Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #108

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry to interrupt the recent topic. In all of the 100 plus threads has anyone suggested that the guy in the blue jacket that was photographed has nothing to do with the murders?

It's because LE has asserted he is the suspect wanted for the murders.

Here's a more recent official press release:

Multi-Agency Taskforce Clarifies Points about the Delphi Murder Suspect Sketches

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.

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


From the April 22nd press conference transcript (snipped by me):

We’re releasing additional portions of the audio recording from that day. Please keep in mind the person talking is one person and is the person on the bridge with the girls. This is NOT two different people speaking- please listen to it very, very carefully.

We are also releasing video recovered from Libby’s phone. This video has never before been previously released. The video shows the suspect walking on the bridge. When you see the video, watch the person’s mannerisms as they walk. Watch the mannerisms as he walks. Do you recognize the mannerisms as being someone that you might know? Remember, he is walking on the former railroad bridge. Because of the deteriorated condition of the bridge, the suspect is not walking naturally due to the spacing between the ties.

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.
 
Last edited:
Far too many people think that if LE have DNA that can positively identify someone, that alone will be enough to secure a conviction. That isn’t the case.

Whether your DNA found at the crime scene is enough evidence to convict you was the question in a recent Court of Appeals case. The defendant was convicted of burglarizing a Santa Ana nail salon based solely on DNA evidence. He appealed the judgment, claiming that there wasn’t enough evidence linking him to the crime scene to support his conviction.

Convicting a person on criminal charges requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did in fact commit the crime. DNA evidence found at the crime scene doesn’t necessarily implicate you without other corroborating evidence.

While DNA evidence may be considered the same as a fingerprint, and can link a suspect to a crime, a criminal conviction requires much more. The criminal justice system depends on irrefutable proof that the defendant was not only present when the crime was committed, but also that he or she in fact committed the crime.

The Court in this case was asked to weigh the question of whether DNA is such convincing evidence, that nothing else matters. The court said No.

https://www.southerncaliforniadefenseblog.com/2014/06/dna_evidence_left_at_the_crime.html

Obviously the bar will be significantly higher when the charge is murder. I believe this is the reason why LE keep saying they just need one more piece of the puzzle, and I'm praying that they get it.
This is what I believe also. An arrest can only come when they have enough evidence to convict. I think LE has a main suspect but not enough evidence to convict...yet.
 
I don't understand. Are you saying what Kelsi was referring to as lyrics from a song are not? That she was mistaken?

A post was made on FB by one of Libby's family members. It wasn't just a post, it was a convo between him and a friend. The content was...interesting. It started many rumors. BP, and now Kelsi, have stated that the post was just quoting a song. Nobody's been able to find such song.

ETA: I don't believe the post has any bearing on the case whatsoever. It did spawn rumors, however, and that's probably why Kelsi felt the need to reference it.
 
Assuming there is DNA, is it possible they built the sketch from the DNA? They took a lot of time to come out with that sketch and it isn’t easy. I’ve seen in on a few shows of real crime. Not many people can do it but the resemblance of the sketch matching the suspects is surreal. (I saw 2 or 3 cases but these people have done many more).
I apologize if this has been discussed already or if LE said how the sketch was obtained.
MOO
 
Sorry to interrupt the recent topic. In all of the 100 plus threads has anyone suggested that the guy in the blue jacket that was photographed has nothing to do with the murders?

It's not just a photo, but actually a video that also contains the man's voice ordering the girls to go down a hill. Since it was probably also timestamped around the time of the murders, then it's probably safe to presume that he probably wasn't just a passer by.
 
That "confirmation" was the quote "at every crime scene..." and it is hardly enough to conclude that they have DNA of an assailant.

When he says "at every crime scene, you're going to have DNA", he doesn't mean that every criminal is going to leave behind DNA.

When he says "we are still trying to identify all of the DNA we have..." he doesn't mean that this criminal left DNA we are working to identify.

A crime scene such as this one is going to be huge. They're going to keep every sock, can, empty bag of chips, or cigarette butt they find at that scene just in case its relative to the killer.

So, to clarify, we have no idea if Law Enforcement has DNA of the perpetrator(s) or even DNA they believe could be the perpetrator(s).

Finally, as you mentioned after, DNA works to place a person at a scene. It is evidence of presence, not crime. For example, if a woman is sexually assaulted, they'll have DNA from the assailant - it puts him with that woman. Other evidence, such as victim statements, defensive wounds, etc... along with the DNA, work to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual committed a criminal act.

Now, earlier, you used the word *irrefutably*, to describe the burden of proof in a criminal case. This is not accurate. Beyond a reasonable doubt is not beyond any doubt. Rather, doubt can be (and often is) present in any criminal conviction.

It really comes down to the jury and whether they collectively decide that doubt is reasonable. You'd actually be quite surprised how much doubt is necessary to be beyond reasonable.

Finally, and most importantly, if law enforcement has DNA of the assailant I think we can safely count on a conviction at some point. DNA is excellent evidence to present to a jury - not of a crime, but of a person's presence. Once law enforcement has zeroed in on an individual with DNA, building a circumstantial case is remarkably easy. For example, they could present witnesses to say he frequented the trail, witnesses to attest to his propensity for violence, evidence supporting his behavior after the crime, evidence showing that he wasn't at work that day, a friend remembering he had a 9 mil that they'd shot together on multiple occasions but he denies having now or ever owning, or testimonial evidence from his spouse/friend/roomate that he we threw away knives and bought new ones around the time of the murder.

DNA and circumstantial evidence is more than enough to convict. Rather, circumstantial evidence alone is often all you've got and is often enough to bring a conviction.

Believe it or not, a jury is quicker to convict on a murder than they are on a shoplifting case.


Here is what I think(my opinion): A jury trial is based on the opinions of a group of individuals who are tasked with interpreting the law to the best of their ability. They are tasked with trying to be as objective as they possibly can to do their job. And sometimes they get it wrong. But most of the time they get it right.

I personally do not think any jury member wants there to be even reasonable doubt if they are convicting someone who could possibly get the death penalty or spend the rest of their life in prison or even part of their life. I do not agree with your interpretation of reasonable doubt because we have different interpretations of what defines reasonable. In my opinion, that is the whole point. In my opinion there is no factual objective definition. The definition is all based on each individual's opinion.

You may have an opinion based on the evidence and I may have an opinion totally different from yours based on the same evidence. Some people may agree with you. Other people may agree with me.

In my opinion I think the case of Abigail Williams and Liberty German will be solved because a detective follows up on a tip that the detective thinks in their opinion is worth checking out.
 
A post was made on FB by one of Libby's family members. It wasn't just a post, it was a convo between him and a friend. The content was...interesting. It started many rumors. BP, and now Kelsi, have stated that the post was just quoting a song. Nobody's been able to find such song.

ETA: I don't believe the post has any bearing on the case whatsoever. It did spawn rumors, however, and that's probably why Kelsi felt the need to reference it.
Yes i saw it but Kelsi said they were lyrics. I guess they can't be found though?
 
LE said he does though...

I have not followed this case closely and am really new to all of this and started reading the posts about two months ago. I am an older person but once had girls that age and feel so bad for the families involved. When I first read over case info and watched the video I felt the bridge man could have been trying to keep the girls from danger and hurry them away but instead unknowingly lead them to danger or if bridge person is the evil one he might have had a person or people waiting to help him. I don’t really know who was scheduled to pick the girls up but it seemed the girls weren’t at the park long enough to really hike and hang out and I wondered if the person picking them up got a bad feeling, maybe saw the pic of the girl on the bridge and felt that wasn’t a good place for them to be or just protective instinct. I also felt like someone set them up - maybe someone they thought was a friend? I am an outsider looking in and those are the things that stood out to me. It’s hard to imagine that those two very smart girls didn’t try to run away if they sensed danger and perhaps that’s why they were found I think 1/2 mile away? And scream - girls always scream if they can.
 
Assuming there is DNA, is it possible they built the sketch from the DNA? They took a lot of time to come out with that sketch and it isn’t easy. I’ve seen in on a few shows of real crime. Not many people can do it but the resemblance of the sketch matching the suspects is surreal. (I saw 2 or 3 cases but these people have done many more).
I apologize if this has been discussed already or if LE said how the sketch was obtained.
MOO

It’s possible, but from the media links available here, the first sketch was a composite sketch from at least one witness and combined with the image from the video of BG Libby took.

The second image from a witness (which actually was sketched soon after the crime) was not shared publicly for about two years.

So there were two witnesses, not sure if they were looking at the same person, but they came away with two different looking people. Maybe that’s why Carter said the actual BG may look somewhere in between.

Others that have been following for a while chime in with the links or if I misunderstood.
 
As I said earlier. I'm in London, UK. Everyone I mention this case to, unless they've seen it mentioned on a forum or here or Reddit, has never heard of it. It was mentioned in a thread on a big forum, Digital Spy, recently, about unsolved crimes. When I tell them that they have a pic taken by one girl of a man on the bridge and audio too, they just can't believe he hasn't been caught. I explain that it's not a clear pic and they've only released 3 words. Wonder if this would have been solved if it had been in a smaller country like here in the UK, with the pic and audio. Not criticising the US investigators at all.

As a man myself, and I don't mean to praise the evil killer in any way, but I think he was very brave to take on TWO girls. People I mention the case to say the same. Why not let them go and wait for just one as one's much easier to overpower? What if one had been selfish and left her friend and got away and could identify him? He must have been armed with a gun or knife to feel that confident. Doubt I'd take on two teenage girls as these weren't little helpless kids, but teens who surely will fight back, but then am not a monster or a rapist or killer. Anything could have gone wrong from his point of view. In fact it did as she got audio and a pic of whom we assume is the killer.

We lost our 22 year-old daughter, only child, last year to SADS, sudden adult death, so we know what those poor parents will be going through. Imagine living in a small town too where you could pass the killer any time and not know it. Think I'd go mad.

Thank you for your post. Very sorry for the loss of your only child. Can't even find the words to express what I feel.

I always read that in UK, "they have cameras on every corner". Is it true? Do you think the case could have been solved even in a large country like the US, if there were the pics, and the audio, and cameras on both sides of the Monon Bridge?

It is an important issue. Some people here believe we need more cameras, but others feel it is invasion into their privacy. Hence my question.
 
Hi. Dropped by today to check out the theories about Abby & Libby. Haven't been here since the disappearance of Hillary Sharma in the CVNP.
The murder s of Abby & Libby have been bothering me since they happened. You all raise some interesting points. One thing I haven't seen mentioned in the thread was when LE released the longer audio. At first, they released just the words "down the hill", but then month s later they released "guys, down the hill." They held that back for some reason. My amateur guess is that "guys" is an affectation of speech that they thought might sound familiar to someone.
Also, LE has not said that the girls were sexually assaulted, and if I remember correctly from this thread, they were murdered within minutes of when the video was taken. That suggests no sexual assault, unless it was post mortem.
 
If BG was alone in committing this crime, my guess is that he grabbed one of the girls and threatened the other... eg, “if you scream or run, I will kill your friend.”

His voice makes me think that he’s 30+ and either has kids or has worked with kids. The “guys” is something I say frequently to my kids & their friends. And his tone is authoritative & calm... like this is not the first time he has given kids instructions.

The talk about them calling him a “creepy man” also makes me think 30+ and I wonder if he exposed himself to them or just said something creepy.
 
I did not use the word "irrefutable". That was a quote from the article. "Our criminal justice system depends on irrefutable proof that the defendant was not only present when the crime was committed, but also that he or she is, in fact committed the crime".



No, I wouldn't be surprised at all. That's quite an assumption on your part as you know nothing of my background.

Neither do I need to have circumstantial evidence explained. I followed the entire Henri van Breda case on WS where he was found guilty of murdering both his parents and brother and was guilty of the attempted murder of his sister. This trial lasted 66 days. DNA evidence alone took one week, but he was found guilty on circumstantial evidence alone.


I think reasonable doubt means different things to different people. Reasonable doubt is a loose term because it cannot be defined. It is left up to you the individual to define for yourself. And don't we all reason differently? The law is meant to try to be as objective as possible, but it is still interpreted by human beings. And human beings make mistakes.

Different people, different juries, different opinions all trying to come to the same conclusion is sometimes a very difficult task. Opinions change with time, the evidence presented, how it is presented, and who it is presented to.
 
Sorry to interrupt the recent topic. In all of the 100 plus threads has anyone suggested that the guy in the blue jacket that was photographed has nothing to do with the murders?

I am guessing and this is just my opinion, but since they have video and audio from Liberty German's phone, they probably determined the individual in the blue jacket to be the suspect based on the distance from where she videotaped him to when this person started speaking to the girls. And based on that rough guestimate of how fast a person can walk across an old wooden bridge to when their voice first appeared on Liberty German's recording they are able to guess that he was involved or was very close by to the girls and the person in the blue jacket.

This is all my opinion.
 
The reference is to a FB post. The post did not state that they were referencing song lyrics-it looked like an ordinary posting. However, when people started questioning it with suspicion, BP stated that it wasn't a post, that he was just quoting song lyrics. The post wouldn't be allowed here, but it's a slippery slope since Kelsi referenced it in the video the other day.
Can we ask what was the overall message of the post?
 
Can we ask what was the overall message of the post?

It was a combination of the post and another person doing the commenting and it referenced an underage girl. Normally this would be off topic, but since Kelsi addressed it in her video, I'm not sure where it stands TOS wise. Kelsi has stated that it's a song lyric, but no title has been provided and searches have not yielded a result. It's possible that the post and comment paraphrased a song instead of quoting one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
196
Guests online
1,907
Total visitors
2,103

Forum statistics

Threads
589,955
Messages
17,928,285
Members
228,017
Latest member
SashaRhea82
Back
Top