Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #138

[paraphrase]

I just can't fathom the thought of a killer grabbing two victims, marching them to a kill site and them getting away as fast as he could. Why not just kill them on the bridge and be done with it? Or kill one and take the other one?

I do think he was trying to corral them to his vehicle where he could carry them away but he lost control when the girls made a break for it and had to change his plans.

Or, he (they) knew the girls would be there, planned to march them to a kill site where they wouldn't be found immediately, and got away as fast as he (they) could possibly return under the guise of a searcher(s).

And if the new (old) sketch is indeed him, what would the motive be for this young person to kill them?
Was anyone aware of any classmates, teammates, church friends, etc. with the following signs?

Violent Behavior in Children and Teens | Michigan Medicine

moo

 

[minazoe]

This is a sexually motivated crime and the perpetrator is an adult male with sadistic tendencies. mOO

 

[Spartygirl]

Why hasn’t LE divulged what FSG’s name is? Does he even exist? Why are there so many unknown, unnamed people surrounding this case?
Moo-ing here, I find it very bizarre that there is so much unknown about Abby & Libby’s case. Through my eyes and POV it seems like they have little interest in solving this case, and/or the person(s) responsible are of some importance/pedigree (for lack of a better term), and are somehow, in some way, shape, form or fashion invincible to the law. Maybe because they are the law???!? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
MOO, moo, cow.

I think, IMO that FSG name not being in news is because he is a key witness who was there that day.

We know DG spoke to FSG and if you dig around, you will find out who FSG is, IMO

 

[Spartygirl]

It’s been super confusing and I think someone’s tried to keep it confusing. JMO

I agree !!!!!

 

[Spartygirl]

ISP Superintendent Carter at the 22 April 2019 PC: "During the course of this investigation we have concluded the first sketch released will become secondary, as of today. The result of the new information and intelligence over time leads us to believe the sketch, which you will see shortly, IS the person responsible for the murders of these two little girls. We also believe this person is from Delphi- currently, or has previously lived here, visits Delphi on a regular basis, or works here. We believe this person is currently between the age range of 18 and 40, but might appear younger than his true age."

From the 24 April 2019 press release (signed out by ISP Sgt Kim Riley, not ISP Super. Carter) clarifying the new sketch:
Multi-Agency Taskforce Clarifies Points about the Delphi Murder Suspect Sketches
"In the early days and months of the Delphi Murder investigation information was developed about suspect descriptions. It was initially believed the sketch that has been in public view over the last two years of a person in the age range of his 40’s to 50’s was a person of interest in this murder investigation. Now, as the investigation has matured and past information has been reassessed, it is the belief of investigators with the Multi-Agency Task Force that the person depicted in the sketch released on April 22nd more accurately represents the person wanted for the murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German.

It is important to distinguish these points about the two sketches:

- They are not the same person.

- The person depicted in the originally released sketch is not presently a person of interest in this investigation.

- The sketch released on April 22nd is representative of the face of the person captured in the video on Liberty German’s cell phone as he was walking on the high bridge.

-The person in the sketch released April 22nd is described as having a youthful appearance, but could fall in the age range from his 20’s to late 30’s."

"....new information and intelligence"? No explanation as to what that is. A new tip? LE revisited the tips and the related interviews and discovered something they missed the first time through?

(Of course, 2-3 weeks later, ISP Superintendent Carter would walk back the bolded 2 points in the press release above by saying "a sketch is not a photograph" and the killer could be "a combination of the two".)

As you point out that first released sketch takes 6 months. A sketch by committee? Compromises on the part of each of the witnesses? Different sketch artists along the way? And why was the first drawn sketch by ISP Master Trooper Taylor Bryant discounted early on? And Bryant did not take part in the first released sketch: Delphi murders update 2019: New suspect sketch, video released

Did the witness who described the person to MT Bryant take part in the first released sketch? 3 or 4 witnesses remembering different details led to the 6 month delay? I tend to believe that might be it. But your theory that someone lied is not one I can ignore.

The lack of answers leads to confusion.

BBM
Not to discredit Mr Bryant, but if you search back, you can see he does some sketches that look very similar to each other.
JMO
(Edited my me-- article now behind paywall so can't post photo without backup) **

 

[Spartygirl]

I've missed a lot of threads on this case but has anyone heard what time Abby took the video of BG? If not, why are they keeping it a secret, it would narrow down the time considerably I would think.

Around 2:30 it was posted, I believe on SC, but photo time taken, IIRC is 2:05
Also--it was LIBBY, not Abby that took video of BG.

Just trying to keep facts straight

 

[Spartygirl]

Geez, that seems so quick. I’m no murderer but I’d think he would want to revel in his capture, torture and ultimate murder of his two victims. Ten to twenty minutes seems so rushed through for someone who seemed to have prepared for this opportunity. IMO

He was on a mission, IMO

 

[Charlot123]

My first reaction is "no, would have been digital if at all." Because it's very likely that if BG did have exposed film, he would NOT want the clerk at the photo desk looking at the photos. So if he did shoot real film, it is pretty likely he would have had to develop it himself.

Doing it himself would almost certainly be black-and-white photos, then. There are a lot of us eccentric hobby photographers still shooting film, but developing color film is much more complicated and delicate than B&W film.

So I'd say a film camera is a good thought but very unlikely. It DOES fit perfectly with the thought that BG didn't bring a cellphone--so it couldn't be traced. But by 2017, there had been good point-and-shoot digital cameras for a dozen years. I'm guessing it's much more likely he would have used a P&S if he wanted photos. (signed) --The Hasselblad Kid

OK, in 2009 I bought this camera that was good for my purpose. It is digital and has a battery and a flash drive. Is it GPS - enabled? Not sure, in 2009 it was inexpensive. It still works.

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W290 ~ 12.1MP 5x Zoom ~ Digital Camera ~ Blue ~ 27242749122 | eBay

The killer could be using something of similar quality. I don’t think it is traceable because in 2000es, not every soap dish was GPS-enabled.

 

[Awsi Dooger]

OK, in 2009 I bought this camera that was good for my purpose. It is digital and has a battery and a flash drive. Is it GPS - enabled? Not sure, in 2009 it was inexpensive. It still works.

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W290 ~ 12.1MP 5x Zoom ~ Digital Camera ~ Blue ~ 27242749122 | eBay

The killer could be using something of similar quality. I don’t think it is traceable because in 2000es, not every soap dish was GPS-enabled.

That is very similar to the camera I used when visiting the bridge. BTW, that was 2 years ago today. Difficult to believe. Mine was a Canon from 2008. I much prefer it above a cameraphone because it has an adjustable dial. Very easy for me to quickly assess the situation and pick the proper setting. So much better than automatic.

Unfortunately I screwed up at Delphi and didn't clear the photos and videos from the Purdue game a day earlier. My storage card was almost full. Consequently I had to switch to the cameraphone at the end of the bridge, just before going down to the gravel access road. I thought I filmed three great videos that would be the highlight of the visit. I traipsed to my car thinking several times that the photos are good but the three videos blow them away. One was theater ramp walking down to gravel access road. One was skidding down the second stage to lower level. The third was a very long comprehensive video while walking in the center of the creek bed, panning to both sides along with up at the home above the ridge and also across the bridge itself. Lots of spontaneous commentary on all three. As you can tell I'm still sick I lost those videos. I had no idea until reaching Speedway. It was my own fault for never experimenting with the cameraphone until I knew how to competently operate it. Now I know how to operate it but can't stand it. I bought a newer Canon with a large video card.

Anyway, regarding a recent topic of Bridge Guy, there's no reason to believe he was seen on departure. The so-called timelines mean nothing. It's a 240 foot walk from the drop off point until you turn left toward the bridge on 501. Very, very few people walk toward the bridge. That path itself takes 5-6 minutes average, with some turns. If there were a group field trip everyone would instantly grasp that the notion of a park is not accurate at all. These are seldom used trails. Robert Ives in one of the podcast series said that they don't have a conclusive sighting of the departure. He didn't say it that definitively but the theme was the same. IMO, Bridge Guy may have been captured on camera from distance on one of the Mears buildings while crossing the drop off point headed back toward Hoosier Heartland Highway. That would explain how they know he was there 15-20 minutes after Derrick arrived, and also why they think he may have parked near the abandoned building.

BTW, last February I asked a few questions to Leazenby in the Q&A in the Comet. They were printed. A couple of them were whether Bridge Guy was caught on camera anywhere other than Libby's phone, and if there were other pictures/videos on Libby's phone that had not been released. The following week I was watching a Gray Hughes video and he was going over the Q&A. When he got to my questions he got all indignant and said it's obvious this person has been stealing my ideas.

I howled. Yeah, that's been my primary difficulty all my life. Idea void. I can't think of anything to say or write.

 

[BNA]

I just can't fathom the thought of a killer grabbing two victims, marching them to a kill site and them getting away as fast as he could. Why not just kill them on the bridge and be done with it? Or kill one and take the other one?

I do think he was trying to corral them to his vehicle where he could carry them away but he lost control when the girls made a break for it and had to change his plans.

Possibly. Depending on where a vehicle was parked making or breaking that theory for me.

Whatever the case, he would have had to be very fit.

 

[Jealoushe]

I just can't fathom the thought of a killer grabbing two victims, marching them to a kill site and them getting away as fast as he could. Why not just kill them on the bridge and be done with it? Or kill one and take the other one?

I do think he was trying to corral them to his vehicle where he could carry them away but he lost control when the girls made a break for it and had to change his plans.

I was listening to the True Crime daily podcast and they were saying it was clear the killer had planned this ahead and was prepared and had potentially already had the location picked and ready and set up.

He wouldn't have killed them on the bridge because the bridge was sketchy at best, not easy to even walk across.

 

[minazoe]

I think you can accomplish quite a lot with a couple of zip ties and a gun...fit , not fit..we just don't know what went down..but..my candidate turned his Facebook
to private only the very next day so we cant really see if he had facial contusions, scratches, bruises, gouges etc..I wonder how the police get access to that? would they need a court order to force Meta/Facebook to release the contents..or did they already automatically have that from his current conviction?

any camera could be used..and even film. mOO

 

[minazoe]

I was listening to the True Crime daily podcast and they were saying it was clear the killer had planned this ahead and was prepared and had potentially already had the location picked and ready and set up.

He wouldn't have killed them on the bridge because the bridge was sketchy at best, not easy to even walk across.

my my, said the spider to the fly..

 

[Charlot123]

That is very similar to the camera I used when visiting the bridge. BTW, that was 2 years ago today. Difficult to believe. Mine was a Canon from 2008. I much prefer it above a cameraphone because it has an adjustable dial. Very easy for me to quickly assess the situation and pick the proper setting. So much better than automatic.

Unfortunately I screwed up at Delphi and didn't clear the photos and videos from the Purdue game a day earlier. My storage card was almost full. Consequently I had to switch to the cameraphone at the end of the bridge, just before going down to the gravel access road. I thought I filmed three great videos that would be the highlight of the visit. I traipsed to my car thinking several times that the photos are good but the three videos blow them away. One was theater ramp walking down to gravel access road. One was skidding down the second stage to lower level. The third was a very long comprehensive video while walking in the center of the creek bed, panning to both sides along with up at the home above the ridge and also across the bridge itself. Lots of spontaneous commentary on all three. As you can tell I'm still sick I lost those videos. I had no idea until reaching Speedway. It was my own fault for never experimenting with the cameraphone until I knew how to competently operate it. Now I know how to operate it but can't stand it. I bought a newer Canon with a large video card.

Anyway, regarding a recent topic of Bridge Guy, there's no reason to believe he was seen on departure. The so-called timelines mean nothing. It's a 240 foot walk from the drop off point until you turn left toward the bridge on 501. Very, very few people walk toward the bridge. That path itself takes 5-6 minutes average, with some turns. If there were a group field trip everyone would instantly grasp that the notion of a park is not accurate at all. These are seldom used trails. Robert Ives in one of the podcast series said that they don't have a conclusive sighting of the departure. He didn't say it that definitively but the theme was the same. IMO, Bridge Guy may have been captured on camera from distance on one of the Mears buildings while crossing the drop off point headed back toward Hoosier Heartland Highway. That would explain how they know he was there 15-20 minutes after Derrick arrived, and also why they think he may have parked near the abandoned building.

BTW, last February I asked a few questions to Leazenby in the Q&A in the Comet. They were printed. A couple of them were whether Bridge Guy was caught on camera anywhere other than Libby's phone, and if there were other pictures/videos on Libby's phone that had not been released. The following week I was watching a Gray Hughes video and he was going over the Q&A. When he got to my questions he got all indignant and said it's obvious this person has been stealing my ideas.

I howled. Yeah, that's been my primary difficulty all my life. Idea void. I can't think of anything to say or write.

About these cameras from 2008-2009. Not only are they cheap and good, they are unbelievably sturdy. A woman I know accidentally tossed hers in a washer (forgot to check pockets). After a “normal” cycle, and when dried, it still worked. I remembered it today thinking that if (if!) the BG, indeed, crossed the creek, and got all wet, a camera like this could still be usable. Not sure about the flash drive, though.

 

[FromGermany1]

I was listening to the True Crime daily podcast and they were saying it was clear the killer had planned this ahead and was prepared and had potentially already had the location picked and ready and set up.

He wouldn't have killed them on the bridge because the bridge was sketchy at best, not easy to even walk across.

When I first heard of the girls, I thought, the killer had them pushed off the bridge. I was surprised, that it didn't happen. Too fast for the satisfaction of a real thrill-kill or too dangerous for himself to fall with one of them?

 

[FromGermany1]

He was on a mission, IMO

Question remains: "work" (for $$$) or "pleasure"??

 

[FromGermany1]

BBM
Not to discredit Mr Bryant, but if you search back, you can see he does some sketches that look very similar to each other.
JMO
(Edited my me-- article now behind paywall so can't post photo without backup) **

Even Parabon pictures often are not special enough also, IMO. For a while, I saw several pics (for diff. crimes), which showed a much too similar mouth area always.

 

[Ekliptika]

If a pedestrian was seen after the crime with a duffle bag, it makes sense to have been BG. BUT: nobody saw a man carrying a duffle bag before the crime. That's strange. IF it was BG on the road side: did he prepare the crime scene with his filled bag in advance?? Are there witnesses, who saw him (a man with a bag) on Friday/Saturday/Sunday?

Maybe a witness that saw something they felt needed to be reported?

 

[TedMac]

When I first heard of the girls, I thought, the killer had them pushed off the bridge. I was surprised, that it didn't happen. Too fast for the satisfaction of a real thrill-kill or too dangerous for himself to fall with one of them?

There are a few reasons that I can think of for not pushing them off the bridge. (1) When he caught up to them at the end of the bridge, he was in plain view of not only the entire bridge, but also in view of anyone who happened to be below the bridge. Evidently, there was no witnesses to what transpired that doesn't mean he was aware of that fact. (2) He may have simply wanted to torture or scare them before killing them and he would have needed time to do so before doing whatever he had in mind. If that was his plan, he would have wanted to do that in a secluded place, where he wouldn't be seen or their screams heard. (3) There is a verified retired police investigator on Websleuths who has investigated several of these types of crimes and he stated that in almost all cases that involved a child abductions and/or murders where the victims are unknown to the abductor/killer that the motive is almost always sexual in nature. I have always believed the killer or perhaps killers were unknown to Abby & Libby. I think he (or they) was taking them to secluded spot where he could be alone with them. The girls either started running and/or fighting with him and they were killed in the struggle. While Abby was small in statue, Libby while only 14 weighed approximately 200 lbs. and could probably have put up a good fight. I have always thought rape or rape & murder was the motive. We don't know if either one or both were sexually assaulted or not. But, even if a sexual assault did not occur, that does not mean rape wasn't his intention. FWIW, I think he went there that day looking for a victim and when Abby & Libby came along, he tried to abduct them both, but found out he couldn't handle them both. Again, MOO.

 

[AC4RD]

.. ..my candidate turned his Facebookto private only the very next day so we cant really see if he had facial contusions, scratches, bruises, gouges etc..I wonder how the police get access to that? ... any camera could be used..and even film. mOO

Minazoe, there's another excellent question for my list of questions! I never thought of it before--did police request ALL photos taken by ANYBODY who was at the park on 2/13? There could be something important in the background of somebody's family snapshots.

BTW, "me too" on the inexpensive digital point-and-shoots. When I traveled for work, by air, I'd bring a little Nikon P&S in my carryon. DSLR rig is better but too much to carry for casual snaps, and like Awsi's comment above, the P&S cameras allowed much better control. Today's smartphone cameras are pretty darned good, though that wasn't the case back then. And as Charlot said, they're tough--and cheap enough, bought used from Adorama or B&H Photo, not to worry about if you break or lose it.

Thanks again for another excellent question to ponder!