Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #126

[Nerissa]

I believe he recorded these murders.

I believe he's a narcissistic psychopath who spends a great deal of time viewing *advertiser censored* of an extreme and violent nature.

I'm sure he thinks he's very clever. Just because psychopaths are often high functioning , it doesn't always translate to intellect.But I still think he is very cunning and secretive.

In so many cases , there is a toxically masculine male with a shed, locked basement room, locked office, garage, storage unit etc. They have a staging area, and privacy.

Also I think in order to operate this guy really needs a car. if its his car , I imagine it to be another place he can hide things. This guy has equipment and things he wishes to do.
he has a purpose.

Also someone folded or pressed his jeans in such a way that they are creased.

He has done this before in my opinion and they probably are looking at cases where they had no DNA evidence but other matching markers or signatures.

no one knows what he has done , I used to think he would tell someone or brag about something , but now I think not...if so it's in sharing a predilection for *advertiser censored* etc. perhaps with a sibling.

mOO

Here's my rub: why did LE say unequivocally that the public did not need to fear, that the murders of Abby & Libby were specific to them - that suggests LE is saying: there is no serial killer on the loose......
It also suggests they know the motive - in fact, they MUST know the motive to even say such a thing...right???
Otherwise, how the heck do they know if this is NOT a serial killer, 'thrill kill' or what not...?
JMO

 

[Falling Down]

Here's my rub: why did LE say unequivocally that the public did not need to fear, that the murders of Abby & Libby were specific to them - that suggests LE is saying: there is no serial killer on the loose......
It also suggests they know the motive - in fact, they MUST know the motive to even say such a thing...right???
Otherwise, how the heck do they know if this is NOT a serial killer, 'thrill kill' or what not...?
JMO

Good post.

My take is early on they thought they would have it wrapped up in short time, a form of "hubris" or what have you.

I 100% believe it was a 'thrill kill' of some sort or another, a fantasy on
the part of the perp.

Be that as it may, I 100% believe the set of crimes involved in this case are random.

JMO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Here's my rub: why did LE say unequivocally that the public did not need to fear, that the murders of Abby & Libby were specific to them - that suggests LE is saying: there is no serial killer on the loose......
It also suggests they know the motive - in fact, they MUST know the motive to even say such a thing...right???
Otherwise, how the heck do they know if this is NOT a serial killer, 'thrill kill' or what not...?
JMO

Just my opinion but I don’t think LE knew what they were dealing with when that was said. Personally, I think it may be the most irresponsible statement ever made after a major crime. I feel certain when it was said, that LE had no idea if the public was in danger, had no idea why the girls were killed or what the motive was, and almost four years later they have no idea who the killer is. Irresponsible and at this point in the investigation, irrelevant.

 

[Charlot123]

I believe he recorded these murders.

I believe he's a narcissistic psychopath who spends a great deal of time viewing *advertiser censored* of an extreme and violent nature.

I'm sure he thinks he's very clever. Just because psychopaths are often high functioning , it doesn't always translate to intellect.But I still think he is very cunning and secretive.

In so many cases , there is a toxically masculine male with a shed, locked basement room, locked office, garage, storage unit etc. They have a staging area, and privacy.

Also I think in order to operate this guy really needs a car. if its his car , I imagine it to be another place he can hide things. This guy has equipment and things he wishes to do.
he has a purpose.

Also someone folded or pressed his jeans in such a way that they are creased.

He has done this before in my opinion and they probably are looking at cases where they had no DNA evidence but other matching markers or signatures.

no one knows what he has done , I used to think he would tell someone or brag about something , but now I think not...if so it's in sharing a predilection for *advertiser censored* etc. perhaps with a sibling.

mOO

This is the strangest thing. One cannot predict IQ by the level of functioning, much less by the grades.

How many times the people who could not keep any job, when sent to IQ testing, came back with Mensa-level IQ? And it came as a huge surprise to themselves?

Jeffrey Dahmer was surprisingly unsuccessful in school, army, and all his jobs. Looking at his performance, who could ever guess his genius IQ?

What could people make of their IQ is another matter.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

He has done this before in my opinion and they probably are looking at cases where they had no DNA evidence but other matching markers or signatures.

no one knows what he has done , I used to think he would tell someone or brag about something , but now I think not...if so it's in sharing a predilection for *advertiser censored* etc. perhaps with a sibling.

mOO

bbm

^^^^ This maybe. Perhaps a predilection not for *advertiser censored* but for crime/murder (or both?). With a male sibling, probably. IMO

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Regarding the signatures at the crime scene, the only aspect I've heard multiple times that seems reliable is that people submitting a name of a suspect -- especially in the early going -- were asked if that suspect is known to own any unusual weapons.

bbm
Now I understand. Insider knowledge, so-to-say, of someone, who called LE with a tip. I don't know anyone, who called in, therefore I didn't hear of this LE-question.

 

[Ozoner]

Here's my rub: why did LE say unequivocally that the public did not need to fear, that the murders of Abby & Libby were specific to them - that suggests LE is saying: there is no serial killer on the loose......
It also suggests they know the motive - in fact, they MUST know the motive to even say such a thing...right???
Otherwise, how the heck do they know if this is NOT a serial killer, 'thrill kill' or what not...?
JMO

Just my opinion but I don’t think LE knew what they were dealing with when that was said. Personally, I think it may be the most irresponsible statement ever made after a major crime. I feel certain when it was said, that LE had no idea if the public was in danger, had no idea why the girls were killed or what the motive was, and almost four years later they have no idea who the killer is. Irresponsible and at this point in the investigation, irrelevant.

I agree 100%. Those comments were meaningless. They were meant to prevent a general panic in the community. Investigators hadn't even developed a profile of the killer at that point. They should have admitted that they didn't know anything, but they wanted people to think that they had the situation under control.

 

[I wonder]

Here's my rub: why did LE say unequivocally that the public did not need to fear, that the murders of Abby & Libby were specific to them - that suggests LE is saying: there is no serial killer on the loose......
It also suggests they know the motive - in fact, they MUST know the motive to even say such a thing...right???
Otherwise, how the heck do they know if this is NOT a serial killer, 'thrill kill' or what not...?
JMO

My bet is that they believed they had/have a suspect and/or a motive which indicated that the attack and murder of Abby and Libby was in some way targeted and consequently a one off. They believe/d the killer had done what he wanted or needed to do and he would pose no further danger to the local community.

If this is the case, it fits in with their belief that the murderer is a local and with Carter saying the murderer could be in the room at that press conference.

It also explains why 'the killer didn't think we'd change our strategy' (or words to that effect) comment, which raises an interesting possibility. I don't see a massive change in strategy. There was a different image of BG and LE talked about the vehicle parked nearby, but neither feels like a massive change of gear.

But the investigation is twofold. I don't know if you know the swan analogy? Swans glide along the surface apparently effortlessly, but under the water their feet are padding furiously.

We see the part of the investigation above the surface and it seems at times that LE aren't doing very much. We clamour for more information, more specific information, but they've released very little. I've seen numerous posts about how poorly people think of the investigation.

Going back to the swan, what if underneath the water is where all the paddling is happening? It's quite possible that the police are carrying out a very specific and targeted investigation that we don't get to see. Maybe they are in some sense communicating with BG via this unseen (to us) investigation.

The change of strategy could have been the new image, but also what seemed like direct communication to the killer.

I think it's quite feasible that LE have got close to BG, but one or more members of his family are protecting him, because they either don't believe, or don't want to believe he is capable of such an evil act.

What will those closest to you think of when they find out that you brutally murdered two little girls, two children? Only a coward would do such a thing."

I can't imagine having to accept that my father, brother or husband killed Abby and Libby. But, if someone is protecting BG, they need to realise that their feelings are, in truth, irrelevant. Their self denial doesn't mean it didn't happen. It did happen and they need to turn him in.

 

[JimmyWells]

Extremely random oddity. 1:26:17 of the movie "Silence of the Lambs," FBI boss Jack Crawford is pointing at a map cluing Clarice on where the victims of Buffalo Bill were recovered. The blue dots signify where victims were taken and red arrows signify where bodies of victims have been recovered, one of which points directly, and I mean, directly, at Delphi Indiana. Odd witch hunt, I know, but random, too random not to mention.

 

[Charlot123]

Extremely random oddity. 1:26:17 of the movie "Silence of the Lambs," FBI boss Jack Crawford is pointing at a map cluing Clarice on where the victims of Buffalo Bill were recovered. The blue dots signify where victims were taken and red arrows signify where bodies of victims have been recovered, one of which points directly, and I mean, directly, at Delphi Indiana. Odd witch hunt, I know, but random, too random not to mention.

Hmm, and were there any other matches with that map?

 

[St. Anthony2017]

Extremely random oddity. 1:26:17 of the movie "Silence of the Lambs," FBI boss Jack Crawford is pointing at a map cluing Clarice on where the victims of Buffalo Bill were recovered. The blue dots signify where victims were taken and red arrows signify where bodies of victims have been recovered, one of which points directly, and I mean, directly, at Delphi Indiana. Odd witch hunt, I know, but random, too random not to mention.

Wow! That is very interesting! I wonder if anyone knows of any connection to the series Dexter too. There is a POI that listed that as his favorite series but then took it down after we were posting about him. Interestingly enough he changed his favorite show to CSI. I can’t name him because he is just a POI in the groups like many others.

 

[Kittybunny]

When I hear Ives say that, my first impression was not that it was so complicated as police being deliberately led astray. I thought there was a good possibility that he meant something like, we had footprints that seemed like they were unique and easy to trace. But we never matched them with the right person. It doesn't mean BG wore someone else's shoes. Just that they never found a suspect who had shoes like that at all.

And for footprints you could insert any type of physical evidence - we found bindings made of rope and we thought we could trace who purchased it, we found injuries that seemed to be made by an unusual weapon but we could never figure out who would have owned it. Just examples here.

So I guess instead of the evidence leading to the "wrong" person, IMO it led to nobody. Or, nobody yet.

my thoughts are exactly this as well. I was thinking of bindings specifically for some reason. And of course, the one we actually know about, the video. We all certainly thought that would lead to finding out the specific person, and yet here we are 126 threads and almost 4 years later, and no arrest.

 

[JimmyWells]

Hmm, and were there any other matches with that map?

I'm going to try and dig a little. Obviously, if we find similar crimes in the other areas with the arrows the branch is worth shaking. Serial killers love moves about serial killers.

 

[Marzipan]

bbm

^^^^ This maybe. Perhaps a predilection not for *advertiser censored* but for crime/murder (or both?). With a male sibling, probably. IMO

Why with a male sibling? I’m always interested in sibling and sibling order theories but know nothing about how they apply in criminology. Would love to learn.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I can't imagine having to accept that my father, brother or husband killed Abby and Libby. But, if someone is protecting BG, they need to realise that their feelings are, in truth, irrelevant. Their self denial doesn't mean it didn't happen. It did happen and they need to turn him in.

Wonderful said! Thank you!

 

[girlfriday]

I'm very new to this case, so I've had to spend a good deal of time looking back. It's hard to try to process everything, while not being influenced by all the unconfirmed information. So, trying to just stay with facts of the case, I still find a few things puzzling:
- Abby had a sleeveless shirt, why didn't she just take her own jacket?
- Why would Libby post the photo of Abby on the bridge, to Snapchat, if Abby was going to get grounded for it?
- Did anyone, in the immediate search, know about the snapchat photo of Abby on the bridge, before the police were called?
- Since iPhone recordings are ended by incoming calls, what does that tell us about the audio/video found on Libby's phone?

I'd love to hear other's thoughts about this.
All my posts are just my opinions.

 

[somequestions]

Extremely random oddity. 1:26:17 of the movie "Silence of the Lambs," FBI boss Jack Crawford is pointing at a map cluing Clarice on where the victims of Buffalo Bill were recovered. The blue dots signify where victims were taken and red arrows signify where bodies of victims have been recovered, one of which points directly, and I mean, directly, at Delphi Indiana. Odd witch hunt, I know, but random, too random not to mention.

This is all my opinion and interpretation.

They are just random points on a map. There is no meaning to it, not in the movie and not in real life. It is interesting how people interpret the movie "Silence of the Lambs". There is a part where Dr. Lecter tells Clarice where the bodies were found is desperately "random", but I think the meaning is different from how a lot of people interpret it. Many of the victims were strangers to the killer. I wonder how a real criminal profiler would interpret the "map points" in the movie?

Many times when criminals begin any type of crime scenario they start close to their home base. So the points on the map that Clarice is later clued into by Dr. Lecter are nothing but points on the map. They are indeed random. What Dr. Lecter is trying to get her to clue in on is that the killer is trying to hide his association to one of the earliest victims. And usually when criminals try to hide something there is a reason. She eventually figures it out by the order of how the victims were found. So the randomness meant absolutely nothing. It is a killer's way of trying to fool police. The FBI and Clarice were completely fooled by it. They went in the wrong direction trying to locate where the killer lived. Clarice ended up finding the killer by accident when, if I recall correctly, she went to visit the home of the woman the victim worked for as a follow up to her investigation once she realized the victim probably knew the killer. That is my interpretation of the map points in the movie.

 

[rosesfromangels]

my thoughts are exactly this as well. I was thinking of bindings specifically for some reason. And of course, the one we actually know about, the video. We all certainly thought that would lead to finding out the specific person, and yet here we are 126 threads and almost 4 years later, and no arrest.

BBM. Bindings. Just a bit upthread there is talk of crossbows. Zip ties and crossbows.....really seems to be associated with deer hunting?

Amateur opinion and speculation

 

[Snoop Sister]

I haven’t been following this case for some time <modsnip> I started following the Delphi murders in 2017 and I am appalled that there has been no new information or an arrest made. For Abby, Libby and their respective families, I hope there is closure. Someone knows....

 

[JimmyWells]

This is all my opinion and interpretation.

They are just random points on a map. There is no meaning to it, not in the movie and not in real life. It is interesting how people interpret the movie "Silence of the Lambs". There is a part where Dr. Lecter tells Clarice where the bodies were found is desperately "random", but I think the meaning is different from how a lot of people interpret it. Many of the victims were strangers to the killer. I wonder how a real criminal profiler would interpret the "map points" in the movie?

Many times when criminals begin any type of crime scenario they start close to their home base. So the points on the map that Clarice is later clued into by Dr. Lecter are nothing but points on the map. They are indeed random. What Dr. Lecter is trying to get her to clue in on is that the killer is trying to hide his association to one of the earliest victims. And usually when criminals try to hide something there is a reason. She eventually figures it out by the order of how the victims were found. So the randomness meant absolutely nothing. It is a killer's way of trying to fool police. The FBI and Clarice were completely fooled by it. They went in the wrong direction trying to locate where the killer lived. Clarice ended up finding the killer by accident when, if I recall correctly, she went to visit the home of the woman the victim worked for as a follow up to her investigation once she realized the victim probably knew the killer. That is my interpretation of the map points in the movie.

I think you're missing the point, pun intended. For example, Luka Magnotta confessed that he idolized Patrick Bateman and mimicked his behavior after him. That movie is an ode to serial killers and if there is a point on a map to Delphi, along with bodies recovered at those other points, things could get interesting.