IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #76

Status
Not open for further replies.
Per Dr. Phil interview:
1:30 drop-off
2:07 pictures posted
2:30 approximate time of BG video
3:11 DG called Libby
3:14 DG started walking the trails
3:30 DG could not find, other family called
4:00 MP was called
5:15 Police were called by MP
6:00 Search was on

MP says witness saw suspect "leaving area around that time of day".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, my point is, he had to have been seen before 3:14. Also, there have been at least 5 people identified as being in the area of the bridge who were questioned.


Perhaps the drawing is not from a witness at all.

How do you draw your conclusion, that perhaps the drawing in not from a witness? For what reason would LE and family lie to the public?

If this witness came forward would their sighting also be disputed?

Otherwise when this case eventually reaches a courtroom, that's quite a significant fabrication that LE would be required to explain. It never bodes well with a jury when LE practises deception for no good reason because how can it be trusted that the other evidence was honestly obtained.
 
How do you draw your conclusion, that perhaps the drawing in not from a witness? For what reason would LE and family lie to the public?

If this witness came forward would their sighting also be disputed?

Otherwise when this case eventually reaches a courtroom, that's quite a significant fabrication that LE would be required to explain. It never bodes well with a jury when LE practises deception for no good reason because how can it be trusted that the other evidence was honestly obtained.

I'm curious about this as well. The police superintendent was on Dr. Phil saying that at least one eyewitness had a face to face encounter with BG. What in that timeline would make anyone deduce that they couldn't find a witness who actually saw this guy?
 
I'm curious about this as well. The police superintendent was on Dr. Phil saying that at least one eyewitness had a face to face encounter with BG. What in that timeline would make anyone deduce that they couldn't find a witness who actually saw this guy?

There were people at the bridge when Derek arrived. That was 3:14. The video was taken at 2:30. That's 44 minutes and Dr. Phil said 41 minutes with LE right there not disputing it. I'm just saying it's fishy! BG would literally take them to the spot, kill them and leave with no time to spare. The only other explanation is a bit of baiting, which is done. Please read thread.
 
How do you draw your conclusion, that perhaps the drawing in not from a witness? For what reason would LE and family lie to the public?

If this witness came forward would their sighting also be disputed?

Otherwise when this case eventually reaches a courtroom, that's quite a significant fabrication that LE would be required to explain. It never bodes well with a jury when LE practises deception for no good reason because how can it be trusted that the other evidence was honestly obtained.

I have seen nothing that would lead me to suspect that LE was behind dishonest about the means in which they came by the sketch. In fact, the insinuation that they are fabricating the story actually makes me very uncomfortable. They said there was a witness, that multiple witnesses helped with the sketch, and I believe that. Outside the realm of our rules, and on other sites, you can even find more information about the witnesses who were there and had a "BG sighting" on that day. Mike Patty and LE did not say at what time the witness who ran into BG saw him. It may not have even been within that tight timeframe. (Misty, I am not disagreeing with you btw. I just realized that, because I am quoting you, it may feel like that. On the contrary, I agree with you. :) )
 
There were people at the bridge when Derek arrived. That was 3:14. The video was taken at 2:30. That's 44 minutes and Dr. Phil said 41 minutes with LE right there not disputing it. I'm just saying it's fishy! BG would literally take them to the spot, kill them and leave with no time to spare. The only other explanation is a bit of baiting, which is done. Please read thread.

I'm not following you. What does any of this have to do with a description of the killer? The guy could have lead them to the spot, killed them, and fled in a completely different direction. That doesn't mean people didn't see him there earlier in the day, and those folks contributed to the sketch.
 
Thinking of these little ladies as I lace up my boots before my hike this morning.

Rest in Paradise, girls. Justice is coming. [emoji170]

Sent from my LG-D415 using Tapatalk
 
I'm curious about this as well. The police superintendent was on Dr. Phil saying that at least one eyewitness had a face to face encounter with BG. What in that timeline would make anyone deduce that they couldn't find a witness who actually saw this guy?

I just don't get it either. It's one thing to speculate about what we don't know, but in this case the trend seems to have leaned towards disputing what little information LE has provided.

But another prevalent complaint against LE is they haven't released more details. It becomes a vicious circle If what they release is disbelieved and criticized. Neither LE or the family deserves any disrespect or distrust while seeking to solve this case and it must very hurtful when they notice that sort of thing happening.

I can't help but be reminded of something Jeff Ashton said many years ago regarding the Casey Anthony trial. He compared it to having become somewhat like a sporting event where people pick and choose their side (ie team). I see that somewhat in the case, where people determine a theory to support but then must ignore or dispute evidence or LE statements if it doesn't support it. That's just how I see it anyway....
 
There is value in being a verified insider of different sorts. That’s always been the case with this board for years. However, doesn’t mean that I cannot appreciate ones opinion if they are not verified. I don’t believe many ppl on the internet just because they say they are so and so. I will not be naive, this of all places a crime forum that gets visitors of all sorts.
 
I'm not following you. What does any of this have to do with a description of the killer? The guy could have lead them to the spot, killed them, and fled in a completely different direction. That doesn't mean people didn't see him there earlier in the day, and those folks contributed to the sketch.

MP said "leaving the area at around that time of day." This is what bugs me! "leaving"
 
Thank You, but I need a few members here to understand me better, clear some things up so to speak.

If you contact a moderator directly and provide adequate information then you can become a "Verified Insider" to the case or can be listed as a verified member of law enforcement or a detective. This will then allow you to speak more freely about what you know. Everyone here has their own opinions and, at this point, nobody knows who is right because none of us really have more information the others (unless you're following this case on other sites, in which case sometimes you'll stumble upon info that isn't discussed here). It doesn't really matter if people agree with you or not, we're all just here to share ideas and theories while remaining within the rules.
 
Can't link at mo - haven't heard from Mods yet. Obviously if anyone sees it in MSM we would be able to link that. I can't understand why media hasn't picked it up. Probably all too busy covering sport.
Eta. It's getting late for me so may not hear about this unless mods post it direct on the thread.

I have seen nothing that would lead me to suspect that LE was behind dishonest about the means in which they came by the sketch. In fact, the insinuation that they are fabricating the story actually makes me very uncomfortable. They said there was a witness, that multiple witnesses helped with the sketch, and I believe that. Outside the realm of our rules, and on other sites, you can even find more information about the witnesses who were there and had a "BG sighting" on that day. Mike Patty and LE did not say at what time the witness who ran into BG saw him. It may not have even been within that tight timeframe. (Misty, I am not disagreeing with you btw. I just realized that, because I am quoting you, it may feel like that. On the contrary, I agree with you. :) )
And DN has not been ruled out. Surely the witness would have done so in a picture line up if it was not him. Seems to me like mum is the word. IMO
 

That was another early misconception that's since been corrected. (Even Becky Patty made reference on the program to it being a half-mile.) The distance from the north end of the bridge to the north bank crime scene is roughly 1000'. It's noticably shorter from the south end. (The distance from the trailhead, though, is indeed a half-mile.) That's been confirmed by various videos and images of the spot where the yellow crime scene tape appears, which verifies your last two sentences. Indeed, a section of Mr. Logan's 40-acre property abuts the Delphi Cemetery, which is where the majority of the LE and searchers' vehicles were parked, and from where the crime scene was accessed. It's unclear where Kelsi was standing when she & the searchers were exchanging information about the girls' attire. Note the shallowness of the creek in picture #2. (The U-shape in the top right corner of picture #1 is the cemetery road.)

attachment.php
attachment.php
attachment.php
If indeed the girls were taken down the hill and across the creek it was approximately 441 feet to the crime scene( not even 1/8 of a mile ) This is giving 20 feet for the creek(which could have been more) and the greatest footage to the crime scene(of 70 feet from the creek edge to the crime scene). These footages are according to a map in the image thread. Even if the creek was 70 feet across, it was still less than 1/8 of a mile to the crime scene. I guess most people don't know that a mile is 5,280 feet and half a mile is 2640 feet. I guess we generalize on footage.
 
Libby and Abby Crime Flow:
Master Sleuther Gary Hugh's New Video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dkJ-U07So4

From last night, assimilating what was learned from Dr. Phil's coverage.

Seems, very compelling, plausible, competent and full of obvious time and effort to share a great precise overview.

Thinking of what Foxfire had mentioned about serial killers and cemeteries, the draw or some sense of security they draw from it. The other thing I recall was that Foxfire taught me that a spot such a freak picks has deep meaning for them. My take from it was it could be a place or spot that brings their greatest weakness and their greatest point of control together as they commit their crimes.

So this place, which RL described in MSM before his arrest as he walked reporters to it, as a place where his son used play with his friends when he was younger, the water, the woods, the park, the paths, the little mud overhang by the creek, the flat place covered in leaves "left pristine"...

Speculating:
That kind of setting, can you imagine this freak lurking in the woods watching young girls taking walks since he was young man, maybe immobile with fear and self doubt, and now as a man escalating to being a proficient killer?

Maybe arrests going back to when he was in his teens occurred due to this kind of behavior.

Maybe in some town not too far away folks noticed him for such behavior when he was a teen.

Thank goodness an eye witness saw him leaving this time. So, it stands to reason he's been noticed as being off and scary in other places, by other girls, who got away.
 
There is value in being a verified insider of different sorts. That’s always been the case with this board for years. However, doesn’t mean that I cannot appreciate ones opinion if they are not verified. I don’t believe many ppl on the internet just because they say they are so and so. I will not be naive, this of all places a crime forum that gets visitors of all sorts.

Hi Her,
Not being a victim or crime, nor guilty of committing one, I guess I am naive.
But I have lived a long time and read a lot of news. In any case,
l would like to see the LE move on this.
 
I agree, my guess is that 25% of the people on this Forum aren't who they say they are and a handful spend every waking moment trying to find out who they really are.
That's a good point, being anonymous. Opinions can be given freely. If posters don't like someones ideas they are free to scroll and roll. We are all abiding by the same TOS. Only mods can moderate the posts and it is certainly not for us to tell each other how or what to post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
176
Guests online
2,794
Total visitors
2,970

Forum statistics

Threads
593,832
Messages
17,993,635
Members
229,255
Latest member
flying_fox1
Back
Top