Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #136

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
somequestions said:
If I remember correctly and someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I watched a tv program about the Unabomber. One thing I never knew was that he was turned in by his own brother. It turns out when the Unabomber wanted the manifesto published in the papers, his brother picked up the newspaper and could tell by the writing and the ideas expressed that it was his brother. But because he seemed to be very sure, the brother did what he thought was the right thing.

When the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski, was brought in by investigators he was obviously very surprised that LE found him. So he asked the question "How did you find me?" and if I remember correctly, LE told him the truth. Someone correct me if I am wrong. I think at some point the family probably would have told him anyway. I think the special I saw was about family members who are from a killer's family and how they live with the last name, etc.

In the Delphi case, there is always the possibility that a family member may recognize the man from Liberty German's phone video, but I think it will be very difficult to be sure about it. Let's assume for a moment the real killer is 58 years old and lives in South Dakota. This is an example. Now they research the case before submitting a tip because they want to be sure and the only thing they have to go on is what everyone else knows. The man responsible is the man pictured in the second sketch who is between the ages of 18-40 but may be younger than his true age. I do not see 58 years old in that second sketch and the person who may have information but not be sure about it is probably going to think the same thing, especially if they are thinking about turning in their family member. There are others too who do not do it because of denial, but I wonder if that is the case in the Delphi murders.

We also have to remember that not everyone has a deep family history of aunts, uncles, nephews, and nieces. In certain cultures this is seen as completely normal. Not everyone has this in their lives.

But like so many ideas and theories, you cannot begin to discuss their veracity until the case is solved.
Click to expand...


I 100% agree with you. I would do as much research as I could before submitting a tip if I suspected someone of a crime. I wouldn’t want to falsely accuse someone of something.
 
Awsi Dooger said:
There is no such thing as underneath the bridge on the north side. The creek is wide in that area with no way to cross. It is a steep drop off. That's why the 505 trail is forced to gradually slope down to creek level, far to the right and away from the bridge.

The water was high on February 13, 2017. But I found out the hard way in November 2019 that the creek is not crossable in that area even when the water level is considerably lower. I crossed the bridge one way and decided no chance I was crossing it on the way back. I thought I could walk back underneath the bridge and cross Deer Creek near the north side of the bridge, to gather the 505 trail at bottom and ascend. To my surprise that was not available at all. The creek dominates that area, with natural unkept grounds. That's why I continue to emphasize this is not a park. I could not even locate the bottom of the 505 trail on the opposite side, let alone have any to get there. Consequently I had to traipse along Bridge Creek for a long time before finding a large downed log and a Wallenda opportunity that proved successful.

Also, don't bother with the notion that anyone crossed the 850 foot bridge and then walked all the way back to underneath the bridge just beyond the creek. I did that by necessity. Locals don't do that. Maybe some kids playing in the area and using the gravel access road would sometimes be near the creek in that area. Nobody using the trails goes down there:
Click to expand...

hmm that’s very interesting, thanks. Not sure I follow - do you mean the creek was impossible to cross at a spot presumed to be where A&L crossed it ?
 
iamnotagolem said:
I 100% agree with you. I would do as much research as I could before submitting a tip if I suspected someone of a crime. I wouldn’t want to falsely accuse someone of something.
Click to expand...

I think your view on this is common. It's interesting, though, because Doug Carter has stressed more than once that people who may have pertinent information should not feel like they are accusing somebody if they call in something to be checked out. He has said, just let us look into it. If the person is not involved, they will be on their way and they'll never have to know who called them in (I'm paraphrasing, but that's the gist of his comments).
 
Yemelyan said:
I think your view on this is common. It's interesting, though, because Doug Carter has stressed more than once that people who may have pertinent information should not feel like they are accusing somebody if they call in something to be checked out. He has said, just let us look into it. If the person is not involved, they will be on their way and they'll never have to know who called them in (I'm paraphrasing, but that's the gist of his comments).
Click to expand...

But won't the information a person uses to decide whether or not to call in a tip be based on the information released by LE, namely the information and second sketch from the April 2019 press conference?
 
somequestions said:
But won't the information a person uses to decide whether or not to call in a tip be based on the information released by LE, namely the information and second sketch from the April 2019 press conference?
Click to expand...

I imagine it could be based on that, or just "something they feel needs to be reported."

The point of what Carter was saying, I think, is this: if you think you know something that could help solve the case, don't be held back from reporting it by thinking "but I could ruin this person's life if I am wrong." He was trying to say, IMO, let LE look into it. Let LE decide what is important. If the person has nothing to do with it, no harm has occurred.
 
Yemelyan said:
I imagine it could be based on that, or just "something they feel needs to be reported."

The point of what Carter was saying, I think, is this: if you think you know something that could help solve the case, don't be held back from reporting it by thinking "but I could ruin this person's life if I am wrong." He was trying to say, IMO, let LE look into it. Let LE decide what is important. If the person has nothing to do with it, no harm has occurred.
Click to expand...

There also could be a self-preservation part also at play. If your husband is say violent then taking the risk of reporting him risks nothing happening after they've checked him out and now he's coming home angry/risk he logically deducts who it was. Paticularly if the information on its own without context is not a smoking gun, you have to make a leap of faith in the Police.

I'll be blunt, from how it has come across as someone from a different country who is not used to the style of some of the press conferences (Don't know if that is a US thing), I'd not have much in them. But I guess that's irrelevant as long as they do.
 
<modsnip>
To the point of another poster, whether any tipped information is correct or incorrect, Carter has also said "we will protect you." I agree that some may not have faith in LE's ability to do that and it likely remains a stumbling block.

I also think, though, that LE have their ways of doing things where a potential POI may not realize they have been tipped in, especially if the tip proved to be irrelevant information. However, a person who has a tip and is afraid may not realize that it would never just be announced - "we're talking to you today because your neighbor called us," for example.

The accurate evaluation of tips is one reason the holdback information becomes so important.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
FrostedGlass said:
I need a refresher of where DG was when he passed FSG.
Click to expand...

I hadn’t noticed it transcribed anywhere but my recollect the point of BP’s monologue was to explain in general terms why DG didn’t personally check out the bridge area. We don’t know anything of the timing, when DG headed down the trail towards the bridge and met FSG, asked if he’d happened to have seen the girls. I think one reason it’s impossible for us to make any real determination of what is what is because BP was not responding to a question pertaining to who might’ve been suspect, nor did she insinuate anything of the conversation she was repeating was unusual. She was simply talking about the actions of DG when he initially arrived to pick them up and everything was likely not specifically precise nor word for word. We can’t know what we don’t know.

After the girls were reporting missing, definitely after the girls bodies were found it would be extraordinarily bizarre if LE hadn’t talked to all these people to assist in determining a timeline. By now it wouldn’t surprise me if LE has received 1000 or more tips to “you should check out this couple!”

JMO
 
Last edited:
Mod Note:
Several posts from the last few days have been removed. The majority of those posts were back and forth replies on an alleged arguing couple when no link was posted to support the discussion.
If a post is removed due to no link, all posts that quoted it, and those that continue quoting require removal. As a reminder, if you wish to bring something into the discussion a link to reference the information you are bringing up is required.
 
 
JnRyan said:
Kelsi and Gray Hughes talk about DG about 2:11:30 into this podcast. The only time I can recall it being discussed.

Simply put, he is not comfortable with speaking publicly and Kelsi is OK with that aspect.
Click to expand...

That's such a wonderful interview with Kelsi. I just love, admire and support her.

Years ago, I wanted DG to speak on behalf of his daughter. After learning more about the family dynamics, I totally understand his wishes to avoid publicity.

Now, this is the way I remember the story of DGs walk as GH described it in a video 4 or 5 years ago.

When DG was walking the trail, he comes to a place where if he'd looked straight across Deer Creek he'd have been able to see the girls. Those were GHs words, not mine.

So, if you're on the trail DG walked along, the trail sorta curves outward toward the Creek, on the opposite side from RLs land.

Now, we don't know precisely their location, for I feel they were placed a bit higher up, thereby, preventing DG from seeing them even if he'd glanced in that direction.

IOW, if he would have looked straight across at that particular spot, at that point on the trail, facing RLs property, GH seemed to think they were visible and said that in his video.

JMHOO Based upon a memory from long ago
 
 
news buff said:


"So at that point she didn’t answer so he started up towards the trailhead. He stood there for a little bit, he looked around and didn’t see anybody or anything so he thinks he started walking towards the High Bridge, he was just about to where it forks and he ran into an older gentleman that was coming from the High Bridge and he asks him ‘Did you see a couple of girls there?’ and he said ‘No, but there's a couple down underneath.’ " - Mike Patty, Timestamp 22:47, Interview with Mike and Becky Patty by Gray Hughes
Click to expand...
Thank you.
We talked a lot about whether the older gentleman meant a couple of girls or a couple. I noticed Becky put emphasis on "couple", so I took that to mean a male and female.

This part came immediately after the down underneath comment. Is it even possible to see underneath either end of the bridge from trail 505?

So Derrick, instead of going to the High Bridge, took the trail that went down to the creek to where he said the couple was there. I don't even remember if he saw them or what but he came walking back up and he called me.
Click to expand...
 
Just wanted to say that I had been following the case of the California road-rage incident where a gun was fired into a car, killing a 6 year old boy. In relation to the Delphi murders:

After a 2 week search, the 2 suspects have been apprehended, and the vehicle and weapon used in the crime have been seized. This is the kind of swift outcome I had anticipated after Libby’s video was released in 2017.

 
SMK777 said:
Just wanted to say that I had been following the case of the California road-rage incident where a gun was fired into a car, killing a 6 year old boy. In relation to the Delphi murders:

After a 2 week search, the 2 suspects have been apprehended, and the vehicle and weapon used in the crime have been seized. This is the kind of swift outcome I had anticipated after Libby’s video was released in 2017.
Click to expand...
A car model would do it. In Delphi the police have nothing but a picture of a common sort of guy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 195 more.
Total: 4,590 (members: 196, guests: 4,394)

Online statistics

Members online
196
Guests online
4,394
Total visitors
4,590
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,449
Messages
17,969,080
Members
228,774
Latest member
OccasionalMallard
Back
Top