Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #130

[TL4S]

I've always felt once the killer told them to 'go down the hill' he would have a short time period in which to contain them. The only possible hope the girls would have had to escape him would have been once they hit the private road. I don't feel once they went down the second 'hill' to the creek, they tried to 'run' at that point. Water, rocks, etc slippery. I feel he incapacitated them before going across the creek, then carried (or dragged) each girl to the final spot they were found deceased at.

I always wondered if, just before he got to the end of the bridge, the girls themselves went down to the gravel road to try to avoid an encounter and wait until he turned and went back across. Maybe "down the hill" actually was the hill off the road instead of the bridge.

 

[FrostedGlass]

Yes, but the kind of scofflaw culture Indiana is, MOO no one would report them.
MOO Indiana is unexpectedly druggie and criminal.
Extremely lenient courts, cases go on for years, get pled down.

I am astounded at some of the plea deals I see. Seasoned criminals, people they could put away, given slaps on the wrist.

 

[Justice101]

following

 

[Charlot123]

I've always felt once the killer told them to 'go down the hill' he would have a short time period in which to contain them. The only possible hope the girls would have had to escape him would have been once they hit the private road. I don't feel once they went down the second 'hill' to the creek, they tried to 'run' at that point. Water, rocks, etc slippery. I feel he incapacitated them before going across the creek, then carried (or dragged) each girl to the final spot they were found deceased at.

I don’t believe he threatened them with a gun. I feel that the scenario from “hi guys” to the girls ending up dead might have been different.

If he is a local and someone sees him taking the girls down the hill, he can still explain it. He is taking them out of the dangerous zone. He can not explain the gun.

If he is a non-local, he can impersonate the forest ranger. Unless he has a gun out.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I’m not here to discuss definitions. I want to hear everybody’s ideas. Even the ones I disagree with, I respect, and stow the info away in case it’s needed.
After all, we’ve spent four years dissecting and disassembling every word and sentence LE has said, and after those four years where are we....we’re all four years older! That’s about it!
What I have learned from all this is Indiana LE has the communication skills of an inanimate object. They are awful at it. No sense in trying to read between the lines if the lines themselves are indecipherable.
Just my thoughts.

 

[Pyschsandi]

@Yemelyan, thank you for your time explaining...although Merriam-Webster is on my side

Definition of CIRCUMSTANCE

“a condition, fact, or event accompanying, conditioning, or determining another : an essential or inevitable concomitant”

With that, surely, small utterances like those of TL, are subject to interpretation.

The main thing - I enjoy your articles about SKs, but it is my human right to doubt that the girls’ slayer was a serial killer on the prowl. (ISP, in a way, almost went there, with DN, and what happened? Two years lost in vain. )

But coming to non-native speakers - if you think I had to summon my “other” languages to interpret what has been said, it is obvious, why - I don’t buy the theory of a serial killer, unless we assume that the killer lives in Delphi or around, and it is not quite logical. Maybe the murderer is a serial killer. The ISP is not releasing more facts, and how they speak, is subject to huge interpretations. (Except for R. Ives, who definitely has logic on his side, but this, I suspect, is inborn).

I hope you won’t be upset if I say - after “the shack”, after two sketches, I don’t know anymore what ISP representatives mean when they speak to public. Especially if in one interview TL uses words like “victim-specific” when speaking about the murders, and in another, “victims of circumstances and opportunity”.

My opinion? Maybe they simply have to arrest him, if they think they know, and then, the witnesses might come. Definitely, they should stop public briefings if they have nothing new to say. And for sure, being interviewed by the family member indicate certain boundary issues on DC’s part. I suspect he did it out of kindness, but his act invites another question, can he be impartial when interviewing the relatives and cross-checking the alibis?

I’m not going to rule anything out at this time. I agree BG may not be a serial killer, but he might be one. We just don’t know. We do know that he did three things that he didn’t need to do in order to commit the crime which are the three signatures. The police found evidence everywhere that an unorganized killer would leave. Unorganized killers tend to find victims around areas familiar to them. The crime could be just a one time crime, but I think he could strike again. I hope and pray that I am wrong.

 

[photographer4]

If* he walked out the way he went in, and was still wearing whatever he was wearing when he killed the kids, was it necessarily a bloody crime scene? We're told it was an unusual scene or something to that effect by LE - what made it so? We were told he left physical evidence, but not what we might think. What does that mean?

 

[JnRyan]

A Sister’s Walk for Justice: The Delphi Murders [EXCLUSIVE]

"This means the killer did something unique that was not necessary for the commission of the crime. I asked him (Ives) straight out could there have been two killers.

He said, “No, I don’t think so. This was one person.

A killer leaving at least three different signatures leads me to think there is some distinct mental illness that he would not be able to hide from others. We don’t know if these signatures were pre or postmortem. Ives said it’s not like any other crime he has been to."

This is some interesting stuff from Ives, IMO.

For the longest time I've heard Ives state "...it’s not like any other crime he has been to." I believe I've read that Ives has spent almost all of his career in that area. I believe I've also heard him say they've had murders, but the culprit was caught soon after. Very few murders over his career to be sure. But I imagine all of what he has seen to this point are committed by a family member or an acquaintance known to the victim and the motive was money or it was the result of something like a domestic issue. To find two girls murdered like this is probably enough to qualify as different from any crime scene he has been to before. IOW, not necessarily because of something ritualistic or symbolic at the crime scene. I try to no longer read too much into that statement by Ives.

Unlike the sheriff he doesn't publicly ponder about whether there is one killer or two. He seems to believe it was one person.

 

[Pyschsandi]

If* he walked out the way he went in, and was still wearing whatever he was wearing when he killed the kids, was it necessarily a bloody crime scene? We're told it was an unusual scene or something to that effect by LE - what made it so? We were told he left physical evidence, but not what we might think. What does that mean?

Since we don’t know how the girls were killed, we don’t know if BG was bloody or not. LE doesn’t say what evidence they found, so we are all theorizing about almost everything in this case. I’ve heard rumors on the net about how the girls died but they are rumors and can’t be backed up with evidence.

 

[minazoe]

I think we all agree with several scenarios...the reason being? we know little to nothing about the crime.

planned/unplanned/staged for shock/ staged to obscure motive/catfished/snapchatted/random/ known/unknown/ weapon/hair/hat/young bg/old bg/

the only reason I got on a father son kick is that older sketch with the younger sketch.

maybe the new sketch was meant to send a message.

rabbit hole again? could be...mOO

 

[pearl]

I’m not going to rule anything out at this time. I agree BG may not be a serial killer, but he might be one. We just don’t know. We do know that he did three things that he didn’t need to do in order to commit the crime which are the three signatures. The police found evidence everywhere that an unorganized killer would leave. Unorganized killers tend to find victims around areas familiar to them. The crime could be just a one time crime, but I think he could strike again. I hope and pray that I am wrong.

Bolded by me

I have followed this case for years. I know that they said there were signatures. However, I must have missed the information being given about an unorganized serial killer's evidence being left at crime scene. Do you know a source for that information? Thanks in advance.

 

[Yemelyan]

@Yemelyan, thank you for your time explaining...although Merriam-Webster is on my side

Definition of CIRCUMSTANCE

“a condition, fact, or event accompanying, conditioning, or determining another : an essential or inevitable concomitant”

With that, surely, small utterances like those of TL, are subject to interpretation.

The main thing - I enjoy your articles about SKs, but it is my human right to doubt that the girls’ slayer was a serial killer on the prowl. (ISP, in a way, almost went there, with DN, and what happened? Two years lost in vain. )

But coming to non-native speakers - if you think I had to summon my “other” languages to interpret what has been said, it is obvious, why - I don’t buy the theory of a serial killer, unless we assume that the killer lives in Delphi or around, and it is not quite logical. Maybe the murderer is a serial killer. The ISP is not releasing more facts, and how they speak, is subject to huge interpretations. (Except for R. Ives, who definitely has logic on his side, but this, I suspect, is inborn).

I hope you won’t be upset if I say - after “the shack”, after two sketches, I don’t know anymore what ISP representatives mean when they speak to public. Especially if in one interview TL uses words like “victim-specific” when speaking about the murders, and in another, “victims of circumstances and opportunity”.

My opinion? Maybe they simply have to arrest him, if they think they know, and then, the witnesses might come out. They might be scared now. Definitely, they should stop public briefings if they have nothing new to say. And for sure, being interviewed by the family member indicate certain boundary issues on DC’s part. I suspect he did it out of kindness, but his act invites another question, can he be impartial when interviewing the relatives and cross-checking the alibis?

Sorry, not sure I understood much of this but, I stand by what I wrote. The "circumstance" in the American English colloquial phrase "victim of circumstance," refers to an unintended, unpredicted situation. It's just how we use the phrase.

 

[Pyschsandi]

Bolded by me

I have followed this case for years. I know that they said there were signatures. However, I must have missed the information being given about an unorganized serial killer's evidence being left at crime scene. Do you know a source for that information? Thanks in advance.

The unorganized SK was my opinion because LE said they had a lot of evidence. The organized SK won’t leave much evidence behind because he will clean up the crime scene and wear gloves, etc... All of what I said was my theory. That’s all we can really do is theorize in this case.

 

[Yemelyan]

I always wondered if, just before he got to the end of the bridge, the girls themselves went down to the gravel road to try to avoid an encounter and wait until he turned and went back across. Maybe "down the hill" actually was the hill off the road instead of the bridge.

TL was asked in the Comet article where "guys...down the hill" was uttered and his answer was "south end of the high bridge."

 

[minazoe]

okay i have new one..( please don't explode in laughter). but if you should , I understand.

the bomb threat on the processing plant.

could this crime have an animal rights aspect? someone who hates what they do at that
plant? really it is horrible isn't it? I wonder about what kind of threats they have received over the years and what the long time workers there know about it, does the plant have bomb threats often?, also does the property owner where the shoe was found have any relationship to it? what other kinds of threats have they received at the plant...?

is it family owned? does the family live in the area?

people are crazy...really crazy.mOO

 

[JnRyan]

This may or may not fall into the related discussion as to whether this was a crime of “opportunity” and/or “circumstance”, but I wonder about planning.

As an example, farmers where I grew up frequently had a gun in a rack of the back window of their truck or behind the seat. If such a farmer drives out with the intention of checking their north soybean field during deer season and sees a six point buck on the edge of the field something different might happen. A hunter before going out in the field for a planned hunt might go through their checklist – ammunition, hunting license, hunting/skinning knife, etc. – before even leaving the house. Planned. In the case of the farmer he didn’t plan on shooting a deer on that trip, but he probably checked to make sure he had his wallet with his hunting license/tags and his rifle. Gets out, shoots the deer and works out the details – cleaning, skinning, etc. – later. He didn’t INITIALLY plan on getting a deer, but once the situation presented itself, he devised a plan.

I try to picture in my mind how this killer operated. Did he go out to the trails prior to this and devise a plan and then went there that with he planned to need on his person and hunted a victim? Or did he find himself at the trail that day and see the girls and possibly went back to vehicle and get what he needed.

For those of us on here, that distinction probably holds little meaning, but LE probably does give it a lot of thought. I also wonder if the crime scene yields anything that tells the investigator the level of planning in this and the type of person he/she is looking for. How does the signatures figure into this, if at all? How the definition of “opportunity” or “circumstance” in criminology fits into these, I don’t know. Just thinking out loud.

 

[Pyschsandi]

okay i have new one..( please don't explode in laughter). but if you should , I understand.

the bomb threat on the processing plant.

could this crime have an animal rights aspect? someone who hates what they do at that
plant? really it is horrible isn't it? I wonder about what kind of threats they have received over the years and what the long time workers there know about it, does the plant have bomb threats often?, also does the property owner where the shoe was found have any relationship to it? what other kinds of threats have they received at the plant...?

is it family owned? does the family live in the area?

people are crazy...really crazy.mOO

I wouldn’t discount anything at this point, but I would think that an animal rights activist would respect all life and wouldn’t do a crime as this one. Don’t ever think that a crazy idea wouldn’t have any merit because this is a sick person who did this horrible crime.

 

[Yemelyan]

I’m not here to discuss definitions. I want to hear everybody’s ideas. Even the ones I disagree with, I respect, and stow the info away in case it’s needed.
After all, we’ve spent four years dissecting and disassembling every word and sentence LE has said, and after those four years where are we....we’re all four years older! That’s about it!
What I have learned from all this is Indiana LE has the communication skills of an inanimate object. They are awful at it. No sense in trying to read between the lines if the lines themselves are indecipherable.
Just my thoughts.

Respectfully, I am here to discuss definitions because it allows me to learn and educate myself about dangerous offenders and their motivations. Ideas are not the only important thing here, and in my opinion ideas/theories must fit both the known facts of the crime and reality. Of course anyone should be welcome to post any ideas they have within TOS; however, if there are fallacies of documented facts in the case, or misunderstood definitions (of how criminologists use the term "signatures," let's say) I think those things should be pointed out for discussion. It's nothing personal, but not all theories about the crime deserve equal consideration because some contain a lack of knowledge or misunderstanding of the facts or context. JMO

Communication from LE in this case has been vague at times and confusing at others. I hope one day, perhaps at trial, it will be obvious to us why this was and that there's a reason other than incompetence. However, if LE issue corrections or do give out more info over time I think we should take this at face value and not have a knee jerk response that LE is always lying to the public or deceptive.

 

[St. Anthony2017]

8-sec. video clip of some volunteers gathering to search on the morning of the day the girls were found (Valentine's Day). Some of these well-meaning guys were undoubtedly scrutinized after the release of the sketch.

https://twitter.com/JillianDeam/status/831523564834738178

This guy was in an out pretty quickly for whatever he did to the kids. Have we considered that he may have planted trail cams to watch what was going on? Would police even have found them if they were way up high over the scene? WOuld they even think to look UP? Have electronic sniffing dogs ever been used in this case / in that area?

It is said there are tree or deer stands for hunters off the trails but does anyone know where the closest one to the crime scene was?

 

[MistyWaters]

Circumstance from Google/Oxford
1. a fact or condition connected with or relevant to an event or action.
"we wanted to marry but circumstances didn't permit"

• an event or fact that causes or helps to cause something to happen, typically something undesirable.

So Monday, Feb 13th was an unusually warm winter day and a day off school. After a sleepover at Libby’s place, the two girls asked to spend the afternoon at the bridge, hiking and taking photos. Although they had no means to get there on their own, Libby’s sister kindly agreed to drop them off on her way to her boyfriends place. They arrived just after 1:30pm.

This to me all that describes the “circumstances” (ie situation) causing them to be at the bridge at the exact same time a killer was lurking.

Had the weather not been warm, had they been in school, had the two friends not been hanging out together, had they not went to the trail/bridge but instead to somewhere else, etc this tragedy wouldn’t have occurred however there easily might’ve been different victim/s .....but still totally opposite to that of a targeted murder, premeditated murder of Abby and Libby.

JMO