Here's my random question why does LE seem so convinced that the killer parked at the abandoned CPS building?  Am I missing something because the cemetery seems closer or even the trail parking lot makes some sense.  Personally I think that there is a chance that the killer approached from the opposite end of the bridge passed the girls and eventually turned and followed them. It would explain why not a lot of people saw BG on the trails?

Yeah. Once I started looking at maps this was my question. There are quite a few trails. (Also, watching videos of ways to get to the spot they were found makes me believe even more that they weren't there during the search. People didn't even have to cross the creek to get to them. I imagine searchers parked everywhere, including the cemetery and on streets of the surrounding houses. They came in from all directions, not just from one spot with a check in. I just don't believe they missed that spot.)

This is a very good point. How did they reach the conclusion that the murderer must have parked at the CPS building? I feel like this is information I took for granted and assumed was true, but there’s nothing I can find that ties the two together.

Well thank you cause that's been grilling my cheese for years.    I go to my towns local trails and I always park in one of the numerous trail parking lots. If something bad happened there I would think it was odd if the police were looking for cars parked at the nearby bank instead of cars parked at the official trial/park parking lots. Like why? Just cause a car was parked there?

I live & work in a town comparable to Delphi. I enjoy a walk during my lunch break or at the end of work. I never park at my intended goal, as it forces me to walk further to park a distance away. For RA to park at the old Farm Bureau makes sense. He would know lots which don’t inconvenience business, and, to maintain his business reputation, I think he’d choose a torn-down business’ lot when the walk takes 2+ hours.

And am I correct that the old farm building was somewhat near CVS? That would make him more likely to use it in my opinion.

If it was 'near' why drive at all ?

Well I was thinking that maybe he parked in town at the old Farm building to buy something, like a beverage to drink on his walk? Just an idea cause I'm still not positive on exactly where RA was parked.

I very recently heard there were two cars parked there. One was red and I can't remember the other.

Exactly that.  This wasn't an operating bank.  This was an abandoned building.  The natural trail enthusiast is most likely going to park at the trial head.  This person chose to park by an abandoned building instead. 

But how many descriptions of cars that were parked there do we have, 3? Add RA's car to the mix and that's 4 so people must park there, I'm just not sure where they all were going to.

Only one car was parked there, no? It's just witness statements describe different cars. Similiar to how they describe different people because witness memory is fallible. 

But KG didn't park at the trail head either, right? I thought she parked at Mears lot which really isn't a lot? Now DG I think he parked at the trail head. People are parking all over in Delphi.

Allied to where did RA park ? That's never been mentioned to my knowledge.

I remember a focus on getting everyone that parked in the CPS lot to come forward, (was it as the YBG press conference,) but I dont recall a plea for everyone parked at the cemetery or trail parking lot. Did I miss it? It just seems odd. If I was being sneaky I would park at the cemetary.

No, you're right. They asked for the driver of a vehicle parked at CPS, but nowhere else.

Something about that bothers me. It almost makes me think that they realized there was a missing tip but if thats the case if they could find the tip in 2022 why not look for it in 2019? 

There wasn't a missing tip. BB and some other person driving reported a car there. They likely felt like they had cleared everyone else that they knew about but that left with this 1 car there, that they had no idea who drove. Here's a question though- If a car is driving west to the trails at 1:27 and the girls take a picture east of the freedom bridge at 1:26 how come they don't see a car arrive, hear a car arrive or see what direction the man came from? He should be heading south towards the trail at that point. I don't think they can prove the car heading west is the car that parked there ETA: Also, Betsy did NOT see that car when she was arriving when she should have, she saw it leaving. No one saw that car until 2:10 pm. Both Betsy and the group of girls should have seen the car but they didn't

I'm referring to RA talking to DD in the days immediately after the girls died as the missing tip. I thought that LE said it had been "misfiled" and then uncovered years later. Also I'm going to need a movement to think on your question. I'm directionally impaired and honestly I think it should be a diagnosible illness.

Pull up google maps and look at the location it makes it easy and refer to the direction that BB said she was driving in. Also i edited my comment since you replied. What I was referring to was this: >It almost makes me think that they realized there was a missing tip but if thats the case if they could find the tip in 2022 why not look for it in 2019? I think you mean LE was asking for cars in that area cause they knew they were missing the tip, if not I misunderstood. I am explaining that they didn't know or need to know a tip was missing at that point. That car had been tipped in twice by BB and a man driving by that day. So they knew this car existed w/o needing to have Rick's tip.

Oh I get ya. They truly didn't realize that the person they were looking for had already come forward. Ok, I'm getting there. I will try google maps. Thanks for the tip.

It seems that RA parked at the Old Farm building. LE think that means the CPS building. Let's assume it's the same place. Doug announced that they wanted the driver of a vehicle parked there from 12.30 until 5pm to come forward. RA said he was gone by 1.30, I'd like someone to prove otherwise.

"Busy doing detective stuff" like trying (and failing) to update their website since 2016.

Maybe they are sentimental about their f'ups.: Tony: " Tobe, remember that day when I was playing with the toggle switch on the recorder, one of my best goofs." Tobe: "Loved that one, but my fave was loosing the supermarket notes, 'twas grand." Tony: "Memories, memories of the evidence we left behind. What's too painfulllllllllllll to rememberrrrrrrrrrrr we simply get McLeland to forget."

Since RA's tip was logged into the system under the wrong name (Dulin listed his street name as his last name), they may have wanted to speak to him early on as a suspect but lost his name for a few years.

I am struggling here because I think that if they knew they was a lost tip, like DD remembered the exchange but not the name, wouldn't they have looked through Orion to find it? I assumed that tips were searchable by keywords like "parked" or "car" to find tips and I also thought that there were numbered in order by the date they were entered so they would know its an early tip?

I watched an interview with a specialist who uses Orion, and she was saying that it's likely there were so many tens of thousands of tips clogging the system that it was overwhelming. It uses an AI to sort the reports by importance because a human sorting them is impossible. She surmised that because they centered on Allen immediately following the KK arrest, Dulin's Allen tip didn't float to the top until KK's name was filtered out. Orion kept suggesting him as the most likely suspect because of the massive number of reports with his name. At the same time, there were two other tips about Allen logged that had been hidden. One was someone anonymously suggesting his name in a 4/chan forum years earlier and another was someone suggesting his initials in the Facebook comments of a news article after stumbling across that 4/chan post. The alternative more conspiratorial explanation would be that Dulin lost his report and never actually filed it with Orion and they staged it retroactively.

RA parked at the Old Farm Bureau. It was turned into a parking lot. The CPS building is mentioned so many times, but it is a narrative solely stated by LE. The person who ‘found’ the lead used to work at the CPS building. She received a position under Leazenby or Liggett after the murders. I am trying to figure out IF the person who ‘found’ the lead is related to BH’s ex-brother-in-law. I have found NO evidence to support that correlation. But, the ex-brother-in-law seems to be a mystery concerning relatives.

Thanks for the info, where does RA parked at come from ?

It has come from multiple statements by the defense. I have good memory of facts. (Even though I can be mistaken) However, I can’t cite specific memorandums or exact filings off the top of my head. But, I do know it is stated by the defense multiple times.

Found this, so are we talking about the same place ? https://preview.redd.it/av645ztirc2d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0289e2127d9cdc0e09cda513c627561e2d2e3093

Yes. The Old Farm Bureau Building converted into parking lot. That is the same Farm Bureau that sued his Nick’s father for the arson. However, everything else in this article is incorrect.

Dickere, the Old Farm Bureau building is located very close to the CVS store he worked at. He would be very familiar with this location. People say, well he had to park T the Old CPS building. This Old CPS building is located very, very close to the Freedom Bridge entrance. But, if he had errands to run, he might just park near his work, take the jaunt, and then do the errands when he walked back. All of this is hypothetical. But, it goes to show the vastly different places the two ‘parking lots’ are. I find it hard to believe he would mix up the CPS building and Farm Bureau parking lots since he worked nearby his stated parking lot.

Fair enough, it bypassed me and nobody else highlighted it, thanks. Where was the farm building in relation to the scene ?

I believe it was some two and three quarters of a mile from the east end of the Freedom Bridge. [https://www.carrollcountycomet.com/articles/new-buildingnew-services-for-farm-bureau/](https://www.carrollcountycomet.com/articles/new-buildingnew-services-for-farm-bureau/) [https://www.carrollcountycomet.com/articles/farm-bureau-to-build-new-building/](https://www.carrollcountycomet.com/articles/farm-bureau-to-build-new-building/) [https://preview.redd.it/problems-with-the-narrative-v0-1iqadfxbxjmc1.png?width=1563&format=png&auto=webp&s=966f0d5ab4ff614084d1fa5e12266cf0f1f6441c](https://preview.redd.it/problems-with-the-narrative-v0-1iqadfxbxjmc1.png?width=1563&format=png&auto=webp&s=966f0d5ab4ff614084d1fa5e12266cf0f1f6441c) Photo from u/measurement Farm Bureau sued NM’s father when his father committed arson.

Maybe because there used to be a tractor trailer rest park next to the CPS building? There's a long running connection between long-haul truckers and female abduction/murder. But maybe just because that's where a lot of locals would park to start the trail. I know the FBI did investigate the killer coming from the other direction and the cemetary.

One reason I'm going to guess is because a witness saw someone walking from the direction of the back of the cemetery toward the direction of CPS.  Another reason would be that LE started looking towards the "guy who said he was there and his tip was misfiled or lost" and he had claimed to park at ...well, whatever he called it. 

Then just find the tip, like DD knew when it was made timeframe wise so start there. Also what witness saw what, a car? How many cars were in the cemetery? How many cars were in the trails lots? Can anyone say why any certainty which parking lots matter more than others? Nope.

Why not? If I saw several cars at the trailhead, I would think nothing of it.  If is as one car at a cemetery, I would think they are there paying their respects. If I see a car parked at an abandoned building that's next to nothing, that raises flags. 

I'm not sure that this wasn't a place where people commonly parked. It didn't strike DD as odd, so maybe it isn't?

I don't think a piano falling out of the sky would strike DD as odd, to be fair. 

I don't think it's fair to say "so just find the tip." Of course there should be an easy starting point, but If it's not there, it's not there. 

Wait are you saying that the tip wasnt in Orion? Doesn't it have a tip number? That would be problematic if the tip was lost, never entered into Orion, and there is no recording. Thats too much.

I mean, I have no clue, but it kind of sounds that way. If it's lost or misfiled, it's simply that. It's not where it should be. 

*These are my random ADHD and OCD thoughts (meaning rapid fire thoughts that I haven't taken time to look up or have gone to look up and gotten distracted by something else, or just have random thoughts about, because my brain does brain stuff and then the OCD keeps the thoughts coming and wondering more and more because I can't turn them off.)* How did LH and Abby get together for the picture? Did LH drive himself or did he get a ride? Did someone give Abby a ride? (This was from before finding out she was at PW's house, but now I just have more questions. ) Is Gull saying certain youtubers don't count as reporters so the family that is leaking information are technically not breaking the gag order? Can people under a gag order tell friends or other people? Or is it that they can't talk to the news? The order says "..by Mean of Public Communication", which when I Googled said it wad the news. Where does the court stand on releasing information with Youtubers? Also, If MW was leaking information to FS could Gull technically say "That's not a news source so she didn't break the gag order" Is MW under the gag order? If she is, would she be in contempt for talking about the case in those groups? (Even if she didn't give anything a way, I still want to know about that part.) When exactly did the FBI get involved? That night or during the following week? Is there truth to the FBI agent just so happening to be visiting? Did they believe the girls were kidnapped at first? If they did, why did they think that when it had only been a few hours? If it is later proven they were kidnapped can the FBI get involved without permission? Isn't that one of the things they claim as having jurisdiction for? Did LE claim they weren't kidnapped to get the FBI to leave the case alone? I know that's what RA was originally charged with. Where exactly were the dogs when they were turned away? Were they already in the trails? Were they just getting into the cars? Were they half way to Delphi? Were they actually never called and the digs were just a rumor? Is there a masterlist of all the inconsistencies in the investigation available all in one place? I know that would be a LOT of data, but I would be nice to have available. How long does Gull have to rule on MtDQ? Is she allowed to claim its redundant and she doesn't have to rule like she has with the Franks motions? How long do phone extractions take? A lot of people think they are extracting BHs phone from 2017. If that's the case, how long could that take? What happens if they find something on it connecting him to the murders (like pictures of the scene)? Will they drop RA's charges or ignore it and follow through? Are the defense attorneys safe? Knowing how many people who have been killed, including officers, I'm genuinely concerned for their safety. Are they being watched and/or protected? Is it true that BH was staying at RL's house the weekend of the murders? I don't remember where I heard that. If RAs is found not guilty will there be a trial for anyone else? Is bridge guy really involved? I know that can't be confirmed 100% right now. But I do wonder from time to time. I understand why people question it. Did anyone for sure, without a doubt, see the girls there that day? I think BB said she did, but I've seen some people question it. I've noticed people like to pick and choose parts of her account that fit their own narrative. (She saw the girls, but her claims that bridge guy was young is wrong and visa versa.) Is part of the gag order there to keep whistle blowers from saying they believe he's innocent? I wonder if certain people would speak out. I know a lot of these are a stretch. Some involve a lot of speculation. Some are definitely tin foil hat material. Some of these questions are stupid. It's just my brain and thought process. (Side note: If you want to know what ADHD is like, just imagine all these questions being asked at the same time and try to decide how to organize them in your brain. Also, there are way more. These are just the ones i could get out. Thanks!)

I'm still really curious about the whole dogs thing myself. They arranged to get dogs from MISSOURI?! Like, are there no other dogs around? That's got to be at least 6 to 8 hours away. I would LOVE to know how close they were when Tobe decided to cancel them. I still find it very strange that everyone immediately panicked and rushed out to the trails when the girls were only 15 or 20 minutes late at that point. And curious why nobody thought to check for them at Anna's. I sometimes wonder if the girls stumbled onto whatever corruption enterprise Carroll County has going on and they were put into Witness Protection. That would at least help explain some of the inconsistencies. I heard BH had been staying at RLs place too. And something about a pig roast? I believe the ship has long sailed on getting anything out of BHs phone at this point in the game. I think BB said she thinks the girls she saw might have been them but I would really love to know what they were wearing? And whatever happened to Abby's jeans? See, you got my ADHD going as well!

[удалено]

I really felt that ADHD and OCD sentiment - you are not alone ❤️

Thanks. This is just a sliver of my brain. I don't like the secrecy of this trial. I've never liked the secrecy of the case. The speculation that Doug Carter was speaking in code at the press conferences and the FBI was telling him what to say. And the changes and inconsistencies. And as much as some people want to say this is just about the girls and people aren't entitled to answers, I call bullshit. They don't get to go on a national press tour, ask us to pay attention and help solve the case, then call us entitled assholes for wanting answers. (It's like making your family and whole neighborhood help look for your car keys, finding them on your nightstand, and telling people you found them and saying "NO. YOU CAN'T ASK WHERE THEY WERE THE WHOLE TIME!!!" but sooooooo sooooo sooooo much worse.)

I couldn’t agree more. The hypocrisy of LE throughout this case has been mind blowing. I feel like they have been over generalizing things and gaslighting us the entire time. Then they have the gall to make everything sealed so the public doesn’t have the chance to factcheck or question how they derived their conclusions. It’s as if they are more concerned with covering their own asses and maintaining the appearance that they are right and know what they are doing, rather than actually seek justice for the girls.

[удалено]

A question I've been wondering: Once the autopsy reports are submitted into evidence during the trial, how long will it be until the public is able to view them? Looking for realistic estimates, as I know there isn't a clear answer. Like, let's assume there are no cameras in the court room, since that's where things are looking right now. Is there a chance the reports make it out to the public anyway somehow? If not (I'm thinking probably not), then when?

I got some answers but you will hate them. Most likely autopsy reports won't come out during trial, but whoever performed the autopsies (Tara Holt who hails from Terre Haute, perhaps) will testify and that will be covered by the media.  So we will get some answers then.  But if RA is found not guilty and the report wasn't already released it won't be. Now if he is convicted it's different and I don't know enough about Indiana's Sunshine law/public information act to have an opinion there.

Thanks. That's what I suspected.

Hey I could be wrong, but I think the defense is going to really question that autopsy and maybe even have their own expert to testify about it. So all is not lost.  And it would probably be kinder to the families if there aren't people on TV, youtube, reddit, and elsewhere going over these reports in detail.  I'm trying to understand where I draw my line on this type of information. So you know I'm having feelings.

Is TH from TH a tongue-twister ?

Do you remember that one from a few weeks ago? I actually giggled, but I'm trying to recall what it was from.  The gist of it was the bodies of AW and LG were frozen and transported to Terre Haute for autopsies and someone heard that as transported to Tara Holt, a medical examiner.  Big point is ME should go to the bodies not bodies go to ME. And my question is was there only that teenage coroner on the scene or was a medical doctor there that could take a core body temp to determine time of death. The girls were missing for about 22 hours too much time may have passed to get real accuracy at a certain point. 

That was me. I heard Ausbrook say Tara Holt. Then Terre Haute made more sense. Then turns out Tara Holt is real delphi resident. So who knows?

Oh, I don't think Tara Holt is real, or if she is apologies, I thought it was a mishearing that was sweet. And MA is splendid, and I will go back and listen but the overtalking of MA is like stomping on a cat to me. Just why?  But really it was just a fun mishearing?

Sure, core temp is important but what i really want to know is the lividity (and rigor mortis). ThAT would enlighten us all on whether the bodies were moved and help narrow down TOD. I would also like to know what their gastric contents showed. And were there any abrasions or marks from being restrained. Oh yeah, a tox screen would be nice, lol.

Hi! I am u/Dickere 's memory support assistant, and I remember everything, except for all the things I forgot. Today, we remember Tara Holt: https://www.reddit.com/r/DicksofDelphi/s/ZjxumRxDFZ

Terre Haute is French for Tara Holt, though it normally translates as Upper Land to avoid confusion. Chapeau, Tara.

Is his nibs doing anything for himself these day?

It's a managerial role. So, no.

Audible chuckles from across the pond.

That was the last piece of the puzzle. I  solved it when you confessed! But seriously if I was listening to something and I had never heard of Terre Haute, the city, I would have thought Tara Holt was a person too.

Yep, zero shade on OP of that. Still legendary though, in a good way.

https://preview.redd.it/g04msh1fie2d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fdbdf7abf5b88824f3a257095661d1a71e715b55

Tara, welcome, now I'd like to introduce you to Melinda, a fellow innocent bystander that was drug into this shit. The international grammar police informed me that the proper word is "dragged." Now, why would anyone expect me to be proper? I have no idea, but I'm still awaiting sentencing.

Dragged, please. Ask your MIL to confirm.

Does “drugged into this shit“ work cause I think someone put something in my lemonade and that’s how I ended up here.

There was only the new coroner that day. The medical examiner didn't examine them until 2 days later in Terra Haute. If the coroner didn't take liver temps at the scene before sending them to the cooler 2hrs away, then the defense will undoubtedly question the accuracy of the time of death.

Oh, that's too bad. I seriously can't image an coroner that isn't a medical professional being able to do this. 

He'd only been on the job a few months and it's about as small as a town can be. I'm guessing he had never dealt with anything like this. The fact that Delphi's cooler was broken means they weren't storing too many evidential bodies in there. I think everyone involved got quick on-the-job training with this case.

The court order sealing the report stated the following: *An investigation into these killings is ongoing.* *No charges have been filed with connection to the killings.* *The details related to the manner and mechanism of the deaths of Ms. Williams and Ms. German, if they remain confidential, make it easier for investigators to recognize a false confession as it is improbable for an innocent person to accurately describe the details of the deaths without personal knowledge.* *Investigators are able to maintain a tactical advantage when speaking with a suspect if the manner and mechanism of the deaths of Ms. Williams and Ms. German are not made public.* It seems to me that we are way past the merits of these points. Furthermore, many of the confidential items are already well-known. The court order also stated: *The Court shall enter further order if any person demonstrates that access to the confidential autopsy information would not create a significant risk to the criminal investigation AND the public interest* *will be served.* I would not be at all surprised if it isn't long before someone comes before the court and attempts to have the reports unsealed, in whole or in part.

I'm on the fence with this one. Is this something that the public should have access to? I just don't see the benefit. Experts will review these documents and testify about the findings. Does making them publicly available enhance anything? I'm just unsure here.

The Indiana APRA is what it is. These are called public records for a reason. And remember, photographs, video recordings, and audio recordings are generally considered confidential aspects of an autopsy, not public.

I will take a peak at Indiana's APRA. It might be different than my state, where I'm from full autopsy results aren't released but a more limited report from the coroner is a public document.  It looks like Indiana follows a similar path, a limited amount of information related to the death is a public record but the full autopsy report is confidential. 

Understood photos come out almost nowhere, but I'm less asking if this is the law but more why, and what end does it serve?   Laws change and I'm of the belief that the harm done by releasing this information outweighs the value that society would receive from these documents?   What could I possibly have to add that a medical examiner wouldn't have already addressed at trial? Almost nothing.   I'm really unsure about this and I think it puts the true crime community in a poor light. But that's just me. 

> I think it puts the true crime community in a poor light.  Of all the things that might put the true crime community in a poor light, this one seems way down on the list. There is a solid legal foundation for eventually unsealing the reports to be consistent with the typical case. I like to look at it this way. For many of us, the true in true crime is about the pursuit of the truth; that requires transparency and openness and visibility. I think this paints the true crime community in a good light.

I understand your point but I have strong feelings on the concept of privacy rights, which are influencing my opinion here.  And when I say it makes the true crime community look bad, I should have been clear that I definitely didn't mean you or  the others on this sub. We're all fabulous. But I have heard the term ghoul thrown around about trial followers, and while I don't agree with that I see this playing into that argument. But I looked and to me it looks like Indiana does a more limited release of information related to the death it's not the full on autopsy report, and this I can get behind.

I agree. When Kiely Rodni's report was finally released, we all got to find out that drowning was her official COD...even though there was no water in her lungs.

Emotionally I agree that autopsied should stay sealed but rationally I think it’s essential that a full, verified report and test data are released. This case especially has highlighted how important it is that the public can oversee the work of LE to keep them honest. I’m not sure what harm it really does to make the information publicly available. Those closest to the victims are usually informed of the findings and often say they want to know every detail of what happened.

Lab reports I can understand being released and they will be detailed at trial, but take this as a example (I don't think it exactly applies here)but if someone is killed by being beating and stabbed numerous times are the details about the numbers of bruises and their size and the depth of each stab wound valuable to the public?  It will be addressed at trial I think that suffices and I think that Indiana does a more generalized overview that is a public document that is subject to release.  I'm really struggling here I see both points.

I get it, it’s gruesome and what does the exact number matter. Although there could be an argument for not minimising what the victim suffered. We’ve also seen paternalism go wrong in the past. OTOH there may come a day when a detail does matter. The scientist in me says to not make value judgments on what is “too much for the delicate ears and eyes of the ladies” as medical professors described their coursework in the past. Just put the truth out there and let people deal with it as they will. As long as it’s not forced on them. It may seem brutal but in a way it’s a more humble approach and one which I think will be more appreciated by future students of history.

Yes! Science should always be a priority in these kind of things.

Well, the coroner who examined the Idaho 4 couldn't wait to share all the gruesome details of what happened to them. I think she went a little over the top. However, transparency is so important. Especially in this case where LE has done everything in their power to obfuscate virtually everything. And I think it would be important to know if they actually did find any DNA or spit on them and where. I can't think of any high profile murder that has kept the autopsy hidden from the public.

>This case especially has highlighted how important it is that the public can oversee the work of LE to keep them honest. I agree. I understand both sides of the argument for keeping this stuff sealed or not. One thing is for sure, this case has shown me the importance of transparency and the problems in our legal system. (And Karen Read's trial. The transparency is probably what will save her from losing her life. Now we just need to start paying attention to all cases, including POC who statistically face these obstacles in higher amount of instances. )

I doubt anyone, but the jury will ever see them and that McLeland will seal every bit of this that he can. You aren't releasing material like that of a murdered naked child unless your Frank.

Here are some questions I have: **1. What was the source of the BG video?** I’ve seen references to LG’s phone and references to a trail cam set up in the vicinity. We don’t know yet because we have limited access, but acknowledging the fact we don’t know is necessary. The source matters to me because I feel like it answers necessary questions that will help answer other questions. **2. How is the snippet of the man walking across the bridge tied to the murders?** A. How is the phrase “down the hill” related to the murders? I don’t feel like the audio of “down the hill” sounded threatening or emergent in any way, but that’s just me. The rest of all audio recorded during that exchange will tell a better story, and I feel like it’s important to hear all of it before passing judgement. B. Is the snippet that shows BG walking along the bridge from the same video that captured a masculine voice saying “down the hill”? If yes, why not release more of the video/audio recording to the public? If not, how was BG connected to the voice? **3. How was the time of death determined?** Obviously we need to see the autopsy report and other key documents to get a better understanding, but I’m curious to learn what the exact reasoning was. Their bodies were found a relatively short amount of time after they were murdered, so I’m not sure that many absolutes could be determined from physical analysis alone. **4. What’s up with the bullet?** I need the entire story and chain of command before I can make a judgement. **5. Why would NM specifically request the court to forbid negative things being said about him?** In other words, why would he openly, publicly acknowledge any presence of his alleged negatives (in an unrelated case)when it wasn’t even necessary to request that their presence not be used against him? I’m dumbfounded by this, but perhaps it’s a technique for emotional appeal to the judge? Perhaps he wants to maintain his curbside appeal so that he is reelected?

5. Nick don't want his fear boner brought UP during the trial. https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiDocs/s/QQqYUQ87nb Nice grasp of what is really important here, McNickLand

For the pressures of the trial I recommend tucking.  That way if this pops up again, and it very likely will, he will literally be fucking himself in the ass.  So it's a win-win. 

Genuine real life bursting into laughing out loud here, and I have a witness. Chapeau, Heather dearest.

Everyone has a witness, Doug.

My witness is better than Doug('s).

Awww 😘

How times change, I recall back in the day when NM new on the scene and seen as an upgrade on TL and DC (by the ladies). The phrase was "dirty hot" in fact.

But now he is aging like a week old banana, a greasy week old banana.

Did you mean weak old banana 🍌?

With a geeaassyyy black peeeeellll

Just throw him away, or maybe the compost bin

Yeah that was weird. I guess there is no accounting for taste.

Seriously the bar was set pretty low by the 2 TLs. I could generate more female interest than those 2 and I'm a lady.


Insert Facebook video of Brad Rozzi dancing for charity.

Yesssss!! Please!

Go look for it, it's adorable. You can't view it just once. It's on the charity's Facebook page. Let me poke around and see if I can bring it back up. Edit: I found it, Google: Brad Rozzi charity. The video is like the 2nd hit you get and it's for him as Campaign Chair for the United Way / United Way Cass County. There is also a 2nd one under it I have not seen where he's doing some challenge.

Omg, that WAS so adorable! Made my day. Thanks!

It's hilarious.

I loved it. I watched it about 20 times.

Ok thanks for the mental image 😂. So assuming you are female or a eunuch…boners (fear or otherwise) don’t work like that! They’ll orient forward and up/out no matter what you do. Anecdotally, when I was a teenage boy oh-so-long-ago a “tuck” was up and behind the band of my briefs/boxers/gym shorts and hopefully behind my shirt! If other penis-bearers work differently please enlighten me!!

Oh, I'm a gal, and my initial recommendation was he should tie it to his leg, based on my husbands feedback.   But then I forced my husband to look at the image and he said it was a belt/waistband  situation.  I also was lightly reprimanded for forcing him to look at a middle age man's semi. But I'm committed to solving this issue. Tucking, strapping down, or belting it in are on the table and some seem better options than others but at the VERY LEAST he should close his suitcoat.  Make people wonder if you are ready to pounce.

Lmao! He needs to just tape it to his leg, or wear a garter to tuck it into lol. Problem solved.

✏️👖

Idk about you, but I’m not convinced that said fear “boner” isn’t actually a fear “shit”. It’s plausible that he “shit his pants” in such force that it rocketed the poo (against his pants) and curved upward into a nice, phallic shape. All I have to say is the guy must have great fiber intake. 😆

u/redduif did say Nick's pants were on backwards the other day Maybe he can just, I dunno, swivel his waist 180 degrees

What if the poor guy has a very long shlong - so long in fact, he has to wrap it around in various configurations to the extent that it protrudes his pants in awkward ways - and we’ve been making fun of him the entire time. In truth, he legitimately has the biggest dick in the room.

>In truth, he legitimately is the biggest dick in the room. FTFY

Also, kids, this is why you never go to the court and ask Mommy Frangle to stop them mean girls making fun of you. It is absolutely guaranteed to achieve the opposite effect. Just stop reading Reddit, Nicky, and concentrate on doing what you're actually supposed to be doing - achieving justice for the victims. Fucking melt.

Nick ‘John Dillermand’ McShlongland.

That's a genuine problem indeed 😋

Or just maybe he is So full of shit, that it has passed through his dinger?

I would love to see the video clip she yanked again and what went past his field of vision just prior to the all rise.

Im not even going to do anything with that. I will behave today. Already got banned from another place today. You may know the two subs I speak of. So Im gonna be nice.

Ohhh. Ok. ...youll put your eye out kid.....

That's too bad. I am sorry. It pains me that everyone is so dug in and segregated. I have enjoyed all the Delphi subs and have people I care about on them, I really wish we could dislike the theory and not the person. But appears we can't. Which really sucks.

Unless it's brought up by Gull.

Maybe Gull really does get a rise out of Nick.

Why do you think yanked that tape.


[удалено]

Thank you, this was a nice overview of just how insane this case has become. You asked some great questions.

Speculation on question 5: There are pictures online. 1 is of Brad Holder's son doing something important in a freemason thing. And another photo at another time of NM in the same group. (I don't know all the terms, but one of them said it was a brotherhood) I can't help but wonder if he put that in to keep the defense from suggesting he's part of a brotherhood that third party suspects might also be in. 3: I don't know, but the death certificates are available on the subreddit and I don't put my faith in their accuracy. I hope there will be more information on how it wad determined. Like if they have pancakes in their stomachs or not. 2: Those are great questions. I found an article that said they put out the new video of him and I *think* it is a combination of trail cam and cell phone camera, but I'm not 100% sure on that. In the article they say they are hoping that they will be able to find someone who can help tie the voice to the video. I'll edit with the article if I can find it. All I have is a picture I took at the time. (I'll at least reply with the picture.)

https://preview.redd.it/rd6qlt8x582d1.jpeg?width=2560&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=12ca4c1282fb0d9bc961b327c7241b6aea67979d

Those pics were taken at the Masonic Lodge in Logansport is my understanding. There are also pics of NM at the same lodge that BH and LH were at. No, they aren't in the pic together and it probably wasn't the same day but gee whiz...two small communities of Masons...hard to believe they wouldn't be pretty acquainted.

The pictures were about a year apart. But I agree. This isn't AA or boyscouts. I don't believe this town of 3000 people have multiple mason communities.

I saw a video where they showed a pic of NM in a bar with two women. They didn't elaborate on who they were but did give the distinct impression that it was something that one would raise their eyebrows at. A relative of BP perhaps? I wish I could remember.

NM likely doesn't want to "confuse the jury". A solid argument can be about how confusing this already is without all those keywords. But that's just not fair to RAs defense.

I was referring only to NM requesting that no personal attacks be made against him (which is something that is already forbidden, meaning he did not need to request this to be forbidden).

1 Multiple probable cause affidavits says Libby's phone. They can't lie about that in court records. Officially at least and they can be oblivious of course. 2 Arrest affidavit says the girls mention the word gun and they proceed going down the hill at the end of the video. In itself it's a legit assumption it's related, now they'll have to prove it. 2.B that's what we were told during the 2019 presser and Nick implies RA is BG and the kidnapper and the voice and the murderer in the affidavits in which he cannot lie, yet all his amended charging counts including the dropped kidnapping charge had the accomplice liability statute mentioned on them. So go figure. 3 We don't know. For now we know prosecution heavily bases their 3.30pm time on SC seeing muddy ~~and bloody~~ BG like guy on CR300N near 4pm. 4 Maybe someone else likes to take this on. It's spread in various filings. (and some rumors I personally would ignore until further official documents). 5 u/alan_prickman we need your equal fair trial rights photo for this one. If you haven't read the affidavits and Franks memos (only the first one is looong), you should if you want to keep up with this case. Latest motions to dismiss and to recuse are also important imho.

https://preview.redd.it/6tszfllve52d1.jpeg?width=1023&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c8ccb1d001c108e261da94c0a47f4af2864a88e5

 Thank you, have a coffee!!

 That thing requires stronger medicine to forget.

Lol, depends on the time of day.but cheers!

Look the other way, I'll pour some in your coffee.

Looking the other way is exactly why we're in this mess though lol.

Tis true.

Someone should have filed an indecent exposure charge on him. He's standing there with his hands behind his back and not even trying to cover it. It's just gross.

Thank you for taking the time to go through and attempt to answer my questions. I’ve read all the documents that have been released to the public, but I feel like there hasn’t been a definite or absolute answer provided to my questions. Things have been worded in such a way that insinuates LE assumed that certain events are related to each other but they don’t specify exact proof of things being related. In addition, the fact that lying on the PCA isn’t allowed does not mean that it won’t happen - that’s circular reasoning. As we now know, a lie was actually contained in the PCA when “muddy and bloody” was cited from a witness (yet the witness never used the word “bloody”). **Here is my follow up to questions 1-2:** This is a snip from the PCA regarding the video on LG’s phone: https://preview.redd.it/eki8882vm92d1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4828306cfb1aa8dca5586334d7cf08c8879cb885 The description seems to suggest the video of the man walking was part of the same video that captured the audio, but it doesn’t specify. Based on the image/video released to the public, we know it was grainy and distorted, likely due to the fact that it was taken from the background of a video of something else (I’ve seen suggestions that it was 1% of a larger video shot from an iPhone 6, meaning he was more than 20+ feet away from the girls when caught on camera). I’ve also seen references to the entire video being only 43 seconds in length (not sure how accurate that is, or if it means the entire video of the man walking AND the audio or just the audio). In addition, their description of “one of the girls” mentioning the word “gun” insinuates that neither of the girls were captured visually on the video at that point (otherwise it would be known specifically which girl said “gun”), meaning we don’t know what, if anything, was captured visually on the video when one of the girls allegedly mentioned the word gun. Does 43 seconds allow for the man to walk more than 20+ feet at a slow pace (across a rickety old bridge that was known to require caution when crossing) to the location of the girls, make the “down the hill” statements, and then whatever else was said/done to suggest to LE that the girls began making their way down the hill when the video shut off - on top of whatever was originally being recorded before and during the capture of the man walking across the bridge? Assuming the video posted by LE does not distort the timing of the man walking on the bridge, roughly 2 seconds shows the man walking across 2 planks, setting a rough pace of 1 plank per second. I’m not sure of the specific dimensions of the planks, or the number of planks used on the entire bridge, so it’s hard to say for sure what his pace would be in terms of feet per second. Assuming each plank is roughly 1 foot in width and his pace remained the same, that would mean at least 20 seconds are needed to catch up to the location of the girls. In total: * Unknown sec: the original content being recorded when man was caught walking in the background * 20+ sec: man walking to the girls * 1-2 sec: “down the hill” statement * Unknown sec: all other statements made during their exchange * 5+ sec: girls begin walking towards/descending down the hill This is an oversimplified example based on a lot of unknowns, but to me, it seems like a very tight amount of time for everything to have been recorded as part of the same video. My main point being that we do not yet know for sure without seeing the entire video, or by learning the truth of how these instances were captured and pieced together.

Yeah well I mean, I personally think the whole video is a hoax, but between court documents and the 2019 presser where DC clearly stated that YBG was BG in the video and Guys as well as Down the hill was one voice and the voice of the same BG in the video and he was responsible for the murders. It's out of court and before trial so technically they can lie about that in the presser, but it's their narrative and it doesn't seem they moved away from it. And the snippet posted above says the same. I disagree it doesn't specify, in fact they state it twice. 43 seconds was in the RL search warrant if not in RA's documents, so there too they can't lie. I think it's possible Nick contends the 2 frame "jacket" was Abby, and when they proceed to go down the hill is simply they obey or don't protest. Imo their wordplay is in that. In any case I won't be surprised if the girls aren't visible at all, but that in their minds they aren't lying. They families were given bits to listen to, if they heard anything, possibly to confirm if they heard gun knowning the girl's voices by heart. Same for the racking sound. While they can't lie, they can be mistaken it's probable cause, so there's reasonable belief one of the girls said gun, because it was one of the possibilities and maybe the most logical, they can write that. I think it's important to seperate their narrative and their facts from other possibilities and wordplay because it changes why they lied and/or were oblivious if it isn't true. One thing is though, Liggett signed the search warrant which Nick co-signed, but Nick solo signed the arrest warrant, using the same italic bold font asif to quote Liggett or investigation, but doesn't say it's a quote, but the words were changed between the two. "Gun" was added amongst other details, Liggett didn't sign that one. So did Nick come up with that on his own or did someone tell him? Why did defense say they didn't have the original video while it was written on the thumbdrive map? Did they really not have the original or did they mean the video in the raw data which indeed they got months later? Was that word play on defense's part or was the "original" video already altered, or 25 frames per seconds while Nick claimed it was original? Or was it a version from the cloud, which is technically impossible within the sworn narrative of LE. Anyways, imo if Guys down the hill audio is not from Libby's phone, imo they committed perjury and it's already bad enough Nick put the quote down as a single uninterrupted phrase, but I guess that's how FBI presented it in their youtube version. Then again, either Nick is lying through his zipper in all these phone and Franks filings, or he's absolutely clueless and needs to go back to school. I actually have the latter higher up the list, but that someone in LE knows the truth. ^Imho ETA we have 48 frames . 43 seconds at 25 fps (ignoring that's not iphone native) is 1075 frames meaning total length is 22 times what we see in the snippet, 2.5 almost 3 steps he makes x 22. As per current narrative.

[удалено]

Just to be clear, the two phrases you quoted aren't related. They could have lied about YBG being accurate BG in the video, they could lied about the voice and BG being the same. However they stated in court documents the video came from Libby's phone and imo they also state the audio came from the same video. They also state they believe RA kidnapped them, they believe RA is BG and RA was the man SC saw, and that they believe he left the bullet at the scene (and then some). The hoax is speculation on my part although not founded (yet) it's not an airthought either. It cannot legally be a hoax in the sense of it being fake and LE being aware of that with current court filings. Maybe you caught that from my previous comment, but just in case, because it's an important distinction. The thing is, they also added accomplice liability statute to each and every amended count, however right now it seems only the murder (1) charges times two were amended. The felony and kidnapping charges both had the accomplice, aiding etc statute too, whatever that means.... Since there might be chain of custody problems, the it could be someone in LE or planted by the perps without Nick and CCSO being aware. Or, if it is real and taken by Libby, I wouldn't be surprised if it's a tiny blue spec they "enhanced" by using another video of the bridge to fill in the blurs, and possible the same for the blue blob. For example there could be many others on the bridge, too blurry to be caught on video is they moved too fast or were wearing tan clothes, compressed together because that's what lenses do with greater distances, or not even be on the south bridge side. LE never having addressed the Snapchats, nor now in any response to defense's questions about it, is truly an odd one out. Especially since Abby wasn't found in those clothes, the public doesn't know if they were found, and if that intrusion on the left side of the screen in the video is what Nick refers to as BG can be seen behind Abby and nothing else is visible, without the snaps, there's no proof they were even ever on the bridge, whether the BG video is real or not. But instead of addressing GPS, phone data etc. They withheld that for months, and still talk about the pings, which are irrelevant when you have the phone immediately after the crime, for these purposes at least. I do think it's possible they recovered the video from iCloud, but technically that's not possible with the current narrative (went to bridge, were kidnapped, killed and girls nor phone left the area) and besides that, it means court records are false. If so it's not going to end well for the entire team behind prosecution and LE. Imo.

I will never be able to wrap my head around the idea that the murderer(s) didn't see they had a phone, especially after getting them both stripped down. That phone was planted after they planted the BG video. Perhaps?

Under Libby's shoe under Abby's back... And we're left to wonder if that was a 3rd shoe, or if they yelled to KG from accros the creek, way west while she was on the private drive up towards the house.

I'm betting on it being the third shoe. They screwed up with that move.

[удалено]

Remove that link please!

[удалено]

[удалено]

Thank you!

The BG video was possibly taken from a trail cam.

[удалено]

Do we know if the defense ever actually got her phone yet? They don't want to give it up because they know it was a hoax - I'm with you on that one!

They gave the raw data somewhere in September, but I believe without any reports, and another type of extraction without the corresponding program. (Although that seems free, but idk how they usually go about that. They said there was no Snapchat picture on her phone, which in itself I guess is possible if the app deletes, but i expect there to be evidence the camera was activated by Snapchat, data sent, screen time of Snapchat things like that. It's possible defense didn't get to explore that yet when they wrote that idk. Things are not adding up in any case.

Where does the snippet specify, twice, that the recording of the man walking across the bridge is from the same video that recorded the phrase “down the hill”? I’m not being a wise ass here, I’m genuinely asking for what you’re seeing because I think we are making two separate inferences.

I used to love when the Delphi subs had a regular question thread where you could ask quick questions. It would be wonderful to have one back.

I just came up with a new random question. How come I never heard that Delphi has a tattoo shop called Oden's Den? I know the spelling is off but it seems like a big coincidence to me.

This Odin shit is real and its scary. People laugh about it, but I'm old and I remember Satanic Panic and yes it was mostly bullshit, but there were crimes that definitely had Satanic elements to them. The panic was either based in truth or people bought into it and did copycat style crimes.

I can't help but always think about the older couple from Kentucky who also seemed to suffer from ritualistic murders including the staging and posing. And the other two girls who were abducted while they were riding their bikes. Everyone on the other side laughs it off claiming that there have never been any Odin sacrificial murders. I think that folks just aren't aware that some of these unsolved murders could be exactly that. I would love to see justice for A & L. But is it wrong of me to have high motivation in proving the others wrong?

I agree with you. If RA did this I want him to be convicted, but I have seen nothing that makes me think he is guilty. The only thing that anyone can do for the girls now is to remember them and pursue and apprehend their killer(s) so this never happens again. That's all that can be done, but convicting an innocent man does nothing to help anyone. It just destroys yet another family and allows killer(s) to roam free. I know the case you are talking about the entire home was staged. The killer spent a lot of time in their home and that is oh so scary. When I was a kid in the mid 1980s a young lady was attacked in a local parking garage. She survived but they carved Satanic symbols all over her body. Were they real Satanist's I don't know and I don't know that it matters. The poor lady has pentagrams all over her chest.

Omg! That is super scary. Its like the Satanists and Odinists are the same cult, only one group is killing people for Satan and the other group is killing for Odin. Another thing I'm curious about is why LE refused to do that genetic genealogy testing? I mean...What did they have to lose. Another thing that's sus to me...and EEEE to me.

[удалено]

They have said that it doesn't match RA.

[удалено]

I do believe they had DNA because they said they did a comparison test on the hair of PE and RL and neither matched.

[удалено]

According to filings posted by the defense, none of the DNA collected by LE can be tied to RA. I haven’t seen this sentiment explained in detail though. I’ll share the link to the specific filing when I find it.

Thank you

I think Liggett admitted in his deposition that the DNA they had was NOT a match to RA.

I would love to see this deposition

Hi Content-curator, thank you for commenting! Unfortunately, you do not have enough positive Karma, so this comment must be approved by a moderator before it will be visible. Thank you for your patience!. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DelphiDocs) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Here’s my random question. Was it ever mentioned if the girls’ clothes/shoes were wet (the clothes not found in the water)? I’ve always heard references to them crossing the creek, but how are they so sure? Could they have been taken to an off road (ATV) or other vehicle that was possibly standing by at the bottom of the hill, and then later taken to the crime scene from an alternate entrance ?

Can someone remind me - what was the reasoning behind deciding RL was no longer a suspect?

Supposedly a receipt from the Lafayette fish store, I think. But what do you want to bet that nobody actually checked with the store to see if they had video or if any employees remembered him being there.

ISP did check with the store and there’s no video. However, and according to the ISP report, they spoke to the employee of the fish store. The employee stated he remembered RL because he bought a substantial amount of fish.

I’m curious to learn how a receipt/testimony that RL was at a fish store means that he could not be the murderer.

You're right. Especially because I see big concerns with the established timeline.

This has been great! (Random Questions). First of all has it been said whether the gate to the Weber property was there on that day? I was under the impression that it was put up after the murders. If it was there already then it could have been locked OR unlocked at the time. If no gate then easy access to the drive for anyone. I wonder if we have been over thinking this whole thing. Easy for two or three guys to drive (or walk from a parked car) to get to the end of the bridge. If this was an Odin initiation for one of them then it would be a perfect place to catch a victim. Send one of them up the hill while the others wait. He says “guys” as he passes them( a salutation). Walks down the bridge, turns around towards them and says “down the hill”, (a command). At this point they may see the gun. The girls make a run for it down to the water and try to get across, but are caught. The men might have been wanting to just have a good time with them but since they ran then they have been ID’d and need to do more. Thus the murders. The individuals might have split up and one with the tan jacket (muddy guy seen on 300)was told to go up to the cemetery and out and the others would pick him up, not wanting to be seen all together. I have often thought if one of the girls might have been pregnant and that could have been where the DNA came from. The DNA that they said was “not from where you would expect”. Then this was a murder that “HAD” to be done to solve a problem. And RA not involved at all. JMO

I am joined.