogation:

Pg 52
DC: Bud, from your drop box account off your phone, we have started one of the largest child *advertiser censored* investigations ever under taken in the State of Indiana.

Pg 57
DC: And you know what we're actually had some people look at that and they believe there are two people routinely speaking on multiple devices that are in your house. 'Cause the, the phonetics are different, the phrasings different, but this is over a period of time. We're not talking like this is isolated, like - a week here and not here and not here -we're talking over a period of time.
...
Well I'm telling you right now that it's connected to that, the house that you lived in with you dad.
Many folks will see this as just another piece of LE falsified information, because we don't know for sure what is truth and what is fiction in that interview. The fact is, while none of us knows what is real or not, none of us knows if there is key evidence LE left out of the interview, either. We just don't know LE's strategy. We don't know their evidence. We really know very little.
 
  • #309
Here is a quote by Aine Cain from the article @TL4S posted earlier:

When Kline was arrested and charged in the summer of 2020, investigators claimed he victimized 15 young females.

Only one witness, referred to as “Juvenile 10,” is on the prosecutor’s list to testify.

”It is a bit surprising because you would think that of all this whole material, this cache, that they would be bringing in multiple people,” said Cain. ”It makes you wonder exactly what happened with those other witnesses or if they just feel like one is enough.”

 
  • #310
Many folks will see this as just another piece of LE falsified information, because we don't know for sure what is truth and what is fiction in that interview. The fact is, while none of us knows what is real or not, none of us knows if there is key evidence LE left out of the interview, either. We just don't know LE's strategy. We don't know their evidence. We really know very little.
I'm kind of doubtful about it being one of the largest *** investigations in the State of Indiana but I do believe they had someone examine the devices and thought 2 people were using them. It always seemed to me that EA was different.
 
  • #311
I'm doubtful about it being the largest *** investigation in the State of Indiana but I do believe they had someone examine the devices and thought 2 people were using them. It always seemed to me that EA was different.
I'm wondering the same. I also think that Dropbox could have led to other people. It very easily could have turned into a tangled web, but who knows!
 
  • #312
I'm wondering the same. I also think that Dropbox could have led to other people. It very easily could have turned into a tangled web, but who knows!
I agree about the Dropbox but if it's as big as they portrayed, why only 13 girls? Or maybe 13 is really a lot? It just seems to me that if it was that big, there should have been more girls' photos shared.

Admittedly, I really don't know how these *** rings work.

Edited: It was 15 girls, not 13.
 
Last edited:
  • #313
I agree about the Dropbox but if it's as big as they portrayed, why only 13 girls? Or maybe 13 is really a lot? It just seems to me that if it was that big, there should have been more girls' photos shared.

Admittedly, I really don't know how these *** rings work.
I think it was 15 girls, but I don't have it in front of me. I think KAK solicited nudes from those 15. What about the very young, and all the downloads? I wonder if those are included in the dropbox. It's sickening, whatever it was. :(
 
  • #314
I'm wondering the same. I also think that Dropbox could have led to other people. It very easily could have turned into a tangled web, but who knows!
Or "tentacles".
 
  • #315
I think it was 15 girls, but I don't have it in front of me. I think KAK solicited nudes from those 15. What about the very young, and all the downloads? I wonder if those are included in the dropbox. It's sickening, whatever it was. :(
KAK may have victimized 15 girls, but who knows, how mannny buddies of him did this with -umpteen other girls. These 15 girls (their pics/data) KAK could have exchanged with the rest of the ****ring. Plus his downloads, he got from anywhere with pics/videos of unknown victims from age 3 to older. Terrible.
 
Last edited:
  • #316
  • #317
It will be very interesting to hear KAK's father testify in KAK's trial.

Do you think they will call him to testify? If they do, will defense be able to introduce the KAK interrogation as evidence that LE believed there was another person using KAK's accts?
 
  • #318
It will be very interesting to hear KAK's father testify in KAK's trial.

Hmmmm... not sure I could believe everything his father says. And yes, I can say that before even hearing what he says as I feel a lot of parents, family, and friends tend to have a hard time thinking their loved one could be guilty of something. It should be obviously but I'll say it anyway... that was all MOO. lol :)
 
  • #319
KAK claims he doesn't remember ever communicating with L. So was it just a coincidence that right around the time of the murders, before LE had even talked to KAK about anything, KAK decided he was "f'ed" and brought an extra bag to Vegas so he could go back after his dad fell asleep? What was he so worried about? That bit is from the affidavit, not the interview, so I consider it factual. Did he have reason to think he was about to get busted for CSAM, maybe? Why was he following the Delphi case and then immediately looking up how long DNA lasts and if IP addresses could be traced? This was from the interview, but KAK did not refute it.

Then we have BP and KG confirming that a_shots was communicating with L. Of course, we can't say for sure who was the user of a_shots in those communications, but the creator of a_shots happened to be the same guy who days after the murders suddenly thought he was "f'ed." If the user was KAK, he's lying, and if it was not KAK, he's telling the truth, but then we need an explanation for why he thought he was "f'ed," and how someone else was using his account.

Remember, per the affidavit, the FBI is the one who told ISP Cyber Crimes Unit about a_shots very early on. It isn't clear whether the SC and Comcast subpoenas were submitted and received before the FBI gave ISP this information, or after, but we're talking 11 days after the bodies were found they were ready with this data and a search warrant. So was the FBI already watching a_shots, before the murders, and maybe KAK knew it? In the end, the question is who was using a_shots in the communications with L, when did LE know about it, and how?

Now, could this all be coincidental to the murders? Sure. It's certainly a worthy trail for LE to sniff out, though.
 
  • #320
KAK claims he doesn't remember ever communicating with L. So was it just a coincidence that right around the time of the murders, before LE had even talked to KAK about anything, KAK decided he was "f'ed" and brought an extra bag to Vegas so he could go back after his dad fell asleep? What was he so worried about? That bit is from the affidavit, not the interview, so I consider it factual. Did he have reason to think he was about to get busted for CSAM, maybe? Why was he following the Delphi case and then immediately looking up how long DNA lasts and if IP addresses could be traced? This was from the interview, but KAK did not refute it.

Then we have BP and KG confirming that a_shots was communicating with L. Of course, we can't say for sure who was the user of a_shots in those communications, but the creator of a_shots happened to be the same guy who days after the murders suddenly thought he was "f'ed." If the user was KAK, he's lying, and if it was not KAK, he's telling the truth, but then we need an explanation for why he thought he was "f'ed," and how someone else was using his account.

Remember, per the affidavit, the FBI is the one who told ISP Cyber Crimes Unit about a_shots very early on. It isn't clear whether the SC and Comcast subpoenas were submitted and received before the FBI gave ISP this information, or after, but we're talking 11 days after the bodies were found they were ready with this data and a search warrant. So was the FBI already watching a_shots, before the murders, and maybe KAK knew it? In the end, the question is who was using a_shots in the communications with L, when did LE know about it, and how?

Now, could this all be coincidental to the murders? Sure. It's certainly a worthy trail for LE to sniff out, though.
Respectfully, KAK owned up to communicating with Libby. Here's the text from a post I made over on the Delphi murder thread:

A is KAK, Q is unidentified officer doing the interviewing. See the very first line of page 1 from the link at the bottom.

16 Q: - what, we need to discuss it. Okay? Umm you had told investigators umm and I
17 know you say you don't remember a girl that you ever talked to but I know you
18 remember Liberty German?

19 A: (inaudible)
20 Q: Right and you know you talked to her and you admitted to talking to her? And -
21 A: I don't think I ever did though. I think I talked to one of her friends like I told
22 them. (inaudible)
23 Q: You, you admitted that you talked to her -
1 A: (inaudible)
2 Q: - for a few hours at a sleepover and then you blocked her because she was
3 annoying. You remember that?
4 A: You're right yeah.
5 Q: You remember that?
6 A: Yeah. Um hum.


Pgs 125/126 of KAKs interrogation: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yx5KO5JgwVdpVR5D9Reykk57BHVAm7VcimyvGhUa0nQ/edit
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
143
Guests online
3,089
Total visitors
3,232

Forum statistics

Threads
633,395
Messages
18,641,269
Members
243,517
Latest member
Dossier NZ
Back
Top