Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #118

Status
Not open for further replies.
This has gone on almost three years and there’s a reward of almost $250,000. If, as LE suggests, the killer is from Delphi or the area at least, it is an absolute travesty this guy has not been identified by someone
All good stuff I'm reading on here, thanks!

I don't think these girls were lured to the bridge that day, but I do think the killer knew they were going there. I also think he had either a personal vendetta against one, or both of them, OR he killed them to cover up another previous crime he had committed of which the girls became aware.

I bounce back and forth between a killer who holds some respect in the community, a leader of some sort, a person who is rather well known.....OR, a killer who went to school with the girls, who was angered by them to such a degree. Possibly a twisted young man who felt jilted, or maybe who was bullied, and perceived the girls as being part of that, and exploded, took it out on them that day, not too much unlike the Columbine murderers, and sadly, countless other murderers since then.

Via SM, or overheard in conversation, the killer could easily have found out the girls were heading to the bridge that day, and never even have actively communicated with them.

I am firmly in the camp that believes this killer was, and remains, very familiar with the MHB area, and all the wooded area surrounding.

All above comments are my opinion only.

I’m in that camp that believes the killer knew the trails and the area very well too but i’m not so sure he’s terribly well known to the people around Delphi. I base that pretty much solely on the fact that no one has turned him in yet. Maybe I believe too much in the goodness of people but it is beyond my comprehension, and with an almost $250,000 reward out there, that, if he was living in or around Delphi, somebody hasn’t ratted him out.
That being said all of your scenarios you mentioned are still in play in my book of scenarios still. Although I think it’s less likely a twisted high schooler in my opinion. I just think the girls would have recognized and mentioned him on the audio. I also think every student in town would have pointed a finger at him.
Just my thinking right now. It’ll change like it always does.
 
How do we know the BG type though? An alpha male that attempts to strangle women and tortures and kills a young mother I would call a coward and a bully, wanting to be an alpha male but not succeeding. JMO

True, but from what I read about the case, it was: a) drug-related. Or drug-fueled. B) GK was trying to provoke two women to fight over him? Typical alpha-male behavior, they usually have “harems”.

He is a bully and an idiot. A coward? Prison will tell, but what I want to say is he seems to be different from BG.
 
For some reason, I still think BG knew the area well, probably was on and to the side of the trail a lot and knew it very very well. One week day.. he sees an opportunity of a young girl. He checks and the coast is clear in both directions and he makes his move. He moves them "down the hill" so that so new people coming along from the NW will spot them.

This guy HAD to be seen on that trail before that day.
I agree this guy knew that area well. Of course, someone with experience in the outdoors like orienteering could have pulled it off without prior knowledge. But such a person would have to do research and Google Earth would not have been enough. While that is possible I believe the chance of it is very small. This guy not only knew the trail, but he knew the areas off the trail.

I have one scenario where the killer lived or visited in the area 10-20 years ago when he was in, say, middle school and probably doesn't look enough like he did then for any local to recognize him and his voice would be different. Another is that he has been there in the area within the last year. If that second scenario is the case, you would think he would have been seen there in the weeks or months before the murder. Unless he got very lucky then, too.
 
My take is also that this person knew the area really well. I live in a rural part of the world with what you call trails.They change season to season and look different. I am not talking about the main 501/505 or what ever I am talking about the How he knew where to go afterwards. That takes knowledge. I really am not budging from that thought.

MingyMoo
We may not all agree whether this was purely random or a targeted attack, one killer or two, a serial killer or a one time kill, but I'd be willing to bet almost all believe this guy knew this trail AND the surrounding areas very well and was likely there previously.
 
There has been talk that the words 'guys' and 'down the hill' were from 2 different parts of the conversation that Libby recorded. Also that the girls possibly did not (or could not have) crossed the creek and climbed the hill to where they were killed. Here is a different idea as to how it may have happened:

Girls walk on bridge, Libby takes pic of Abby and video of BG, BG gets closer and asks 'hey guys, where does the trail end?' They answer that it ends right at the end of the bridge where they are. He says, 'thanks, I better turn around and head back.' Then he goes back over the bridge and lays in wait. Girls cross back over, BG comes out and directs them 'down the hill' at that point. This way he does not get wet, girls don't have to climb steep, wet hill. Just a thought.
 
I agree this guy knew that area well. Of course, someone with experience in the outdoors like orienteering could have pulled it off without prior knowledge. But such a person would have to do research and Google Earth would not have been enough. While that is possible I believe the chance of it is very small. This guy not only knew the trail, but he knew the areas off the trail.

I have one scenario where the killer lived or visited in the area 10-20 years ago when he was in, say, middle school and probably doesn't look enough like he did then for any local to recognize him and his voice would be different. Another is that he has been there in the area within the last year. If that second scenario is the case, you would think he would have been seen there in the weeks or months before the murder. Unless he got very lucky then, too.

I think he was not only well-aware of the place. I always wonder what RI said about the crime scene being "physically strange". When I think of it, subconsciously what comes to my mind would be a scene from a sci-fi movie, but since the guy was not an alien, I wonder if he indeed lived very close by and the place bore the traces of his activity? People post a lot, so it is hard to decide what is right and what is not, but - why do LEO insist that the man was a hunter or a fisherman? Did he leave skeletons of fish, bones, some traps? Or, like what I once saw in a museum, a trapper's hut, with pelts, only under the open air?
 
I think he was not only well-aware of the place. I always wonder what RI said about the crime scene being "physically strange". When I think of it, subconsciously what comes to my mind would be a scene from a sci-fi movie, but since the guy was not an alien, I wonder if he indeed lived very close by and the place bore the traces of his activity? People post a lot, so it is hard to decide what is right and what is not, but - why do LEO insist that the man was a hunter or a fisherman? Did he leave skeletons of fish, bones, some traps? Or, like what I once saw in a museum, a trapper's hut, with pelts, only under the open air?


I never knew that police pushed the fisherman and hunter angle. I would like to see any of that material.
 
There has been talk that the words 'guys' and 'down the hill' were from 2 different parts of the conversation that Libby recorded. Also that the girls possibly did not (or could not have) crossed the creek and climbed the hill to where they were killed. Here is a different idea as to how it may have happened:

Girls walk on bridge, Libby takes pic of Abby and video of BG, BG gets closer and asks 'hey guys, where does the trail end?' They answer that it ends right at the end of the bridge where they are. He says, 'thanks, I better turn around and head back.' Then he goes back over the bridge and lays in wait. Girls cross back over, BG comes out and directs them 'down the hill' at that point. This way he does not get wet, girls don't have to climb steep, wet hill. Just a thought.

Very interesting, and makes sense.

It could be "the twist" Lazenby (was it him? or Riley?) was talking about.

What other "twists" could have happened? What could a policeman call "a twist"?

The most typical, in the detective novels, would be one of the inner figures 0f the case (such as a LEO, for example) being the perp. I can't comment on this, I have no information, don't know the Delphians.

The second most typical - if one of the girls would be plotting against the other with the perp, but die in the process. I think it is not the case, as the girls seemed to be devoted to one another.

The third one - one of inner circles of the girls. Possible? Yes, they have huge families. Go trace the whereabouts of all current/ex-relatives. But, no evidence to this as far as I know.

One more - if a girl from the circle well-known to the victims, or maybe a girlfriend of the BG, a woman, was helping him out. This, judging from other situations I am reading about, is quite possible. She could drive him to the trails, she could be waiting in a car, she could even walk around and be one of the "witnesses". Saying about the eyes being "definitely not blue", for example.

Or, let us imagine, there is a witness on the bridge who very randomly runs into BG and recognizes him, but it is a relative or a best friend. Then this witness would give the description totally different from the real BG. He is not involved in the crime, he just does not want his friend to get in trouble.

What other twists might have happened?
 
There has been talk that the words 'guys' and 'down the hill' were from 2 different parts of the conversation that Libby recorded. Also that the girls possibly did not (or could not have) crossed the creek and climbed the hill to where they were killed. Here is a different idea as to how it may have happened:

Girls walk on bridge, Libby takes pic of Abby and video of BG, BG gets closer and asks 'hey guys, where does the trail end?' They answer that it ends right at the end of the bridge where they are. He says, 'thanks, I better turn around and head back.' Then he goes back over the bridge and lays in wait. Girls cross back over, BG comes out and directs them 'down the hill' at that point. This way he does not get wet, girls don't have to climb steep, wet hill. Just a thought.
I don't know the area and I am only going on memory from what I have seen and read, but wasn't the slope going down the hill only easily navigable from the one side? I thought it was pretty steep on the other side, going directly down to the water's edge. I thought I remember reading that they would have gone a ways back before going that direction. I could be wrong though. In any event, I think LE would know from what evidence they have whether or not they actually waded through the creek.
 
I never knew that police pushed the fisherman and hunter angle. I would like to see any of that material.

Trying to find, but from the very beginning, they were saying an outdoorsman, a hunter, a fisherman. It was way before NBG's portrait was released. Many here pointed out that it described a lot of people in Indiana. I did see it, Boxer. I am on the opposite end, so each time I'd see a fishing rod in the hand of a man from Indiana (on a FB photo, for example), I'd start wondering.
 
Trying to find, but from the very beginning, they were saying an outdoorsman, a hunter, a fisherman. It was way before NBG's portrait was released. Many here pointed out that it described a lot of people in Indiana. I did see it, Boxer. I am on the opposite end, so each time I'd see a fishing rod in the hand of a man from Indiana (on a FB photo, for example), I'd start wondering.

I seem to remember something about it.
 
I don't know the area and I am only going on memory from what I have seen and read, but wasn't the slope going down the hill only easily navigable from the one side? I thought it was pretty steep on the other side, going directly down to the water's edge. I thought I remember reading that they would have gone a ways back before going that direction. I could be wrong though. In any event, I think LE would know from what evidence they have whether or not they actually waded through the creek.
I would think they know, even if fbe clothes dried, microspic material in tbe creek water would be present in the fabric.

I have always been confused about the footprints that led the searchers, do you know where they were?
 
And taking pictures of it and posting it on a SM where the evidence is soon deleted. So you get to brag and get kudos for your exploits with a wider audience than word of mouth, then your proof is gone.

All this exposure seduces these kids into thinking they have it all handled at such and early age. They crave good peer judgement just like we did. I saw it with my kids. The difference is instead of them venturing out into the jungle, the jungle comes right into their rooms via the internet, making it much more intimate and seeming that much safer to them.

Abby and Libby's murders could be just random, spur of the moment crimes by some opportunistic sick mind. More and more though, I think they were lured. AJMO
As kids today are very tech savvy and many are smart and also cheeky, the girls could have "stalked" an attractive man (well known not only to them!!) and then he annoyingly started stalking the girls. Maybe, since his HS time (a decade ago or so) he was so-to-say a victim to idolizing by little girls, aged between 9 and 13 - and he really hated it for one reason or another. Maybe, he expected respect by important adults (male/female), which he meant to have deserved, but what he got in his eyes, was only idolizing by unimportant little girls all over the place.
I would like to know, if the girls had posters on the walls in their room at home. ;)
 
After listening to the preview for the podcast, I’m now wondering if BG intentionally left “clues” at the scene to throw LE off. I’m basing this on the quote about (paraphrasing) “a lot of evidence” and “some of it odd.”
bbm
If he is verrry smart and very firm with crime/forensics (amateurish but near a pro), which I think he is MOO, then I can imagine such an approach.
 
For some reason, I still think BG knew the area well, probably was on and to the side of the trail a lot and knew it very very well. One week day.. he sees an opportunity of a young girl. He checks and the coast is clear in both directions and he makes his move. He moves them "down the hill" so that so new people coming along from the NW will spot them.

This guy HAD to be seen on that trail before that day.
bbm
At least once, I think, he has to have been there. What, if he had a completely different outfit, another hairstyle, facial hair in a different style AND had a girlfriend, maybe even a dog by his side?
 
bbm
If he is verrry smart and very firm with crime/forensics (amateurish but near a pro), which I think he is MOO, then I can imagine such an approach.

OMG, one does not need to be even smart, he just has to know how to Google. This should be enough.

Anyone can mask own DNA by creating an organic mess. Fish should be enough. Especially sticky one.

Maybe...remember something about leaves on the girls? Old leaves, leaves that were decaying. After the snow. Same thing, I presume. You need to clean them off, you remove foreign DNA with them. Or so I think.
 
Last edited:
As kids today are very tech savvy and many are smart and also cheeky, the girls could have "stalked" an attractive man (well known not only to them!!) and then he annoyingly started stalking the girls. Maybe, since his HS time (a decade ago or so) he was so-to-say a victim to idolizing by little girls, aged between 9 and 13 - and he really hated it for one reason or another. Maybe, he expected respect by important adults (male/female), which he meant to have deserved, but what he got in his eyes, was only idolizing by unimportant little girls all over the place.
I would like to know, if the girls had posters on the walls in their room at home. ;)

I think killing them for idolizing him would be pretty crazy. It is another thing if he did not respond, and then they got upset and started teasing him.

I read an interesting article about how men - carriers of the "warrior" gene (slow version of MAO-A) respond to perceived slight. Bottom line is, they are way more aggressive, even sadistic, but they turn these qualities on depending on the degree of perceived slight.

Say, you expect a change of a dollar. Instead, you get less.

If that "less" was "slightly" (e.g.), 86 cents, carriers of the "warrior" gene responded the same way as everyone else. But if it was, say, 40 cents, then the gene switched full-on and their response, angry and sadistic, was totally un-matching the situation - and the population of the tested subjects.

Of course, IRL, it is not even money or the level of being "cheated", it is the level of being "dissed" that turns these "warriors" on.

So I think if your theory is right, it was not as much about them "adoring" him as the man perceiving something they did as being greatly disrespected. He got 40 cents, and expected a dollar.
 
I would think they know, even if fbe clothes dried, microspic material in tbe creek water would be present in the fabric.

I have always been confused about the footprints that led the searchers, do you know where they were?

I read somewhere a strange thing, they saw two deers, and then lifted their gaze and saw the girls. Which makes me wonder, were the girls somehow mounted/placed high up, or were the deers at the bank near the water. Why "lifted"?
 
Say, you expect a change of a dollar. Instead, you get less.

If that "less" was "slightly" (e.g.), 86 cents, carriers of the "warrior" gene responded the same way as everyone else. But if it was, say, 40 cents, then the gene switched full-on and their response, angry and sadistic, was totally un-matching the situation - and the population of the tested subjects.

Of course, IRL, it is not even money or the level of being "cheated", it is the level of being "dissed" that turns these "warriors" on.
Immediately I remember of a certain person in my ex-environment, which has the warrior gene, haha. These people may have further psycho-problems, which may turn into aggressiveness, dependent on the situation. So, it could be both: expecting something, the person didn't get or just hate for another reason, the start point perhaps lying in childhood/teen's age.
I wonder, if ADHS/OCD people in general often are still hating as an adult, how their (helpless) environment had responded to their disease during their upbringing. Do I have expressed well, Idk. Of course, there haven't to be murderous cravings, but perhaps something like fury. I would like to know.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
2,415
Total visitors
2,519

Forum statistics

Threads
590,005
Messages
17,928,888
Members
228,037
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top