Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #146

Status
Not open for further replies.

JnRyan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2013
Messages
4,968
Reaction score
21,086
(snipped by me for length)

I agree with your conclusions. I don’t think it’s misleading as much as using the gray areas to the investigator’s advantage. She can truthfully say he was in the proximity, because proximity is a vague word. She can say he was likely outside of the house because the data showed a greater-than-not chance that he was outside of his house. Keep in mind, as well, that she also caveats it with being the “initial analysis”, so there is still wiggle room for that to ultimately be an incorrect statement. Writing affidavits is almost an art, and you have to know how to work within the uncertainties to achieve the results you’re looking for. I absolutely 100% cannot fault her for anything she wrote. That being said, anything she couched with “possibly” or “likely” or similar should not be taken as 100% fact, because if it was a plain fact it would have been addressed as such.

I think that the house could be somewhat excluded because of where it lies in relation to the cell towers. It appears to be right on the edge of two sectors of two towers, so it’s possible that the tower overlap was enough to cut the house out of the picture while retaining a bunch of the rest of the property. Whether that’s accurate or not (phone in house vs phone not in house) isn’t for me to say - that’s a level of precision that would take actual site surveys and capabilities that I don’t have to prove.

JMO
Agree with all of that. That agent wanted a SW and the wording was designed just for that purpose. I should have explained what I meant by 'misleading' and that is for the majority of us on here that are reading this affidavit - not LE. That is why your explanation of cell phone data was so important. In fact, now that this affidavit is loose out in the public arena, it could be misleading to those persons as well.
 

m00c0w

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Messages
3,047
Reaction score
1,059
Agree with all of that. That agent wanted a SW and the wording was designed just for that purpose. I should have explained what I meant by 'misleading' and that is for the majority of us on here that are reading this affidavit - not LE. That is why your explanation of cell phone data was so important. In fact, now that this affidavit is loose out in the public arena, it could be misleading to those persons as well.
Yeah, I don’t think you meant anything negative. That was more pre-emptive. Someone got pretty mad at me earlier for suggesting the agent may have taken liberties with the location data to help obtain the SW, so I figured I would take the opportunity here to elaborate on the entire premise.
 

SMK777

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
2,657
Reaction score
20,187
Hi, I was a big follower of the Delphi murders case here on Websleuths for a long time, but I fell away from the threads due to too much frustration and dead ends.

I’m attempting to catch up because of information online that I’m just now seeing. I’m sure this has been seen and posted by many, but I’m just stunned about the parts regarding neighbor Ron Logan:

The affidavit indicates that Logan, who died in January 2020, lied to investigators.

It also indicated that Logan asked his cousin the morning of Feb. 14, 2017, to tell police — if asked — that he picked up Logan at his house between 2 and 2:30 p.m. Feb. 13, 2017, and drove to an aquarium store in Lafayette.

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," the affidavit states.


The affidavit also noted that Logan's voice could be the man on the audio recording released by police in which the killer orders the girls to "go down the hill."


 
Last edited:

abams

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
182
Reaction score
1,786
I dont think the police are blaming it on RL.

Rather, news channels are sensationalizing and hyping their "new" material. While the material does contain some new information regarding the victims and the circumstances of the crime, the core facts regarding RL seem to be old:

- RL was not a pleasant person and lied to the police. This contributed to him being a suspect to some degree.
- An FBI search warrant was served on his residence / property.
- The search warrant yielded nothing. RL also had a plausible explanation for his lies (prevent probation officer from learning that he was driving on a suspended license).

The investigation then moved on.....

To be clearer, we have no idea what this particular search warrant actually yielded. We can make assumptions, since no charges were ever brought in the end, but we have no idea what evidence was or wasn't obtained.
 

Barbieshell

Always be kind folks YOLO
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
284
Reaction score
2,325
To be clearer, we have no idea what this particular search warrant actually yielded. We can make assumptions, since no charges were ever brought in the end, but we have no idea what evidence was or wasn't obtained.
My problem was Ron had a good few weeks before he was raided / the search warrant was executed to dispose of evidence. His land is vast, they turned the dogs around, he could pretty much account for everything else because the girls were found on his property.
 

IQuestion

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
1,997
Reaction score
7,479
Here's something to ponder, what happens if Ron Logan was BG, he told the girls they were trespassing and offered to get them back across the creek where he killed them. But as a coincidence someone Libby had been communicating with went to the bridge to meet them - "I was supposed to meet up with her but she didn't show up".....he then thinks he's been blown off, exits the trails and gets his dad to pick him up.
Doug Carter said nobody had got the scenario right, it could be something like the aforementioned but it could explain someone giving LE the YBG sketch as he was there, with his burner phone perhaps, possibly planning to do something illegal, but not murder.
This case is just baffling, I think LE need to come out and publicly state Ron Logan was NOT bridge guy, or maybe he was, maybe he did get them back over to his side and shooed them off with a flea in their ears only for them to fall into the clutches of the actual killer that was on the trails - eek !!
Snipped from above: But as a coincidence someone Libby had been communicating with went to the bridge to meet them - "I was supposed to meet up with her but she didn't show up".....he then thinks he's been blown off, exits the trails and gets his dad to pick him up.
That is a possibility and KAK actually wrote "I was supposed to meet her but she didn't show up" comment to a contact. Only problem is he didn't truthfully convey that information to LE when questioned. In fact I seem to remember there was some verbal arm twisting to even get him to admit he was in contact with LG at all. I would hope the person she was supposed to meet and the parent who picked him/her up contacted LE as soon as the story hit the news.
 

Blacksheep13

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
48
Reaction score
337
I feel like KK would be involved with a network of pedophiles. It’s very typical with that type of behavior. Possibly shared the information with someone else about meeting her and they took his place and committed this heinous act. Plausibly why he wouldn’t be so forthcoming. He was already toast for the inappropriate pictures and catfishing. He just didn’t want some accessory etc to murder rap as well.
 

TheProblemWeAllLiveWith

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 27, 2021
Messages
25
Reaction score
352
I'd be surprised to learn that the kids ever asked BG anything really. We've always been told that LG took the video of his approach, perhaps secretly to conceal what she was doing and perhaps to show someone later about the weird guy they saw at the bridge. I believe that is the case, and if so, I cannot imagine the girls stopping to ask him anything. I don't know if BG issued a command to go "down the hill" or if he was directing their attention to something "down the hill". I almost think it was directing their attention because LE have said the look on one of the girl's faces was demonstrative of her fear of what she realized. So I wonder, if he directed their attention, "down the hill" - what could have been, "down the hill" that might shock or scare them?
Once the girls stepped foot on the bridge, they were under the control of the killer/s. They’re was no path to escape & they had to keep walking to the end. We don’t know at what point on the bridge they realized they were in danger, when BG showed up, or when they began filming the video. I’m guessing that feeling of being trapped on the bridge with that man might be the fear the investigators were referring to.

It’s been a long time since I’ve looked at the details, but the girls were made to cross the creek to get to the kill site on RL’s property, correct?
If so, they were still alive at that time according to the SW?
 

minneolo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2020
Messages
153
Reaction score
2,087
Reading the search warrant, this is my speculation:

In the early weeks of the case, RL was a viable POI given where the girls were found, and his history and evasiveness. The warrant was written in a way that utilized the facts at hand but emphasized just those that would make RL look like a possible suspect.

My guess is that LE’s theory at the time was that RL and the Klines were collaborating and/or that they suspected RL of photographing the scene.

After the search and subsequent investigation, LE decided that RL was not directly involved with the deaths.

IMHO, RL is certainly a creep. Probably with some things to hide. But his offenses don’t include these killings. Mid-70s isn’t the age at which an offender commits a first-time double-homicide of children with ‘odd signatures’ and a complex crime scene. I also speculate that if he was collaborating with the Klines, he would not allow the crime to take place on his property.

One fact that’s troubling is RL trying to manufacture an alibi. It doesn’t quite fit with my theory. My best explanation is that he distrusted LE given his background, had some (unrelated) things to hide, and tried to manufacture the alibi to simply avoid scrutiny.

I also agree with an earlier poster (forgive me for not remembering who!) that if RL was the killer, this case would have been solved within the first year.
 

Arkay

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2019
Messages
1,060
Reaction score
16,297
IMHO, RL is certainly a creep. Probably with some things to hide. But his offenses don’t include these killings. Mid-70s isn’t the age at which an offender commits a first-time double-homicide of children with ‘odd signatures’ and a complex crime scene. I also speculate that if he was collaborating with the Klines, he would not allow the crime to take place on his property.

I agree, but we never really know.

The Taiwanese man (with a pro-China agenda) who killed and wounded Taiwanese people at their church recently is 68 years old.

We don't know if these older people may have done these horrific acts before but were never caught, or if even at their more advanced ages, they suddenly snapped. Maybe they were harboring fantasies for a long time and couldn't control it anymore.

That said, I still don't think BG resembles RL. That white mustache is pretty conspicuous.

IMO
 

Blacksheep13

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
48
Reaction score
337
I’m leaning towards RL’s evasiveness being related to his long history of run-ins with the law…not necessarily his involvement in this case. I don’t think as a property owner he would just leave the victims posed and laying on his property. He would want to do something to ensure they weren’t found.
 

cuecard

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
91
Reaction score
1,017
No signs of a struggle could possibly indicate a single fatal strike, say slitting of carotid artery, as opposed to multiple stab wounds, where the natural instinct would be to defend with hands.
I actually think this is what happened too with this new info coming to light. I think when he got them into the general area he wanted he probably incapacitated one of them before they could do anything and then turned his attention to the other. I think the actual act of the killings happened pretty quickly. It would also help explain the moving of the bodies.
 

m00c0w

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Messages
3,047
Reaction score
1,059
The alibi seems like a smoking gun that he knew about the murders until you realize that RL told the police he was picked up at 3. With that, it looks like the timing of the alibi didn't really matter to him. It was seemingly just a coincidence that he picked 2-2:30 to begin with.
 

Angleterre

Verified LE & Sr Investigating Officer, England
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
1,893
Reaction score
14,093
JMO- Comments from investigators describing the crime scene as pristine and lack of struggle suggest to me the perp had some means to control them and suggests perhaps overwhelming h force. This suggests towards two perps. Even with the addition of a firearm it would be difficult to control both of them. Two perps certainly could have.
I respectfully disagree . Of course I could be wrong and it was two perpetrators however, at that age, the fear would be so great that they would have been terrified even without a weapon involved but with a weapon then even moreso and it wouldn’t necessarily take two perps to control them. Don’t forget that these are young girls and their frontal lobe of their brain would not yet be developed and that is responsible for reasoning and decision making and responsibility etc so they were probably scared to the point that they truly couldn’t move other than where directed, they would possibly be thinking of running but the risk too great and not wanting to leave their friend behind and they probably couldn’t think fast enough once he was upon them and were unable to process the situation quickly enough to do anything other than comply initially . Fight or fight and adrenaline rushing but we look at the situation and put ourselves there as more experienced grown up people who have life experience, and we think about what they may have done or said or not done as our adult selves and not as a 12/13 year old self with a best friend in tow. Plus we have the benefit of hindsight. We don’t know their thought process but from my own perspective , working with child victims of crime, they can be so compliant and non combative , especially the younger they are. After all, she recorded the offender as he was obviously advancing and making them uncomfortable but I suspect by the time they even thought that through , it didn’t give them much time or any real obvious 12/13 years old options of thought to do anything about the situation they found themselves in, particularly with a weapon , real or perceived, to control them alongside their own fear .
 

Angleterre

Verified LE & Sr Investigating Officer, England
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
1,893
Reaction score
14,093
Exactly. I'm not in LE, but I do have a job where I frequently need to get approval from a higher authority. You know the result you want, so you're only going to put things that support that result in your request (EG. they leave out that he's not in the likely age range of the suspect, which they thought they knew at this point.)
There's something of an art to it. You want both quality AND quantity. You start with your strongest arguments, like the agent does here: The murder scene is on his property, his build is consistent with the suspect, he's known to carry the type of weapons used, he lied to create an alibi, someone thought the person in the video was him, etc. Then, to pad it out and make it the evidence seem overwhelming, you add supporting facts that wouldn't really stand up to scrutiny on their own: He's physically able to navigate the terrain, his phone was in the proximity at the time, he's capable of violence under different contexts, etc. The idea is, by the time the judge (in this case) gets to that part of it, he's made up his mind in your favor, and that all just reinforces it.
Exactly this above ⬆️
As someone who has sworn out many warrants in front of judges, this is exactly how it goes……
 

Angleterre

Verified LE & Sr Investigating Officer, England
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
1,893
Reaction score
14,093
You raise an interesting point. RL's phone made a call at 2:09 pm. Libby started recording the video of BG four minutes later at 2:13 pm. In my mind, that means RL isn't BG... I just don't see BG calling someone from the vicinity of the bridge with Libby and Abby in sight.
Why not? It’s a good way for him to appear initially innocuous and non threatening as he neared the girls in the event that he was seen by a member of the public and to allow him to get closer to the girls before they got the message and were really spooked by him.
“I just happened to be in the vicinity taking a phone call your honour , not kidnapping two young girls “ - thinking of his response in a court of law . It’s actually a smart move to sew a seed of doubt IMHO and from an investigative standpoint and that’s all that is needed, a tiny element of doubt and then it’s no conviction
 

TheProblemWeAllLiveWith

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 27, 2021
Messages
25
Reaction score
352
Sorry, long rambling post, I did try to organize it a bit.

The killer/s seemed to take many risks with this crime. Everything went down in broad daylight, there were other hikers around, noise carries a good distance that time of year, and they knew they had a limited time window before the girls would be picked up and the alarm raised when they didn’t show up.
It was a difficult journey. The killer/s had to lure the girls from their homes, to the trail, and then once they were in the ‘danger zone’ the girls were made to walk about 1/4 mile down a hill and across a creek, without noise or resistance, to their deaths. They must have been bound and gagged, because that is a long time to be afraid for you and your friend’s lives. I believe they would have tried to get away if they could have.

My gut instinct is saying this crime was part of a much bigger network of cp/murder film production. (WRT L&A, I don’t know if there was BG at the start of the bridge, another guy at the top of the hill, another guy farther north with binoculars watching for hikers, another guy to film, a driver, who knows? I’d say there was at least 3 men that day). This could be a massive investigation, maybe even international. I have to hope that L & A’s killer/s are locked up on other charges, and will face justice eventually along with the others we don’t currently know about.

I’m aware of Occam’s razor though.

RL
I don’t think RL personally killed the girls, but I think he was involved with this group of men. Maybe he was the lookout. Maybe he was an alibi for someone else. Maybe he owed them a favor. Maybe they blackmailed him.

**Why make the girls cross a creek and kill them on RL’s property?**

We do know that RL had control of the crime scene for a good chunk of time, and we do know he lied to LE during a double homicide investigation into two little girls found on his property, because he was worried about violating parole. He knew LE would corroborate his story, so why bother lying? I like the theory mentioned earlier that he’d rather have his parole revoked than have to narc on one of the killers.

Now is a good time to remind your children to never let someone take them anywhere or restrain them, no matter what, scream and fight for your life right there.
ETA I don’t know why I’m hung up on the creek crossing element, it just seems awkward and risky. Why even go to RL’s property at all? Trying to throw off a future scent hound?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top