LIBBY GERMAN & ABBY WILLIAMS: Indiana vs. Richard Allen for 2017 murder of two Delphi girls *TRIAL IN PROGRESS*

On February 14, 2017, the bodies of Abigail Williams and Liberty German were discovered near the Monon High Bridge Trail, which is part of the Delphi Historic Trails in Delphi, Indiana, United States, after the young girls had disappeared from the same trail the previous day. The murders have received significant media coverage because a photo and audio recording of an individual believed to be the girls' murderer was found on German's smartphone. Despite the audio and video recordings of the suspect that have been circulated and the more than 26,000 tips that police have received, no arrest in the case has been made.[1][2][3]

1581272168478.png

Police have not publicly stated nor released details of how the girls were murdered.[6] As early as February 15, 2017, Indiana State Police began circulating a still image of an individual reportedly seen on the Monon High Bridge Trail near where the two friends were slain; the grainy photograph appearing to capture a Caucasian male, with hands in pockets, walking on the rail bridge, head down, toward the girls.[4] A few days later, the person in the photograph was named the prime suspect in the double-homicide.[5]

On February 22, law enforcement released an audio recording where the voice of the assailant,[7] though in some degree muffled, is heard to say, "Down the hill." It was at this news conference that officials credited the source of the audio and imagery to German's smartphone, and, further, regarded her as a hero for having had the uncanny foresight and fortitude to record the exchange in secret. Police indicated that additional evidence from the phone had been secured, but that they did not release it so as not to "compromise any future trial." By this time, the reward offered in the case was set at $41,000.[5]


1581272119747.png


 
Last edited by a moderator:
The "why return it" screams loudly.
It DOES. Hurts my eardrums.

You got away probably by little time and great worry and aren't caught yet and are in the midst of all you'e done and yet having got away so far, you decide to go back and RETURN IT. Not unless you are on the inside with LE and have a clue knowing what is being done, who or what is being looked for, whether anyone is patrolling in that very area and so on.

I'm not trying to be mean it just makes no sense. I at least will generally try to entertain something but this one gets nowhere.
 
you'd return it if you WANT the bodies to be found timely and/or found just the way you staged them. JMHO
Well I'll admit that's a different thought.... But they were so close and bound to be found the minute they had a full day of daylight hours to search why would their staging change in that short of a time period, just mere hours from night before to next day. And at best the staging was not finished if it was Os so you want seen why...? The way it has always sounded anyhow.

The killer if he did this risked all going back. And risked Libby's phone having anything on it WHICH IT DID.

You want them found timely, join the search and go OH NO I see something... They weren't found by that last ping were they? It wasn't 4 something it was nearer to noon wasn't it?

An interesting thought but still way too much that doesn't work. Or as the way I look at things in the many cases I follow, way too many things to have to explain or make excuses for and that's when it falls down.

If I give this more thought, I could come up with 20 things easy on why it doesn't work. I'm not going to as I don't want to be that way and haven't hit another thread yet and it doesn't work either imo. Won't bore all with the day, phone call after work and shift coming tomorrow. It is a different thought, I'll give it that, but still just too much wrong to make it fly. For me anyhow and of course jmo.

So what are you saying he wanted his handiwork seen, worried in less than a day it would be messed up and wanted people to believe it was Os, rather than RA....? I can go with the last part maybe...

Of course more of your thinking might help or change my thoughts to at least thinking down that route.
 
Wouldn't they be found faster just leaving it to start with? Wouldn't you be taking a MAJOR chance of being found with it yourself? How would taking it to start with in any way help with that? That makes no sense.
SAme thought here but I gave benefit of the doubt that say he forgot he pocketed it and turned it off and even that's a big stretch and then realized later... YES it would make more sense to leave it to start with.

And that's an IF the killer even knew she had one, still had it with her, etc. which I'm not sold on either necessarily. Libby was smart enough to record and may well have been smart enough to tell him if he even KNEW she had one to say she lost it when he ran them down the hill, etc.
 
You know, we've all heard the weird rumors about the guy saying he spit on one of the bodies. Maybe he did that at 4:30 or whenever. His story was half believable at the time.
 
So in the dark on Feb. 14th he spit on Abby in the dark or did the Os all have torches like the K K K or something? And told him to spit on her? How'd he or they get there?

Is this the same guy (truly not sure thought so) that said how did he get there, riding a turtle or some such?

You know what it sounds like to me someone that others like to mess with who has issues which I've seen a hundred times in life and play game with. We used to have a sweet dear one like that some people did that too that actually was out in the bars but some types would do this kind of thing with him--they I don't think meant anything truly awful but liked to mess with him as so gulilible and I DON"T AGREE with that but have sure seen it. My good gf told him once, we were really good to him, that her husband was in the doghouse and he took it literally that she made her hub stay in the DOGHOUSE, and we heard it from him for weeks after. This is what all this stuff sounds like and the other "Os" who liked to act like whatever.

By the way the one I am talking about his family would take him to the bars and he drank and trusted all knew him and would never mess with him. He was never rnot safe imo but some people did get a kick out of messing with him and getting laughs at how he took things.

That is all imo all the O thing is. And the others as well. Don't know what kind of idiots Click and the others are but doubt they are part of the local scene and in on the ways and humor. Could be wrong.

Back to though so he was there and spit on Abby in the dark in the woods after the girls were known to be missing and some searching had already went on and would start again the next day.

Doesn't come close to takign off the ground much less flying for me.

Not sure I mentioned this I decided to not last night as a tear down to defense yet again but so this phone info went into a FOURTH FRANK'S MEMO??? And was again clear as mud lol? Maybe I did say it, I thought I may have but thought I decided not to.
 
you'd return it if you WANT the bodies to be found timely and/or found just the way you staged them. JMHO
This just would not happen. Is there any crime that you know of where this has happened before? ie where the victim's phone has been removed then taken back the next day?

Do you think that is what actually happened? Who do you think returned it?
 
Last edited:
You know, we've all heard the weird rumors about the guy saying he spit on one of the bodies. Maybe he did that at 4:30 or whenever. His story was half believable at the time.
So you think the O's did it?

How many on here think the D theory is true and RA is innocent, just out of interest, to try and determine what a jury would make of this?
 
No offence but I, for one, am going to wait until trial when we then hear  all the evidence.

Not long now.

That video confirms that there is no DNA evidence linking RA to the crime scene.

I agree with waiting for the trial. I'd love to see everything the prosecution has. There is DNA at the murder scene, as well as fingerprints. How far did they go investigating those. Did they do a familial DNA test? If not, it's, at best, incredibly poor investigation. At worst, it was done deliberately to protect someone.
 
This just would not happen. Is there any crime that you know of where this has happened before? ie where the victim's phone has been removed then taken back the next day?
Do you think that is what actually happened? Who do you think returned it?
I was going to say similar yesterday but held off on it. About any other crime some perp decided the tracking device, cell phone, thing with possible recordings, texts and you name it is taken BACK for cops to find. Can anyone name a single one?

I mean think about it--not you, you get it--this probably didn't happen but IF locked and perp could not access so he knew of no recording of him, just say Libby texted some quickly and said that CVS guy is coming towards us and we are scared. A perp is NUTS to take a phone and tracking tool back TO THE SCENE OF THE CRIME he can't access and if he COULD access it, he would know of the BG/his recording by Libby and of course would be stupid as HE77 to take it back.
 
Little time last night and little this a.m. but sure have a few things to add if I get a chance before all changes again as we head into the last business day week before trial when one can count on a lot going on new each day imo.
 
This just would not happen. Is there any crime that you know of where this has happened before? ie where the victim's phone has been removed then taken back the next day?

Do you think that is what actually happened? Who do you think returned it?
I'm not speculating as to who. I'm focused on this: Is there evidence that is exculpatory? Is there evidence that supports an SODDI theory? Is there a timeline that's more likely that the State's?

All I'm doing is looking at the facts and asking if we follow Libby's phone, what are the most likely scenario(s) that explain Libby's phone records. We don't have the internal logs, but the D and P do. We do have some new info on pings, so ... what scenarios would work? I've been through the scenarios that support the State's theory; the timeline seems too short and forced to me - and that's just MOO.

The D suggesting a later death timeline (death occurring later than the State's timeline that would be exculpatory for RA) ... tells me that the P did not provide the D with forensics that had a tight time of death window; the official window ToD does not exclude an early morning of Feb 14th death. The D suggesting a later timeline also suggests that Libby's phone log records do not exclude an early morning a Feb 14th death.

In other words, the forensic and digital facts give a very wide ToD range.

(I've read so many times that the memorial marker for the victims do not have the same date of death. One is the 13th, one is the14th. No source at the moment - I think we've all read of this anomaly before. Did families get different date-of-death reports from the coroner? Was the time of death estimated at a broad range of 12 hours so it could be either 13th or 14th? Were the victims separated during the abduction, thus different eta's of death?)

Knowing who returned the phone late ... is LE's job. Knowing if the victims may have been separated during the abduction ... also LE's job.

We know that crime scene had a great deal of staging. (Including one victim free of blood and dressed and the other's hands smeared with their friend's blood.) (Per original FM.) There are many crimes where the murderer intentionally leaves staged "messages" at the CS, in an effort to mislead. Or for their own sick satisfaction for notoriety and attention. A cellular phone has been a narrow location tool since early 2000's.

The bottom line (for me) is that ... it appears the options for the timeline are expansive, yet the State has locked itself in to 1.5 hours or less. est.
This is new information and - IMO, it's significant and explains the D's focus on raising doubt on the State's timeline.

JMHO
 
That video confirms that there is no DNA evidence linking RA to the crime scene.

I agree with waiting for the trial. I'd love to see everything the prosecution has. There is DNA at the murder scene, as well as fingerprints. How far did they go investigating those. Did they do a familial DNA test? If not, it's, at best, incredibly poor investigation. At worst, it was done deliberately to protect someone.
How does it "confirm" that? It hasn't gone to trial yet for all the info they have and don't have to come out. That only confirms bits and pieces of select info that is being released.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
2,999
Messages
238,321
Members
953
Latest member
dayday
Back
Top Bottom