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

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a made a very detailed timeline for feb 13th, based on family interviews, from 10AM till 5:20PM.
Yesterday I PM'ed moderator Tricia and asked if I am allowed to post it, but I have not heard back from her yet, when I do, and hopefully get permission, I will post it.

Just got info that I will get answer from moderator tomorrow tuesday.[/QUOte
I’ll be looking for it

I look forward to seeing it if you are allowed to post.
 
Last edited:
Okay, I placed an asterisk(*) and highlighted in red the ambiguous comment about comparing sketches or photos.

Reposted interview with updates/corrections (05/18/19)

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****.

Interviewer: 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 thirty 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-released 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*, 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 happe
n.

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)

*What is DC comparing here? Is he comparing the first sketch to the second sketch? Or, is he comparing the second sketch to a photograph? Or, even to the video clip? Unknown at this point.
I’d like to think I’m a fairly intelligent person, but at times, I just cannot understand what DC is saying. Or trying to say. I think he needs to shush for awhile and let someone else do the talking. Lol jmo
 
I’d like to think I’m a fairly intelligent person, but at times, I just cannot understand what DC is saying. Or trying to say. I think he needs to shush for awhile and let someone else do the talking. Lol jmo

I hear you. I think most of us feel that way. Idk if he is intentionally doing that to not directly answer or if he is so emotional he starts to say more than is out then realizes what he is saying and where it is leading so he backpedals.
 
Has there ever been a timeline of all activity in the case based on LE statements and/or family interviews? If so, could someone point me there please? I started one, but have so much to catch up on (the 10th thread till the Apr 22 PC) and I’m sure I’m missing things.

Hi Cutiekitty,

Here is one timeline from JC Online:
Delphi murders: A timeline of the search for Abby and Libby's killer

Also, the media thread does have most articles posted as they came out in order, many of the articles have quotes from LE and family. I do believe some media timelines are posted there as well; it appears the media thread was started on 21 Feb, 2017. It is definitely worth a review to see if you’ve missed anything. It’s almost 40 pages of news articles.

Here’s the link:
IN - Abigail Williams & Liberty German, Delphi, Media, Maps, Timelines NO DISCUSSION
 
Last edited:
Hi all, long time lurker, first time posting. I’ve been intrigued with this case from the start for several reasons. I’m from Indiana and the murders of these two young girls just hits too close to home for many of us here.
IMO, both the known and unknown make this case one of the most bizarre I have ever seen.

I came across Websleuths while searching for information shortly after the news story first broke. The thought provoking ideas and theories that get discussed here are generally very impressive, and unfortunately, rather addictive!

I wish I could throw out a complete and solid theory as to how all of the events unfolded, but there’s just not enough information for me to do so. However, I do have some thoughts / theories as to how some of the pieces may fit together.

I have not read every thread here, so my opinions may have already been discussed at length, or there may be evidence to the contrary, but here it is... (all of which is MOO)

1) I believe this is not the first time this person has committed murder.
Though it is not unusual for the FBI to get involved early in cases such as this, they have had a very noticeable presence from the onset, and as horrific as the murders of two young girls is, there are too many unsolved heinous murders of young people each and every year. SOMETHING about this case makes it different. IMO, either the crime scene, or the manner of death makes them believe they are dealing with a larger than normal threat and I wouldn’t be surprised if it ties back to the IA case. Irregardless, the posting of billboards nationwide is both impressive and concerning.

2) IMO, the released audio doesn’t occur at the bridge. I believe it takes place at the top of the hill above where they were found.
I say this for several reasons...
Firstly, it just doesn’t make sense to me. IF the killer is organized, then I don’t believe he would start an abduction at a point knowing that he would need to control two individuals through rough terrain to get them to his preselected location. IF he was disorganized, I don’t believe he would have the patience to take them to a destination that far away - his impulse and adrenaline would have overcome him and it probably would have occurred right there below the bridge.
Many have speculated that the manner in which he uses the term “guys” suggests familiarity. I don’t totally disagree, but IMO, it’s more of familiarity because he has already gained control- and he knows it.
How they ended up on the other side is anyone’s guess. Perhaps they chose to go a different direction because one of them didn’t want to cross the bridge again. Maybe they felt safer trying to distance themselves from BG. Maybe they were driven from the bridge to the graveyard. ???

3) In regards to the change from the old sketch to the new sketch, I firmly believe that OBG has been identified. There have been several arrests lately for other crimes in which many people believe the accused perpetrator(s) resembles OBG - perhaps one of them is. If he has been identified, it’s very possible that he had his own unrelated reasons for not being found. Once found, he may have provided additional information regarding BG or other elements of this case.

Sorry for such a lengthy post, it’s definitely not what I had intended!

ALL JUST MOO

Welcome What If!
You make good points here. My thoughts:

1) I think, if I remember right, the FBI agent who originally was there helping with the search just happened to be there when the call came in. That doesn’t explain though why they remained on the case but I agree that at least at first LE thought it was a serial type killing. They seem to have pulled off of that with now insisting he’s local. Also, very early, wasn’t there talk of the Dept of Homeland Security being involved in some way? I certainly never understood that...if that’s true.
2) This is a very interesting scenario. I initially thought BG walked them back across the bridge and down the other side. Then LE said at some point that they crossed the creek and I went long with it thinking they meant wading across. How nobody noticed BG with wet clothes afterward has always been a problem. Your scenario does have them crossing the creek, just not wading across. Is LE playing word games with us? Who knows.

Thanks for throwing this out for discussion. Something else to think about!
 
Welcome What If!
You make good points here. My thoughts:

1) I think, if I remember right, the FBI agent who originally was there helping with the search just happened to be there when the call came in. That doesn’t explain though why they remained on the case but I agree that at least at first LE thought it was a serial type killing. They seem to have pulled off of that with now insisting he’s local. Also, very early, wasn’t there talk of the Dept of Homeland Security being involved in some way? I certainly never understood that...if that’s true.
2) This is a very interesting scenario. I initially thought BG walked them back across the bridge and down the other side. Then LE said at some point that they crossed the creek and I went long with it thinking they meant wading across. How nobody noticed BG with wet clothes afterward has always been a problem. Your scenario does have them crossing the creek, just not wading across. Is LE playing word games with us? Who knows.

Thanks for throwing this out for discussion. Something else to think about!

IIRC the creek has a place to cross by the sand bar.
 
I find it rather odd that the witness that helped with the first sketch couldn't tell what color eyes he had, but knew enough to know they weren't blue, yet this same person didn't notice his clothing was wet?
That is of course unless he was identified before the crime took place.
 
I find it rather odd that the witness that helped with the first sketch couldn't tell what color eyes he had, but knew enough to know they weren't blue, yet this same person didn't notice his clothing was wet?
That is of course unless he was identified before the crime took place.
Maybe we just are not privy to that information?
 
upload_2019-5-20_9-2-6.jpeg
DELPHI TIMELINE: The murders of Abby & Libby

Just looking back at this photo is from Feb 17, 2017, quite the police presence on that stage.

From the same article - I’d bet this dish wasn’t only due to overwhelmed cellphone towers. It would’ve aided in providing data if a suspect called in a tip to misdirect the investigation -

“The Department of Homeland Security brought in a special communications dish to help with the overwhelming number of tip-line calls coming into the department...”
ISP on Delphi murders: "Everyone is a suspect"
 
Last edited:
I find it rather odd that the witness that helped with the first sketch couldn't tell what color eyes he had, but knew enough to know they weren't blue, yet this same person didn't notice his clothing was wet?
That is of course unless he was identified before the crime took place.

@@screenshot.gif

The updated version of the FBI poster lists the suspect's eye colour as 'unknown' as opposed to 'not blue'. I'm thinking the 'not blue' description was based on a different witness who contributed to the composite of OBG, which LE have stated is a different person who is no longer a suspect. OBG would not have been wet because he was not involved in the murder.

Something else I think might be worth noting from the FBI poster is that the still image of BG (taken from the bridge) is referred to as a 'photo'. In DC's most recent interview he confused so many people by stating that the suspect's actual appearance will be 'somewhere between the two' which many took to mean the two sketches. But he actually means the sketch and 'photo'. See above, they are side by side in the poster.
 
I find it rather odd that the witness that helped with the first sketch couldn't tell what color eyes he had, but knew enough to know they weren't blue, yet this same person didn't notice his clothing was wet?
That is of course unless he was identified before the crime took place.

I am thinking that he might have worn colored lenses. They stand out, but "eye color" is not a reliable factor today.
 
Interview with Mike and Becky Patty - by GH
Published on Aug 20, 2018
“This is an interview with Mike and Becky Patty. The interview was conducted in conversation form. It was then later edited for length and continuity. Mike and Becky are Liberty German's Grandparents and legal guardians”
 
@@screenshot.gif

The updated version of the FBI poster lists the suspect's eye colour as 'unknown' as opposed to 'not blue'. I'm thinking the 'not blue' description was based on a different witness who contributed to the composite of OBG, which LE have stated is a different person who is no longer a suspect. OBG would not have been wet because he was not involved in the murder.

Something else I think might be worth noting from the FBI poster is that the still image of BG (taken from the bridge) is referred to as a 'photo'. In DC's most recent interview he confused so many people by stating that the suspect's actual appearance will be 'somewhere between the two' which many took to mean the two sketches. But he actually means the sketch and 'photo'. See above, they are side by side in the poster.
I wonder about only libby's name in capital letters above (beneath it the 2 pics of the 2 victims) .....
 
View attachment 185239
DELPHI TIMELINE: The murders of Abby & Libby

Just looking back at this photo is from Feb 17, 2017, quite the police presence on that stage.

From the same article - I’d bet this dish wasn’t only due to overwhelmed cellphone towers. It would’ve aided in providing data if a suspect called in a tip to misdirect the investigation -

“The Department of Homeland Security brought in a special communications dish to help with the overwhelming number of tip-line calls coming into the department...”
ISP on Delphi murders: "Everyone is a suspect"
Where was this held? Note the religious stuff on the wall.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
79
Guests online
1,661
Total visitors
1,740

Forum statistics

Threads
590,011
Messages
17,928,977
Members
228,038
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top