IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #40

[expatCanada]

RL gave up his right to the 4th amendment. He has NO rights there. Any judge would grant that. IMO

I very much disagree. I do not think a judge would have signed off on a probable cause search warrant for RL's entire property because a bunch of people on lap tops called in tips. Novelist, here on websleuths had a tip called in on him and received at call from ISP, but I don't believe they exercised a search warrant of his property, JMO.

 

[kstephens98]

No prep arrested today???

Anyone with cliff notes on the day?

Could RL be BG? Some say no, others say possibly. That's it in a nutshell. Oh and someone posted they have inside info but can't share it because it would violate TOS.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

[liltexans]

I didn't know that. We don't know for sure without the release of the SW (search warrant). Thanks for responding.

When interviewed about the SW, Sgt. Slocum said LE had developed probable cause during the course of the investigation. I really doubt a judge would have signed a SW affidavit based on a flimsy rationale for probable cause. Of course, we don't know because the SW affidavit is sealed.

 

[tokyorose]

Does anyone know if RL, or any person close to the girls and/or the girls family, are breeding pigs?
(I know it seems like an odd question but I do have a good reason to ask)


On another note;
One of my suspects, who lives a bit south of Delphi, popped up in the media in a video interview just hours before the image of BG was released by the media, in that interview my suspect was wearing a brown hoodie, has reddish hair and had a bit of a beard.

Oddly enough yesterday I fund another recent (dated ca 1 week ago, ca 5 weeks after the first interview) videoclip/interview with the very same man AGAIN being interviewed about the girls murder.
And there is nothing that indicate that this man has any particular reason to be re-interviewed like having some connection to any of the girls or their families.

Isn't that kind of odd that he was re-interviewd ?

So now I wonder why media interviewed him again ?

Did he kind of mingle himself into the location where media, covering the case, was doing their thing?
Did police, for whatever reason, ask someone from media to interview the guy ?
Or was it just a coincident?

Could you send us the link so we know what you're talking about?

 

[Alexsea]

40 threads and I'm just done. Abby and Libby you will always be my heroes. What you tried to give us, I hope my nieces are as brave and smart as you. I'll be watching and holding you in my heart, and never ever forgetting.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[tokyorose]

RL gave up his right to the 4th amendment. He has NO rights there. Any judge would grant that. IMO

Then why is the warrant sealed?

 

[liltexans]

RL gave up his right to the 4th amendment. He has NO rights there. Any judge would grant that. IMO

Then why didn't LE simply state that? They could have said that RL waived his 4th Amendment rights and that since the girls were found on his property, they were executing a SW.

Instead, they said they had developed probable cause during the course of their investigation and they were looking to either clear RL or "place him higher on the suspects list" or words to that effect.

 

[expatCanada]

One more time (lol)
https://public.courts.in.gov/mycase...UQTJNVFF3TnpFNU1qTXdPakUxTWprd05EVXhZbUU9In19

The defendant's probation shall be supervised. The terms of probation are set forth in the Order on Probation and include the following: waiver of 4th amendment rights against search and seizure; participation in a drug and alcohol program at mental health and substance abuse evaluation; initial probation users fee in the sum of $100 and monthly probation users fee in the sum of $30; $100.00 probation administrative fee; no criminal violations; and no alcohol consumption.

 

[Bemused]

So, what happens if, in the next few weeks, LE comes out and clears RL of any involvement? Do the mods go back and delete all the posts containing baseless speculation about him? I'm genuinely curious. It seems to me if this kind of speculation is allowed (i.e., double murder, or at least aiding and abetting a murderer), even though he has not been named a POI, then something should be done to make amends, if and when he is cleared. Wouldn't that be the right thing to do?

What happens if they point the finger at him and arrest? Will everyone who criticized the police make amends to them?

Like it or not, RL had a search warrant served and police said in an effort to clear or count him in to the murders. Period. People can have opinions why that is. I really very much hope it is not him, but I'm not a person who can ignore facts.

 

[Jabarn]

One more time (lol)
https://public.courts.in.gov/mycase...UQTJNVFF3TnpFNU1qTXdPakUxTWprd05EVXhZbUU9In19

The defendant's probation shall be supervised. The terms of probation are set forth in the Order on Probation and include the following: waiver of 4th amendment rights against search and seizure; participation in a drug and alcohol program at mental health and substance abuse evaluation; initial probation users fee in the sum of $100 and monthly probation users fee in the sum of $30; $100.00 probation administrative fee; no criminal violations; and no alcohol consumption.

Wow- thanks.

ETA- why the SW then? Trying to understand.

 

[expatCanada]

Only LE knows that.

Then why is the warrant sealed?

 

[tokyorose]

Then why didn't LE simply state that? They could have said that RL waived his 4th Amendment rights and that since the girls were found on his property, they were executing a SW.

Instead, they said they had developed probable cause during the course of their investigation and they were looking to either clear RL or "place him higher on the suspects list" or words to that effect.

I would be very curious to know if RL gave permission for his property to be searched on the evening of 2/13..all I can find is that he was asked, not that he gave permission. I believe his property was not searched that night and the reasoning was because it was dark and difficult ( a logical reason given the terrain) but it was past sunset on 2/13 when he was asked and getting dark, so why ask and then not search there?

 

[Theforeigner]

Could you send us the link so we know what you're talking about?

Sorry but I choose not to do that bc I don't want to expose his name.
I have sent tip to the police about him.
In 2001 he was convicted of conspiracy/murder

 

[Bemused]

So I watched the inside edition video and RL says that he was asked permission to search his property when he returned home at 6:30 pm, on 2/13, but he never said he gave permission. There is a difference. Does anyone recall an article where it says he was asked and gave permission? Or have we all been assuming that permission was implied perhaps erroneously?

I don't know and I should've been more clear. I'm taking about what he said he did on the day the girls were found and he went to Delphi, IIRC. The first day I remember he said they asked for permission but I assumed he granted it.

 

[tokyorose]

Wow- thanks.

ETA- why the SW then? Trying to understand.

LE specifically said the SW was for probable cause related to the double homicide not because of the probation violation. During the course of their investigation LE determined they needed to search inside RL's home... what led them to that conclusion we cannot know..

 

[Bemused]

I did. He went to Lafayette, IN on 2/13. He came home @ 6:30 to a neighbor asking permission to search for 2 lost girls. On 2/14 he went into Delphi, IN. Remember, during he time the girls were just presumed LOST and no foul play was considered until their bodies were found around 12:15 pm on 2//14.

Exactly.

 

[tokyorose]

I don't know and I should've been more clear. I'm taking about what he said he did on the day the girls were found and he went to Delphi, IIRC. The first day I remember he said they asked for permission but I assumed he granted it.

Right, I think we all assumed that but how do we know? It's never been said whether he did or not, only that he was asked.

 

[expatCanada]

:dunno: ... don't know. I keep saying it's odd that they would do that with the press in tow, etc. Any judge would sign off on a probation violator (march 10th arrest) and one who gave up his rights anyway. Puzzlement to me. IMO

Then why didn't LE simply state that? They could have said that RL waived his 4th Amendment rights and that since the girls were found on his property, they were executing a SW.

Instead, they said they had developed probable cause during the course of their investigation and they were looking to either clear RL or "place him higher on the suspects list" or words to that effect.

 

[TheOtherChristina]

Wow- thanks.

ETA- why the SW then? Trying to understand.

IANAL, but if I were hazarding a guess, it would be that there was adequate probable cause for the SW, so they chose to take that route to make sure any evidence would be bulletproof in court.

 

[Yvettea]

Right, I think we all assumed that but how do we know? It's never been said whether he did or not, only that he was asked.

But he doesn't have to give permission to LE because he waived his 4th amendment rights. We know they searched because they found the girls.