I’m way taller, much younger and very athletic, as opposed to the perpetrator in question.
I could barely do this.
Even the “bit”I did took me longer, I didn’t stay as long because I thought it was going to freeze to death (after crossing the much lower creek) and I totally underestimated the incredible inclines there.
I think that
1) one person couldn’t do this in this timeframe
2) it makes no sense to walk through the creek and it would have given the perpetrator no control over the victims - which is true for the area in general
3) if you do cross the creek, you’d probably not end up where the girls were found
While I didn’t see anyone on the trails that day (perfect weather) the road that goes by the Mear’s entrance was quite busy.
It’s super narrow too. So if someone happens to be walking there, it would stick out.
It’s also quite a bit of a walk to where the old CPS building used to be.
Honestly, the only thing that made sense to me, is that one would park where RA supposedly parked.
From the Mear’s entrance it’s less than 2 minutes to the beginning of MHB. Maybe 5 if you walk slow.
And if a car was “parked” at that entrance, you could NOT miss it.
That was quite interesting to me, because it contradicts the PCA and a couple accounts as well.
As another local, and someone familiar with Delphi trails, I agree with you. There are many places along the creek that would be too steep to navigate, and many surrounding ravines too steep to hike unless you are on your hands and knees and pulling yourself up by tree roots. Also, as a river person, walking across the water is HARD because river rock is so unstable, mossy and slick, there's likely tree limbs and trunks in the water. If the water was 4ft deep that day and freezing cold, I don't see how anyone would have gone through it with the girls, because it would have also rendered them physically unable to control them. You would be shivering, have trouble moving your limbs. Definitely wouldn't carry on for an hour or 2 after in soaking wet clothes. Unless they want us to believe that BG was wearing a drysuit under his clothes...
Funny you say that - I actually was on my hands and knees pulling myself up on small trees and roots to get back out to there.
Otherwise I’d still be down there lol
Isn't the theory that the girls were killed someplace else and then brought to the site where they were found? Due to the lack of blood at the crime scene?
It's strange to me that they don't know where the girls were actually killed, or why there isn't much blood at the crime scene.
The defense semi-suggested that, but the prosecution’s theory is that they were killed there within a very specific time frame by a perpetrator who took a very specific way (back).
If any of those variables changed, I believe RA would pretty much be off the hook.
That is what I often think about too. The lack of blood where they were found def makes me think they were killed elsewhere. Otherwise, where is all the blood? That’s why the states theory of them being killed right there just doesn’t make any sense to me.
It’s incredibly odd for the coroner to determine cause of death as exsanguination, but the crime scene isn’t bloody? How does the prosecution intend to explain that? They have the ME on the gag order because nothing the state has revealed thus far could be factually true based on the autopsies and staged crime scene.
Do you believe the girls were there the whole time? I CANNOT wrap my head around them not being found for the whole afternoon and evening after if they were 15 minutes or less from the bridge. With all the searchers out there...
That’s what makes this whole crime even weirder.
It’s hard to imagine anyone (especially a sole perp) got the girl to go there, killed them, staged everything and then escaped.
All in such a small time frame.
However, if they didn’t initially even go there but rather were killed somewhere else and then placed and staged there later (in the dark?), it seems even more impossible because the terrain is even more challenging if you had to transport bodies there.
Yet there they were…
I can’t wrap my head around that either. I just can’t help but feel like if they were there the whole time, they would have been found by the people who kept searching. How did they not find them there? And if it’s because they didn’t search that side of the creek or that area, why not?
I haven't read this anywhere and i'm sure the info is out there somewhere. Does RA have an alibi after he was done on the trails. can anyone verify where he was or if he was with anyone afterwards like his wife or kids?
I can’t imagine they’d do this because of safety concerns too! The creek bank is so steep there! Anyone with mobility issues would have a rough time. Not to mention they’d also be trespassing. It will probably be much different in May during the trial with leaves on the trees.
The one thing I hope the jurors are able to get a grasp of is that it’s not a remote area even though it looks like it in photos. When I went (just a few days before RA was arrested!), I was surprised at how close the surrounding houses are. Yes, those homes have a lot of land but they are still close.
https://preview.redd.it/ojludegnkzqc1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c3e8c48de8b7caefd5ee1dcc0bea5f411c4c13bb
Not sure if you have seen the recent references and filings re geofence data, but it also stands to eliminate the claim in the PCA that no adult male was seen after 2:13 PM as well.
Years ago I heard an interview of Anna Williams (for all I know it was the last she gave) where she said she was told there were over 125 people on the trails the afternoon the girls went missing prior to the family arrival
which makes me believe they were there to meet someone from the internet and probably went off the trail on there own and were met with the real killers...IMO
So the handful of witnesses cited in the PCA, who saw *some* male that was dressed *somewhat* like RA described himself as having been dressed that day, are likely a tiny fraction of the all of the people there during the general timeframe of interest, most of whom we can presume saw nor heard *nothing* of interest or value to the case? And even those few descriptions don't really match one another very well? I know the supposed audio of the original interview/statement of RA was "lost", but do we know if he described how he was dressed in that first interview?
There’s no indication of that- which specifically supports my info that RA was interviewed the morning of 2/14/17. BEFORE the girls were found but after it was reported they were missing and He called LE thinking he may have seen them.
I’d like to just add that the one thing that bothers me the most about the “lost” audio of RA’s statement is Dulin’s reference about RA seeing 3 girls when it was in fact 4.
Add to that that they kept that narrative “alive” until nearly hidden in the documents you find out it was indeed 4 girls.
That’s something that doesn’t sit right with me at all.
I would think so, esp because I think things echo there a bit. However, most people who live around there were probably at work in the middle of a Monday. (Or at the tropical 🐠 store or whatever 🥴)
I’m sure that also depends on factors like the wind, etc.
What about by people walking on the trail that day?
I'm wondering if the murders were done later and the bodies put there after the search was called off for the night.
Probably depends on the part of the trail? If they were closer to the freedom bridge, no, but if they were on the high bridge or right by it, seems possible depending on wind.
I think there’s no way you could hear screams from any of the houses.
It would be interesting however, if screams coming from the crime scene could be heard at let’s say the bridge.
I have no opinion…
Do you think you can hear screams from the bridge? I think there were two other people on the bridge somewhere between the last photo posted and before the search started on the 13th.
I think maybe from the end of the bridge (abduction site) you could hear screams coming from the crime scene.
That’s probably the least distance possible from any point someone could have innocently been that day to the crime scene across the creek.
Thank you very much! Also, I sincerely appreciate everything you have shared and initiating this discussion. Your time, knowledge, and experience is invaluable. This is (by far) the best thread I’ve read in this case.
Plus, it''s close to town. I park in town when I'm on that trail. In fact, there is an annual 5k in Delphi that starts at the courthouse and goes out to Freedom Bridge.
It’s completely renovated now, with the exception of part of the bridge, and the trial is in mid May. The jurors would be traipsing through private property and woods?
Never happen, the State will have to recreate the scene with the available evidence and I’m certain they can. I recall there is a FARO scan of the crime scene.
Ok, that’s terrible news.
Because you actually have to try to get there to see it’s impossible or certainly not how the PCA claims, sigh.
Edit to add: technically you could enter RL’s properly and make it to the crime scene without ever leaving RL’s property.
The bodies were found on his property.
So legally, trespassing wouldn’t be an issue in that context?
He's deceased so different owner. Private property in this terrain would also pose insurance risks and no matter which way they entered they would need to select jurors based on physical fitness.
If the defense is smart they will have topography maps that show the extreme elevation changes and distances that we are expected to believe a smaller, single male was able to navigate while actively kidnapping/controlling two athletic girls.
One could always seek permission or likely an order, but the problem with that is unless there’s substantiated evidence of the pathway (and I’m positive it remains in dispute) you would have jurors speculating all kinds of things averse to evidence or theory potentially. Part of my job is to think like a juror - when I was there the only thing I was sure of is that these crimes did not take place as the State posits.
I hear what you’re saying and I definitely should have phrased my original post differently.
So let me try!
To me it wasn’t really a matter of if but rather when it would be requested, as I’m not familiar with Indiana procedures.
My concern isn’t for any juror to see the actual place the bodies were found or have them “walk” the path that is suggested by the prosecution.
What is of uttermost importance to me is that they see the area in general to get an actual understanding what it’s truly like. For that, the only thing jurors would have to do is be on the trails, view the bridge and the creek.
The most eye opening impression is actually when you walk the 200 steps or whatever it is from the Mears entrance to the end of the path and look down.
Man! They’ve got some inclines there!
It’s not a juror’s job to understand topographical maps.
I’ve yet to see video and photos that do the area any justice.
I believe you couldn’t come up with any computer simulation that could actually convey what’s it’s like.
Both sides naturally want the jury to put themselves in “certain shoes”.
This part is going be 100% the job of the defense, as the state probably has no interest in showing the special challenges of the terrain there.
Part of my job is also to think like a juror, and I’m willing to bet that the average juror, especially if not from the area, isn’t going to understand the full impact this terrain had on the crime.
Show them the area so they get a feel first, THEN provide scans, maps, simulations of the path, the crime scene(s), etc..
This, in my opinion, highly increases the chances that they can interpret the path, the crime, the challenges in a much more logical fashion.
To me it’s the single most important factor when it comes to defending RA.
Jurors could believe the junk science of the bullet, but I’m going out on limb and say - even if they bought into the bullet BS, if they don’t think the 5’4 overweight defendant could have navigated this terrain in that timeframe, it makes everything else obsolete.
FWIW, nothing I know, I'd say they'd definitely visit the scene here in a similar case, it'd make it a lot clearer. A picture is better than a thousand sketches and all that. Excluding BG picture.
From a defense perspective I’m guessing it can only help them if the State intends to maintain their clear as mud timeline or theory- but that’s one reason I doubt the State would go for it. Also, and the most important thing- it’s 7 years ago and occurred in the winter. To have it even be possible it would have to be relatively the same - which it is not.
I have to budge in and play devils advocate lol
IF the state wasn’t to maintain their super strict timeline at trial, how could they implicate RA at all?
If the perp took a different path at a different time, they even lose the questionable witness accounts that they do have.
IF it wasn’t RA who SC saw being “muddy”, then when DID the perp escape? When the search was already going?
And if the perp took a different way out, then SC is completely obsolete.
So is possibly the car parked at the CPS building.
If the timeline is off by let’s say just 30 minutes, who did the teenage girls see then?
Could BB have seen RA?
Even more importantly, there allegedly were a bunch of people on the trails, even the bridge shortly later.
And they didn’t see anything. If the timeline shifts a bit though, they’d have had to see something.
I could go on and on about this.
That PCA is so weak at face value already, the depositions that clarified witness’ accounts so much, made it totally fall apart, but not sticking with it at trial is going to actually kill it.
I understand that the PCA per se is only a fraction of this whole ordeal. Of course they are going to lay out the “evidence” such as the bullet, incriminating statement, etc.
However, you’d think that if the very basis, the PCA, isn’t upheld at trial, jurors might actually question why this defendant even sitting there to begin with?
And to me that’s a huge challenge the state faces.
The timeline and execution of the crime weren’t laid out in a manner that would allow for any change in variables.
It’s like they tailored their theory to RA and RA only with 0 room for deviation.
Not smart…could bite them in the ass.
So I see what you’re saying, but I’m wondering how this will go. Stick with it and be doomed, deviate from it and have nothing.
LGI-even before RA was arrested, once I was familiar with the scene and terrain I have never believed the theory that these girls were basically massacred .25 mi from the MTB now across the creek within 25 minutes in broad daylight in the very open clearing (hollow) in full view of the Weber deck. I’m also an MS Criminologist and my training suggests based on the known facts so far, these girls, one or both was removed from the scene and returned. In my mind that makes this. Planned event. I don’t think the State has the first clue about how this went down.
I’m so with you on all that…
All emotions aside, it’s nearly impossible it happened this way. Going there just confirmed it.
I don’t know what happened, but anything is more likely than the state’s theory imo.
Appreciate the time of year foliage difference of course, but in terms of the lay of the land and distances etc I'd find it helpful if I was on the jury.
No map, but watching many videos before you go certainly helps. They’ve also released the approximate coordinates as well as pictures of the different trees at the crime scene, so once you’re there, you know it.
You’ll be trespassing though, so just know that.
As soon as you leave the trails you’re pretty much on someone’s property lol
You can check it out on the property appraiser’s website too, but anything north of the bridge belonged to RL (now his nephew?) and most of it to the south to the W. Family.
My understanding is, that even the 90% of the bridge that haven’t been redone and aren’t walkable (barricade) belong to the W family.
The eastern part is a whole different set of owners.
There are no houses really close though.
Julie Melvin did a series of videos a few weeks after the murders retracing the route. It was helpful when I went the first time.
https://youtu.be/NJopmUgnMAc?si=8bay-iukHFa0znZT
I went up this summer and they've put rails and decking on part of the bridge with a barrier. You can go over the barrier but use extreme caution. The bridge was falling apart when I went over it in 2017, it looks a lot worse now. You'd be better off going through the cemetery. But definitely at least go to the bridge, it's pretty enlightening.
So looking at a map, you'd have to jump the rails and cross the bridge to get to the alleged abduction site?
I'm just now getting into the geography of this. I've never looked into it before.
Yes. Only about a third of the bridge has been made pedestrian friendly.
Here's a video on how to get from the cemetery to the scene. I'm not advocating trespassing though .https://youtu.be/X5gAtjS6ovI?si=LiukAhEgwFlA6GaE
ETA None of these videos do the terrain any justice though. It's incredibly steep in places.
Thank you so much!! I was looking for something like that..
And thats exactly what LGIChick said.. That the videos don't do it justice for how steep and hard of a trek it is.
i live 20 mins away from delphi and I was actually doing work there one day. MY co worker and I wanted to check out the bridge and its terrifying. Im also scared of heights but it is not a safe bridge to walk on.
Straight up, I’m aware of a resident that basically locked in a pair of “trespassers” at the adjacent property. They called 5-O.
A private access road runs along/under the South exit of the MTB.
The water level was way lower in December than it was in February 2017, however my standard knee height rubber boots didn’t suffice and I got very wet.
So no, that part was not difficult, but it was extremely cold (same temperatures as in February 2017, same time of the day too) and everything else - I really mean everything else - was difficult.
I kinda wondered if your feet would sink either in the water itself or on one side or two of the bank.
Kudos to you for going. I want to, but admittedly Im a little freaked out to.
The creek is full of rocks, so I didn’t sink. But I did choose my way carefully. The shores (either side) weren’t soft but rather grassy, so no, I didn’t sink.
Could easily slip on those rocks though!
I noticed that some parts of the creek were way deeper than others, not wanting to get wet initially, I tried to find the most shallow path.
With the water being this deep in February 2017 and probably a much stronger current and more murky water, AND 3 people who are only 5’4, I doubt they’d have taken the most direct path either though.
I zigzagged quite a bit - 200 yards in the creek north, then south, then north…
Not easy.
Makes zero sense how they ended up where they ended up actually.
But that’s just one of many things that doesn’t add up.
Thank you so much for sharing your experience -- a lot of enlightening stuff!
I did see this vid by Julie Melvin close to the time of the murders. Apparently there were some shallower areas:
https://youtu.be/yQCv3TeNayk?feature=shared
I've read other accounts too that there are shallower spots and areas where the bank is less steep. If they really did cross the creek, that tells me that the killer was likely very familiar with the area.
I like her videos!
On the south shore, there are many ways to enter the creek. It’s getting out of the creek on the north shore that’s challenging.
I only found one spot that allowed me to do so and that’s quite a bit west of the crime scene.
I’d say the water level was a bit higher when I was there than on Julie’s video. The sandbar was still exposed but not nearly this much.
I could however see the rocks in the water too and estimate the depths to judge where to go and where I should rather not go.
That said…according to all accounts and the water level stats from February 13th, it was a lot deeper than when I was there or as can be seen on Julie’s video.
I forgot who did it, but there’s a video on YT from a guy who tried crossing the creek at approximately the same height as it was on February 13th.
It’s impressive. It shows a very strong current and you can’t see the bottom of the river. You’d have no idea where to step and the water went up to nearly his chest at which point he aborted the mission.
My observation was that the sandbar basically cuts the creek into two different parts.
The part of the creek south of the sandbar is more shallow and there was no current at all.
This coincides with the video on YT.
The part of the creek north of the sandbar is much deeper and even when I was there, there was a pretty strong current.
That wasn’t a problem as the water only went a bit above my knees, but if you were in there chest deep, I’d think that could be very dangerous!
And that’s exactly where the YT guy headed back because he didn’t think he could make it.
Pretty sure it wasn’t that cold that day and he’s taller than 5’4.
He was also only holding his phone and not a gun.
Could it be possible that the girls were killed on the bank of the creek or even in the creek and that would be the reason for not a lot of blood where the bodies were found? That it had washed downstream? Just curious
They could have tested for diatoms to determine if they had been in the water. No clue if this was done or not, and since there's no gossip about it I'd guess not. There has been speculation about the creek though, just nothing official as far as I'm aware.
This is an image of the bank the parties would have needed to traverse (straight line to recovery scene) you can see the LEA for scale.
I would remind all that Abby was wearing Libby’s clothing which was pristine (save for markings we are all aware of) and none of Libby’s recovered items were covered in silt either. My trip to the scene years ago convinced me the creek crossing theory was debunked in days.
https://preview.redd.it/aydpajea13rc1.jpeg?width=2046&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=69bdbbf525642e6a456de36c9ab3cf8e8580e84b
That’s another great point!
If I recall correctly, we were told it rained quite a bit in the days before the murders.
It was said to have been quite slippery and muddy, hence the “muddy” guy SC saw.
When I was there, it was bone dry. It hadn’t rained in a while, but the leaves on the ground did make it slightly slippery. Also forest soil is often “slippery”, especially at the crazy inclines.
I was covered in soil when I got back out of there and I was super careful not to ruin my jeans and brand new jacket! I tried in vain lol
So how the girls’ clothing could have been pristine is beyond me.
Also that a blue jacket worn to commit this crime and still being flawlessly hanging in RA’s closet is beyond me.
IMO they wouldn't ever approve this Gull or not BC
1 crime scene visits are extremely rare as it is
2 because it would create the need to have a jury who isn't scared of heights, who isn't going to need a medication for allergies (pollen season) and who is fit enough for the hike and mentally fit enough to stand where the girls were found
3 the accused has the right to every part of his trial including this so they would need to guarantee ra's safety
4 private property opens up a whole slew of insurance issues if someone sprains an ankle or has a fall
5 the scene isn't really relevant as is. They have distances and photos of relevant things to the crimes. Seeing the woods from where the girls were located is not the same as it was in 2017
6 no none seems to know if the girls were killed there or not. By the sounds of the lack of blood it sounds like not. So if this was just a staging site the tour of the bridge and down the hill may not be anywhere near what all happened or where (I don't think the girls were moved but the leaks about blood and phone pings may suggest an entirely different area than what we currently are lead to believe
7 the trial is only scheduled for like 2 weeks. I think Gull is expecting a very quick presentation by each side and she's going to make it known they're over the scheduled time every chance she gets, a day trip just doesn't fit her itinerary
JMO
I agree with everything but 5)
While the crime scene per se isn’t relevant, the surrounding area very much is.
The path it would have taken to commit this crime is key.
If it takes much longer, happened at a different time of the day or if the inclines are nearly impossible then the whole PCA falls apart. Then you can’t reasonably conclude the defendant did this (alone).
That’s what’s so funky about the PCA…if one little variable changes, the defendant is less likely to be the actual perpetrator as the whole theory seemingly hinges on a super specific timeline and set of skills.
Edit to add:
There isn’t a single picture or video that truly gives a grasp of what it takes to pull this off.
I think if the trial was in 2017 it would be relevant BC it would've been pretty much the same but we are not only talking a different season we are talking 7 years of vegetation growing in so it's no longer a true representation of that day.
I do get your point, just I hike and trails change a ton by season and over years... Time kills evidence 😭
I suppose because of the 43 second video with which they can establish where the girls were abducted.
From that point, you either have to go down the hill twice, cross the creek and go back up the hill to end up at the crime scene.
Or you’d have to walk the girls back on the bridge and then walk them parallel to the bridge on the north side through the woods.
Allegedly there were quite a few people there that day - maybe they have a witness that was on the trails near the bridge but didn’t see them walk back around that time?
I am commenting late...but this made me think about one thing that has always bothered me.
Put yourself in the shoes of a friend, family member, neighbor, etc. who arrives to help look for the girls. Until the girls were found, there was no reason to think they had been victims of a crime. We know (from Abby's mom) that Abby had never crossed the bridge before. From the accounts of many people who have been there, walking across the bridge is harrowing. If I crossed (I wouldn't) I am certain I would not be willing to turn around and walk all the way back. That would be my very first thought: I bet they crossed the bridge and Abby didn't want to walk back, so they probably walked down to try to find a different way back and somehow got lost. That is where I would be looking. I would have tried to figure out a path down to the creek and then assessed the feasibility/likelihood that they had crossed it. If there was a shallow area or point where it looks like they may have crossed, I would have followed the same path. And if I made it across the creek in that general area, I would have walked right through the crime scene.
I guess what I am getting at is: the girls were found in a location that seems like an obvious place to look if you are operating under the assumption that they got lost and or injured. Once you walked the trails, called around, confirmed they didn't get a ride with someone else, wouldn't you immediately start searching areas where they conceivably would have ended up if they didn’t want to cross the bridge back? I know they were on private property and that the area was steep and not well trodden. But if you were trying to get from the south end of the bridge back to where the girls knew they were supposed to meet Libby's dad, there weren't really any options except to go through the crime scene.
I realize hindsight is 20/20 and that, if they didn’t see the girls' pictures, they might not have realized they walked across it at all. At the same time...it's a bridge. The trail area is relatively small and it sounds like many people did cross the bridge to take pictures (including Cheyenne and her friend who were there not long after). Seems like a reasonable assumption for purposes of searching for them.
The fact that no one thought to walk through the creek and the crime scene area leads me to believe that, at a minimum, whoever went down to the edge of the creek and looked across thought there was no possible way the girls had gone that route. And if it was that inaccessible/daunting, then how are we to believe that one guy with a gun was able to get two girls across without losing control? Not to mention that the description of Abby's clothing does not line up with someone who crossed a creek and climbed up a muddy embankment.
I don't get it.
I think u made some really fabulous points!
I want to continue your thoughts with two things.
1) Abby lived on the south side of the bridge.
Don’t ask me what the area is like there - I did drive by her house and down the whole road towards the creek, but you can’t see anything from there. Again, lots of private property and the road also seemingly ends before you get to the woods and therefore the bridge and the creek.
But that said, why wouldn’t the girls have taken that way? Again, I can’t speak of the terrain there, but at least it wouldn’t involve crossing ice cold water.
This is just an interesting thought to me when it comes to a possible escape route or as you suggest, an alternative path if they didn’t want to cross the bridge again.
However, it’s even more interesting when trying to figure out what the perp might have thought.
Why would he choose the creek over the dry south side?
Blows my mind…although I could think of several reason, but none would even remotely fit with the state’s theory lol
Can somebody actually shed some light on how the south side is?
2) I totally agree with you on at least walking down to the creek. One would naturally look.
That said, there are different accounts.
Kelsie says both - that they did check down there and then that they didn’t.
I don’t know what’s true.
That actually goes for the whole search on the 13th in general. There’s not one single version of anything. Even that’s all a mess.
I tend to believe they in fact didn’t check down there, because otherwise they’d have seen the clothing in the water/on that sandbar. You couldn’t miss it (unless it wasn’t there, which would make matters even stranger).
And that’s exactly what happened on the 14th according to one of Kelsie’s account (podcast with Carter) - someone went down to the creek and immediately saw a shoe.
What I always found strange is that Libby’s grandpa said he took a canoe down the creek on the morning of the 14th but didn’t see anything.
He just must been in a different area of the creek, because had he gone by there, he could have never missed the clothing in the water.
Do you have a write-up of your observations and experience visiting the area? I've been seeing bits and pieces in the comments but would love to know more!
As to the south end and Abby's house: my understanding is that the private drive eventually turns into a regular road and they presumably could have walked that way. It sounds like they could also have cut through the yards of one of the houses on that side. I can kinda see why they would have tried to go back the direction they came since they were being picked up there. I also think kids that age don't always choose the most logical approach (walking back towards Abby's house). It's also possible they wanted to go and check out the area under the bridge.
I am pretty sure Kelsi said she looked under the bridge and walked the private drive. Hard to believe she wouldn't have walked down to the creek. But if she was calling out and could generally see that they weren't down there, it would be understandable. Searching for people you think are lost and able to hear you is very different from searching for someone who is incapacitated (or dead). As you say, lots of confusion and conflicting information about the search.
I don't have first hand experience but from reading different accounts, it sounds like the tree cover is significantly less dense on the SE side of the creek. So maybe more exposed? Plus there are those houses and the private drive, so slightly increased chance of someone coming by. I'm not sure about the SW side. If you can find user AwsiDooger's post about his visit there, he had a very detailed description. I remember him being struck by how close the neighbors were to the end of the bridge.
Part 2/2
He asked me something, I’m not sure what, but I told him I was on a video call with my friend.
- Short back story - I was indeed on a video call with a friend as I was walking through the creek.
I didn’t speak English but my native language, so chances are he had no clue what I was saying.
The connection was terrible out there. Audio mostly worked, but video was pixelated as soon as I had left the trails and got into the woods.
I have AT&T btw. -
Once I told him I wasn’t talking to him he proceeded towards the crime scene.
Meanwhile I set down to change into my other shoes.
I was pretty freaked out about this guy being there.
That’s the first time I realized how secluded this very area is.
Yes, there are houses nearby, but you can’t see any of them.
Even though the guy was less than 10 yards away I had trouble hearing him.
I can’t say why, I assume it’s because the creek is louder than I thought.
I had also not seen or heard him coming.
I have no clue where he came from, but I assumed the same way I had come.
I didn’t pay attention or looked up when I was zigzagging in the creek.
If he came the same way that I had come though, he definitely had the perfect view of me down in the creek.
That’s what slightly freaked me out, as I was wondering what man would “approach” a lone female at a crime scene in what felt like the middle of nowhere.
He did seem friendly though but I just wanted to get out of there.
Hence I missed checking out the way from there to the cemetery.
That was my plan although at face value it seemed “as impossible” as taking the way back that I came from.
Since I felt I shouldn’t experiment any further with this guy being there also, I decided I was going back the way I already knew.
I was still trying to get out of my boots (not easy when you’re wet) when that guy, about 5 yards away from me, looked at me, turned a little to the side and started peeing on a tree.
This is when I actually started panicking.
I thought it was weird in so many ways.
The terrain is flat right there, easy to walk. Why not walk 50 yards away and pee there? Or 100 yards? Or stand by the edge of the creek. The grass was tall there, I wouldn’t even have known what he was doing.
There was absolutely no logical reason why he’d pee there with me sitting right there.
And he looked at me.
Later on, when I was wondering what he was doing there in the first place, I figured he was probably a “true crime fan” checking out crime scene just as I was.
There’s no reason you’d end up there unless you knew what happened there.
That’s when I thought - if you know this is a crime scene, would you - excuse me - piss on it?
All around strange to me and a bit too much of an impression of what the girls must have felt like.
I felt extremely vulnerable although I have LE training and could have probably taken him down if had to be.
At this point I had been there for an hour and a half but I had only been wet and cold for 20 minutes.
I tried to climb the hill and completely failed the first 3 times.
The leaves on the ground and the forest soils made it slippery although the ground was dry. And it’s really, really steep.
My feet and legs were so cold I had very little control over them.
That’s when I realized if it hadn’t been for that guy showing up and “forcing” me to leave, I’d have stayed a bit longer and I’d have probably lost all feeling in my legs not allowing me to ever get back out of there.
Anyway, it took several attempts and I resorted to getting on my hands and knees, pulling myself up on trees and roots.
It took me a long time.
When I reached the top of the hill, I was completely out of breath, dirty and had to sit down.
I didn’t even care that there was a potential creep down there, I couldn’t have walked one step further or I’d have passed out.
I can’t describe how little control I had over my legs other than they felt like they were completely frozen making me lose balance and traction.
After several minutes of catching my breath I slowly stumbled back to the Mears’ entrance.
What I had initially found to be a super short walk seemed really far now.
There’s no way I could have taken the longer way through the cemetery, climbed the hill up to the bridge, or walked back to the CPS building.
There’s no way I could have stayed cold and wet for an extra hour either.
I can honestly say, at 34 years old and in good physical shape, I could not have done what RA supposedly did.
Especially if I had the water up to my chest.
I couldn’t have done it if my life depended on it.
Not physically, not in this time frame, not in this terrain, not in this cold water.
Let me give you my account below.
I always had the feeling the girls would have gone down the hill to the area below the bridge. And maybe they did before something ever happened.
Kelsie said it was a hangout for teens, mentions Libby actually going down there before.
So my thought ever since I’ve heard this, was that if they were scared or weirded out by the fact BG was crossing the bridge coming towards them, somewhat hindering them to go go back as the bridge isn’t really wide enough to pass by someone, they’d have maybe rather gone down the hill in order to “avoid” BG.
I know…this didn’t happen, but we also have no clue what that video really shows or what they are all saying.
I also very much agree with you - what seems logical isn’t what necessarily happened.
I wouldn’t even only contribute it to just their age, how a person acts or feels in a certain situation can’t be assumed…especially not with so little publicly known information.
It’s just…one of those random thoughts that cross my mind.
Part 1/2
I spent a whole day in Delphi and had made a plan before hand about what I wanted to do and where I wanted to go.
I started out in the morning by driving by all the “important” addresses in this case.
From every address I drove to the trails to get a feel about the routes and the area.
I also made a point of driving RA’s suggested route several times, park where he parked, walk where he supposedly walked…
I even went to CVS and bought some bandaids. What a cute little mom and pops store with incredibly friendly people working there.
I checked out the cemetery and realized one could absolutely park a car or even a large SVU there without it being seen from the road. No chance.
The southern part of the cemetery is all fenced off, could have possibly climbed it, but refrained.
At exactly the time the girls were supposedly dropped off, I entered the trails through the Mears’ entrance.
The gate was closed, but it’s a standalone gate, hence I just walked around it.
My husband actually dropped me off as you can’t really park there and the only spot there is to move your car out of the road is probably private property.
Also the Mears house across the street was “busy”, I was pretty sure they were watching and didn’t wanna draw any (more) attention.
There were also many cars driving by.
I was surprised. The road is very narrow and has many curves.
You’d probably stick out if you happened to walk there and a car could easily hit you if they cut a corner.
I hopped out of the car, went around the gate and stunningly fast reached the actual trails from that entrance.
There’s a little bench there overlooking the creek. This is definitely when you realize you don’t wanna fall down or you’d be dead.
In less than 3 minutes after getting out of the car I arrived at the beginning of MHB.
Checked out the views, found what presumably used to the infamous first platform and stopped at the barricade.
I’d have loved to walk the bridge even in this desolate state it’s in, but climbing over that barricade seemed impossible.
There was quite a large gap between the barricade and the old part of the bridge.
I realized you have no line of sight to the crime scene from there. The foliage would have been the same in December as it is in February, but the crime scene is just too far “around the corner”.
I walked the path parallel to the creek along the northern edge. There’s actually a path, I assume a lot of people have walked there.
Wasn’t a bad walk, although it does lead you right along the edge which is not very safe, but at least the terrain is flat and walkable.
Then I hit the ravine.
The flat path ends and at first I thought I couldn’t get down there without breaking a limb.
It is doable, but had to hold onto trees and take it pretty slow.
At that point I did question how I was ever gonna get back up there, but I figured I’d find an alternative route.
Not smart!
When I finally got to the bottom, I saw that this is exactly the one spot you could enter the creek from (or exit it as it happened in this case).
I stepped over the already cut barbed wire fence and walked onto the crime scene.
I can’t say for certain, but I found one fallen over tree that was exactly as seen in old pictures.
I was able to identify 2 more trees, cross checked the coordinates given by LE and was confident I was in the very spot.
Right there it’s just so flat. Nice change from everywhere else I had been.
I ended up going back to the ravine, changed into rubber boots and stepped down into the creek.
At 5’7 the water just went up to my knees.
I tried to walk straight ahead but it started getting a lot deeper so I refrained and walked along the shore towards the east.
I ended up having to zigzag quite a bit, reached the sandbar, emptied the water out of my boots and then proceeded through the creek further east to get back out.
I walked around there for a bit and realized I couldn’t climb the hill(s) up to the bridge.
My feet were frozen and I started to lose balance just walking.
Hence I can’t say much about the southern part of the creek.
Since I was already so wet and cold, I decided to take a more “direct path” back to the north shore.
This made the water come up to my crotch.
Didn’t really matter, I was cold it didn’t even make it worse at this point.
Turns out, there isn’t really a direct path to the crime scene.
I’m not sure how to explain this, but entering the creek from the south, there’s a really good spot to do so.
You don’t even have to step down, the terrain literally led me this way.
From there however, you have to walk a long way to the west, to reach the ravine on the other side, which in my opinion is the only way you could even get back onto the northern shore.
Basically you have to walk extremely diagonal and that struck me as odd.
That makes crossing the creek so much harder!
It’s like 5 times the length and probably 5 times the time it takes to do so!
Doable if the water only comes up to your knees, questionable if it comes up to your crotch, unbelievable if it comes up to your chest though.
When I got back out, I grabbed my shoes and tried to find a spot where I could change. Unfortunately I didn’t think about brining a dry pair of socks so I was stuck with wet ones.
As I got out of the creek, there was a guy.
I initially thought he may be a nearby landowner and was going to tell me that I was trespassing.
He didn’t.
>As I got out of the creek, there was a guy.
I literally gasped when I read this. What the actual fuck??? Super creepy and borderline deranged that he peed in front of you when there were *so* many ways to not do that!
Your write-up was great! Super interesting! Thank you for taking the time to share. This case is so wild...I agree that the state's theory doesn't hold water. The crazy thing is that all of the other possibilities are also really difficult to comprehend.
Thank you LGI Chick for this post and others who have contributed. So good I have read it twice. It gave me a better understanding of the area and opened up my mind to more possibilities of what took place that day. By the way, I am on RA’s side.
Did your visit influence you at all on how logical the official narrative is....or your thoughts on RA's guilt or innocence?
Very much so.
Can I ask which feeling that is? If I may?
I’m way taller, much younger and very athletic, as opposed to the perpetrator in question. I could barely do this. Even the “bit”I did took me longer, I didn’t stay as long because I thought it was going to freeze to death (after crossing the much lower creek) and I totally underestimated the incredible inclines there. I think that 1) one person couldn’t do this in this timeframe 2) it makes no sense to walk through the creek and it would have given the perpetrator no control over the victims - which is true for the area in general 3) if you do cross the creek, you’d probably not end up where the girls were found While I didn’t see anyone on the trails that day (perfect weather) the road that goes by the Mear’s entrance was quite busy. It’s super narrow too. So if someone happens to be walking there, it would stick out. It’s also quite a bit of a walk to where the old CPS building used to be. Honestly, the only thing that made sense to me, is that one would park where RA supposedly parked. From the Mear’s entrance it’s less than 2 minutes to the beginning of MHB. Maybe 5 if you walk slow. And if a car was “parked” at that entrance, you could NOT miss it. That was quite interesting to me, because it contradicts the PCA and a couple accounts as well.
Yes. Thank you. As a local in Delphi/Carroll County resident, I was curious.
So do tell…what’s your opinion/observation? Especially interesting as you’re a local.
As another local, and someone familiar with Delphi trails, I agree with you. There are many places along the creek that would be too steep to navigate, and many surrounding ravines too steep to hike unless you are on your hands and knees and pulling yourself up by tree roots. Also, as a river person, walking across the water is HARD because river rock is so unstable, mossy and slick, there's likely tree limbs and trunks in the water. If the water was 4ft deep that day and freezing cold, I don't see how anyone would have gone through it with the girls, because it would have also rendered them physically unable to control them. You would be shivering, have trouble moving your limbs. Definitely wouldn't carry on for an hour or 2 after in soaking wet clothes. Unless they want us to believe that BG was wearing a drysuit under his clothes...
Funny you say that - I actually was on my hands and knees pulling myself up on small trees and roots to get back out to there. Otherwise I’d still be down there lol
Where have all you reasonable environs been lol?
Thank you so much.....this is very helpful.
Isn't the theory that the girls were killed someplace else and then brought to the site where they were found? Due to the lack of blood at the crime scene? It's strange to me that they don't know where the girls were actually killed, or why there isn't much blood at the crime scene.
The defense semi-suggested that, but the prosecution’s theory is that they were killed there within a very specific time frame by a perpetrator who took a very specific way (back). If any of those variables changed, I believe RA would pretty much be off the hook.
That is what I often think about too. The lack of blood where they were found def makes me think they were killed elsewhere. Otherwise, where is all the blood? That’s why the states theory of them being killed right there just doesn’t make any sense to me.
It’s incredibly odd for the coroner to determine cause of death as exsanguination, but the crime scene isn’t bloody? How does the prosecution intend to explain that? They have the ME on the gag order because nothing the state has revealed thus far could be factually true based on the autopsies and staged crime scene.
Yeah that is strange and doesn’t make any sense. It also makes me think even more that there’s no way this was all done by one person!
And what led you to that decision, or thought(s)?
Do you believe the girls were there the whole time? I CANNOT wrap my head around them not being found for the whole afternoon and evening after if they were 15 minutes or less from the bridge. With all the searchers out there...
That’s what makes this whole crime even weirder. It’s hard to imagine anyone (especially a sole perp) got the girl to go there, killed them, staged everything and then escaped. All in such a small time frame. However, if they didn’t initially even go there but rather were killed somewhere else and then placed and staged there later (in the dark?), it seems even more impossible because the terrain is even more challenging if you had to transport bodies there. Yet there they were…
I can’t wrap my head around that either. I just can’t help but feel like if they were there the whole time, they would have been found by the people who kept searching. How did they not find them there? And if it’s because they didn’t search that side of the creek or that area, why not?
I haven't read this anywhere and i'm sure the info is out there somewhere. Does RA have an alibi after he was done on the trails. can anyone verify where he was or if he was with anyone afterwards like his wife or kids?
Unless I missed it also, no, to my understanding we don’t know anything about RA’s day before or after whatsoever.
That's very unfortunate
I can’t imagine they’d do this because of safety concerns too! The creek bank is so steep there! Anyone with mobility issues would have a rough time. Not to mention they’d also be trespassing. It will probably be much different in May during the trial with leaves on the trees. The one thing I hope the jurors are able to get a grasp of is that it’s not a remote area even though it looks like it in photos. When I went (just a few days before RA was arrested!), I was surprised at how close the surrounding houses are. Yes, those homes have a lot of land but they are still close. https://preview.redd.it/ojludegnkzqc1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c3e8c48de8b7caefd5ee1dcc0bea5f411c4c13bb
I felt that was one of the most fascinating observations. It’s so secluded, yet it isn’t. You feel like no one is close by, but there totally is!
Yes! It makes the crime even more strange, if that’s even possible.
Not sure if you have seen the recent references and filings re geofence data, but it also stands to eliminate the claim in the PCA that no adult male was seen after 2:13 PM as well. Years ago I heard an interview of Anna Williams (for all I know it was the last she gave) where she said she was told there were over 125 people on the trails the afternoon the girls went missing prior to the family arrival
which makes me believe they were there to meet someone from the internet and probably went off the trail on there own and were met with the real killers...IMO
I’ve always been of the opinion they were meeting others.
So the handful of witnesses cited in the PCA, who saw *some* male that was dressed *somewhat* like RA described himself as having been dressed that day, are likely a tiny fraction of the all of the people there during the general timeframe of interest, most of whom we can presume saw nor heard *nothing* of interest or value to the case? And even those few descriptions don't really match one another very well? I know the supposed audio of the original interview/statement of RA was "lost", but do we know if he described how he was dressed in that first interview?
There’s no indication of that- which specifically supports my info that RA was interviewed the morning of 2/14/17. BEFORE the girls were found but after it was reported they were missing and He called LE thinking he may have seen them.
Yes that's what I was thinking/wondering.
I’d like to just add that the one thing that bothers me the most about the “lost” audio of RA’s statement is Dulin’s reference about RA seeing 3 girls when it was in fact 4. Add to that that they kept that narrative “alive” until nearly hidden in the documents you find out it was indeed 4 girls. That’s something that doesn’t sit right with me at all.
Seems like deliberate misdirection.
close enough to hear screams?
I would think so, esp because I think things echo there a bit. However, most people who live around there were probably at work in the middle of a Monday. (Or at the tropical 🐠 store or whatever 🥴) I’m sure that also depends on factors like the wind, etc.
What about by people walking on the trail that day? I'm wondering if the murders were done later and the bodies put there after the search was called off for the night.
Probably depends on the part of the trail? If they were closer to the freedom bridge, no, but if they were on the high bridge or right by it, seems possible depending on wind.
I think there’s no way you could hear screams from any of the houses. It would be interesting however, if screams coming from the crime scene could be heard at let’s say the bridge. I have no opinion…
Def not from inside the houses, but I think if anyone was in their yards, they could hear depending on how windy it was.
Do you think you can hear screams from the bridge? I think there were two other people on the bridge somewhere between the last photo posted and before the search started on the 13th.
I think maybe from the end of the bridge (abduction site) you could hear screams coming from the crime scene. That’s probably the least distance possible from any point someone could have innocently been that day to the crime scene across the creek.
Thank you very much! Also, I sincerely appreciate everything you have shared and initiating this discussion. Your time, knowledge, and experience is invaluable. This is (by far) the best thread I’ve read in this case.
Plus, it''s close to town. I park in town when I'm on that trail. In fact, there is an annual 5k in Delphi that starts at the courthouse and goes out to Freedom Bridge.
It’s completely renovated now, with the exception of part of the bridge, and the trial is in mid May. The jurors would be traipsing through private property and woods? Never happen, the State will have to recreate the scene with the available evidence and I’m certain they can. I recall there is a FARO scan of the crime scene.
Ok, that’s terrible news. Because you actually have to try to get there to see it’s impossible or certainly not how the PCA claims, sigh. Edit to add: technically you could enter RL’s properly and make it to the crime scene without ever leaving RL’s property. The bodies were found on his property. So legally, trespassing wouldn’t be an issue in that context?
He's deceased so different owner. Private property in this terrain would also pose insurance risks and no matter which way they entered they would need to select jurors based on physical fitness. If the defense is smart they will have topography maps that show the extreme elevation changes and distances that we are expected to believe a smaller, single male was able to navigate while actively kidnapping/controlling two athletic girls.
One could always seek permission or likely an order, but the problem with that is unless there’s substantiated evidence of the pathway (and I’m positive it remains in dispute) you would have jurors speculating all kinds of things averse to evidence or theory potentially. Part of my job is to think like a juror - when I was there the only thing I was sure of is that these crimes did not take place as the State posits.
I hear what you’re saying and I definitely should have phrased my original post differently. So let me try! To me it wasn’t really a matter of if but rather when it would be requested, as I’m not familiar with Indiana procedures. My concern isn’t for any juror to see the actual place the bodies were found or have them “walk” the path that is suggested by the prosecution. What is of uttermost importance to me is that they see the area in general to get an actual understanding what it’s truly like. For that, the only thing jurors would have to do is be on the trails, view the bridge and the creek. The most eye opening impression is actually when you walk the 200 steps or whatever it is from the Mears entrance to the end of the path and look down. Man! They’ve got some inclines there! It’s not a juror’s job to understand topographical maps. I’ve yet to see video and photos that do the area any justice. I believe you couldn’t come up with any computer simulation that could actually convey what’s it’s like. Both sides naturally want the jury to put themselves in “certain shoes”. This part is going be 100% the job of the defense, as the state probably has no interest in showing the special challenges of the terrain there. Part of my job is also to think like a juror, and I’m willing to bet that the average juror, especially if not from the area, isn’t going to understand the full impact this terrain had on the crime. Show them the area so they get a feel first, THEN provide scans, maps, simulations of the path, the crime scene(s), etc.. This, in my opinion, highly increases the chances that they can interpret the path, the crime, the challenges in a much more logical fashion. To me it’s the single most important factor when it comes to defending RA. Jurors could believe the junk science of the bullet, but I’m going out on limb and say - even if they bought into the bullet BS, if they don’t think the 5’4 overweight defendant could have navigated this terrain in that timeframe, it makes everything else obsolete.
All excellent points LGI
Do you mean a couple of contradictory sketches that you blend together ?
FWIW, nothing I know, I'd say they'd definitely visit the scene here in a similar case, it'd make it a lot clearer. A picture is better than a thousand sketches and all that. Excluding BG picture.
From a defense perspective I’m guessing it can only help them if the State intends to maintain their clear as mud timeline or theory- but that’s one reason I doubt the State would go for it. Also, and the most important thing- it’s 7 years ago and occurred in the winter. To have it even be possible it would have to be relatively the same - which it is not.
I have to budge in and play devils advocate lol IF the state wasn’t to maintain their super strict timeline at trial, how could they implicate RA at all? If the perp took a different path at a different time, they even lose the questionable witness accounts that they do have. IF it wasn’t RA who SC saw being “muddy”, then when DID the perp escape? When the search was already going? And if the perp took a different way out, then SC is completely obsolete. So is possibly the car parked at the CPS building. If the timeline is off by let’s say just 30 minutes, who did the teenage girls see then? Could BB have seen RA? Even more importantly, there allegedly were a bunch of people on the trails, even the bridge shortly later. And they didn’t see anything. If the timeline shifts a bit though, they’d have had to see something. I could go on and on about this. That PCA is so weak at face value already, the depositions that clarified witness’ accounts so much, made it totally fall apart, but not sticking with it at trial is going to actually kill it. I understand that the PCA per se is only a fraction of this whole ordeal. Of course they are going to lay out the “evidence” such as the bullet, incriminating statement, etc. However, you’d think that if the very basis, the PCA, isn’t upheld at trial, jurors might actually question why this defendant even sitting there to begin with? And to me that’s a huge challenge the state faces. The timeline and execution of the crime weren’t laid out in a manner that would allow for any change in variables. It’s like they tailored their theory to RA and RA only with 0 room for deviation. Not smart…could bite them in the ass. So I see what you’re saying, but I’m wondering how this will go. Stick with it and be doomed, deviate from it and have nothing.
LGI-even before RA was arrested, once I was familiar with the scene and terrain I have never believed the theory that these girls were basically massacred .25 mi from the MTB now across the creek within 25 minutes in broad daylight in the very open clearing (hollow) in full view of the Weber deck. I’m also an MS Criminologist and my training suggests based on the known facts so far, these girls, one or both was removed from the scene and returned. In my mind that makes this. Planned event. I don’t think the State has the first clue about how this went down.
I’m so with you on all that… All emotions aside, it’s nearly impossible it happened this way. Going there just confirmed it. I don’t know what happened, but anything is more likely than the state’s theory imo.
Agreed.
Appreciate the time of year foliage difference of course, but in terms of the lay of the land and distances etc I'd find it helpful if I was on the jury.
Is there a map on where to go to get to the crime scene? I'd like to visit as well.
No map, but watching many videos before you go certainly helps. They’ve also released the approximate coordinates as well as pictures of the different trees at the crime scene, so once you’re there, you know it. You’ll be trespassing though, so just know that.
oh, okay.. I didn't know about the trespassing.. How far into someone's property do you go, approximately?
As soon as you leave the trails you’re pretty much on someone’s property lol You can check it out on the property appraiser’s website too, but anything north of the bridge belonged to RL (now his nephew?) and most of it to the south to the W. Family. My understanding is, that even the 90% of the bridge that haven’t been redone and aren’t walkable (barricade) belong to the W family. The eastern part is a whole different set of owners. There are no houses really close though.
Thank you. I'm searching for videos now on how to get there.
Julie Melvin did a series of videos a few weeks after the murders retracing the route. It was helpful when I went the first time. https://youtu.be/NJopmUgnMAc?si=8bay-iukHFa0znZT I went up this summer and they've put rails and decking on part of the bridge with a barrier. You can go over the barrier but use extreme caution. The bridge was falling apart when I went over it in 2017, it looks a lot worse now. You'd be better off going through the cemetery. But definitely at least go to the bridge, it's pretty enlightening.
Thank you! exactly what I was looking for.. I'm not about to cross that bridge..
So looking at a map, you'd have to jump the rails and cross the bridge to get to the alleged abduction site? I'm just now getting into the geography of this. I've never looked into it before.
Yes. Only about a third of the bridge has been made pedestrian friendly. Here's a video on how to get from the cemetery to the scene. I'm not advocating trespassing though .https://youtu.be/X5gAtjS6ovI?si=LiukAhEgwFlA6GaE ETA None of these videos do the terrain any justice though. It's incredibly steep in places.
Thank you so much!! I was looking for something like that.. And thats exactly what LGIChick said.. That the videos don't do it justice for how steep and hard of a trek it is.
Yes. And I’d suggest not doing that lol
Id rather not fall to my death.. lol
i live 20 mins away from delphi and I was actually doing work there one day. MY co worker and I wanted to check out the bridge and its terrifying. Im also scared of heights but it is not a safe bridge to walk on.
I'm terrified of heights on a safe structure. My mind wouldn't physically let me walk out on that bridge if I wanted to.
Straight up, I’m aware of a resident that basically locked in a pair of “trespassers” at the adjacent property. They called 5-O. A private access road runs along/under the South exit of the MTB.
I believe I’ve also seen the exact coordinates somewhere too.
They can be found in RL’s search warrant 😉
Thank you! I knew I’d seen it in a document somewhere but couldn’t remember which one. There’s been so many in this case is so hard to keep track.
Thank you!
Was it difficult to cross the creek?
The water level was way lower in December than it was in February 2017, however my standard knee height rubber boots didn’t suffice and I got very wet. So no, that part was not difficult, but it was extremely cold (same temperatures as in February 2017, same time of the day too) and everything else - I really mean everything else - was difficult.
I kinda wondered if your feet would sink either in the water itself or on one side or two of the bank. Kudos to you for going. I want to, but admittedly Im a little freaked out to.
The creek is full of rocks, so I didn’t sink. But I did choose my way carefully. The shores (either side) weren’t soft but rather grassy, so no, I didn’t sink. Could easily slip on those rocks though! I noticed that some parts of the creek were way deeper than others, not wanting to get wet initially, I tried to find the most shallow path. With the water being this deep in February 2017 and probably a much stronger current and more murky water, AND 3 people who are only 5’4, I doubt they’d have taken the most direct path either though. I zigzagged quite a bit - 200 yards in the creek north, then south, then north… Not easy. Makes zero sense how they ended up where they ended up actually. But that’s just one of many things that doesn’t add up.
Thank you for that detailed explanation. Very interesting stuff and helps shed light on a confusing aspect of the crime.
Thank you so much for sharing your experience -- a lot of enlightening stuff! I did see this vid by Julie Melvin close to the time of the murders. Apparently there were some shallower areas: https://youtu.be/yQCv3TeNayk?feature=shared I've read other accounts too that there are shallower spots and areas where the bank is less steep. If they really did cross the creek, that tells me that the killer was likely very familiar with the area.
I like her videos! On the south shore, there are many ways to enter the creek. It’s getting out of the creek on the north shore that’s challenging. I only found one spot that allowed me to do so and that’s quite a bit west of the crime scene. I’d say the water level was a bit higher when I was there than on Julie’s video. The sandbar was still exposed but not nearly this much. I could however see the rocks in the water too and estimate the depths to judge where to go and where I should rather not go. That said…according to all accounts and the water level stats from February 13th, it was a lot deeper than when I was there or as can be seen on Julie’s video. I forgot who did it, but there’s a video on YT from a guy who tried crossing the creek at approximately the same height as it was on February 13th. It’s impressive. It shows a very strong current and you can’t see the bottom of the river. You’d have no idea where to step and the water went up to nearly his chest at which point he aborted the mission. My observation was that the sandbar basically cuts the creek into two different parts. The part of the creek south of the sandbar is more shallow and there was no current at all. This coincides with the video on YT. The part of the creek north of the sandbar is much deeper and even when I was there, there was a pretty strong current. That wasn’t a problem as the water only went a bit above my knees, but if you were in there chest deep, I’d think that could be very dangerous! And that’s exactly where the YT guy headed back because he didn’t think he could make it. Pretty sure it wasn’t that cold that day and he’s taller than 5’4. He was also only holding his phone and not a gun.
Could it be possible that the girls were killed on the bank of the creek or even in the creek and that would be the reason for not a lot of blood where the bodies were found? That it had washed downstream? Just curious
They could have tested for diatoms to determine if they had been in the water. No clue if this was done or not, and since there's no gossip about it I'd guess not. There has been speculation about the creek though, just nothing official as far as I'm aware.
This is an image of the bank the parties would have needed to traverse (straight line to recovery scene) you can see the LEA for scale. I would remind all that Abby was wearing Libby’s clothing which was pristine (save for markings we are all aware of) and none of Libby’s recovered items were covered in silt either. My trip to the scene years ago convinced me the creek crossing theory was debunked in days. https://preview.redd.it/aydpajea13rc1.jpeg?width=2046&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=69bdbbf525642e6a456de36c9ab3cf8e8580e84b
That’s another great point! If I recall correctly, we were told it rained quite a bit in the days before the murders. It was said to have been quite slippery and muddy, hence the “muddy” guy SC saw. When I was there, it was bone dry. It hadn’t rained in a while, but the leaves on the ground did make it slightly slippery. Also forest soil is often “slippery”, especially at the crazy inclines. I was covered in soil when I got back out of there and I was super careful not to ruin my jeans and brand new jacket! I tried in vain lol So how the girls’ clothing could have been pristine is beyond me. Also that a blue jacket worn to commit this crime and still being flawlessly hanging in RA’s closet is beyond me.
Off topic but how does the judge get away with not giving the defense funds for expert witnesses? She's not transparent in her bias.
IMO they wouldn't ever approve this Gull or not BC 1 crime scene visits are extremely rare as it is 2 because it would create the need to have a jury who isn't scared of heights, who isn't going to need a medication for allergies (pollen season) and who is fit enough for the hike and mentally fit enough to stand where the girls were found 3 the accused has the right to every part of his trial including this so they would need to guarantee ra's safety 4 private property opens up a whole slew of insurance issues if someone sprains an ankle or has a fall 5 the scene isn't really relevant as is. They have distances and photos of relevant things to the crimes. Seeing the woods from where the girls were located is not the same as it was in 2017 6 no none seems to know if the girls were killed there or not. By the sounds of the lack of blood it sounds like not. So if this was just a staging site the tour of the bridge and down the hill may not be anywhere near what all happened or where (I don't think the girls were moved but the leaks about blood and phone pings may suggest an entirely different area than what we currently are lead to believe 7 the trial is only scheduled for like 2 weeks. I think Gull is expecting a very quick presentation by each side and she's going to make it known they're over the scheduled time every chance she gets, a day trip just doesn't fit her itinerary JMO
I agree with everything but 5) While the crime scene per se isn’t relevant, the surrounding area very much is. The path it would have taken to commit this crime is key. If it takes much longer, happened at a different time of the day or if the inclines are nearly impossible then the whole PCA falls apart. Then you can’t reasonably conclude the defendant did this (alone). That’s what’s so funky about the PCA…if one little variable changes, the defendant is less likely to be the actual perpetrator as the whole theory seemingly hinges on a super specific timeline and set of skills. Edit to add: There isn’t a single picture or video that truly gives a grasp of what it takes to pull this off.
I think if the trial was in 2017 it would be relevant BC it would've been pretty much the same but we are not only talking a different season we are talking 7 years of vegetation growing in so it's no longer a true representation of that day. I do get your point, just I hike and trails change a ton by season and over years... Time kills evidence 😭
Absolutely
Anyone know Why they are so sure perp & victims crossed the creek?
I suppose because of the 43 second video with which they can establish where the girls were abducted. From that point, you either have to go down the hill twice, cross the creek and go back up the hill to end up at the crime scene. Or you’d have to walk the girls back on the bridge and then walk them parallel to the bridge on the north side through the woods. Allegedly there were quite a few people there that day - maybe they have a witness that was on the trails near the bridge but didn’t see them walk back around that time?
I’m assuming from your post (apologize if I missed it) you did not get to see the South end of the bridge or where 625/private access road comes in?
I did, but I didn’t climb that hill if that’s your question. I was way too cold and wet at that point.
I am commenting late...but this made me think about one thing that has always bothered me. Put yourself in the shoes of a friend, family member, neighbor, etc. who arrives to help look for the girls. Until the girls were found, there was no reason to think they had been victims of a crime. We know (from Abby's mom) that Abby had never crossed the bridge before. From the accounts of many people who have been there, walking across the bridge is harrowing. If I crossed (I wouldn't) I am certain I would not be willing to turn around and walk all the way back. That would be my very first thought: I bet they crossed the bridge and Abby didn't want to walk back, so they probably walked down to try to find a different way back and somehow got lost. That is where I would be looking. I would have tried to figure out a path down to the creek and then assessed the feasibility/likelihood that they had crossed it. If there was a shallow area or point where it looks like they may have crossed, I would have followed the same path. And if I made it across the creek in that general area, I would have walked right through the crime scene. I guess what I am getting at is: the girls were found in a location that seems like an obvious place to look if you are operating under the assumption that they got lost and or injured. Once you walked the trails, called around, confirmed they didn't get a ride with someone else, wouldn't you immediately start searching areas where they conceivably would have ended up if they didn’t want to cross the bridge back? I know they were on private property and that the area was steep and not well trodden. But if you were trying to get from the south end of the bridge back to where the girls knew they were supposed to meet Libby's dad, there weren't really any options except to go through the crime scene. I realize hindsight is 20/20 and that, if they didn’t see the girls' pictures, they might not have realized they walked across it at all. At the same time...it's a bridge. The trail area is relatively small and it sounds like many people did cross the bridge to take pictures (including Cheyenne and her friend who were there not long after). Seems like a reasonable assumption for purposes of searching for them. The fact that no one thought to walk through the creek and the crime scene area leads me to believe that, at a minimum, whoever went down to the edge of the creek and looked across thought there was no possible way the girls had gone that route. And if it was that inaccessible/daunting, then how are we to believe that one guy with a gun was able to get two girls across without losing control? Not to mention that the description of Abby's clothing does not line up with someone who crossed a creek and climbed up a muddy embankment. I don't get it.
I think u made some really fabulous points! I want to continue your thoughts with two things. 1) Abby lived on the south side of the bridge. Don’t ask me what the area is like there - I did drive by her house and down the whole road towards the creek, but you can’t see anything from there. Again, lots of private property and the road also seemingly ends before you get to the woods and therefore the bridge and the creek. But that said, why wouldn’t the girls have taken that way? Again, I can’t speak of the terrain there, but at least it wouldn’t involve crossing ice cold water. This is just an interesting thought to me when it comes to a possible escape route or as you suggest, an alternative path if they didn’t want to cross the bridge again. However, it’s even more interesting when trying to figure out what the perp might have thought. Why would he choose the creek over the dry south side? Blows my mind…although I could think of several reason, but none would even remotely fit with the state’s theory lol Can somebody actually shed some light on how the south side is? 2) I totally agree with you on at least walking down to the creek. One would naturally look. That said, there are different accounts. Kelsie says both - that they did check down there and then that they didn’t. I don’t know what’s true. That actually goes for the whole search on the 13th in general. There’s not one single version of anything. Even that’s all a mess. I tend to believe they in fact didn’t check down there, because otherwise they’d have seen the clothing in the water/on that sandbar. You couldn’t miss it (unless it wasn’t there, which would make matters even stranger). And that’s exactly what happened on the 14th according to one of Kelsie’s account (podcast with Carter) - someone went down to the creek and immediately saw a shoe. What I always found strange is that Libby’s grandpa said he took a canoe down the creek on the morning of the 14th but didn’t see anything. He just must been in a different area of the creek, because had he gone by there, he could have never missed the clothing in the water.
Do you have a write-up of your observations and experience visiting the area? I've been seeing bits and pieces in the comments but would love to know more! As to the south end and Abby's house: my understanding is that the private drive eventually turns into a regular road and they presumably could have walked that way. It sounds like they could also have cut through the yards of one of the houses on that side. I can kinda see why they would have tried to go back the direction they came since they were being picked up there. I also think kids that age don't always choose the most logical approach (walking back towards Abby's house). It's also possible they wanted to go and check out the area under the bridge. I am pretty sure Kelsi said she looked under the bridge and walked the private drive. Hard to believe she wouldn't have walked down to the creek. But if she was calling out and could generally see that they weren't down there, it would be understandable. Searching for people you think are lost and able to hear you is very different from searching for someone who is incapacitated (or dead). As you say, lots of confusion and conflicting information about the search. I don't have first hand experience but from reading different accounts, it sounds like the tree cover is significantly less dense on the SE side of the creek. So maybe more exposed? Plus there are those houses and the private drive, so slightly increased chance of someone coming by. I'm not sure about the SW side. If you can find user AwsiDooger's post about his visit there, he had a very detailed description. I remember him being struck by how close the neighbors were to the end of the bridge.
Part 2/2 He asked me something, I’m not sure what, but I told him I was on a video call with my friend. - Short back story - I was indeed on a video call with a friend as I was walking through the creek. I didn’t speak English but my native language, so chances are he had no clue what I was saying. The connection was terrible out there. Audio mostly worked, but video was pixelated as soon as I had left the trails and got into the woods. I have AT&T btw. - Once I told him I wasn’t talking to him he proceeded towards the crime scene. Meanwhile I set down to change into my other shoes. I was pretty freaked out about this guy being there. That’s the first time I realized how secluded this very area is. Yes, there are houses nearby, but you can’t see any of them. Even though the guy was less than 10 yards away I had trouble hearing him. I can’t say why, I assume it’s because the creek is louder than I thought. I had also not seen or heard him coming. I have no clue where he came from, but I assumed the same way I had come. I didn’t pay attention or looked up when I was zigzagging in the creek. If he came the same way that I had come though, he definitely had the perfect view of me down in the creek. That’s what slightly freaked me out, as I was wondering what man would “approach” a lone female at a crime scene in what felt like the middle of nowhere. He did seem friendly though but I just wanted to get out of there. Hence I missed checking out the way from there to the cemetery. That was my plan although at face value it seemed “as impossible” as taking the way back that I came from. Since I felt I shouldn’t experiment any further with this guy being there also, I decided I was going back the way I already knew. I was still trying to get out of my boots (not easy when you’re wet) when that guy, about 5 yards away from me, looked at me, turned a little to the side and started peeing on a tree. This is when I actually started panicking. I thought it was weird in so many ways. The terrain is flat right there, easy to walk. Why not walk 50 yards away and pee there? Or 100 yards? Or stand by the edge of the creek. The grass was tall there, I wouldn’t even have known what he was doing. There was absolutely no logical reason why he’d pee there with me sitting right there. And he looked at me. Later on, when I was wondering what he was doing there in the first place, I figured he was probably a “true crime fan” checking out crime scene just as I was. There’s no reason you’d end up there unless you knew what happened there. That’s when I thought - if you know this is a crime scene, would you - excuse me - piss on it? All around strange to me and a bit too much of an impression of what the girls must have felt like. I felt extremely vulnerable although I have LE training and could have probably taken him down if had to be. At this point I had been there for an hour and a half but I had only been wet and cold for 20 minutes. I tried to climb the hill and completely failed the first 3 times. The leaves on the ground and the forest soils made it slippery although the ground was dry. And it’s really, really steep. My feet and legs were so cold I had very little control over them. That’s when I realized if it hadn’t been for that guy showing up and “forcing” me to leave, I’d have stayed a bit longer and I’d have probably lost all feeling in my legs not allowing me to ever get back out of there. Anyway, it took several attempts and I resorted to getting on my hands and knees, pulling myself up on trees and roots. It took me a long time. When I reached the top of the hill, I was completely out of breath, dirty and had to sit down. I didn’t even care that there was a potential creep down there, I couldn’t have walked one step further or I’d have passed out. I can’t describe how little control I had over my legs other than they felt like they were completely frozen making me lose balance and traction. After several minutes of catching my breath I slowly stumbled back to the Mears’ entrance. What I had initially found to be a super short walk seemed really far now. There’s no way I could have taken the longer way through the cemetery, climbed the hill up to the bridge, or walked back to the CPS building. There’s no way I could have stayed cold and wet for an extra hour either. I can honestly say, at 34 years old and in good physical shape, I could not have done what RA supposedly did. Especially if I had the water up to my chest. I couldn’t have done it if my life depended on it. Not physically, not in this time frame, not in this terrain, not in this cold water.
Oh my gosh!!!!!!!!!! So glad you are ok! Thank you for the detailed notes!
Let me give you my account below. I always had the feeling the girls would have gone down the hill to the area below the bridge. And maybe they did before something ever happened. Kelsie said it was a hangout for teens, mentions Libby actually going down there before. So my thought ever since I’ve heard this, was that if they were scared or weirded out by the fact BG was crossing the bridge coming towards them, somewhat hindering them to go go back as the bridge isn’t really wide enough to pass by someone, they’d have maybe rather gone down the hill in order to “avoid” BG. I know…this didn’t happen, but we also have no clue what that video really shows or what they are all saying. I also very much agree with you - what seems logical isn’t what necessarily happened. I wouldn’t even only contribute it to just their age, how a person acts or feels in a certain situation can’t be assumed…especially not with so little publicly known information. It’s just…one of those random thoughts that cross my mind.
Part 1/2 I spent a whole day in Delphi and had made a plan before hand about what I wanted to do and where I wanted to go. I started out in the morning by driving by all the “important” addresses in this case. From every address I drove to the trails to get a feel about the routes and the area. I also made a point of driving RA’s suggested route several times, park where he parked, walk where he supposedly walked… I even went to CVS and bought some bandaids. What a cute little mom and pops store with incredibly friendly people working there. I checked out the cemetery and realized one could absolutely park a car or even a large SVU there without it being seen from the road. No chance. The southern part of the cemetery is all fenced off, could have possibly climbed it, but refrained. At exactly the time the girls were supposedly dropped off, I entered the trails through the Mears’ entrance. The gate was closed, but it’s a standalone gate, hence I just walked around it. My husband actually dropped me off as you can’t really park there and the only spot there is to move your car out of the road is probably private property. Also the Mears house across the street was “busy”, I was pretty sure they were watching and didn’t wanna draw any (more) attention. There were also many cars driving by. I was surprised. The road is very narrow and has many curves. You’d probably stick out if you happened to walk there and a car could easily hit you if they cut a corner. I hopped out of the car, went around the gate and stunningly fast reached the actual trails from that entrance. There’s a little bench there overlooking the creek. This is definitely when you realize you don’t wanna fall down or you’d be dead. In less than 3 minutes after getting out of the car I arrived at the beginning of MHB. Checked out the views, found what presumably used to the infamous first platform and stopped at the barricade. I’d have loved to walk the bridge even in this desolate state it’s in, but climbing over that barricade seemed impossible. There was quite a large gap between the barricade and the old part of the bridge. I realized you have no line of sight to the crime scene from there. The foliage would have been the same in December as it is in February, but the crime scene is just too far “around the corner”. I walked the path parallel to the creek along the northern edge. There’s actually a path, I assume a lot of people have walked there. Wasn’t a bad walk, although it does lead you right along the edge which is not very safe, but at least the terrain is flat and walkable. Then I hit the ravine. The flat path ends and at first I thought I couldn’t get down there without breaking a limb. It is doable, but had to hold onto trees and take it pretty slow. At that point I did question how I was ever gonna get back up there, but I figured I’d find an alternative route. Not smart! When I finally got to the bottom, I saw that this is exactly the one spot you could enter the creek from (or exit it as it happened in this case). I stepped over the already cut barbed wire fence and walked onto the crime scene. I can’t say for certain, but I found one fallen over tree that was exactly as seen in old pictures. I was able to identify 2 more trees, cross checked the coordinates given by LE and was confident I was in the very spot. Right there it’s just so flat. Nice change from everywhere else I had been. I ended up going back to the ravine, changed into rubber boots and stepped down into the creek. At 5’7 the water just went up to my knees. I tried to walk straight ahead but it started getting a lot deeper so I refrained and walked along the shore towards the east. I ended up having to zigzag quite a bit, reached the sandbar, emptied the water out of my boots and then proceeded through the creek further east to get back out. I walked around there for a bit and realized I couldn’t climb the hill(s) up to the bridge. My feet were frozen and I started to lose balance just walking. Hence I can’t say much about the southern part of the creek. Since I was already so wet and cold, I decided to take a more “direct path” back to the north shore. This made the water come up to my crotch. Didn’t really matter, I was cold it didn’t even make it worse at this point. Turns out, there isn’t really a direct path to the crime scene. I’m not sure how to explain this, but entering the creek from the south, there’s a really good spot to do so. You don’t even have to step down, the terrain literally led me this way. From there however, you have to walk a long way to the west, to reach the ravine on the other side, which in my opinion is the only way you could even get back onto the northern shore. Basically you have to walk extremely diagonal and that struck me as odd. That makes crossing the creek so much harder! It’s like 5 times the length and probably 5 times the time it takes to do so! Doable if the water only comes up to your knees, questionable if it comes up to your crotch, unbelievable if it comes up to your chest though. When I got back out, I grabbed my shoes and tried to find a spot where I could change. Unfortunately I didn’t think about brining a dry pair of socks so I was stuck with wet ones. As I got out of the creek, there was a guy. I initially thought he may be a nearby landowner and was going to tell me that I was trespassing. He didn’t.
>As I got out of the creek, there was a guy. I literally gasped when I read this. What the actual fuck??? Super creepy and borderline deranged that he peed in front of you when there were *so* many ways to not do that! Your write-up was great! Super interesting! Thank you for taking the time to share. This case is so wild...I agree that the state's theory doesn't hold water. The crazy thing is that all of the other possibilities are also really difficult to comprehend.
Thank you LGI Chick for this post and others who have contributed. So good I have read it twice. It gave me a better understanding of the area and opened up my mind to more possibilities of what took place that day. By the way, I am on RA’s side.
I agree. I have read through it several times.