The Delphi Murders /// Off The Record | Forensic Files

[Applause] [Music] [Applause] How can a case where they've told us so little be so big? Right. This case is
just it seems huge. It seems really small on the outside when you when you look into it and you're like, "Oh, well,
we have a a couple seconds of a video clip of somebody walking on a bridge. We have couple seconds of some guy talking
saying guys down the hill." Mhm. And then you look into it and you're like, "Wow, this is a huge huge case." And
part of that has been I think a lot of a lot of it is due to speculation. And we
talked about this quite a bit before is right now anytime some some guy does something super violent, sexual in
nature resulting in murder, any of those different things, we're seeing them being brought to the forefront of being
a possible suspect in the deli murders case, right? And not just individuals that are arrested in Indiana, but
anybody that's arrested that has ties to Indiana. Well, one guy we talked about was Paul Eder. Okay. Now, he is super
interesting for a million reasons, but one thing that you and I keep keep going back to is DNA. Okay. So, early last
week, what came out was that the sheriff states that the Deli murder investigators have requested Eder's
autopsy results as well as his DNA. Okay. Okay, so this guy was 55 years old. He's dead. He committed suicide
after a standoff with police where he was in this standoff with police because he had he had
attacked a woman. He abducted her while she was changing a tire on the side of the road in Tippy Canoe County, which is
not terribly far from Deli. Well, she actually didn't she actually like break down right by his house? Yeah.
something. The way that the the story works that that I read anyway was that he she broke down on the side of the
road right in front of his property very early in the morning, like at like 4:30
in the morning. Yeah. He offers to help her and she's she's kind of creeped out by this
dude. So, she decides, you know, I don't need any help. And just continues on. Well, right. And we but we make some
leaps here. Like one one of the things that I've heard was, "Okay, well, this Eder guy creeped out his victim and that
we we know that Abby and Libby were creeped out enough to take pictures of the guy, bridge guy." And so some people
make that leap that this girl felt the same thing that Libby and Abby felt. Mhm. He ends up following her and
abducting this woman. Eventually, he lets her go after rape and sexual assault. And then the police catch up with Paul
Eder because he's driving around in a stolen vehicle. Yeah. After this standoff, he commits suicide. And now we
find out that the sheriff's, they're saying that the investigators requested his autopsy results and his DNA. And
we've seen DNA requests before and we've we've talked about this before, but to me, this really solidifies for me what I
believe there to be DNA. And you say, "Well, Nick, why are they even questioning? Why are you Nick Colonel
Captain? Why are you garage idiots questioning the DNA? Well, we're questioning the DNA because in the
beginning, the investigators made it sound as if they had it. And then at some point that went away from their
their press releases and from their what their words that they were choosing to use to the public. It just disappeared.
And so then you have to question, is there something wrong with the DNA or did they not have it? or did they speak
did they speak out before they knew if they were going to have it or not? Yeah. And one of the statements that they made
again that makes me question it or I think would make anybody question it is the idea that they say look we're not
going to clear anybody. We're not going to do that. We're going to call it checked or or they've been we've gone
over that person. He's been checked. Yeah. We're not going to say that they've been cleared until somebody's
arrested and somebody's convicted and then the next statement is if they are convicted, right? Meaning
that this um law enforcement officer believes that they might one day arrest somebody but might not be able to get a
conviction. That's what it makes it seem. Now, they might just be playing it safe and that's fine and I understand
that. But if they're not playing it safe and that statement is a true statement,
that makes you question if they have DNA. Because if you have somebody that you arrest for the crime, you have DNA,
plus you have other evidence, why wouldn't this be a slam dunk? Well, and then one thing too is we discussed the
reasons why you would ask someone to submit their DNA even if you did not have this. You're doing it as a scare
tactic, as a way to see if this suspect will squirm, right? And and immediately become uncooperative in your questions
and in your investigation. And then you go, well, we should be checking into this guy further because he doesn't want
to seem to help us with this double homicide of of two children. I mean, yeah, you can be guilty of a lot of bad
things, but nothing as bad as this. So you you you would think persons would comply and offer their assistance at the
very least to just get their name off of this investigation. Well, you see this similarly with um asking people to take
a lie detector. We know that we can't use that in a court of law, but we're going to use it to kind of see how you
play play out this hand. Right. And so the thing though that really kind of I'm really going the way of yes, they have
DNA and I I've always kind of been that way on this on this case, but I feel like the longer that we look into it,
the the stronger my feeling is and my the higher my confidence level gets that they do have DNA. And so it just doesn't
make any sense to me when people I I I'm leaning your way. I I have some reservations about it, but at
the end of the day, it's like why would they keep bringing up the idea that they're going to test individuals? And
even law enforcement kind of said, look, it would be they'd be very surprised if if Eder
is is connected in any way, but is it just a statement that they're making to the public to let them know we're doing
everything in our power? Yeah. Well, not only that, you have you have the public saying, "This guy's a
suspect." And if if the public considers him a suspect, then law enforcement better as well, at least to the point of
check into him, like you said, he's been checked. And then move on to your next guy. And I I think that's where the
argument comes in where people start to question if there's DNA because they're going, "Oh, there's been all these
suspects in the public's eye, right? the police and investigators and FBI are saying, "We're checking into this guy
that we've been made aware of now because he's been arrested for something else." And then we never hear anything
as far as the guy being cleared. And like you pointed out, that's for good reason. They've already said early on
that they are not going to clear anyone whether they whether they get somebody's
DNA and they compare it to what they have on file, the sample that was left at the crime scene and they might go
he's been checked. He's been checked. We know, they may know that that person did
not do it, but they're not going to say that publicly until, as you said, Captain, somebody is sitting in court
and sitting through the court the the trial process. Well, and let's break that down a little bit because that
didn't make a lot of sense to me. Why Why would you not state that somebody's cleared if you cleared them? And and one
of the things that they were saying is that if you come out publicly and say uh Logan, for example, you know, the girls
were found on Logan's property, Logan was arrested on other charges. If they go through and check alibis and do some
things, they go, "Okay, well, Logan is cleared." And then it comes back that he's not cleared. And they arrest him
and they go to trial. that just the statement that the law enforcement at one point cleared this
individual that could be reasonable doubt, right? That gives the jury reasonable doubt. And so that makes a
lot more sense. And because then you're fighting an uphill battle. You're you're
now saying, "Well, at one point we cleared this individual, but now uh no." And and so if if at one point law
enforcement said this person wasn't involved, that would, like you said, gives you probable cause to go, well, I
uh or gives you reasonable doubt to go, you know, if they weren't sure at one point, how am I supposed to be sure?
Mhm. Well, the the other thing that really strengthens my belief that they do have
DNA, one, I'm just going back to the beginning and realizing and knowing and reminding myself that they said they had
it at one point and I see that it's disappeared from their narrative. I'm fine with that and I get why I think
that is and I think it's smart and I'll get into that in just a second. But the thing that really strengthens my belief
that there is DNA here is they're requesting it from a dead man. And we know this to be true per per the news
reports that were coming out last week. And on top of that, the way that that the wording that they use when they
state that is that they requested it shortly after this guy committed suicide, shortly after Paul Eder killed
himself. So the thing the thing is it's no longer a scare tactic if there's nobody to scare, right? it's just simply
collecting evidence at this point. And so that really strengthens it for me on that level. And then I've recently
viewed a a short interview where um Kim Riley, one of the officers, one of the investigators with the state police,
he's not the on the local level, he's on the state police where he Here's the thing with these with these with the
investigators here. They're all doing a very good job. They're they're trying to
field and answer as many questions as possible. They do have a, let's say, script or a narrative to try to stick to
that they've all agreed upon, but on occasion because they are being so transparent or or at
least with what what they're willing to share and their availability to be in front of the public and to answer
questions. On occasion, you can catch a little bit of a slip where you're like, "Oh, I don't know that they were
supposed to say it like that." or well, and think about all the emotions they're
they're carrying around with them. So, in one in one of these little news clips, I saw Kim Riley stating, you
know, basically he's being asked, if you have DNA or if you have so much evidence
on this guy, why hasn't there been an arrest? And he was saying, well, there there's
we and he's trying to be hypothetical, but you can tell in a way he's probably talking about what's actually going on
with the case. He says, you know, well, we might have a situation here where this person has never done anything
before and we just don't have any way of tracking him down or tracing this individual. Right. So, that really that
statement to me really makes me feel like the police at least believe that they're working on a suspect. the bridge
guy has not been convicted of anything where he would have his DNA profile already submitted to Cotus. And then
when when he goes further to say wouldn't have anything to track, no way to trace this individual, that also
makes me wonder if they have fingerprints as well, but they're just not in the system that we do have stuff.
We just we need to find the right guy, the right person, bring him forward and and have his fingerprints and or DNA to
compare this to. And so I I feel good that I think that it's there. I think the reason why
you go back and you go back and you go, "Oh [ __ ] we talked about DNA. Let's kind of just drop that from the story
and not bring it up again." Because and then there's other times where we have somebody like Daniel Nations who says,
"I submitted my DNA." And you never hear from police saying that they that yeah,
we asked him to do so or he did submit it, anything like that. They just say he's somebody we're not really that
interested in. I think the other thing if you do in fact have DNA or as some guys up in the Amy Mahalik case like to
say bait in the net. I always thought that was a strange way to word it. But if you do in fact have
DNA, you might want to drop that from the narrative just for the fact that you want this guy to slip up. Wait, why why
do you find that weird? Bait baiting the net. I just saw so when when u the investigators at
Watertown, right? I mean, they're they're by water, right? But what I mean by that is when they're asked if they
have DNA, um most of the time their answer is, well, we have bait in the net, rather than just giving you a a
clear general, right, clear general understanding. Sometimes they've given a better answer than that, but but for a
while they were sticking to that bait in the net kind of thing, which is fine. Um
anyway, what I was getting at though, Captain, is here you have a situation where if you do have DNA of this guy and
he is not in the system, he has not committed any offenses that he's been caught for to the point where he would
be in the system. Now you're going, you know what? Let's drop that from the narrative because we wouldn't mind
terribly if he goes out and commits an offense and gets caught for it, right? I mean, we're nobody's saying nobody's
suggesting, hey, go out and and murder somebody so we can catch this guy. Well, what we're what we're you're hoping for
is could he get picked up for a DUI? Could he could he do something dumb? You know, anything that would warrant a
felony arrest from my understanding in Indiana. Now, you were forced to submit your DNA. So, you get this guy driving
drunk home from from from a bar one night, right? Right. You might end up catching your guy. But let's be clear
about that. So, every state is different. But in the state of Indiana, if you are arrested with something that
you can be charged a felony for, you don't have to actually be charged. You don't have to actually go through the
process and and be found guilty. But when you're arrested, they'll swab your DNA and they're going to take your
fingerprints and all that. That's how they enter you into the system. Yeah. And I And I think you were saying that
that didn't pass until 2017 and and then they don't implement it until 2018 or whatever. That Yes, that's my
understanding of of the way that it's going down in Indiana. And as you said, it gets difficult for us to remember.
There's 50 states and they're all kind of doing that stuff a little different from from state to state. Here's the
other thing though. Paul Eder is in fact we we know that they went after his DNA.
According to the words that they chose to use and made it sound like it was shortly after he killed himself. So now
we're looking at a month ago. You would think if he is the guy, he's not alive for you to even bother talking to him,
right? Be trying to gather more information. That's true. Just because we've not heard does not mean he's not
the guy. But do you think he makes a good suspect? Because the initial the the thing I jump to immediately is yes,
Paul Eder is a a horrible individual. Uh he abducted and raped a woman, but he let her go. We're looking
for a killer, not a not necessarily just a rapist. And we don't know the the mounds of
possibilities are are endless. And and and that gets a little um it can make everything convoluted.
But I think what we we have here is an individual that possibly could look like bridge guy. I mean, we're only seeing
just like a head shot of this individual, but you go, okay, here's this guy that has uh committed crimes
before, violent crimes, sexual in nature. Is it possible that he he did this uh double murder and then uh kind
of went on a spree if you if you will that or or ha had a you know weird universe uh the universe puts um for
lack of a better word prey right by his house and or early morning he attacks her for whatever reason maybe he knows
that this has gone too far. We've seen this with other killers, with other attackers where they uh where afterwards
they'll say, "I'm never doing this again." Or or they take their own life. Maybe he knew he was going to take his
own life. And for whatever reason, it's like, "Okay, I did this double murder that's been on my mind. Now I did this
this basically torture is what it was. Um this sexual assault, rape, torture. I'm going to take my own life."
And maybe that's why he let her go. and and then he takes his own life. I mean I
mean I understand that there's a five hour standoff, but we we can't know for sure what was going through this guy's
head, but it that's a possibility. So when people say, "Well, he let this other uh victim go and he didn't let you know
that that rules him out in so pe so many people's mind." And I'm like, I don't think that rules out anything because we
don't know what's going on in this sick individual's mind, right? I agree. I I but I tend to lean
toward I I don't know that I'd make him the top suspect. Partly in part just because he did let that future victim
go. And from the way I'm I'm viewing this thing, it looks to me like he may have got away with that. And I hate to
say this out loud, he may have got away with that whole attack and rape if he had not let her go. And it's just the
Well, and the other thing that makes me question it, too, is his age. Well, and that's what I wonder because he had to
have some knowledge that she had knowledge of where he was from and maybe she didn't know that area that well, but
where she broke down. And so by letting her go, it's almost like you you're setting free the person that is going to
basically be your downfall and the reason why you get captured. But again, if your vehicle breaks down in front of
this guy's house and he comes walking out or in front of his property and he he very clearly comes walking out and
you go, "Well, he must have lived there." I mean, that's probably the first thing you're going to say. You
might not know the the numerical of the address that that you broke down in front of, but you're going to go, "Hey,
I was on on uh I such and such street." Yeah. Last week I had the note I had the
street name in my notes, but yeah, you could go I was right around this area on such and such street. Guy comes out of
his house 4:00 in the morning. Yeah. And um and then you can identify the guy. And what's interesting to me about the
whole connection with with Eder is um he kind of has a bulbous nose. Would you say it's bulbous?
Yeah. And I've actually Yes. Well, and I'm I'm using that term uh uh in this case because I've actually
seen several videos where they're doing new profiles of Bridgeman and they start
talking about that he has a a characteristic that we haven't noticed in the past. And I've actually seen this
from at least two individuals where they're saying it has a character that we didn't notice, but now we notice he
has a bulbous nose. Mhm. And I wonder if that is these online armchair detectives, if this is their way of them
shifting the narrative. Okay. Well, we have this guy in custody. Is he a perfect match for a
bridge guy? No. Uh like you said, logically, he attacks one uh attacks two individuals,
kills them, lets another one go. that doesn't seem to line up really, but um he's he's 55 and yeah, which would be
past the actual age range that they they gave us, right? From Yeah, from the most
recent press conference, the the big one that kind of blew everything up in April, they're saying 18 to 40 is the
age that they believe that they're looking for. And so even, you know, even two years ago, Paul Eder would have been
53. Now, I am sitting here looking at a mug shot of his from 2012. I'm not I don't have a full understanding of what
his charge would have been back then, but it appears to be a mug shot from 2012, right? So, seven years ago, he
would have been 48. I will I will say this about Paul. He could probably Now, mind you, this is a very small sample
size. He's bald. If he had hair, it would help quite a bit more, but I I could maybe see him passing for 43 in
this picture. Yes. And he would be about 48. So, he does look younger or appear younger than what he is, which that's
also part of what they said in their release that we're looking for someone probably between the ages of 18 and 40
who may appear younger than their actual age. Right. But the tricky thing here though is didn't they also claim in this
description that the that the perpetrator bridge guy had, you know, kind of a reddish hair.
Well, in the first sketch, yes, the first sketch that was released, it appears to be reddish hair. I What were
they saying about the second sketch? Did they give a hair color for that one as well? I thought that's the one that they
said reddish. Okay. And so that that makes me question. I mean, when people still bring up Logan because the girls
were found on Logan's property. Again, clearly Logan has gray hair. Clearly Eder has, you know, salt and pepper
hair, I would say, but leaning more gray. So, I don't know. Uh, unless unless that I I have some
issues and I think anybody should have issues with the idea that you have a you have two sketches that they claim were
happened at the same time. They went with one over the other. They look like two different individuals to me. I'm
having a real hard time the more um we dive into this case. I'm having a hard time actually believing any of this as
far as eyewitnesses go. Well, I think I think somebody that's still of very big interest to me is Thomas Bruce, who is
thankfully in jail waiting on something to happen with his current case, right, where he is facing
a murder charge and sexual assault and rape charges. He's the one that went into the Catholic
supply store for and ordered the women to the back of the the the establishment,
right? And attacked and assaulted and killed one of them there. the way that this thing goes down and I can't
remember I know we went through his timeline somewhat, but he left the store at one point under the guise of going
out to get a credit card from his car, which he returns. And I I'm assuming that's when he went out and got the gun
from his vehicle. And this guy is weird, too, because again, the age is wrong with him. The the difference between him
and Paul Eder is we know Thomas Bruce to be a killer. The thing that also I find
fascinating about Thomas Bruce is it doesn't appear that he's been in any kind of trouble before this strange
attack, right, that results in the murder. And I I don't know. I I'm I'm not saying that Thomas Bruce is the guy.
I'm just saying on the on the outside looking in, he looks a little more like the guy to me in a sense that it seems
like he committed a crime of opportunity that maybe when he did enter that store the first time, I mean, look,
we know he left the store and came back. So, there was something in his plan that
he needed from the vehicle or something that he needed to readjust before he carried out the attack or he wasn't 100%
planning on attacking the place when he first walked in there. Yeah. How many individuals were in there? I think it
was three women were in there. And and again, so logic would tell you, okay, well, so Eder attacks a single
female and then obviously Libby and Abby being two females, but in this other case with Bruce, then you go, well, he
he had no problem going, hey, there's three people. I can control this in his brain, right? And so that's the same
scenario as Libby and Abby. So, you're out in a park, you see these two girls walking, and you think that's an
opportunity. And I I really think that that narrows down the individual quite a bit because there's a lot of individuals
that they're not going to try to control two two victims. They're not going to try to to tell most of these
perpetrators that's too big of a situation. Mhm. And so, you know, logic would tell you that that's a good match.
Yeah. And the other thing, too, is Thomas Bruce was even, let's say, he did not plan on attacking those women at the
Catholic supply store until after he went in there the first time. He obviously was prepared to do
something like that in some form or fashion, even just to the point where he needed to go out to his vehicle and get
something possibly. And that's what I think he I think this dude had a had a kill kit, rape kit in
his vehicle. Yeah. And he saw an opportunity or maybe he was planning on maybe he was watching and casing the
place and saw his opportunity and right he goes and retrieves the kill kit, rape
kit from from the vehicle. Right. Again, same type of thing though is you don't know who's going to be on the trails.
You don't know who's going to be at the park that day, but you just bring the stuff with you, but you were prepared to
do something if if an opportunity presented itself, right? Which again, same as the first attack. So, let's talk
about the suspect's age. One thing that I find and the sketches as well. So, one
thing that I find completely fascinating, like like you were saying, when you see these two sketches, they're
completely different from one another and and that's frustrating as hell, right? In a whole bunch of ways,
they're completely different from one another. And then we have the statement of the suspect. We believe we're looking
for a guy between the ages of 18 and 40 who may appear younger than what he is. Well, what's the population on people 18
to 40? I mean, that's a that's 22 years that we're spanning. And then, okay, so we've been told that those sketches,
both sketches were developed by eyewitnesses that saw a man matching that description, whether it be sketch A
or sketch B, that day near the bridge or on the trails that day. Right. So, again, it's it's it's weird that we have
two completely different sketches. And then on top of that, here's here's one thing that I really wonder about the age
range here because you should be able to look at somebody's face. If you're going
to describe them to the point where somebody can draw a sketch, you should be able to answer the
question of does he look 18 or does he look 40 rather than I couldn't decide if it was 18? Could have been as late as
40. What I wonder here is because we have the two sketches and they're two so different from one another,
are they not ruling out the possibility of either sketch being correct and and police are thinking
that he looks younger in one sketch than he does in the other and therefore now we have a a range of 20 to 22 years for
the possibility. Well, see, I just wonder at first um based off of eyewitness, based off of the video
footage that they had, if they just went, you know what, this this eyewitness gave us this this um drawing,
we were able to look at that drawing, look at Bridgeman, look at the the video footage that we have because we're
assuming that they have more video footage. The rumor is they have a lot more footage. Um, I could not get that
confir. I I have a weird situation where I do have a contact that actually worked
the case. I can't get into that too much. Uh, but some of the information that I have passed along to them just to
see if they can confirm or deny. Uh, sometimes I don't want to I don't know how to say this, but I I think sometimes
it's almost like if they can confirm it, like they just won't. Um, not they're not trying to be jerks
or anything, but it's it's so it's almost like uh you know like oh I heard they have a lot more footage. Can you
confirm or to deny that? And then it's like no answers, but it's really like basically they're confirming what I'm
saying. So I think they have a lot more footage um than than what they're leading on to believe. And so what what
if it's just this simple? I saw this guy on the bridge. Okay, he looks like this.
Okay, we do a drawing. That drawing kind of looks like bridge guy kind of looks like this grainy video footage we have
of the individual. You get the next eyewitness. They give you a whole different person. You kind of compare
that with bridge guy. Your gut feeling tells you no. You that's why you went with the first drawing.
My argument is that we have all these people coming forward, or not all these people, but we have a handful of people
saying, "Well, we saw these this guy on on the path." That doesn't mean that they actually saw the killer. They just
saw a guy on the path, right? And that's what I can't get over because I believe this
uh where he took them to to go down by roughly by that service road keep going down cross the
river. I think that was all by design and I think it's more than likely it was either to take them to a more
remote situation. But even if that was the case and there was no vehicle down there, I
either think he was trying to take them to a remote situation and that's where his getaway
was or it was let me take him to this remote situation and then whatever happens happens. But then when I'm
leaving, I think this individual knew that area so well that they didn't have to leave back on that path.
So then I question, are these are these eyewitness accounts even of the murderer?
Well, we don't know. What we do know is that they tell us that the what we're seeing in the video, the the man in the
video, bridge man, is is the killer. And then we're getting these two sketches of
people that were seen in the area on the paths. And the the sketches to me are fascinating in the sense of thinking
about it this way as well. So let's assume in this situation, right, you would assume that you would
have one person that you wouldn't know who they are. That's the killer. the killer is not going to come forward and
say that was me on the path there that day. We find that highly unlikely. Okay, not that it would never happen, but we
know it probably has not happened to this point. But it let's say both of these people and multiple people that offered
up this this person that they claim to have seen that day. If we're to believe all of them, then we
have two persons, at least two people that don't look anything like each other. So, I'm
going to go ahead and say two people, right, that are unknown to us at this time when we should only have
one. And so, then you and I were talking about this and you brought up a good point and I countered it with a with a
another good point. You said, "Well, then it also make now that makes me wonder how many other people you have
that you're that are unknown to you." Yeah. It's not like you walk into the park and you check
in, you know, or there there's some like camera that you have to go buy and then
we can go, well, we know that there was 100 people there that day and and 98 of them are accounted for or 99 of them are
accounted for. One thing I question in this though, is there a chance that we that there's a person that's been made
up that there dive into that further? So what I mean by that is where where we're
sitting here going okay if both of these sketches are correct then we have two people that have not come forward two
people that are unknown to us right and then you brought up the good point that well if you got two then maybe you have
more and I I agree with that possibility as well. I also think about the idea of
maybe we don't have two people that were there. What if one of these people is just a bad description of of a person
that's already come forward, right? What What if for whatever reason somebody look, they had the best of intentions,
they're trying to help. They're misremembering and they're describing somebody that they didn't really see.
They saw somebody else instead or it's a mashup of multiple people that they saw
that day. Right. And we we also don't know when we're getting these reports. And so we do know at one point, you
know, the we know, okay, correct me if I'm wrong, but we do know that that the father was there looking for the girls.
Yeah, Dererick was there. We know he was there because he he was in charge of picking them up that day. And I I could
see, you know, somebody giving a bad description and saying that bridge guy kind of looks like him. Kind of see
that. I I think uh the grandfather looks more like bridge guy number one. The drawing again is are there are these
people searching? Are they asking for eyewitnesses? Did somebody come forward a week later and say, "Yeah, I saw this
guy." And give you a a bad description and all they saw was um you know Derek looking for the girls. From my
understanding, both of those sketches, and I'm just going off of words that, and mind you, they're choosing their
words very carefully, but from press conferences and from interviews that police and investigators
and state police have done with with the public and the media, those two sketches, from
everything I've seen, were developed within 48 hours of the girls going missing.
Right. And and both were both They came up with both sketches because they were eyewitness statements and and accounts.
And look, you have was that there's like a meat packing place pretty close by. A
lot of sex offenders there. There's a lot of sex offenders in the area. It It's very possible that somebody was
just taking a hike, not doing anything bad, uh, but has a record or has a kind of a dark history that is just not going
to come forward. I just don't see And again, we don't know because it's not that that information hasn't been
put out there. They're not saying that this eyewitness saw the person coming back through an entrance or exit. So, we
don't know where they actually saw this individual, right? Well, I mean, probably know, right? The
police know. I can't say for certain, but the the things that I'm seeing, reading,
hearing is okay. So, we talked a little bit about the flannel shirt man. The flannel shirt man is believed to be one
of the witnesses to seeing one of these individuals in the sketch, and I believe I think the
general thought is that Flannel Shirt Man saw what he described to be the first sketch that came out. Okay. So the
slight the the older looking of the two in my opinion. And the thing is, the way that this has
been described is that this man, based off of his timeline, would have seen the bridge guy
on the trail on the 501 trail walking away from the Monen High Bridge and he's believed, it's believed
that bridge guy was leaving at that time, leaving the area in the process of doing such. So, we know from Derek's
statements as well, Derek saw the flannel shirtman when he arrived around 3:15 to pick up his daughter.
So that that would put Flannel shirtman and Derek at the intersecting trails at 505 and 501 around 3:14 3:15 p.m. Now
flannel shirt guy is going to say that he saw bridge guy around this same time. Mhm. But he also saw Derek. So we we
have a general marker and place marker for where bridge guy may have been around three. Let's back it up and say
310 to maybe 320. And the the thing that I would love to see the most in this guy's statement
and flannel shirt guys statement is is it police saying that bridge guy was leaving at that time just basing
everything off of the known facts of the case and and their timeline? Or was that that dude's
statement? He was leaving. Why would he know if the guy's coming or going or anything different? Mhm. That seems a
little strange to me. I would love to know if that's if that's flannel shirt guys or if that's the investigator's
words because that would be about the time he should be leaving. Right. We know they were alive and well at
207 and then we have statements from the family saying that around 3:30 or so the phone was going straight to
voicemail. It wasn't even ringing anymore. The thing is we have a very a very small
window. Things happened very fast that day once they started going wrong. Right? We're talking th this attack and
murder and everything happened between 207 and 3:30. And you can even whittle that down faster if you believe some of
the other known statements. Right? So let's go through this real quick. 207 that picture's taken. There's no bridge
guy on the bridge at that time. They say that it would take 7 minutes for somebody to walk that bridge. Now,
that's if you're walking, you're very mindful of your steps. You're you're you're watching your steps as you go
along. You're being very safe, cautious. I actually think Bridge Guy moved a lot faster than that. Wasn't so
cautious. I think that's what probably alerted the girls that this dude is weird. that he's something is up, right?
Or scary, right? I think they look back on the bridge and all of a sudden this guy's on the bridge and he's moving and
he's moving at a good pace. He's not running. You can't run on that bridge, but he's moving at a good pace. And not
only is he moving at a good pace, he's he's watching his steps and he's turning and he's checking behind him every now
and then to make sure nobody is behind him, nobody's behind him. They're and they're thinking,
"Yeah, what should this guy care if nobody's behind him? And why is he moving so fast?" Well, again, so he
doesn't want to be seen. So then I then I question because did he try to make the girls
cross the water or or did they actually make a run for it? You know, uh I heard somebody say that they think that it was
his idea for them to cross, but that's probably where he lost control of them and that's why they, you know, he took
their lives on the other side. But, you know, we don't know the details of how he took their lives other
than they we believe there was a weapon involved. So, we know that, but then we also know
that there's a a very good possibility, right? What almost at least 100% chance that he was wet on some level. And so,
again, he would he would have to be at some point that day. He he he was in the water, right? And that's again what
makes me believe that he didn't backtrack. Okay, now this is done. Let me get back on that main trail.
Uh, I know I don't know those trails that unless he had to. You know what I mean? I I get what you're saying. I I'm
fully with you because of the bridge, right? So, it when I look at this thing, if you were going to try to plan this
out and make it go down without any problems at all. Here's how it goes down. You You see them a little bit
after 207. And And this is the thing. You would actually go down trail 505. the less traveled trail. The 501
leads to the Monen High Bridge. Okay. But on the 505, when you walk down there and you get creek side, I'm wondering if
there's a spot down there because what happens is picture a V, right? That the trails start off together and they don't
when I say intersecting, it's not an X. It's more of a of a thin V where one goes off to to one side a little bit,
but you're basically walking these trails and and and a friend of yours could walk on the other and and and
really you just have a small tree line separating you for a while and then it extends it extends. It extends and you
get a little further and further from one another. But what I'm getting at is somebody could sit there, could post up
on the 505 down there near the creek and you could spot people coming. I'm guessing
cuz I've never been there, but I would think that you might be able to see people approaching the bridge from your
viewpoint. And if you see what you think to be your possible victims there, it's
just two people. There's nobody else with them. and there's nobody else around or on the bridge at that time.
That's when you you don't have to go back out to that main trail. You could cut across and really you're going to
end up right at the front of the bridge. And so at 207 they're fine. Let this guy didn't take 7 minutes
to move across that bridge. He moved across that bridge in in five or four. He he was faster. He was
moving faster than if somebody was watching their steps. Mhm. He scooted across that bridge. That puts us at 12
after two. And then he is, if we're to believe that the eyewitness statement is correct and it is in fact bridge guy,
then that puts him back at that intersection of the trail an hour 1 hour later. So, a lot of things have happened
during that time. And I'm with you though, Captain. If you were to plan this thing out perfectly, once you see
them get to the other side of the bridge, they're completely compromised now. You go, "Well, all most likely
anybody that could help them or anybody could that could view what I'm doing, they're on the back. They're on this
other side of the bridge, right? The girls are on the opposite side of the bridge. That's where I'm going to get
them. That's where I'm going to take control." If you I mean you just watch the words and you you map out a quick
little location of where they were found, you can see down the hill across this little uh driveway that that
actually looks like a road and then it's down the hill more across the creek and
then they're found right there. Both of their bodies are found right there. If you were to plan this out perfectly, you
probably would have parked your vehicle in the graveyard where there are little roads that go back by the trees. You
could have put your vehicle over there and after killing them, you could have walked through the woods up to the
graveyard, never going on a trail again. Mhm. The only trail you have anywhere near you on that opposite side of Deer
Creek are the horse trails for Ron Logan's farm. But those aren't those are horse trails. They're not traveled by
the the people that are visiting the bridge or the park. So that would be if you wanted to to not be seen after the
attack, that would be your where you would really want to park your car. Now the issue could be though he he didn't
know that. He didn't know exactly where he was going to do this attack or exactly how it was going to go down and
maybe his vehicle was left elsewhere beforehand. Mhm. And one thought is the the vehicle that was parked at the
abandoned building, which that would have required him to go back up that trail in the
opposite way. You would probably try to walk off the trail as much as possible, but at some point you might have to pop
back onto that that trail. Well, it's getting hard to kind of visualize some of this stuff because like the entrance
where the girls were dropped off at, I believe they have like a new gate there. So, that looks different than the day of
of the murders. And then where the abandoned car was, there's no aband or well where the car was by the abandoned
building, there's no abandoned building anymore. So, um, but it kind of looks like a
little service road in between like a highway where that car would be parked and then it would be facing depending on
where you're parking, you'd be looking right at the Freedom Bridge. Yeah. So, you have Yeah. You have the What was
that? Highway 25 is right there on your on to your left. Here's an interesting thing to
think of though, too. Okay, so if that was his car at parked at the abandoned building, he would have had to walk back
up the 50 the 501 trail, the the most heavily traveled trail and make his way up that way most
likely. I'm sure there's probably ways to do that, but keep in mind you have the Mir's farm. A lot of this property
right here are the is belongs to the Mir family or Mir's family. And remember you
you mentioned that Mike Patty looks something like the bridge guy in your opinion. He he might not have been able
to been mistaken for bridge guy because given the timeline we have, he would not
have been at the park or near the bridge at the time that the witness saw bridge
guy. But their statement in the press conference from 4:22 of this year, their exact words, police were, "We are
seeking the public's help to identify the driver of a vehicle that was parked at the old
CPS/DCS welfare building in the city of Deli that was abandoned on the east side
of County Road 300 North next to the Hooser Hartland Highway. That's also Highway 25. between the hours of noon to
5 on February 14th, 2017. And then it says in this presser, uh, note it has been updated. That date was misspoken.
It should have been February 13th, which was the day the girls went missing. So,
this CPS DCS welfare building was a um like a like a child support building at one time, right? And
so it was like a government city building, but it was abandoned at the time on February 13th, 2017. They're
asking for the driver of a vehicle. And it makes you wonder, are they just going, "Okay, we we saw this
vehicle, nobody in it, or saying, hey, uh, we want to identify the driver of this vehicle." Are they saying that
there's a there was a driver in it at that time? Um I I don't know. It's not clear
enough. No. Right. And so that changes the whole dynamic. Right. We're looking for this driver that was in the car.
That changes the whole dynamic. Right. If you were parked there or know who because they're saying the driver if you
were parked there or you know who was parked there. It's like were you in the car? Well, yeah. car didn't kill the
girls. They're they're looking for an individual. Well, no, but what I'm saying is that, you know, they're not
saying we're we're looking for the owner of the car. No, they're saying the driver of the
car, right? Somebody put that car there, somebody moved that car later, right? That's who they're looking for. Saying
if going on to say if you parked there or know who was parked there, please contact the officers at the command post
at the Deli City Building. But again, that doesn't mean that that that is your killer. But that's a very
quick way to go when you start going, "Okay, well, where did he park?" Because that's that's a really big question that
nobody usually gets to when they start talking about Deli, in my opinion, is this guy left some way. He left the area
somehow. He fled the area after the attack. We don't know what time he got there. We can assume I would assume he
probably arrived before the girls did. He may have arrived long enough before where he was he's waiting this thing out
and looking for a victim. I don't I don't feel like it's highly likely that he just arrives and immediately spots a
victim. That doesn't seem likely to me. There were other people there that day. He didn't choose some of them in my
opinion. Right. Right. Well, and I I think that's why if this is premeditated like in the
sense that they this killer knew going in going to this park, going to these trails that he's going to do this, you
know, the the service road by the bridge, you know, down the hill like like we said, whether it's a driveway or
service bridge or a service road or or Well, it's it's a road that becomes a a driveway to a residence, right? And then
but then there's also once you cross the water a little bit further down I believe there's some access there
further down. I believe that the if the person knew this killer goes there knowing they're going to try to do this
that their truck or car is going to be parked somewhere there. Not so much at an entrance or at
a where people could see this individual. That's my gut feeling. Oh, yeah. No, I agree 100% with you. That's
why I said he would have been parked in the the graveyard would be the right would be the most likely spot. I mean,
and the the problem with parking so so where you would put your vehicle if you wanted to park closest.
All right. It would be the whole thing the whole thing's a crime scene, right? The whole place is a crime scene. from
the minute he stepped on the ground to the moment he left. Yeah. Every everything that his feet touched is a
crime scene. However, if you were to plan this out in great detail and everything go your
way, then ideally you would park you would want your vehicle, I believe, to be as close to the ending point of your
crime scene, right, than the beginning point of your crime scene because you're going to, if this is a messy
murder, there's any number of ways that you can look different at the end of this crime than you would walking step
stepping foot onto the crime scene for the first time. Yeah, you know, we already talked about his jeans likely
were wet. He he went through the water at some point that day. We There's no question about that. Unless he unless
this [ __ ] can hover, he went through the water that day. Okay, that would make a good shirt. And then on top of
that, he very likely could have had blood on his person or on his belongings somewhere.
And either of those are giant red flags. Keep them. They were looking for missing
girls that day. They weren't looking for murdered girls that day. They were looking for missing girls that day. They
weren't looking for a murder suspect that day. He got away. He fled pretty undetected. Whether he was seen by the
flannel shirt guy or not, he fled pretty undetected. So if if you were to map this thing out and carry it out the
exact way that you would want to, ideally you want to put your vehicle as close to the ending point of the crime
in the crimes in the crime scene as possible. Well, right. And instead of just having it on a residential drive or
or some other road that that would stick out like a sore thumb. But if you park at the at the graveyard,
right? Yeah. If you park at the Here's the problem with that very spot. You could park at the graveyard and be okay.
I would think the other the areas that are as close to you as the graveyard, mind you, we're going from right where
the bodies were found. The other areas that you could park that would be close to you at that point, that's private
property. That that belongs belongs to Ron Logan. That belongs to the Mirs family.
That seems quite a bit more risky to me than parking at the graveyard. Yeah, unless unless you
know, you know, Logan's whereabouts or you know the family. But still, again, if you're going there with
the idea that you're going to commit a crime, if you know these individuals, you don't want them to be able to say,
"Oh, yeah. I saw I saw this guy's vehicle on on my property that day." I think the graveyard makes the most
sense, too, because it's like there had to be some other visitors, right? So, it's not so suspicious if you have a
car that's, you know, there's I can't see anybody here. Oh, they might have parked and walked down to a grave and
and and spending a little time at the grave. I mean, the graveyard was it was it a working graveyard?
Um, it seems to be, right? I I I I I know what you mean. I and I sorry for laughing there, but I I do think that
yes, you that it's still spots are available is what I think you mean by that. And if you look
at it on Google Map, there is a picture a rectangle. Okay. And right off of the road, I thought you going somewhere else
with that. The road west 300 north. Mhm. So, if you look off of 300 North, you have the graveyard right there on
one side of the road. Now, the graveyard is lined out like a big rectangle, which
it has a a a drive. You can drive in, go all the way to the back of the property,
and I believe at the tree line, you can actually go across the tree line, and then then head back out the other way.
So, you have two running roads or drives from 300 North that basically encompass
this graveyard. There's places to drive. And what I'm getting at here, too, is you could you could drive a fair
distance away from the road and put your vehicle back by by the tree line. And there's also a little center crossing uh
section as well that you can drive on. Now, I don't know how the width of those if they're, you know, two lanes both
ways or if it's just a single lane. Usually with the in a graveyard type setting, usually it's just a single lane
to make it easier for people to access different parts of the graveyard to to visit uh people. But here's another
really interesting thought, Captain. We have an eyewitness, several eyewitnesses
actually, saying that they saw an individual who's not come forward. We don't know who either of them are. It
could just be one person, could be two. Um, I don't want to mix words here. I don't think that there's two killers. I
think there's one killer. Well, I think the cops would know that based off the the audio and video footage. Yeah. And
but here's the thing. With there being no vehicle description, police love a vehicle
description. They would rather have a vehicle description than a person description. They love it. It's easier
to find the car. It's easier to find the car. It's harder to harder to hide the car. We don't have one here. So, I
wonder a little bit. Did this guy arrive on foot and leave on foot? Now, it seems
a little confusing maybe to people that are not from the area, but if you do a type up some some maps, you know, bring
up any map and look at the maps and you you bring up some directions and you play around with it. One thing I found,
you could walk, you actually the distance is shorter walking than it is driving because the way that the roads
are laid out in this particular area. So you could walk from the middle of the Monen High
Bridge and you could be at East Main Street Deli and it's a 1.2 mile walk. You would
have to go over the Freedom Bridge for the shortest route, but that would be the direction that it's believed that
bridge guy, if in fact he was the killer. Mhm. But the the flannel shirt man says that he saw bridge guy on the
501 trail heading toward the Freedom Bridge at about 310 to 320. Somebody could walk. That's crazy.
Somebody could walk from the middle of the Mon High Bridge to East Main Street, Deli be in
Deli at 1.2 miles, right? So about 15 to 17 minutes. Yeah. 15 to 20 minutes. Well, let me tell you a little
story to open up some possibilities. I I I'll make it quick. So, I I was interned
for a long time as a recording engineer at this point. Like I I I didn't do a lot of sessions. I didn't I I had
knowledge of this stuff, but I I I have never done it myself other than like maybe bringing in some of my buddies to
record. So they said, uh, my boss says to me, "Hey, there's a night session. Do you want to do it?" And of course, I was
nervous. I said, "Nah, I don't really want to do it." He goes, "Well, no. I'm going to set it up. It's easy. Two
microphones on this piano. All you have to do is hit record and stop." The guy, he's he's from
Athens, Ohio. What's that? About an hour and a half away. Yeah, roughly a drive. Mhm.
He's from Athens. He's a great kind of jazzy bluesy piano player. We had this great piano, but it wasn't tuned and we
had some rattles in the low end, but the guy didn't really care. It was just demo. And so, my boss was giving him a
discount because the piano wasn't working perfectly. So, we go and record three or
four tunes. And after after two or three songs, this guy's just playing live. He'd come back in and listen. This guy's
very scruffy. He has um a book bag with him and a guitar case, you know, that you would wear as book bag. So I go out
to make some coffee and then I go out to my car and I realize he has no car there. And I'm thinking, well, this is
strange. So we we're almost done with the session and I see he has this guitar case. So, I unzipped the guitar case cuz
I just want to see what guitar he has in the back, right? Um I shouldn't have done that, but I did. Anyways, there was
um I see um a gun. Mhm. And at this point, I'm freaked out in my mind. So, in the session, uh I I I I'm
back in the day, I had have to make a CD for him. Here you go. Take this with you. And I said, "Uh, is somebody coming
to get you?" Uh, and he said, "Yeah." So, he get uh he leaves, pays, I clean up the studio, go to leave.
Probably 5 minutes after him, I start driving. I don't see him anywhere around. You you know, remember the
studio is really far back. Mhm. Five minutes later, I'm I am driving pro on 33 and I see him
walking. This guy walked all the way from Athens, set up a recording session, walked all the way from
Athens, played his songs, took paid me, took the CD, and started walking back. Mhm. Now, I don't know if he was meeting
somebody somewhere, but he was walking on the freeway. My point of this long story is cuz one, I I was thinking about
that gun and how much how freaked out I was. But the point of this story is this
individual could have walked from really far away. And and I I hate to be the guy
that to say there's so many possibilities, but this guy booked a session, walked an hour and a half,
played five or six songs, and then took off walking back. It's not out of the realm of possibilities. Well, and not
only that, in this situation, I'm I'm bringing this up for a couple different reasons. One, East Main Street,
Deli, one mile 1.2 two miles from the bridge. 15 20 minutes. Yeah. So, this guy I mean there's there's plenty of
houses over there. This guy could have lived in a neighborhood near there and just walked home. He could have parked
anywhere really within 1.2 miles of the bridge. He could have parked in any of these neighborhoods that are a mile and
a half from the bridge. Yeah. And so he doesn't necessarily have to be parked at
the abandoned building or parked in the graveyard or parked on Ron Logan's property. He very likely could have been
parked in an area that nobody would found to have been suspicious at all because it's a a heavy heavily traveled
area. It's it's an area where there's a lot of cars parked on the side of the road or he parks in a in a busy parking
lot somewhere. But you have to be careful of those areas because if it's a busy parking lot, then you have the
possibility of being seen if you're covered in blood, mud, or water. So, right. You know, so I I get what you're
saying and and and that's what's so frustrating about this case, though, is as every time I'm I'm looking into it, I
start feeling like I'm getting somewhere and then the doors of the possibility just are blown open. And and I
wonder I I wonder if it's going to be another situation where if we don't hear anything in in 6 months to a year if
they're going to have to keep putting out information that they know cuz they have to be getting a lot of leads. I
mean this case is highly covered on YouTube. I mean there's seems like there's a million armchair detectives
working on this case like solely working on this case. not like, hey, we covered
this case and and we moved on to another case the following week. Like people that are
just like that's all they're doing. Well, and that's why I think it's important to examine the possibilities
and the reasons why this has not been solved. [Applause]

The Delphi Murders /// Off The Record Episode: 66 Released: 7-29-2019 www.TrueCrimeGarage.com

Brief Summary

The episode analyzes Paul Eder as a suspect in the Delphi murders, discussing DNA evidence and investigative challenges.

Key points

The Complexity of a Small Case. What seems like a small case is actually huge upon closer inspection.
Paul Eder's Dark Past. Paul Eder, a suspect in the Deli murders, had a violent history.
The Mystery of DNA Evidence. Investigators are requesting DNA from a deceased suspect, raising questions about evidence.
The Age Dilemma. Discussion on the suspect's age and how it doesn't match descriptions.
Thomas Bruce's Profile. Exploration of Thomas Bruce as a potential suspect.
Sketch Confusion. Frustration over two different sketches of the suspect.

Episode highlights

Episode quotes

This guy was 55 years old. He's dead.

1:50WatchApr 27, 2025

Tension

60/ 100Some tension

More from True Crime Garage TV

Solve the Crime

Read a real case one clue at a time, then see how your call held up against the investigators.