Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #132

[FromGermany1]

Gray Hughes has said that the information he's gotten from his sources that the killer left and was spotted near the cemetery, walking on the road.

bbm
Very interesting, I never heard of it.

I would like to know the man's gait (and mannerisms, if). Big or small steps, leg/knee injured, too much athletic for his "funny" outfit or not.
I would like to know, if he at all was still dressed like in Libby's video. Jacket, trousers, shoes, hat, scarf (scarf on face would be odd of course ).
I would like to know, if he had reddish-brown hair with some curls and if it was now afterwards well visible.
I would like to know, if something stood out; any extra-detail, one could notice as a witness (although a witness didn't know of the murder at that time, I think).

I would like.
That will not do any good, unfortunately.

ETA: For the sketch #2 aka YBG it makes sense, if someone saw him without hat and with curly, reddish-brown hair.

 

[sunshineray]

bbm
Very interesting, I never heard of it.

I would like to know the man's gait (and mannerisms, if). Big or small steps, leg/knee injured, too much athletic for his "funny" outfit or not.
I would like to know, if he at all was still dressed like in Libby's video. Jacket, trousers, shoes, hat, scarf (scarf on face would be odd of course ).
I would like to know, if he had reddish-brown hair with some curls and if it was now afterwards well visible.
I would like to know, if something stood out; any extra-detail, one could notice as a witness (although a witness didn't know of the murder at that time, I think).

I would like.
That will not do any good, unfortunately.

ETA: For the sketch #2 aka YBG it makes sense, if someone saw him without hat and with curly, reddish-brown hair.

GH talks about a witness saw man leave cemetery area walking. I should amend my previous post to say "possible killer".

 

[MistyWaters]

I believe this came from the Fox59's (Alexis McAdams, the reporter) interview in August 2017. I wondered at the time - believing LE knew how it all went down - that maybe some were 75% accurate, some maybe more and some maybe less, but not 100% and that is what he meant.

Then we have the recent DTH interview with Sheriff Tobe Leazenby and he is asked how the killer left the area. TL basically says they don't know for sure and that all they have is speculation. What if Liberty's video/audio is not that much longer after that photo and audio? I believe LE during the DTH (TL again?) that the recording is not that long. What if that recording is not that long and LE is basically speculating parts of the crime from the bridge to the crime scene? For example, LE may not know if the girls ran from him across the creek or the killer directed them across. Are certain 'facts' not released by LE because they don't have them either?

To me it makes sense what TL said as LE can’t know for sure how the killer left the area or the exact sequence of events before or after the murders - because they don't yet know the identity of the killer, where he lived, his connection to the trails and locals in general.

Evidence proving he was responsible for the murders is what’s crucial for a conviction. Other details surrounding that will be built into the prosecutor’s theory based on what is known about the killer, when his identity becomes known. JMO

 

[photographer4]

What abandoned house?

At the south end of the bridge, there is a house a ways up from the bridge. To my understanding, the occupants / owner was out of town at the time of the crime. Its possible BG knew that. He may have used that property as a place to park or hide afterwards until the coast was clear enough for him to escape. MOO

 

[photographer4]

I've been curious about how LE knows the time of death occurred in such a small window. I found this really interesting article that is a pretty simple read.

" After death, the body loses or gains heat progressively (at 1.5 degrees per hour) until it equilibrates with that of the surrounding medium." Considering the conditions (cold water, cold ground, dressed/undressed), I wonder how challenging it was for the coroner to determine TOD.
Determining Time of Death

Probably pretty easy to determine the time of death. Aside the drop in body temp per hour, there are other signs as well. Have a look:
How a Forensic Witness Decides Time of Death | Dr. Chundru

 

[JnRyan]

To me it makes sense what TL said as LE can’t know for sure how the killer left the area or the exact sequence of events before or after the murders - because they don't yet know the identity of the killer, where he lived, his connection to the trails and locals in general.

Evidence proving he was responsible for the murders is what’s crucial for a conviction. Other details surrounding that will be built into the prosecutor’s theory based on what is known about the killer, when his identity becomes known. JMO

I should have been more specific. I believe he was referring to the killer leaving the crime scene. That is, did he walk through the cemetery to Rt 300, down the path that paralleled Rt 300 or did he go back across the creek to the bridge or down the private drive? He addressed this along with the statement that he decided not to bring in the tracking dogs and in hindsight he now wonders if he shouldn't have used them. Why? It might matter with respect to when and where the witnesses had their sightings.

 

[photographer4]

To me it makes sense what TL said as LE can’t know for sure how the killer left the area or the exact sequence of events before or after the murders - because they don't yet know the identity of the killer, where he lived, his connection to the trails and locals in general.

Evidence proving he was responsible for the murders is what’s crucial for a conviction. Other details surrounding that will be built into the prosecutor’s theory based on what is known about the killer, when his identity becomes known. JMO

LE said if the killer wasn't local, or had had no prior experience with the MHB area, he wouldn't have "known certain features" or something to that effect. That might suggest the killer knew the area quite well. Maybe he moved or disabled trail cams? Maybe that means he left through a trail or area not widely used or known about? Maybe it means he knew someone wasn't home at X house and used that area to hide out? Who knows.

 

[MistyWaters]

I should have been more specific. I believe he was referring to the killer leaving the crime scene. That is, did he walk through the cemetery to Rt 300, down the path that paralleled Rt 300 or did he go back across the creek to the bridge or down the private drive? He addressed this along with the statement that he decided not to bring in the tracking dogs and in hindsight he now wonders if he shouldn't have used them. Why? It might matter with respect to when and where the witnesses had their sightings.

No problem, I understood what you wrote.

The challenge with witness sightings is nobody was an actual eye witness to the murders. Tracking dogs would’ve been helpful to locate the girls had they not been found by items provided by the families with a sample of their scent.

But I’m not so sure tracking dogs would’ve been successful in following the path of the killer because of the difficulty dogs would have in distinguishing between the scent of searchers, various emergency responders and LE who initially attended the crime scene.

 

[MistyWaters]

LE said if the killer wasn't local, or had had no prior experience with the MHB area, he wouldn't have "known certain features" or something to that effect. That might suggest the killer knew the area quite well. Maybe he moved or disabled trail cams? Maybe that means he left through a trail or area not widely used or known about? Maybe it means he knew someone wasn't home at X house and used that area to hide out? Who knows.

That’s right, who knows is not us.

I think we get caught up brainstorming a before and after scenario which IMO is only a sidestep away from ‘guessing’ because we don’t know what LE knows, while LE is more focused on identifying the killer through a connection to direct knowledge pertaining to the murders.

A hypothetical example, LE may be aware of reported sightings of say, four vaguely described vehicles parked in or around the trail in various places which don’t match up with vehicles owned by other people who already came forward after LE made that request. First off, LE has no way of knowing how accurate people’s memories were so they can’t assume the four unidentified vehicles were indeed observed as described. But when a killer is identified, if he owned a vehicle of the exact description of one of the four, then LE might conclude that location was where he parked. Even if they’re wrong about where he parked his vehicle it doesn’t really matter so much as long as there’s evidence to prove to the jury beyond reasonable doubt it was he who is guilty of being physically present at the crime scene when committing murder.

JMO

 

[FromGermany1]

The human brain is a pattern recognition machine. Without this trait, you would not be able to learn language or undergo much of the learning needed to survive in your environment. Pattern recognition starts when you're a baby and continues all your life. Pattern recognition is probably the reason Libby got bad vibes about the guy walking toward them and felt it in her gut, for example. Really she was feeling that danger with her brain. But pattern recognition also works like this: whenever you hear sounds, your brain tries to make sense of them by trying to match them to patterns already stored in its "database."

This is kind of a simplistic way of putting it, but when you hear unintelligible sounds - especially if you are already thinking or hoping there is something there for you to hear or interpret - your brain searches for a recognized pattern, finds the closest match, and then processes the incoming sensory information to enhance the apparent match.

If you were thinking "I might hear the girls in distress in this clip because KR said it was hard to listen to, knowing what they went through," then if you listened and heard some odd sounds that weren't 100% recognizeable, your brain would take that pattern and try to assign something meaningful to it. Based on the previous suggestion you received through your reading that it would be nightmarish, your brain might decide you were hearing screams. This phenomenon is a normal outgrowth of the way our brains work. But it doesn't mean those sounds are actually there. MOO

Abby's mom AW said in a recorded interview that was posted on these threads (The Herbert interview) that she has heard the unedited section of audio that contains "guys...down the hill" and there are only a few seconds between "guys" and "down the hill." Furthermore, she says that the only utterance in that couple of seconds gap between "guys" and "down the hill" is the girls making what she called "a teenage thing like what? huh?"

I don't even know, if it fits here now, but fellow members always seem to forget, that

1. the residents of Delphi had a kind of secret conference with LE right at the beginning
and that
2. the relatives were apparently very shaken after the preliminary talk with them before the April 2019 PC.

It could be, that quite a few people know more than we do, but do not always reproduce everything correctly, because the authorities absolutely expect them to. By not revealing anything, they are asked to support those, who want to arrest the BG (LE / FBI). The killer thirsts for all sorts of details, which, however, should be withheld from him.

<modsnip>

 

[JnRyan]

But I’m not so sure tracking dogs would’ve been successful in following the path of the killer because of the difficulty dogs would have in distinguishing between the scent of searchers, various emergency responders and LE who initially attended the crime scene.

I wondered the same thing and why TL thought calling off the tracking dogs on the 14th when the bodies were found was a mistake on his part. We had a local case here in the 1980's that was the subject of a Forensic Files episode, "Garden of Evil". One of my favorite radio stations, WWDE, lost a DJ, Debbie Dicus, to a murder. The police dog picked up the scent of the killer off the murder weapon and later alerted his handler to one of the bystanders nearby.
Debbie Dicus: A Deejay Signs off Too Soon
In the case of Abigail and Liberty, I don't if the dogs could have tracked the killer's path due to the large volume of searchers and LE.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Probably pretty easy to determine the time of death. Aside the drop in body temp per hour, there are other signs as well. Have a look:
How a Forensic Witness Decides Time of Death | Dr. Chundru

Thanks for the link. The one I posted listed the difficulties of coming up with an accurate TOD when the bodies have been in extreme temperatures. Even their beginning point can be wrong due to individual temps. What if their estimation was a couple of hours off; would it make a difference to our way of thinking?

I added this:
To help with his estimation, the ME / Coroner utilizes various observations and tests, including:
Body temperature
Rigor mortis
Livor mortis (lividity)
Degree of putrefaction
Stomach contents
Corneal cloudiness
Vitreous potassium level
Insect activity
Scene markers

 

[MistyWaters]

I finally found what I’ve been looking for now and then - the FBI billboard with the photo of the killer on the bridge “last seen 2:30pm.” The billboard to shown on the video at this link.

FBI expanding billboards for tips in Indiana teens' killings

 

[mpnola]

The human brain is a pattern recognition machine. Without this trait, you would not be able to learn language or undergo much of the learning needed to survive in your environment. Pattern recognition starts when you're a baby and continues all your life. Pattern recognition is probably the reason Libby got bad vibes about the guy walking toward them and felt it in her gut, for example. Really she was feeling that danger with her brain. But pattern recognition also works like this: whenever you hear sounds, your brain tries to make sense of them by trying to match them to patterns already stored in its "database."

This is kind of a simplistic way of putting it, but when you hear unintelligible sounds - especially if you are already thinking or hoping there is something there for you to hear or interpret - your brain searches for a recognized pattern, finds the closest match, and then processes the incoming sensory information to enhance the apparent match.

If you were thinking "I might hear the girls in distress in this clip because KR said it was hard to listen to, knowing what they went through," then if you listened and heard some odd sounds that weren't 100% recognizeable, your brain would take that pattern and try to assign something meaningful to it. Based on the previous suggestion you received through your reading that it would be nightmarish, your brain might decide you were hearing screams. This phenomenon is a normal outgrowth of the way our brains work. But it doesn't mean those sounds are actually there. MOO

Abby's mom AW said in a recorded interview that was posted on these threads (The Herbert interview) that she has heard the unedited section of audio that contains "guys...down the hill" and there are only a few seconds between "guys" and "down the hill." Furthermore, she says that the only utterance in that couple of seconds gap between "guys" and "down the hill" is the girls making what she called "a teenage thing like what? huh?"

While all that is true, I was not listening to hear anything else. It actually startled me and I thought I had a crossed recording. It is very possibly not there, but if you listen with headphones, you just might hear it. Keep in mind, they released the word "guys" much later. That, again, makes me think they didn't release that first because there was something in between that they didn't want us to hear. It doesn't really matter of it exists, because it doesn't have any bearing on the case. I just think it's likely. I'm 99.9% sure that just about anyone would scream, if getting abducted. It's not a real stretch.

 

[Imvp2]

While all that is true, I was not listening to hear anything else. It actually startled me and I thought I had a crossed recording. It is very possibly not there, but if you listen with headphones, you just might hear it. Keep in mind, they released the word "guys" much later. That, again, makes me think they didn't release that first because there was something in between that they didn't want us to hear. It doesn't really matter of it exists, because it doesn't have any bearing on the case. I just think it's likely. I'm 99.9% sure that just about anyone would scream, if getting abducted. It's not a real stretch.

I've always heard it as well. A shrieking of sorts, "oh my God". I wasn't expecting to hear anything. It's truly heartbreaking , all of it.
BG needs to be caught soon.
MOO

 

[ReadySet]

People Magazine Investigates is airing its program about the girls' murders again on the ID channel. It's on air in my area right now, 9pm MDT.

I'm glad to see it showing again.

 

[Yemelyan]

While all that is true, I was not listening to hear anything else. It actually startled me and I thought I had a crossed recording. It is very possibly not there, but if you listen with headphones, you just might hear it. Keep in mind, they released the word "guys" much later. That, again, makes me think they didn't release that first because there was something in between that they didn't want us to hear. It doesn't really matter of it exists, because it doesn't have any bearing on the case. I just think it's likely. I'm 99.9% sure that just about anyone would scream, if getting abducted. It's not a real stretch.

All well and good, but why would her mom lie about it? If she truly was allowed to listen to that portion of the audio, why would she say she heard them say "huh? What?" in the few seconds between "guys" and "down the hill" if what really occurred were screams?

For what you think you heard to be true, she would either have to lie about what she heard (making up something when she easily could have said "no comment") or lie about being allowed to listen to that portion in the first place.

 

[mpnola]

All well and good, but why would her mom lie about it? If she truly was allowed to listen to that portion of the audio, why would she say she heard them say "huh? What?" in the few seconds between "guys" and "down the hill" if what really occurred were screams?

For what you think you heard to be true, she would either have to lie about what she heard (making up something when she easily could have said "no comment") or lie about being allowed to listen to that portion in the first place.

Because 1. I think the police would have told her why they were blocking out the sounds for the public. And 2. Would you want to say I heard my child screaming her last sounds? Maybe they blocked it for her or maybe she didn't want to talk about it. Or maybe the police asked her not to discuss it.. Or maybe it didn't happen! But your reasons hold no more weight than any theory.

I have a question for you now.... if all that was said was "huh? What?" By Abby or libby, as you claim, why wouldn't the police have left that in? What would be the need to cut that out.

I'm not trying to convince you. Germany asked a question and I answered her, in my opinion. That's it. To each, their own.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

Theorizing based on some known fact sourced from MSM or LE is fine, but there is no known fact to substantiate speculation about catfishing. Please move on from that discussion.

 

[Charlot123]

Abigail Joyce “Abby” Williams (2003-2017) - Find...

Ok. I went and had a look at that find a grave and the write up is inaccurate! "Abby took a picture and recorded the voice of the suspect. She is considered a hero."

This might pertain to both of the girls. I paid attention to what is directly said in “gravesite details”.

(RIP).