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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh so the pic is only on the screen for so many seconds? IIRC the timer was at the 9 p.m. position ( if it was a clock ) so 6pm would be 5 seconds (halfway round) and 9 p.m. would be about 7 seconds I guess. Can it be viewed several times and/or saved? I just wondered how the person was able to show a reporter the SC photo if it can only be viewed the once for a certain number of seconds, that's all.

edit. I am talking about the circular icon in the top right of Libby's SC pic of Abbey, that the OP is also discussing, that looks a bit like a stopwatch that has gone 3/4 of a minute around the clockface.

snapbridge.jpg

I'm sorry if I am coming across dense. So, I get that "7 hours" is referencing how long ago the photo was taken before the receiver opens the message. (is that right??)

It's the circle on the right side I don't get. Is it a countdown clock? Is it a timer? Is that where the 1-10 second viewing period is displaying? Thank you for your patience.
 
Add to that the speculation that the killer had a baby goat or dog under his jacket, was wearing a respirator or mask of some kind, and might have had a congenital defect due to his prominent chin.

He should have stood out quite spectacularly...

Time for me to go to Specsavers, because for the life of me I can't see any of these things, just a blurry image of an average Joe wearing lumberjack boots, a hat, jeans and a jacket. o_O

moo

You are still seeing way more detail than me...
 
View attachment 185160

I'm sorry if I am coming across dense. So, I get that "7 hours" is referencing how long ago the photo was taken before the receiver opens the message. (is that right??)

It's the circle on the right side I don't get. Is it a countdown clock? Is it a timer? Is that where the 1-10 second viewing period is displaying? Thank you for your patience.
It’s the amount of time the recipient has to view it till it disappears. You can screen shot it, which is what it looks like the recipient did.
 
I don't see a beer belly or a definitive age when I look at it. I see someone wearing a baggie jacket, loose fit jeans, hat obstructing his hair, a possible fanny pack around his waist, possible knife sheath on his left side hip, hands not visable, chin tucked down. All in all, kind of hard to distinguish features let along age. AJMO
Taking the video and combining it with the physical description that law enforcement has put out, all I can say is that we’re not dealing with some finely tuned athlete here.
 
This is actually about Androids but Mr Hickman is working to crack the code on iPhones.

"But apparently Snapchat doesn't actually delete the photos. It just buries them deep inside a device.* A digital forensics examiner named Richard Hickman has found a way to resurface the private pictures on Androids. The finding is similar to a flaw Buzzfeed uncovered in December."
BBM

Actually, Snapchat Doesn't Delete Your Private Pictures And Someone Found A Way To Resurface Them

Well, it looks like Mr. Hickman sold his business to a Financial Services Company, but that's okay. I found this from 2017:

How to retrieve deleted Snapchat photos from iphone6:

Run iPhone Data Recovery on computer and plug iPhone into computer with USB cable, and select the first recovery mode, “Recover from iOS Device” to scan your iPhone. Click “App Photos” to find Snapchat photos, to view all Snapchat photos that are deleted automatically (include sent Snapchat photos), then click “Next”.May 22, 2017

Pretty sure LE already figured that out. I promise to move on from Snapchat talk.
 
Add to that the speculation that the killer had a baby goat or dog under his jacket, was wearing a respirator or mask of some kind, and might have had a congenital defect due to his prominent chin.

He should have stood out quite spectacularly...

Time for me to go to Specsavers, because for the life of me I can't see any of these things, just a blurry image of an average Joe wearing lumberjack boots, a hat, jeans and a jacket. o_O

moo
LOL :D:p I don’t see anything either.
 
We know that Libby posted the snapchat 2:07PM
A person close to Libby, watched the snapchat of Abby 7 hours after it was posted.

That means the person watched the snapchat ca 9:07 PM

SO... this person, close to Libby would at 9:07PM have know that Libby and Abby for sure was at the bridge ca 1 hour prior to Derrick, Libby's dad, had arrived at the meeting point ca 3:14PM.

So , those close to Libby would have known by then that the girls probably was still pretty nearby the bridge area when Derrick was looking for them.

I personaly do not understand why the called of the search that evening the 13th of February.

Does anyone know for sure who it was that received Libby's snapchat of Abby on the bridge ?
 
Yes. My opinion only.
Here is one protocol outlined. Our city has hiking trails and occasionally hikers are lost. The search once initiated doesn't stop until found or called off. The sheriff department of course may have their own modified protocol.

Inside the Art of Backcountry Search and Rescue

It appears Delphi had not been faced with lost people in the past. A population of 3000, it’s doubtful they had large crews of either police or fireman working the midnight shift, definitely they’d not have 24/7 search crews or parks personnel on standby as it appeared most of the searchers were local volunteers. Therefore I’d presume officials had no other option but to call off the official search at midnight due to darkness, fatigue and risk of injury with plans to begin again the next morning if the girls didn’t contact anyone by then.

The families have never, ever criticized the search efforts whatsoever.
 
Yeah, I’ve seen both.

I’ve seen searches that go through the night, and ones that are called off at sunset.

I imagine that it comes down to the terrain, the weather, the age of those missing, the circumstances of their disappearance, and the standard protocol of the organization conducting the search.

With these circumstances, I completely understand why they called it off.

It wouldn’t have changed much anyways, as they were long since dead.


Continuing to question why LE called off the search is, IMO, pointless. Dozens of people have offered reasonable and logical explanations as to why they did and why their protocol dictated that they did. People were still there even after LE called it off. If they'd continued having dozens of untrained folks canvassing the dark park into the early hours of the morning, it's very possible that the crime scene would've been compromised.

It's a circular argument. We see this on every thread. What's done is done and nothing can go back and change that. The girls had been dead for several hours by the time the search was called off.

The only people I've seen criticizing it are those who aren't involved with the case. The families have been nothing but supportive of LE's efforts.
 
We know that Libby posted the snapchat 2:07PM
A person close to Libby, watched the snapchat of Abby 7 hours after it was posted.

That means the person watched the snapchat ca 9:07 PM

SO... this person, close to Libby would at 9:07PM have know that Libby and Abby for sure was at the bridge ca 1 hour prior to Derrick, Libby's dad, had arrived at the meeting point ca 3:14PM.

So , those close to Libby would have known by then that the girls probably was still pretty nearby the bridge area when Derrick was looking for them.

I personaly do not understand why the called of the search that evening the 13th of February.

Does anyone know for sure who it was that received Libby's snapchat of Abby on the bridge ?
It was on her story.
 
We know that Libby posted the snapchat 2:07PM
A person close to Libby, watched the snapchat of Abby 7 hours after it was posted.

That means the person watched the snapchat ca 9:07 PM

SO... this person, close to Libby would at 9:07PM have know that Libby and Abby for sure was at the bridge ca 1 hour prior to Derrick, Libby's dad, had arrived at the meeting point ca 3:14PM.

So , those close to Libby would have known by then that the girls probably was still pretty nearby the bridge area when Derrick was looking for them.

I personaly do not understand why the called of the search that evening the 13th of February.

Does anyone know for sure who it was that received Libby's snapchat of Abby on the bridge ?

A Snapchat photo taken on the bridge only proves where they were at 2:07. It wouldn’t have been automatically assumed they were still hanging around the bridge more than an hour later, as it appears they were expected to go back to the parking area where he’d pick them up.
 
View attachment 185160

I'm sorry if I am coming across dense. So, I get that "7 hours" is referencing how long ago the photo was taken before the receiver opens the message. (is that right??)

It's the circle on the right side I don't get. Is it a countdown clock? Is it a timer? Is that where the 1-10 second viewing period is displaying? Thank you for your patience.

I think that is my understanding now. The timer face representing 10 seconds. But what if the viewing is set at only 3 seconds is what I don't follow ?? Can you only view it the once? I'm dense too I guess.
 
I think that is my understanding now. The timer face representing 10 seconds. But what if the viewing is set at only 3 seconds is what I don't follow ?? Can you only view it the once? I'm dense too I guess.

if the timer is set to 3 seconds the icon will stay the same but the bar will just spin around the icon faster. The point of the icon is to actually see the time running out.

ETA: the app is minimal in size and is free to download if anyone wants to sleuth how it works.
 
I get what you're saying but could you clarify?

- How is it a matter of principle not to give DNA when two young girls were murdered and LE is trying to find the killer?
Anyone with principles and morals would do their best to help LE.

-Why in the world would LE try to frame someone innocent?

-Why would an insurance company get hold of DNA and charge higher premiums? Surely LE would keep that info strictly private and insurance companies would not be allowed access? LE would be comparing DNA to the DNA found on the girls. I don't think they'd be testing for Lou Gehrig's ALS.

moo and EBM for spelling.

I’m not in any way implying that I thought that those were my ideas, or that the reasons I gave were valid.

However, quite a number of people think that they shouldn’t give more to LE than the law requires. Quite a number of people thinks that LE occasionally frames people, or accidentally contaminate evidence.

The other ideas are more paranoid, but I’ve heard people express extremely paranoid ideas. (And I don’t deliberately run in those circles.)
 
A Snapchat photo taken on the bridge only proves where they were at 2:07. It wouldn’t have been automatically assumed they were still hanging around the bridge more than an hour later, as it appears they were expected to go back to the parking area where he’d pick them up.
I think the foreigner means they would/should have known they couldn't have gone that far in an hour or so. Were family on Libby's Snapchat or only her friends?
 
Yes I understand that but someone watched that snapchat image 7 hours after Libby posted it, and made a screenshot of it at ca 9:07PM, that screenshot that we have a copy of with the "7h ago " at the upper left corner of the screenshot, and who was that?

I do not have the link handy but I am recalling there were mentions in the media that friends had seen the snap and saved it. LE would be able to see who Libby's friends were on the app and if LE were able to access the phone and app itself - they would see a list of people who actually viewed her snap.

Edit: words
 
I’m not in any way implying that I thought that those were my ideas, or that the reasons I gave were valid.

However, quite a number of people think that they shouldn’t give more to LE than the law requires. Quite a number of people thinks that LE occasionally frames people, or accidentally contaminate evidence.

The other ideas are more paranoid, but I’ve heard people express extremely paranoid ideas. (And I don’t deliberately run in those circles.)

*raises hand*

I'm paranoid and am one barrel of dried rice short of being one of those folks on "Doomsday Preppers." Paranoia isn't logical.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
160
Guests online
2,499
Total visitors
2,659

Forum statistics

Threads
590,038
Messages
17,929,240
Members
228,044
Latest member
Bosie
Back
Top