Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #96

[moonlessnight]

I don't see the camera.

The other thing I saw after watching the presser for the 400th time and never seeing it before, was the small camera behind Carter shooting the attendees.
MOO, MOO

 

[OldLadyBlues]

I wasn't going to say anything, but I guess I have no self-control. When I first read that, I thought it said that the camera was recording Carter shooting the attendees, and I thought I must have missed a big part of that PC! I think I may need to take a break from reading soon.

LOL! I guess I shoulda worded that differently!

 

[Jaclin]

I agree with everything you’ve written. And the reason he hasn’t killed again may very well be due to the focus that’s been consistently maintained on this case. The “power” that Carter spoke to, the connection, does he get his kicks off the ongoing notoriety, his voice, his photo, all the media and internet attention - which in turn enables him to imagine his despicable actions over and over. This is the main reason I’m very glad LE has never mentioned SA, even if it did occur. I agree, the pressure is on.

MOO I'm not sure we can know that he hasn't killed again. OK, if they found matching DNA from another crime scene, then we would know, but if other bodies haven't been found or if no usable dna was present, then he still wouldn't be connected to the other crimes. Not saying that he has killed again or will.

 

[Jaclin]

Great post. And I agree. But I do think the statement he read HAD TO BE scripted or he couldn’t have made it through. They need to shake this guy up and get a reaction from him. They desperately need that break. I still believe it was scripted and for good reason.

and also so they wouldn't inadvertently show their hand

 

[cjack410]

I know the picture quality of BG is not so good, but its hard to see a younger man's
face in that pic or video, it just doesn't look like a younger guy.

Could he have been wearing a mask? I know its random

 

[tmar]

I wasn't going to say anything, but I guess I have no self-control. When I first read that, I thought it said that the camera was recording Carter shooting the attendees, and I thought I must have missed a big part of that PC! I think I may need to take a break from reading soon.

This has given me a laugh, as so stressed that the Creep hasn't been arrested.

 

[PaulaDC]

I'm hoping there is a parabon sketch that resembles the original sketch so closely. Hence the two weeks. Seems they are always close when they release the sketch.

I could see why they might rule out the first sketch if they made a positive ID and were able to prove that he was uninvolved, perhaps even recently. What is more confounding to me is their confidence regarding the newly released sketch. It seems like the first released sketch was originally a POI only, where now they are claiming confidence that the newly released sketch is definitely the killer and claiming that this sketch more closely resembles the man in the video. I find that very interesting. I still see mostly just a Caucasian blob for a face. Outside of having a parabon sketch made that resembles the original sketch, I don't see how they can make this leap, unless there are more images they don't want us to see. Maybe someone recently arrested with nothing else to lose admitted to seeing something and gave a description that matched the younger sketch.

 

[Harmony 2]

Here is what I have so far: I've heard mention of a 1.) teenager witness (or possibly a group of teenagers) who saw 2.) someone dressed all in black, 3.) a woman who provided the details for the OBG sketch, 4.) the man coming off the trail that Libby's Dad spoke with, 5.) possibly a person in flannel (may be the same as the person Libby's Dad spoke with), 6.) the actual recording from Libby's phone, 7.) a witness who felt something they needed to be reported (this mention may be referring to the recording from Libby's phone) that provided the details for the NBG sketch and a 8 - 9). couple under the bridge (may have been the girls / may not have been / may not have existed at all). I don't have links for all of this yet but if requested I can provide the ones I do have references for.

Edited to add: ... and 10.) woman on bridge (CE) who stated "she had been at the bridge shortly after the girls posted the photo. She said she didn’t notice anything out of the ordinary. '“I even walked all the way across the bridge and back. I only (saw) 11.) a guy when I first got there and 12-13.) another couple once I got on the bridge,” CME wrote. “I didn’t see the girls at all. I also didn’t take the trail that leads to the right. Only took the trail that lead to the bridge.”

Assuming none of these are the suspect I am counting 10 -13 potential witnesses.

Please provide MSM or LE links for the information in this post. If the information comes from comments in social media it is not allowed as it is considered rumor.

 

[MassGuy]

I'm hoping there is a parabon sketch that resembles the original sketch so closely. Hence the two weeks. Seems they are always close when they release the sketch.

With a Parabon sketch, you know they are close; genealogy is almost always in the works at that stage.

I thought that’s exactly what we’d see at that press conference. Unfortunately, I don’t see any signs of that at this point.

I’m not reading too much into that “two weeks” or “couple weeks” comment. I think that’s just an effort to give the family time to process all of this.

 

[Jaclin]

I agree it is unlikely that anyone could remember who was parked in a certain place 2 years ago. Which is why it was strange to me that LE waited this long to even talk about that if they knew this information before now.

I can't even say what cars were in my apartment parking lot when I got home today. I think, for anyone to be helpful about the car at this point, they would have to be close to the suspect. Someone saying to themselves, "I went hiking with my ex boyfriend and we parked in that lot sometimes", or "When I worked at that building, one of my co-workers would always leave his car there to go hiking on the trail (or go fishing at the creek)."

 

[Charlot123]

That is a great question. If a person confesses to a religious leader, who may also be a family member, what then? I wonder if there are any law cases on this.

I don’t know if there are any rules. Confession is sacred, I think, and in countries where church used to collaborate with any legal organs or secret services, it was later accused specifically of this.

But here. we are discussing deranged, unhinged murderer, so...

If a person confessed to a religious leader in general, i’d think the life of the said leader is not worth much, as he becomes the witness. I’d never leave the confessory place alone. I’d immediately seek ethical guidance from the clergyman above me, via Skype, and describe the confiding person, just to safeguard myself. And follow the guidance.

If it is someone in the family who is not a very close relative, the same rule applies.

If it is a very close relative who knows, he/she should better call a lawyer and behave like a non-religious leader would, according to his/her moral principles.

(This is why doctors prefer not to treat own relatives. They are too close to the situation).

 

[Charlot123]

With a Parabon sketch, you know they are close; genealogy is almost always in the works at that stage.

I thought that’s exactly what we’d see at that press conference. Unfortunately, I don’t see any signs of that at this point.

I’m not reading too much into that “two weeks” or “couple weeks” comment. I think that’s just an effort to give the family time to process all of this.

I can think of several situation when genealogy does nothing.

They rely on mirror trees and matches in genealogy databases. Supposedly, they find someone who is close enough (2nd cousin) and hit a roadblock because this 2nd cousin has no clue that 30 years ago, his second aunt secretly gave birth to a baby that was adopted. The baby is in no one’s tree. The said aunt, since that time, is high on substances and not into genealogy at all.

Another situation - the DNA belongs to an international adoptee. No matches.

I can think of several other situations of the similar type.

I surely hope it is not the case.

 

[moonlessnight]

I think the PC was very well done. It was worded very carefully to take the power the suspect got from the crime away from him. He was chastised, called out, and embarrassed for how he exposed himself and his compulsions to the whole town, country, and world - something those close to him have not been capable of doing. And he should be embarrassed, and utterly ashamed. How small and inconsequential he must be to have to prey on little girls for a sense of power when he is clearly a grown man. And from the looks of the "man suit" he wore on the bridge, all the gear he needed. That is utterly embarrassing. And if he is a public figure, it will be all the more belittling when they all find out.

 

[StarrChance]

I'm still wondering what compelled Doug Carter to make this statement: "For more than two years you never thought we would shift gears to a different investigative strategy, [insert pause for dramatic effect] ... but we have." Huh? How absurd. I feel like I'm watching the pilot episode of a failed TV series.

I believe they have shifted gears, letting us/him know that he is much younger, also likely lives or has lived and moved but still visits Delphi for family. I think profiling was used but LE are watching their suspects very closely now.

 

[travelbug]

With a Parabon sketch, you know they are close; genealogy is almost always in the works at that stage.

I thought that’s exactly what we’d see at that press conference. Unfortunately, I don’t see any signs of that at this point.

I’m not reading too much into that “two weeks” or “couple weeks” comment. I think that’s just an effort to give the family time to process all of this.

I believe they already know who it is. To them, the sketch is superfluous. What they need are more concrete links to connect the perp to the crime scene, i.e. some sort of evidence (beyond DNA) that will allow them to arrest and prosecute this person.

 

[mrsobrien]

I can't even say what cars were in my apartment parking lot when I got home today. I think, for anyone to be helpful about the car at this point, they would have to be close to the suspect. Someone saying to themselves, "I went hiking with my ex boyfriend and we parked in that lot sometimes", or "When I worked at that building, one of my co-workers would always leave his car there to go hiking on the trail (or go fishing at the creek)."

Some people are very observant about things like this. My husband is one. He does note what vehicles are in our apartment garage at any given time, and remembers which belong to whom, just by crossing paths. There's about 50. He knows the days and times a certain vehicle would normally be there. If he sees an unexpected person driving a specific car, he notices.

I don't. Lol

All this said, recalling these details two years later would be a stretch. There would have to be a strong reason for a given day to be memorable. I feel like if an emergency (like a murder) occurred, my husband would have a decent chance of recalling impressive details about the parking lot on that day.

It's possible, worth a try. Imo

OR- this could be a scare tactic by LE. I kinda lean toward this.

 

[mrsobrien]

I agree. I'm leaning toward the PC being partly theater, with the intention of prompting a mistake by the killer, but also reaching out to the public for corroborating evidence.

I believe they already know who it is. To them, the sketch is superfluous. What they need are more concrete links to connect the perp to the crime scene, i.e. some sort of evidence (beyond DNA) that will allow them to arrest and prosecute this person.

 

[Joolz1975]

I'm sure this has been discussed a dozen times so apologies but I am confused.

I keep seeing that the first sketch has been ruled out BUT people seem to be linking the reason it has been ruled out to the arrest of CE who has now been discounted as been BG.

I get there are similarities between CE and the first sketch but are people actually saying CE was there that day??

I thought the rumour that CE and BG were the same person came about because of something mentioned on a pod cast or you tube video or something and the rumour has just grown legs?

Is it an actual fact that CE was suspected of been BG because he was in the vicinity that day or have people just run away with this theory because since CE was arrested the 1st sketch has become redundant?

Hope that makes sense and apologies for the dumb question but I'm confused.

 

[Spy Versus Spy]

For all the drama and emotion and supposed importance of the press conference, it was shocking to me how sloppy some things were. They flew through the part about the vehicle, got the date wrong, awkwardly corrected it. The three most important elements, new video...new audio, new sketch...were presented so clunkily(is that a word?) and fast I got nothing out of it. Had to gather it all in later. All the corrections and clarifications after the fact (new sketch is two years old, forget old sketch, sketches are two different people, etc) were very slack. Obvious the talking to the killer part was the priority.
Now, a week later, I really am more confused. I thought we were near the end...not so sure now.

^^^^This!

Someone highly cynical and pessimistic could even add that the overblown amatuer dramatic performance given in delivering a sloppily written fbi profiling script actually highlighted the lack of any progress rather than hailing the beginning of the end.

Devil's Advocate moo

 

[Spy Versus Spy]

I disagree. How can you state that as fact unless you’re privy to more information than we have? Do we have all their evidence? No, we don’t.

Maybe badly worded...if it had said '...any person known to us' would that help?

Clarification #143a