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

Status
Not open for further replies.

photographer4

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2014
Messages
1,862
Reaction score
8,193
Thank you PHOTOGRAPER4 you ask some great questions. I just copied this part from your post:-> ""One of LG's shoes was found on the bridge side of the creek. We know some clothes were missing and one shoe was recovered. why is one shoe found where it was? Does that speak to the killer leaving the area and dropping it perhaps? Like do we think LG dropped it there on her own hoping to give a clue as to their direction of movement? Or? Thoughts pls?"
My thought is the shoe that was found is an important clue! If the shoe was found quite a distance from the bodies and the shoe had no blood on it, then one of the girls may have purposely dropped it. If the shoe was found quite a distance from the bodies and was covered in blood, then that would indicate (at least in my humble opinion) that the killer took the shoe along with some other belongings and dropped it as he made his escape.
Of course, the FBI is diligent in photographing crime scenes and would be looking for drag marks. Perhaps the killer just moved the girls to an area that provided more seclusion and delaying the discovery of the crime.
I remember some contributors discussing a second location many years ago and a possible accomplice...could that be the couple heard arguing? Did they mean a couple of men, women or one of each?
I have a few other ideas about the shoe actually:
-> It seems doubtful that the shoe found on the bridge side had any blood on it at all. Why? Because if there had been blood on it that was noticeable, or concerning in amount, it probably would have alarmed LG‘s sister who was along that side of the bridge when the searchers found LG. I haven’t read or seen anything to suggest that the shoe itself freaked anyone out in any way. I’ve only read that the shoe was found on the bridge side not too long before the searchers found the bodies of the girls. If it were more notable, we’d have heard stories about it being found and people being upset and freaked out by it.

Following that train of thought, I’m left with two options really.
1. LG kicked the shoe off herself in order to give some clue to anyone who she knew was going to be soon looking for her and AG as to which direction they may have gone in. She knew her dad was to meet her very soon and she was probably aware that if she didn’t answer his calls / texts, that would worry him. She was smart. She may have dropped it hoping to give a sign as to where to go. It would be interesting to know if the shoe looked kicked off, or if it looked placed. EG: where specifically was it? Was it pointed in the direction the girls were likely sent in? Was LG one who normally bothered to tie and untie laces? Were the laces left differently than she might have left them? You can bet that these are questions the police probably have the answers to.

You can also bet they probably used forensics to find possible evidence as well. EG: that shoe might tell the police a lot more than you think. EG: an assessment of it would tell police whether the shoe had been cleaned before it was found. Perhaps someone took the time to clean dirt or other debris off it and left it there on purpose to help hasten the process of finding the girls. More likely if his aim was shock and horror.

Or: perhaps there was dirt on the sole that matched dirt from the side of the hill they were told to go down. If the other shoe was found, that would have the same soil if it was marched down the hill. Let’s consider the creek for a minute as well. What about minerals from the water itself? If the shoe had been in the creek or not, if that shoe was in the creek even for a brief moment before it ended up where it did, then perhaps minerals soaked into the absorbent parts and could be determined by police - that might tell them if the shoe was placed or left there before the actual killing.

2. If someone placed that shoe there postmortem, you might know if it had been cleaned. EG: was bleach used? Sprayed on? Wiped off? You might notice that with the help of a special chemical and a black light (luminal, I think, but do not quote me). If there was no blood on the shoe, then where was it while the bloody murders happened? Did the killer keep it a safe distance away? Avoid getting blood on it as he made his retreat?

I’m going to just assume police know more than we know about the shoe and everything else and hope it helps point in a direction that tells the story and solves the crime eventually.
 

sandy_80

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
572
Reaction score
3,297
why there is no talk..he was eliminated based on dna as well ?
they would have taken his dna if they considered him a suspect right
there is a tiny doubt in my mind that he might have found them before anyone and didnt report it
 

sandy_80

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
572
Reaction score
3,297
This newly released affidavit tells us a little bit, but obviously not enough to answer all of your questions. However, one thing the affidavit does say is: "A large amount of blood was lost by the victims at the crime scene." This is from point 4 of the affidavit. So yes, the crime scene was bloody.

Why did the searchers not know what they had come upon? Keep in mind that was one person's opinion who wasn't there at the moment they were discovered. However, perhaps the bodies were covered or concealed in some way (leaves or brush?). Perhaps the person speaking knew that the searchers did not get very close to the bodies (smart people if knew enough not to disturb the scene). I would also guess that shock might have kept the first searchers from processing exactly what they were seeing if it was especially brutal. For example, a lay person might have seen discoloration on the victims' bodies and assumed it was bruising from the victims fighting their murderer. When in reality, forensic examiners might know that those marks are due to the regular processes of early decomposition, not bruising at all. Just giving an example here.

It's my opinion that since the affidavit says that the crime scene was the location where the large amount of blood was lost, that the victims were moved within the boundaries of that specific area after death. We know from the crime scene coordinates given in this document that it was located probably 50 feet or so from the banks of the creek. The crime scene tape never extended as far as the creek. I think whatever occurred, happened within that taped off area alone. But it's JMO.
isnt it possible however ..that while the victim lost so much blood >>the crime scene could still be clean ?
cause that what RL said afterwards describing it..after le left of course
i mean is it possible..that the loss of blood was mainly due to examination of the bodies and due to horrific injuries ? or does it necessary mean the state of the said crime scene
 

Falcon500

Verified Law Enforcement Detective/L.E. Procedures
Joined
Jan 15, 2012
Messages
510
Reaction score
3,083
Yes, you are absolutely correct.
Thank you PHOTOGRAPER4 you ask some great questions. I just copied this part from your post:-> ""One of LG's shoes was found on the bridge side of the creek. We know some clothes were missing and one shoe was recovered. why is one shoe found where it was? Does that speak to the killer leaving the area and dropping it perhaps? Like do we think LG dropped it there on her own hoping to give a clue as to their direction of movement? Or? Thoughts pls?"


She ran out of her shoe while running to get away.
 

TL4S

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2018
Messages
3,079
Reaction score
26,444
I think she ran/stepped out of her shoe, too. Considering the proximity to the creek, including the crossing itself, maybe it stuck in the mud.

Once the killer approached the girls at the end of the bridge, the audio ended and I don't think either girl had the time or ability to leave clues, like a shoe, behind, nor would she want to have to purposefully walk that area without her shoe.

Unfortunately, I think it came off on either side of the bank and the killer simply didn't care, leaving it behind with all the other clothing LE said they recovered.
 

TL4S

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2018
Messages
3,079
Reaction score
26,444
Two things keep rolling around in my head from the 2020 KAK interview, especially now with details we know from the RL SW. In that interview, the LE officers read from a CSAM exchange with a young girl where something is mentioned about "my daddy" wanting to do something with the girls underwear (I can't find it now on the more heavily redacted version). Judging by the large word redacted in the RL SW on the souvenir taken, I think "underwear" could fit there. Then there's the mention of KAK having a thing for girls' stomachs. I mean, I could be getting ahead of myself in my thoughts, but I think LE chose the conversations they read to KAK carefully, and I just wonder if it eludes to some of this evidence we now know about. Jmo.
 

Spartygirl

Verified Insider - Michael Vanzandt case
Joined
May 3, 2016
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
37,479
I am not putting a lot of faith in this --I mean, I believe it is from a FBI agent and her thoughts /reasons for the warrant, I get that.

I just do not believe RL is BG or a murderer. I never have thought that.

PLUS-- this quote below just goes against what we have been hearing for 5 years.
Libby fought like hel!, the girls were killed where they were found.. not moved.

Yet, this is the FBI agent's thoughts on the case to get the warrant.

"The warrant also reportedly indicated that it “appeared the girls’ bodies were moved and staged.” It also is said to have asserted that the police found no evidence of a “struggle or fight.”

IDK, but I cannot get on board with all of this. JMO
 

deugirtni

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
9,616
Reaction score
25,369
This current news article states that RL died in 2020: FBI agent: Bodies 'moved and staged' in Delphi murders, suspect took clothing

Edit to add: they probably have the date wrong (based on estate filings) but I would expect them to update; and it's confirmation that he is deceased.

He died Jan 24, 2022.
HIs estate: 08C01-2202-EU-000011
RIP Mr. Logan
Thank you. I would have thought his death at the time, would have been bigger news, both because of his connection to this case, as well as another death due to Covid (reportedly, according to youtubers). Is there an obit, or a memorial notice, or a 'find-a-grave' marker, or something? Where did the estate number come from posted above?
 

deugirtni

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
9,616
Reaction score
25,369
Is it 'normal' for an FBI search warrant request to be signed by the FBI agent without the agent's title/rank/standing(?) listed as well in the signature area?
 

FrostedGlass

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2017
Messages
2,338
Reaction score
8,112
Thank you. I would have thought his death at the time, would have been bigger news, both because of his connection to this case, as well as another death due to Covid (reportedly, according to youtubers). Is there an obit, or a memorial notice, or a 'find-a-grave' marker, or something? Where did the estate number come from posted above?
This is where Indiana court cases are, put in his case number. Indiana Supreme Court public access case search - MyCase

Once there, click on "Order Issued" and the info will be in there.
 

AC4RD

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2019
Messages
340
Reaction score
3,446
PLUS-- this quote below just goes against what we have been hearing for 5 years.
Libby fought like hel!, the girls were killed where they were found.. not moved.
Yet, this is the FBI agent's thoughts on the case to get the warrant.
"The warrant also reportedly indicated that it “appeared the girls’ bodies were moved and staged.” It also is said to have asserted that the police found no evidence of a “struggle or fight.”
Just my own guess, but it may be true that the bodies were found where the murders took place, at the "scene of the crime," but that after death the murderer moved the bodies in small ways--arranged them so the heads were in one direction and the feet the other, "staged" them by placing their faces pointing in the same direction or their arms around each other ... Thus the bodies were found in the place they were killed, but there was still some movement and/or staging postmortem. :-( Just MHO.
 

HistoryNut

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
338
Reaction score
1,937
The new details about the crime literary makes me sick. By the evidence he left behind, he wanted them to suffer. Not to mention, he took a trophy and staged the crime scene. IMO, he’s another Ted Bundy, and I wonder if he’s been murdering people before and after L & A. I also wonder if he stopped because he’s incarcerated like KAK and JBC.
 

Arkay

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2019
Messages
1,047
Reaction score
16,126
I'm a million miles behind in this case.

I wasn't yet a member of Websleuths when Libby and Abby were killed, but I remember that it was too painful to follow on the news at the time. My eldest granddaughter was 12 then and I just couldn't bear it.

Since I joined Websleuths 2 1/2 years ago, I've occasionally ducked into these threads. I know about BG and some of the potential suspects, but not much else.

Thanks to everyone here, your theories and attention to detail, I'm catching up. Since their case is in the news again, I ducked back in but it's difficult to catch up with everything.

I have no clue as to which monster did this. My only opinion is that RL does not resemble BG. I know about KAK but was unaware of TK. I'm too uninformed about this case's details to speculate further.

Another of these tragic mysteries that just are so painful, even to us strangers, that I can't imagine how their families cope.
 

Trebor5591

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Messages
692
Reaction score
5,450
PLUS-- this quote below just goes against what we have been hearing for 5 years.
Libby fought like hel!, the girls were killed where they were found.. not moved.

Don't forget that what we have been hearing for five years is very little from LE and a lot of internet speculation based on conjecture and comments made by searchers and family of the deceased. The "Libby fought like hell" idea we have all been hearing about may well have been speculation based on conjecture and family comments repeated and repeated by amateur sleuths like us until it became accepted as fact. I feel certain law enforcement did not say anything about Libby fighting like hell.

The search warrant say there was no signs of resistance by the girls probably means no defensive knife wounds on their hands or arms. Hopefully that means the end for them came so quickly they did not have much time to react.

My opinion only.
 
Last edited:

Spartygirl

Verified Insider - Michael Vanzandt case
Joined
May 3, 2016
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
37,479
Just my own guess, but it may be true that the bodies were found where the murders took place, at the "scene of the crime," but that after death the murderer moved the bodies in small ways--arranged them so the heads were in one direction and the feet the other, "staged" them by placing their faces pointing in the same direction or their arms around each other ... Thus the bodies were found in the place they were killed, but there was still some movement and/or staging postmortem. :-( Just MHO.
Ahhh--OK-- well, that makes sense then if the "moved" was the moving of post mortem "staging" then, yes... parts of their bodies were moved.

I went all in, thinking their whole bodies were moved from one location to another.

Thanks for that explanation and it makes sense @AC4RD
 

IceIce9

Verified EMT
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
4,145
Reaction score
39,606
Don't forget that what we have been hearing for five years is very little from LE and a lot of internet speculation based on conjecture and comments made by searchers and family of the deceased. The "Libby fought like hell" idea we have all been hearing about may well have been speculation based on conjecture and family comments repeated and repeated by amateur sleuths like us until it became accepted as fact. I feel certain law enforcement did not say anything about Libby fighting like hell.

The search warrant say there was no signs of resistance by the girls probably means no defensive knife wounds on their hands or arms. Hopefully that means the end for them came so quickly they did not have much time to react.

My opinion only.
AFAIK the rhetoric about Libby “fighting like hell” came from her grandfather, not Mike Patty but another grandfather in Michigan maybe? Then the remark got repeated over and over again on SM and by sleuthers until everyone heard it so often that it was taken as gospel. JMO
 

Peppery

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2014
Messages
2,188
Reaction score
17,673
I am not putting a lot of faith in this --I mean, I believe it is from a FBI agent and her thoughts /reasons for the warrant, I get that.

I just do not believe RL is BG or a murderer. I never have thought that.

PLUS-- this quote below just goes against what we have been hearing for 5 years.
Libby fought like hel!, the girls were killed where they were found.. not moved.

Yet, this is the FBI agent's thoughts on the case to get the warrant.

"The warrant also reportedly indicated that it “appeared the girls’ bodies were moved and staged.” It also is said to have asserted that the police found no evidence of a “struggle or fight.”

IDK, but I cannot get on board with all of this. JMO
The libby fought like hell quote has morphed over the years. Iircc, MP originally said something like if I know Libby, there no way she didn’t fight like hell. I think this was said soon after the murders and at the time he didn’t have any inside knowledge, but it would be impossible to find a link now. So moo.

I also agree with the previous poster who said they were likely moved within the scene, perhaps a few feet at most. I do think they died and were found within a few square meters at most.
 

m00c0w

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Messages
3,047
Reaction score
1,056
Correct. Could have given the phone to a searcher.

Phone location in such an area as the one in question might be good to within 200 feet, that's going off experience having worked in cell tower equipment design and manufacturing. People with experience driving for ride share platforms and/or using ride share apps know this, besides, they use Google to find pick up and drop off points.

The apps use Google Maps, which uses cell tower signals. What if one or more towers in an area are 'off' a little bit? What about 'dead spots' for signals? Tower data may have put RL's phone within 'x' number of feet close to the CS, when in reality the phone was 500 or more feet away. Happens all the time with tower location data.

That evening during the initial search, LG's phone was pinged, and they knew it was in the general area in question, but would not have known its precise location.

JMO

That's true for location data based off of cell tower pings, which is what they were referencing in the affidavit. But assuming RL's phone was GPS equipped and they were able to retrieve that data, they should have been able to get fairly precise (within a few feet probably) location from that. The GPS location is based on satellites, so the scarcity of cell phone towers wouldn't matter.

It seems clear that they didn't have that information at the time the affidavit was filed, but they may well have gotten it later and determined that RL's phone was at his house, not at the crime scene. That would be one explanation for LE seeming to move on from him as a suspect.

Phone tower triangulation is not used for navigation purposes on cell phones, and 200 feet is generous for tower triangulation. If you're only working with two towers, your possible area could be hundreds to thousands of feet. Usually more towards the thousands than hundreds. If you are only hitting one tower, you can only make very basic approximations based on signal strength and azimuth from the tower. There will be something like a 2km area that phone could potentially be in. If you have a phone in the same general location for a while that keeps hitting off of towers, it is possible you can collect enough data to narrow down the area based on overlapping sectors, but that's a pretty specific set of circumstances.

GPS is used for most location-specific stuff on a phone nowadays. A telecom provider can use the GPS functionality of the phone to send the phone's location back to the provider given a search warrant (or sometimes exigent circumstances, like a person in imminent danger). This only works in real-time (ie you cannot collect historical GPS data from the provider, only data since the geolocation was started). If you want to see historical locations, you have to rely on historical tower records which produce the results I described above. When the phone connects to the tower, that is logged in the telecom's system. With a warrant, you can retrieve that data and analyze it to create a broad picture of where the phone was that during the specified time range. It won't be nearly as accurate as GPS, and you're still only going to get an answer like "we can tell RL wasn't at his house because of how the sectors overlapped, but we can't tell where exactly he was on the property aside from that".

Even if you get a phone extraction, you're likely not going to get much location data of value unless he was snapping photos at the time and left his GPS tagging on. I suppose if he had wifi on, you'd be able to see connects/disconnects to his home wifi in the logs... but that's neither here nor there at that point. All of this to say, investigators probably never got super accurate information on RL's whereabouts on his property during the day of the murder, and there's probably not much they could do to get better information, unfortunately.

MOO
 

Spartygirl

Verified Insider - Michael Vanzandt case
Joined
May 3, 2016
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
37,479
AFAIK the rhetoric about Libby “fighting like hell” came from her grandfather, not Mike Patty but another grandfather in Michigan maybe? Then the remark got repeated over and over again on SM and by sleuthers until everyone heard it so often that it was taken as gospel. JMO
yes-- Libby's grandfather said that in a news article
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top