Regarding Tuesday, June 17 - do we simply have no data, or do we have data that conclusively establishes that no calls/texts fit into the above graphs so kindly done by BJB for that day (e.g., some phone records that run from prior to June 17 through a date past June 17, which would mean no activity then, etc.?) :waitasec:
ETA: I have reviewed the ping map for that day and it appears there's a 3 hour gap for Tuesday, June 17. Could there be more data between 5:30ish and 8:30ish & we just haven't seen it yet, or is that all there is?
Another way to look at things, given it appears you have ingested her records into a spreadsheet, is look how often Cindy used her phone period. To me it looks like she typically had her phone off while at Gentiva. Just a quick glance at calls I see 48 total for the first 20 days, or just a smidge under 2.5 per day. This includes the first week of June when she was on vacation.
No calls on the 21st or 22nd (a weekend) with anyone.
Then...June 23 - June 27 (5 days) there are 38 calls, or just over 7 per day.
Similar story with texts. Just six in the first 20 days, then seven over the next five days, and 53 on July 3.
Not as broad a range of home phone records in the April dump...but my impression is that KC was attempting to force Cindy to use the cell phone rather than the land line. Maybe this was to avoid any chance of speaking with George, or perhaps there was another reason. :waitasec:
Oh no - BJB - I agree with you re: Casey & Cindy being of the most probative value. When I said "... calls/texts fit into the above graphs so kindly done by BJB for that day," I was referring (apparently incoherently, lol) to calls/texts between Cindy/Casey, since that was what would have "fit" there...For these charts I only plotted the Cindy:Casey:G&C phone relationships. Can do the same for other relationships e.g. Casey:George or Casey:Tony, etc. Just takes time...and I thought the Cindy:Casey relationship was of most value.