IN - Abigail Williams, 13, & Liberty German, 14, Delphi, 13 Feb 2017 #72

[her]

RBBM

Here you go: https://www.thedailybeast.com/slain-girl-recorded-her-suspected-killer-saying-go-down-the-hill

I did not see a statement directly from LE, did I skip over it? I could have it's late for me.

Although it's likely to be the case of audio of the perp, LE never released a statement so far that I can tell.

MSM has speculated sure, they do that. In the beginning LE did state at a press conference about hoping they don't have to release more audio.
They sure need to release something because they got zero so far.

 

[newredtabby]

I've already given the link twice so am not providing it again.

I have seen no place in ANY link where LE confirms they have more audio of the killer, before or after, "down the hill".<modsnip>


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[midwestseeker]

I have seen no place in ANY link where LE confirms they have more audio of the killer, before or after, "down the hill".<modsnip>


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Here you go:

http://www.wdrb.com/story/36134958/...eved-to-have-killed-2-girls-in-delphi-indiana

 

[Yvettea]

I have seen no place in ANY link where LE confirms they have more audio of the killer, before or after, "down the hill".<modsnip>


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

You're actually asking for AUDIO of LE stating they have more audio of the killers voice.

 

[TTF14]

I am SO frustrated over this case. I only skim it now and go to the last post.

 

[sleuther0192837465]

New article, but not really new info :/ Thought I’d post it anyway MOO

https://gearjunkie.com/tim-watkins-mountain-biker-murder-no-suspects



I just read back in the thread & realized Kizzykat beat me to it. Apologize for repeat info MOO

 

[Ember123]

I really don't get the significance of this? Sooo many ppl wear hats like this?

The significance is the odd way the top of the hat is very high on the head and oddly "bumped up" on DN's (AND BG's) Left (Our Right, looking at the pic) ... and odd cleft in the middle just like BG's hat in Libby's bridge pic!

 

[Ember123]

Thw ISP says it has enough evidence to convict the killer, but does not enough evidence to exclude or include Daniel Nations.
That really sounds like they still believe there are two people involved and why it’s so hard to exclude people.

I know, SO confusing!!! Anyone here know enough about DNA & genetics & how crime scene evidence is analyzed to shed light on: IF DN IS BG (assuming so for purpose of understanding, in this instance), how could this seeming contradiction BE?! I don't get it! At all! Anyone???

 

[RIP Meagan + Johnny]

Here you go:

http://www.wdrb.com/story/36134958/...eved-to-have-killed-2-girls-in-delphi-indiana

Thank you.

 

[sumzero]

I know, SO confusing!!! Anyone here know enough about DNA & genetics & how crime scene evidence is analyzed to shed light on: IF DN IS BG (assuming so for purpose of understanding, in this instance), how could this seeming contradiction BE?! I don't get it! At all! Anyone???

Let’s assume LE has found unidentified DNA at the crime scene. It’s highly likely the DNA belongs to the killer; but until it is matched to a specific person, the possibility exists (however remote) that the DNA was left by a completely innocent person. (One of the victims maybe just happened to pick up the DNA somewhere.) So, LE is looking for a match. If they find a match, they probably find the killer. DN is likely not a match for the DNA, otherwise he’d be arrested, lickety-split. So, he can’t be “ruled in” by virtue of DNA. But he also can’t be “ruled out” for sure, since the killer may have left no DNA and the unidentified DNA may belong to an innocent person (as explained above).

 

[Ember123]

I am SO frustrated over this case. I only skim it now and go to the last post.

:stay:

 

[Shiressleuth]

I know, SO confusing!!! Anyone here know enough about DNA & genetics & how crime scene evidence is analyzed to shed light on: IF DN IS BG (assuming so for purpose of understanding, in this instance), how could this seeming contradiction BE?! I don't get it! At all! Anyone???

Maybe they haven't got DN' s DNA yet. He may have refused a swab. Maybe they haven't got a recording of DN's voice yet to compare. Maybe he's refusing to say where he was on the 13th. Without those things, they can't exclude or include him yet. They may still be waiting for forensics from the hatchet too. I think it is telling that they have not yet excluded him. That is all I can say really.

 

[sumzero]

Maybe they haven't got DN' s DNA yet. He may have refused a swab. Maybe they haven't got a recording of DN's voice yet to compare. Maybe he's refusing to say where he was on the 13th. Without those things, they can't exclude or include him yet. They may still be waiting for forensics from the hatchet too. I think it is telling that they have not yet excluded him. That is all I can say really.

I&#8217;ve posted the links more than once to MSM articles which clearly state that (1) LE obtained a cotton swab from DN and (2) LE &#8220;talked to the people they needed to talk to&#8221; in CO.

 

[Shiressleuth]

I’ve posted the links more than once to MSM articles which clearly state that (1) LE obtained a cotton swab from DN and (2) LE “talked to the people they needed to talk to” in CO.

Well it can't have come back yet then. If it didn't match they could exclude him unless he had an accomplice.

 

[sumzero]

Let’s assume LE has found unidentified DNA at the crime scene. It’s highly likely the DNA belongs to the killer; but until it is matched to a specific person, the possibility exists (however remote) that the DNA was left by a completely innocent person. (One of the victims maybe just happened to pick up the DNA somewhere.) So, LE is looking for a match. If they find a match, they probably find the killer. DN is likely not a match for the DNA, otherwise he’d be arrested, lickety-split. So, he can’t be “ruled in” by virtue of DNA. But he also can’t be “ruled out” for sure, since the killer may have left no DNA and the unidentified DNA may belong to an innocent person (as explained above).

This would explain why LE earlier expressed confidence in being able to put this killer away (audio, video, and probably DNA). It would also explain why LE wants to rule people out but they haven’t been able to. That someone’s DNA does not match the crime scene DNA most likely means the person had nothing to do with it. But they can’t be cleared since the possibility exists (however remote) that the killer didn’t leave DNA behind (and the unidentified DNA belongs to an innocent person).

 

[sumzero]

Well it can't have come back yet then. If it didn't match they could exclude him unless he had an accomplice.

I also posted links to two different MSM articles which reported that fast-tracked DNA in this case could be returned in two days. If LE traveled all the way to CO, they probably asked for DN&#8217;s DNA to be fast-tracked. IMO, pinning the Delphi murders on DN is not gonna happen.

 

[Shiressleuth]

This would explain why LE earlier expressed confidence in being able to put this killer away (audio, video, and probably DNA). It would also explain why LE wants to rule people out but they haven’t been able to. That someone’s DNA does not match the crime scene DNA most likely means the person had nothing to do with it. But they can’t be cleared since the possibility exists (however remote) that the killer didn’t leave DNA behind (and the unidentified DNA belongs to an innocent person).

So they need a weapon match or cell phone data placing perp in Delphi.

 

[Shiressleuth]

This would explain why LE earlier expressed confidence in being able to put this killer away (audio, video, and probably DNA). It would also explain why LE wants to rule people out but they haven’t been able to. That someone’s DNA does not match the crime scene DNA most likely means the person had nothing to do with it. But they can’t be cleared since the possibility exists (however remote) that the killer didn’t leave DNA behind (and the unidentified DNA belongs to an innocent person).

I also posted links to two different MSM articles which reported that fast-tracked DNA in this case could be returned in two days. If LE traveled all the way to CO, they probably asked for DN’s DNA to be fast-tracked. IMO, pinning the Delphi murders on DN is not gonna happen.

So why arent they excluding him ?

 

[Shiressleuth]

I also posted links to two different MSM articles which reported that fast-tracked DNA in this case could be returned in two days. If LE traveled all the way to CO, they probably asked for DN’s DNA to be fast-tracked. IMO, pinning the Delphi murders on DN is not gonna happen.

How did they rule out the CaCo RSO's if it wasn't by DNA? If it turns out the DNA found at the CS isn't the perp's (e.g. it belongs to an innocent fisherman's chewing gum or tobacco) what then? ullhair:

 

[minazoe]

or,

what if BG cleaned up and didn't leave the obvious DNA and what they have requires more lab work, I would think after all his arrests, if this was DN, he may have cleaned up very well and only left something like mitochondrial DNA .. maybe there are fibers and other evidence they are looking to match up. Maybe they are looking for the girls DNA in the red car, hatchet, and other items in BG's possession.

Wondering too if he gave any of the girls things to his wife. necklaces or keychains, etc.

maybe they have his DNA but he wont give hair. ( it's different isnt it?) like can they match blood DNA to hair?

I can see the police coming forward and saying based on DNA from the crime scenes of several cases and several jurisdictions that this killer may be charged with several murders and attacks. ( which could account for the long wait).

MOO