Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams & Liberty (Libby) German - The Delphi Murders - #149

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tricia

Tricia

Manager Websleuths.com
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2003
Messages
28,799
Reaction score
43,535
Welcome back to the Delphi Murders discussion thread.

On the afternoon of Feb. 13th, 2017, best friends Abigail Williams and Liberty German were dropped off at a bridge in the town of Delphi. On Feb 14th their bodies were discovered around noon about 50 feet from the north bank of Deer Creek which is about 0.5 miles from the bridge.
The Sheriff's office gave a press conference on 4/22/19 and we have some solid information. Please take a look below

HERE IS THE NEW SKETCH FROM THE PRESS CONFERENCE ON 4/22/19
delphi-suspect-sketch-ht-jef-190422_hpEmbed_5x6_992.jpg



HERE IS THE NEW AUDIO. IT'S-A BIT LONGER THAN THE FIRST AUDIO:
https://www.in.gov/isp/files/Delphi_Audio_Edited_2019x3.wav

Here is the old audio in a loop:
http://www.in.gov/isp/files/Delphi_male_voice_loop.mp3

LATEST PRESS CONFERENCE 4/22/19

FOR MORE CLICK HERE FOR THE CARROL COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE FACEBOOK PAGE.

Anyone with information about this case, no matter how insignificant, is encouraged to call the Delphi Homicide Investigation Tip Line at (844) 459-5786.

Information can also be reported by calling the Indiana State Police at(800) 382-7537, or the Carroll County Sheriff's Department at (765) 564-2413.

Information can also be emailed to Abbyandlibbytip@cacoshrf.com

video of press conference from 2017 02/22/17: https://www.facebook.com/NewsCenter1...4728963476130/

Let's do this. Let's commit to getting this killer's picture and voice out there any possible way we can.

Pictures of Abby and Libby

Link to post with all Threads #1-98 (Courtesy of margarita25)

Thread #99 Thread #100 Thread #101 Thread #102 Thread #103 Thread #104 Thread #105 Thread #106 Thread #107 Thread #108 Thread #109 Thread #110 Thread #111 Thread #112 Thread #113 Thread #114 Thread #115 Thread #116 Thread #117 Thread #118 Thread #119 Thread #120 Thread #121 Thread #122 Thread #123 Thread #124 Thread #125 Thread #126 Thread #127 Thread #128 Thread #129 Thread #130 Thread #131 Thread #132 Thread #133 Thread #134 Thread #135 Thread #136 Thread #137 Thread #138 Thread #139 Thread #140 Thread #141 Thread #142 Thread #143 Thread #144 Thread #145 Thread #146 Thread #147 Thread #148

Link to Media Maps & Timelines *No Discussion*
Link to Media Maps & Timelines #2 *No Discussion*

IMAGE Discussion Thread

Scanner Thread

Rules Etiquette & Information

Case map by skibaboo updated with grayhuze crime flow video

Grayhuze youtube channel
Murder sheet YouTube

Verified Insiders: None in this case at this time. Verified Professional, Member michael.gartley, is a Verified Expert in Imaging Science.

RULES OF THIS DISCUSSION
DO NOT post photos of random individuals (including persons featured in MSM articles about other area crimes) to compare to the images of unidentified suspect on the bridge.

PLEASE DO NOT POST PICTURES OF SEX OFFENDERS!

Do not sleuth family, PERIOD. This includes previous public records which have nothing to do with this case. They are victims here. Plain and simple.

If you feel you have a tip, by all means, phone it in. Do NOT discuss your tip here. Contact the authorities and give them time to follow your lead.

NOTE - per Tricia and Sillybilly’s 5.28.2021 post here, JBC as a poi is now open for discussion in the Delphi thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ADMIN NOTE:

Theorizing based on some known fact sourced from MSM or LE is fine, but speculation not based on known fact is not allowed.

Also, a few reminders from TOS:

It is WS preferred policy to use initials only for anyone other than victims or perps.

If you have questions about rules or moderation, please do not ask them on the thread. Just private message a Mod or Admin for clarification.

Rumors are not allowed. If you can't link information to Websleuths approved sources, do NOT post it with "I read it somewhere" or "I'll find the link later ...".

Before you post something make sure what you are stating is FACT as we know it from MSM, LE or another approved Websleuths source.

Sleuthing or discussing RSOs just because they are on the registry is not allowed. A thread specific exception may be made by Tricia or an Admin depending on geographical location in relation a crime.

Photo alterations or side-by-side comparisons are not allowed.
 
MOD NOTE:

Please keep the conversation about THIS CASE.

Generalized discussing about unusual unstaged scenes is a fascinating topic, but it's not specific to THIS case. Many, many posts were removed. Only a few discussed that, and the rest were about totally different cases. Please keep the focus in this thread on this specific case.

I would, however, read a thread about unusual unstaged scenes, so if you'd like, start one in

www.websleuths.com

General Information & Discussion

Discussion about all kinds of crime solving tools, organizations, and more!
www.websleuths.com www.websleuths.com

or start a chat in PMs, where as many as 20 members may participate. PMs are unmoderated and private. Only those on the PM will see the messages.

THANK YOU for helping us keep this thread about Abby & Liberty.
 
Just to note, there are a lot of articles from right after the Peru house search in 2017, summarizing what Ramsey said in reference to the residents of the home not being connected to the murders. However, this article actually quotes Ramsey and it is in reference only to KAK. Ramsey says, "he," not "they."

FBI searches Peru home, finds no link to Delphi killings

"We in no way believe he is connected to the murder of those girls," Ramsey said.

That early on, I don't believe LE had all the evidence yet regarding a_shots and L's communications, and they certainly didn't have the digital evidence to claim more than one user at that point. So I'm not saying the FBI was being coy here, but I don't think this statement should be taken out of context to cover all members of the household, nor will I buy that this was them truly closing the door on KAK.
 
Great post by @TL4S which I tried to reply to but the thread got closed while I was typing.

I am having trouble linking it here - post #988 on the previous thread.

All really good questions. I agree 100% and can't buy that a guy with that severe of an addiction stops cold turkey for that long without leaving a single trace for 3 years.

Your post has prompted me to wonder about something else...

(Forgive me if this has been discussed and I missed it.)

I imagine that the SW in Peru would have indicated that any devices at the address would be covered under the warrant as LE would have no way of knowing who the device belongs to without first examining the contents, which they wouldn't be doing while on the premises.

If that's the case....it would have been prudent for LE to execute their search when all occupants of the residence were at home to ensure that they were able to bring into evidence all possible devices including cell phones, laptops, i-pads, usb drives etc .

LE found not a single trace CSAM on the other residents' devices or there would have been charges against him as well, right?

Based on the interrogation records, we know that LE stated that they believed that more than one person in the residence was using the AS profile, based on the writing style (paraphrased.) This is the same profile that was used to solicit CSAM from minors.

Are we also to believe that there wasn't a single trace of CSAM on any other devices that belonged to the other occupant, if he was the only other person who was regularly in the home?

How the heck is that possible?

We are definitely missing some important pieces of this puzzle, which could explain the three plus year delay in arrest.

JMO and wondering out loud
 
bradfordsleuth said:
Great post by @TL4S which I tried to reply to but the thread got closed while I was typing.

I am having trouble linking it here - post #988 on the previous thread.

All really good questions. I agree 100% and can't buy that a guy with that severe of an addiction stops cold turkey for that long without leaving a single trace for 3 years.

Your post has prompted me to wonder about something else...

(Forgive me if this has been discussed and I missed it.)

I imagine that the SW in Peru would have indicated that any devices at the address would be covered under the warrant as LE would have no way of knowing who the device belongs to without first examining the contents, which they wouldn't be doing while on the premises.

If that's the case....it would have been prudent for LE to execute their search when all occupants of the residence were at home to ensure that they were able to bring into evidence all possible devices including cell phones, laptops, i-pads, usb drives etc .

LE found not a single trace CSAM on the other residents' devices or there would have been charges against him as well, right?

Based on the interrogation records, we know that LE stated that they believed that more than one person in the residence was using the AS profile, based on the writing style (paraphrased.) This is the same profile that was used to solicit CSAM from minors.

Are we also to believe that there wasn't a single trace of CSAM on any other devices that belonged to the other occupant, if he was the only other person who was regularly in the home?

How the heck is that possible?

We are definitely missing some important pieces of this puzzle, which could explain the three plus year delay in arrest.

JMO and wondering out loud
Click to expand...
Those are great questions too. I don't know the law when it comes to search warrants, but it does seem like if the subpoenas came back to the Peru address, all devices would have been seized. I know KAK is a liar, but several times he says the devices LE are referring to are old ones of his, that he apparently didn't use anymore on the dates LE suggests some of the chats took place. Was TK just using KAK's old phones? LE listed TK emails and skype accounts on several of the devices. Why would they be on ALL of KAK's devices if TK had his own? Can LE prove who was using what device during these chats? IDK. I really think that might be one of the hangups with his case.
 
Last edited:
TL4S said:
Those are great questions too. I don't know the law when it comes to search warrants, but it does seem like if the subpoenas came back to the Peru address, all devices would have been seized. I know KAK is a liar, but several times he says the devices LE are referring to are old ones of his, that he apparently didn't use anymore on the dates LE suggests some of the chats took place. Was TK just using KAK's old phones? LE listed TK emails and skype accounts on several of the devices. Why would they be on ALL of KAK's devices if TK had his own? Can LE prove who was using what device during these chats? IDK. I really think that might be one of the hangups with his case.
Click to expand...
Seems plausible.
TK finds these old devices, charges them and opens Yelliow and other apps, logs in as KAK.
 
on KAK,
you could talk to him until you are blue in the face, he will agree with you make heartfelt commitments and agree with you whole heartedly..and then the moment you turn your head he will be sexting your daughter...I mean this is who he is...it's a mask you are seeing and nothing more. mOO
 
Question to anyone who takes seriously the interrogators comment regarding another possible user, why wasn’t TK charged with even one single CSAM offence out of the 30 charges KAK faces alone?

And should KAK be found not guilty because of that one comment which might be suggestive of LE believing someone else was equally involved (which I think was for another reason, to bait KAK into admitting he was solely responsible, which he did. We know LE is allowed to lie during interrogations.)
 
I’m still here and still waiting for the day of justice for these young ladies. I have never heard of chirp but it sounds like a deal at $4.00 a month. Do inmates have the phones 24/7 and do they also receive calls as well as make them. This just does not seem right especially considering how KK misused his before his arrest.
 
MistyWaters said:
Question to anyone who takes seriously the interrogators comment regarding another possible user, why wasn’t TK charged with even one single CSAM offence out of the 30 charges KAK faces alone?

And should KAK be found not guilty because of that one comment which might be suggestive of LE believing someone else was equally involved (which I think was for another reason, to bait KAK into admitting he was solely responsible, which he did. We know LE is allowed to lie during interrogations.)
Click to expand...
Likely because there's not concrete proof that he possessed or viewed the material. If all of the devices that had CSAM on it were in KAKs name, his logins, etc. there may actually be nothing connecting TK directly to CSAM. That could be deliberate, that could be because he's not a "techy" person, or it could be that he actually had no interest in CSAM. Maybe he only likes being a predator in real-life.

Also, just because he isn't currently charged, doesn't mean there won't be charges in the future if something was/is found. My guess is that KAK was very reckless with some of his devices and it was "easy" to link him to the CSAM crimes.

I suggest listening to Murder Sheet's episode 124 with two CSAM detectives, it's very enlightening and touches on a lot of what you are talking about.
 
MistyWaters said:
Question to anyone who takes seriously the interrogators comment regarding another possible user, why wasn’t TK charged with even one single CSAM offence out of the 30 charges KAK faces alone?

And should KAK be found not guilty because of that one comment which might be suggestive of LE believing someone else was equally involved (which I think was for another reason, to bait KAK into admitting he was solely responsible, which he did. We know LE is allowed to lie during interrogations.)
Click to expand...
It's a fair question. For me, if I'm going to assume that LE was lying about two users, I would also have to assume they were lying about all the "my daddy" stuff (unless this was an unusual preference of KAKs). Then I'd have to assume the "is it bad...?" references are also fake, because they were used with the "my daddy" stuff. So if those are fake, then is the "is it bad I'm super in to you?" the from a_shots to L also not real?

It becomes impossible to differentiate the truth from the lies. Maybe 99% of what was said in that interview, by both LE and KAK, was lies. But if all they needed was KAK to admit to being the sole user, then you're right, they succeeded. And as you said, he is the only one being charged at this time.

If LE lied about all those chats and very little kid stuff, that might account for why KAK doesn't have charges for all those earlier dates.

I suppose we'll see what comes. If LE can lie that much in an interview, I'll never bother reading another one.
 
minazoe said:
I think you can't make calls but can still get on the internet?? this is my experience.
Click to expand...
Maybe that is what I am trying to say. I know the old phones I have are disconnected from any type cell service so unable to make calls. Internet would be under Data Plans usually. Maybe time for me to dig out my old phones and experiment. IMO MOO
 
MistyWaters said:
Question to anyone who takes seriously the interrogators comment regarding another possible user, why wasn’t TK charged with even one single CSAM offence out of the 30 charges KAK faces alone?

And should KAK be found not guilty because of that one comment which might be suggestive of LE believing someone else was equally involved (which I think was for another reason, to bait KAK into admitting he was solely responsible, which he did. We know LE is allowed to lie during interrogations.)
Click to expand...
@MistyWaters, here is something that really bothers me about KAK's charges. Even if we disregard the interview, we do still have the search affidavit from 2/25/17. In it, you can read on pg. 3 where Det. DV talks about the 5/14/16 chat between emilyanne and another user about dropbox links. This date correlates with a few of KAK's exploitation and possession charges. That is from the iPhone 4, which Det. DV also states includes CSAM of children between ages 3 and 11 years old.

https://www.wishtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Kegan-Anthony-Kline-PC.pdf

So here's what gets me. If KAK's device had CSAM of children between 3 and 11 years old, then why does he not have charges representing that? His 2016 charges are all F5 level with no aggravating factors. *Sidenote: he DOES have F4 level charges with aggravating factors on his 2/17/17 and 2/25/17 charges (c)(1) - does not include letter to specify.

2017 Indiana Code :: TITLE 35. Criminal Law and Procedure :: ARTICLE 42. OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON :: CHAPTER 4. Sex Crimes :: 35-42-4-4. Child exploitation; possession of child *advertiser censored*; exemptions; defenses
IC 35-42-4-4

(c) However, the offense of child exploitation described in subsection (b) is a Level 4 felony if:
(1) the sexual conduct, matter, performance, or incident depicts or describes a child less than eighteen (18) years of age who:
(A) engages in bestiality (as described in IC 35-46-3-14);
(B) is mentally disabled or deficient;
(C) participates in the sexual conduct, matter, performance, or incident by use of force or the threat of force;
(D) physically or verbally resists participating in the sexual conduct, matter, performance, or incident;
(E) receives a bodily injury while participating in the sexual conduct, matter, performance, or incident; or
(F) is less than twelve (12) years of age; or

So why was KAK not charged with F4 level possession charges when his iPhone4 had CSAM of 3 to 11 year olds?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 156 more.
Total: 3,553 (members: 157, guests: 3,396)

Online statistics

Members online
157
Guests online
3,396
Total visitors
3,553
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,296
Messages
17,966,857
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top