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

[TL4S]

Thinking about witnesses the afternoon of 13 February. The family (Mike Patty?) didn't notify LE till sometime between 5:00 and 5:30 PM. LE shows up sometime between 5:30 and 6:00 PM, maybe later. Any witnesses that left the trail before then would likely only be known to LE if such person or persons voluntarily came forward. So we have a section of time between 1 PM and 3 PM when potential witnesses would be on the trail and none of the family members or LE would be aware of them. Then it is up to family members to remember potential witnesses until LE shows up. Sunset was approximately 6:20 that day so most everyone is leaving or left by the time LE first arrives. To add to this, LE doesn't necessarily suspect criminal activity? Just 2 missing girls. In that case, how focused are they in identifying persons as killers or witnesses of the killer(s) on the trails?

I'm wondering how comprehensive a list LE really has with all these facts. Any male out on the trail that afternoon is not just a potential witness, but a potential suspect as well. Anyone, male or female who is a habitual offender or has outstanding warrants against them is going to be less likely to walk into the sheriff's office. The voluntary witnesses are, of course, a source of who else was on the trail. If they knew those individuals. My knee jerk reaction is to assume the vehicle parked at the CPS building is that of the killer. It could be no one was seen around the vehicle - it was simply there around noon-1:00 and gone sometime before LE showed up. Just simply unaccounted for and thus an unaccounted for witness. Or witnesses. In this case the occupant or occupants might even be females.

I would hope any such unaccounted for witnesses have at least tried to make an anonymous tip.

I'm with you. I've been back and forth about the vehicle in the CPS lot, but since the clarification that LE is looking for someone who could identify the vehicles parked in the lot that day, and that it's linked to why they think he's local and got around quickly, I keep leaning towards the vehicle being related to BG. Funny, though, it hasn't been mentioned since...unless they don't put much emphasis on it anymore because what's the likelihood anyone would remember now.

Also, even right from the beginning LE was asking about vehicles parked from 1 - 5pm at the High Bridge Trail Head parking, which I'm not sure if that's the spot the girls were dropped off at, or the main trail head. Most likely to find possible witnesses? Maybe the 1 - 5pm timeframe is standard to cover everything before and after the crime? IDK.

 

[JnRyan]

I'm with you. I've been back and forth about the vehicle in the CPS lot, but since the clarification that LE is looking for someone who could identify the vehicles parked in the lot that day, and that it's linked to why they think he's local and got around quickly, I keep leaning towards the vehicle being related to BG. Funny, though, it hasn't been mentioned since...unless they don't put much emphasis on it anymore because what's the likelihood anyone would remember now.

Also, even right from the beginning LE was asking about vehicles parked from 1 - 5pm at the High Bridge Trail Head parking, which I'm not sure if that's the spot the girls were dropped off at, or the main trail head. Most likely to find possible witnesses? Maybe the 1 - 5pm timeframe is standard to cover everything before and after the crime? IDK.

Very early on we heard about LE asking about a person walking on the highway, a possible hitchhiker. Then nothing again about such a person in the 2 1/2 years since. Then, as you point out, we have LE asking about a particular vehicle in a certain spot during a specific time frame. Then nothing about it since. I could just see LE asking me about a vehicle parked somewhere over 2 years ago. ("Oh yeah, it wasn't white, black or red. It was one of those off-the-wall colors like 'pewter' or 'bronze' or 'beige'. And it looked like one of those part SUV, part hatchback vehicles. But I don't know the make and since my interests lie with sedans and sports cars I couldn't tell what year since I don't pay attention to those vehicles.")

 

[TL4S]

Very early on we heard about LE asking about a person walking on the highway, a possible hitchhiker. Then nothing again about such a person in the 2 1/2 years since. Then, as you point out, we have LE asking about a particular vehicle in a certain spot during a specific time frame. Then nothing about it since. I could just see LE asking me about a vehicle parked somewhere over 2 years ago. ("Oh yeah, it wasn't white, black or red. It was one of those off-the-wall colors like 'pewter' or 'bronze' or 'beige'. And it looked like one of those part SUV, part hatchback vehicles. But I don't know the make and since my interests lie with sedans and sports cars I couldn't tell what year since I don't pay attention to those vehicles.")

Right? After two years, the "did you see anyone walking the highway" or "what vehicles did you see in a parking lot" questions are no longer valid, IMO, because even if your random witness came forward now, the accuracy of that information would be highly questionable. It's my feeling that anything date/time-related asked by LE from here on out is directed specifically at the killer and/or those who know or suspect him. Like saying, "Hey, we do know some things about you, a-hole." JMO

 

[sunshineray]

Yes, and this is why I think there is more than one audio/video. Even earlier on the trail they could have been recording themselves. To me, the most important statement is that she hit record "after he approached them near the bridge."

That's the audio during the crime, and a different audio, IMO, than ones where the girls are discussing things.

If you listen to that Renner interview with Abby's mom, she talks about what I said before about not being able to go on because the trail ends. She also says (paraphrasing) she's sure the girls felt they were stuck there until BG finished crossing because there was no room to safely start back over the bridge until BG was off. The girls talking she listened to, at least some of it, was on that side of the bridge for sure. Whether there was more audio before they ever crossed the bridge, there could be. Maybe they even mentioned BG.

 

[sunshineray]

Thinking about witnesses the afternoon of 13 February. The family (Mike Patty?) didn't notify LE till sometime between 5:00 and 5:30 PM. LE shows up sometime between 5:30 and 6:00 PM, maybe later. Any witnesses that left the trail before then would likely only be known to LE if such person or persons voluntarily came forward. So we have a section of time between 1 PM and 3 PM when potential witnesses would be on the trail and none of the family members or LE would be aware of them. Then it is up to family members to remember potential witnesses until LE shows up. Sunset was approximately 6:20 that day so most everyone is leaving or left by the time LE first arrives. To add to this, LE doesn't necessarily suspect criminal activity? Just 2 missing girls. In that case, how focused are they in identifying persons as killers or witnesses of the killer(s) on the trails?

I'm wondering how comprehensive a list LE really has with all these facts. Any male out on the trail that afternoon is not just a potential witness, but a potential suspect as well. Anyone, male or female who is a habitual offender or has outstanding warrants against them is going to be less likely to walk into the sheriff's office. The voluntary witnesses are, of course, a source of who else was on the trail. If they knew those individuals. My knee jerk reaction is to assume the vehicle parked at the CPS building is that of the killer. It could be no one was seen around the vehicle - it was simply there around noon-1:00 and gone sometime before LE showed up. Just simply unaccounted for and thus an unaccounted for witness. Or witnesses. In this case the occupant or occupants might even be females.

I would hope any such unaccounted for witnesses have at least tried to make an anonymous tip.

Since LE never described the vehicle when asking for the public's help in identifying it, LE either knows the make, model and color or they don't. Maybe they know only one of those. The fact that information on this vehicle has not been solicited again leads me to believe they know that info now. If it is the killer's car, LE knows. JMO

 

[Misfitisland]

I wonder why the killer didn't think to take the phone. Surely he saw them taking pictures as he approached them on the bridge.

 

[MJPeony]

If you listen to that Renner interview with Abby's mom, she talks about what I said before about not being able to go on because the trail ends. She also says (paraphrasing) she's sure the girls felt they were stuck there until BG finished crossing because there was no room to safely start back over the bridge until BG was off. The girls talking she listened to, at least some of it, was on that side of the bridge for sure. Whether there was more audio before they ever crossed the bridge, there could be. Maybe they even mentioned BG.

Yes, but Abby’s mom also said she didn’t sense any concern (paraphrasing) in their voices.

So that’s all a bit confusing. I know it’s assumed by many that the girls were scared or spooked by this guy, and that’s why Libby started recording him, but I’m not convinced there was conversation about him being creepy, or that what the family had heard on audio was talk about trying to avoid him, etc. I don’t pretend to know why exactly Libby got video of BG, but the fact Abby’s mom said she did not hear any alarm in their voices gives me pause to think they were scared at that time the audio (that the family heard at least) was going on.

MOO.

 

[MJPeony]

Right? After two years, the "did you see anyone walking the highway" or "what vehicles did you see in a parking lot" questions are no longer valid, IMO, because even if your random witness came forward now, the accuracy of that information would be highly questionable. It's my feeling that anything date/time-related asked by LE from here on out is directed specifically at the killer and/or those who know or suspect him. Like saying, "Hey, we do know some things about you, a-hole." JMO

I think very much this has to be the case.

I 100% cannot believe that LE actually wants people to think back and try to remember if they saw a car there, or what kind, or who might have been near it or inside it. Not 2 years in. No way.

They mentioned the car solely for the purpose of letting someone- BG, or a witness they know was there but did not mention this- know that they knew about it. They were fishing out someone or someones.

MOO.

 

[Misfitisland]

So what do we know about libby's phone as far as pings or if the battery was dead when they were found the next morning?

 

[Spy Versus Spy]

Yeah I never posted a comment "suspecting [myself] of thinking a scarf will be the key." I do not think it is a relevant topic of discussion and never did. I don't think a discussion here as to what he was wearing is a key to anything. I was simply wondering why the debate was so important and asked if anyone actually thought that websleuthers identifying what he was wearing would help solve the case.

But I'm aware that what I think is relevant is not relevant to the progression of the thread! So, rock on.

My replies have all been lighthearted, gitana. There is no edge meant. Hope none detected

 

[Cutiekitty]

I think very much this has to be the case.

I 100% cannot believe that LE actually wants people to think back and try to remember if they saw a car there, or what kind, or who might have been near it or inside it. Not 2 years in. No way.

They mentioned the car solely for the purpose of letting someone- BG, or a witness they know was there but did not mention this- know that they knew about it. They were fishing out someone or someones.

MOO.

Maybe trying to generate some chatter.

 

[MingyMoo]

I wonder why the killer didn't think to take the phone. Surely he saw them taking pictures as he approached them on the bridge.

Because he was Tech Savvy enough not to.

MingyMoo

 

[Boxer]

Because he was Tech Savvy enough not to.

MingyMoo

Yes he was!
MOO He would be in custody now if he took it.
Knowing the risk of taking vs. not taking the cell phone indicates a younger, smart assailant. Apparently he was also confident that he left no digital messaging footprint in her phone.

 

[Charlot123]

I agree it could be something like that- it has been suggested before too. Less likely to fall off and get left behind though, like a scarf would. Except LE said it was a scarf. But maybe even a scarf tied like cowboys wear, for disguise, protection against wind, etc.

I think versatility-wise, a neck tube scarf is the best one.

This girl shows all the ways to wear it, except for the one, when you wear it around the neck, covering the lower part of the face.

Neck tube scarves come in all materials and colors. They are also used in all countries.

 

[Charlot123]

(I think people just get hopeless because all links lead nowhere.

There was hope after the presser, then it gave way to anxiety, and now, to hopelessness. And yet one feels that the thread has to continue.)

About the scarf - will you think I am totally off because today I thought that al-Amira, or Al-Ameera, an Islamic two-piece veil, could be used by BG?

It has two parts, a skullcap (one may wear a regular hat on top) - this would catch any hair that can inadvertently fall off from the head (not everyone can afford shaving off the head like JP did). And the lower part looks like a scarf and can be pulled on and off the face.

They are sold everywhere, including Amazon. Come in all colors, too.

From the video, it looked like the scarf was wound tightly over the face. Yet witnesses mentioned seeing the scarf? I think that he had on a somewhat versatile kind of garb, that could be pulled on and off the face.

 

[moonlessnight]

I think they know exactly which car they are interested in and who owns it. I think they want additional witnesses that might be able to place a person near or in the car. If the car is used by more than one person, they would need to verify who used it on 2/13, esp if one of the owners is the other's alibi.

Since LE never described the vehicle when asking for the public's help in identifying it, LE either knows the make, model and color or they don't. Maybe they know only one of those. The fact that information on this vehicle has not been solicited again leads me to believe they know that info now. If it is the killer's car, LE knows. JMO

 

[moonlessnight]

if the assumption that the girls were spooked by BG is not exactly accurate, why else might they have been videoing him?

In the chance they made some loose arrangement to meet someone for whatever innocent reason, would they video him if they thought he was the person they were meeting, or if they expected someone else but this guy approached instead?

I get the feeling they were on the bridge or at that end of the bridge for some time before BG arrived. Unless LE releases the time stamp on the video there is no way of knowing what time BG arrived on the bridge. But if the photo of AW approx. halfway across was at 2:07, and it takes 10 min max to cross the bridge (per GH), the video of BG must have started by 2:15 if he was on their tail before they got all the way across. If it was later than that, did they hang out on the end of the bridge for a time before BG arrived? Would that mean they were waiting for some purpose?

Is it possible BG was under the bridge among the steel girders while the girls crossed, and crept up onto the bridge after they walked over his hidden location? He seemed to appear out of nowhere between 2:07 and whatever time the video started, unless the video began later than 2:15.

Yes, but Abby’s mom also said she didn’t sense any concern (paraphrasing) in their voices.

So that’s all a bit confusing. I know it’s assumed by many that the girls were scared or spooked by this guy, and that’s why Libby started recording him, but I’m not convinced there was conversation about him being creepy, or that what the family had heard on audio was talk about trying to avoid him, etc. I don’t pretend to know why exactly Libby got video of BG, but the fact Abby’s mom said she did not hear any alarm in their voices gives me pause to think they were scared at that time the audio (that the family heard at least) was going on.

MOO.

 

[sunshineray]

Yes, but Abby’s mom also said she didn’t sense any concern (paraphrasing) in their voices.

So that’s all a bit confusing. I know it’s assumed by many that the girls were scared or spooked by this guy, and that’s why Libby started recording him, but I’m not convinced there was conversation about him being creepy, or that what the family had heard on audio was talk about trying to avoid him, etc. I don’t pretend to know why exactly Libby got video of BG, but the fact Abby’s mom said she did not hear any alarm in their voices gives me pause to think they were scared at that time the audio (that the family heard at least) was going on.

MOO.

Kids that age are, in general, not thinking something/someone out of place or weird is anything more than an inconvenience or an oddity. Most don't look ahead to the what ifs, they just figure they will deal with what presents itself. I felt that way as a young teen. I don't think the nature of being young and feeling invincible changes in the young unless something tramatic happens to an individual to make them adjust their perspective and their trust. At that young of an age the good should outweigh the bad in their minds, they are just children. Could be why Abby's mom heard no alarm in their voices, their brains weren't registering fear yet. AJMO

 

[moonlessnight]

would someone commit murders near the bridge in order to prevent development of it? seems like a ridiculous idea, but who knows these days. Unless money was going to be spent on the bridge that would have otherwise been the killer's...

Do we know if anyone ever financially sponsored the trestle to trail conversion?

Sponsor, donors sought to turn trestle into trail crossing

 

[raja]

I think very much this has to be the case.

I 100% cannot believe that LE actually wants people to think back and try to remember if they saw a car there, or what kind, or who might have been near it or inside it. Not 2 years in. No way.

They mentioned the car solely for the purpose of letting someone- BG, or a witness they know was there but did not mention this- know that they knew about it. They were fishing out someone or someones.

MOO.

I also think that little slip at the PC where files were shown on the large screen briefly was used along with the car info to rattle someone.