Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #99

[Tiger Stripes]

JMO.

Let's look at the semantics of what LE has really said about the DNA.

They haven't said they are processing the perp's DNA. They said they were processing DNA. It could have been Abby's and Libby's DNA the labs were processing in order to extract their DNA profiles and see if there were others mixed in.

LE has also said that familial DNA for finding the perp is "on the table." That means nothing. Of course, it's "on the table," meaning an option if they ever get enough of the perp's DNA to run through familial (autosomal) DNA testing and then have a genealogist build trees to find matching relatives and MCRAs (Most Common Recent Ancestors).

I have done this kind of work, and it is very time-consuming, but it does not take two years to build family trees for a white male from Indiana, whose ancestry is probably very traceable. If LE had autosomal DNA from the perp that was a full sequence, and it was found at the crime scene on the girls' clothing or evidence, he would already be arrested and charged.

Look at the solved 47-year-old cold case announced today of the ISU coed! They had no witnesses, no leads at all, but the perp's DNA conclusively placed him in contact with the victim and was enough to arrest and try him for murder if he were still alive!

DNA doesn't lie, but there has to be enough to tell the story.

Here are *2* cases of DNA's being used to solve long-cold cases, both of them announced this evening (one, in Seattle, WA, and one, in Reno, NV):

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...ee-help-solve-52-year-old-seattle-murder-case

and

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...ation-in-1982-cold-case-killing-at-lake-tahoe

I'm hopeful that, with the recent advances in DNA technology, there will be a familial match *sooner* rather than later (i. e., decades from now). Justice for Libby & Abby!

P.S. Sorry if others have already mentioned either or both of these 2 cases announced today; I'm working to catch up on my WS reading!

 

[carbuff]

I must be missing something. If they know make, model and VIN and who owned the car at the time, why don't they just ask them where it is or what they did with it and go from there?

Possibly because the person who is the car's registered owner doesn't know who "borrowed" the car for the afternoon. Maybe a car shared by several members of a family, or several people at work, or potentially even stolen.

Over the winter we had a out-of-the-area contractor installing several miles of fiberoptic cable (they had a deal with Verizon to install all through New England). At the end of they day they parked all their work vehicles at a lot near the work site (and us), then carpooled back to the motel. I presume they weren't supposed to use the work vans at other times, but at least twice we saw workers come back in the evening for a van. For all I know they had to pick up materials for the next day or something, but it sure looked like they were borrowing the work truck for personal use.

 

[TheVisual]

I've been debating for over 24 hours whether or not to put this out there, because y'all will think I'm completely crazy. I get that, but please don't laugh too hard at my expense...

Okay, I know the FBI and other agencies, organizations, and companies are FANTASTIC at cleaning up audio and video. That's without dispute. Some amateurs do an amazing job also. Having said that, a couple days ago, I finally got up the nerve to look at the pics and sketches again. Since the most recent presser, in spite of being locked and loaded, several highly active and protective dogs in the house, and security cams/system, I'd been unable to sleep at night anytime I viewed the images. Anyway, when I finally pulled up an image, it was the first image released, the grainy one. I could swear that I can make out 2 people, with the outline of the second person showing at various points around the edge of BG. (No, I've not been smoking anything.) Can anyone else see even the slightest hint of what I'm seeing? Again, please don't laugh too, too hard. TIA

Yes, yes, yes! I also see someone behind BG. Maybe he went around Abby and headed for Libby(with the phone) and she jumped at his back to stop him. You can see her face. <modsnipped> I think that is why LE can't put on the whole sequence of BG'steps.

 

[Tiger Stripes]

Could he have reddish brown hair based on water? Not because he highlighted but just because of what minerals and water do to hair...?

Okay, as someone who has lived in Lafayette, IN, and as someone who has brownish hair w/red "highlights" (natural, and not from any artificial substance), I noticed in the first few months of living in Lafayette that *everyone* (homeowners) in that area pours tons of water softener salt into their water to keep their laundry from getting orange-ish/ reddish "rusty" streaks... Also noticed that, during the time I lived there, my hair seemed to have more of the red "highlights" than before or after I lived there. FWIW. MOO.

Btw, Lafayette is just maybe a 15-20 min. drive from Delphi, so maybe some similarities in the water and geological formations in/near the water table in that area.

 

[mtnlites]

Okay, as someone who has lived in Lafayette, IN, and as someone who has brownish hair w/red "highlights" (natural, and not from any artificial substance), I noticed in the first few months of living in Lafayette that *everyone* (homeowners) in that area pours tons of water softener salt into their water to keep their laundry from getting orange-ish/ reddish "rusty" streaks... Also noticed that, during the time I lived there, my hair seemed to have more of the red "highlights" than before or after I lived there. FWIW. MOO.

Btw, Lafayette is just maybe a 15-20 min. drive from Delphi, so maybe some similarities in the water and geological formations in/near the water table in that area.

I'd never put any of that together, but after reading here I also realized that my hair is different when I wash it up there. My family always talks about the "hard" water and they have a big thing about drinking from the tap. My hair texture changes when I wash it up there and it also starts getting a little brassy.So there really may be something to that.

 

[crhedBngr]

Okay, as someone who has lived in Lafayette, IN, and as someone who has brownish hair w/red "highlights" (natural, and not from any artificial substance), I noticed in the first few months of living in Lafayette that *everyone* (homeowners) in that area pours tons of water softener salt into their water to keep their laundry from getting orange-ish/ reddish "rusty" streaks... Also noticed that, during the time I lived there, my hair seemed to have more of the red "highlights" than before or after I lived there. FWIW. MOO.

Btw, Lafayette is just maybe a 15-20 min. drive from Delphi, so maybe some similarities in the water and geological formations in/near the water table in that area.

That's very interesting, and if so, possibly increases the number of suspects!

JMVHO.

 

[TTF14]

Okay, as someone who has lived in Lafayette, IN, and as someone who has brownish hair w/red "highlights" (natural, and not from any artificial substance), I noticed in the first few months of living in Lafayette that *everyone* (homeowners) in that area pours tons of water softener salt into their water to keep their laundry from getting orange-ish/ reddish "rusty" streaks... Also noticed that, during the time I lived there, my hair seemed to have more of the red "highlights" than before or after I lived there. FWIW. MOO.

Btw, Lafayette is just maybe a 15-20 min. drive from Delphi, so maybe some similarities in the water and geological formations in/near the water table in that area.

Very interesting!

And totally off topic: I'm listening to a really interesting podcast right now about a case that used geological expertise to narrow down the identification of 4 dead bodies (3 of them related, one not) through "isotopes" in/on their hair and teeth which told which regions of the US they were from and could even tell where they'd been living in the 2 weeks to 2 months prior to their deaths. Very educational and fascinating. I haven't finished it, but so far it is really educational in that regard. It is called Bear Brook.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Or they actually finally found sketch #1 guy and cleared him.

I hope you can explain this to me because I'm having some sort of a mental block on how they could do that.

We have a BG with one body and 2 faces. Was your #1 guy wearing the same clothes as he was on the bridge? If he wasn't, how did they know how to clear him. If he was, then why are they still showing those same clothes on the latest image? Both people couldn't be wearing the same outfit. MOO

 

[tmar]

Ha, I've seen the other two you posted! Go Bucks!!!

Hi Ohio, Welcome.
I'd also like to welcome you here, with your first post.

 

[Joolz1975]

Deleted

 

[ocgrad]

Yes, I would think so. A paper trail would be good info.

At this point in time, I worry that the darn thing has been crushed for recycling, or dismantled and sold for parts.

I think thats ok because even if it has been dismantled, burned or sunk, the fact tha

Would love to know who gave the description of BG that became the first official for the public to see Sketch #1? from an eye witness or from the video only? and if from an eye witness what if it came from the actual BG killer himself gave false info to throw everyone off?

When it was released the LE officer described someone who came forward, waiting a few months due to fear, as "she." And she gave description to the FBI sketch artist who was said to have been working on the sketch already for about a month.
The FBI has a program for making photo-like sketches which recently now many state and local LE agencies have also. It has a lot of capabilities including cleaning up and extracting facial images from video. Since the sketch came from the FBI I would be surprised if they didn't use their program but that is just a guess on my part.

 

[pepper 34]

I think it's possible that the saying they were looking for the car was not what Riley intended to say exactly. I think he meant looking for info about the driver of the car as was said in the PC. We obsess over these details but they don't in the same way. MOO, I have no idea, it just seems that since at the PC they said they are looking for the "driver" and didn't say "and vehicle" that he probably was just not careful with his words today. We've seen that quite a bit in this case MOO.

Also... this mystery vehicle. It's really changed pretty much my whole thinking on this case. Sure, the sketch switcheroo is a big deal, of course, but the fact that BG was mobile, that's a big game-changing bit of info. Bigger than the new sketch possibly. It really came across, to me, in Feb 2017 and for the next two plus years, that they felt BG was most likely someone that passed through and they had no idea where he could be. Remember all the billboards? Remember did you see someone hitchhiking? Remember possible POI's in other states reported to IN LE by the other states? Things like that. And now there's a vehicle "driver" parked nearby and not only that but they are sure this person has connections to Delphi and is somewhere around nearby. I'm not sure what my point is just that the "vehicle" changes so much about this case. For me, anyway. moo

I had also wondered about this after thinking about it for awhile. But, now, if that's true (that it was just a "misspeak) then I am afraid I have to be a little bit critical of the officer who spoke in the news interview.

"We are still looking for the car" means "We are still looking for the car" in any language, imo.

But, I won't be critical for long (already forgiven, in fact) because I'm aware of the incredible pressure that LE is under on this case and their jobs in general, imo. ...And, some officers are not accomplished or practiced speakers but are excellent in the other aspects of their jobs.

Still, I sure do wish I knew what the officer really meant to say.

 

[tmar]

Ok I have to ask why is the shed significant? I’m confused as I don’t see how BG would have been able to move the girls and bring them back?

Over the bridge, down the hill across the creek, up the hill across the cemetery and to the shed? Then back across the cemetery, down the hill to the recovery site?

I’m still going with down the hill cross the creek, kill, leave.

This ain’t a movie, most time these crimes are very quick and rushed. If there was a bunch of back and forth posing etc he would have been caught red handed imo

Perhaps BG had spent time in the shed, prior and after the murders:
where he kept more items, ? cleaned up with a change of clothing.
It may have been convenient to use this shed, while stalking the trail.
Maybe LE have found it had been used during this period.
Way back in the threads, we were informed the owners were not present at their property.
MOO.

 

[sumzero]

I must be missing something. If they know make, model and VIN and who owned the car at the time, why don't they just ask them where it is or what they did with it and go from there?

It wasn't that long ago, was it, that LE said they had no info at all about a vehicle? So, I doubt they have anything more than a vague recollection by a witness who cannot even recall the color. Like sketch #2, LE probably had a good reason to dismiss it all this time. Now, it seems LE is revisiting the info they've collected, throwing anything and everything out there, hoping to get lucky. I think they're desperate for a viable lead.

 

[ab01]

Perhaps BG had spent time in the shed, prior and after the murders:
where he kept more items, ? cleaned up with a change of clothing.
It may have been convenient to use this shed, while stalking the trail.
Maybe LE have found it had been used during this period.
Way back in the threads, we were informed the owners were not present at their property.
MOO.

Different properties IIRC that property was south/ east of the bridge where the owners were down south....moo

 

[sumzero]

I had also wondered about this after thinking about it for awhile. But, now, if that's true (that it was just a "misspeak) then I am afraid I have to be a little bit critical of the officer who spoke in the news interview.

"We are still looking for the car" means "We are still looking for the car" in any language, imo.

But, I won't be critical for long (already forgiven, in fact) because I'm aware of the incredible pressure that LE is under on this case and their jobs in general, imo. ...And, some officers are not accomplished or practiced speakers but are excellent in the other aspects of their jobs.

Still, I sure do wish I knew what the officer really meant to say.

Just remember, LE had to issue a press release right after the PC to clarify some statements Carter made. So, maybe it's Carter who misspoke, not Riley.

 

[tmar]

I must be missing something. If they know make, model and VIN and who owned the car at the time, why don't they just ask them where it is or what they did with it and go from there?

If I, and many others could be similar, were witnesses to seeing a car nearby, my report would be very sketchy:
Colour probably, car not a truck, unknown model but not a sports car etc
So if a couple of similar witnesses, gave their report, LE may not have sufficient info to identify this car.
MOO.

 

[ocgrad]

I've been debating for over 24 hours whether or not to put this out there, because y'all will think I'm completely crazy. I get that, but please don't laugh too hard at my expense...

Okay, I know the FBI and other agencies, organizations, and companies are FANTASTIC at cleaning up audio and video. That's without dispute. Some amateurs do an amazing job also. Having said that, a couple days ago, I finally got up the nerve to look at the pics and sketches again. Since the most recent presser, in spite of being locked and loaded, several highly active and protective dogs in the house, and security cams/system, I'd been unable to sleep at night anytime I viewed the images. Anyway, when I finally pulled up an image, it was the first image released, the grainy one. I could swear that I can make out 2 people, with the outline of the second person showing at various points around the edge of BG. (No, I've not been smoking anything.) Can anyone else see even the slightest hint of what I'm seeing? Again, please don't laugh too, too hard. TIA

I think what you are seeing is due to the movement and trying to get a still shot frame from the video. I don't know the lingo but it's due to the movement. The video was zoomed a lot since she was so far away, but then to take still shots from it they are even lower definition.

 

[ab01]

I think what you are seeing is due to the movement and trying to get a still shot frame from the video. I don't know the lingo but it's due to the movement. The video was zoomed a lot since she was so far away, but then to take still shots from it they are even lower definition.

Correct very low pixels and blurriness from the fact that the phone was not stationary while filming and the screen cap was zoomed moo

 

[ilovechili]

JMO.

I agree. No perp DNA in the Closs case. But was the investigator talking about perp DNA? He only said there was DNA at every crime scene. Yes, there is DNA at every crime scene because the victim's DNA is also there. That was my point.

The investigator's answer was nebulous and told us nothing.

Semantics are important in understanding exactly what has been said. Lawyers are masters of this type of communication; speaking a lot of words but saying nothing. How many times have we heard, "my client looks forward to having his day in court" or "my client is anxious for the facts of this case to be heard" as if his client is innocent. It's all bluff and bluster.

Basically, the investigator never answered the reporter's inferred question, asking if there was perp DNA at the crime scene.

I have thought of this too, that they are so vague about DNA that it could just mean it is the girls' DNA, etc. I then think well the perp has to have a pretty good idea whether he left DNA so it is not going to fool him. I mean the perp could be unsure but there is a good chance he knows with regard to semen, saliva, blood, etc. whether he left any. The length of time it has been makes one wonder how much, if any, good quality DNA they have of the perp.

Then on the other hand, how are they clearing people including being sure the first sketch is not the person if not by DNA? An ironclad alibi is possible but how would they even know the person that has that is the person in the first sketch...? DNA seems to be the only positive way...

My apologies if this is redundant, it is a fast moving thread. I am always at least a few pages behind and have not even checked other cases lately in trying to keep up with this and one other one.