From 31:37
lunch for the next day and then at 2:58 is when his phone went um went dead or
turned off and there was there's there's some anomalies out there of another chat
that he sent to a friend after the phone went off uh and then possible ping but
those both occurred after the phone uh was not working so there's really no
evidence that that phone really did that other than is just an anomaly it could have
could have happened he could have sent those a lot earlier and the phone could have actually connected to a tower a lot
earlier it just happened to show up you know within about a 12 minute time frame
uh after his phone went bad right that makes sense we talked about that earlier where sometimes a phone call can be made
but when it's actually received on the other end is a little bit later so that makes a lot of sense so law enforcement
I know believes that it truly went dead if you will his phone at 258 and that
========
The above is part of the transcript from that
recent J Coffindaffer interview with Caleb’s 6 family members. Seems the father saying with more clarity that 2:58 is when the phone died, and so the Snapchat photo of the foggy bridge (3:03) and the cell tower ping (3:12) were not useful in a timeline sense of Caleb’s movements? That the phone died or was turned off at 2:58—so is that when everything stops? Is that kinda what he’s saying? JMO
But the bridge Snapchat was of a foggy night, so it does seem like it was from that general time and day, right? JMO
(if this was discussed already, excuse me. I’m behind)