Search results

Only if the phone had been backed up (ie onto another device still in existence, or in the cloud), is my understanding.

I expect that this info will come from the data recovery experts; a great deal of their conversation was by tm.

Maybe she was listening to a saved message that contained important info, or was comforting to her for some reason. Maybe she was changing her vm outgoing message. Maybe was was checking a message from a known caller left some time ago, that she had been avoiding listening to. *shrugs*

If it's off, I believe it will still ping. If the battery has been ripped out, and the phone has been tossed (in a lake, perhaps), it will not.

The phone went dead (no longer pinged off towers, no longer received TMs) not long after that activity. My understanding is that incoming call detail after that point would not appear on a billing statement. The phone company may be privy to such info, but I don't believe it would show up on a...

There was also a 23 minute call between DM & LB not long before the timeline we see in the statement attached above. I'm blanking on the date, however.

The judge and crown clarified this in court. I haven't reviewed all the tweets (especially for days I was present) but this clarification must not have made it to the tweets.

Not unless her phone was actually on and receiving calls/data/pinging etc. By the time alarm bells starting going off for SL, LB's phone was long gone (not pinging, etc.).

I believe it was clarified in court that the last eight outgoing calls were to DM, and the last call activity on the phone was to voicemail.

Their turnaround time to provide their print, radio and/or tv reporting is pretty tight. I'm not sure the recordings are released with enough lead time to be useful.

I wouldn't put it past him, based on everything we've learned and observed to date.

The Dellen show, starring Dellen Millard? Reliving glory days? To imply "This guy is still my best friend, regardless of the fact that he was a friend of LB's, and is aware of my charges." Just a few thoughts.

Entering an agreed statement of facts (where and when it can be done) is more typically more efficient than bringing several witnesses to testify, and then endure cross-exam. I'll speculate that because LB had seen so many different doctors, nurses and other specialists at multiple institutions...

IIRC, April 2012 was when CN met up with DM in Vegas. Given that they didn't live together (and that he was spending a lot of time "elsewhere"), the Vegas trip would have been a LOT of one-on-one time, and plenty of opportunity to be present and together for any contentious text messages...

Feb 2012 was when the ***** really started hitting the fan, with CN learning of LB's renewed involvement with DM, and presumably when CN started putting pressure on DM and/or making ultimatums.

Wow. That is extra special.

I agree... it's a very, very unusual scene, period. I am trying to remember whether I've heard the judge remind the jury that DM's suggestive, leading questioning is neither testimony nor evidence, but it's gotten a little blurred with all of the reminders and guidance that's come from the...

Ok, as to DM's question of whether LB mentioned a Jeep or a truck: Could this not be as simple as him querying whether Laura had been specific about which of his cars the post-shopping activities had taken place in, hoping to discredit LB's claim re the activities? Although at this point...

IMO he "got away with it" until roughly November, 2012. Then he had another "problem" to get rid of.

The "love triangle" tagline, IMO, was assigned by the media, not the Crown.