You may be right, but, I find it difficult to comprehend how a man--married only once, to his high school sweetheart, a father, gainfully employed--how this seemingly normal man carefully planned the rape and murder of two young teenage girls as his first crime. It doesn't ring true to me, IMO. Of course I may be wrong, and I am hoping for more evidence and a motive being disclosed at the trial.Whenever I want to visualize how this all took place and the deviancy of RA's planning, I watch the Hughes reconstruction video on YT.
To me, it's obvious he has walked thru this scenario before, and this may have just been the perfect situation where the stars lined up as far as he was concerned.
1) A week day when few people would be on the trail.
2) A "school off" day when teens/children would be off school and possibly on the trail.
3) Two girls passed him and were the only ones between him and the end of the trail.
4) A look back over his shoulder proved the woman that was at the bridge was headed back in the opposite direction and not going to see him.
5) Two innocent young and defenseless girls out on the end of the bridge trapped at the end of the trail with only one direction they could possibly go.
6) He had all the weapons he needed: His commanding voice, a gun to scare and corral them and a knife to eventually kill them.
7) I think he intended to kill them from the start because he was local all the way and so were they. If he had just raped them, they could identify him.
What a despicable human being.
I'm in general agreement, Trebor; I think we can be reasonably certain it wasn't his first crime. *IF* RA is guilty, *IF*, I'd be fairly certain he has had other incidents of crime in his history--probably not murder, on the odds, but probably other instances of hurtful or inappropriate behaviors, likely involving adolescent girls.You may be right, but, I find it difficult to comprehend how a man--married only once, to his high school sweetheart, a father, gainfully employed--how this seemingly normal man carefully planned the rape and murder of two young teenage girls as his first crime. It doesn't ring true to me, IMO. Of course I may be wrong, and I am hoping for more evidence and a motive being disclosed at the trial.
Still, despite all of the publicity and they nationwide coverage of this crime and RA's arrest, there has been nothing so far as I know about unsavory or criminal incidents concerning him, and I warrant thee would be people or victims coming forward by now with their stories of abuse. Makes one wonder if that is because there is nothing there. But perhaps you are right. We will have to wait and see, IMOI'm in general agreement, Trebor; I think we can be reasonably certain it wasn't his first crime. *IF* RA is guilty, *IF*, I'd be fairly certain he has had other incidents of crime in his history--probably not murder, on the odds, but probably other instances of hurtful or inappropriate behaviors, likely involving adolescent girls.
Now that would sure be an interesting police interview transcript to read, wouldn’t it? Not saying we should be allowed to — I’m sure it’s better if it’s not leaked.It probably doesn't have much bearing on the case, but I don't think RA saw the woman who saw him on the bridge platform. He didn't tell the CO he saw her back in 2017, even though he did admit to seeing the three girls by Freedom Bridge. In fact, he didn't even admit to going out on the high bridge to the CO then. He said he walked to it, then back, and didn't see anyone else but the three girls.
If he talked to the CO to try to cover for himself, because he'd been seen or whatever, then why would he not tell them he'd seen the woman by the bridge, if he had? Surely he would assume she had seen him, too.
In Oct. 2022, during his second interview, he did say he had gone out on the bridge platform to look at fish, so I think LE likely told him a witness had seen him there, which is why he finally admitted to it. JMO.
What I’m not seeing in recent posts about how it might have all come about us any mention of KAK. I know he has a separate thread, but it’s interesting to see him fade from the conversation. I think think it would be so bizarre if he turns out not to be involved. What do you think, Ken (or is it Kent, sorry)?I'm in general agreement, Trebor; I think we can be reasonably certain it wasn't his first crime. *IF* RA is guilty, *IF*, I'd be fairly certain he has had other incidents of crime in his history--probably not murder, on the odds, but probably other instances of hurtful or inappropriate behaviors, likely involving adolescent girls.
I also thought Justice's summary opinion was well reasoned and logical, overall, and generally agreed with it.
I think Justice sounds right in that IMOthe guilty person had probably been waiting for a good opportunity; work day for most, off day for kids, nice enough day to encourage outside activities; I find it very easy to believe the murderer had been to the park watching and evaluating "customers" on many previous occasions. On this particular day, I easily can believe, he checked the south side carefully, then took up a place or places, watching and waiting. And then L&A came strolling by and went over the bridge; BG knew they were now in a place from which it would be difficult for them to be heard and from which they could not easily escape him. And he decided to act--possibly something he'd been fantasizing about for a long time--despite having two targets to have to control..
To me personally, this "hunter waiting for opportunity" scene sounds more likely than the idea that BG had been stalking one or both of the girls on some personal level, for whatever reason. Though I don't rule that out, either. I've had a lot of opinions on who/what/why/when/where/breed of jacket puppy over the years, and I've changed my mind on far too many of them to be confident that I'm correct about one now.
You didn't ask me, so I hope @AC4RD doesn't mind my two cents...What I’m not seeing in recent posts about how it might have all come about us any mention of KAK. I know he has a separate thread, but it’s interesting to see him fade from the conversation. I think think it would be so bizarre if he turns out not to be involved. What do you think, Ken (or is it Kent, sorry)?
I'm not sure why it would be bizarre. It was clear early on that he was playing games with the police and likely making things up for attention or to try to create some kind of advantage for himself. I'd very surprised if he was involved in any way.What I’m not seeing in recent posts about how it might have all come about us any mention of KAK. I know he has a separate thread, but it’s interesting to see him fade from the conversation. I think think it would be so bizarre if he turns out not to be involved. What do you think, Ken (or is it Kent, sorry)?
The thought may have never crossed her mind. Hundreds of locals were named and shown on social media in side-by-side photos. AFAIK, RA never came up. He may not have told her, or anyone other than the CO, that he was on the bridge that day.Also he has a daughter the same age. I know Delphi is a small place. His daughter could well have been traumatised by what happened to the girls. It must be terrible to realise it’s her father. How could she have been safe with him. Could she have known all along? Am I allowed to say that?
Do you live in the U.S.? It would be illegal for law enforcement to do that here. No one can be arrested with out probable cause, and no one has to answer questions asked by police. In fact, no one with a functioning brain would talk to police, in my opinion. I would not answer police questions under any circumstances even if I were completely innocent.Apprehend and question hundreds - thousands if needs be.
No im in the U.K. But really you wouldn’t talk to the police if they were looking for a child murderer? Surely they could ask every man to voluntarily come in for questioning? Maybe I’m naive then.Do you live in the U.S.? It would be illegal for law enforcement to do that here. No one can be arrested with out probable cause, and no one has to answer questions asked by police. In fact, no one with a functioning brain would talk to police, in my opinion. I would not answer police questions under any circumstances even if I were completely innocent.
I hear ya, it was a frustrating 5.5 years waiting for an arrest. Part of the problem was the sheer number of tips, and that the BG photo looked like so many people, including Sheriff Leazenby, Mike Patty, Ron Logan. The picture was helpful, but not enough to truly distinguish.It was always going to be someone living extremely close by. Everyone needed to be brought in for questioning. I wouldn’t ask about alibis. I’d look at whether the person in front of me could be the bridge guy. Then get digging. I know there was suspicion about this K guy. But he was not the man on film. So don’t get distracted. Something went terribly wrong with this investigation.
But 300 is not a lot. I don’t know, I just feel if you knew this person then you’d see the video was of him. Release a bit more and get him identified.I hear ya, it was a frustrating 5.5 years waiting for an arrest. Part of the problem was the sheer number of tips, and that the BG photo looked like so many people, including Sheriff Leazenby, Mike Patty, Ron Logan. The picture was helpful, but not enough to truly distinguish.
By March 2017 they had already interviewed over 300 people and cleared over 200 that resembled BG.
As we now know, it turned out they had already talked to RA.
ISP: More than 300 interviewed in Delphi case
Police investigating the murders of two Delphi teens say they have interviewed more than 300 people and are still following up on thousands of tips from the case.www.wrtv.com