Crime Weekly - S1 Ep31: The Snapchat Murders: Abigail Williams and Liberty German (Part 3)

Episode Date: July 9, 2021

It is a story that we have all become familiar with. Two small girls in a small town go missing after a carefree day in the woods, a day that was supposed to have been filled with fun, and childhood memories, but turned darker than most of us even realize. Two friends, fourteen year old Libby German and thirteen year old Abby Williams, would be found murdered the next day, and the tight knit community of Delphi Indiana has never been the same. Over the years, this case has been analyzed by thousands of people, but even though video footage of the suspect was captured, as well as audio of what his voice sounds like, the murders of these two, innocent teenage girls have yet to be solved. Shop for your Crime Weekly gear here --> https://crimeweeklypodcast.com/shop Stephanie's Video -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqkOPh82qVU Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/CrimeWeeklyPodcast Website: CrimeWeeklyPodcast.com Instagram: @CrimeWeeklyPod Twitter: @CrimeWeeklyPod Facebook: @CrimeWeeklyPod

Hello, everybody. Welcome back to Crime Weekly. I'm Stephanie Harlow. And I'm Derek Levasseur. So today we are finishing our Delphi series. This is part three. This will be the final part. We're going to go into a couple of suspects, not too many. I kind of picked the suspects that I thought had the, I guess, the biggest chance of being the Delphi killer or the ones who were spoken about the most or who just kept coming up in this case. The one person I probably won't talk about is James Chadwell, simply because he's the newest suspect. I did an entire video on

him on YouTube. I don't think that he is the killer here. And, you know, we did talk to Kelsey as well, and she doesn't believe that he is either. You know, there's a lot of stuff that went on around him and a lot of things I can understand why people might think he was involved, including where he lived, the crime that he was charged with just this past year. But I will tell you guys to go over and watch the video on YouTube if you want to know more about him, because I just don't want to reiterate it all here, especially for those who already kind of saw that video.

But if you want to check it out, we will link it in the description. Yeah. And also, I think some people, you know, there's a lot around it that would say suggest maybe this guy was the guy. But I also think a lot of people are putting his photo up against the first sketch right the first sketch that came out yeah and the reality which we've covered extensively and even kelsey's spoken about it other people have spoken about it that that photo as much as it's you know kind of ingrained in our minds it's a a nothing burger now. They're saying that it was basically done off the original video. And the newest sketch, which we covered in last week's episode,

is the sketch that you really should be focused on. And as we established, that could be anyone. So when you look at Chadwell and you look at that first sketch, you go, wow, he looks just like him. You're not wrong. It just doesn't matter anymore. And that's in that aspect, because that sketch has kind of been debunked by the police departments themselves. I mean, I would kind of say that James Chadwell does resemble the second sketch, which we now know is actually the first sketch of the younger man. Right.

He probably resembles both of them. But just like because what you said, that second sketch, it could be any guy. Honestly, it was a any guy, honestly. Resembles a lot of people. Yeah. And James Chadwell is a little younger. Like, I can't remember exactly how old he is now. But yeah, around Delphi time, he would have probably been in like his 30s, like early 30s, maybe.

So it makes sense if he matched the second sketch, a.k.a. the first sketch more. I just I don't think that it's him, unfortunately. And I think if he's been arrested now for several months, I feel like we would have heard something by now. Yeah. And I think I like where we're going with it tonight, where you're going to cover a few of the suspects, but at the end of the day, it does appear that the person who did this hasn't been apprehended yet, or isn't or is at least not known to the public. And so to spend two hours talking about potential suspects when in reality, everyone in that area is a suspect, I think it's not really productive to what we want to

accomplish, which is something new, something that could help law enforcement down the road. And I do like the idea of covering a few suspects that everyone really knows because they want to hear our opinions on it, but then ending this episode with our own theories on this case, because as we've read in the comments, a lot of people want to hear what we personally think. I know you've researched this case extensively. I've spent a lot of hours researching it over the last two weeks. And in fact, I was telling you earlier, I was on it for about six hours just last night because I was buttoning up a few loose ends questions that I had. So I'm looking forward to that aspect of it because maybe right, maybe wrong, but I think

it's important to put our opinions out there and maybe it strikes a chord with someone who knows. Maybe it's already been discussed in other podcasts, other YouTube videos, but we want to put our, like I said, our stamp on it and give our opinions on it because we know there's many of you that want to hear it. involved with and are just crazy. The things that they've done, the way they were apprehended, the things they were doing when they were apprehended, which even led to them being connected to Delphi in the first place. It's just insane. And I think that people need to know about these four gentlemen on their own, even if we can say probably maybe not the Delphi killer, but still a really bad person who needs to be recognized for the bad things

that they did. Absolutely. Absolutely. And I think, you know, you talk to someone, I don't know if we're going to say his name or not. You talk to someone that you're close with. Can we say his name or no? Yeah.

Yeah. Gray Hughes. And I know I, when I was doing my research, his name is just going to pop up and he's got some, some theories and stuff. And I didn't get the chance to dive into his stuff extensively. But this is a shocker for me. Stephanie, I was like, I was patrolling around Reddit. I was on Reddit.

I know you get there. I don't know how, but you get there. I honestly was like, look at me. I'm a Reddit person right now. And I was like into it. You can't stop either, can you? Honestly, I was really impressed by some of these individuals. It's impressive. I know.

Their theories. I was like, wow, I didn't think of that. Let me write that one down. honestly i was really impressed by some of these individuals their theories their theories i was like i was like wow i didn't think of that let me write that one down so and i i have you know this negative perception of reddit in a lot of ways because i've been talked a lot of you know a lot of shit about me has been said on reddit that's not true and a lot of other people you everybody we've talked about this it's like reddit can be a really terrible place, but I think when it's used like this for a form of group thing to talk about these cases and bounce around ideas and it's kind of, it's formatted in a way where people can follow certain things. Like if you had a question about the car, there's a subreddit.

I'm like, wow, this is very well done. I was thoroughly impressed. So if there's any Reddit users out there who are part of this group, that's specifically focusing on this case job well done, because although there's a Reddit users out there who are part of this group that's specifically focusing on this case, job well done. Because although there's a lot of speculation, I thought it was very respectful for the most part and very thoughtful as far as not just putting any theory you have out there. There was always some type of basis for their thoughts, which I may disagree with some of them, but they came from a place that you could tell they did their research.

So yeah, Reddit, shout out. Yeah, people always talk shit about Reddit. And I know why. But I tell you, some of these people on there, they are very well educated on how the investigatory process works. They know every little detail. I mean, they track it down. They do their own homework.

It's a very impressive, mad respect out there to the Reddit detectives who are doing it every day. We really appreciate you guys. He's close to the family. He's had interviews with them. He does a completely different sort of format than we do, but I think that there's a lot of value there. And if you guys want, we can bring him on and we can kind of go over the things that he knows. So let us know if you want to do that, but we're going to dive right in. And the first person I'm going to talk about is 55-year-old Paul Etter. So Paul Etter came on law enforcement's radar on June 22nd, 2019. So a 26-year-old woman pulled into Paul Etter's driveway after getting a flat tire. And Paul went outside his house and he asked her if she needed help. But she felt right away instinctually that he was creepy and that she wasn't safe with him. So she said no, and she pulled out of his driveway with her flat tire. He then jumped into

his car, I guess, and followed her to the driveway of a friend's house, and he abducted her out of this driveway and drove her back to his family's house in Tippecanoe County. He then sexually assaulted her and then drove her back to her car. So he's a douchebag and he's incredibly bold, which I think a lot of people felt this was something like Delphi because Delphi happened broad daylight. Delphi happened in a public area. You know, there was all these sorts of people around. It was very bold, just very obvious. And on June 27th, a Lebanon police officer noticed a truck that had been reported stolen from Tippecanoe County and Paul Etter was driving it. This turned into an over five hour standoff between Etter and law enforcement, which only ended when Paul Etter took his own life.

After his suicide, Carroll County law enforcement revealed that they'd already been looking into Etter due to a tip that had come in, and they requested his autopsy results and his DNA so they could either rule him out or officially make him a suspect. So from what I'm understanding, even before Paul kidnapped this woman out of her friend's driveway, they were kind of already looking into him because they'd gotten a tip about him. Yeah. And, you know, not to discredit this, but I'm sure they have tips on a lot of individuals. And this was probably one of the members on a very long list. The one thing that was interesting about it is some people say, oh, he knew he was caught at that point, didn't want to be taken into custody.

So he took his own life. What I found interesting was that the Carroll County law enforcement agents wanted to get some of his DNA because again, I don't know what they have, but why would you want DNA if you don't have anything to compare it to? So there's that question out there of do they have DNA from this suspect? And if they do, how much do they have? Well, it's enough where they think down the road, whether science and technology has to catch up or whatever the case may be, there's something there. Or they wouldn't be asking for DNA from any suspect because what are they going to compare it to if they don't have anything?

So I think just a common sensical assumption would be that they definitely have something. Yeah. And the fact that where he lived, Tippecanoe County, it's just about 30 minutes away from Delphi, his close location, the fact that he was so brazen, it kind of put him on their radar. But they said they already had him on their radar before this even happened. So that's interesting to me. I wonder if it's true. Listen, I mean, you had said, I think, last episode where it's like, even with the sketch, they throw out a sketch that they know to be false to kind of mislead. It's a cat and mouse game, right? Like we do do it. There are times when we're in law enforcement, we'll put out misinformation,

right? Because we might be closer than we want the person. We might already have identified the person. We're waiting for the judge to sign off on something or waiting for something to come back from the crime lab. We don't want this person fleeing the area. So we put out something deliberately to make them comfortable. So they stick around a little longer. So you never truly know. You always have to take what law enforcement is saying when it comes to these big publicized cases with some skepticism, not because they're mistrusting or however you feel about cops, but because they don't owe you anything. So they will use you and the media to further their investigation. They don't care. They'll come out later after they arrest the guy and say, sorry, we tricked you guys too,

but it was for the sake of solving this case and everyone's going to forgive them. So you can't always take everything they're saying as it's a hundred percent fact, because again, it may be just something that they want a specific person to hear. And you may not know what that thing is. Well, I would really like to pick your brain about the ongoing Summer Wells case out of Tennessee. If that keeps happening and she isn't found or there's not some sort of resolution within the next week or so, I really would like to get your perspective because the TBI is saying things that are incredibly contradictory to what the family is saying. And you kind of wonder what's the truth. So I would like to know from a law enforcement perspective why you think the TBI is doing what they're doing. So if you guys would like us to

cover the Summerwells case, I know I just did it on YouTube. It came up today, but I really wish that I had been talking to Derek when I was doing it because I really want to know what the TBI is doing and if this is a tactic that they're using to make somebody feel comfortable. I don't know, but let us know in the comment section or on social media if you want us to cover Summer feel comfortable. I don't know. But let us know in the comments section or on social media if you want us to cover Summer Wells. If this keeps going, we don't have some sort of resolution soon. Absolutely. I'm game. I'm game.

Anytime you think we can help, I'm in. So the Carroll County Sheriff, Tobe Lesenby, told the public that Paul Etter was being looked into and pursued, just like all the other potential suspects they were aware of. But he urged people to not get too excited, saying, quote, I would caution folks on not getting ramped up on just one certain individual because of his recent attention and because of what he's done, end quote. There really isn't much to tie Paul Etter to what happened to Abby and Libby. Tippecanoe County,

like I said, it's about 30 minutes from Highbridge, so he lived in the general area, but he doesn't resemble really either of the sketches, even though a lot of people think he resembles that first sketch, which we have found out now is the second sketch and not even the suspect. A lot of people think he looks like that dude. The sheriff of Tippecanoe County revealed that Paul had told him that he'd done some bad things in his life and that he was a bad person, but I don't think any of us didn't already know that. Based on what he did, I guess we could just go ahead and agree that he's done some bad things and he's a super bad person. Right. And then there was also a child who lived

across the street from Paul Adder. She commented that she did not feel good when Adder tried to have a conversation with her. She said it creeped her out and she was a little scared. But I mean, like I said, that could simply be because he clearly was a creepy guy and a scary one, too. Like she probably had a legitimate reason to feel fear. But that doesn't mean that every young girl in a 30 to 40 mile radius who died was was his fault. So it's kind of tough to put anything. And we're not saying we're not saying paul's not capable of carrying out this murder we're just saying the set the facts around it don't support that he was responsible

for a big difference not saying so everything that you know this woman was saying all true we we have no reason not to believe her right and obviously with the you know his past history it's it's very i think it's a it's it's a it's a fair assumption to say, could he be capable of doing something like this? Absolutely. But there's a lot of people, it's scary to think, there's a lot of people out there that are capable of conducting this type of, carrying out this action that just physically weren't in that area. So although they're capable of it, you can't tie them to this direct one. And that's what we're attempting to do. We know there's a lot of bad guys out in the world who could carry something like this out

We're looking for the guy who did it and so like as a police officer if you have a potential suspect and he Kills himself during this police standoff. What are you going to do to eliminate him? You're going to try to see where he was on that date, right? Like probably first and foremost. Yeah, try to see where he was on that date probably get a search warrant for his apartment Um if there's dna clearly we would get some dna First and foremost. Yeah. Try to see where he was on that date. Probably get a search warrant for his apartment. If there's DNA, clearly we would get some DNA. I'm hoping there might be foot impressions at the crime scene. We could compare his closet of shoes to the footprints in that area.

It would take a lot of work because a lot of people walk through there. We're going to talk about shoe impressions more later when we get into theories. But I would go through every single piece of evidence I have in relation to this case and compare it to him starting with, like you said, his whereabouts. That's macro level. Like, Hey, was he even in the state at the time? Let's start there. Okay. He was in the state. Was he around this area at this time? Is there any account for where he was that day? Could it be possible for him to have been in that location then you go on more of a micro level dna shoe prints um go through his notepads his phone number everything you can photos he has you know web search history if you had a computer you name it you do it right i mean they probably go through a cell phone pull his gps see where he was on monday february 13th probably see if

there's any messages text messages that where he's saying like, oh, I'm here in Delphi or something like that, anything like that. And I feel like if they'd found anything, it kind of would have been told to us by now because he's dead. They're not worried about him running, right? Yep. If they had definitive proof that he was in fact the killer, I think they would have came out with it by now. And the fact that they haven't ruled him out, guys don't look too deep into that. They're not going to rule out every single suspect that they've looked into. They're going to keep it vague for some of the reasons. One, again, they don't owe us an explanation. They might've ruled them out, but also they don't want the guy who did this to watch any of this and think that they're running out of options or

that there's, they don't want them to know anything about what they're doing with the case, because there's a very high probability that this individual, if he has access to a computer or a television is keeping up on this case to figure out where they are. Are they getting warmer? Right. Are they searching areas where, you know, he was only, he knows what happened. So when he sees certain things on the news, don't think for a second, he's not cross

referencing it with what he actually did because clearly his objective was to not only carry out this action, but get away with it. So that's the stage he's in right now, is did I do enough to avoid apprehension? And that remains to be seen whether he did enough or not. So far, he has, but hopefully that doesn't remain the case. All right, next we have 46 have 46 year old Charles Eldridge. Now, this dude, when you look at his picture against the original bridge guy sketch, the one that we now know is nothing because it's not the suspect.

He looks identical to this dude. Like, I want you to look it up on your computer right now if you can. Do you see this? I saw him. The name came up a bunch of times when when I was doing the research and he does. And there's a few guys that look just like him. I mean he does. And there's a few guys that look just like him. I mean, there's a few guys that look just like that sketch. I mean, this guy is insane.

It's crazy. To a T. Oh, my gosh. So I completely get it. Absolutely. Like I said, we're not saying like, oh, you're so stupid because you think this person might have been Bridge Guy. No. I mean, he looks just like him.

And then you go further into like, what's Charles Eldridge all about? Well, that also adds some fuel to the fire. He lived in Union City, Indiana, and he got arrested on January 8th, 2019, after having a sexual conversation with a person that he thought was a 13-year-old girl, but the person actually turned out to be a man, an undercover detective posing as a 13-year-old girl. So Aldridge asked to meet up with this girl, who's not really a young girl, in Union City to exchange sexual acts, and then he showed up and he got arrested. So people obviously, they think his mugshot looks like Bridge Guy, and he had a reputation for being a weirdo who liked to hang out in the woods. He had a violent streak and he had an obsession with guns.

After he got arrested, the parents of his ex-wife said they've long seen a comparison between Eldridge and the sketch of the Delphi murderer, which is hard not to. I mean, it looks like that sketch was made of Eldridge. Donna Clack, who is his mother-in-law, his ex-wife's mother, she said, quote, When we saw ex-wife's mother, she said, quote, when we saw that picture on the news, we said that looks like Andy. So I guess Andy was what everyone called Charles Eldridge. That was his nickname. Yeah. So the Clacks have been asking themselves why their daughter married Eldridge to begin with. And then when they had

been married, he apparently took their son, who was still a baby, and shut him in a room with the lights off and left him there for hours. There was another incident where Eldridge exposed himself to a group of his daughter's friends. This is actually really gross, so I'm going to quote Donna Clack, so you don't think these are my words. But she said that her granddaughter had some friends over their apartment. And the daughter, Charles's daughter, she said, do you guys want to see something funny? And then she opened the door and then on the other side of the door, Charles Eldridge was, I guess, basically masturbating all over the floor. So I'm not sure if the daughter just kind of knew he was going to do this and she was just trying to like make fun of him, which is sad

if that's what's normal to you that you know that this is happening enough that you're going to open it up and show your friends like like a circus performance additionally after his arrest eldridge told police that he had engaged in multiple sexual encounters with another child under the age of 13 now like i said he looks like the first sketch but not the second one um so, you know, I'm not sure. Which is a problem. Yeah. Which is a problem, right?

Yeah. It's a problem because that's great. He looks like the first guy again. And I see a lot of people getting caught up on this. I hate to just be that Debbie Downer, but the first sketch does not matter anymore. It was a sketch made on the video. I'm surprised there is as many people as there is that looks like the sketch, but there's a few guys.

But that's the reality of it. And I, you know, I do have to blame law enforcement for this because they left it out there so long. It wasn't like it was a week or two. And again, they don't owe me anything. They left it out there a couple years. And so people really dug down on that sketch and broke it down to its last little inch of who this person could be. And they went out there and they rightfully so, they wanted to help. They wanted to help solve it, right?

Because it wasn't solved. And so I think it's a hard thing for a lot of people to let go of that first sketch when they spend so much time analyzing it. And especially, I feel like there's a lot of people that don't even realize that first sketch is not important now. Because when the second sketch got released, everyone was like, what? There's a second there's a there's a second sketch. And then there was a confusion. And then eventually the police did clear it up. And they said, you know, just so you know, the first sketch that you saw is not important anymore. The second sketch is actually what we're

looking for. But you would have had to have really been following this case like every single article that came out in order to kind of get that clarification and i think some people just didn't get it and they still think that that first sketch and the second sketch are maybe two people who might be involved or you know maybe just different versions like what if bridge guy shaved and lost a couple of pounds and took his hat off maybe this is what he would look like you know a lot of people might not understand that the second sketch is actually the first sketch because that was made just a couple of days after Abby and Libby were found dead. He really is still part of it, but the police don't want him to get nervous So they're pulling they're retracting that and you know We shouldn't give up on that sketch because there's got to be something to it, right? And you know, maybe they're right. Maybe they're right, but there's definitely a a large population of people who have not let go of that sketch at all. They're still holding on to it as if

When we find out who did this uh This person's going to resemble that first sketch. And can you really blame them for thinking that, though? No. Like, that was the only sketch we had for years. So, yeah, you're going to think, oh, the police say it's nothing,

but at the same time, if it was nothing, why would it have been at the forefront of this case for, you know, two years if it was really nothing? So I completely get that they still think it might be valid, and you know what? It might actually still be. That's the thing. We don't know. But I'd like to think that the police are being honest with us in this in this like exact situation, because why would they want us to be chasing somebody that had nothing to do with the case? So hopefully they are being upfront with this. Yeah, hope so. I believe they are for what it's worth. Everyone out there, I believe we, and we hit on this a little bit in the first episode, I believe they got the second sketch that was eventually released first, right? That was from an actual witness. That was someone who believes, you know, they saw this individual after the video was released, after the three frames of

photos released in the video, they believe they saw an individual matching this clothing description and got a good look at his face. So they took a sketch from that person and they didn't release it right away because maybe they were thinking, let's hold this back. We don't want to spook the suspect. Let's keep it internal. Let's try to find this guy. We're probably going to catch him right away. Somebody's got to know who he is. I mean, I think everyone probably felt we got video, we got audio, it's a rural area. We're going to nail this guy. No problem. And so they wanted to keep it in house at first. Well, two years go by and they don't have them yet. And they initially released this first sketch thinking, let's put that out there as a decoy. He's going to look at it and say, I look nothing like that. I'm i'm golden and he's gonna stick around and delphi and not take off to another part of the country

or even out of the country and so oh so you agree with my theory now though that that was just a decoy that that was never who they were looking for i did i disagree with you last episode if i did i apologize you said like oh maybe you know maybe i think you didn't want because that's that's kind of shitty if you think about it like you didn't want to think that for two years, they would have just been showing us a guy that had nothing to do with the case. Yeah. And again, I don't know if I do agree with you. Yes.

And I don't know if I don't know if they were like, listen, they don't know who did it. So there might be a small part of them that's like, hey, you know, we had some video expert look at this video and they broke down a sketch because we believe the sketches off this video. Right. So they probably like, Hey, it's a long shot, but let's throw it out there. Do I think that, and I have nothing to prove this one way or the other, but do I think they knew a hundred percent, the guy looked nothing like that and put it out there to intentionally mislead people. I wouldn't go to that extent because again, when we think about the second sketch, that's based off a witness's perspective. And as from experience, I can tell you it's not always accurate and it's not because the person didn't

try. It also is a contingent on the sketch artists as well. So they probably are looking at it like, Hey, two, two sketches are better than one. Let's throw out the first one, which is just off the video. Let's hold back the second one. And if it doesn't lead anywhere, then we'll release the second one because we need help. And I think that's what happened. But I don't know. It's a great, as far as you're saying, like, hey, they threw it out there as an intentional to throw people off.

100% possible. Because they thought he was local. And they really did from the beginning. They thought that this guy was local. Now, I do want to mention something that Becky Patty recently said. I believe it was in the Down the Hill podcast. She said maybe he wasn't local. They have been advertising the bridge like leading up to when Abby and Libby were murdered.

They had been like trying to do like tourism tourism and advertising the bridge as a cool place. So maybe that drew somebody from out of town. And that's honestly the first time I've really heard somebody close to the case kind of go against the grain of the original narrative that it's someone local. That it must be someone from Delphi or the surrounding areas. Because she's thinking now at this point, maybe it was just somebody who came there for the bridge. I don't know. What do you think about that? I definitely think it's possible. And I think as more time passes, it becomes even more of a possibility, right? Because you have to start asking yourself for the small community who

everyone knows everyone, and you have this video and audio, and yet no one has put forward a person that we know of that appears to be the guy. It's really interesting. And I think as time progresses, you always have to expand your scope. And I know we have more guys to talk about. We have theories, but before we get into that, let's take a quick break. All right, so we're back from break. And as we were just talking about before the break, you don't want to get tunnel vision. So initially, understandably so, I'm sure the general consensus was that this individual was someone local. This is, as Kelsey told us, it's a tourist area, but it's more something that's frequented

by people who are familiar with the area. Me being from Boston, I've been to Indiana a few times, but I didn't know about Delphi. So it's something that I definitely didn't know about Highbridge. So it's one of those things that unless you've been through there, I would even say if you were like a trucker or something, because Highbridge is so far off the beaten path, you've got to go a ways down the trail. And we're going to hit on that a lot later in this episode. Was really diving into the maps. And it gave me a lot better perspective on where this is located in relation to the road, in relation to the parking lot.

You really got to know where that is to know about it. And so I have no issue with them saying, this has got to be a local guy who was familiar with the area, who planned his escape route, who knew the type of people that went there, knew it was a lot of kids. But again, we're sitting here today and yet we don't have someone in custody for it. Doesn't mean they don't have some crosshairs on some people, but nobody's been arrested yet. And so I'm sure the scope has expanded for them. And I'm sure in the family's minds as well, they're thinking to themselves, man, I was certain this was a local person, but now I'm not so sure.

Well, let's go back to Eldridge too, because the way he's described, they described him as a short and stocky GI Joe wannabe who had a violent temper, but he was too damn lazy to work. And Charles Eldridge seems to have had two different social media accounts. So where the first guy we talked about, Etter, it wasn't a lot to connect him to Abby and Libby. Charles Eldridge had these social media accounts and he used to post like hundreds of stories, like story after story every day about murder, sex crimes against children, missing children. And he posted several times about Abby in Libby's case. He shared the recording of Bridge Guy along with a photo of Bridge Guy. So when you look at it this way, and this is interesting, I want to get your take on it.

You've got somebody here who clearly has an affinity for underage girls. He's admitted that he's had sexual interactions with a young girl. He got caught by an undercover detective trying to hook up with a young girl, but he's also on social media sharing stories and trying to help, quotation marks, I'm making air quotes, trying to help get the story out there and share Bridge Guy's picture and stuff. When you look at something like that, does it kind of not fit together? Because normal people like you and I, we want to help. We want to share. We want people to say, hey, do you recognize this guy's voice? Do you recognize this guy to see if it could possibly lead to this killer's capture? But do you think that Charles Eldridge wanted to see Bridge Guy caught? Or do you think that he just kind of got a kick out of these kinds of

cases and involving himself in them? I don't want to be disrespectful to the people that get passionate about these cases, but I will tell you this. There's some weird people out there with a lot of time and I can't even get into the mind of why he would do it. But I can tell you that we have had numerous cases where it's always the same couple players who try to integrate themselves in the actual investigation. They'll literally show up on crime scene. They have the radios in their house or they have them on their iPhones now where we'll get a call out to go to a breaking and entering or homicide and you show up and they're there before you. What are they doing there? Literally, I got to be careful here.

So there was a family. I'll be nice. There was a family that lived in the community where I worked and they were very good people. Their hearts were in the right place. They literally put light bars on their cars. They wore shirts with like badges and they felt like they were the community police. And they were great. They were really good people and they felt like they were the community police. Um, and, and they were great. They were really good people and, and they're still there.

They might be listed as, but they did overstep many times. And I, we all knew them personally. So we would just tell them, Hey, like get back behind the, like, they'd start, like you'd show up at the crime scene, there'd be yellow tape. And then all of a sudden they're at the outside of the old, Hey, Derek, Hey, if you need me, I'll be guarding the perimeter. They got the flashlight in their hand no no joke and i'm like yep you got it buddy you get it and then all of a sudden i'm looking down at like a placard and i see another flashlight hit the placard and i'm like i look up and he's standing

next to me i'm like dude what do you what do you he goes oh yeah that's around go back outside the tape oh yep yep i got you buddy i just if you need anything i'll be right over here you let me know it's funny so you're like walking you're like walking up to the door and you're like hey guys and then you like look around and they're like a couple steps forward and then you walk forward and then you look back and they're like even closer they're just inching right there there's a whole family it's a whole family cousins aunts uncles and they had they have well they were all great there was a couple of them that like you know they'd be you know they would get hired for like bar details and stuff as a security company and stuff sometimes and they would take things a little far we had one guy who um started training

his own dog and threw like a canine logo on his je. Like, I'm like, no, you can't do that. You can't do that. You know, but again, they were harmless. If they are listening, they know their names. I'm not going to say I have a good relationship with the dad. And I think you guys are cool. I think you guys are cool. But there's definitely like a Judd Apatow movie there.

I think potential for that. No, they were cool. And again, I appreciated the fact that they genuinely just wanted to help. They genuinely just wanted to help. But back to your question, there are people like that who do find gratification with these types of cases, they're looking into them for that reason, which just makes them sick individuals. And I had some other choice words for them, but there's also that element to it. So when you see people like that being involved with certain cases that involve children, you have to ask yourself as an investigator, are they doing this to help? Or are they doing this because at night they're looking at this when no one's around because it arouses them?

And it's a question we have to ask and you can't rule anything out. I kind of feel like it's the second option with him because it wasn't just Abby and Libby's case he was sharing, right? So he wasn't just like obsessed with one case. It was all of these cases. So he would seem from the outside observer to kind of be just like me, you know, sharing on Twitter cases when this happens. But in reality, I think that there was a part of him where he was probably getting off on it in some way. And that's

scary. Yeah, it is. And there's definitely things you can do about it. Again, we'll go a little nerdy here. We were trained in basically going into former sex offenders or individuals that we felt might be on the cusp of becoming sex offenders. And we could go in there with a search warrant. We come in, knock it, do a knock search warrant. We have this software where we're able to enter it into the computer. It doesn't change a single hash in the computer. So basically as far as the computer, whatever it was before we touched it, it stays the exact same. We're able to take a digital screenshot of that computer. And then we can use software to identify certain things that we're looking for,

pornographic material, certain websites, pictures of children. And so within like an hour or two, if the guy's really good, they can come in there and identify if that individual has anything on their computer that's questionable. And that's been done a lot. And in some cases you do it, you don't find a single thing. And others you do. Then you got to determine whether it's connected to the case you're working or not. Or is this someone you just have to be aware of? Yeah, that's kind of crazy.

So you could just look for anything on their computers. Yeah, so it's a backdoor. I don't want to give away too much of this stuff, but basically anyone who has digital forensics, when you go into someone's computer, the one thing you don't want to do is even change a single piece of it because then as far as evidentiary value, now it's null and void. So you have to take a screenshot of it without you making one digital footprint, we'll call it, on that computer. Because once you do, now the argument could be made that you put whatever you found on there. So they want to get it beforehand, just like a physical piece of evidence. And then they can take that screenshot and you're able to show that in a court of law exactly what the computer was at this date and time before anything was manipulated. So it's definitely something that is widely available out there. And anyone who's in digital forensics, I know we have a bunch of people from the forensics field that

watch and listen to this. It's a pretty common practice and it's becoming more prevalent with the increase in today's technology and our ability to not only enter someone's computer, but also identify certain material that may be changed or altered in order to try to hide it from law enforcement. They do do that a lot, especially individuals who take part in this type of activity frequently. They can manipulate the files and change the names with a period or something so that it's hidden from most software but now obviously law enforcement is coming back with newer software that detects those changes it's a constant battle right yeah it just feels like as law enforcement

technology evolves then the bad guys figure out how to get around it yeah and you see that now with surveillance footage and stuff because oh yeah yeah yeah. Yeah. That's kind of- But to- That's hard because you're always like, oh, it's great. It's 2021. Everyone's got a ring camera. Everyone's got a surveillance camera on their house. But you see now cases where people are getting around that too.

Yep. Absolutely. And again, there's also the privacy issue because you can't just go searching everyone's computer. There's got to be probable cause to get that search warrant, to have it signed by a judge. And so I don't want everyone being scared out there i will tell you this i'm scared i'm scared well you know what's on my computer it's so bad i will tell you i will tell you that well you're on a you're on a couple lists with the stuff that you search i'm sure i'm definitely i'm sure man

you need you know what you need a vp ip vanish oh i use a vpn don't you worry about that um but but yeah no it's one of those things where i'm sure this isn't the case i'm sure there's people that are way smarter than me that can do it but when we would do it you had to physically be in possession of the computer but i'm sure there's a way to get through this you know the the firewall or whatever and access the computer so we weren't we weren't at level. I remember I went to a basic course at the state police and we were doing it on, um, we had a sex offender registration list that you would have to go check on their addresses certain times of the year to make sure they didn't move in part of their release. If there were a level three was that we could have access to their computers at any time and cell phones. That was part of

their agreement to once they're on that list as it should and so we and we would go in there and we would do a periodic scan and those individuals know it's coming so there's been multiple times where i've been in there and we scan the computer and they're thinking that we're not going to find it and then sure enough there's a secret folder with two or three hundred photos that they've taken from the internet. Um, and then they're coming with us at that point. Oh, a secret folder. Yeah. And they do, they do manipulate the folder. So it looks like it'll say like something as specific as pictures of my cats. And they think, because when you're searching certain keywords that won't hit, right. Cause we're not going

through every folder. Imagine me going through every folder on your computer. We're using algorithms to find certain folders. So they'll change it to like pictures of my grandchildren or my trip to New Hampshire. But then within that folder, but so they try to basically avoid detection through these like very minimal, and that's like a very minimal means of trying to avoid detection there's a lot more advanced stuff but um saw it all the time saw it all the time well as far as charles eldridge goes i mean he's in they have him you know he's arrested um i feel like once again if they could prove he was even in delphi that day anywhere near delphi he would be a bigger person of interest at this point. I don't believe he is

because obviously, you know, he's behind bars. People are still looking for the bridge guy. So it's not I don't think. Yeah, I agree. No, I agree. Now we have Daniel Nations. He was one of the first suspects I can remember being talked about in this case. He was a big person of interest early on. Daniel Nations was arrested in 2017 in Colorado Springs while he and his wife were driving. They got pulled over. They happened to be driving a car that matched the description of one that was driven by a man who'd been threatening several hikers with a hatchet, like threatening to kill them. So when he was arrested, Daniel Nations did have a hatchet in his car. But when he when he was asked if he'd threatened anyone with a hatchet, he responded,

quote, we're not that kind of people, end quote. So he wanted the police to know that he and his wife are not the kind of people that go around threatening hikers with hatchets. Yet he had a hatchet in his car. Now, I do believe Daniel Nations did end up being hatchet guy. And many people believed that he looked like the sketch of Bridge Guy, that original sketch, which we know now isn't actually the original sketch. He was also a registered sex offender with ties to Indiana. He'd been threatening people on a hiking trail. There was somebody who had gotten beat up on a hiking trail. And court records showed that Nations was in Indiana during February of 2017. He was living at the Royal Inn in Indianapolis on February 14th.

Daniel's wife spoke to the Colorado Gazette and she stated that her husband had snapped after they moved to Colorado following the death of his brother. And she said he developed a temper that caused her to be afraid of him. But she also said she knows for a fact he's never owned a jacket

like the one that Bridge Guy was wearing. And at the time of the murders, she believes that Daniel was at a doctor's appointment with her. But in 2018, Delphi law enforcement said, quote, As you all know, we went out to Colorado and spent a little time with him, and he is not a person we care a whole lot about at this time, end quote. There seems to be very little connection between Daniel Nations and Abby and Libby, but because he was one of the very first people who were kind of being looked at seriously by the police and the public,

he was very like, oh, he was harassed. I mean, he doesn't seem to be a good guy, so I'm not super sad about it, but he was definitely one of the people that took up a lot of airtime back in the day when this first happened. Did you hear about him? I did not. I did not. But I can tell you from what you just read to me, again, you asked me about that other case, reading between the lines when law enforcement puts out quotes. Well, it's what they're not saying. What they are saying is they don't care a whole lot about him. So you could take that a couple of ways, but how I take it is we think he's a scumbag, but he's not our guy. So we don't care what happens to him either way,

but we're not looking at him for this. Now, how they came to that conclusion, I'm sure there's something definitive where they were able to go to the doctor's office where his wife allegedly said they were. Maybe obtain some video. You could basically prove that alibi or discredit that alibi in minutes. Go there. Do you have video cameras? Yes, we do. Look at the video cameras. Here she comes. Here he comes. Look at the time stamp. Doesn't look like him or show the camera and he's not there. Or you might have witnesses who were, you know, working that day, secretaries, doctors who could say, yeah, she was here with her husband. So, and I'm sure they wouldn't just go off that one thing because timestamps could be off all these things, but that in conjunction with some other things, coupled with the

conversations they had with him in Colorado, they feel confident that he is no longer their guy. Again, different departments do it different ways. It seems like this police department, their MO is to never definitively rule anyone out. And that may be a CYA, a cover your ass, where they're like, hey, we don't think it's the guy, but we're never going to say no longer a suspect because just in case it is him, we don't want to put our foot in our mouth. But that just seems like the way they do things. It looks like the ISP, the Indiana State Police did say we don't consider him a suspect. In 2018, he actually talked to the Colorado Gazette, Daniel Nations did. And he said, I'm not what they made me out to be. And it says widespread speculation of his involvement in multiple killings sparked

after his arrest in September for menacing locals with a hatchet in the same Mount Hermon area where a biker was murdered. So it doesn't look like Daniel Nations killed the biker or abby and libby but the public did basically find him guilty of of both of these crimes and the isp said no he's he's not a he's not a suspect for what happened in delphi so yeah he still gets and that is something we should talk about yeah and that's it and maybe he's not the guy and you know you've said it a couple times like we're not saying these people are good people and maybe some of this is warranted based on their past transgressions, but the scary side of it is, and I think, I apologize, I don't know his name, but the individual who owns the property where Abby and Libby were found, he kind of looks like the first sketch.

Yes. And he kind of sounds like it too. I remember seeing an interview on 2020, this poor bastard was also a suspect in a lot of people's eyes. This poor bastard. And a suspect in a lot of people's eyes. This poor bastard. And all because he looked like a sketch that wasn't him. And he seems, that guy seems like a good guy. He doesn't have a-

That's not all. They were found on his property. He looked like the sketch. Found on his property. He sounded like the person. He was from Delta. He knew them. He didn't know them, know them, but they were all familiar with each other.

So I get why people kind of took that leap, but he was harassed, right? I get it. That's my point. That's my point. And here's a guy who probably doesn't deserve it, right? Doesn't have a past like this. And that's the problem with putting out sketches because a lot of people will take it upon themselves to serve justice if they feel like they're right. And people, as you probably know way better than me, become very passionate about these cases to sometimes an unhealthy level. And they can do things that not only are not condoned by law enforcement, but could actually end up hurting the case they're trying to solve. So there is a fine line there. I like people being out there,

I like the community being involved, but we're talking about all these different things like Reddit and what we're doing. It is our responsibility to be cautious. And it's just something I felt like bringing up because we do talk about a lot of people, but I think we do it in a way where we're putting out these suspects, but we're also giving both sides to it. We're not trying to lead you guys down any path. No. And we shouldn't be trying to lead you guys down any path, especially one that would, you know, because we know you guys are like loyal and we know that you're passionate about these cases just as we are. So we don't want to be sitting here and saying like, oh, it was definitely this guy because

we know that you guys are going to mobilize and you're going to go after them, which is great because we're powerful together. But at the same time, we don't want to stick you on the wrong person. Absolutely not. Absolutely not. Before we get into this next person, let's take another break. All right, we're back. We have one more guy we're going to talk about. This guy is a freaking piece of work. So we're going to talk about 53-year-old Thomas Bruce. On November 21st, 2018, he was arrested in Imperial, Missouri after a two-day manhunt, and he was charged with 17 criminal counts, including first-degree murder, sodomy, and kidnapping. On November 19th,

Bruce entered a St. Louis Catholic supply store and forced three female employees into the back room where he ordered them at gunpoint to take off their clothes and commit sexual acts. One of the women, a 53-year-old married mother named Jamie Schmidt, she refused to do what he asked. She said no, and he proceeded to shoot her in the head and then ordered the other two women to continue doing what he had asked. At the time of his arrest, Thomas Bruce was described as a heavyset Caucasian male, standing at 5'9", and weighing 220 pounds. And if you remember, it was basically the exact description of Bridge Guy. When Bruce assaulted the three women, he was wearing a gray pageboy-style hat

and a blue Carhartt jacket, which is pretty much exactly what Bridge Guy was wearing. Now, both these crimes, right, Delphi and this one in Missouri, they occurred brazenly in the middle of the day on a Monday just before a holiday. And since we know very little about what happened to Abby and Libby and we don't know if a weapon was used, we both think that a weapon was used, whether it was a gun or a knife. Many people do theorize that Bridge Guy was able to get Abby and Libby to do what he wanted by threatening them with a gun, just like Thomas Bruce had done in his crimes. There's some facts that detract from the theory of Thomas Bruce being Bridge Guy.

He was living in Missouri at the time of the murders in Delphi. That's like almost 300 miles away. His victims that we know of, because there could be others, they were adult women, but he could have other victims. We don't know. Abby and Libby were obviously children, so it's not the same MO. Bruce also wears glasses.

It doesn't look as if Bridge Guy did. However, there are pictures of Bruce like on social media and stuff where he's not wearing glasses. So I don't know if he's just wearing glasses because it's a fashion accessory or if he has contacts or something. We're not quite sure. But when he was arrested, the police were able to recover the clothes that he was wearing at the time of his crimes, the cap and the jacket.

He had tried to get rid of his clothes after attacking the three women, but the police said he did it like really badly, obviously, because they were able to get the clothes. And that leads a lot of people to ask the question of, you know, why he wouldn't have made an attempt to do this after the Delphi murders. Like if it was the same guy, if it was Thomas Bruce and it was the same page boy cap and the same Carhartt jacket, why would he have not tried to get rid of those like he his clothes like he did after the Missouri crime? So I think it's a valid question and if you notice all these suspects we talked about they're all like older guys in their 40s and their 50s but then that sketch that now they're saying is more accurate and a more accurate

representation of bridge guy he looks to me to be much younger than than any of these suspects yeah i mean they are saying that he could still be in late 30s, early 40s. Isn't that a lot of people, what they're saying? I mean, I'm 37. And as you've told me and many others, as many people in the comments, everyone who's questioning whether I was a police officer or not, I don't look 37. I think that's fair to say. But I don't think I look 20 either.

So I think if you did a sketch of me, you could say I'm in my late 20s when I'm almost 40. So it's one of those things where I'm not saying the sketch is inaccurate, and I'm not telling you guys not to look at the sketch, but all I would suggest for anybody who's really involved in this, if you find someone that you think could be the person or you know of someone who could be the person and they don't necessarily look like the sketch, don't let that deter you because there's a possibility the witness did not get a good. We don't know how good of a look this person got at the bridge guy.

And secondly, we don't know if the sketch artist, you know, their level of, I'm assuming it's someone good. I'm not discrediting them, but again, there's some human error there, right? And again, they're going off the memory of this person. We don't know if it was a young individual, an older individual, if they saw a side profile. We don't know any of those specifics. Did they walk right up to this person and have a conversation with them? We don't know. One thing that does throw me off, and I know we've talked about the sketch a lot, it does appear to me that bridge

guy without a doubt is wearing a frigging hat. Yeah. And this sketch does not have him wearing a hat. So my question is, how do we know what his hair looks like under the hat? If you saw him that day and he's wearing the same outfit, cause that's how, you know, you saw, you saw the video, you go, that's the guy that I saw. I walked right by him. Well, he was probably wearing similar clothes. Maybe he had taken off the hat. I don't think he would, but this person suddenly knows what their hair was like under the hat. And I think the hat itself, we can go so many ways with this right now. I know I'm getting off subject, but the hat looks like it covers his ears. It's like one of those like Russian style caps, but like it has a brim, but it has like the flaps over the ear i don't know what that's called i apologize but it's

not like that iris scully that you see in the um in the uh original sketch it's more of something that has like the dog ears on it in my opinion um really you saw like the the ear flaps hold on yeah that's what i see yeah yeah i have one of those hats there. They're real big with Eastern European men. They love them. So that's what I see. So again, this sketch throws me off, not only because of the face, but it's a sketch without his hat. If they threw a hat on that sketch, I bet a lot more people would be like, that's our guy. You know what I mean? I think the hat throws everyone off. It throws me off. I'll be honest. It just throws me off. I'm like, that looks like a completely different person than the person that I see in that video. But listen, check this out. Okay. So what if the person, the witness saw bridge guy after the murder? So he commits the murder. He's got all these clothes on to like hide. He commits the murder and then he takes off the cap and he takes off the coax. I swear he's got layers underneath that. And then that's

when they see him afterwards. So that's the description that they give. So how do they know that it's him if he's in a completely different outfit? How do they make the comparison? Well, they may not know it's him, but if you look at it, they interviewed everybody who was at the Monon High Bridge that day. So you're going to account for all the people that are seen. And then you're also going to cross-reference. So if Linda was at the bridge, Linda saw Jody and Mike and Steve. And so then you go to Jody and Mike and Steve and you're like, who'd you see? And they're like, we saw this. And then you start cross-referencing till you have one person that's unaccounted for. And this one person that's unaccounted for may not be wearing that hat and everything, but he's still unaccounted for. He

was still there at that park and nobody knows who he is and nobody can find him. So that's where you start thinking this is the person who's responsible. So I want to talk about all this. I want to go back to our last suspect before we do, because there's a lot to cover there. The one counterpoint I'll say is you would expect that if he got rid of his clothes, you would have found them because they canvassed that area, I'm hoping, like crazy. And they would have found evidence that he took off some clothes and just left them somewhere, his hat or his jacket somewhere, which then I would completely agree, but they never found it. Maybe they just didn't find it. But if he had discarded his clothes, you would think that with the searches that were conducted, there would have

been some evidence of that. But I do have a theory that would explain why, but we'll get into that after this person. Is there anything else we wanted to cover with this individual? Again, not a good person, but you make a great point. Why wouldn't he have gotten rid of his clothes from, this is four years later, right? And not only that, are we to assume these are the same clothes he wore for the first incident four years prior? Yeah, that's how they kind of made it seem. That would be pretty dumb. That'd be pretty freaking dumb. Maybe those are his crime clothes. I don't know.

You know, Dexter has his clothes he wears when he's going out. Maybe that's what it is for this guy. I don't know. I don't think it's him. Absolutely not. That's pretty dumb. Yeah, I mean, but he got caught, right? He just walked into this store in the middle of the day on a Monday.

And this is clearly like, this is a crime that wasn't thought out either. Thomas Bruce, you know, what a stupid thing to do. No, this person doesn't seem, this seems like it was kind of more spur of the moment. This is a lot more aggressive. Completely spur of the moment. You could argue that if this guy is our guy, right? If he wasn't in Missouri when this happened, this is our guy could be an escalation, right? This could be a form of escalation where he's now become more aggressive, completely explainable. I think the biggest issue here

is the fact that according to police, he was not in that immediate area at the time when this occurred. And therefore, it's physically impossible for him to have conducted this. Yeah. And that's really what it comes down to. Bad guy, just not our guy. And I think some people, when they're trying to find bridge guy, they're going through all these bad guys and they're like, oh, this guy's a bad guy. This guy's a bad guy. There's so many of them out there, you know, and if you're not in this same M.O. But you're not taking into account that there's so many of these crazy murderers and just people who have no respect for life or others' lives. There are so many of them out there and they're all just hiding, waiting to come out of the woodwork. So just because one bad guy has one of those hats on, it doesn't mean he's the bad guy. Unfortunately, that would make everybody's life a lot easier if they all just look the same and we could kind of point them out easily.

Yeah, absolutely. And we're not discouraging any of you from, if you see something that may be helpful to the case, we always advise you, if you think you have something or a person that might possibly be connected, call the police because never assume they already know because they might have a puzzle going and they're missing just one small piece. And you may think what you know is minor, but that could be the thing that breaks the case wide open.

And you won't know that probably ever. But again, I can tell you that if you don't call in or you don't email in, it definitely isn't going to help. It's going to stay in your head. So, you know, for anybody out there, we're not trying to discourage anyone. Keep the names coming. I know they have a lot of people working it. But again, let's just be honest at this point, it's not solved. So they're still missing something. And if you have a person in mind who could do this is not to look at the sketch or look at what they look like, because I think Bridge Guy went to great lengths to hide what he really looked like. I don't think he went out there, you know, as himself. I think he definitely tried to disguise himself. So what I would say to do is, you know, look back at February 13th, February 14th. Is this person that you know, were they not at work that day? Or did they come home late?

Or did they seem to follow the Delphi footage very closely when you've never known them to be into true crime cases before? That's a really big indicator. Do they try to bring up Abby and Libby in conversation when once again, you've never known them to be into true crime like that before? Did they start acting different? Were they, you know, kind of overly sensitive or like like the FBI profile said, did they start drinking a lot or start doing drugs or something like that?

Like any personality change, behavior change and just like their absence on February 13th or February 14th, if you were their employer, if you were their girlfriend, if you were their parents, did the person that you know and you're close to that you think could possibly do this, were they exhibiting weird behavior in those days? Or were they like MIA on February 13th, 2017? That's probably the best indicator of whether or not that person had something to do with what happened to Abby and Libby. I don't think the sketch is really ever going to get us anywhere. No. And that might be our downfall right now, right? Is if that people are focusing too much on the sketch, not seeing law enforcement. Yep. Yep. It's something we can see. Really focus on that video. Really focus on that audio. We played it for you last week. Really focus on those things

because they're open to interpretation, but your interpretation, the sketch itself has been kind of spoon fed to you. We don't know the circumstances in which that sketch was obtained. I'm not discrediting it. I'm just putting out a reality, which if they came out and said, no, bridge guy was still wearing the clothes. This person had an immediate conversation with them. They spoke to them for 10 minutes about the weather. That's a pretty good, it's a pretty good witness. We don't know how minimal this interaction was, which obviously would give a lot more credence to the sketch if it was more, you know, interactive, or it could have been from a distance. We don't, we just don't know. Um, there was a couple of things I wanted to go over with you before we go into theories, just things that as I was

researching, I saw different subreddits on these specific things. One thing we kind of already hit on, we can kind of sum that up. We kind of hit the hat pretty hard, right? The hat, you just looked at the photo again. I looked at that video and photo a hundred thousand times now at the scene. It feels like I, some people say there's no hat. I don't see how you say there's no hat you can clearly see a dent in the top of his head that to me is definitively a a hat people say that's kind of above there's a couple of people are like is he wearing a hat or is that his hair to me again to me it's definitely a hat it's definitely hat i did think from again this is probably because my mind was focused on the original sketch hood it would be like a it kind of looked like maybe it could be like one of those camo hoods.

You know what I mean? That's what some people are saying. Some people are saying, is it a hood? Is it a hat? Is it the front of his hair with it? All good questions. To me, it definitely, and again, it could be the hood, but it looks like a hat to me. It looks like a hat.

And it looks like, like I said, the one with the dog ears with like a brim on it. But, but again, that photo, that video that we're looking at originally it was a three frames and now they've released the actual video. You can go on the site and see the video and it's, the small piece that they have. It's, you can tell, as we discussed, it's zoomed in and it's from an iPhone, an older iPhone. And we're going to dive into the video. I guess we could do it right now. In my opinion, I've changed my interpretation of the video a little bit. And it was funny because I felt this way before you even had a conversation with Gray, but going to the original video and not looking online and finding it from the immediate

source, it seems to me like this video was something that was taken by Abby as they were walking down the bridge. And it was actually a video of Abby. I don't think this was a video. Again, I'm speculating here, guys. Don't kill me. I think this was a video that Libby was taking of Abby at the last platform. So one thing that I took away from High Bridge or Monon Bridge is that, which is scary, by the way, I don't like heights, but there's like five or six platforms along this bridge where they're like, you can literally like step onto the platform and look over. Super scary.

But I guess if you're someone who's not afraid of heights and have been there a lot, it wouldn't bother you. But there's so many things you can extrapolate from having those platforms because they're markers. There's trees, there's these platforms, there's certain identifiable marks that you can actually pinpoint where this person was at a particular time. And one thing that I've taken away from it is this person comes out of nowhere. So clearly they were walking faster than Libby and Abby. And it does appear based on the photo of Abby that Libby did take the still photo that we've all seen, which you really don't see him at all.

And then in the next, what was a photo originally, but is now a video, it looks like it's Abby. It looks like it's Libby taking a video of Abby. And I had texted you and said, could you ask gray? Because in one of the frames, to me, it looks like what is Abby's jacket that you can kind of see in the video frame. And I'm like, that would make sense because this video is super zoomed out. If you look at the last photo we have of Abby, how far away it is that Libby took, and you consider that the video was probably the same size frame. Well, to zoom in that much on the guy who's 20 30 feet away they're they're using zoom and it also looks like they're using a stabilizer and you had said that gray made the comment that

it appeared that based on some of the things they did it was she was one to two feet off the ground when that video was taken no the phone the phone was so one to two yeah it sounds like she would have had her phone in her hand but her hand down next to her side, casual, like not pointing it at someone, you know, because then you know that someone's recording you and you're pointing the phone. So it seemed because I think that he actually went to the bridge and he did like a recreation of it. So it looks like she would have had her phone in her hand, her hand down at her side, and then with the camera lens pointing out. So that's why it kind of looks like this strange angle because it's not straight ahead. It would kind of be pointing up.

It's not. Yeah. Yeah. And I did. I picked up the angle. It looks like they're using a stabilizer as the phone is moving around to keep it on him. Now, we can speculate, a lot of people have, that Libby was taking that video of the man and making it look like it was abby i

would even argue that it was actually a video they were playing around and at this point he may have looked creepy to them or whatever but i don't know if she was specifically taking the video of him because she also could have zoomed in on the camera if she really wanted to focus on him but again it could have been recording each other and then he walks up and says something her hand falls to like look at him and be like, what? You know? And then she continues recording. Right.

But he definitely came up fast. You can see it from the platforms. It looks like from the video, they're at the last platform because that's the only platform you really can't see from those photos. I think there's six. Don't hold me to it. I believe there's six platforms. And you can see that this guy comes out of nowhere and

it really, we're going to get into the theory in a couple of minutes. I think we're going to take one more break, but before we get to that break, it definitely looks like he's wearing a hat. It definitely looks like he comes out of nowhere. And, and to, we talked a lot about the video angle and how it could be high, a trail cam. I'm definitely retracting that comment after further review, even without gray, I can see it. I can see it now. I'm definitely retracting that comment after further review. Even without Gray, I can see it. I can see it now. I see the full video. It's an entirety. It definitely is from a lower level. And even that, it could be, as Gray said, it could be only one to two feet off the ground if she was holding it by her side. So I retract that statement. It does appear that she was moving around a lot and they used some technology to try to stabilize the footage to give you a shot of him which is maybe why i got the

the impression originally that it was an upward angle because they're using some technology to zoom in on it i don't know what it is but you can clearly see it now um but there was one more thing i want to talk to you about you definitely think that abby was in the frame and they cut her out when they zoomed in right that's what i'm saying like to the left right that's what in the frame and they caught her out when they zoomed in, right? That's what I'm seeing. I do too. Like to the left, right? That's what I'm seeing. And that's why I told you to ask Gray because I didn't see a ton on it and I don't think I'm identifying something that is the smoking gun. But to me, it looks like this video is a small portion of a much larger video. I think if we had the real video, the guy, for those of you who can't see it, um, would I'm pinching my fingers together. Like that's why he's so blurry guys.

He's blurry because they had to use some high quality zoom technology, which is, isn't, which is obviously limited by the pixels of the iPhone, but they're zooming in on him so much. You're thinking yourself, why is it so, so many shadows? Why can't I make out whether it's a hat or a hood? I think he was a lot further off in the distance When that video was taken and I think in the original video what you would see is abby walking on the bridge towards libby Um one more thing I wanted to hit with you. Actually, we're right at that mark. I'm looking at the timer Let's take one more break and I got a question for you All right, so we're back from break before break I had a question I wanted to pose to you

And it's about the car right this unidentified car that everyone has spoken about And there's not too many details about it. I wrote some notes here a couple couple things that there was an initial statement about the car, and then there was a clarification because they were kind of vague. They actually misspoke. They originally said it was a parked car that was abandoned later. And so people were like, oh, so you have the car. But in reality, what they meant to say was it was a parked car that was at the abandoned CPS building parking lot, which is a big difference, which is a big difference, right? Not the same. Because if they could only get the car, DNA.

No, right. They got the car. They got the DNA. They got registration, can run a VIN. I mean, that's a lot. This is a lot. They don't have the vehicle. Do you know what the vehicle looks like?

They are not saying from what I read, and if somebody else knows, correct me if I'm wrong, but it's so vague. They're just saying that the car was parked between the hours of noon and 5 p.m. on February 13th, 2017. The location of the abandoned CPS building was 6931 West 300 North in Delphi, Indiana. The building has since been demolished and is now just a vacant lot. But this car, we don't know all the facts. There's a reason why they're focusing on this car. I don't know why. I don't know why. There has been speculation on the color out there. Maybe you have more information on it. I know

some people have speculated. I don't know what's true and what isn't, but there's something about this car that the police are definitely interested in. Why that is, we don't know. I have a theory as to why, which is part of my bigger theory I want to give at the end, but there's something about this car because if you look on the map, and we'll throw the map up throughout this video, John, our editor, I'm sure is hearing this. Make sure we throw the map up, but this CPS building is pretty far off in the distance. It's a little bit ways away from the high bridge. It really is. It's a good, it's a good troop, especially if you're walking. So for them to target this area and this specific vehicle, I don't know what's around there. There's a couple buildings around there. There's a market down that

road. Did they get a video or a photo from someone there that would suggest the guy matching his clothing description walk that way? I don't know. But if the car was there between 12 and 5, that would fit the time in which the crime occurred. It's just so weird that they would say, hey, we want everybody to look out for this car, but they're not telling us any thing about the car. It literally just says, looking for the driver of a vehicle parked at the old CPS DCS welfare building that was abandoned on the east side of CR 300 North next to the hosier Heartland Highway between noon and 5 p.m. Police did not give a description of the vehicle. How are we supposed to find the driver of the vehicle when you're not telling us what the freaking vehicle looks like? This is bananas. Like, oh, let me just walk outside. How many cars do I see? Let me call the Delphi, Indiana police.

It's kind of bananas, right? It almost feels, once again, like just something thrown in there to detract because you're not giving anybody enough to do anything with, nobody, unless you're like a psychic. And you would think that anybody who would have been working in that area, I don't know if they were storing other public vehicles in that area. Sometimes you store tow trucks or snow plows or whatever in a certain area of the state, if this is abandoned property. I don't know if there would have been someone else who would have been there. Maybe they're thinking, because the trails did go further that way, the opposite way where somebody could have walked down that way um but i think they're they're kind of

just throwing something you know darts at the wall and hoping something sticks because how how don't they know do they not have a shot of this building from the camera that they got i don't know i don't think that they have a picture of the car or saw it abandoned i think that people just said we saw this car because i think even kelsey said something like that that she had talked to people who'd seen a car just like parked there for several hours. So I think that probably what happened is people said to the police, well, there was this car that was parked there for several hours. And the police have no idea what the car looks like, just that there was a car there. They have to have some idea.

Like somebody had to have given them a color. But they're probably just like, well, well yeah this is all we have so let's just throw it out hoping that somebody remember something and maybe can give us more information on the car like a make model and a color maybe that's what's happening but yeah i will say this the fact that no one's come forward because i'm assuming there wasn't a lot of cars parked there right maybe there was i don't know so yeah but i'm assuming if i had a vehicle that was parked there on that day because i'm assuming everybody in the area knows what happened and they're probably watching the news. If any law enforcement agent came out and said, we're looking for a vehicle that was parked at that building between 12 and 5, and I'm like, oh shit, that's my car.

The first thing I'm doing is calling. The fact that they haven't announced the vehicle is no longer a vehicle of interest suggests that the person who was parked at that location has not come forward, which can be interpreted's like, listen, if it really was nothing and this was just a reasonable person who was parked there, I'm sure they would not want their vehicle to be on a list like this. And they would have came forward and explained who they were and why they were there for that time. Yeah. I mean, the fact that nobody has said that's my, and we don't know, maybe somebody did say that's my car and this isn't even an issue anymore. Right? We don't know. They have been pretty vague. I would like to think that based on this report, it was in 2019, April 23rd, 2019. You would think that they wouldn't want people going

after this person if they were no longer someone of interest. This is what I will say about this, okay? Let's take it at what it was. It was an abandoned CPS building. Abandoned, as in not active. I don't even think the building- As in really no reason to be there. Yeah, I thought the- It's demolished now. It's demolished now, but it was there, but it was abandoned.

So this was not an active building. If you look at the map, there's not much around there. There's really no reason to be parked the map there's not much around there there's really no reason to be parked there because there's another parking lot where if you were going to go on the trails you could be right in the middle so i think part of it is there's really no reasonable explanation for someone to park that far away from the trail what time and also it just so happens to kelsey dropped them. It was around 135. Right.

So she drops them off at 135 cars there from noon till five. Kelsey said when she dropped them off at 135, there were cars there like there were some people there, but it wasn't that busy. Now, later, Becky Patty goes around like, you know, three to look for them. And she says at this point, it had filled up more people were there. There was cars parked on the side of the road in that makeshift parking lot across from the trailhead. So if somebody's showing up at noon, why wouldn't they park closer to the trailhead? Because there wasn't that many people there when Kelsey dropped the girls off. There was way more people there when Becky Patty went a few hours later. So if they parked in this abandoned CPS parking lot,

that's not super close to the trail. Because like you said, you got to walk a little bit to get to that trailhead from that parking lot, right? That's right. You definitely do. You definitely do. If they were going to the trailhead, why wouldn't they have just parked closer to the trailhead instead of in that parking lot? So that's definitely suspicious if you're parking that far away at noon when there were more places to park closer to the trail. 100%. And I think that's the rationale behind them wanting to learn more about this vehicle because there really is no reason for it to be there.

And then again, you take into the consideration that the timeframe in which it was there would allow this person to travel down to this location on foot, kind of scope out the area, find a point and angle to get an eye on everyone coming in and leaving, and then also time to do what they did. And then what I'm going to get into in a few minutes, as far as theory, get back to that vehicle without being detected or without being seen by many people. And we'll get into that in a couple of seconds. But I definitely want people to understand that on the surface, from what we know, the fact that the police are so interested in this vehicle, and then you take into the facts that we do know about it, which

are limited, but with the facts we just laid out, it's definitely someone that I want to identify. I want to know who was in that vehicle. And they clearly believe there was a vehicle there. How they know that, we don't know, but they seem pretty confident about it. Because not only did they put out an original description, they went back and clarified to make sure people knew what they were looking for, because clearly they felt that was important. But they also didn't tell us about it until 2019. So, I mean, once again, this is two years after it happens. We don't hear about this car until 2019.

At that point, if you're asking people, oh, do you guys remember cars that were parked in this parking lot in 2017? No, no one remembers. It's two years. So even if you're from that area, you're not going to remember what kind of freaking cars you saw in the parking lot two years before. You're not going to have a like, I don't know why they did. I don't know why they did this.

I don't know why they. Yeah. And maybe it was something. It could have been something that came forward later. I don't know. I don't think so. I don't know. It seems like they knew.

I mean. They just held it back. You're going to be interviewing people who are at the park or around that bridge area that day. Like in that day and then in the following days, they said they interviewed everybody who was on the trails and at Monon High Bridge. So that's when you're going to get people saying, well, we did see this car parked here. But then you don't tell anybody else about it until two years later when everyone's memory

is kind of foggy. So I just don't know. No, you're right years later when everyone's memory is kind of foggy. So I just don't know. No, you're right. Should we dive into theories? Okay. So final theories. Again, just preface it.

This is obviously speculation on our part, but it's based on everything that we've heard and researched on our own. And again, everyone's entitled to their opinion. This is ours. So without re-going over everything we've said, I want to pick up from the point where right before he, he encounters them, right? Because we've talked about the fact that he's obviously, in my opinion, if this is the vehicle that was parked at this abandoned building, it gives him time to come through the woods, to come up to that trailhead where the girls and everybody else who's normally parking there is getting dropped off. It allows him to see who's coming in and who's going out. So if Bridge Guy

is sitting there, when Abby and Libby are dropped off, he already knows that he hasn't seen anybody else go down the trail towards Monon Bridge. He knows that because he's been sitting there probably since about one o'clock, maybe even earlier, because it's not that far of a walk from where the car would have been parked if you're assuming that's his car. So he's been sitting there a while, maybe off in the distance, seeing who's coming and going and knowing that when these two girls get dropped off by Kelsey, nobody else is with them and that he's not going to encounter anyone coming back up the trail as he's walking down.

So he allows them to get a little bit of a headstart. They're walking down. He knows there's really nowhere for them to go. And the only way back out is going to be right back towards him. So he starts to gain on them. As most people have speculated, it's clear from the videos in the photo, you know, in one picture, he's nowhere around. And then before you know it, he's right on him. And this is where now it gets grainy because we've heard the video, we've heard the audio, we've seen the video. And my opinion, based on the last video that's taken, Abby is still clearly on the bridge if we're right in the fact that that is her jacket. And we talked about gun, knife, whatever i personally think abby might have even been

standing still at that point for the video or maybe taking one step or whatever as libby is you know now facing her taking this video it might be something funny i don't know maybe she's taking a video of the guy but i would even suggest that she's just taking a video of her friend they were doing multiple candid shots again libby had gone over this bridge many times. This was really a big deal for Abby. And so I think they were memorializing the occasion for her. I think that bridge guy catches up to Abby. Abby's back is probably still turned to bridge guy. I think he pulls out a knife and I'll get into why i think it's a knife over a gun but now the knife is literally right on her back physically on her back where she can see it she can feel it he directs her closer to libby right libby's still recording at this point because

the last time she saw bridge guy he was just walking probably assuming he was going to walk right by her but he doesn't he stops at her and puts the knife to her back or to her stomach. And now Libby, not expecting this, the phone is still recording. So as he walks over to Libby while holding Abby at knife point, he says, guys, down the hill, guys, down the hill. She can see the knife. She's scared. She's frozen. She sees her friends got a knife to her. Abby's upset. They go down the hill. At some point, the phone is discarded, right? I think he might see the phone. He might tell her ditch the phone because the phone is not found with them. So at some point he notices that she has a phone in her hand. This would explain what we talked about last episode as far as the recording stopping. She

had the phone in her hand. At some point you get the guys down the hill. I do feel that if they had more audio of this guy, there would be no reason not to release it. It would only help us identify him, that people help him. They've already released guys down the hill. I don't know if there's much more. And if there is, maybe it's something that they don't want people to hear out of respect for the family. That's the only reason I would say not to release it. Maybe you're hearing Abby and Libby upset, whatever the case may be. But I would think that if they had more audio of him, they would release it so that we would have a better idea of what he sounds like, what he speaks like, does he have an accent, et cetera.

So they discard the phone. They start discarding some clothes. And again, guys, we're going to have the map overlaying a lot of this. What do you mean they're discarding clothes? Well, weren't there some, like her shoes were found? Yeah, but who's discarding the clothes? I'm going to get into it. I'm going to get into it. So there's some shoes taken off and I have a reason why I think that might be. Okay. So if you look on the map and guys, you guys are probably seeing this map if you're watching

on YouTube. If not, you might want to pull it up while you're listening to the podcast. But their bodies were not found immediately down the hill. If you haven't looked at this area, it was about a half a mile walk from, what did we say, Stephanie, from the entrance of the bridge? It was still a far distance away. And it has been concluded, which I was not aware of, that they actually crossed over a portion of Deer Creek and went on the opposite side.

The shoes were found on one side and then they were found on the other side. Yeah. Correct. I think the shoes were taken off to cross the Creek. I do. I think the shoes, I'm not saying reason, but for some reason the shoes were taken off to cross the Creek because they did get wet. There's no doubt about it. So why, why did they, why did this individual have them cross the Creek? Well, I have a couple of theories on that. One, it separates them from anybody who does come up on the trail afterwards. They're further away. If someone were to walk down that way, they more than likely wouldn't cross the creek to where they were because they would get wet. And it's private

property. It's private property. And also, this is a stretch by me, but if they're kind of secluded, bridge guy would be able to hear someone coming through the water, splashing around. It would give him an alert that someone may be coming. Again, maybe I'm giving him too much credit, but this is why I think he would risk getting wet and maybe looking not normal to someone as he's walking back, right? Because now his pants are wet and his shoes are wet. But I have an explanation for that. Now, the next thing we're going to go

into, I want to talk about, this is something that I'm going to give a disclaimer on, okay? Because one, they're not great. They don't sound great at all. So if you don't want to hear about this, this is about potentially how Abby and Libby were killed. And the reason I'm reading it is because it goes in line with the theory that I have as far as how they got there. I do have to preface it by saying this is from a David Erskine, allegedly. Some people have said he's like Abby's step-uncle. Some people have said he's a volunteer firefighter. And supposedly he was one of the individuals that found Abby and Libby. Many of you who know this

case already know about these text messages. They were screenshotted. They appear to be between David Erskine and maybe a family member or somebody close to Abby and Libby's family. I don't know. We've never found it out. And there's a lot of dispute over whether these text messages are even real. So take them with a grain of salt because nobody has ever confirmed that they are in fact real, but I'm going to read them verbatim. And again, this is not for the light of heart. So please, if you don't have the stomach for it, do not listen to this part. Fast forward like 45 seconds. Okay. So the text message starts with David, you told me you found the girls. I just want to confirm the second person with you

was Ivan and the third was a lady? He writes back, no, my sister's husband. And then we call two county deputies, Drew Yoder and Darren Giancola. The next text message is from David Erskine and he says, coroner's report stated everything was over by 3 30 no rape this is one of the big contentions for everybody who doesn't believe the text messages because as a volunteer firefighter or as a guy who found him he would not have access to the coroner's report it's completely sealed i don't know if this is this would indicate they are fake or he was referring to something else or overheard something from someone and he's just relaying it as if he said him himself. Cause he didn't say, I read the report. He just said,

coroner's report stated everything was over by three 30, no rape. Uh, the person responds, but I was told the report was not released. Um, Becky Patty told me the families have not been told whether they were raped or not.

He wrote back. Sure. And, uh, he, and I'm reading exactly. He wrote new K N E W. Um, he wrote sure. And knew what they were doing or not. He wrote back, sure. And I'm reading exactly. He wrote new, K-N-E-W. He wrote, sure. And knew what they were doing with Abby. It was personal with Libby.

Person responds to David, yes, I heard Libby had most of the injuries, but it could be that she was trying to defend Abby. She was bigger. David responds, again, guys, please please if you don't want to hear this this is the time to tune out uh libby's head was an inch away from being taken completely off abby was stabbed in the heart and the text message is kind of cut off here so uh abby was stabbed in the heart and it looks like artery of the neck am i reading that right it really hard to see, but it looks like they say heart and neck. Artery in her neck. Okay. So let's stop there for a second. And I'm going to explain. This would explain the theory that I have as far as going down there. So he's walking with them. The knife is always close to Abby because that's who he first encountered. So as I said in the

last episode, and we talked about this, I didn't understand why once one of the girls were starting to be hurt, why the other one wouldn't run. Were they detained? Were they restrained? Were they unable to run? My best explanation would be that when they got to the point where he wanted them, he quickly stabbed Abby, fatal stabs, because he realized he wasn't going to be able to control both of them. So if he quickly stabs Abby in two locations that would be fatal, she's no longer a threat. And now he can deal with Libby and he can do what he wants to do a little slower because he only has one person to control. That's where I'm getting the theory that one, it was a knife because nobody

in the area heard any gunshots. And two, you have these types of text messages. And again, it would allow him to be more lethal without being detected, which clearly this murder was premeditated in my opinion. The text messages go on. Libby was nude. Libby's top half was covered with leaves and sticks and almost like she, they were trying to cover her up. It goes on to say, but you said there was no rape. Is there a, if there was a rape, there would be, there is no DNA. If there's no rape, there's no DNA. He wrote back. Correct. I don't know why she was nude, but I read the coroner's report. Okay. He does say I read the reporter's report here. The only, only DNA would be from Libby's fingernails. She fought like hell and again

That's what he says and then I'm gonna read the last pop. But yes, but maybe the DNA they were referring to That may be the DNA they're referring to please again. I'm struggling to read these and they're so they're like screen They lay screenshots of screen screenshots of like the phone um to like pictures of the phone and then they talked about i don't want to read these other ones he talked about um you know i guess there were some photos circulating that might have been libby and abby's in this person said do you believe this is real and he said no that's not her nor libby abby was placed there on the ground like a doll, a hood up and hands folded, wearing the same clothes as in the pic. Again, I think you can explain this from the injuries. I think that she might've been walking. He makes a decision unbeknownst to them that this is the spot.

He quickly stabs Abby. And when she falls, the hood goes up. I don't know what the hands may have naturally fell that way, but it would explain why one didn't get away. And we had that question where we were asking it last week, right? Yeah. I'm reading some of these other messages. Did you see the one where it says, Becky Patty told me the families have not been told whether they were raped or not. And then David allegedly says she lied to you.

But then the other person responds. Also, Abby survived until the next day. She tried to crawl away. I don't believe that. Yeah. I don't believe that. Yeah, I don't believe that. So do we believe any of these then? That's why I'm saying take it with a grain of salt. I personally think there's some truth to it.

But I think what happens is, again, this could be a person who knew a portion of the story because they were there. And now they feel like they're the authority on this case. And so they want to divulge information that where it's not really fact, they're speculating. But I did see that. And I don't see how she would have, if she was stabbed in the heart and she was stabbed in the artery in the neck, it would be over very quickly. But there's one more thing I want to get to, and then I want to hear your opinion on it. And obviously if you disagree on any of it, when you look at the map, I tried to ask myself, other than being across the creek, other than being away from noise, not being heard if they scream or whatever, what would be

the other reason for it? And for me, if this was premeditated, I would think that this individual, after killing these girls, knowing that this bridge is a popular area, would most likely not want to walk back up that bridge and back down that trail because there's a chance someone's going to see him. He's going to walk right by him face to face, and there's going to be multiple people who see him leave, maybe get in a car. If you're looking at the map, and anyone who's watching on YouTube, you can see this, but I'll try to explain it if you don't. Where they were found is about a half a mile from the entrance. It's north of the Monon Bridge. If you look, a very small wooded area there, all you got to do is cross through that and you can get out to Delphi Cemetery. It's right there, right on 300. And so it's a short walk where you could walk out towards the cemetery

or you could stay in that wooded area all the way along Deer Creek on the opposite side of the trails. And yeah, it's a bad walk. You're going through some thick stuff, but you could get out at some point without ever going back up those trails, which avoids you being detected by anybody else, which avoids anyone noticing that your pants are now wet and your sneakers are wet. And it allows you to escape and walk up 300 back to your car that's not in the parking lot. And that's my theory on it. Again, just a theory, but I think it would explain why we have such a lack of witnesses that saw this guy because he didn't want to be seen.

Well, he definitely didn't want to be seen. I mean, that's why I think he definitely disguised himself. It was way too warm that day to be wearing all those clothes and layers. And, you know, whether or not he has a hat on or a hood, I keep looking at the picture and I'm like, sometimes it looks like a hood. He could even be wearing a hat with a hood pulled up over the hat, but he's clearly trying to disguise himself. And so you think that he was waiting to see who was getting dropped off, saw Libby and Abby and followed them up? Oh, yeah. He was looking for victims of opportunity and not only victims of opportunity that he could overtake, but also in a situation where nobody else would witness the act, right? Like if someone,

I hate to say this, but if someone had pulled into the parking lot right after Libby and Abby and were on that trail as well, they're probably still alive today. But he had been watching that trail. He was there before them. He knew that in the last half hour, nobody had walked down that trail. So nobody was coming back. They get out of the car. There's nobody behind them. He lets them get a little ways ahead. He sits in that parking lot or in a wooded area, sees that no one's coming behind them, and then starts to kick it into high gear and walk at a fast pace to catch up to them before they get back across the bridge. Because then if they get back across the bridge,

now they have options. That's my takeaway. That's why he was walking at such a fast pace in comparison to them. So do you think this was the only day he's done this, or do you think he went there other days? It's so funny you asked that. I thought about this last night, and you know what, there's a real possibility that this could have been the first time and it just happened to work out for him. But there's also a real potential that he could have been doing this for weeks. Which is more likely. Not months.

In your opinion. I don't know. I'm not a profiler. I'm not a profiler. And you know, I would like to think that if he had been there multiple times and this was his disguise, someone else from a previous occasion would have saw him sitting there or walking and said, I saw that guy two days ago. And maybe that did happen, but we don't know if it did. If it did, then yeah. If somebody who gave a statement that the police have where they say, I saw that same guy two weeks prior, well, then we know he was casing the place for weeks. There a picture um there's a picture of a guy in lafayette which is close to delphi um he's at like a playground he's sitting on a sitting on a bench he looks just like bridge guy and the picture was taken in april of 2017 so just a

couple months after so and i mean i'm gonna find the picture i'm gonna send it to john so he can put it in here for for youtube but it looks very similar, right? So you have to wonder, does he just kind of maybe live in the area? But when we say area, it could be five, six hours away from Delphi and maybe on days off, right? So this was a Monday. It was a holiday. Kids were off from school, maybe on weekends and school holidays and stuff. He goes and hangs out at these parks and he finds isolated places that he can kind of pick his victims and then go from there. And I think the truck driver angle is really one

that doesn't get looked at enough. It's very possible that he was somebody who drives far distances for work and it gives him the perfect hunting grounds because he's there and then he's gone the next day. Nobody knows him. And I mean, I know law enforcement says that they believe that this person is local and for them to so vehemently kind of stay with that story, I feel like they

have to have something that leads them to believe that, that we don't know. But it is also very possible that this person could just have been passing through. It's possible. I think part of it is when you look at the map and guys, if you're watching the audio version, I strongly recommend you check out the YouTube video or Google it yourself. But there's a long trail before you get to the bridge, a long trail. There's no way to know that these girls are not only on that trail, but also alone on that trail. Unless you're there, you would not drive by and say, oh, the bridge is right next to the

parking lot where they were dropped off. So you can see it from the parking lot. You cannot so this guy Definitely was in that area before them and knew for a fact that they were a wonder why he didn't take Libby's phone. I think he might have felt like we felt I mean listen I'm gonna be honest with you guys and some people might not like this this guy might be smarter than we think He really might be he seems like he planned this out if he parked his car at that distance, when you can see on the map, goes all the way, has a premeditated

path to get out of the woods without being seen. There was some planning. There was some planning that was done. That means this wasn't his first time though. Probably. It could be possible. I mean, could it be connected to other murders in the area or other attempted murders or other attempted sexual assaults? Absolutely. And I'm hoping they're looking into that. I'm sure they are. But it does seem like this guy put a little bit more.

He wasn't just at the trail that day going for his normal walk and had this urge that suddenly came over him that he'd been trying to suppress for years. This guy went there with this intention, and that's proven by the amount of clothing he was wearing that didn't suit the temperature and also having that knife on him ready to go to carry out this, you know, this act. He was ready for something, and I just looked it up because I couldn't remember where I read it from. But the former Carroll County prosecutor, Robert Ives, he stated that the investigators witnessed at least three signatures left by the killer, along with a lot of other unusual evidence. And then the article goes on to say, a signature is often left by serial killers who have developed over time a specific method of assaulting, murdering, or opposing a victim. So they never really say what these signatures are,

what this unusual evidence is, but apparently they have enough to kind of make this statement that these are signatures and this is a possible serial killer, which is terrifying because that means it's not his first time and it won't be his last either. And I'm sure behind the scenes, they're comparing those signatures to past murders that were solved and unsolved to see if there's, or even not only past, but also future murders that

happened after their deaths, after Abby and Libby's death, where he could have continued this trait. So it's just giving me like West Memphis three vibes though. Like the way that somebody just came in out of nowhere. West Memphis was a small town. These kids often played in these woods. There weren't a lot of strangers wandering about. And then all of a sudden these three young boys are dead

and nobody knows even to this day who did it. Yeah. I personally, I think it is someone who's familiar with the area. They may be a reclusive, again, not a profiler, but they may be someone who's a reclusive person. Someone who obviously has some serious mental issues who doesn't go out of the house much. But when they do, they have a purpose. And the way this is laid out, I just don't see how it could be some random person driving down 300 that would choose this location. Because again, from the parking lot, you wouldn't be able to see your victims. You would have to say, oh, that's a cool lot. Let me go look at that one and then hop out. And then yeah, maybe they saw it and decided to come back. And that's why they did it because they knew they were going to be moving on to another location completely possible. Um, but this would appear

to be someone who was familiar, not only with the trail, but the, um, the things around the trail, like the cemetery, like, you know, Mary Gerard's natural Nature Reserve, the abandoned CPS building. This is something where either this person's not from the area and they did a lot of research and reconnaissance, or they just knew the area and they knew from past experience, maybe as a kid or whatever, how they could get through the woods and get to the cemetery without being seen. Yeah, I agree. Just because they're familiar with the area doesn't mean they live in the area, right? Right, right. They could have put some research into it.

They could have. What do you think about all that as far as, I mean, as far as the knife, the creek, and as far as going out, maybe not coming in, going out the same way they came in? I definitely agree with that, especially given where he was parked, right? Yes, if that's his car. If that's his car. But even if it's not his car, even if he's parked somewhere else that we haven't identified. Yeah, I can't imagine why he would park right there if he's going to do this. Yeah.

So he definitely parked someplace further down. And then he knew once he crossed that creek, he wouldn't have to go back and take the normal route and risk getting spotted. He could just make his way through. Because like you said, there's trails that go all the way down there. And I disagree with you on one point, which I do think that there's more audio and video that the police have that they just haven't released. So what would be the reason and why? Because I don't...

I don't know. See, I wrote down a question for you. Do you think they should be releasing more from the video? What's the reason why? I don't know. I mean, they could be saying things, but that's another reason why i don't know i mean it they could be saying things but that's another reason why i don't think abby and libby knew their killer because if this dude had walked up and they were recording it they would have said hey mr johnson or what are you doing here

barry yeah yeah i don't know john douglas sorry but i can't i don't think there was much conversation i don't i personally think they haven't released more video because again i think in the grand scheme of the video this guy was like in a corner you know and he wasn't the focus of the video i know people want to believe that libby picked up on it and started recording because of this guy i think she was recording to memorialize this occasion that abby was doing an amazing job walking across this bridge and conquering her fear. And I think the video just happened to capture their killer. And I think when it did finally capture the killer, he was only 10, 20 feet away from Abby walking at a fast pace, immediately walked behind her and walked over to Libby who wasn't far from Abby. And that's where you hear guys get down the hill. If there is more audio, that's the video portion of it. If there is more audio, I don't see a rational reason if it's not something that's

going to just crush the family, why you wouldn't release it if it gives us a better... Because the more data you have about how this man speaks, maybe one certain word you hear, if you know this person, triggers something. They've kind of said, though, that they have more. Did they? I mean, there's got to be a reason why they're not releasing it. There has to If you know this person, trigger something. They've kind of said, though, that they have more, you know? Did they? I mean, then they should. I mean, there's got to be a reason why they're not releasing it. There has to be because they want to solve this case as bad as we do.

And there's got to be a reason. And I would even go on a limb and say a justifiable reason why they're not releasing those certain words. It's either out of respect for the family. There's something in it that if there is anything else, they're choosing not to. So what I'm wondering is, do you think that if he was doing what you say, following them since the trailhead, it's possible that they noticed him? Because like you said, it's a pretty long way from the trailhead to the bridge. It's very possible that they could have figured out he was there behind them on their way through the woods, on the trail going towards the bridge.

And they're just like, whatever. And then as they're on the bridge and they see him again, now they're like, all right, this guy's here again, still. And maybe that's why she pulled her phone out. I don't know. It's hard to tell. It's really hard to tell. They were stopping a bunch, too. They were stopping a bunch.

Like we were saying about the platforms. It looks like from what I was seeing online, I think it was even great. Hughes was one of the things where Libby had stopped on one of the previous platforms to take that photo that we all know of Abby. And in that photo and, and gray Hughes, I think it was him that disputed this.

You know, some people believe you can see bridge guy off in the distance. He's disputed that. I said, no, it's just a, it's just a weird looking tree so in that shot there's i believe it's around two o'clock no there's no bridge guy so he was moving and in conjunction

with him coming out of nowhere they kept stopping to take photos until he definitely waited at the entrance to the bridge until they got basically almost all the way over the bridge and there was no turning back and here's the other thing. There's other trails there. Who's to say he wasn't following on a parallel trail in the woods where as soon as they got on the bridge, he popped out. Maybe he wasn't walking right in plain sight. Maybe he's walking in the edge of the woods off that trail. As soon as they're on the bridge and there's no turning back, all of a sudden there goes from being no one in the picture to here's bridge guy halfway across the bridge this was planned this was definitely planned it wasn't like he saw them and they just

all happened to be there and he said this is my chance this was something where the minute they got out of their car they were targets people that theorize he has got some sort of like fanny pack on in the picture and that's where he's yeah i saw it i mean it kind of looked like if you're if you're a bridge guy it would be on his right hip sort of listen we could talk about this video for probably four or five hours there was even something where i started my mind started to play tricks on me where one hand you know i guess it's reversed like one hand is in a pocket the other hand is not so is that other hand under his jacket and that's where he's holding the gun or knife at that point like i mean

you could speculate all day long and the image will start to play tricks on you yeah if you look at it long enough it definitely does yeah i can see now looking at him that that is possible that he is younger and he does look more like second picture, which is actually the first picture than than the first picture, which is actually the second picture. I can see that now I can see the younger features. I just I think he was definitely trying to appear to be older, though, the way he walked, the way he dressed, the way he kind of had his shoulders hunched up like this is somebody who's trying to disguise their true mannerism. So like you said, he may be a lot smarter than than we know. that sucks that's that's not good news not good news for

for this case i i have a hard time believing at this point that we'll ever know who he is and i'm sorry to leave off on such a negative note but i don't think that we'll ever figure out who he is it's just really and that's gonna it's to be hard for the families, of course, but also there's so many people out there now who've invested themselves in this, hoping to find some answers, hoping to help solve it. And I just feel like it's going to be such a fruitless sort of endeavor at this point, because he clearly covered his tracks pretty well. Yeah, it's possible. I hope you're wrong. I hope you're wrong. I hope for Kelsey's sake and for the family's sake that you're wrong and that this person makes a mistake.

You know, it is getting to a point where- It's possible they could offend again. I mean, I think they will. Yeah. That's the hope. I hope this person makes a mistake, makes a spontaneous utterance to someone they trust. I don't think that's going to happen. I don't think they're going to make a spontaneous-

I don't think so either. I think they'll be caught in the act or they'll leave DNA next time and they may get caught for other crimes and it never gets connected to Delphi. That could possibly happen too. And that's another thing, DNA. We don't know exactly how much DNA is in this crime scene. And we have talked to some people, we're going to leave that stuff out because we don't want to go anywhere with it. But there's a possibility that maybe newer science and technology can take whatever they do have and do something with it. We see it happening all the time. I just talked to a few weeks ago with you guys about how people are using fingerprints now

to identify what you ate for lunch. I mean, we never know what's going to happen with science and something that may seem invaluable today may be the smoking gun tomorrow so my thing to the family first off and again i'm sure you have a lot to say is um thank you to you to connecting us with kelsey kelsey is so strong for doing this we hope we did justice by this case covering it at length it takes a lot for her and her family to continue to go out there and retell this story because every time they do, they're reliving it. And so I did hear from you and from others that Kelsey has been getting a little bit of heat and not that I don't know how much weight it carries, but leave her alone. Leave her alone. That's coming from me. Leave her alone. The girl has been through enough she's a sweetheart for some reason leave her the f alone leave her the f alone um and you know i didn't see it personally

but i obviously trust you stephanie and so leave her alone she doesn't deserve it the family doesn't deserve it they didn't ask for this and they're doing this not for you know notoriety or fame they're doing this to keep their sister and abby's story alive so that hopefully one day someone who didn't know about the case now does and can help solve it. That's the reason they're doing it. No other reason than that. If you know any information from this case and you think it might be helpful, but you're not sure, go with your gut. Tell someone who can actually do something about it.

Call the Indiana State Police. Call the FBI. Call someone. Don't keep it inside because the worst thing that happens is that it's not valuable, but let them make that decision. Yeah, we appreciate you guys hanging with us for so long. You can actually send tips using Abby and Libby tip at C-A-C-O-S-H-R-F dot com, or you can call 844-459-5786. And if law enforcement needs more information about the tip, they'll contact the person who submitted it.

So there are ways to get a hold of somebody. We really appreciate you. Obviously, as I was researching something while we were recording this, I saw somebody posted something on Reddit. And they're like, I don't think Stephanie and Derek know what they're talking about on Crime Weekly because of this, this and this. Of course, there's going to be a million things about this case that we don't know about simply because they're obscure or they've only been released on certain places in the Internet or their speculation. But we're all here in the same place. We know so little. So a lot of what we say is just our speculation and our opinion. And to be fair, we can't be wrong about that because we don't know the truth. Therefore, you don't know that we are wrong.

So we're just doing our best. I think anybody could, we get a lot of comments from people about wanting to start their own podcast. And one of the number one things I can tell you is all you can do is be authentic to who you are. Try to be, be sincere, be truthful, don't sensationalize, and understand that you're not always going to get it right. And there are going to be people that don't agree with you regardless of what you say. And it's okay to say you don't know, or you don't know everything.

And that's what we've done. And I know that that's not what you guys want to hear. You want us to have all the answers. And I wish we did, but there are just certain things we just don't know. And it's okay to say that because it's the truth. Absolutely. And we only want what's best for the family. And we don't try to say we're the authority on anything. There are other podcasts like Down the Hill. There's Gray Hughes. There's many other people who've dedicated their lives to this particular case. We are not doing that. We're Crime Weekly. We do the best we can. We try to always vet everything we can vet in the time that we have. But we understand that there are people probably on Reddit who know more about this case than us because that's the only case that they're covering.

Which is great and super helpful. And I appreciate you guys for that. But we're not going to have as tight of a handle on it as those people are, unfortunately, because we have to keep going and keep pushing. But we appreciate you guys being here. Absolutely. We hope it helped. We hope that someone got something out of this. Maybe something that we said tonight helps down the road. Either way, our thoughts are with Kelsey and Abby's family, everybody involved with this. It's one thing to hear about

it. It's another thing to start researching it and coming up with some of the things we came up with. And it's just a tragic story that I hope for everybody's sake, this monster is caught soon and has to answer for what he did. And hopefully he doesn't take the coward's way out when he eventually is caught. Thank you guys so much for being here. Stay tuned for next week. We'll have a new case coming your way and we'll see you then. Bye.

Take care.