Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #126

[crhedBngr]

1) what was the motive for the murders?
2) was/were DNA/DNAs from the crime scene submitted to the Parabon?
3) whom did the girls plan to meet on Feb 13, 2017, when they asked to go to the trails?
4) did Libby have her own “cloud”, or, given that she was only 14 and on household calling plan, share the cloud with someone else?
5) the full list of people searching for the girls on February 13-14, with times of signing in/out

Excellent questions.

I'm wondering if LE ever tied a possible suspect to RL. The crime did take place on his land, and at least one search warrant was executed for his property.

JMVHO.

 

[MistyWaters]

They've said more than that, though.
2 Delphi sketches are different people, first man no longer person of interest

According to Sheriff Leazenby’s remarks in this April, 2020 interview, I get the impression LE is beginning to back away from focus on the sketches. A POI is typically a person who may have information about a crime and not necessarily a suspect.

“The Sheriff indicated the two sketches, which varied greatly from each other, were supplied by two different people near the scene on Monday, Feb. 13. Both images are of persons of interest in the investigation.”
Lots of tips, no arrest in 2017 double homicide | Carroll County Comet

 

[Ozoner]

1) what was the motive for the murders?
2) was/were DNA/DNAs from the crime scene submitted to the Parabon?
3) whom did the girls plan to meet on Feb 13, 2017, when they asked to go to the trails?
4) did Libby have her own “cloud”, or, given that she was only 14 and on household calling plan, share the cloud with someone else?
5) the full list of people searching for the girls on February 13-14, with times of signing in/out

There's an invalid assumption contained in your question number 3. There is no evidence that the girls planned to meet anyone. In fact, there is overwhelming evidence that they did not plan to meet anyone.

 

[MistyWaters]

Excellent questions.

I'm wondering if LE ever tied a possible suspect to RL. The crime did take place on his land, and at least one search warrant was executed for his property.

JMVHO.

IIRC other properties in close proximity including the Mears barn was searched as well. That’d be due diligence to search nearby properties, particularly so if initially LE had reason to believe a possible suspect was seen hitchhiking or walking down the highway, a transient-type person perhaps.

I’m certain anyone connected to RL has been looked at, left, right and centre, as you say the murders occurred on his land. JMO

 

[Charlot123]

There's an invalid assumption contained in your question number 3. There is no evidence that the girls planned to meet anyone. In fact, there is overwhelming evidence that they did not plan to meet anyone.

I don’t know, @Ozoner... Anyhow, I chose to “spend” one of my 5 questions this way, so if the answer is, “no one”, I lost the question

 

[Charlot123]

IIRC other properties in close proximity including the Mears barn was searched as well. That’d be due diligence to search nearby properties, particularly so if initially LE had reason to believe a possible suspect was seen hitchhiking or walking down the highway, a transient-type person perhaps.

I’m certain anyone connected to RL has been looked at, left, right and centre, as you say the murders occurred on his land. JMO

I believe that Delphi has a lot of farmland. Where I live, the land costs a lot, so houses are like honeycombs. If no one sees a perp, then a camera will.

The way I imagine the land around Deer Creek (and why I believe the question about escape route might be moot), BG could have taken a shortcut via anyone’s property, and in the absence of people and dogs, or if the dogs know him, he can even amble around till dark, and then join the search, or go home, get cleaned, wait for the evening news, and then join the search party.

That if everything happened exactly how we were told. Personally, I think LE is not lying about what they know, but given initial laissez-faire attitude with ensuing chaos, the full picture of the events could still be fragmented.

 

[MistyWaters]

I don’t know, @Ozoner... Anyhow, I chose to “spend” one of my 5 questions this way, so if the answer is, “no one”, I lost the question

I think you might’ve lost half of your 5th question as well. The search on Feb 14th was officially organized into teams, people signing up at the fireball. But on the 13th, aside from LE and the Fire Dept members I recall the family stating several times word had quickly spread throughout the community that Libby and Abby were missing so people simply came out to help. I’d doubt they were required to sign in/out that evening.

 

[MistyWaters]

I believe that Delphi has a lot of farmland. Where I live, the land costs a lot, so houses are like honeycombs. If no one sees a perp, then a camera will.

The way I imagine the land around Deer Creek (and why I believe the question about escape route might be moot), BG could have taken a shortcut via anyone’s property, and in the absence of people and dogs, or if the dogs know him, he can even amble around till dark, and then join the search, or go home, get cleaned, wait for the evening news, and then join the search party.

That if everything happened exactly how we were told. Personally, I think LE is not lying about what they know, but given initial laissez-faire attitude with ensuing chaos, the full picture of the events could still be fragmented.

Until somebody is charged I’d be surprised if LE knows everything about everything including where he came and went from - and yet not know his identity. So yes, highly possible, the full picture of events are likely fragmented, very common to every murder case without witnesses or CCTV. Thankfully the Prosecution is only required to prove beyond reasonable doubt an accused committed murder, but not the complete timeline before or after although a theory is generally presented.

 

[Manwel]

I'm not sure if this is considered sleuthing, but at the beginning of the case when they showed the video of BG walking, I noticed the right foot/leg being inwardly rotated and it appeared he was pivoting towards his left by crossing his right foot toward the middle of the bridge. BUT, if this person had an inwardly rotated right femur and/or ankle, it could cause this appearance in the video. I recently viewed images of a male who matches the second sketch walking in the Delphi area (on a bridge in Delphi, no less), and the inward rotation of the right leg/foot was identical to what is seen on the video of BG walking on MHB. The slope of the shoulders and one hand in a pocket was also identical.

Haven't police/FBI commented that walking on the bridge would change people's gait while stepping carefully?

 

[Manwel]

Apparently I had a post deleted because it's "rumor." Can anyone confirm for me that the alleged teen girl taking a photo and spotting someone in a scarf is supposed to be real or is that rumor? I went digging through a lot of information on this case and podcasts where I read police used her for their sketch for the original Bridge Guy (not the younger one). Is that correct or what? Or was this person somehow ruled out and that's why the deletion?

 

[Charlot123]

I think you might’ve lost half of your 5th question as well. The search on Feb 14th was officially organized into teams, people signing up at the fireball. But on the 13th, aside from LE and the Fire Dept members I recall the family stating several times word had quickly spread throughout the community that Libby and Abby were missing so people simply came out to help. I’d doubt they were required to sign in/out that evening.

I probably did. But there could have been some “documentation” of events of the 13th. The photographer (KK) was there, and probably, some other people, too. Cameras are commonplace, so there might be something left. I understand it is not an official list, but LE has some knowledge. If there was any centralized point to manage the search, the people there could have some memory, too. I understand it is easy to miss someone this way, though.

 

[BNA]

I don't know why that would make you cringe; LE has made it clear that the person depicted in the original sketch is not the same person as the one depicted in the second sketch and is no longer a person of interest. It is therefore quite likely that they have identified the person from the first sketch.

The word used was "secondary" IIRC.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Apparently I had a post deleted because it's "rumor." Can anyone confirm for me that the alleged teen girl taking a photo and spotting someone in a scarf is supposed to be real or is that rumor? I went digging through a lot of information on this case and podcasts where I read police used her for their sketch for the original Bridge Guy (not the younger one). Is that correct or what? Or was this person somehow ruled out and that's why the deletion?

It probably falls in the rumor category because it’s never really been discussed by LE or main stream media.

 

[Yemelyan]

They've said more than that, though.
2 Delphi sketches are different people, first man no longer person of interest

It's still MOO that they've used this terminology "no longer person of interest" and "different people" because they are trying to find a simple way to communicate to the public that the information developed for the OBG composite sketch comes from a different source (sources) than the NBG one and that the one depicting younger features is now considered by LE to be much closer to the actual appearance of the perpetrator.

As I said before, the sketches are developed from the memories of witnesses or potential witnesses....not even witnesses to the crime itself in the Delphi case, but witnesses of behaviors that were suspicious at the time or in retrospect. They aren't mug shots and they aren't stills from surveillance footage, both of which would represent an actual person that exists. They are memories filtered through the interpretation of a sketch artist.

To understand the point I'm trying to make, think of the many sketches that were created in the Golden State Killer case. Out of all of them I've seen, to my eyes only one captured a likeness to the actual perpetrator as he looked when the crimes were being committed. So can we conclude that the sketches that didn't look like the actual appearance of GSK were actually of other people, unconnected to the crimes? No, they were inaccurate because the victims' and witnesses' memories of facial recall were imperfect, a neurological phenomenon that has been studied and is well known.

 

[Yemelyan]

DBM.

 

[Ozoner]

It's still MOO that they've used this terminology "no longer person of interest" and "different people" because they are trying to find a simple way to communicate to the public that the information developed for the OBG composite sketch comes from a different source (sources) than the NBG one and that the one depicting younger features is now considered by LE to be much closer to the actual appearance of the perpetrator.

As I said before, the sketches are developed from the memories of witnesses or potential witnesses....not even witnesses to the crime itself in the Delphi case, but witnesses of behaviors that were suspicious at the time or in retrospect. They aren't mug shots and they aren't stills from surveillance footage, both of which would represent an actual person that exists. They are memories filtered through the interpretation of a sketch artist.

To understand the point I'm trying to make, think of the many sketches that were created in the Golden State Killer case. Out of all of them I've seen, to my eyes only one captured a likeness to the actual perpetrator as he looked when the crimes were being committed. So can we conclude that the sketches that didn't look like the actual appearance of GSK were actually of other people, unconnected to the crimes? No, they were inaccurate because the victims' and witnesses' memories of facial recall were imperfect, a neurological phenomenon that has been studied and is well known.

I understand your point clearly, but you're choosing to put your own spin on what LE has said. You're essentially saying that LE is telling half truths; I doubt that they would do that. They didn't simply say that the sketches of the perp were generated by different witnesses; they said unambiguously that the sketches depict two different people. I take that the mean that they know for a fact that the NBG witness described one person and that the other witnesses were describing a completely different person.

 

[Yemelyan]

I understand your point clearly, but you're choosing to put your own spin on what LE has said. You're essentially saying that LE is telling half truths; I doubt that they would do that. They didn't simply say that the sketches of the perp were generated by different witnesses; they said unambiguously that the sketches depict two different people. I take that the mean that they know for a fact that the NBG witness described one person and that the other witnesses were describing a completely different person.

Yes, I'm putting my own interpretation on what they've said based on what I know to be true about how composite sketches are created and the purpose of them. If they had originally shown us CCTV images of a person of interest and later said nevermind, it's a different person - then it would be a different consideration. But sketches aren't photographs. IMO

And LE definitely are NOT giving the public full information about most things in this case...nor should they. For example, they've told us the "fact" that they are holding information back to prevent false confessions. That's definitely a truth but we all know there's more there that's unsaid about why they are holding info back. They've told us that every crime scene has DNA. That's true, they do....but that's not the whole truth, is it? Not that I think this strategy (we can call it half truths if you like) is unique to the Multi-Agency Task Force investigating the Delphi case or necessarily wrong.

 

[Cryptic]

There is no evidence that the girls planned to meet anyone. In fact, there is overwhelming evidence that they did not plan to meet anyone.

Law enforcement has stated that they have not ruled out any motive in regards to a planned meeting or the lack of one.

The possibility of a planned meeting might hinge on two questions:

1. Was the meeting arranged via olde fashioned face to face contact? Some criminals could be aware of police tracking abilities and have developed a new love for the olde fashioned.

2. Can all social media exchanges be re-created- even by the FBI? In particular, there has been discussion on this forum as to whether all former Snap Chat exchanges can be recreated by anybody.

I have no idea what the answer to question number two is. Likewise, I have no idea as to whether or not there was a planned meeting. I do know that the FBI had a very hard time retrieving intact data from the phones of the San Bernardino terrorists- so much so that they needed to take Apple to Court.
FBI–Apple encryption dispute - Wikipedia

The difficulties for the FBI in retrieving erased phone data demonstrate that even the FBI has electronic limitations and that one can greatly hinder the FBI by using commonly available technology such as an Apple phone.

As another poster pointed out, the answer to question two is probably a closely guarded secret. Quoting Lao Tzu: "Those who say, don't know and those who know don't say".

 

[Manwel]

It probably falls in the rumor category because it’s never really been discussed by LE or main stream media.

How? My understanding is this is how they got police sketches? They really didn't even talk about THAT with the public. Geeeez.

 

[Manwel]

It's still MOO that they've used this terminology "no longer person of interest" and "different people" because they are trying to find a simple way to communicate to the public that the information developed for the OBG composite sketch comes from a different source (sources) than the NBG one and that the one depicting younger features is now considered by LE to be much closer to the actual appearance of the perpetrator.

As I said before, the sketches are developed from the memories of witnesses or potential witnesses....not even witnesses to the crime itself in the Delphi case, but witnesses of behaviors that were suspicious at the time or in retrospect. They aren't mug shots and they aren't stills from surveillance footage, both of which would represent an actual person that exists. They are memories filtered through the interpretation of a sketch artist.

To understand the point I'm trying to make, think of the many sketches that were created in the Golden State Killer case. Out of all of them I've seen, to my eyes only one captured a likeness to the actual perpetrator as he looked when the crimes were being committed. So can we conclude that the sketches that didn't look like the actual appearance of GSK were actually of other people, unconnected to the crimes? No, they were inaccurate because the victims' and witnesses' memories of facial recall were imperfect, a neurological phenomenon that has been studied and is well known.

Which in my opinion is off because if we're supposed to believe the killer is the man in the audio, that's not a "young" man. Or do police actually want us to think the man in the audio is just someone who encountered them and might have seen someone else?