IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #11

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wonder if they have looked into the possibility of it being Richard Dobeski. He was just release about a month ago, but he also killed 2 girls when they were young by strangulation.
 
If there was no sexual assault.........and in my opinion there was not(no DNA on girls but at crime scene discovered days after?)........then this attack was a straight kill.

As to motive? The thrill? This man is evil and loves to terrorize.

They live among us. It is hard to fathom I know.

Where was it said no DNA was on the girls?
 
I read it to mean they were talking about the public service announcement which was released earlier today. Hope I'm wrong.
I hate when articles are purposefully worded wrong like that. Click bait.[emoji35]

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
New member here, and just wanted to comment on the audio clip and Sgt. Slocum's statement during the Crime Watch interview.

1) I'm confused by Sgt. Slocum's statement. It sounds like he's analyzing and guessing just based on the short three-word clip that was made public. However, wouldn't he have listened to the entire audio? He would know whether the perp had asked the girls before to go down the hill (or whatever other instructions he gave them). I'm not sure why he's making it sound like conjecture when he would know for certain...unless Libby started recording just right before that phrase.

2) I do agree that it sounds like the perp had possibly told them before, and they did not comply as quickly as he wanted. To me it sounds like a parent/teacher/coach/LEO or someone in authority who does not feel like repeating himself. On a personal note, the recording reminds me of my stepfather who would ask me to do something once, and if I hesitated he'd use exactly that tone the second time. Calm, but firm. Not angry or loud, but with emphasis and a sense of urgency. "Do as I say. Or else!" Whenever I heard that tone I knew I had better comply or I'd get the belt.

3) MOO is that he pulled a gun on them. I cannot imagine them (or anybody else) following a stranger's commands to go down a hill (or something similar) unless they are being threatened with a gun. You can outrun fists or a knife, but you cannot outrun a bullet. Nothing is more intimidating than a gun pointed at you or a friend.

4) Not that it matters now, but I wish one of the girls had pushed the perp off the bridge. :(

Welcome KensieK. :)

:wave:
 
Here it is... seems pretty clear to me.

Sorry to quote myself... seems I didn't get the entire quote I wanted, but it's post #535 and the moderator clearly says the entire topic is now off limits.
 
If there was no sexual assault.........and in my opinion there was not(no DNA on girls but at crime scene discovered days after?)........then this attack was a straight kill.

As to motive? The thrill? This man is evil and loves to terrorize.

They live among us. It is hard to fathom I know.
It is more likely that DNA was found at the crime scene, possibly on the girls or otherwise, and the reference to discovery later was preliminary results that the submitted evidence DID contain DNA. I have not seen any article stating that no DNA was found at the scene the day of discovery.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
 
We don't know what they did or didn't find on the girls.

Indeed. That is why I left the (?). Perhaps you didn't see it?

IMO the surroundings did not lend itself to sexual assault.

IMO what was done was done very quickly.
 
Perhaps mere coincidence but...

There's an RSO that lives in Peru that works at Indiana Packer's in Delphi.
 
It is more likely that DNA was found at the crime scene, possibly on the girls or otherwise, and the reference to discovery later was preliminary results that the submitted evidence DID contain DNA. I have not seen any article stating that no DNA was found at the scene the day of discovery.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

All of this is speculation and JMO. I think that LE is trying to determine how many people perpetrated this crime. Let's assume for a minute that DNA in some form was collected from the crime scene. LE would already have those results back, now I am also guessing they are looking for more DNA from the bridge, trail, etc that would match the DNA from the crime scene to establish where the killer or killers had been. Also there may be more than one person's DNA at the crime scene that was unknown, not to mention all the foreign DNA on Abbey and Libby that may have come from innocent places not connected to the crime. I think we can begin to see how very complicated this can be.
 
To any family members who might be protecting your loved one, please do not refrain from turning in someone if you are protecting them based on shame, or guilt...this person is responsible for his own actions...ARS's mother turned in her own son after he murdered a little girl. As hard as this was, she was a hero and we all respected her it, for sacrificing her own public shame and grief or whatever is for the sake of getting a killer off the streets.

Eta: you will be commended and supported for doing the right thing. Pleeeease do the right thing....
 
I was struck by that, too. They can't connect him to other homicides, but they're doing a nationwide billboard and media blitz to try to locate him? He's not a serial killer but we think he's going to kill again? Wha????

IMO, most killers don't just randomly murder one day one time then never do it again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Editing to explain my post is in response to that of Crimedawg123's post: ' No, not at all. I think he marched them across the creek, assaulted and killed them, then fled to the cemetery, leaving in his car. I don't think he removed them, that seems really unlikely IMO '.

I thought I'd hit reply to Crimedawg123 but apparently I messed up. Apologies

Your summation seems most likely to me since watching Gray Hughes videos. Seems to me right now that he enticed them, rather than forced them to go with him across the creek. I think they went willingly, on a version of treasure-hunt. His voice does not sound menacing to me. At the moment I'm thinking the girls asked him where the 'treasure' was or how to reach it and he said, 'Down the hill '. He may have said, more, such as down the hill, across the creek then under that fallen tree up the bank or something equally helpful. Then, once on the other side, things changed of course. It's a ruse that's been used for centuries, luring children with promise of reward such as sweets or the chance to play with kittens. Seems quite possible to me that the girls were familiar with and thus trusted the perpetrator. He might have had designs on one of the girls, things got rough so he despatched with one then the other, suggesting he has a reputation to maintain or much to lose if he released the girls to report him. Maybe he didn't intend to kill when it began but things got out of hand. Not saying that's what happened, but it seems possible to me and as likely as other scenarios which have been proposed
 
Indeed. That is why I left the (?). Perhaps you didn't see it?

IMO the surroundings did not lend itself to sexual assault.

IMO what was done was done very quickly.
whether or not sexual assult happened i still believe its a sexual crime.

Sent from my RCT6303W87DK using Tapatalk
 
Considering where you're from I guess you have your fill of serial killers cases, eh? You might want to frequent the LISK forum if you don't already, you may have insight being a local (ish) person.

Also.. everyone talks to strangers despite what parents say. My daughter is 14 and if someone says "hi, I like your shirt" she doesn't stare at them with her lips sealed. That would be rude. She says "thanks". Which of course opens the door to some savvy stranger saying "I have the same one, I got it at X Store, do you shop there?" or "I like that band too, have you ever seen them live?" or whatever.

In the attempt to not sound rude, we often open doors without realizing it and get sucked in IMO.

I don't think I"ve ever ever seen any child ACTUALLY not talk to a stranger, ever. Unless they're shy and hten you know what usually happens? The parent usually says "don't be rude, say hello to the nice lady".... I always cringe when I see that at the store. I think "NO let the kid continue to say nothing, that's what you taught him to do!"

so may nuances really... but in this case the girls are not missing, sadly they're found, and found dead, so much of this part of the speculation only keeps our minds and fingers busy but doesn't actually constitute "websleuthing"... wish tehre was something I could actually sleuth and contribute but perhaps I will have to take some time off and walk away. I don't think we're gettin any new info from LE today.
Well, yes the LISK case interested me immensely. I live in Wantagh which calls itself the "Gateway to Jones Beach" and chillingly I have dropped my daughter and her friends off on Ocean parkway to walk over the dunes into Gilgo beach gazillions of times to avoid the $$$ entry fees and likely they walked very near some of those bones before they were discovered. We stopped the practice as soon as the first story broke BTW. But I don't frequent the forums because they have become so politicslisized and mixed up and my brain just can't.

But I guess growing up in Queens NY and then long island my children were very street smart and downright rude to any strangers that came into their space. But, they admittedly didn't have the small town secure feeling that these girls may have had. Mostly I don't feel as though he sweet talked them based upon they way LE has presented the little evidence thus far, and just a feeling. Jmo.

Btw, your post is very astute and I don't doubt you know your stuff.😀

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
184
Guests online
2,265
Total visitors
2,449

Forum statistics

Threads
589,946
Messages
17,928,016
Members
228,009
Latest member
chrsrb10
Back
Top