Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #104

[nearsouth]

Good point.

I have **advertiser censored* theory - someone is providing an alibi not really to protect the killer himself but to protect several people's interests in inheritable land/assets. This cronyism behavior is super common in rural America. Some of it doesn't make sense. Someone on another public forum suggested something like this a long time ago when everyone was convinced it was an older man who was the main suspect.

I have a lot of thoughts on this case but all I will say is, be patient. & The local LE needs to put their efforts into listening to the local "grapevine." Small towns are full of gossip always. There might not be justice like we want it all the time but some people never change.

This is an interesting angle. There was chatter about a barn also early on, but could have just been rumor I suppose.

 

[SeattleStew]

I don't recall them directly saying they had tied that vehicle to the suspect in the PC. Is this new info?

That's what I was trying to figure out, too. Someone upstream said they think the reporter made an assumption. Curious, though. IMO

 

[Boxer]

This is an interesting angle. There was chatter about a barn also early on, but could have just been rumor I suppose.

The Mears Barn was searched, is that what you were thinking of?

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I want it to be related to a specific person/vehicle/etc., but I really think it’s a desperate attempt to restart some movement in this case. I wish I could share the optimism some people feel, but I think LE is back at zero and reading from a profiler’s playbook. I sincerely hope I am wrong.

I remember LE saying at the last press conference that they had a witness and that certainly stoked my excitement that day. Also the statement about the car and the new sketch had me sure that the case would be solved very very soon.
Then we find out the new sketch was made four days after the murders and my hopes were deflated a bit. Now a month later we are back to the same old stuff. LE makes the same comments they’ve been making all along. Absolutely nothing happening here. They keep saying “I wish I could tell you why we released no info, why we said this or that, why we did this or that...and we will explain it all after we arrest the killer”. I am feeling like we will never be able to hear those explanations.

 

[MistyWaters]

"Desperate" was my initial reaction to the PC. I think they worried that the case was going cold, so they took a second look at everything (with or without the help of an outside agency). For whatever reason, they ruled the man in the first sketch out. Now what? Well, they did have another sketch, though for 2+ years they didn't give it much credibility. They also may have had a vague report of a vehicle parked near the abandoned building. So, with the case growing colder by the day, they decided to shift strategies. Show the new sketch. Hope that after 2+ years someone could remember seeing the vehicle. Take an aggressive tone toward the killer, hoping to stir him up enough that someone would notice a change in his behavior. In other words, they're getting nowhere. They're desperate for a lead.

I’d like to hope this is just a bump sideways in the investigation. But looking back for what it’s worth, considering there was no actual eye witness to the murders LE would’ve probably been further ahead had they released both sketches, seeking to speak with the unidentified people who sighted wherever they were sighted at.

Instead to attempt to use a sketch to put “a face” on the photo of the murderer clearly leads people to believe LE knows who they’re looking for. As we’ve learned from the first go-around, that’s not always true.

Although the new image is now over two years old, accuracy unknown, once again the sketch is being represented to replicate “the face” of the murderer, aside from LE adding the person may look entirely different today.

It’s like déjà vu as Carter blips from one media program to the next. I wonder why he’s the only one making media appearances, excited about this “new direction”?

 

[nearsouth]

The Mears Barn was searched, is that what you were thinking of?

Yep, just couldn't remember. It's hard to go back and look through details when cases drag out.

 

[Andreee]

I remember LE saying at the last press conference that they had a witness and that certainly stoked my excitement that day. Also the statement about the car and the new sketch had me sure that the case would be solved very very soon.
Then we find out the new sketch was made four days after the murders and my hopes were deflated a bit. Now a month later we are back to the same old stuff. LE makes the same comments they’ve been making all along. Absolutely nothing happening here. They keep saying “I wish I could tell you why we released no info, why we said this or that, why we did this or that...and we will explain it all after we arrest the killer”. I am feeling like we will never be able to hear those explanations.

Agreed. The whole sketch thing just confused people and the amount of secrecy about the case has been non productive IMO. I think this case is at a standstill IMO. If they have a suspect, great, but we can only speculate at this point.

 

[watcher9]

I think there’s too many variables to draw any conclusions because by the time BP repeated her son’s condensed version of events, the murders were known. For her not to later connect that the sighting of the couple was significant would be really bizarre.

From GH interview, post #211
“He was just about to where it forks and he ran into an older guy, a gentleman that was coming from the High Bridge, and he asked him, “Did you see a couple of girls there?” and he said, “No, but there’s a couple down underneath”. So Derrick, instead of going to the High Bridge, took the trail that went down to the creek to where he said that the couple was there. I don’t even remember if he said he saw them or what but he came walking back up and he called me. That was when he called me – it was about 3:30 – and said, “Libby’s not answering her phone and I don’t see her”.

Just reading this again slowly and took another look. Derrick says did you see a couple of girls there? and the man says no but there's a couple down underneath. Did the "no" mean to say there no girls were on the bridge but a couple (of them) were underneath. In other words, did he mean "a couple" as a man and woman, two men, two women or the two girls? Was the "couple" ever verified?

 

[sumzero]

From April 22, 2019

Police release new sketch, video of suspect in Delphi murders

Snipped for focus:

"Carter also said police believe they know where the killer parked his car on the day of the murders. It was near a building that once housed child welfare offices.

"We have a witness. You made mistakes. We are coming for you, and there's no place for a heartless coward like you to hide that gets his thrill from killing little girls," Carter said"

BBM. I was looking back at MSM and found this. I can't say that I ever realized that they had connected the car at CFS to the killer directly. Also, "we have a witness" seems new to me as well.

Any thoughts, Sleuthers?

The "we have a witness, etc." quote did not come from the PC. It came from a statement released after the PC by the ISP Chief Public Information Officer. The statement claims to be quoting Doug Carter during the PC, but it's not accurate. Weird.

New 'Face' of the Delphi Murder Suspect

 

[sumzero]

Just reading this again slowly and took another look. Derrick says did you see a couple of girls there? and the man says no but there's a couple down underneath. Did the "no" mean to say there no girls were on the bridge but a couple (of them) were underneath. In other words, did he mean "a couple" as a man and woman, two men, two women or the two girls? Was the "couple" ever verified?

Well, it wouldn't make sense if the answer to the question, "Did you see a couple of girls?" was "No, but I saw a couple of girls." It also wouldn't make sense if the man said he did not see a couple of girls "there" but he did see a couple of girls "down underneath" -- and then Derrick had no interest in finding out if the girls "down underneath" were the girls he was looking for. Without knowing verbatim what the man said, there's no way to know what Derrick left out in the retelling. In the two years since then, has Derrick ever indicated he was confused about what the man was telling him?

 

[sumzero]

I’d like to hope this is just a bump sideways in the investigation. But looking back for what it’s worth, considering there was no actual eye witness to the murders LE would’ve probably been further ahead had they released both sketches, seeking to speak with the unidentified people who sighted wherever they were sighted at.

Instead to attempt to use a sketch to put “a face” on the photo of the murderer clearly leads people to believe LE knows who they’re looking for. As we’ve learned from the first go-around, that’s not always true.

Although the new image is now over two years old, accuracy unknown, once again the sketch is being represented to replicate “the face” of the murderer, aside from LE adding the person may look entirely different today.

It’s like déjà vu as Carter blips from one media program to the next. I wonder why he’s the only one making media appearances, excited about this “new direction”?

When Carter speaks, he never expresses a lack of confidence and conviction. He is forceful and determined. LE needs that "one tip" to solve this case. Really, he's very convincing. Problem is: so many cold cases need just "one tip" to be solved. So, after 2+ years, is he giving the GP and -- more importantly -- the families false hope? I really don't know.

 

[JenniD]

Just reading this again slowly and took another look. Derrick says did you see a couple of girls there? and the man says no but there's a couple down underneath. Did the "no" mean to say there no girls were on the bridge but a couple (of them) were underneath. In other words, did he mean "a couple" as a man and woman, two men, two women or the two girls? Was the "couple" ever verified?

I think it’s very possible OG May have been responding to if girls were seen on bridge-and responded no but a couple underneath meaning 2 girls. I am sure LE has clarified his response. Or it could be that he saw one male and 1 female under bridge. Could have been killer and one girl with the other being out of sight. I do think LE knows exactly what OG was saying
Moo

 

[Cutiekitty]

To add onto sumzero, where do you go exactly next? All the tips that came in even after the update yielded nothing so far...

2 plus years isn't exactly a lifetime but with all we have at our disposal, the guy still hasnt been caught. I think that's telling.

BBM - that we know of. LE hasn’t said anything and they aren’t going to give us the play by play on their investigation.

 

[Boxer]

Yep, just couldn't remember. It's hard to go back and look through details when cases drag out.

I agree, really difficult.

 

[Cutiekitty]

I believe DG wasn't right at the bridge when he first encountered the older gentleman. It was because of what he told him, that he hadn't seen the girls, just a couple, that DG at first went down a different path looking for the girls. IIRC

You are correct. When I initially posted I couldn’t remember exactly where he was.

 

[MizStery]

Just reading this again slowly and took another look. Derrick says did you see a couple of girls there? and the man says no but there's a couple down underneath. Did the "no" mean to say there no girls were on the bridge but a couple (of them) were underneath. In other words, did he mean "a couple" as a man and woman, two men, two women or the two girls? Was the "couple" ever verified?

Hi Watch9 and all,

I just double checked my notes. I am paraphrasing so please keep that in mind.

YouTube video of Grey Hughes using Skype to answer questions from a call in audience addressed to the Patty’s.

Did Derick know the couple under the bridge?
In the video this is a Skype question addressed to to BP:
At that time after the gentleman told him only a man and woman were under the bridge and no one else were there. Derrick decided to turn around and go the opposite way on the trail. LE were told about the couple BP does not know if the couple came forward.Derrick never saw the couple.

Again this is BP speaking,Derrick did walk down to the Freedom Bridge and walked back. He passed that older gentleman again and – so he went back to the car and he was, like I said, he was walking, and by this time it was about 4 o’clock.

This is BP speaking,I can say when I got there were a few kids that I knew that went to school with Libby and they were under bridge.
​

[/MEDIA]

​

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Well, it wouldn't make sense if the answer to the question, "Did you see a couple of girls?" was "No, but I saw a couple of girls." It also wouldn't make sense if the man said he did not see a couple of girls "there" but he did see a couple of girls "down underneath" -- and then Derrick had no interest in finding out if the girls "down underneath" were the girls he was looking for. Without knowing verbatim what the man said, there's no way to know what Derrick left out in the retelling. In the two years since then, has Derrick ever indicated he was confused about what the man was telling him?

Why at all asking for "a couple", if I meant 2 -two- identifiable girls, namely my daughter and her friend?

 

[MDATCA]

IMO he was long gone by the time DG and other family members started searching. The girls were on the bridge (about a third of the way across) at 2:07pm. It would seem that BG closed in on them as they got to the end of the bridge, which could have been as early as 2:15pm (it only takes 5-10 mintues to cross). LE has stated that they were killed within minutes of the recording. I'm guessing this crime was over by 2:30pm or 2:45pm at the latest, which means he had anywhere from 30-45 minutes to clean up and exit before DG even arrived at the trails.

The video of BG is at 230 according to the billboards. He was still there at 230 and was @70 feet from the girls. I can't remember which show I was watching where they said they encountered at 235.

 

[Cutiekitty]

Hi Watch9 and all,

I just double checked my notes. I am paraphrasing so please keep that in mind.

YouTube video of Grey Hughes using Skype to answer questions from a call in audience addressed to the Patty’s.

Did Derick know the couple under the bridge?
In the video this is a Skype question addressed to to BP:
At that time after the gentleman told him only a man and woman were under the bridge and no one else were there. Derrick decided to turn around and go the opposite way on the trail. LE were told about the couple BP does not know if the couple came forward.Derrick never saw the couple.

Again this is BP speaking,Derrick did walk down to the Freedom Bridge and walked back. He passed that older gentleman again and – so he went back to the car and he was, like I said, he was walking, and by this time it was about 4 o’clock.

This is BP speaking,I can say when I got there were a few kids that I knew that went to school with Libby and they were under bridge.
​

[/MEDIA]

​

Thank you!

 

[gonegonegoing]

Murders occur and two years later:

“We are just beginning. We are just now beginning...”

Oh, and that sketch we’ve been circulating all this time? Scratch that:

“For more than 2 years, you never thought we would shift gears to a different investigative strategy. But we have.”

Here’s another word, two steps, location of a potential vehicle of interest, and a sketch we had all along.

The kicker:

Oh, and he’s likely between 18-40 y/o...well, actually could be even older than 40 y/o but look younger.

He could either be a kid or a dude with a kid within that age range? Awesome.

Can see why people’s faith in this case getting solved is beginning to wain; the interest surrounding it, naturally, certainly is.