Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #103

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
StarrChance said:
Thank you so much , the transcript is very helpful.
Quoting -
DC: I think if he wasn't in the room, he was close by, but I'm 100% convinced he was watching.

Interviewer: Why?

DC: Because of all that has happened over these last three months--the information that we had received, the information that we knew--and I hope to one day be able to tell that story.

I find this very telling. To me he is saying over the last three months they have received information that corresponded with the information they knew. I believe they have a good idea who the perp is. I think this is also why the pc was so targeted and also over the Easter break knowing that person would be home.
Click to expand...
I thought he said 30 months, but I was 1/2 paying attention. Going to relisten to the interview.

The 2 year anniversary was about 3 months ago.
 
this thread moves so fast i can't keep up (different time zone,i'm in UK)

its probably been discussed but two things bother me

1/ if he's a sc user and this is how he's found out their movements then surely he would take the phones with him? he would know a lot of info would be on there....also,was it just one girls phone found or both?

2/ are we absolutely certain this man is the killer? or is he a red herring? could it be he was a witness and nothing to do with it?
 
Rosegold68 said:
this thread moves so fast i can't keep up (different time zone,i'm in UK)

its probably been discussed but two things bother me

1/ if he's a sc user and this is how he's found out their movements then surely he would take the phones with him? he would know a lot of info would be on there....also,was it just one girls phone found or both?

2/ are we absolutely certain this man is the killer? or is he a red herring? could it be he was a witness and nothing to do with it?
Click to expand...

Only one girl had a phone with her. And, yes that makes a lot of sense. Personally, I don't believe he was following on SC.

LE seems to be clear they believe BG is the killer. moo
 
crhedBngr said:
Here's my quickly-typed transcript of the 05/16/19 interview between Carter and the wishtv broadcaster.

I believe I got the gist of this interview. I typed it verbatim. Should anyone find a correction, other than spelling, please let me know. I'll repost.

I used "DC" and "Interviewer" for the two parties involved. I believe we're not allowed to post full names.

ISP superintendent provides update on Delphi double murder investigation

Date of Interview: 05/16/19

Interviewer: The quiet period ends today in the Delphi murder investigation. It has been more than two years since the murders, and two weeks since the release of new clues in the case. State police said they would wait to say more until more tips came in, and give time for the families to absorb the new information.

Interviewer: Well, that time has passed now, and State Superintendent D. Car**r (DC) is here now. Good morning, Sir.

DC: Good morning, S****.

Interiewer: We've been reporting on Day Break that some 3,000 tips have come in since the release of the new information. Is any of it different? Is any of it useful?

DC: It's all useful, and it's all--the vast majority--is different. I'm thrilled with what's happened since then, and we still have a lot of work
to do, but we're not near done.

Interviewer: When we first got word--it was on Friday when we first got word that there was new information. Some of the things struck me as unusual; you invited the public to this, you weren't taking questions at that point, to wait those a little bit later. And in that briefing, it seemed like you were speaking directly to whoever did this, with the sense that this person might even be in the room. Do you think that person was in the room?

DC: I think if he wasn't in the room, he was close by, but I'm 100% convinced he was watching.

Interviewer: Why?

DC: Because of all that has happened over these last three months--the information that we had received, the information that we knew--and I hope to one day be able to tell that story.

Interviewer: You said something during the briefing that struck me--you feel like the investigators may have talked to him. You think that at some point, or since then, one of your guys has gotten in front of this person and asked him questions, and if so, how, at that point, did it not lead to an arrest, and how could it be moving forward?

DC: Well, I think it's likely. I think it's likely. There's a lot of opinions out there, there's a lot of subjective opinions, there's a lot of analysis
being done, which we're trying to encourage folks to not do, those kinds of side-by-side analysis. I really believe, that over time, we're gonna have an idea that we were onto something early on. Now remember, this isn't a 43-minute TV show, we have to, we have to, we have to understand that's not just science, but it's also human intelligence, what people know.

DC: Somebody knows whose body that is. Somebody knows. You take the head off that person, and you'll know, you'll recognize the body, whether it be your dad, your brother, your uncle, your friend, your neighbor, your coworker. That's the piece we're waiting on. I believe that we'll get there. There is an extraordinary group of people up there that's doing this work, and I believe they're gonna come to a successful resolution.

Interviewer: You mentioned the body. In the release of video, and this is only two or three frames of video, but it shows the movement of the person. It's been asked, and I'm sure it's been asked of you as well, why not release that sooner? You knew right away you had a picture, but a picture's different than video. Why wait that long?

DC: Yeah, a picture is different than video, and a sketch is different than a photograph. So you are right, you are absolutely correct, we'll be
able one day to tell you what we know, and why we didn't release it. We don't want to show our hand. We don't want to show the complete picture of what we know, versus what we think. We have to be very, very careful there. Remember, it's easy to give an opinion if you don't understand the factual basis for what we've done and why. I don't mean that in a critical sense. But, we have to protect the integrity of what we know. And, geez, we're gonna stay at it.

Interviewer: The sketch, and to be clear, and you did clarify this after, in case folks didn't hear it, you don't want them to look at both
sketches anymore. You only want them to look at the newly-release sketch, correct?

DC: That's correct, but remember, the sketch is not a photograph. It's something similar to a resemblance. And the likelihood of this being
something between the two (sketches), is probably pretty strong. But again, that's a subjective opinion, based on what I believe.

Interviewer: And, certainly, you've shown frustration at the killer, at the fact that it takes a long time sometimes to find this(?)
The families have gotta feel frustration as well. And, one question that occurs to me, if they are fielding rumor, that you've said you
don't like, that you could head some of that off by sharing some of the grim things that the families shouldn't have to share. Why is it
that we don't know how these girls died? Why is it that we don't know if they were sex****ly assa**ted?

DC: Because only the killer knows that. And so do we. That's why. And you're right--the frustration of the families is something I
can't even begin to fathom or understand. And, we've tried very, very hard to stay connected with them, throughout this thing, this process.
But remember, a lot of people are starved for information, particularly sensationalized events like this. We can't show our hand. We
just can't.

Interviewer: Will there be a point when things change? Because it's been two years; you've changed strategies now, you have to be
looking down the horizon, if you don't get the resolution you want, you may think it may be because people want to sensationalize things.
I've heard from people close to those families who say we're tired of answering FB posts about did this happen, did that happen.

DC: I can't begin to understand their frustration. But, we can stay connected with them. And, I can't say sensationalism in a negative sense at all. Because I'm thrilled about what you've done, what you've allowed us to do today. Because this is why we'll be successful. This is why we'll be successful. But, we can't turn this into a wide-open schematic of what we know and why. We just can't. But, I believe that one day, we'll be able to.

Interviewer: You've been involved in investigations that have lead to convictions, you've been involved in some frustrating cold cases. Do you think someone will go to trial for this case someday?

DC: Yes.

(General interview wrap-up)
Click to expand...

Thank you so much! I do believe there is one correction that needs to be made.

Where he talks about how long, I believe he says THIRTY months, not three months.
 
neesaki said:
Thanks Tiger Stripes, Yes it's well known that Bundy targeted women that resembled his ex-girl friend.
I guess some people, especially psychopaths, don't take rejection well. Makes me want to look inside his brain, seriously. As in, what made him tick, what went wrong.
Click to expand...

https://www.med.wisc.edu/news-and-e...opaths-brains-differences-structure-function/

Quotes from link:

The study showed that psychopaths have reduced connections between the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC), the part of the brain responsible for sentiments such as empathy and guilt, and the amygdala, which mediates fear and anxiety.

"The combination of structural and functional abnormalities provides compelling evidence that the dysfunction observed in this crucial social-emotional circuitry is a stable characteristic of our psychopathic offenders," Newman says.
 
Rocky1 said:
If they didn't have DNA from the crime scene, then they wouldn't be swabbing anyone for DNA.
If they had a suspect and no DNA, then yes, they'd follow up on checking out an alibi, and if it was false, then they'd dig deeper.
Click to expand...

Ok, they have swabbed him. I turned him in within two weeks of the murders but they didn't swab him until a year plus later. But if they asked him where he was on the Feb. 13th . date and he told them, would they follow up and check it out. Would they do that for every call that has been made to LE?
 
Rosegold68 said:
this thread moves so fast i can't keep up (different time zone,i'm in UK)

its probably been discussed but two things bother me

1/ if he's a sc user and this is how he's found out their movements then surely he would take the phones with him? he would know a lot of info would be on there....also,was it just one girls phone found or both?

2/ are we absolutely certain this man is the killer? or is he a red herring? could it be he was a witness and nothing to do with it?
Click to expand...

He himself may not be a SC user.

E.g. Dad, my friends Libby and Abbey are going to the trails today. Can I go with them?

No you have to go to your mother's house and I have errands to run.

Moo
 
TheVisual said:
Ok, they have swabbed him. I turned him in within two weeks of the murders but they didn't swab him until a year plus later. But if they asked him where he was on the Feb. 13th . date and he told them, would they follow up and check it out. Would they do that for every call that has been made to LE?
Click to expand...

Now the new sketch is out, what do you think? Would your tip still be valid?

I would think they would have to check the alibi as the DNA could take months, even years in some cases, to be tested.
 
Broken record here, but I was thinking about Carter's comment on May 7th about the vehicle being part of the reason they think BG's local. Yes, the vehicle helped him get around quickly that day, but I wonder if they have something more. An Indiana license plate, maybe?

They obviously don't have a license number, but a grainy photo or witness might at least have caught the state. JMO Sorry, I'm obsessed with the vehicle...
 
Tiger Stripes said: ↑
@insearchoflight: With all due respect, and as always, MOO, I disagree. I believe that they have the suspect's physical location pinned down to GPS coordinates (but at this very moment, he believes he's gotten away with this, "scot-free").

Cutiekitty said:
BBM -I agree and that is absolutely possible
Click to expand...

Jumping in this to ask: Is it possible they were able to triangulate the cell phone signals for the afternoon of Feb 13, and came up with a location matching where the vehicle of interest at the old DCS office parking lot was?

If vehicle belonged to BG, maybe he left his cell in his car while he did his murdering, because he thought he was smart enough to realize he shouldn't walk around with his cell due to location app?
 
SeattleStew said:
Tiger Stripes said: ↑
@insearchoflight: With all due respect, and as always, MOO, I disagree. I believe that they have the suspect's physical location pinned down to GPS coordinates (but at this very moment, he believes he's gotten away with this, "scot-free").



Jumping in this to ask: Is it possible they were able to triangulate the cell phone signals for the afternoon of Feb 13, and came up with a location matching where the vehicle of interest at the old DCS office parking lot was?

If vehicle belonged to BG, maybe he left his cell in his car while he did his murdering, because he thought he was smart enough to realize he shouldn't walk around with his cell due to location app?
Click to expand...
There's trailhead parking right next to the DCS building's lot. LE is pretty specific about the DCS lot. I don't know if triangulation is that pinpoint accurate, but you have me curious now, too.

I do think, however, that if they had cell phone information, they'd have his ID, and he'd already be arrested.
 
Last edited:
TL4S said:
Broken record here, but I was thinking about Carter's comment on May 7th about the vehicle being part of the reason they think BG's local. Yes, the vehicle helped him get around quickly that day, but I wonder if they have something more. An Indiana license plate, maybe?

They obviously don't have a license number, but a grainy photo or witness might at least have caught the state. JMO Sorry, I'm obsessed with the vehicle...
Click to expand...

And now, to question myself:

If LE has the make/model or possible Indiana state plate (or number), how could they not have already tracked down the owner? There are thousands of cars in that county, but only so many that would match up with a specific description. Maybe LE interviewed all the owners of vehicles like this, and alibi's checked out? Or BG wasn't the owner of the vehicle and the owner is covering or wasn't aware he had it at the time?

With LE asking for a description and owner, maybe they are trying to disprove an alibi? Maybe I've already had WAY too much coffee this morning?
 
SeattleStew said:
Tiger Stripes said: ↑
@insearchoflight: With all due respect, and as always, MOO, I disagree. I believe that they have the suspect's physical location pinned down to GPS coordinates (but at this very moment, he believes he's gotten away with this, "scot-free").



Jumping in this to ask: Is it possible they were able to triangulate the cell phone signals for the afternoon of Feb 13, and came up with a location matching where the vehicle of interest at the old DCS office parking lot was?

If vehicle belonged to BG, maybe he left his cell in his car while he did his murdering, because he thought he was smart enough to realize he shouldn't walk around with his cell due to location app?
Click to expand...

It’s possible I suppose (and really hope). I was just thinking of all of the things I use that track location. I have navigation built into my car. If he’s local I doubt he used car nav though.

If he’s like a whole lot of people he’s got a smart phone. On my phone I have apps that track location data like find my iPhone, FB, SC and mapping. If he had his phone and location data was on for any app that uses it then I would think LE can get that info.

If the phone is off then nope.
 
TL4S said:
Broken record here, but I was thinking about Carter's comment on May 7th about the vehicle being part of the reason they think BG's local. Yes, the vehicle helped him get around quickly that day, but I wonder if they have something more. An Indiana license plate, maybe?

They obviously don't have a license number, but a grainy photo or witness might at least have caught the state. JMO Sorry, I'm obsessed with the vehicle...
Click to expand...
Me too. I replied to a post and was talking about my car nav and I said if he was local he wouldn’t need navigation. You got me thinking though...What if he had Onstar or a similar service? Do they track all the time? Could LE request all users in a location at a certain time and date. I’m positive this has come up in previous threads, but I’m throwing it out here now anyway. I’m still working through old posts while keeping up with new ones.
 
TL4S said:
There's trailhead parking right next to the DCS building's lot. LE is pretty specific about the DCS lot. I don't know if triangulation is that pinpoint accurate, but you have me curious now, too.

I do think, however, that if they had cell phone information, they'd have his ID, and he'd already be arrested.
Click to expand...

Just playing devil's advocate here, but it could be a burner phone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 73 more.
Total: 3,712 (members: 74, guests: 3,638)

Online statistics

Members online
74
Guests online
3,638
Total visitors
3,712
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,113
Messages
17,963,426
Members
228,686
Latest member
Pabo1998
Back
Top