Found Deceased CA - Audrey Moran, 26, & Jonathan Reynoso, 28, Riverside County, 10 May 2017 #1

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't follow all that many missing person cases, but with all the ones I have followed, the frustration we are encountering here is prevalent.

The McStay case is a perfect example. Almost none of the info given to the public, for years!!!!!, turned out to be true.

What "WE" know, may just not be a priority for LE. They may deliver just enough info. to stir up memory and hopefully useful leads.

Very true. I completely agree with you and firmly believe law enforcement knows plenty.
 
I wonder how long On Star keeps route data ? I would think they could access through the GPS , what roads the Suv took.? Also 8 to 8:45 is a long stay if you are picking up somebody. I am guessing the sister wasn't near a clock.
 
Good one..... From ON STAR...
How often is data collected from the vehicle?
OnStar Smart Driver data is collected by OnStar from the vehicle upon every ignition cycle. Once data is collected, customers may log in to their account on onstar.com and view this information on the OnStar Smart Driver Activity Page from their computer or mobile device.

https://www.onstar.com/us/en/help-support/onstar-smart-driver/driving-info-data-collection.html

It would appear that some of the travel should or could be solved, a wealth of information here?


 
Maybe, but I also found another that still had them separate... for Jon call Palm Desert and for Audrey call the legal group. Weird huh?

Can you post that flyer. The ones I read didn't differentiate between AM and JDR.
 
Good one..... From ON STAR...
How often is data collected from the vehicle?
OnStar Smart Driver data is collected by OnStar from the vehicle upon every ignition cycle. Once data is collected, customers may log in to their account on onstar.com and view this information on the OnStar Smart Driver Activity Page from their computer or mobile device.

https://www.onstar.com/us/en/help-support/onstar-smart-driver/driving-info-data-collection.html

It would appear that some of the travel should or could be solved, a wealth of information here?



Ahh... I'd always wondered about this but couldn't find anything. Thanks for sharing! This should certainly be helpful for LE.
 
I'm not sure I can... it's on the Find Audrey/Jon FB. Its public but I don't know if that's an okay link to share.

I looked at the one on Find Audrey/Jon and it doesn't differentiate between AM and JDR.

But now, Riverside is supposed to be handling all leads, so not sure....
 
Ahh... I'd always wondered about this but couldn't find anything. Thanks for sharing! This should certainly be helpful for LE.

I looked into this. It's controversial, because on the one hand, we don't want On-Star invading our privacy. Tesla ran up against this 4th amendment/privacy issues. If you don't go missing, do you want a company to know your every move?

But apparently it's up to the owner to decide just how much On-Star tracks.
 
You bring up a lot of interesting points, and it's really helpful that you show your thought process on this as well.

I really wonder if there isn't simple confusion on the Brawley matter. For instance, maybe JDR met someone who was from Brawley, and he was helping him/her move, or was going to meet some new people at a bar or house party mid-way. Whatever the plans were that night, it seems that they weren't long in duration. As in, they were probably made that day. Or even at the last minute.

I have been thinking this exact same thing, that perhaps the receiver of the info heard it wrong. Or AM herself interpreted it wrong. "A friend from Brawely" turned into "with friends in Brawley". Classic game of Telephone. Also someone brought up the auto-correct. On the wrong info theory, what if Brawley was really Beaumont? In one of the news pieces it was stated that none of the people they knew in the Inland Empire expected them, so they (or one of them) do know people out that way.
 
I looked into this. It's controversial, because on the one hand, we don't want On-Star invading our privacy. Tesla ran up against this 4th amendment/privacy issues. If you don't go missing, do you want a company to know your every move?

But apparently it's up to the owner to decide just how much On-Star tracks.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you have to pay for comprehensive On-Star services through GM, which of course would require you to consent to their terms of tracking when you sign up. I had a differently branded vehicle with similar service on it and read the disclosures. The legalese boiled down to you pay this monthly fee and we can keep track of where your car is even if it's off. We can also use the GPS data for marketing, R&D and repo purposes. This was all separate and apart from using the navigation system.
 
Ahh... I'd always wondered about this but couldn't find anything. Thanks for sharing! This should certainly be helpful for LE.

With this done correctly, one should be able to pinpoint when she left her sister's house, where she went, and everything else until the vehicle came to rest in Beaumont on the 10, it was most likely not tampered with because On Star was able to locate the vehicle on request meaning things were operational..... If someone intercepted these people they probably made a mistake and were not aware she was driving up with On Star as a feature.
 
I think that there is absolutely a chance they could have met foul play. What I was asking was what evidence pointed to that because I think right now arguments could be made for both and I felt like the direction of this thread was very one sided. Of course, everyone would want to believe that they wouldn't take off, but I've had mothers come to me and tell me that their child didn't put the syringe filled with heroin in their own arm. I was merely asking if there was some indication I had missed. I apologize to everyone for interrupting the discussion with my nonsense.
First time poster, so not sure I'm doing this correctly. My apologies to all if I'm not. Offdutycriminologist (ODC), you say there is a chance they could have met with foul play and that you think (at least for the moment) an argument could be made for something other than a voluntary disappearance of these two people. I'm interested in what argument you would advance for the latter. TIA
 
its not interrupting. its just that all angles are being discussed. I have no idea. they could have ran off, they could have been abducted, they could have gotten involved in something they should not have, I don't know. just here to discuss ideas.

I think that there is absolutely a chance they could have met foul play. What I was asking was what evidence pointed to that because I think right now arguments could be made for both and I felt like the direction of this thread was very one sided. Of course, everyone would want to believe that they wouldn't take off, but I've had mothers come to me and tell me that their child didn't put the syringe filled with heroin in their own arm. I was merely asking if there was some indication I had missed. I apologize to everyone for interrupting the discussion with my nonsense.
 
I have been thinking this exact same thing, that perhaps the receiver of the info heard it wrong. Or AM herself interpreted it wrong. "A friend from Brawely" turned into "with friends in Brawley". Classic game of Telephone. Also someone brought up the auto-correct. On the wrong info theory, what if Brawley was really Beaumont? In one of the news pieces it was stated that none of the people they knew in the Inland Empire expected them, so they (or one of them) do know people out that way.

Yes! And there are definitely cities in both directions that start with B Blyth, Banning, Barstow, Beaumont, Baker. Only thing that keeps me from going all the way with that thought is the KMIR news report stating that "several people have told investigators he was coming back from Brawley with friends".
 
also maybe they have their own PI's working for them. my husband's crzy ex wife had us stalked by PI's I believe she got through her lawyer. lol

Walter Clark Legal Group is a personal injury firm, but maybe they offered their services. There might be someone who wants to give a lead, who either fears ICE or has a record and would not want to speak directly with LE.
 
First time poster, so not sure I'm doing this correctly. My apologies to all if I'm not. Offdutycriminologist (ODC), you say there is a chance they could have met with foul play and that you think (at least for the moment) an argument could be made for something other than a voluntary disappearance of these two people. I'm interested in what argument you would advance for the latter. TIA

So, they're close (relative) to the border, Jon is unemployed, there are some unexplained circumstances here that have not been fully fleshed out in the sixty days they've been missing. My mom always used to tell me "what's the most logical answer?" The most logical answer is Jon was making a little side money. There's a reason no one has come forward from Brawley. Someone knows something and they just aren't talking. And I'm going to leave it at that.

<modsnip>
 
I have been thinking this exact same thing, that perhaps the receiver of the info heard it wrong. Or AM herself interpreted it wrong. "A friend from Brawely" turned into "with friends in Brawley". Classic game of Telephone. Also someone brought up the auto-correct. On the wrong info theory, what if Brawley was really Beaumont? In one of the news pieces it was stated that none of the people they knew in the Inland Empire expected them, so they (or one of them) do know people out that way.

I thought the same thing, but I couldn't get an attempt at "Brawley" to autocorrect to "Beaumont".

But, that would make SO much more sense, given where the vehicle ends up.
 
ODC Interesting pov. Not trying to compromise you at all as its apparent you have to be discrete and respect to that. Just curious what are your thoughts are on Brawley and the interviewed friends/mother stating there was no Brawley connection.
 
ODC Interesting pov. Not trying to compromise you at all as its apparent you have to be discrete and respect to that. Just curious what are your thoughts are on Brawley and the interviewed friends/mother stating there was no Brawley connection.

My understanding of Brawley, and I mean no offense to anyone from the area, I am a total outsider who is getting this information from LEO friends is that it is basically just a drug trafficking route. That's what I've been told. But understand where I'm coming from, too. That's their world so that's all they probably know of Brawley, too.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you have to pay for comprehensive On-Star services through GM, which of course would require you to consent to their terms of tracking when you sign up. I had a differently branded vehicle with similar service on it and read the disclosures. The legalese boiled down to you pay this monthly fee and we can keep track of where your car is even if it's off. We can also use the GPS data for marketing, R&D and repo purposes. This was all separate and apart from using the navigation system.

I performed a very cursory search on this. My personal interest is constitutional rights, so I glommed onto those articles that referenced that issue. I didn't do enough research to come to any kind of definitive conclusion.

BUT on that note, if the place AM was going to meet JDR was not familiar, maybe she typed it into her GPS....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
133
Guests online
1,553
Total visitors
1,686

Forum statistics

Threads
601,768
Messages
18,129,554
Members
231,138
Latest member
mjF7nx
Back
Top