IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #61

[Evania]

Okay, now I know the spot you are talking about. I am linking the video that was shot by Julie Melvin, when she went to retrace Libby and Abby's steps in March. Julie stood on the platform and took video of the exact area where Abby was standing in the SnapChat photo. The exact view is at the 9:34 mark precisely. You will see the same dark figure exactly as it is in Abby's picture. So it could not have been BG. I think it is two tree trunks close together in shadow or something to that effect.
However, that doesn't mean the scenario you described didn't happen. It's very possible, we just don't know.:gaah:

[video=youtube;I_kYOPFQglQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_kYOPFQglQ[/video]

Awesome debunking! Thanks for this. This is why I love this site.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WebSight]

Sorry, I have to make a correction: I posted the wrong mark in the video. The exact view is at the 6:21 mark. How embarrassing. :facepalm:

Okay, now I know the spot you are talking about. I am linking the video that was shot by Julie Melvin, when she went to retrace Libby and Abby's steps in March. Julie stood on the platform and took video of the exact area where Abby was standing in the SnapChat photo. The exact view is at the 9:34 mark precisely. You will see the same dark figure exactly as it is in Abby's picture. So it could not have been BG. I think it is two tree trunks close together in shadow or something to that effect.
However, that doesn't mean the scenario you described didn't happen. It's very possible, we just don't know.:gaah:

[video=youtube;I_kYOPFQglQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_kYOPFQglQ[/video]

 

[Bird of Paradise]

Sorry, I have to make a correction: I posted the wrong mark in the video. The exact view is at the 6:21 mark. How embarrassing. :facepalm:

:therethere:

 

[liltexans]

Friendly reminder that all scanner discussion must remain downstairs in the scanner thread, which is a private thread only for Websleuths members. Please do not bring any discussion from the scanner thread up into this thread.

 

[midwestseeker]

Okay, thanks for the clarification. It'll be hard to point out to you without drawing a circle to where I see it. It's at a distance and almost camouflaged perfectly within the trees. In the image discussion thread, they have it circled and have cleaned up the image so you can view it more easily. So keeping in mind that it is difficult to make out without drawing upon the image, people claim that they see him coming from the direction of the crime scene which would be to the right of the bridge, but slightly to the left of Abby, close to the platform. (This is from Libby's vantage point) Oddly, he (if that is what it is) is more centered in Libby's picture, than what Abby is. Based on that, I wonder if Libby caught his movement walking through the trees, heading toward the end of the bridge, and this was when she started to get uncomfortable. Or it could have been intended to be an "artistic" photo of Abby upon the bridge, and he was subsequently caught in the photo.I think that within the short timetable from this particular photo (about midway across the bridge, just past the water), that it could likely be him considering by the time they saw him, they were on the other side and he was fairly close to them at that point.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you for bringing this up. I am new enough that I am still uncomfortable about what can/can't be discussed and where they should be discussed. Very early on, I saw this photo and it had been retouched by someone to enhance the image. I also wondered if he was not the real focus of Libby's photo. I admit I had to take a magnifying glass to it but once I did that, I felt comfortable that someone is behind that tree....IMHO!Sitting here in Indianapolis tonight and waiting for CrimeCon to start tomorrow. Almost made a side trip to Delphi this morning but was not sure what seeing it with my own eyes would change. I just desperately want to see someone arrested.

 

[Burnt Toast]

What do you think may have been indicated by the clothes reportedly seen in the creek by the media?

it was by one reporter. she said she saw "girl's clothing" from about a 150 feet away. how you could tell something was clothing from that distance let alone girl's clothing is beyond me. It might be the reason why no one else reported the same. it was speculation on the reporter's part and not fact.

 

[midwestseeker]

Just fyi, I was able to read the scanner threads as soon as I created a login. Not sure if that's a recent change, but I'm a pretty new member (long-time lurker previously).

Me too

 

[midwestseeker]

it was by one reporter. she said she saw "girl's clothing" from about a 150 feet away. how you could tell something was clothing from that distance let alone girl's clothing is beyond me. It might be the reason why no one else reported the same. it was speculation on the reporter's part and not fact.

I have a 650 mm camera lens and I guarantee I could clearly see and photograph at that distance

 

[Burnt Toast]

I have a 650 mm camera lens and I guarantee I could clearly see and photograph at that distance

the picture was taken by her camera man. we did not see any zoom. the picture she posted was was from quite far away. it looked liked something caught in branches from a distance. i think if she had a camera to zoom they would have shared a close up picture and not one from so far away. it would give better credibility to "girl's clothing". it would have been a big news scoop to have close up pictures of the clothing the girls wore that day.

 

[liltexans]

Hi everyone, Please drop the speculation that Abby and Libby were playing detective and lured someone to the trail. There is no evidence of that and in fact, Libby's family has very clearly stated that the girls were out that day to take pictures because they both enjoyed photography and being outdoors.

 

[0101ABA]

Just like what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas...please remember that anything and everything on the scanner thread stays on the scanner thread. It cannot be mentioned or referenced here. Thanks!

 

[crhedBngr]

Sorry, I have to make a correction: I posted the wrong mark in the video. The exact view is at the 6:21 mark. How embarrassing. :facepalm:

Pfft. No worries.

 

[Jax49]

the picture was taken by her camera man. we did not see any zoom. the picture she posted was was from quite far away. it looked liked something caught in branches from a distance. i think if she had a camera to zoom they would have shared a close up picture and not one from so far away. it would give better credibility to "girl's clothing". it would have been a big news scoop to have close up pictures of the clothing the girls wore that day.

There's a photo posted? All I remember is the male photo journalist's comment on Facebook. Link? TIA

From 75-yards away I could see girls clothing in Deer Creek east of the bridge and knew full well that the girls where found very nearby.

 

[Burnt Toast]

There's a photo posted? All I remember is the male photo journalist's comment on Facebook. Link? TIA

yes, there is a photo. it was posted many times in early threads. i had no reason to save it. there was not much to see. you could not even tell it was clothing. no other reporters or media outlets seemed to be interested in it.

 

[Jax49]

yes, there is a photo. it was posted many times in early threads. i had no reason to save it. there was not much to see. you could not even tell it was clothing. no other reporters or media outlets seemed to be interested in it.

k

Thought I'd read every thread...maybe someone else can find a link.

 

[ocgrad]

There's a photo posted? All I remember is the male photo journalist's comment on Facebook. Link? TIA

That is also the only reference I have ever seen as well. Never have seen a photo of girls clothes in any thead.

 

[Burnt Toast]

That is also the only reference I have ever seen as well. Never have seen a photo of girls clothes in any thead.

the photo is taken from above looking down. you can not tell it is clothing let alone girl's clothing. it would have been the scoop of the century to have a picture of the girl's clothing. media outlets would have been all over it. the fact that they weren't speaks volumes.

 

[Momma2cam]

k

Thought I'd read every thread...maybe someone else can find a link.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10209763404819911&id=1174987605

"From 75 yards away I could see girls clothing in Deer Creek..."

ETA: I don't see the picture on the post anymore but do recall seeing one previously. It looks like it may have been deleted.



Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

 

[Peace777]

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10209763404819911&id=1174987605

"From 75 yards away I could see girls clothing in Deer Creek..."

ETA: I don't see the picture on the post anymore but do recall seeing one previously. It looks like it may have been deleted.



Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

Deleted so maybe it wasn't 1 of the girls clothing then? Or LE told them to take it down as the killer or killers would know where clothing were left and if any were in the creek bed right?

 

[Burnt Toast]

RL knew the area
he walked the woods day and night
he had the opportunity
he was out that day and likely passed the bridge several times
he knew the families
he had disregard for the law
he lied to the police
his place was searched with probable cause
he stopped cooperating with the police
he is still involved in the investigation- all while not cooperating
he has not been cleared