Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #145

Status
Not open for further replies.

Peppery

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2014
Messages
2,188
Reaction score
17,673
I’d like to know more about the FBI agent’s opinion that the bodies had been moved. She said due to injuries they lost a lot of blood, and significant amounts of blood were found at the scene. Makes me think the bodies were moved to pose or hide and not actually moved a great distance. But I’d like to know more…
 

Yemelyan

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2017
Messages
2,974
Reaction score
27,210
Thinking back to the K connection and the CSAM searches, etc., maybe the "staging" was to make the girls look like they had been doing something they were not, and that would indicate the want to digitally document. Or would that be posing? I guess I'm kind of hinting at something that would be shared online and perhaps making it look initially consensual...I don't want to get any more specific. But it's a fine line between posing and staging.
Also thinking back to the press conference statement - "how you left them in those woods...is NOT what they are experiencing today."
 

Yemelyan

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2017
Messages
2,974
Reaction score
27,210
I’d like to know more about the FBI agent’s opinion that the bodies had been moved. She said due to injuries they lost a lot of blood, and significant amounts of blood were found at the scene. Makes me think the bodies were moved to pose or hide and not actually moved a great distance. But I’d like to know more…
I agree, I don't think the bodies were moved a great distance. I think there was a lot of blood at the scene and that's the reason that TL was able to answer confidently that LE believes they were killed in the same place they were found, when he got that question (twice) in the Carroll County Comet interview.

After reading all of this information, the one thing I am sure of is that this isn't a "the girls made him mad" type of crime. This was something done for the offender's pleasure.
 

CADwrest

You're Welcome!
Joined
May 31, 2017
Messages
405
Reaction score
802
Reading the affidavit, here are my takeaways, as RL obviously didn't pan out as a suspect:
1. The aquarium alibi was probably related to him not being allowed to drive, and he thought it'd come up since he at least suspected the crime had happened in the afternoon.
2. He probably didn't bother with one for the transfer station because it was a much shorter trip that happened before the crime probably occurred.
3. Him being outside on his phone was probably due to being attracted by the search activity going on. Given how close he lived to the crime scene, he couldn't really help being 'in proximity' to it.
4. Given the emphasis on guns and knives, both of those implements were likely involved in some way in the murder. I'd be willing to bet the redaction in paragraph 4 is the word 'sharp'. 'Blunt' would fit too, but there's no request for blunt objects in the rest of the search warrant. Further, given the mention of him carrying a gun in a fanny pack, the video probably indicates the presence of a gun in some way.
 

iamnotagolem

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
4,966
Reaction score
8,130
Reading the affidavit, here are my takeaways, as RL obviously didn't pan out as a suspect:
1. The aquarium alibi was probably related to him not being allowed to drive, and he thought it'd come up since he at least suspected the crime had happened in the afternoon.
2. He probably didn't bother with one for the transfer station because it was a much shorter trip that happened before the crime probably occurred.
3. Him being outside on his phone was probably due to being attracted by the search activity going on. Given how close he lived to the crime scene, he couldn't really help being 'in proximity' to it.
4. Given the emphasis on guns and knives, both of those implements were likely involved in some way in the murder. I'd be willing to bet the redaction in paragraph 4 is the word 'sharp'. 'Blunt' would fit too, but there's no request for blunt objects in the rest of the search warrant. Further, given the mention of him carrying a gun in a fanny pack, the video probably indicates the presence of a gun in some way.
In response to point 1. He lied about when he went to the aquarium and asked his cousin to provide a false alibi for that time. That’s what is key, he went to the aquarium leaving a bit before 5 but said he left at 3, got his cousin to say he was with him at 3. This being before the girls were found dead.

If he had no knowledge of their murders then how did he know when he needed an alibi for?
 

JnRyan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
4,959
Reaction score
21,007
In response to point 1. He lied about when he went to the aquarium and asked his cousin to provide a false alibi for that time. That’s what is key, he went to the aquarium leaving a bit before 5 but said he left at 3, got his cousin to say he was with him at 3. This being before the girls were found dead.

If he had no knowledge of their murders then how did he know when he needed an alibi for?
With search parties out and LE out the word may have gotten to him about a 1-3 PM timeframe. But we have no way of knowing.
 

Yemelyan

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2017
Messages
2,974
Reaction score
27,210
With search parties out and LE out the word may have gotten to him about a 1-3 PM timeframe. But we have no way of knowing.
The key is that he did this before the bodies were discovered, though. Even if he had heard about a "missing between 1-3 pm time frame" from LE or searchers, you do not need an alibi for girls who are lost on your property. You do need an alibi for murdered ones.

The affidavit states that RL contacted his cousin at approximately 9:20 am on February 14th to ask him to lie not only about accompanying him on the trip to the store but about the specific time they went. And the bodies weren't found until approximately noon that day. If this was just lying to cover up probation violations, why change the time of the trip?

As the FBI agent wrote in the application for the warrant: “Based on investigators experience it is reasonable to believe that the creation of an alibi prior to the discovery of a crime indicates culpability or knowledge of the crime."

I'm not saying RL did this but I am saying I see why LE were so suspicious.
 

Yemelyan

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2017
Messages
2,974
Reaction score
27,210
So with the "search limited to the discovery of firearms" and the large amount of blood, I assume the girls were shot?
Is it also safe to assume the "unidentified hair" is the DNA?
I don't think we can assume they were shot. The warrant also lists "cutting instruments." This is in point 1. of the warrant.

Edit - The "search that was limited to firearms" that is referred to in the document was the search related to his probation violations, not the search relating to Libby and Abby's murders. The application asks for permission to look into cutting instruments and that is granted by the warrant in point 1.
 
Last edited:

TL4S

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2018
Messages
3,088
Reaction score
26,504
The key is that he did this before the bodies were discovered, though. Even if he had heard about a "missing between 1-3 pm time frame" from LE or searchers, you do not need an alibi for girls who are lost on your property. You do need an alibi for murdered ones.

The affidavit states that RL contacted his cousin at approximately 9:20 am on February 14th to ask him to lie not only about accompanying him on the trip to the store but about the specific time they went. And the bodies weren't found until approximately noon that day. If this was just lying to cover up probation violations, why change the time of the trip?

As the FBI agent wrote in the application for the warrant: “Based on investigators experience it is reasonable to believe that the creation of an alibi prior to the discovery of a crime indicates culpability or knowledge of the crime."

I'm not saying RL did this but I am saying I see why LE were so suspicious.
My question, though, is if he was going to change the time of the trip in his alibi, why not make it for 2pm? Why leave a 45 minute window of opportunity?
 

CADwrest

You're Welcome!
Joined
May 31, 2017
Messages
405
Reaction score
802
In response to point 1. He lied about when he went to the aquarium and asked his cousin to provide a false alibi for that time. That’s what is key, he went to the aquarium leaving a bit before 5 but said he left at 3, got his cousin to say he was with him at 3. This being before the girls were found dead.

If he had no knowledge of their murders then how did he know when he needed an alibi for?
He was kind of inconsistent with the times, he told his cousin "2 to 2:30" and but told the police "3 pm." Paragraph 13 indicates that was false but it doesn't say what the truth was. My reading of it is that the false part of it is that his cousin never drove him at all, he drove himself. The times may be false as well, but it's not totally clear. They never mention when he got to the store or how long he stayed.
Interestingly, the return time isn't totally off the mark. He said he returned 5 - 5:30 and his checkout time was 5:21pm.
Ultimately, though, I'm viewing all of it through the lens that the investigation moved away from him after this.
 

Tippy Lynn

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 9, 2016
Messages
6,539
Reaction score
44,788
I’d like to know more about the FBI agent’s opinion that the bodies had been moved. She said due to injuries they lost a lot of blood, and significant amounts of blood were found at the scene. Makes me think the bodies were moved to pose or hide and not actually moved a great distance. But I’d like to know more…

I suppose this could be where the "shack" reference comes into the picture.
 

Yemelyan

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2017
Messages
2,974
Reaction score
27,210
My question, though, is if he was going to change the time of the trip in his alibi, why not make it for 2pm? Why leave a 45 minute window of opportunity?
This is why I only say that his behavior was suspicious and that I see why they looked into him so hard, not that he is definitely responsible. But perhaps he thought someone could place him nearer his home closer to 2 and so 3 pm was the earliest possible time that he could say that still "made sense." Or 3 pm was the earliest time that made sense with what the cousin could possibly cover for. "Say you took me at 2:00 pm." "I can't, my wife knows I was home at 2. I can say we left at 3."
 

TL4S

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2018
Messages
3,088
Reaction score
26,504
I'm having trouble understanding how phone records can tell RL was outside his house on the evening of the 13th, but only that he was "in or around" his property at 2:09pm. Because that leaves 4 minutes between that phone call and where we see BG on the bridge approaching them at 2:13. It would be significant to know if he was on his property vs on the bridge or trail.
 

Yemelyan

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2017
Messages
2,974
Reaction score
27,210
I'm having trouble understanding how phone records can tell RL was outside his house on the evening of the 13th, but only that he was "in or around" his property at 2:09pm. Because that leaves 4 minutes between that phone call and where we see BG on the bridge approaching them at 2:13. It would be significant to know if he was on his property vs on the bridge or trail.
Me too. I do know that LE can be intentionally vague here. So they can perhaps argue later "he may not have taken his phone with him when he was on the bridge." In essence, it's enough to show it was in the general area.
 

Diddian

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
1,678
Reaction score
30,717
So with the "search limited to the discovery of firearms" and the large amount of blood, I assume the girls were shot?
Is it also safe to assume the "unidentified hair" is the DNA?
THIS warrant authorized a search for "firearms and cutting instruments."

The reference to "firearms only" was in relation to an earlier search for breaking probation.
 

StarryStarryNight

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
2,009
Reaction score
22,848
I’m thinking that if RL is connected in any way to the murders as either the actual killer, an accomplise, or an aquaintaince, that could explain why no one saw a blood splattered person walking back to their car. The killer could have walked straight to RL’s house to clean up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top