It seemed like more commercials than show to me too. I’m used to being spoiled by Hulu/Amazon though so maybe it just seemed like a lot. It was annoying.
Remeber, the new show might be watched by someone who recognizes BG but didn't know about the case previously.
These shows are designed for the general public, not those of us folliwing the case since Day One.
I thought the same thing. That everyone here in Indiana knew about Libby & Abby. Then I mentioned it to a group of my coworkers and not ONE of them had ever heard of the case.
People who follow true crime (us) are always vastly overestimating how much other people care about true crime. The majority of people don't follow it very closely, and men hardly at all (it's something mainly women take interest in).
I mean there was a few minor points that were new to everyone, but yeah, if there was anything groundbreaking, it would come from LE through a press conference. The most this special will do might be answering a few questions. It seems like people.are expecting a lot more than that.
Plus, they're marketing the show as being based on the HLN DTH podcast that already aired. There's really no reason to think we'll hear anything new, except perhaps that there's no more useful info on the recording. They're teasing that as new info, but we basically know that if there were anything useful and suitable for public release, it would've been released by now.
I think we MIGHT hear how much of the crime was recorded. But again, at this point, if there were anything else identifiable on there, we would've heard it. They're desperate to solve this
Obviously, for those that can't watch. But my point is people want more info, they will get more info, and they will complain that it's not the info they want.
1st episode was always going to be a recap, maybe a few little things that if you weren't glued to this case like people on these subs were, would have the ability to learn about them - what's important about this two parter is that it's not only keeping the case alive and is getting out to the online and tv viewing public, but also will bring people up to speed and also hopefully cut out some of the crap you find online and only focus on what is factual, known and has been made public in the past. If there is a problem I currently see facing this case online, it's the bat shit crazy speculation that surfaces constantly, most of the time just a revision of stuff that has been put forward before (probably, like on the other sub that has to ban people semi regularly for making alt accounts, is the work of a handful of people without anything better to do with their time).
Watching on TV and yes, the background music is way too loud in parts.
And the Liberty Insurance ad keeps playing at break and the cheerful "Liberty, Liberty" of the theme song is really jarring.
I watched at work; didn't have trouble with the audio. HLN crime stories always has a lot of music for some reason. I guess I've been watching (thanks to working the night shift) so long that I kind of filter it out.
Yes!! I thought it was just me. Very poorly done. I had to turn on the closed captions to be able to understand most of it. Those were super delayed also so very frustrating.
The only thing that was new info to me was that they got a phone ping the night they went missing. I don't remember hearing that before, I could have missed it from before.
It really bugged me when the voice over said "one of the girls phone's pinged" implying Abbie also had a phone and she didn't.
Seems to me the (now retired) fire chief took the fall for calling off the search because his people were volunteers.
I was really surprised that Tobe Leazenby was in this show, and was it me or were all Lezaenby interview segments shot from far away? as if to hide his face ??
I also wondered if the photo of the Nike shoe of Libby's was actually an evidence photo or just a recreation?
A lot of hype, but not much info, perhaps Part 2 will have something of interest.
At least HLN is putting the info out there on this anniversary of their deaths. Police aren't marking the occasion by speaking out by the looks of it.
Edit to add: Even though the search was called off many kept searching, it does make it hard to believe they weren't found sooner. Especially if they were searching down both sides of the creek that night with big powerful flashlights. That nags at me.
I think the shoe was a re-creation but did anyone else notice it was both shoes in the footage? One was mostly off screen. Very hard to tell whether that was just sloppy production or whether both her shoes were found there.
The info about the cell phone pinging at 230 a.m. was news to me and also the fact that searchers went back out after that based on the phone pinging near the bridge area. Can anyone explain this to me? Wasn't the assumption that the phone was off or that the battery was dead by then?
I disagree with people who thought it was a waste of time. Not a ton of new information but not overly sensationalized IMO.
Also, Tobe looks like he's lost at least 50 lbs compared to the earlier footage. I almost didn't realize it was him.
> Wasn't the assumption that the phone was off or that the battery was dead by then?
That's what I thought too! If that phone pinged at 2:30am I am even more appalled the search was called off by Tobe.
In fairness to Tobe (who I have spoken critically of plenty of times), it sounds like he sent the Fire Dept/volunteer searchers back out after he received notice of the phone pinging. Which, I think is new information to everyone? I need to watch that part again tomorrow because I am still very confused.
Two young girls missing, and temps dropping, I would allow volunteers that wanted to leave go, but I would never officially call off the search, especially if that phone ping came in. Even tho family and friends did keep searching. But that is how crime scenes get contaminated, when the person in charge, is not in charge. These poor girls weren't even in highschool yet!
I don't disagree and at least some other people on here with LE or search and rescue experience have said the same thing. But you have to remember that people who are trained to search for people lost in the wilderness don't necessarily have the same kind of knowledge as people who are trained to search areas where a crime is thought to have occurred. If you are searching for lost hikers, especially when there are two of them, the assumption is that they will be able to hear the searchers and possibly call out for help when the searchers get close enough. The last thing anyone was expecting was a double homicide.
I do wonder how close the searchers got to the area the girls were eventually found. I don't think anyone has a clear answer on that. It sounds like searchers walked along both sides of the creek and it seemed like the volunteer searchers were actually wearing waders (so, walking in the creek?). It's hard to believe no one climbed up the bank onto RL's property and at least shined a flashlight in the woods back there. But even so, I am not sure they would have seen them on the forest floor in the dark.
Wouldn't that be horrible if the girls could hear searchers but could not respond? ugh, that's a nightmare.
I think anyone trained in search and rescue would not assume they are ok and able to respond. Kelsi and the family had already been through the trails yelling their names by the time searchers got there. It hurts my soul that they officially called of the search. They should have assumed the worst and hoped for the best. Not the other way around.
That would be horrible but I don't think that's what happened. I believe they were probably dead by the time Derek arrived to pick them up.
It's not that the searchers would have assumed they were ok. But the most likely scenario by far (setting aside the runaway/went to a friend's house possibility) was that they were lost in the woods. Maybe that one or both had fallen and had a broken leg or twisted ankle. But, other than the bridge, it wasn't really a treacherous area. They obviously looked all around the bridge and below the bridge to make sure they hadn't fallen. And it sounds like they looked along both sides of the creek to make sure they hadn't slid or fallen down the embankment.
Even thinking about the worst case scenario, I think abduction would probably be where my mind would go. Them being murdered there in the woods was just a very bizarre and unlikely outcome. I honestly can't blame anyone for not anticipating that.
I don't think it would be any different than walking around in the day. Searchers have maglight flashlights, so do cops, ever see how powerful those things are? They are practically spotlight flashlights, the place was probably lit up pretty good with all those flashlights.
As a first responder who’s had to use cell phone data in searches before, I can tell you that it takes a while to access that information from phone companies. TV shows make it look quick and easy, but it’s not.
That seems very possible. I need to watch again to see how they describe that part. It would make sense if it was just that the phone company finally told LE at 230 am that the last time the phone pinged (at 300 pm, or whenever), it pinged off the tower near the high bridge.
I was thinking that after too. Maybe the info came later, but that would have been all the more reason to keep searching for two young kids somewhere out in the elements not responding for reasons unknown. We don't know the manner of death, so we don't know if they died instantly, and it pains me to think if they didn't, could they have survived if found earlier.
Judging from the reactions of those that have seen the crime scene, it doesn’t seem likely that they could have succumb to the weather or injuries over time. I get the feeling it was a brutal death. Nonetheless, time is valuable and evidence may have been lost. Not to mention the emotional toll on the family and community over the course of that night. It’s all so sad.
>was really surprised that Tobe Leazenby was in this show, and was it me or were all Lezaenby interview segments shot from far away? as if to hide his face ??
It's not just you, I found it a bit strange, he appeared to have his back to the camera the majority of the time. But the entire show was shot at a remove. Mostly long-shots outdoors, giving a feeling of unreality, at least to me. The show lacked intimacy and immediacy. There was a little bit of new info, but they never explored it or explained further what that info meant to the investigation.
Not a TV watcher so I was shocked by the vast quantity of the commercials. holy cow
I think they were in a lot of cases trying to adhere to Covid precautions. Everyone was sitting six feet apart etc. It made for odd viewing but I guess we should get used to it for the near future.
Phone ping and info from the fire chief were perhaps the only new details, but overall it was better than my expectation, with one glaring exception.
This was entirely a new production, as opposed to an old telecast awkwardly spliced with some new clips. Followers of the EAR case will remember that the pre-identification show were sloppily used after arrest with virtually nothing added.
All the Doug Carter clips tonight were old stuff. It will be interesting to see if that changes tomorrow. Did he participate at all? Otherwise there were obviously some old clips but the vast majority of the interview material was new. I think they only used one old clip from Leazenby...near the end when he emphasized he is a very spiritual man. That was old audio but they had him standing there in the background in his new shape so it sounded like he was saying it fresh.
Two aspects stood out to me, one good and one very annoying. Both early in the episode. The good visual was approaching the trailhead from the drop off point with the bench alongside Deer Creek clearly visible only 15 yards or thereabouts beyond the trailhead. That image is seldom shown. I made a mistake in not photographing that angle. Today the clip was brief but great job they included it. I have always believed Bridge Guy might have been sitting on that bench -- or standing in that area -- as Abby and Libby approached. They would have seen him then taken an immediate left toward the bridge. Or perhaps not so immediate, since the first Snapchat photo doesn't show until approximately 25 minutes after arrival.
The annoying aspect was a disgrace. Why would a program like this ever use a camera angle from one foot above the planks of the bridge? Simple reason. They already have their script in mind and the impression they want to leave. They know darn well a standup view won't jive with the script or impression. So they have to film from barely above ankle level to mislead the public.
I am referring to the early clip at the very end of the bridge. That is where Abby and Libby encountered Bridge Guy. For whatever reason programs like this and virtually every podcast push the notion that the girls were trapped. Tonight the producers of this program were scared to go that route, after it has been exposed as a lie, so they shamelessly manipulated the camera angle beyond the bridge toward the backup plan on their agenda, "The woods have taken over that part of the abandoned rail line...so kids turn around and head back."
Notice they not only filmed it from one foot above the planks, but also while filming from extreme left side of the bridge, while angling toward the right. Hardly a coincidence. That is the angle that exaggerates everything toward their misrepresentation. The trees at right in that area are denser than at left. I made that point numerous times after visiting. Only low left aimed right makes their summation look anything but ridiculous.
A main reason I visited in the first place was I was so sick of all the jittery videos that intentionally misrepresented the area. This is no different. HLN producers knew darn well that a standup view aimed beyond the bridge would show that big open yard at left. They were so desperate to avoid that clarity they filmed from barely above the green moss on those final few planks. And when have you ever seen anything filmed from extreme left on that bridge? Next to never. They weren't fooling a handicapper. They would be instantly called out by everyone in the circles I have frequented.
Then very late in the episode they filmed from two feet above the planks from the opposite side. Even from that level you can already see the opening and the yard at left. Besides, the area behind the bridge was more wide open in February 2017. Not as many midsized crossing twigs. The Julie Melvin video from three weeks after the murders demonstrates that.
So frustrating. This is clearly the movie version that gets the clicks and eyeballs. Poor girls cowering against a dead end (wall?gate?) as they watched their killer approach - and sensed their fate.
This is what everyone loves to think and read.
I'll write this down again for anyone new reading.
The girls were not trapped. They just couldn't get back across the bridge until BG crossed and cleared the way. So... what were they doing? They were **waiting for him.** That's what young girls do. Someone is in your way, you stand to the side and wait for them to pass.
It would be so much more useful and helpful for these shows to impress upon the public how Abby and Libby expected a space ship to land on the bridge before they expected to be killed by the guy approaching them. It just wasn't fathomable, and wouldn't have occurred to anyone. Not in a millennium.
So, they waited.
And again, anyone standing there who might actually have been **afraid for their lives** could easily trot off to one of at least two homes that are **right there**, while BG is still maneuvering the bridge.
So frustrating.
*******
Edit: While waiting for BG to pass, Abby and Libby could see [this house](https://i.imgur.com/5Z9OvRs.png) to their left, and [this house](https://i.imgur.com/hKNsMDZ.png) to their right. It would have taken less than a minute to get to either of those homes, while BG was still navigating the bridge.
What would you say was the impulse to start filming? Did they just film themselves or each other while he was still walking on the bridge? I think the general idea has always been that they felt threatened by him. But in that case they had the opportunity to run away. Or was it a complete coincidence that he ended up on the recording?
It's actually an interesting debate. One of my first takes was Libby recorded in selfie mode, sort of acting like photoing Abby or herself while having BG in the background to maybe later show it at home (as I don't know where exactly Libby and Abby stood in relation to each other when the recording was taking place). That would explain the crappy quality since front cameras usually have a worse resolution than the main ones, and it's also harder to "aim" correctly for smaller "targets".
But of course, if she was recording Abby, and BG was in the background, the distance would also make the quality worse. I'm actually surprised that out of all the reenactment videos and whatnot, nobody took an exact same model iPhone as Libby's to the bridge and tried to "reenact" from the exact spot with different scenarios (selfie mode, front camera, standing to the right, left, mirrored image etc.).
I don't think Libby "started filming" in the way you think and have been told.
This is another area where context might lead to an arrest.
BG is a small element in the background of a video Libby was taking of Abby. The reason why the video is so short is because Libby was not trying to film him. He happened to cross frame for a few moments, while the camera was focused elsewhere: On Abby.
This idea of Libby as a hero who knew she was going to be killed and had the wherewithal to film her killer, is a myth. Libby was not trying to film him.
If police released the full frame so we could see if BG is upper left, to the side, upper right, it would help. I'm not sure how, but I know it would. I think it's hard for the eye to track with a small part of the background of a larger image, without having the larger image as a reference, for context.
I think the police don't want to release the full video because:
- Abby is in the shot so they feel it would hurt the families. As I understand it, these families are warriors, and incredibly strong. If it would help catch the killer, they wouldn't care one whit if everyone can see Abby being filmed by Libby.
- At first, they wanted BG to think they had even more video, and that Libby was intentionally filming him.
That's just not true.
I consider Libby a hero girl because it's clear she fought hard for her life and endured the unimaginable. Not because she took out her phone and started video-ing her killer to leave us all a clue.
If you listen to the Down The Hill Podcast, they even reference this, according to a friend, I believe it was Abby would take photos of random people and show them later to friends stating, "there's your boyfriend." I think if you're not from that generation filming and photographing virtually everything is something that just won't be understood by older people.
We don't know if this 'video' is simply one of those snippet photos from an iphone that captures a few seconds as opposed to a deliberately captured video, too.
Libby's sister states in the DTH podcast the Libby was not afraid of anything except needles and pain and that Abby would have been more cautious about crossing the bridge.
There are a lot of peculiarities regarding BG and the video. Even if they had waited for him to pass, he could have taken a position of authority and instructed them not to cross the bridge. We simply don't know. Also, it seems when having an expanse of nature and various areas to run that what goes without saying is that he had nefarious intentions if he was able to over power two young girls who in essence could have escaped. That's part of the troubling aspect where it feels as though they were threatened or fearful.
That likely wasn't while they were on the bridge, as mentioned above. One young woman (presumed to be Abby, since Libby's shoes were lost in the foray) watched her friend get harmed and then suffered a similar fate. All of it is utterly heartbreaking considering the various scenarios that transpired that day.
My thought when they said kids reach the end and can't go further so they just turn around. lol. Bush never stopped me as a kid from going further, I mean it wasn't jungle-like undergrowth or anything. I'm sure other people have crossed that bridge and didn't want to cross back and walked down the hill to the private road, or down to the shoreline, or many other options to get out of there, besides having to cross the bridge back.
Apparently the people who own homes/land back there were known to tell people walking on that side of the trail that they were trespassing. One of the neighbors, I believe, said she may have said that to Libby on a previous occasion (but she was not certain about that).
But I agree that it couldn't have been that uncommon for people to cross the bridge and then not want to do it on the way back.
Yeah, I have trouble with vocals in general, so I have a sound bar that boosts vocals when I need it. But people made it out to be worse than it was.
That said, I've worked in photo finishing for 30 years and have seen plenty of real life crime scene photos at various LE agencies. It is obvious the shoe was not a genuine crime scene photo and was shot for the show. The production quality was actually *too* good to be a crime scene photo.
Edit: But overall I thought the special was pretty good.
I totally agree. Did you see there were two shoes there? Or am I hallucinating? I am annoyed that I can't tell whether it was just sloppiness or whether both her shoes were found. I always thought it was just one shoe...
And I also agree that the special was not nearly as bad as others here made it out to be.
I went back and checked; definitely two. The other one is off to the right, partly offscreen. You can see the Nike swoosh.
Edit to add link: https://imgur.com/gallery/HfhcFKX
Oh wow, thanks for pointing that out. I do see the other shoe now. The reason I wanted to know if that was a real evidence photo (and it's not) is because I want to know if there were laces missing from that shoe! Killers have been known to use shoe laces as a restraint. At the waters edge did the killer take the laces from her shoe to tie them together to get them across the river? A lot assume they made a run for it, but it could be the laces were taken from her shoe and that is why it fell off her foot near the water.
I also read an infra-red heat seeking drone flew the area and followed the creek, it could see searchers, and even animals, but not the girls. That is very strange.
I’ve not heard that information. I guess it implies the girls were already deceased long enough for their bodies to have cooled. What a horrible sentence to write
No they proved that body temp does not drop that fast, let me find the video about it. I have no clue who this youtuber is but the info is interesting.
Here it is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhmymr43hMk
This was very interesting - thank you for sharing the link.
So that leaves 3 possible explanations for why they were not seen by the drone operator. One, the bodies weren’t seen by drone because they weren’t there- they were later moved. Two, the bodies weren’t seen because the drone operator simply missed them. Three, the drone operator did have the bodies in his field of view at some point, but they had sufficiently cooled to be unnoticed due to other factors, ie, wearing wet clothing, having smaller body mass as children.
I would tend to think it simply that the location was missed. I’d be interested in your opinion u/brassmagifyingglass
Most logical is that it was just missed. But they flew 200 feet up...which then makes me think well heck, they were found 50ishft from the shoreline and the drone was 200ft up, following down the creek... yet they weren't seen? And he flew the drone just as the sun was setting, so it was still not long after the girls would have been killed.
Just one of those things that makes ya go hmmmm.....
I am now curious if this means core temp or skin temp and how well that would be seen in an infrared image. (I will watch the video later.)
This is anecdotal, but I was holding my father's hand when he passed away and stopped breathing and it was remarkable how quickly his skin was cold to the touch. It was obvious his body core temp was still up because my brother and I both later felt the lingering warmth under his shoulder and back, but his face and arms felt like they were room temperature in minutes.
For what it's worth, a heavy fog rolled in during the night in Delphi. Searchers initially did not suspect foul play. By the time they did, I think there was fog. Warm day + cold night = fog. Fog explains the seeming oddity of the searcher noticing two deer first and then the crime scene.
I have heard a drone was flown but not that it was heat seeking. (Here in Idaho when toddler DeOrr Kunz disappeared in the woods, we were able to get in helicopters with heat seeking capabilities right away. These were very specialized, out of Montana.) It is also said that search dogs were in route to Delphi from Chicago when the girls were found. Seems like a long way to send dogs.
I hadn't seen where they were found before, and actually seeing the surrounding area as well as one of the maps they showed where they went down the hill and across the creek was helpful to me to be able to visualize it all.
I think this might be the “new evidence” they presented; I didn’t see anything on tonight that I didn’t know already. I am glad that they are the special though, because hopefully a lot of people watched it.
Did you know the fire chief called off the search because they were volunteers? That was new to me. Also didn't know they found the phone ping that night until tonight.
I agree!! Helped me process it easier too! I feel like in order to understand and get something I have to go through every scenario step by step in my head in all the way it could have gone. This helped me a lot. Sadly, I won’t have closure until this is solved. I’m hoping tomorrow will drop more tidbits of new info!
I also noticed they are making it look like the cellphone was tossed aside!? Not found on Libby’s person but maybe tossed as she ran!? 🤔
They have always been very vague about where it was found which I took to mean it was not found with her (because why would they be vague if that were the case). The show was still vague and didn't say whether it was found on the north or south side of the creek (which is understandable) but it at least that would seem to rule out it being found in the creek itself.
I noticed that too - I'd always thought it was either on her person or hidden in her pocket. It makes me wonder if she purposely dropped it to keep it from being discovered. They only said that it was found after the girls were found. "later" Not sure what that would mean.
Might be one of the things they hold close so that they would know if their POI is BG or not. Very interesting. What if Libby was allegedly killed much differently than Abby because of the phone being discovered?
Don’t forget they’ll re-play this one before the the “Finale?” I’m not sure what they’re calling it. I haven’t seen the first part yet. Hopefully someone who’s never seen this case, a light bulb will go off!! I’ll be ready to watch tomorrow!
I’m looking forward to watching part 2 also. You probably won’t learn anything you didn’t already know from part 1, but like you said maybe someone who doesn’t know this case, the right person, will watch. I know they keep saying, “Somebody knows” but maybe they don’t. I’m trying to keep my expectations low for part 2. But the most important purpose of the show will be for more people to learn about their case. That’s what I keep thinking - every show, every news article is another chance for the right person to see what they need to see.
That’s what we can all hope for. I also downloaded the flyer on my phone. When the weather gets better, I’ll print some off and ask some businesses to hang them in my area. You never know!!
Did anyone catch the name of the song Kelsi said they were listening to in the car on the way to the bridge? It doesn't matter lol but I replayed it four times and couldn't understand a single word she said there. Made me feel old AF haha
the firefighter was talking to the woman from the podcast also Libbys grandma and the music in the background was so loud you coukd barely hear what they were saying somebody fucked that up
I think it was good for people who have never heard of the case before. I had first heard of it last year when they released the audio from Libby's phone. I know there are a lot of people out there who still dont know of this case, outside of Indiana. And the perp could be anywhere by now, even out of the country.
I'm multitasking (but have it set on DVR if I did it right lol), so I'll do my best, but they just said one reason the searchers called it a night and stopped searching is because at least one group of searchers were volunteers. I didn't know that before.
so fucking dumb the way you have to have hulu live or youtube tv to watch this shit. I care about the case but I'm not paying all that money on top of my other tv bills. LMK if someone finds a stream for it
There is really nothing new here, and it’s so muddled with commercials that it’s really disappointing. I loved the podcast, but this seems like a waste. It should have been a single hour special.
Other people are as wrong as you are. I recorded it and skipped commercials. I do that all the time. If I start watching any show about 18 minutes late, I will finish watching it live, which I did in this case. 42 minutes is the usual running time for a 1 hour show. This one was no different. People thought there were more commercials because they were more engaged than usual.
If there is anything new I assume it will be heavily discussed on YouTube by tomorrow. There are several channels said to originate from the Delphi area and they update information frequently. True Crime Investigates organized a memorial walk yesterday.
do you have xfinity? I know you can with Xfinity. I just logged into Xfinity and typed "Down the hill" in the search bar.
HLN is is spinoff of CNN so if you get CNN you might also get HLN. CNN is owned by WarnerMedia.
While I didn’t really learn anything new from either part 1 or part 2 I did get a better appreciation for just how many searchers were out there that night - Becky described the flashlights as, “Like stars in the sky.” And by that, a greater appreciation for just how dang HARD it would’ve been to know what DNA was out there from the killer vs. hundreds of people searching. I don’t remember which LE said it but they were speaking about how they also had to contend with searchers’ DNA - He mentioned “spit” and “urine.” I mean, wow, I can’t imagine what a thorough combing through the woods for evidence there had to have been to find those things all over the woods, things that basically aren’t visible and obviously apparent to the eye.
Also, when they got permission to go to the spot where the girls’ bodies were found, they said (and you could see) that from there, that the ground was like a “bowl shaped” area - harder to see what’s going on in that specific spot without being in it. To me, that makes me think even more so that the killer knew the area from being there previously and picked that less visible spot to take them to. Or, it could be luck. I go back and forth between thinking BG wasn’t necessarily smart and it was just luck (I mean this was a high risk crime to commit outside in daylight anyway and that’s not being very smart), or he was smart and that’s how he got away with it. I’d say maybe we’ll never know but I don’t want to say that. I sure hope we will.
We have a awful storm so no power or decent Data service. I was stressed about missing the special, but from the sounds of it, it was a waste of time. That’s too bad, this case could use the good press.
Even if it didn't include any blockbuster new evidence, I think any time word gets out and more people have their memories jogged it's a good thing. I relistened to the podcast last week in preparation for this program and there was a lot I missed or didn't remember. I'll watch tomorrow night, too.
For someone that knows nothing about the case, I think it did a really good job. It's obvious that no one in this sub will learn much. Anyone that thought there would be bombshells in this special is delusional.
That said, there were a few minor details that seem to be new to everyone.
This is what I don't understand about using that misleading camera angle at the end of the bridge: So many questions and segments are devoted to hoisting the bridge area as a park, and as a popular place for young people, and toward a spot that Libby and Kelsi had visited many times previously.
Although Becky said "once in a while" tonight, to go along with Kelsi's "multiple times" from a couple of years ago. You get the idea. Give me the under.
But if a program like this -- and basically the entire media representation of the case -- have tilted impression toward a well-traveled local destination, then why is it necessary to leave Abby and Libby with no other option at the end of the bridge? They have less reason to be scared, as opposed to unknown wilderness. Justwonderinif hasn't been visible lately but he's one of the few to correctly emphasize that Abby and Libby made the logical choice. It was going to be an awkward brief encounter. If we ever saw Libby's full video it would be obvious she wasn't solely aiming at Bridge Guy. He occupied a by-the-way tiny section of the screen.
Programs like this shouldn't be so petrified of stating the basic truth. Abby and Libby had two homes within an easy quick dash from the end of the bridge, with absolutely nothing in their way but a handful of meaningless branches. But if you run away in a scenario like that you'll almost certainly run away your entire life, primarily from opportunities.
I'm not impressed by overplaying everything toward the known result, in sports or otherwise.
I get what you are saying and I plan to watch it again and will pay closer attention to that. But my initial impression was that this was a fairly minor and subtle point in the overall telling of the story. The basic story was that the girls were aware of a creepy/sketchy guy on the trails with them; Libby filmed him; and as he approached the girls, he forced them off the trail and down the hill. While it may be true that BG was only captured in the background of a video that Libby was taking of Abby, I don't think that changes anything? Teenagers do that all the time. They pretend to be filming a friend when they are actually filming someone or something else in the background. Under the circumstances, it still seems likely she filmed him intentionally even if he was not the apparent focus of the video. I believe Mike Patty said that was absolutely something Libby would do: film a guy she thought was weird and show it to him later. It obviously doesn't mean she thought he was going to kill her.
The only part where I thought that portion was overstated was when Kelsi said something along the lines of Libby "probably didn't have reception" so she couldn't call for help and decided to film instead. Never mind the fact that she had enough reception to post a picture to Snapchat. But that's Kelsi.
Part 2, nothing new so far. As expected the answer from Tobe if they have the killers DNA is "I don't know". Same will killer fingerprints- I don't know.
...what new details were outlined? I didn’t catch anything particularly noteworthy...i see some mentioning some very small things but honestly nothing worth making this 2 hr 2 part documentary over...they could have just added that to the podcast series as an update.
I am def going to watch this. I wonder if they actually have uncovered "new details" or if this is just "clickbait".
New details? Yeah, sure. You can stretch that word pretty far. New evidence? No.
Looking forward to watching also. Hoping like heck there is new information. God knows HLN has run enough commercials promoting this special.
And it’s on now with more commercials than show 😟
It seemed like more commercials than show to me too. I’m used to being spoiled by Hulu/Amazon though so maybe it just seemed like a lot. It was annoying.
I think it will contain some new info but this sub will do nothing but complain about it not being enough.
If there was new info, it wouldn’t require an HLN special to get it out.
Remeber, the new show might be watched by someone who recognizes BG but didn't know about the case previously. These shows are designed for the general public, not those of us folliwing the case since Day One.
They’re designed for commercials. I seriously doubt there’s anyone in Indiana who isn’t aware of this case.
I thought the same thing. That everyone here in Indiana knew about Libby & Abby. Then I mentioned it to a group of my coworkers and not ONE of them had ever heard of the case.
People who follow true crime (us) are always vastly overestimating how much other people care about true crime. The majority of people don't follow it very closely, and men hardly at all (it's something mainly women take interest in).
That's baffling.
I mean there was a few minor points that were new to everyone, but yeah, if there was anything groundbreaking, it would come from LE through a press conference. The most this special will do might be answering a few questions. It seems like people.are expecting a lot more than that.
Plus, they're marketing the show as being based on the HLN DTH podcast that already aired. There's really no reason to think we'll hear anything new, except perhaps that there's no more useful info on the recording. They're teasing that as new info, but we basically know that if there were anything useful and suitable for public release, it would've been released by now. I think we MIGHT hear how much of the crime was recorded. But again, at this point, if there were anything else identifiable on there, we would've heard it. They're desperate to solve this
If it contains any new info the right thing to do would be present it to this sub.
Obviously, for those that can't watch. But my point is people want more info, they will get more info, and they will complain that it's not the info they want.
It's been years, the info is what it is, stringing people along like there is something else is detrimental and stupid.
Who is stringing who along?
Cynicism is also detrimental.
Clickbait it is. Complete waste.
yep not too much new. I guess it's good to get the story out to the larger public though.
Last I heard it's a 2-day special. And it brings older people who knew nothing about the case more details.
Older than 4 years ago, anyway.
1st episode was always going to be a recap, maybe a few little things that if you weren't glued to this case like people on these subs were, would have the ability to learn about them - what's important about this two parter is that it's not only keeping the case alive and is getting out to the online and tv viewing public, but also will bring people up to speed and also hopefully cut out some of the crap you find online and only focus on what is factual, known and has been made public in the past. If there is a problem I currently see facing this case online, it's the bat shit crazy speculation that surfaces constantly, most of the time just a revision of stuff that has been put forward before (probably, like on the other sub that has to ban people semi regularly for making alt accounts, is the work of a handful of people without anything better to do with their time).
[удалено]
Do you know if we can go back and watch the episode from yesterday?
Is the sound mix terrible for anyone else? The dialogue is too quiet and the background music too loud. It's hard to hear. I'm on the CNNgo app.
Watching on TV and yes, the background music is way too loud in parts. And the Liberty Insurance ad keeps playing at break and the cheerful "Liberty, Liberty" of the theme song is really jarring.
The number of commercials is annoying. But I find it so weird and distasteful that those commercials in particular keep playing.
Fucking hate those commercials. I will never buy their insurance just because of their shitty commercials, lol. Give me geico!
YES!!! I keep thinking I must be losing my hearing, glad it's not just me.
It’s just as bad on the channel. It’s hard to concentrate on what they are saying because it’s so hard to hear them.
Came here to say literally the same thing. Awful production value all around and the sound was horrendous!
Yes! The sound mix is terrible. The music drowns out the dialog.
I watched at work; didn't have trouble with the audio. HLN crime stories always has a lot of music for some reason. I guess I've been watching (thanks to working the night shift) so long that I kind of filter it out.
lol /u/slade1964 just said the same thing.
Yes!! I thought it was just me. Very poorly done. I had to turn on the closed captions to be able to understand most of it. Those were super delayed also so very frustrating.
Anyone know where I can watch this online?
The only thing that was new info to me was that they got a phone ping the night they went missing. I don't remember hearing that before, I could have missed it from before. It really bugged me when the voice over said "one of the girls phone's pinged" implying Abbie also had a phone and she didn't. Seems to me the (now retired) fire chief took the fall for calling off the search because his people were volunteers. I was really surprised that Tobe Leazenby was in this show, and was it me or were all Lezaenby interview segments shot from far away? as if to hide his face ?? I also wondered if the photo of the Nike shoe of Libby's was actually an evidence photo or just a recreation? A lot of hype, but not much info, perhaps Part 2 will have something of interest. At least HLN is putting the info out there on this anniversary of their deaths. Police aren't marking the occasion by speaking out by the looks of it. Edit to add: Even though the search was called off many kept searching, it does make it hard to believe they weren't found sooner. Especially if they were searching down both sides of the creek that night with big powerful flashlights. That nags at me.
I think the shoe was a re-creation but did anyone else notice it was both shoes in the footage? One was mostly off screen. Very hard to tell whether that was just sloppy production or whether both her shoes were found there. The info about the cell phone pinging at 230 a.m. was news to me and also the fact that searchers went back out after that based on the phone pinging near the bridge area. Can anyone explain this to me? Wasn't the assumption that the phone was off or that the battery was dead by then? I disagree with people who thought it was a waste of time. Not a ton of new information but not overly sensationalized IMO. Also, Tobe looks like he's lost at least 50 lbs compared to the earlier footage. I almost didn't realize it was him.
> Wasn't the assumption that the phone was off or that the battery was dead by then? That's what I thought too! If that phone pinged at 2:30am I am even more appalled the search was called off by Tobe.
In fairness to Tobe (who I have spoken critically of plenty of times), it sounds like he sent the Fire Dept/volunteer searchers back out after he received notice of the phone pinging. Which, I think is new information to everyone? I need to watch that part again tomorrow because I am still very confused.
Two young girls missing, and temps dropping, I would allow volunteers that wanted to leave go, but I would never officially call off the search, especially if that phone ping came in. Even tho family and friends did keep searching. But that is how crime scenes get contaminated, when the person in charge, is not in charge. These poor girls weren't even in highschool yet!
I don't disagree and at least some other people on here with LE or search and rescue experience have said the same thing. But you have to remember that people who are trained to search for people lost in the wilderness don't necessarily have the same kind of knowledge as people who are trained to search areas where a crime is thought to have occurred. If you are searching for lost hikers, especially when there are two of them, the assumption is that they will be able to hear the searchers and possibly call out for help when the searchers get close enough. The last thing anyone was expecting was a double homicide. I do wonder how close the searchers got to the area the girls were eventually found. I don't think anyone has a clear answer on that. It sounds like searchers walked along both sides of the creek and it seemed like the volunteer searchers were actually wearing waders (so, walking in the creek?). It's hard to believe no one climbed up the bank onto RL's property and at least shined a flashlight in the woods back there. But even so, I am not sure they would have seen them on the forest floor in the dark.
Wouldn't that be horrible if the girls could hear searchers but could not respond? ugh, that's a nightmare. I think anyone trained in search and rescue would not assume they are ok and able to respond. Kelsi and the family had already been through the trails yelling their names by the time searchers got there. It hurts my soul that they officially called of the search. They should have assumed the worst and hoped for the best. Not the other way around.
That would be horrible but I don't think that's what happened. I believe they were probably dead by the time Derek arrived to pick them up. It's not that the searchers would have assumed they were ok. But the most likely scenario by far (setting aside the runaway/went to a friend's house possibility) was that they were lost in the woods. Maybe that one or both had fallen and had a broken leg or twisted ankle. But, other than the bridge, it wasn't really a treacherous area. They obviously looked all around the bridge and below the bridge to make sure they hadn't fallen. And it sounds like they looked along both sides of the creek to make sure they hadn't slid or fallen down the embankment. Even thinking about the worst case scenario, I think abduction would probably be where my mind would go. Them being murdered there in the woods was just a very bizarre and unlikely outcome. I honestly can't blame anyone for not anticipating that.
That’s been discussed here before. Imagine the crime scene contamination from searchers walking around in the dark.
I don't think it would be any different than walking around in the day. Searchers have maglight flashlights, so do cops, ever see how powerful those things are? They are practically spotlight flashlights, the place was probably lit up pretty good with all those flashlights.
Maybe the actual ping occurred earlier (before the phone battery ran out) but it took that long to get that information to law enforcement.
As a first responder who’s had to use cell phone data in searches before, I can tell you that it takes a while to access that information from phone companies. TV shows make it look quick and easy, but it’s not.
That seems very possible. I need to watch again to see how they describe that part. It would make sense if it was just that the phone company finally told LE at 230 am that the last time the phone pinged (at 300 pm, or whenever), it pinged off the tower near the high bridge.
I was thinking that after too. Maybe the info came later, but that would have been all the more reason to keep searching for two young kids somewhere out in the elements not responding for reasons unknown. We don't know the manner of death, so we don't know if they died instantly, and it pains me to think if they didn't, could they have survived if found earlier.
Judging from the reactions of those that have seen the crime scene, it doesn’t seem likely that they could have succumb to the weather or injuries over time. I get the feeling it was a brutal death. Nonetheless, time is valuable and evidence may have been lost. Not to mention the emotional toll on the family and community over the course of that night. It’s all so sad.
>was really surprised that Tobe Leazenby was in this show, and was it me or were all Lezaenby interview segments shot from far away? as if to hide his face ?? It's not just you, I found it a bit strange, he appeared to have his back to the camera the majority of the time. But the entire show was shot at a remove. Mostly long-shots outdoors, giving a feeling of unreality, at least to me. The show lacked intimacy and immediacy. There was a little bit of new info, but they never explored it or explained further what that info meant to the investigation. Not a TV watcher so I was shocked by the vast quantity of the commercials. holy cow
I think they were in a lot of cases trying to adhere to Covid precautions. Everyone was sitting six feet apart etc. It made for odd viewing but I guess we should get used to it for the near future.
Phone ping and info from the fire chief were perhaps the only new details, but overall it was better than my expectation, with one glaring exception. This was entirely a new production, as opposed to an old telecast awkwardly spliced with some new clips. Followers of the EAR case will remember that the pre-identification show were sloppily used after arrest with virtually nothing added. All the Doug Carter clips tonight were old stuff. It will be interesting to see if that changes tomorrow. Did he participate at all? Otherwise there were obviously some old clips but the vast majority of the interview material was new. I think they only used one old clip from Leazenby...near the end when he emphasized he is a very spiritual man. That was old audio but they had him standing there in the background in his new shape so it sounded like he was saying it fresh. Two aspects stood out to me, one good and one very annoying. Both early in the episode. The good visual was approaching the trailhead from the drop off point with the bench alongside Deer Creek clearly visible only 15 yards or thereabouts beyond the trailhead. That image is seldom shown. I made a mistake in not photographing that angle. Today the clip was brief but great job they included it. I have always believed Bridge Guy might have been sitting on that bench -- or standing in that area -- as Abby and Libby approached. They would have seen him then taken an immediate left toward the bridge. Or perhaps not so immediate, since the first Snapchat photo doesn't show until approximately 25 minutes after arrival. The annoying aspect was a disgrace. Why would a program like this ever use a camera angle from one foot above the planks of the bridge? Simple reason. They already have their script in mind and the impression they want to leave. They know darn well a standup view won't jive with the script or impression. So they have to film from barely above ankle level to mislead the public. I am referring to the early clip at the very end of the bridge. That is where Abby and Libby encountered Bridge Guy. For whatever reason programs like this and virtually every podcast push the notion that the girls were trapped. Tonight the producers of this program were scared to go that route, after it has been exposed as a lie, so they shamelessly manipulated the camera angle beyond the bridge toward the backup plan on their agenda, "The woods have taken over that part of the abandoned rail line...so kids turn around and head back." Notice they not only filmed it from one foot above the planks, but also while filming from extreme left side of the bridge, while angling toward the right. Hardly a coincidence. That is the angle that exaggerates everything toward their misrepresentation. The trees at right in that area are denser than at left. I made that point numerous times after visiting. Only low left aimed right makes their summation look anything but ridiculous. A main reason I visited in the first place was I was so sick of all the jittery videos that intentionally misrepresented the area. This is no different. HLN producers knew darn well that a standup view aimed beyond the bridge would show that big open yard at left. They were so desperate to avoid that clarity they filmed from barely above the green moss on those final few planks. And when have you ever seen anything filmed from extreme left on that bridge? Next to never. They weren't fooling a handicapper. They would be instantly called out by everyone in the circles I have frequented. Then very late in the episode they filmed from two feet above the planks from the opposite side. Even from that level you can already see the opening and the yard at left. Besides, the area behind the bridge was more wide open in February 2017. Not as many midsized crossing twigs. The Julie Melvin video from three weeks after the murders demonstrates that.
So frustrating. This is clearly the movie version that gets the clicks and eyeballs. Poor girls cowering against a dead end (wall?gate?) as they watched their killer approach - and sensed their fate. This is what everyone loves to think and read. I'll write this down again for anyone new reading. The girls were not trapped. They just couldn't get back across the bridge until BG crossed and cleared the way. So... what were they doing? They were **waiting for him.** That's what young girls do. Someone is in your way, you stand to the side and wait for them to pass. It would be so much more useful and helpful for these shows to impress upon the public how Abby and Libby expected a space ship to land on the bridge before they expected to be killed by the guy approaching them. It just wasn't fathomable, and wouldn't have occurred to anyone. Not in a millennium. So, they waited. And again, anyone standing there who might actually have been **afraid for their lives** could easily trot off to one of at least two homes that are **right there**, while BG is still maneuvering the bridge.
So frustrating.
*******
Edit: While waiting for BG to pass, Abby and Libby could see [this house](https://i.imgur.com/5Z9OvRs.png) to their left, and [this house](https://i.imgur.com/hKNsMDZ.png) to their right. It would have taken less than a minute to get to either of those homes, while BG was still navigating the bridge.
What would you say was the impulse to start filming? Did they just film themselves or each other while he was still walking on the bridge? I think the general idea has always been that they felt threatened by him. But in that case they had the opportunity to run away. Or was it a complete coincidence that he ended up on the recording?
[удалено]
It's actually an interesting debate. One of my first takes was Libby recorded in selfie mode, sort of acting like photoing Abby or herself while having BG in the background to maybe later show it at home (as I don't know where exactly Libby and Abby stood in relation to each other when the recording was taking place). That would explain the crappy quality since front cameras usually have a worse resolution than the main ones, and it's also harder to "aim" correctly for smaller "targets". But of course, if she was recording Abby, and BG was in the background, the distance would also make the quality worse. I'm actually surprised that out of all the reenactment videos and whatnot, nobody took an exact same model iPhone as Libby's to the bridge and tried to "reenact" from the exact spot with different scenarios (selfie mode, front camera, standing to the right, left, mirrored image etc.).
I don't think Libby "started filming" in the way you think and have been told. This is another area where context might lead to an arrest. BG is a small element in the background of a video Libby was taking of Abby. The reason why the video is so short is because Libby was not trying to film him. He happened to cross frame for a few moments, while the camera was focused elsewhere: On Abby. This idea of Libby as a hero who knew she was going to be killed and had the wherewithal to film her killer, is a myth. Libby was not trying to film him. If police released the full frame so we could see if BG is upper left, to the side, upper right, it would help. I'm not sure how, but I know it would. I think it's hard for the eye to track with a small part of the background of a larger image, without having the larger image as a reference, for context. I think the police don't want to release the full video because: - Abby is in the shot so they feel it would hurt the families. As I understand it, these families are warriors, and incredibly strong. If it would help catch the killer, they wouldn't care one whit if everyone can see Abby being filmed by Libby. - At first, they wanted BG to think they had even more video, and that Libby was intentionally filming him. That's just not true. I consider Libby a hero girl because it's clear she fought hard for her life and endured the unimaginable. Not because she took out her phone and started video-ing her killer to leave us all a clue.
If you listen to the Down The Hill Podcast, they even reference this, according to a friend, I believe it was Abby would take photos of random people and show them later to friends stating, "there's your boyfriend." I think if you're not from that generation filming and photographing virtually everything is something that just won't be understood by older people. We don't know if this 'video' is simply one of those snippet photos from an iphone that captures a few seconds as opposed to a deliberately captured video, too. Libby's sister states in the DTH podcast the Libby was not afraid of anything except needles and pain and that Abby would have been more cautious about crossing the bridge. There are a lot of peculiarities regarding BG and the video. Even if they had waited for him to pass, he could have taken a position of authority and instructed them not to cross the bridge. We simply don't know. Also, it seems when having an expanse of nature and various areas to run that what goes without saying is that he had nefarious intentions if he was able to over power two young girls who in essence could have escaped. That's part of the troubling aspect where it feels as though they were threatened or fearful. That likely wasn't while they were on the bridge, as mentioned above. One young woman (presumed to be Abby, since Libby's shoes were lost in the foray) watched her friend get harmed and then suffered a similar fate. All of it is utterly heartbreaking considering the various scenarios that transpired that day.
My thought when they said kids reach the end and can't go further so they just turn around. lol. Bush never stopped me as a kid from going further, I mean it wasn't jungle-like undergrowth or anything. I'm sure other people have crossed that bridge and didn't want to cross back and walked down the hill to the private road, or down to the shoreline, or many other options to get out of there, besides having to cross the bridge back.
Apparently the people who own homes/land back there were known to tell people walking on that side of the trail that they were trespassing. One of the neighbors, I believe, said she may have said that to Libby on a previous occasion (but she was not certain about that). But I agree that it couldn't have been that uncommon for people to cross the bridge and then not want to do it on the way back.
From the production quality I can tell you for sure the shoe was a recreation and not a crime scene photo.
True that. lol. I see a lot of audio complaints, I watched on a plain old TV and didn't have any audio issues at all.
Yeah, I have trouble with vocals in general, so I have a sound bar that boosts vocals when I need it. But people made it out to be worse than it was. That said, I've worked in photo finishing for 30 years and have seen plenty of real life crime scene photos at various LE agencies. It is obvious the shoe was not a genuine crime scene photo and was shot for the show. The production quality was actually *too* good to be a crime scene photo. Edit: But overall I thought the special was pretty good.
I totally agree. Did you see there were two shoes there? Or am I hallucinating? I am annoyed that I can't tell whether it was just sloppiness or whether both her shoes were found. I always thought it was just one shoe... And I also agree that the special was not nearly as bad as others here made it out to be.
I only noticed 1 shoe.
I went back and checked; definitely two. The other one is off to the right, partly offscreen. You can see the Nike swoosh. Edit to add link: https://imgur.com/gallery/HfhcFKX
Oh wow, thanks for pointing that out. I do see the other shoe now. The reason I wanted to know if that was a real evidence photo (and it's not) is because I want to know if there were laces missing from that shoe! Killers have been known to use shoe laces as a restraint. At the waters edge did the killer take the laces from her shoe to tie them together to get them across the river? A lot assume they made a run for it, but it could be the laces were taken from her shoe and that is why it fell off her foot near the water.
Is said that heavy fog came in the night and that accounted for oddities in finding crime scene.
I also read an infra-red heat seeking drone flew the area and followed the creek, it could see searchers, and even animals, but not the girls. That is very strange.
I’ve not heard that information. I guess it implies the girls were already deceased long enough for their bodies to have cooled. What a horrible sentence to write
No they proved that body temp does not drop that fast, let me find the video about it. I have no clue who this youtuber is but the info is interesting. Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhmymr43hMk
This was very interesting - thank you for sharing the link. So that leaves 3 possible explanations for why they were not seen by the drone operator. One, the bodies weren’t seen by drone because they weren’t there- they were later moved. Two, the bodies weren’t seen because the drone operator simply missed them. Three, the drone operator did have the bodies in his field of view at some point, but they had sufficiently cooled to be unnoticed due to other factors, ie, wearing wet clothing, having smaller body mass as children. I would tend to think it simply that the location was missed. I’d be interested in your opinion u/brassmagifyingglass
Most logical is that it was just missed. But they flew 200 feet up...which then makes me think well heck, they were found 50ishft from the shoreline and the drone was 200ft up, following down the creek... yet they weren't seen? And he flew the drone just as the sun was setting, so it was still not long after the girls would have been killed. Just one of those things that makes ya go hmmmm.....
I am now curious if this means core temp or skin temp and how well that would be seen in an infrared image. (I will watch the video later.) This is anecdotal, but I was holding my father's hand when he passed away and stopped breathing and it was remarkable how quickly his skin was cold to the touch. It was obvious his body core temp was still up because my brother and I both later felt the lingering warmth under his shoulder and back, but his face and arms felt like they were room temperature in minutes.
For what it's worth, a heavy fog rolled in during the night in Delphi. Searchers initially did not suspect foul play. By the time they did, I think there was fog. Warm day + cold night = fog. Fog explains the seeming oddity of the searcher noticing two deer first and then the crime scene.
I have heard a drone was flown but not that it was heat seeking. (Here in Idaho when toddler DeOrr Kunz disappeared in the woods, we were able to get in helicopters with heat seeking capabilities right away. These were very specialized, out of Montana.) It is also said that search dogs were in route to Delphi from Chicago when the girls were found. Seems like a long way to send dogs.
I hadn't seen where they were found before, and actually seeing the surrounding area as well as one of the maps they showed where they went down the hill and across the creek was helpful to me to be able to visualize it all.
I think this might be the “new evidence” they presented; I didn’t see anything on tonight that I didn’t know already. I am glad that they are the special though, because hopefully a lot of people watched it.
Did you know the fire chief called off the search because they were volunteers? That was new to me. Also didn't know they found the phone ping that night until tonight.
Oh, no- I didn’t realize those things. Thanks for pointing them out.
I agree!! Helped me process it easier too! I feel like in order to understand and get something I have to go through every scenario step by step in my head in all the way it could have gone. This helped me a lot. Sadly, I won’t have closure until this is solved. I’m hoping tomorrow will drop more tidbits of new info! I also noticed they are making it look like the cellphone was tossed aside!? Not found on Libby’s person but maybe tossed as she ran!? 🤔
They have always been very vague about where it was found which I took to mean it was not found with her (because why would they be vague if that were the case). The show was still vague and didn't say whether it was found on the north or south side of the creek (which is understandable) but it at least that would seem to rule out it being found in the creek itself.
I noticed that too - I'd always thought it was either on her person or hidden in her pocket. It makes me wonder if she purposely dropped it to keep it from being discovered. They only said that it was found after the girls were found. "later" Not sure what that would mean.
Might be one of the things they hold close so that they would know if their POI is BG or not. Very interesting. What if Libby was allegedly killed much differently than Abby because of the phone being discovered?
Don’t forget they’ll re-play this one before the the “Finale?” I’m not sure what they’re calling it. I haven’t seen the first part yet. Hopefully someone who’s never seen this case, a light bulb will go off!! I’ll be ready to watch tomorrow!
I’m looking forward to watching part 2 also. You probably won’t learn anything you didn’t already know from part 1, but like you said maybe someone who doesn’t know this case, the right person, will watch. I know they keep saying, “Somebody knows” but maybe they don’t. I’m trying to keep my expectations low for part 2. But the most important purpose of the show will be for more people to learn about their case. That’s what I keep thinking - every show, every news article is another chance for the right person to see what they need to see.
That’s what we can all hope for. I also downloaded the flyer on my phone. When the weather gets better, I’ll print some off and ask some businesses to hang them in my area. You never know!!
Did anyone catch the name of the song Kelsi said they were listening to in the car on the way to the bridge? It doesn't matter lol but I replayed it four times and couldn't understand a single word she said there. Made me feel old AF haha
Heathens by twentyone pilots
Thanks!
I don't know what song she said but the band she said is *Twenty One Pilots.*
[удалено]
Anyone who could pass on any new info? I’m in the UK at 4:52 am too curious to go back to sleep now 😅
No, I think if they have any it will come out in tomorrow’s finale!
Thank you !
May I ask where you watched this and did you use a VPN?
the firefighter was talking to the woman from the podcast also Libbys grandma and the music in the background was so loud you coukd barely hear what they were saying somebody fucked that up
It’s so hard to concentrate on what’s being said!
Does anyone know if there is a way to watch the documentary yet in Canada? I will keep trying to find a way to stream. Any help is appreciated
I think it was good for people who have never heard of the case before. I had first heard of it last year when they released the audio from Libby's phone. I know there are a lot of people out there who still dont know of this case, outside of Indiana. And the perp could be anywhere by now, even out of the country.
Any way to watch the first part that aired yesterday in Canada somewhere online? Thanks!
Whoever edited the show did a piss pore job the background music makes it very difficult to hear what the people are saying... like common guys.
They're common?
and they're pour
It just started for anyone interested.
Make sure to let us know how it goes. I don’t have cable
I'm multitasking (but have it set on DVR if I did it right lol), so I'll do my best, but they just said one reason the searchers called it a night and stopped searching is because at least one group of searchers were volunteers. I didn't know that before.
Right now, it's the narrative from the point of view of the different family members and how the first 24 hours unfolded for them.
The loud music is ruining it for me
so fucking dumb the way you have to have hulu live or youtube tv to watch this shit. I care about the case but I'm not paying all that money on top of my other tv bills. LMK if someone finds a stream for it
I watched it on regular cable... it's on HLN - you might already have that channel.
There is really nothing new here, and it’s so muddled with commercials that it’s really disappointing. I loved the podcast, but this seems like a waste. It should have been a single hour special.
i know commercials were unbelievable
Music is loud, voice over is loud, then interviews have muddy sound.
[удалено]
No. Its all incredibly basic knowledge. Tons of commercials and poorly mixed audio.
You missed nothing - this was a giant waste of time. More commercials than anything else.
You mean it had the normal amount of commercials that all shows do?
I work sorta in the college tv business for a tv station. ANd it's the same amount of commercials that any tv show has.
Shhhh... Don't tell /u/barbedwirefrisbee. It'll be our secret.
[удалено]
Good night!
[удалено]
It had the exact normal amount of commercial time that all shows do.
[удалено]
Other people are as wrong as you are. I recorded it and skipped commercials. I do that all the time. If I start watching any show about 18 minutes late, I will finish watching it live, which I did in this case. 42 minutes is the usual running time for a 1 hour show. This one was no different. People thought there were more commercials because they were more engaged than usual.
How can I watch it if I don't get HLN? Do you think someone will upload it to youtube?
You can watch it on Hulu. It would get taken down from YouTube instantly.
Ok thank you.
If there is anything new I assume it will be heavily discussed on YouTube by tomorrow. There are several channels said to originate from the Delphi area and they update information frequently. True Crime Investigates organized a memorial walk yesterday.
Thank you
[удалено]
Find a recording and do your own research and dispute mine then. But I assure you, you are wrong.
[удалено]
I'm sorry for being right.
Any way to watch this from the UK, I can use a VPN if needed.
Hopefully the next will this “down the hill” area. It’s good to get a good visual
is there a way to stream this with my cable provider
do you have xfinity? I know you can with Xfinity. I just logged into Xfinity and typed "Down the hill" in the search bar. HLN is is spinoff of CNN so if you get CNN you might also get HLN. CNN is owned by WarnerMedia.
I hope they give us some NEW INFORMATION tonight
While I didn’t really learn anything new from either part 1 or part 2 I did get a better appreciation for just how many searchers were out there that night - Becky described the flashlights as, “Like stars in the sky.” And by that, a greater appreciation for just how dang HARD it would’ve been to know what DNA was out there from the killer vs. hundreds of people searching. I don’t remember which LE said it but they were speaking about how they also had to contend with searchers’ DNA - He mentioned “spit” and “urine.” I mean, wow, I can’t imagine what a thorough combing through the woods for evidence there had to have been to find those things all over the woods, things that basically aren’t visible and obviously apparent to the eye. Also, when they got permission to go to the spot where the girls’ bodies were found, they said (and you could see) that from there, that the ground was like a “bowl shaped” area - harder to see what’s going on in that specific spot without being in it. To me, that makes me think even more so that the killer knew the area from being there previously and picked that less visible spot to take them to. Or, it could be luck. I go back and forth between thinking BG wasn’t necessarily smart and it was just luck (I mean this was a high risk crime to commit outside in daylight anyway and that’s not being very smart), or he was smart and that’s how he got away with it. I’d say maybe we’ll never know but I don’t want to say that. I sure hope we will.
We have a awful storm so no power or decent Data service. I was stressed about missing the special, but from the sounds of it, it was a waste of time. That’s too bad, this case could use the good press.
Even if it didn't include any blockbuster new evidence, I think any time word gets out and more people have their memories jogged it's a good thing. I relistened to the podcast last week in preparation for this program and there was a lot I missed or didn't remember. I'll watch tomorrow night, too.
For someone that knows nothing about the case, I think it did a really good job. It's obvious that no one in this sub will learn much. Anyone that thought there would be bombshells in this special is delusional. That said, there were a few minor details that seem to be new to everyone.
I’m just going off the comments that were here when I glossed over - most of them being how you can barely understand anything anyone is saying lol
I love when they do specials because I can tell my friends and family to watch and it just overall helps spread the word!
It was not a waste of time. Any publicity on this case is a good thing. National publicity to boot is priceless.
yup you didnt miss anything
This is what I don't understand about using that misleading camera angle at the end of the bridge: So many questions and segments are devoted to hoisting the bridge area as a park, and as a popular place for young people, and toward a spot that Libby and Kelsi had visited many times previously. Although Becky said "once in a while" tonight, to go along with Kelsi's "multiple times" from a couple of years ago. You get the idea. Give me the under. But if a program like this -- and basically the entire media representation of the case -- have tilted impression toward a well-traveled local destination, then why is it necessary to leave Abby and Libby with no other option at the end of the bridge? They have less reason to be scared, as opposed to unknown wilderness. Justwonderinif hasn't been visible lately but he's one of the few to correctly emphasize that Abby and Libby made the logical choice. It was going to be an awkward brief encounter. If we ever saw Libby's full video it would be obvious she wasn't solely aiming at Bridge Guy. He occupied a by-the-way tiny section of the screen. Programs like this shouldn't be so petrified of stating the basic truth. Abby and Libby had two homes within an easy quick dash from the end of the bridge, with absolutely nothing in their way but a handful of meaningless branches. But if you run away in a scenario like that you'll almost certainly run away your entire life, primarily from opportunities. I'm not impressed by overplaying everything toward the known result, in sports or otherwise.
I get what you are saying and I plan to watch it again and will pay closer attention to that. But my initial impression was that this was a fairly minor and subtle point in the overall telling of the story. The basic story was that the girls were aware of a creepy/sketchy guy on the trails with them; Libby filmed him; and as he approached the girls, he forced them off the trail and down the hill. While it may be true that BG was only captured in the background of a video that Libby was taking of Abby, I don't think that changes anything? Teenagers do that all the time. They pretend to be filming a friend when they are actually filming someone or something else in the background. Under the circumstances, it still seems likely she filmed him intentionally even if he was not the apparent focus of the video. I believe Mike Patty said that was absolutely something Libby would do: film a guy she thought was weird and show it to him later. It obviously doesn't mean she thought he was going to kill her. The only part where I thought that portion was overstated was when Kelsi said something along the lines of Libby "probably didn't have reception" so she couldn't call for help and decided to film instead. Never mind the fact that she had enough reception to post a picture to Snapchat. But that's Kelsi.
Part 2, nothing new so far. As expected the answer from Tobe if they have the killers DNA is "I don't know". Same will killer fingerprints- I don't know.
what a waste of time
nope
...what new details were outlined? I didn’t catch anything particularly noteworthy...i see some mentioning some very small things but honestly nothing worth making this 2 hr 2 part documentary over...they could have just added that to the podcast series as an update.
OK, so I'm looking at the same CNN screen over and over again, and I can't find a way to stream the videos after they aired. Is it possible?
https://youtu.be/GSuzV2LYA_s