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

[Charlot123]

Welcome to the thread!
Nothing really stands out in this Indiana Cold Case map. Carroll County is within the green area.

ISP: Cold Cases by County

Except for a couple of girls, one left in the vicinity of a railroad, the other, drowned in a bathroom and the upper floor set on fire. But both from a while ago.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

The offender could have climaxed, but not where its expected, is something i thought about briefly.

Maybe. But question to you: where would it have been aspected?

 

[Justice101]

following..,.

 

[Hobgoblinmarket]

Maybe. But question to you: where would it have been aspected?

Inside or on one or both vicitms if there were a sexual part of this crime.

 

[Tiger Stripes]

If there is dna, I wonder if local service clubs, rotary, lions etc, could host a ged match drive? Collect many samples from the community. Surely there is a cousin or relative that might participate and unknowingly give up the perp. Just a thought

All such a good idea, @Howcanppldosuch... But what if...? *What if...the killer is an only child, or someone with no cousins in the immediate area? *What if...the killer's "protector" (for the sake of example, let's say a family member, but -- hey, we have *noo* idea, for sure -- entirely speculation here) looong ago back in 2017, shortly after the crime took place, "advised" all family members/relatives via an e-mail newsletter with general family updates, sent to all family members, whether they were then in Delphi, or in any other area of the country, to "not donate blood, or do ***any*** DNA tests of *any* kind; *someone* out there is trying to 'pin' something on one of us..."? *What then?

Oh, sure, I realize that sounds super far-fetched. IKR? But still... when family members are doing their best to "protect" one of their own, and want to do so in the most unobtrusive manner, in order to attract the *least* amount of attention, it seems likely that they would tend to fall back on a familiar way of responding when in "crisis" mode... All JMOO.

(Think about it: Some protect others with guns; others do their "protecting" using what is most familiar to them: their words... *If* the killer comes from a family used to using their words to "protect" each other, then...it would seem entirely natural for someone in the "protect-the-killer" mode to use *their own* words to "protect" a suspect -- perhaps by even advising others "in advance" [of any potential investigations] to avoid donating blood, or doing any DNA tests. "Out-of-the-box" concept? Maybe. Then again, maybe not...)

 

[Marzipan]

All such a good idea, @Howcanppldosuch... But what if...? *What if...the killer is an only child, or someone with no cousins in the immediate area? *What if...the killer's "protector" (for the sake of example, let's say a family member, but -- hey, we have *noo* idea, for sure -- entirely speculation here) looong ago back in 2017, shortly after the crime took place, "advised" all family members/relatives via an e-mail newsletter with general family updates, sent to all family members, whether they were then in Delphi, or in any other area of the country, to "not donate blood, or do ***any*** DNA tests of *any* kind; *someone* out there is trying to 'pin' something on one of us..."? *What then?

Oh, sure, I realize that sounds super far-fetched. IKR? But still... when family members are doing their best to "protect" one of their own, and want to do so in the most unobtrusive manner, in order to attract the *least* amount of attention, it seems likely that they would tend to fall back on a familiar way of responding when in "crisis" mode... All JMOO.

(Think about it: Some protect others with guns; others do their "protecting" using what is most familiar to them: their words... *If* the killer comes from a family used to using their words to "protect" each other, then...it would seem entirely natural for someone in the "protect-the-killer" mode to use *their own* words to "protect" a suspect -- perhaps by even advising others "in advance" [of any potential investigations] to avoid donating blood, or doing any DNA tests. "Out-of-the-box" concept? Maybe. Then again, maybe not...)

Well if that happened, I would find that interesting, especially since someone I think could have been involved has a family that is very much about their words. Or The Word. Not my top POI but one who comes up in my ideas here and there, even if not the BG himself. But I have no knowledge of any sort that there was such a request in this family.

 

[Charlot123]

Respectfully snipped by me

I think the Delphi killer lucked out, as many killers do. I don't think he made any great attempts to minimize biological evidence. I think the outdoor crime scene, with a heavy dew probable overnight and the creek nearby to dispose of evidence, played in his favor. MOO

But maybe he needs extreme stimulus to finish, sorry? Maybe his anger was explained by the fact that he could not? I read Chikatilo’s story, the details, again. He was pretty aggressive to victims because his impotence frustrated him, and he “took revenge” on them.

Two years before 2017, a film, “Child 99”, loosely based on Chikatilo’s story, was released. It was a flop, but it potentially could be the material for the copycat.

All such a good idea, @Howcanppldosuch... But what if...? *What if...the killer is an only child, or someone with no cousins in the immediate area? *What if...the killer's "protector" (for the sake of example, let's say a family member, but -- hey, we have *noo* idea, for sure -- entirely speculation here) looong ago back in 2017, shortly after the crime took place, "advised" all family members/relatives via an e-mail newsletter with general family updates, sent to all family members, whether they were then in Delphi, or in any other area of the country, to "not donate blood, or do ***any*** DNA tests of *any* kind; *someone* out there is trying to 'pin' something on one of us..."? *What then?

Oh, sure, I realize that sounds super far-fetched. IKR? But still... when family members are doing their best to "protect" one of their own, and want to do so in the most unobtrusive manner, in order to attract the *least* amount of attention, it seems likely that they would tend to fall back on a familiar way of responding when in "crisis" mode... All JMOO.

(Think about it: Some protect others with guns; others do their "protecting" using what is most familiar to them: their words... *If* the killer comes from a family used to using their words to "protect" each other, then...it would seem entirely natural for someone in the "protect-the-killer" mode to use *their own* words to "protect" a suspect -- perhaps by even advising others "in advance" [of any potential investigations] to avoid donating blood, or doing any DNA tests. "Out-of-the-box" concept? Maybe. Then again, maybe not...)

It is possible only if the “protector” threatened everyone. As in every family there is an outsider, someone who hates them all, some aunt who would gladly donate the DNA to drown them all.

So I would believe threats. Not “kind advises”.

 

[Charlot123]

In my mind, any way you look at it, killing two sweet and innocent girls is a cowardly, and dastardly act. No matter the thought processes that brought him there that day to kill, IMO the Delphi killer, in contrast or not to anyone, is a coward and a monster.

That was a cowardly act. But I am not sure that BG is scared for own life, or clinging at it. MOO.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

Posts have been removed. TD was ONLY approved once as a source for the 1 on 1 interview he did with Barry Morphew. That's it ... there has been no blanket approval for him to be used as a source in any other case at Websleuths.

 

[NavadaSmith]

Was there ever any mention or hint of BG DNA found at the crime scene?

 

[rosesfromangels]

Was there ever any mention or hint of BG DNA found at the crime scene?

Lead detective in Delphi murders confirms police have more audio from phone, DNA evidence | Fox 59

 

[Ursamajr]

Lead detective in Delphi murders confirms police have more audio from phone, DNA evidence | Fox 59

Woah.

Edit: Seems like this article is from 2017

 

[StarryStarryNight]

Woah.

Edit: Seems like this article is from 2017

If I recall correctly, LE has never said “we have DNA of the killer”. They have only admitted to having DNA in general and that they were trying to sort it out which is why they took swabs from friends and family of the girls. Yes they took DNA swabs from sex offenders etc early on but I think that was done as the samples were being analyzed in the hopes the killer’s DNA could somehow be separated from the others. Yes they sent samples off around Christmas of 2017 to the FBI for new analysis, but who knows what that yielded. Nothing I suspect.
I probably am one of the few who do not believe LE has any useable DNA. I hope I’m wrong about this, but I would think LE would want the killer to know they had DNA to put pressure on him. I think they have danced around it, not wanting the killer to know this. They take swabs hoping technology will develop that will reveal the killer one day. Testing all the rape kits in Indiana will not work with no sample to compare it to. Parabon and genealogy DNA are not being done because they have no DNA.
Just my thoughts and I hope I am very wrong.

 

[NavadaSmith]

Lead detective in Delphi murders confirms police have more audio from phone, DNA evidence | Fox 59

Well their Genetic Genealogy search must be stalled for some reason...missing data is not unusual. Not all genealogy searches lead to a match. If that is the case then unless some ancestry documents are discovered Genealogy may not get close enough to define the our Unsub close relatives. If he is captured though the DNA can still used to match him to the crime scene and that will fry him.

 

[NavadaSmith]

And BTW thanks for the reply. rosesfromangels

 

[MistyWaters]

If I recall correctly, LE has never said “we have DNA of the killer”. They have only admitted to having DNA in general and that they were trying to sort it out which is why they took swabs from friends and family of the girls. Yes they took DNA swabs from sex offenders etc early on but I think that was done as the samples were being analyzed in the hopes the killer’s DNA could somehow be separated from the others. Yes they sent samples off around Christmas of 2017 to the FBI for new analysis, but who knows what that yielded. Nothing I suspect.
I probably am one of the few who do not believe LE has any useable DNA. I hope I’m wrong about this, but I would think LE would want the killer to know they had DNA to put pressure on him. I think they have danced around it, not wanting the killer to know this. They take swabs hoping technology will develop that will reveal the killer one day. Testing all the rape kits in Indiana will not work with no sample to compare it to. Parabon and genealogy DNA are not being done because they have no DNA.
Just my thoughts and I hope I am very wrong.

I agree, if beyond any doubt there had been obvious indications of the killer’s DNA left behind by the killer, ie SA, I don’t think LE would’ve still been sending samples away for analysis 10 months later. As Holeman said (from the link above), every crime scene has DNA. But animals, all other humans have DNA as well so the unanswered question still is whether or not LE has conclusively determined which DNA might identify the killer, especially difficult if it involves incomplete profiles and/or transfer/touch DNA.

“At every crime scene, you are going to have DNA. We are still working on identifying all of the DNA that we have there...”

 

[MistyWaters]

Well their Genetic Genealogy search must be stalled for some reason...missing data is not unusual. Not all genealogy searches lead to a match. If that is the case then unless some ancestry documents are discovered Genealogy may not get close enough to define the our Unsub close relatives. If he is captured though the DNA can still used to match him to the crime scene and that will fry him.

The difficulty with frying somebody with DNA is it doesn’t prove when that person was present at the crime scene. LE needs to be able to connect the suspect to actually committing the murders. For example the river was shallow at that spot and can be crossed by bridge access, there’s a path leading to the same area from the cemetery. Apparently the bridge area was somewhat of a local hangout.

This is the challenge involving an outdoor crime scene, it must be proven the suspect murdered the two on Feb 13th, 2017 beyond a reasonable doubt. If the only evidence is DNA was found somewhere, if the suspect is local his story could easily be that he was in the same area a week before, a month before or a year before, partying, fishing, whatever...but pleads not guilty and denies he was there on that specific day. LE has to be able to prove he was there and committed the murders, his DNA being found supports that proof. IMO this is why LE has consistently asked for tips from somebody “who knows something” from the very onset.

JMO

ETA-
Another scenario regarding the risk of wrongful conviction by a conviction using only DNA evidence to convict a suspect - what if the killer planted an object with somebody’s DNA on it at the crime scene, for example a comb or cigarette butt or some other personal object that appeared to have been dropped by the killer?

 

[MistyWaters]

Dbl ETA

 

[EmmaRose]

The difficulty with frying somebody with DNA is it doesn’t prove when that person was present at the crime scene. LE needs to be able to connect the suspect to actually committing the murders. For example the river was shallow at that spot and can be crossed by bridge access, there’s a path leading to the same area from the cemetery. Apparently the bridge area was somewhat of a local hangout.

This is the challenge involving an outdoor crime scene, it must be proven the suspect murdered the two on Feb 13th, 2017 beyond a reasonable doubt. If the only evidence is DNA was found somewhere, if the suspect is local his story could easily be that he was in the same area a week before, a month before or a year before, partying, fishing, whatever...but pleads not guilty and denies he was there on that specific day. LE has to be able to prove he was there and committed the murders, his DNA being found supports that proof. IMO this is why LE has consistently asked for tips from somebody “who knows something” from the very onset.

JMO

ETA-
Another scenario regarding the risk of wrongful conviction by a conviction using only DNA evidence to convict a suspect - what if the killer planted an object with somebody’s DNA on it at the crime scene, for example a comb or cigarette butt or some other personal object that appeared to have been dropped by the killer?

I have often wondered if someone else’s DNA was planted at the crime scene.

 

[NavadaSmith]

I have no problem with someone who's DNA was found at the crime scene to plead Not Guilty. A good prosecutor would tear him a new one if he decides to testify. Esp if the DNA is found on one of the bodies, hair roots under the vic's nails, touch DNA on the girls clothes or a drop of his blood close by. Not worried one bit. Now if the DNA is found on a milk carton 50 feet away, in the Creek etc...thats a little different, yes more evidence would be needed.