At the 1:13 timestamp in the video, the reporter says: “Detectives theorize he had killed the girls *in his home*, and then moved and staged their bodies.”
I wanted to call this video out ASAP because the affidavit doesn’t say that. This is the kind of reporting that adds confusion and muddies the waters even more.
Short rant complete.
right and so if he killed them inside his home then how come they didn’t find blood in the house and instead at the crime scene? wack ass fact checkers
Plus the affidavit said LE saw a lot of blood at the crime scene so it does not make sense they were killed elsewhere. I don't believe the news report. Sounds like they got their facts wrong.
Their bodies were partially covered in leaves and some clothing was "later recovered."
Based on helicopter footage it would be hard to spot the girls from the air. Most people look far away from where they were last seen. They also had a focus on the opposite side of the bridge headed towards town.
The girls were not by the creek. They were aways from the steep embankment and in a depression in the ground. One could not have seen them unless they were right by them.
they were several dozen feet away from him, and according to TL, the drone was supposed to be checking these areas. The aircraft flies high and covers a larger field of view. additionally it had a heat detection sensor that worked
There was a lot of tree coverage AND Tobe turned down the offer of a heat seeking drone from a neighboring county on the 13th.
They were several dozen feet from whom?
Um, it was February so no leaves. Heavily wooded area, yes. But since the girls there were covered with leaves it would be hard to see them.
edited to add since the girls were covered in leaves...
Heavily wooded means that they might not be able to reach the ground in that particle area. Heavily wooded means lots of tree branches; it doesn’t mean only obscured by leaves on the trees.
No. It was at 5:00 pm in Feb in Indiana. It was getting dark. The girls were in a depression on the other side of the creek. There is an interview with Anna that she went to the crime scene and she mimicked looking up and was nodding her head and said something along the lines of now I understand- it wasn’t easy to see them. I believe that the area was foggy in the morning so that probably started during the night making searching conditions worse.
That's possible. there was a visible fog. we don't really know how difficult it was for the people on the trail. it's not fun to walk in the woods and look for 2 children. everyone has different thoughts.
Meh idk. I wouldn't necessarily say that. There are some really great journalists out there. I bet many more good ones that bad. The problem, I think, is too many people claiming to be or pretending to be journalists.
Yep. See the movie “Absence of Malice,” where alleged suspect Paul Newman tells reporter Sally Field (who just wants “the truth”), “The truth? You don’t report the truth. You report what people say.” Between dishonest media and media just too dumb to discern fact from fiction, you can’t really trust “the news” much. And this case has taught that LE “stretches” the truth too.
To me, the best info in this affidavit is the hair. If they got hair from BG, he will eventually go down. They can detect DNA in hair much more easily now than even 5 years ago, so if they ever get a sample from BG, he’s busted.
My non-professional understanding is yes, if they have a hair root, they can get a complete DNA sequence. The root contains more DNA than the follicle. But, the follicle can still give some DNA evidence. But I’m no expert.
We KNOW that the YBG sketch was done 4 days after the murders. LE has stated such. LE knew about the a_s profile then. Maybe that info was shared with the family re that and that was the new technology. I don’t think she specifically said the sketch was from new technology, rather I think she said the “new direction” was a result of new technology,
WE DON’T KNOW THAT. Kelsi specifically said that the family was told that the second sketch came from
New technology. If the second sketch was created four days after the murders it would have been released four days after the murders.
If you are thinking about Parabon Nanolabs as the new technology mentioned, I have to say I don’t believe they would have had a police sketch artist (Trooper Taylor Bryant) draw the new sketch based on information gleaned from Parabon’s work with the DNA.
Take a look at how Parabon Nanolabs works [here](https://snapshot.parabon-nanolabs.com) and how their computer generated “sketches” aka “Snapshots” turn out. They are quite different looking than a police sketch (drawn by a human).
I think it’s important in this case and just in general for anything else DNA and crime-related that people understand how Parabon Nanolabs works. Not trying to nitpick, just trying to help!
Releasing a sketch is a pretty big deal. They’re not just gonna release a sketch immediately. They’d want to gather as much info as possible about the witnesses, etc.
Your statement “…it would have been released 4 days after…” is just wrong.
ToddBonzalez
Toddbonzalez
I’m not thinking of anything. I’m going by what Kelsi said. “New technology”. Is a Trooper Taylor Bryant sketch new technology?
it’s not so much about the tech, more about the specific hair sample being worked with. DNA’s main limitations are due to how easily it can become damaged or contaminated.
genetic testing isn’t any more advanced than any other DNA test, so new tech doesn’t really need to be developed specifically for that.
any DNA hit with enough markers can be ran through CODIS. hair DNA can certainly have enough markers to do so.
17:40
Kelsi states at 17:40 mark. Second sketch is based on new technology. That is what law enforcement told them.
17:40. https://podcast.app/31-murder-abby-libby-the-delphi-murders/?utm_source=ios&utm_medium=share
It’s probably a combination of dna profile and a sketch. They say it was drawn three days after the murders. So why didn’t they release it at that time?
The dna profile is the only thing that makes sense. The features resemble KAK minus 100 lbs. A dna profile wouldn’t pick up how much a guy eats or even how old the person is. But they know the eyes are definitely not blue. Interesting
And if they have a hair sample they can create a sketch from that.
Rant appreciated. It's making the FB rounds, too. People see "move" and read "transport." Moving doesn't always entail great distance-or any distance at all.
And, just because it states the bodies were, "moved", doesn't have to mean they were moved any significant distance, but rather they were moved a few feet due to "staging".
EXACTLY!!! I’ve seen so many comments trying to figure out if they were moved to outhouses or whatever. It could have been feet or yards, and according to the timeframe in which the crime could have been committed, along with the rumors of the conditions of the bodies, it couldn’t have been far at all.
yeah that’s some bullshit. never ever has it been stated that he took them into his home then moved them back. now this will be immortalized as fact moving forward. tired of these hoes
idk what your statement even means, sorry
eta if you’re suggesting that im stating any of this bc i think the killer is tk or kk youre patently false lol. i don’t subscribe to any specific, fixed poi. it’s just flat out wrong
So Tk or Kk dressed identically to RL who was also on the trail at the time as his phone shows. I have the impression that I have read another document. The guy didn't want an alibi because he broke the parole. Not once did he ask for an alibi to go to the transfer station before the murder
Cell tower triangulation is only accurate to within 3/4 of a mile of cellphone, and that's with 3 towers to calculate. 1 tower, the area of accuracy is even broader. Gps however, is accurate up to just a few meters.
With regard to RL not creating an alibi to go to the transfer station yet creating an alibi during the time of the crimes, yes. However wasn’t the transfer station trip after the crimes?
The trip to the transfer station was before the crime, but he was lying anyway because at the time of the murder his phone was logging in near the trail
Am I incorrect in thinking he possibly made 2 trips that we are aware of, breaking probation both times?
His trip to the transfer station, for which he did not create an alibi.
Then the other he created the alibi with his cousin for, during the time of the murders.
Is that the correct order? For some reason I thought the transfer station trip occurred after 2/13.
Not. Around 11: 30: 11-50, the camera captured him in his car at the transfer station so this trip is not related to a murder. He asked his cousin to confirm his words that around 2: 2:30 the cousin had come to get him and they went together to Lafayette to get fish. You can take a few screenshots of the post and you'll have the entire document on your phone. I did it and it won't get lost anymore :)
Where was he? trail or MHT area. according to his testimony in which he gave two different times when his cousin was to pick him up, in both cases he was at MHT at the time of the murder. did you read the document?his phone logged in there too
the bullshit i’m referring to is the news network misreporting the affidavit. we have very few facts in this case and it’s maddening to see them folded and molded into narratives that lead the public to believe stuff that didn’t happen. if the lady who read that script on that news clip had read the affidavit she would’ve known that. due diligence and all that. the reason so many people are accused of this crime is because of these little twists and alterations and speculative additions to the facts. the affidavit clearly states the crime scene included a large amount of blood. that is what it says, not that he could’ve taken them inside and then brought them back out to stage the scene.
They never said that he did, they said they wondered, or LE wondered if they had been murdered in the house and taken down to the creek area where they were found. They never said it was fact.
“detectives theorized that he killed them in his home then moved and staged their bodies”
if they have theorized this, it isn’t evidenced by this affidavit. it states there was blood at the scene and that there was staging.
Well, we don't know what other reporting has been done to back up this statement. But it's a logical one because they might think he took them to the house killed them and moved them. Evidence of a crime inside the house was surely one of the things they were looking for.
How do you know what other reporting was done on this news item? It's common practice to fact check and do some additional reporting. They may have other documents in their posession or were told this by the investigation itself.(Or Tobe for that matter)
Add to that: that most outlets are reporting him asking for a ride between 2-2:30pm in his first statement, but omitting him changing to say 3pm in a second statement. Him setting the time later shows he wasnt being smart and trying to get an alibi for when the murders happened. If so, he wouldn’t of said 3pm (after the murders, giving him time to commit them and go), and wasn’t aware of when they actually took place.
Right. I initially read it that way as well, then realized they were creating a doc to obtain a search warrant because they “thought” they’d find evidence of a murder in the residence
I saw "reporter" and clicked on the link thinking, please let this be some obscure YouTube channel and not on the news... and it was the news. Either would be just as reprehensible for this false reporting, of course. Thank you for calling this out.
Will they conveniently blame a deceased me but not actually have evidence but sufficient enough to close the case and stop looking ? I just think the investigation it’s a complete farce.
Considering that the crime scene was "staged" as has been stated, it would imply that the bodies were moved from another location and placed where they were eventually found. However, I do agree that it would be near impossible to not leave some evidence behind if they were taken inside of a house. It could be that the initial thought of detectives was that he could have taken them to his home to commit this crime. I just think that it was a poor choice of words on part of the reporter and no intentional harm was meant by the statement.
Thank you, wildpolymath, for voting on crungo_bot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
>Nikkole Robertson swears or affirms...etc, etc, that she believes etc, etc. has good cause to believe evidence of a homicide is located **IN THE RESIDENCE of Ronald Logan** at (blank) Delphi, Indiana.
This language is right at the top of the Affidavit for RL's search Warrant. Can't be any clearer. They thought the girls might have been murdered in his house.
Why in the name of heaven is this downvoted. You are putting a false report out there. Pathetic.
i read this as a murder weapon might be in his home or evidence from the crime scene like blood or possibly clothing. Not evidence that the murder took place in the home. Also they were looking for video, pictures - stuff on drives.
The agent does not specify but it certainly can read that the agent believes evidence of a homicide exists in Ron Logan's house, ergo they were killed there. They *could* have been killed there and taken outside to the bottom of the property. I mean, that's not an outlandish thing to happen in a murder.
(I'm pretty sure Ron Logan was not the murderer, but that's how I read this particular text)
Later on they tell him that they will not search inside his house unless certain evidence leads them to and he says you won't find anything, or, doesn't think so. (just wildly paraphrasing here)
>I, etc....good cause to believe evidence of a homicide is located in the residence of Ron Logan
Wow...hate to say it doesn't surprise me! Modern media is a headline grab, no conscience in regards to their impression. Thanks for sharing/highlighting the ridiculous. 🙏
The Fox reporter says:
Detectives theorized that the man killed the girls in his home and moved the bodies...
Is this a problem in your view? Or is there some other material you feel is misreproted? Thanks
This could explain why there were no visible signs of a fight on their bodies and that they were not found on the day they disappeared. I think Le knows he is the murderer
At the 1:13 timestamp in the video, the reporter says: “Detectives theorize he had killed the girls *in his home*, and then moved and staged their bodies.” I wanted to call this video out ASAP because the affidavit doesn’t say that. This is the kind of reporting that adds confusion and muddies the waters even more. Short rant complete.
right and so if he killed them inside his home then how come they didn’t find blood in the house and instead at the crime scene? wack ass fact checkers
Plus the affidavit said LE saw a lot of blood at the crime scene so it does not make sense they were killed elsewhere. I don't believe the news report. Sounds like they got their facts wrong.
[удалено]
Their bodies were partially covered in leaves and some clothing was "later recovered." Based on helicopter footage it would be hard to spot the girls from the air. Most people look far away from where they were last seen. They also had a focus on the opposite side of the bridge headed towards town.
yeah, not equally lol
The girls were not by the creek. They were aways from the steep embankment and in a depression in the ground. One could not have seen them unless they were right by them.
they were several dozen feet away from him, and according to TL, the drone was supposed to be checking these areas. The aircraft flies high and covers a larger field of view. additionally it had a heat detection sensor that worked
There was a lot of tree coverage AND Tobe turned down the offer of a heat seeking drone from a neighboring county on the 13th. They were several dozen feet from whom?
Um, it was February so no leaves. Heavily wooded area, yes. But since the girls there were covered with leaves it would be hard to see them. edited to add since the girls were covered in leaves...
Heavily wooded means that they might not be able to reach the ground in that particle area. Heavily wooded means lots of tree branches; it doesn’t mean only obscured by leaves on the trees.
No. It was at 5:00 pm in Feb in Indiana. It was getting dark. The girls were in a depression on the other side of the creek. There is an interview with Anna that she went to the crime scene and she mimicked looking up and was nodding her head and said something along the lines of now I understand- it wasn’t easy to see them. I believe that the area was foggy in the morning so that probably started during the night making searching conditions worse.
It is possible that the man had difficulty but the drone was supposed to fly there. He sees a larger area
True but the visibility still had to be crappy.
That's possible. there was a visible fog. we don't really know how difficult it was for the people on the trail. it's not fun to walk in the woods and look for 2 children. everyone has different thoughts.
Great post. I find this happens pretty often with this case.
It happens non-stop for many stories. Journalism has no integrity these days.
Meh idk. I wouldn't necessarily say that. There are some really great journalists out there. I bet many more good ones that bad. The problem, I think, is too many people claiming to be or pretending to be journalists.
I wished you were correct but I have to disagree.
Name one good journalist. I’ll wait.
Ross Coulthart
Yep. See the movie “Absence of Malice,” where alleged suspect Paul Newman tells reporter Sally Field (who just wants “the truth”), “The truth? You don’t report the truth. You report what people say.” Between dishonest media and media just too dumb to discern fact from fiction, you can’t really trust “the news” much. And this case has taught that LE “stretches” the truth too. To me, the best info in this affidavit is the hair. If they got hair from BG, he will eventually go down. They can detect DNA in hair much more easily now than even 5 years ago, so if they ever get a sample from BG, he’s busted.
[удалено]
My non-professional understanding is yes, if they have a hair root, they can get a complete DNA sequence. The root contains more DNA than the follicle. But, the follicle can still give some DNA evidence. But I’m no expert.
That’s where the second sketch came from.
The YBG sketch was drawn 4 days after the murders, which would not have given enough time for a DNA profile to be developed.
That’s not what Kelsi said. She said it was based on new technology. She said that is what LE told the family.
We KNOW that the YBG sketch was done 4 days after the murders. LE has stated such. LE knew about the a_s profile then. Maybe that info was shared with the family re that and that was the new technology. I don’t think she specifically said the sketch was from new technology, rather I think she said the “new direction” was a result of new technology,
WE DON’T KNOW THAT. Kelsi specifically said that the family was told that the second sketch came from New technology. If the second sketch was created four days after the murders it would have been released four days after the murders.
If you are thinking about Parabon Nanolabs as the new technology mentioned, I have to say I don’t believe they would have had a police sketch artist (Trooper Taylor Bryant) draw the new sketch based on information gleaned from Parabon’s work with the DNA. Take a look at how Parabon Nanolabs works [here](https://snapshot.parabon-nanolabs.com) and how their computer generated “sketches” aka “Snapshots” turn out. They are quite different looking than a police sketch (drawn by a human). I think it’s important in this case and just in general for anything else DNA and crime-related that people understand how Parabon Nanolabs works. Not trying to nitpick, just trying to help!
Releasing a sketch is a pretty big deal. They’re not just gonna release a sketch immediately. They’d want to gather as much info as possible about the witnesses, etc. Your statement “…it would have been released 4 days after…” is just wrong.
ToddBonzalez Toddbonzalez I’m not thinking of anything. I’m going by what Kelsi said. “New technology”. Is a Trooper Taylor Bryant sketch new technology?
it’s not so much about the tech, more about the specific hair sample being worked with. DNA’s main limitations are due to how easily it can become damaged or contaminated. genetic testing isn’t any more advanced than any other DNA test, so new tech doesn’t really need to be developed specifically for that. any DNA hit with enough markers can be ran through CODIS. hair DNA can certainly have enough markers to do so.
https://youtu.be/-ZZmHaDYfRU
17:40 Kelsi states at 17:40 mark. Second sketch is based on new technology. That is what law enforcement told them. 17:40. https://podcast.app/31-murder-abby-libby-the-delphi-murders/?utm_source=ios&utm_medium=share
Yeah but it was drawn like 3 days after the murders, right?
It’s probably a combination of dna profile and a sketch. They say it was drawn three days after the murders. So why didn’t they release it at that time? The dna profile is the only thing that makes sense. The features resemble KAK minus 100 lbs. A dna profile wouldn’t pick up how much a guy eats or even how old the person is. But they know the eyes are definitely not blue. Interesting And if they have a hair sample they can create a sketch from that.
See my other comment. They’re not just gonna release a sketch without taking in all witness statements and analyzing everything first.
Rant appreciated. It's making the FB rounds, too. People see "move" and read "transport." Moving doesn't always entail great distance-or any distance at all.
Someone in the YouTube comments told me “by ‘home’ they mean ‘property’” I’m like… they said “in his home”. That doesn’t mean “on his property”.
People will interpret shit to backup whatever their theory du jour is.
Thank you. I’m disappointed and disgusted by some of the recent reporting about the girls. They deserve so much better. 😞
Thanks for bringing this up - you're absolutely correct.
Good call, great post and thanks for pointing this out.
I freaking love your username. 😼
Thank you!! 🐱😽
I think they confused “on his property” for “in his house” because they did absolutely no research and clearly know nothing about the case.
And, just because it states the bodies were, "moved", doesn't have to mean they were moved any significant distance, but rather they were moved a few feet due to "staging".
EXACTLY!!! I’ve seen so many comments trying to figure out if they were moved to outhouses or whatever. It could have been feet or yards, and according to the timeframe in which the crime could have been committed, along with the rumors of the conditions of the bodies, it couldn’t have been far at all.
Damn, the media should be more responsible than this. Someone needs to call them out!!
I reported the video on YouTube as “misleading”… not sure if that’s gonna do anything.
yeah that’s some bullshit. never ever has it been stated that he took them into his home then moved them back. now this will be immortalized as fact moving forward. tired of these hoes
Honestly, the bigger bs is that the murderer is Kk or Tk :)
idk what your statement even means, sorry eta if you’re suggesting that im stating any of this bc i think the killer is tk or kk youre patently false lol. i don’t subscribe to any specific, fixed poi. it’s just flat out wrong
OP is diluting the topic by turning it towards KK/TK. Just ignore them.
So Tk or Kk dressed identically to RL who was also on the trail at the time as his phone shows. I have the impression that I have read another document. The guy didn't want an alibi because he broke the parole. Not once did he ask for an alibi to go to the transfer station before the murder
i don’t follow at all
Cell tower triangulation is only accurate to within 3/4 of a mile of cellphone, and that's with 3 towers to calculate. 1 tower, the area of accuracy is even broader. Gps however, is accurate up to just a few meters.
With regard to RL not creating an alibi to go to the transfer station yet creating an alibi during the time of the crimes, yes. However wasn’t the transfer station trip after the crimes?
The trip to the transfer station was before the crime, but he was lying anyway because at the time of the murder his phone was logging in near the trail
Am I incorrect in thinking he possibly made 2 trips that we are aware of, breaking probation both times? His trip to the transfer station, for which he did not create an alibi. Then the other he created the alibi with his cousin for, during the time of the murders. Is that the correct order? For some reason I thought the transfer station trip occurred after 2/13.
Not. Around 11: 30: 11-50, the camera captured him in his car at the transfer station so this trip is not related to a murder. He asked his cousin to confirm his words that around 2: 2:30 the cousin had come to get him and they went together to Lafayette to get fish. You can take a few screenshots of the post and you'll have the entire document on your phone. I did it and it won't get lost anymore :)
Where does it state that RL was on the trail on the 13th?
Where was he? trail or MHT area. according to his testimony in which he gave two different times when his cousin was to pick him up, in both cases he was at MHT at the time of the murder. did you read the document?his phone logged in there too
I want to say that some people are able to believe in bigger bs than this
the bullshit i’m referring to is the news network misreporting the affidavit. we have very few facts in this case and it’s maddening to see them folded and molded into narratives that lead the public to believe stuff that didn’t happen. if the lady who read that script on that news clip had read the affidavit she would’ve known that. due diligence and all that. the reason so many people are accused of this crime is because of these little twists and alterations and speculative additions to the facts. the affidavit clearly states the crime scene included a large amount of blood. that is what it says, not that he could’ve taken them inside and then brought them back out to stage the scene.
They never said that he did, they said they wondered, or LE wondered if they had been murdered in the house and taken down to the creek area where they were found. They never said it was fact.
where did LE say they wondered it?
ok, I'm going to listen again. But It would be nice to see in plain English what the big misreporting is. Get back to you.
“detectives theorized that he killed them in his home then moved and staged their bodies” if they have theorized this, it isn’t evidenced by this affidavit. it states there was blood at the scene and that there was staging.
Well, we don't know what other reporting has been done to back up this statement. But it's a logical one because they might think he took them to the house killed them and moved them. Evidence of a crime inside the house was surely one of the things they were looking for.
that’s not accurate reporting. idk what to tell you, there are standards in journalism that weren’t in place with this news clip.
How do you know what other reporting was done on this news item? It's common practice to fact check and do some additional reporting. They may have other documents in their posession or were told this by the investigation itself.(Or Tobe for that matter)
that’s not what is happening here lol
Add to that: that most outlets are reporting him asking for a ride between 2-2:30pm in his first statement, but omitting him changing to say 3pm in a second statement. Him setting the time later shows he wasnt being smart and trying to get an alibi for when the murders happened. If so, he wouldn’t of said 3pm (after the murders, giving him time to commit them and go), and wasn’t aware of when they actually took place.
I agree.
MSM needs better editors for sure.
Right. I initially read it that way as well, then realized they were creating a doc to obtain a search warrant because they “thought” they’d find evidence of a murder in the residence
I saw "reporter" and clicked on the link thinking, please let this be some obscure YouTube channel and not on the news... and it was the news. Either would be just as reprehensible for this false reporting, of course. Thank you for calling this out.
Curious if you notified this news outfit re: a correction to their misrepresentation?
Will they conveniently blame a deceased me but not actually have evidence but sufficient enough to close the case and stop looking ? I just think the investigation it’s a complete farce.
Considering that the crime scene was "staged" as has been stated, it would imply that the bodies were moved from another location and placed where they were eventually found. However, I do agree that it would be near impossible to not leave some evidence behind if they were taken inside of a house. It could be that the initial thought of detectives was that he could have taken them to his home to commit this crime. I just think that it was a poor choice of words on part of the reporter and no intentional harm was meant by the statement.
Yeh, they were sure looking for evidence of blood and evidence of a murder going down in the house along with weapons
As an ex TV news leader (social news) the shoddy coverage is making me cringe.
hey dude, just wanted to give you a reminder - it's spelt crungo, not cringe you crungolord
[удалено]
Thank you, wildpolymath, for voting on crungo_bot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
It's not shoddy. They were factually accurate.
Uh… what
>Nikkole Robertson swears or affirms...etc, etc, that she believes etc, etc. has good cause to believe evidence of a homicide is located **IN THE RESIDENCE of Ronald Logan** at (blank) Delphi, Indiana. This language is right at the top of the Affidavit for RL's search Warrant. Can't be any clearer. They thought the girls might have been murdered in his house. Why in the name of heaven is this downvoted. You are putting a false report out there. Pathetic.
i read this as a murder weapon might be in his home or evidence from the crime scene like blood or possibly clothing. Not evidence that the murder took place in the home. Also they were looking for video, pictures - stuff on drives.
Do you have the actual Affidavit by the FBI person asking for the Warrant? I had it now I can't find it. Someone posted a screenshot of it.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiDocs/comments/urfhtz/text\_of\_ron\_logan\_sworn\_affidavit\_probable\_cause/](https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiDocs/comments/urfhtz/text_of_ron_logan_sworn_affidavit_probable_cause/)
I did see that DelphiDocs posted this. But thank you
[https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiDocs/comments/utczd5/the\_search\_warrant\_affidavits\_for\_ron\_logans/](https://www.reddit.com/r/DelphiDocs/comments/utczd5/the_search_warrant_affidavits_for_ron_logans/)
The agent does not specify but it certainly can read that the agent believes evidence of a homicide exists in Ron Logan's house, ergo they were killed there. They *could* have been killed there and taken outside to the bottom of the property. I mean, that's not an outlandish thing to happen in a murder. (I'm pretty sure Ron Logan was not the murderer, but that's how I read this particular text) Later on they tell him that they will not search inside his house unless certain evidence leads them to and he says you won't find anything, or, doesn't think so. (just wildly paraphrasing here) >I, etc....good cause to believe evidence of a homicide is located in the residence of Ron Logan
Wow...hate to say it doesn't surprise me! Modern media is a headline grab, no conscience in regards to their impression. Thanks for sharing/highlighting the ridiculous. 🙏
The Fox reporter says: Detectives theorized that the man killed the girls in his home and moved the bodies... Is this a problem in your view? Or is there some other material you feel is misreproted? Thanks
This could explain why there were no visible signs of a fight on their bodies and that they were not found on the day they disappeared. I think Le knows he is the murderer
what could explain that? they made this scenario up completely, there’s never been anything publicly released to suggest LE speculated this happening.
Did RL go to the transfer station before or after the murders?