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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Diddian said:
If he was a planner, and there are elements which indicate he was in relation to this crime, he may have even planted hair or DNA (say, a used cigarette butt or drinking container) from someone else at the scene (a former convict or offender known to be in CODIS) in an effort to lead investigators astray.

There are so many things that might explain the sudden change in direction in April 2019, but I've often wondered if it was something like this: DNA at the scene from someone who has a solidly provable alibi, so could not possibly have been there.
Click to expand...
I'm with you on this - it wouldn't be super hard to leave evidence at the scene that points to someone else, and this would explain the sudden change in direction in April 2019. There are a lot of elements that make me think that this was planned, and that this was possibly more than just a murder in the woods.
 
Peppery said:
Hate these posts, but does anyone have a link to LE saying they could see a look of terror on one of the girls faces?
Ive been here from the beginning, skipped a few threads, but I dont remember hearing that before. Thanks.
Click to expand...
I hate to be "that person" who is always asking for a link as well but I wondered the same when I saw this popping up in the thread. I don't remember LE ever specifically saying they saw a look of terror on one girl's face.

The closest thing might be this statement from Sgt. Riley in "Down the Hill", this has been cited in the threads numerous times, most recently by @cujenn81 in her post on page 4 of this thread:

DTH:
Obviously, without telling us the parts that you don’t want to release, can you tell us what that’s like to watch that video?

Sgt. Kim Riley:
“It was scary. Uh, I guess would be one way to put it. Just [pause] seeing, um, you know—seeing, just seeing the feelings that were going through the girls at the time. I’m not going to say which one, in particular. But, just knowing that—I, you know, just knowing what they knew is—is just, is just frightening for, uh, a 13- or 14-year old girl to know.”

I think people read this or heard this from the podcast and started running with their own visual of what he might have meant when he said he saw their feelings they were having at that time and he found it scary. My interpretation is that he "saw" - perhaps by hearing their voices on the video - that they realized they were being abducted and he found it frightening to think of a 13 or 14 year old girl going through that. I believe he is a father himself.
 
photographer4 said:
... 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 ... So I wonder, if he directed their attention, "down the hill" - what could have been, "down the hill" that might shock or scare them?
Click to expand...
(respectfully snipped for focus) Just MHO but I think it clearly is a command, and this is obvious in the very first press conference with the LG cellphone audio;

Delphi Police Conference 02.22.17 FULL | RTV6
Cpt Dave Burstin, beginning at 17m15s in; clip played x 4, twice, beginning at 19 minutes.

This is the original "down the hill" audio; at 17m15s Captain Burstin says it is 'four words .. ah, three words," but this is the clip released originally, without the "Guys" preceeding the command. My own opinion (after listening several times) is that BG clearly says "GO down the hill"--a command, imperative voice.

The emphasis added above is mine; in the audio clip, "go" sounds somewhat minimized, almost slurred. It sounds rather like "G'down the hill" to me. But I clearly hear the word "go" begin the command. Listen for yourself and see what you think.

There are several edited versions of the audio on the web, in which noise has been removed (Tom Webster's "my research" on youtube is the best IMO) and the word "go" is more clearly audible. But this press conference is the first official release of the audio so we know the clip is endorsed by law enforcement.

When LE released the later audio version with the word "Guys" preceeding the command, the "go" is no longer audible, in my opinion. There are probably conspiracy theories about why the audio was released a second time with "guys" added and "go" omitted, though I don't know of any and personally don't see any reason to look for sinister or conspiratorial motives on the part of the police.

Give it a listen; the clip loops 4 times and it is played twice. Listen all the way through and see if you think the actual command was "go down the hill." MOO is that it was.
 
Yemelyan said:
I hate to be "that person" who is always asking for a link as well but I wondered the same when I saw this popping up in the thread. I don't remember LE ever specifically saying they saw a look of terror on one girl's face.

The closest thing might be this statement from Sgt. Riley in "Down the Hill", this has been cited in the threads numerous times, most recently by @cujenn81 in her post on page 4 of this thread:

DTH:
Obviously, without telling us the parts that you don’t want to release, can you tell us what that’s like to watch that video?

Sgt. Kim Riley:
“It was scary. Uh, I guess would be one way to put it. Just [pause] seeing, um, you know—seeing, just seeing the feelings that were going through the girls at the time. I’m not going to say which one, in particular. But, just knowing that—I, you know, just knowing what they knew is—is just, is just frightening for, uh, a 13- or 14-year old girl to know.”

I think people read this or heard this from the podcast and started running with their own visual of what he might have meant when he said he saw their feelings they were having at that time and he found it scary. My interpretation is that he "saw" - perhaps by hearing their voices on the video - that they realized they were being abducted and he found it frightening to think of a 13 or 14 year old girl going through that. I believe he is a father himself.
Click to expand...
Yep. That is the quote I'm referring to. So what did they know and when did they know it? How do police know what they knew?
 
AC4RD said:
(respectfully snipped for focus) Just MHO but I think it clearly is a command, and this is obvious in the very first press conference with the LG cellphone audio;

Delphi Police Conference 02.22.17 FULL | RTV6
Cpt Dave Burstin, beginning at 17m15s in; clip played x 4, twice, beginning at 19 minutes.

This is the original "down the hill" audio; at 17m15s Captain Burstin says it is 'four words .. ah, three words," but this is the clip released originally, without the "Guys" preceeding the command. My own opinion (after listening several times) is that BG clearly says "GO down the hill"--a command, imperative voice.

The emphasis added above is mine; in the audio clip, "go" sounds somewhat minimized, almost slurred. It sounds rather like "G'down the hill" to me. But I clearly hear the word "go" begin the command. Listen for yourself and see what you think.

There are several edited versions of the audio on the web, in which noise has been removed (Tom Webster's "my research" on youtube is the best IMO) and the word "go" is more clearly audible. But this press conference is the first official release of the audio so we know the clip is endorsed by law enforcement.

When LE released the later audio version with the word "Guys" preceeding the command, the "go" is no longer audible, in my opinion. There are probably conspiracy theories about why the audio was released a second time with "guys" added and "go" omitted, though I don't know of any and personally don't see any reason to look for sinister or conspiratorial motives on the part of the police.

Give it a listen; the clip loops 4 times and it is played twice. Listen all the way through and see if you think the actual command was "go down the hill." MOO is that it was.
Click to expand...
Oh wow! I *do* hear "go down the hill!" in that recording!! It is also interesting to me that in introducing the clip to the public it is initially described as four words then he corrects himself and says three words. I cannot imagine being either of the kids hearing this guy's voice and realizing just how screwed we were.
 
photographer4 said:
I'm not sure that I'd believe that they captured their own murder on video because LE have said that the video is 43s long. They've said as well there was a lot of work done to the video by various agencies to make it clearer etc (not sure if that was regarding the video or sound quality or both). It doesn't seem like there is anything else they can reveal to the public from the video or nothing else that may be useful.
Click to expand...
You're right. I can't recall where this was stated (maybe HLN?), but even before the RL SW, we were told the video was 43 seconds long and that "guys...down the hill" was at the very end. So no, the murders themselves were apparently not part of that same video/audio on L's phone.

DC said, at one point, that they knew a lot about the beginning and end, but not the middle. IOW, in my interpretation, they know about the encounter at the end of the bridge, and they know where and how the girls were killed, but don't have a clear picture of the events in-between. At least not at the time he said that. Of course, who knows...

LE has also said that a lot of search warrants had been served over the years, and continue to be. I'm sure if we had access and could read them all, our personal list of suspects would grow substantially. Everyone would look guilty in those affidavits, I'd bet.

But what we do have is a very recent statement by L's family that says LE told them they suspect a SM connection. And we have the a_shots "creator" ask and updated SM platforms used by a_shots. Clearly, this a_shots link is pertinent to the case. We know who is the "creator" of a_shots, although in 2020, LE told KAK they thought there was more than one "creator," and we have admission by KAK to communicating with L via a_shots.

Now, I'm willing to consider it's possible a_shots and the Ks are only a middleman between the killer and the girls, but as of yet, I haven't seen anything convincingly tying any of the many POI's (per the public) to the Ks or the CSAM ring. It will be curious to see where this goes.
 
AC4RD said:
(respectfully snipped for focus) Just MHO but I think it clearly is a command, and this is obvious in the very first press conference with the LG cellphone audio;

Delphi Police Conference 02.22.17 FULL | RTV6
Cpt Dave Burstin, beginning at 17m15s in; clip played x 4, twice, beginning at 19 minutes.

This is the original "down the hill" audio; at 17m15s Captain Burstin says it is 'four words .. ah, three words," but this is the clip released originally, without the "Guys" preceeding the command. My own opinion (after listening several times) is that BG clearly says "GO down the hill"--a command, imperative voice.

The emphasis added above is mine; in the audio clip, "go" sounds somewhat minimized, almost slurred. It sounds rather like "G'down the hill" to me. But I clearly hear the word "go" begin the command. Listen for yourself and see what you think.

There are several edited versions of the audio on the web, in which noise has been removed (Tom Webster's "my research" on youtube is the best IMO) and the word "go" is more clearly audible. But this press conference is the first official release of the audio so we know the clip is endorsed by law enforcement.

When LE released the later audio version with the word "Guys" preceeding the command, the "go" is no longer audible, in my opinion. There are probably conspiracy theories about why the audio was released a second time with "guys" added and "go" omitted, though I don't know of any and personally don't see any reason to look for sinister or conspiratorial motives on the part of the police.

Give it a listen; the clip loops 4 times and it is played twice. Listen all the way through and see if you think the actual command was "go down the hill." MOO is that it was.
Click to expand...
Yes, and in the RL SW, the FBI agent describes the words "down the hill" as apparently directing them down into the woods below the bridge (paraphrasing).
 
TL4S said:
DC said, at one point, that they knew a lot about the beginning and end, but not the middle. IOW, in my interpretation, they know about the encounter at the end of the bridge, and they know where and how the girls were killed, but don't have a clear picture of the events in-between. At least not at the time he said that. Of course, who knows...
Click to expand...
Why do you suppose the RL search warrant makes no mention of the recording the girls made being on the bridge? They say walking on the trail and give the coordinates of where the bodies were found.
 
m00c0w said:
Since several people have talked about the phone tower data and there seems to be some confusion about towers versus GPS and accuracy between the two methods... let me explain what's going on here using some sourcing. This is something I have extensive experience in with my day job, so to see the data misrepresented is somewhat bothersome.

This article is a pretty good primer on how historical cell tower data works - you get a list of phone calls and texts from the telco, and with each call or text are the towers the phone was connected to during the session (sometimes more than one, in the case of a phone call that is jumping between towers). The data from that product is then analyzed according to the article:

wrongfulconvictionsblog.org

Cell Tower Triangulation – How it Works

First, I refer you to Martin Yant’s earlier post on this subject: The post makes the point that data from a single cell tower is essentially worthless in trying to place someone in a partic…
wrongfulconvictionsblog.org wrongfulconvictionsblog.org

Of note, one of the first things they point out is "...data from a single cell tower is essentially worthless in trying to place someone in a particular location. The best you can expect is a band within a 120° “pie wedge” from the cell tower.". This is true from my experience, as well.

If you have one tower, you will wind up with a tower location and which sector of the tower the signal was present in:

View attachment 344994

You also get a signal strength that sort of allows you to estimate how far away from the tower the phone was, but it's still going to be somewhere within that 120 degree sector along that band. You can have miles of possible area to cover. If you have multiple towers that overlap, you can start to narrow down where the phone is using basic triangulation - the more towers, the better. AFAIK, there were only two towers in the area of RL's house, for instance, so your ability to pinpoint an exact location isn't going to be very solid. You'll still have a pretty sizeable chunk of area to account for.

Using cellmapper.net, you can actually see that his house sits at the very edges of sectors of both towers. With this, it may be possible to eliminate him having been at his house without knowing where he actually was on the rest of the property that is still within the relevant portion of the relevant sector.

Here's an additonal WaPo article that goes into some more depth about the intricacies involved with this:


They have a similar tower sector image in that article as well. One interesting note from the article that bears repeating:



JMO if not covered by something cited
Click to expand...
This is all good info here and you explain it quite simply in a short and concise post. (I would not be surprised if the detailed and technical explanation could cover an entire chapter - or more - in a technical manual.)

So with the above explanation, I come back to what bothers me about sections 22-24 of the 17 March affidavit.
*************

TWENTY-TWO​

A call placed using Logan's cell phone produced cell tower data.

This shows Logan's cell phone appears to be in or around his property on February 13, 2017 at 2:09pm, although his exact location cannot be confirmed.

The tower data shows that Logan's cellphone was in the Delphi area in the area of the Monon High Bridge Trail.

TWENTY-THREE​

An analysis of Logan's cell phone data revealed a text message sent from his phone at 7:56pm on February 13, 2017.

The initial exam of this analysis indicates Logan's phone was likely outside of his residence and in the proximity of where LG and AWS bodies were located.

TWENTY-FOUR​

An analysis of Logan's cell phone data revealed a text message received by his phone at 10:16pm on February 13, 2017.

The initial exam of this analysis indicates Logan's phone was likely outside of his residence and in the proximity of where LG and AW bodies were located.
*******************
I don't believe it is too much of a stretch to assume the FBI agent is using historical data. Elsewhere in the affidavit (Section 4) it states that RL's home is ~1400 feet from where the bodies were found. So just being in his house or on his front lawn he is in proximity of where the bodies were found.

RL could be sitting in front of his TV in his den and be in the vicinity of the crime scene. So given the accuracy of the historic cell phone data how can LE tell if RL was outside his house or sitting in a room in his house? I understand that if RL was, as an example, stopped at stop sign a half mile from his house on Rt 300 LE might be able to determine that RL was outside his house, but that is not the crime scene. Furthermore in my example could LE determine exactly where RL would be - at the crime scene, standing in the cemetery or at that stop sign? IOW, given the accuracy of the cell phone historical data there is a high probability that there is an innocent explanation as to why the data shows he was outside his house.

Earlier one of posters, @skibaboo, created a map from Google showing where we believe the cell towers were located in relation to the Monan High Bridge.

www.google.com

Abigail Williams & Liberty German. Delphi, IN. 2/13/17 - Google My Maps

April 2019 UPDATE - https://www.in.gov/isp/delphi.htm https://www.in.gov/isp/files/Delphi_Audio_Edited_2019x3.mp3 https://www.in.gov/isp/files/Delphi_MotionFix.mp4 The Delphi Police Department, the Carroll County Sheriff, the Indiana State Police, and the FBI are asking for your assistance in...
www.google.com www.google.com

For someone not familiar with cell phone technology it would seem that Sections 22-24 are misleading.
 
JnRyan said:
This is all good info here and you explain it quite simply in a short and concise post. (I would not be surprised if the detailed and technical explanation could cover an entire chapter - or more - in a technical manual.)

So with the above explanation, I come back to what bothers me about sections 22-24 of the 17 March affidavit.
Click to expand...
(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
 
I don’t think the instagram photo was materially relevant to the search warrant. The video was, because people thought RL looked like BG. We already knew they were dropped off, they had video, the phone pinged there, and that’s where they were ultimately located. The photo of the two of them at the bridge wouldn’t add anything of value to the warrant.

JMO
 
TTF14 said:
Yes, I meant the photo. And presumably, the "video" of BG was right after, correct?
Click to expand...
The timeline seems to be that the A photo was at 2:07 (nobody visible behind A on the bridge/trail - also L took a photo of the bridge facing south and nobody visible there, either), RL's phone made a call at 2:09, then the video was at 2:13. I've seen it said that the average time to cross the bridge is 5 to 7 minutes (some say longer). That seems to mean that BG must have entered onto the bridge (if he started on the north side), shortly after the A photo, around 2:08ish. So if RL is BG, or whoever was using his phone is BG, then RL's phone made that call from right beside or right on the bridge (or from the south end, if that's where BG started). If LE could prove the 2:09 phone call was from the bridge or right by it, then I'd put heavy weight on RL being suspect. Because I don't think it's possible for RL or the user of his phone to make a call from RL's property 4 minutes before L's video and still be at that spot on the bridge by 2:13. The problem, as others have posted, is that we don't know for certain how precise the phone data was for where that call was placed. The FBI agent just said "in or around his property" and "in the Delphi area in the area of the Monan High Bridge Trail." I'm seeing people state this like the call was made from the bridge, but I don't believe that's exactly what is being said in the affidavit.
 
Last edited:
m00c0w said:
I don’t think the instagram photo was materially relevant to the search warrant. The video was, because people thought RL looked like BG. We already knew they were dropped off, they had video, the phone pinged there, and that’s where they were ultimately located. The photo of the two of them at the bridge wouldn’t add anything of value to the warrant.

JMO
Click to expand...
how can he look like BG ?
he looks nothing like BG
tall
white hair
elderly
thin hollowed cheeks
 
Marking beginning of Monday’s WS discussion re: Murder Sheet podcast & Ron Logan Search Warrant so I can catch up on everyone’s comments in order :)

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

—-

Eta: Might as well bring forward MS podcast link and SW while I’ve got them handy:

podcasts.apple.com

Murder Sheet: The Delphi Murders: Search Warrant on Apple Podcasts

Show Murder Sheet, Ep The Delphi Murders: Search Warrant - May 16, 2022
podcasts.apple.com

“The Murder Sheet obtained a search warrant filed in the Delphi murders.

About two weeks after the murders of Liberty German and Abigail Williams, authorities raided house where Kegan Kline lived with his father. That was February 2017. In this episode, we'll talk about the March 2017 search warrant focusing on Ron Logan, the man who owned the property where the girls were found murdered.”


Ron Logan Search Warrant
https://www.wishtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/LOGAN-WARRANT-final_Redacted.pdf
 
Last edited:
sandy_80 said:
how can he look like BG ?
he looks nothing like BG
tall
white hair
elderly
thin hollowed cheeks
Click to expand...
I mean, I agree with you. There are some folks, however, that were included in the affidavit that thought the video of BG looked like RL. So the video was relevant enough to reference it in the application for a search warrant of RL’s property.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 96 more.
Total: 3,476 (members: 97, guests: 3,379)

Online statistics

Members online
97
Guests online
3,379
Total visitors
3,476
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,880
Messages
17,960,303
Members
228,625
Latest member
julandken
Back
Top