Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #110

Status
Not open for further replies.
I C/P this from a @Jax49 Post in thread 108. (We went thru all this two threads ago.)

In this interview Indiana State Police Superintendent Carter clears up his opinion on the two sketches. About the 4:10 mark, he talks about when the perp is caught, he will be somewhere between the two sketches.

Somewhere between the two sketches:

So, a guy in disguise & w/ disguise removed?

Or, two perps?

Or, parabon-aged to different possible ages?

Or ... (other ideas how this could be?)
 
Somewhere between the two sketches:

So, a guy in disguise & w/ disguise removed?

Or, two perps?

Or, parabon-aged to different possible ages?

Or ... (other ideas how this could be?)
It’s been stated that the two sketches are two different people, but first sketch is no longer a person of interest and now second sketch is BG, the killer. I would think they identified person who was original sketch and ruled him out.

This is how second sketch came about:

“The sketch artist with ISP who drew the face, Master Trooper Taylor Bryant, told the Indianapolis Star the picture presented as being new Monday had in fact been drawn Feb. 17, 2017, three days after the bodies of the two girls were discovered.

In vague terms, Bryant told the Star the imagewas based on the description of a man by a witness who reported seeing something they felt needed to be reported. The sketch is a "ballpark estimation of what the person looks like."

Bryant, who did not draw an earlier, widely-disseminated sketch released by police that showed a much-older looking person of interest, told the Star he creates his drawings based off how a witness describes a suspect using a "facial identification reference sheet," which allows people to describe a suspect based on various categories such as a person's head shape, style of eyebrows or type of nose.

"The witness is the main focus," he told the paper. "So there’s no input from law enforcement at all in the generating of a sketch, other than my presence as the artist."


BBM that last part is important because I’ve seen WS posters suggest they released new sketch to fit more with a suspect they have. Which would be detrimental in prosecuting that suspect IMO. But this article clearly states that second sketch came entirely from a witness 3 days after girls were discovered who was reporting something they believed needed to be reported.

'New' Delphi suspect sketch was drawn days after murders of 2 Indiana girls, artist says
 
LE seems pretty confident about when "criminal activity began" and says the killer "got around very quickly". How could they know? They also talk about a "twist". I'm not sure if Libby's camera phone recorded the whole ordeal or not, but I do think maybe the killer at least used her phone to take a picture of his handywork after he was finished - and then left the phone there. That, or he took a selfie with it. These would be timestamped. Maybe that's why they're so confident about the times. It would also mean to me that he was absolutely disguised, not to mention super cocky. I think the video on the bridge is him in disguise and the new sketch is him after ditching it, possibly in a backpack or duffel bag. I think it would also point to someone under 25. I've always wondered why he didn't take the phone or destroy it.

I think he did take the phone but did not realize she had it recording when he shoved it into his pocket where it continued recording the entire crime. In all the confusion, ruffled clothing, associated struggle...I think it fell out of his pocket along the way, and he could not find it back... and certainly couldn't take the time to dawdle around in the woods hunting for the phone of a girl he had just killed.
 
Somewhere between the two sketches:

So, a guy in disguise & w/ disguise removed?

Or, two perps?

Or, parabon-aged to different possible ages?

Or ... (other ideas how this could be?)
I think the second drawing may have confirmed with new technology using his voice to make a physical rendition of his face. Surprisingly the new sketch did not essentially compare to the first, but it certainly could bear a resemblance to the man in the grainy photo\video
 
2 years after Delphi murders, funding sought to boost specialized detective units

I thought this article was interesting from February 2019 as we are discussing the sketches and the video.

"Crider said federal funding is down 14 percent while investigations, like the Delphi case, are up 35 percent. The shortfall threatens those specialized units when they are most in demand.

The cyber teams "are good at going in and trying to recover forensics, images and trying to re-create those mugshots, trying to analyze the data that might exist on a cell phone or something like that," said Crider. Such as the video Libby German bravely recorded that day."

Computer Crimes Against Children unit running out of funds

Link above also mentioning Delphi is another article with a bit more info.
 
Last edited:
Both LE and the families have said that the video has been examined by the top specialists in the country-from Pixar/Disney to NASA and the FBI. I honestly don't think that any of us, or any other armchair sleuther out there, has software or abilities that could make the video any clearer. Many people have "enhanced" it, but I think that's a slippery slope. When the public enhances the video clip, it often changes the guy's face and the result may or may not truly resemble him. I worry that someone in his life will see the public's "enhancements" and talk themselves out of calling in the tip because it no longer resembles the person they know.

When this thing (hopefully) goes to trial, there's a chance that we might see the original video as evidence is released. Until then, though, probably not.

In Jayme Closs' case a few months ago, people were clamoring about how LE should release the 911 call, that there MUST be something useful on there and that if it were released then sleuthers might be able to find the guy. Once she was found and more details were released about the crime, however, it became clear that releasing the audio wouldn't have been helpful to the masses at all. It was a couple of seconds filled with terror. The only real thing it clarified was that these were, indeed, blatant murders and that Jayme was probably not involved (many people online wouldn't let go of that theory). Releasing it might have satisfied the public's curiosity (or maybe not, no matter how much LE releases, the public wants "more"), but it also would have been traumatic for the family.

This case and Jayme's are high profile cases. Every spec of information floats around the internet faster than a fruit fly on a rotten bananas. Can you imagine losing a close family member and every time you turn on the TV or get online someone was playing the audio of their last seconds on earth?
I agree that it is unlikely that we the general public can do a better job with the photo enhancements today. But it keeps people talking.

I believe as time goes by, coupled with advances in society and information sharing, police will start releasing more and more information about crimes.

Over time police investigation tactics will continue to evolve and I think in the future police will open up and share more and more. Maybe not in this case, maybe not in my lifetime but in the future. Holding information to rule out false confessions, will become old school tactics and advancements in dna and forensics will be used to exclude suspects. Somewhere I read recently a fairly new process could complete total dna analysis in 4 hours. That time may get shorter and shorter in the future.

Unfortunately, too this will put that information into the never ending internet and it will last forever for victims families to see/hear over and over.

Who knows what tidbit of information will give someone that ah ha moment. So more and more information will be shared in the future.

Again, I think tactics will evolve and today police are doing what they need to to protect the integrity of the case. This isn’t meant to knock them! We on WS will just have to live with what they give us now.

I think online sleuths have value!
 
I agree that it is unlikely that we the general public can do a better job with the photo enhancements today. But it keeps people talking.

I believe as time goes by, coupled with advances in society and information sharing, police will start releasing more and more information about crimes.

Over time police investigation tactics will continue to evolve and I think in the future police will open up and share more and more. Maybe not in this case, maybe not in my lifetime but in the future. Holding information to rule out false confessions, will become old school tactics and advancements in dna and forensics will be used to exclude suspects. Somewhere I read recently a fairly new process could complete total dna analysis in 4 hours. That time may get shorter and shorter in the future.

Unfortunately, too this will put that information into the never ending internet and it will last forever for victims families to see/hear over and over.

Who knows what tidbit of information will give someone that ah ha moment. So more and more information will be shared in the future.

Again, I think tactics will evolve and today police are doing what they need to to protect the integrity of the case. This isn’t meant to knock them! We on WS will just have to live with what they give us now.

I think online sleuths have value!
I like some of your ideas here, but I have to admit that I think police will become less apt to share information as time goes by due in part because of the internet and SM. So much false information gets spread online that LE is bombarded with crap tips they have to sift through, not to mention all the innocent people (including family) slandered, trolled, and harassed. JMO
 
I agree that it is unlikely that we the general public can do a better job with the photo enhancements today. But it keeps people talking.

I believe as time goes by, coupled with advances in society and information sharing, police will start releasing more and more information about crimes.

Over time police investigation tactics will continue to evolve and I think in the future police will open up and share more and more. Maybe not in this case, maybe not in my lifetime but in the future. Holding information to rule out false confessions, will become old school tactics and advancements in dna and forensics will be used to exclude suspects. Somewhere I read recently a fairly new process could complete total dna analysis in 4 hours. That time may get shorter and shorter in the future.

Unfortunately, too this will put that information into the never ending internet and it will last forever for victims families to see/hear over and over.

Who knows what tidbit of information will give someone that ah ha moment. So more and more information will be shared in the future.

Again, I think tactics will evolve and today police are doing what they need to to protect the integrity of the case. This isn’t meant to knock them! We on WS will just have to live with what they give us now.

I think online sleuths have value!
bbm

Idk, often it seems, being an online sleuth comes right after pest and cholera.
 
It’s been stated that the two sketches are two different people, but first sketch is no longer a person of interest and now second sketch is BG, the killer. I would think they identified person who was original sketch and ruled him out.

This is how second sketch came about:

“The sketch artist with ISP who drew the face, Master Trooper Taylor Bryant, told the Indianapolis Star the picture presented as being new Monday had in fact been drawn Feb. 17, 2017, three days after the bodies of the two girls were discovered.

In vague terms, Bryant told the Star the imagewas based on the description of a man by a witness who reported seeing something they felt needed to be reported. The sketch is a "ballpark estimation of what the person looks like."

Bryant, who did not draw an earlier, widely-disseminated sketch released by police that showed a much-older looking person of interest, told the Star he creates his drawings based off how a witness describes a suspect using a "facial identification reference sheet," which allows people to describe a suspect based on various categories such as a person's head shape, style of eyebrows or type of nose.

"The witness is the main focus," he told the paper. "So there’s no input from law enforcement at all in the generating of a sketch, other than my presence as the artist."


BBM that last part is important because I’ve seen WS posters suggest they released new sketch to fit more with a suspect they have. Which would be detrimental in prosecuting that suspect IMO. But this article clearly states that second sketch came entirely from a witness 3 days after girls were discovered who was reporting something they believed needed to be reported.

'New' Delphi suspect sketch was drawn days after murders of 2 Indiana girls, artist says

Yes, now we know how the newly released sketch came about. From ONE witness 3 days after the killings were discovered. But it leaves unanswered questions about the sketch originally released. LE stated it was a composite from more than one witness or words to that effect. Why did it take months for that originally released sketch to come out? Was LE not confident in it - i.e., they were struggling to get a consensus from the witnesses? Or had LE deemed it critical information that they did not want released to the public? Was the witness for this newly released sketch one of those considered in rendering the original sketch? What did that one witness think of the first sketch? Is there something about the first sketch that is still relevant? After all, the ISP Superintendent said in an interview 2-3 weeks after the release of the 2nd sketch that he believed the killer could look like a combination of the two sketches so is there something about the original sketch that would make it still valid?

Would any of these answers help the general public ID the killer for LE? I have no idea and certainly LE would not reveal who the witnesses for their protection and to protect the case, so they can't be asked. But there are two sets of families and certainly many members of the Delphi community who have helped with probably these same questions. It's no wonder the families left before the 22 April PC in tears. They're wondering what they've been doing for 2 years. They have been very strong in their support of LE for over 2 years and now did they feel they got the rug pulled out from under them?
 
2 years after Delphi murders, funding sought to boost specialized detective units

I thought this article was interesting from February 2019 as we are discussing the sketches and the video.

"Crider said federal funding is down 14 percent while investigations, like the Delphi case, are up 35 percent. The shortfall threatens those specialized units when they are most in demand.

The cyber teams "are good at going in and trying to recover forensics, images and trying to re-create those mugshots, trying to analyze the data that might exist on a cell phone or something like that," said Crider. Such as the video Libby German bravely recorded that day."

Computer Crimes Against Children unit running out of funds

Link above also mentioning Delphi is another article with a bit more info.
Good find. This investigation appears to have an unusual amount of resources - both financial and personnel - being applied to it. For sure they need the resources to cover over 40K in tips. But sooner or later - if it hasn't happened already - ISP Superintendent Carter is going to be asked hard questions by his bosses in the state capital. When money gets tight the areas where most of it is going becomes a target for trimming or cutting back. Someone like the state comptroller or internal auditor is going to question the tips. I struggle to recall a case with even one fourth that number of tips so this is highly unusual. But money counters and auditors focus on the unusual. At some point they are going to question if some law of diminishing returns is in play here. Of the last 1000 tips does LE get maybe - and I'm just throwing out a number for emphasis - 40 tips that require effort and are not repeat tips? Compared to maybe a much higher percentage in the first 10000? IOW, is LE getting quantity, but not quality.

We have two unsolved murders to the west of me - Heidi Childs and David Metzler - and it appears we have had more press conferences here in the first 6 months, maybe the first month, than has been held in the entire 10 years of the unsolved Childs/Metzler murders. And every time there is a conference here in Delphi we hear that X number of tips have been received, thus boosting the total number of tips reported to the public. Don't get me wrong, LE is not doing anything wrong here with PC's. I wish more LE agencies would do this. The PC's keep the case alive in the public's mind and the more you do that the greater the chance of someone with doubts about a possible suspect calls in that one crucial tip. But the other side of the double edged sword is the powers that be in the state capital questioning whether this is propping up the argument for a larger than usual staff. They're going to be asking the ISP what have you done for us lately.
 
2 years after Delphi murders, funding sought to boost specialized detective units

I thought this article was interesting from February 2019 as we are discussing the sketches and the video.

"Crider said federal funding is down 14 percent while investigations, like the Delphi case, are up 35 percent. The shortfall threatens those specialized units when they are most in demand.

The cyber teams "are good at going in and trying to recover forensics, images and trying to re-create those mugshots, trying to analyze the data that might exist on a cell phone or something like that," said Crider. Such as the video Libby German bravely recorded that day."

Computer Crimes Against Children unit running out of funds

Link above also mentioning Delphi is another article with a bit more info.

"Crider says training is a big expense because there is regular turnover on such task forces. Many officers don’t last in the job long, as what they see is often tough and demoralizing."

This is so sad to hear. It's understandable but very counterproductive in fighting crime, especially I'm sure crimes against children.
 
2 years after Delphi murders, funding sought to boost specialized detective units

I thought this article was interesting from February 2019 as we are discussing the sketches and the video.

"Crider said federal funding is down 14 percent while investigations, like the Delphi case, are up 35 percent. The shortfall threatens those specialized units when they are most in demand.

The cyber teams "are good at going in and trying to recover forensics, images and trying to re-create those mugshots, trying to analyze the data that might exist on a cell phone or something like that," said Crider. Such as the video Libby German bravely recorded that day."

Computer Crimes Against Children unit running out of funds

Link above also mentioning Delphi is another article with a bit more info.

"Without that unit [Computer Crimes Against Children], the key clip from Libby’s cell phone may have never been recovered and now, without funding, other cases could also go without the specialized unit’s help."

This part from the second article you linked hints that Libby's phone might have been damaged. Possibly taken and smashed or even thrown in the water?
 
Yes, now we know how the newly released sketch came about. From ONE witness 3 days after the killings were discovered. But it leaves unanswered questions about the sketch originally released. LE stated it was a composite from more than one witness or words to that effect. Why did it take months for that originally released sketch to come out? Was LE not confident in it - i.e., they were struggling to get a consensus from the witnesses? Or had LE deemed it critical information that they did not want released to the public? Was the witness for this newly released sketch one of those considered in rendering the original sketch? What did that one witness think of the first sketch? Is there something about the first sketch that is still relevant? After all, the ISP Superintendent said in an interview 2-3 weeks after the release of the 2nd sketch that he believed the killer could look like a combination of the two sketches so is there something about the original sketch that would make it still valid?

Would any of these answers help the general public ID the killer for LE? I have no idea and certainly LE would not reveal who the witnesses for their protection and to protect the case, so they can't be asked. But there are two sets of families and certainly many members of the Delphi community who have helped with probably these same questions. It's no wonder the families left before the 22 April PC in tears. They're wondering what they've been doing for 2 years. They have been very strong in their support of LE for over 2 years and now did they feel they got the rug pulled out from under them?
I was also under the impression the OBG came from more than one witness, but all the LE statements I've found on MSM says it came from one witness, along with other resources. That's why I'm thinking it was a mixture of witness, video, and perhaps profiling.

I wonder if there are any more sketches in their files.
 
bbm

Idk, often it seems, being an online sleuth comes right after pest and cholera.
It all depends on how the sleuths conduct themselves online doesn't it. Ex: Just a small suggestion of how a crime was carried out could be enough to jog someone's memory about something they saw or heard. Enough for a tip that might help investigations. On the other end, the extemes who think they're smarter than LE, who know all the details, they can and are a problem force online. AJMO
 
"Crider says training is a big expense because there is regular turnover on such task forces. Many officers don’t last in the job long, as what they see is often tough and demoralizing."

This is so sad to hear. It's understandable but very counterproductive in fighting crime, especially I'm sure crimes against children.
What is the key clip? Could that just mean signing in, getting past the phone's security measures?

Eta: duh...I was reading "key clip" as a part of the phone. Obviously they meant the video clip. Too much coffee for me this morning...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
141
Guests online
2,690
Total visitors
2,831

Forum statistics

Threads
590,021
Messages
17,929,125
Members
228,039
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top