Cell Phone Activity Discussion Thread #2

[cityslick]

Originally posted by "Shelby1" in Timeline/reference thread. Copying and pasting.


Oct. 4th:
search continues dozens of LE on scene
3 pictures released of Lisa
parents and grandparents on scene
KCPD and FBI searching around house
Amber alert reported
searching woods west of house
mom taken in for questioning
command post set up
father still at scene
searching near Chouteau and Parvin rd
LE: 100+ officers, help from FBI..ICE..and others, not sure if window was entry
searching fields near house
Firefighter's repel down cliff 34th Terrace and N. Myrtle
Searching near Buckeye park
Amber alert cancelled now listed as missing/endangered
k-9 and police finished for the night

Oct 5th
searching woods near home
LE: 30-40 LE @command post 50 on call, dogs searching woods, parents interviewed until 11pm, LE working with NCMEK, Industrial area, neighborhood and woods near home searched, woods searched 3 times..with different dogs, knocked on 300 doors in area.
2 members from NCMEK on the way to assist with search
several dogs getting ready to search
CSI on scene getting suited up, searching
CSI looking at window
Parents arrive and collect 2 small bags then leave
Parents make plea for return
LE: 300 Le involved, 3 shoulder to shoulder searches, family cooperating, not ruling anything out, FBI suited up to protect scene, no ransom note
neighbor reports her dog did not bark
LE checking sighting at Love's bus stop

Oct 6th
Parents told media 3 phones missing
no developments on truck stop sighting
LE getting ready to search wooded area near house
LE searching manholes in neighborhood by house
LE now searching wooded area near house
Parents speak with LE at command post
LE searched in trash cans
Traffic no longer open on Lister
LE "stumped" for clues
Parents not cooperating
LE shut down command post

Oct. 7th.
Parents dispute LE claim they are not cooperating
Parents decline to comment to local media
LE searching landfill
LE checking sighting from California
LE using metal detectors behind homes in neighborhood
Family releases more photos of Lisa

Oct 8th
GMA allowed inside house
LE will not comment on phones
Parents back out of interview with local media
LE talks with parents on the phone
Parents explain why they backed out of video
CSI at home with metal detectors
Parents sitting down with LE in person talking

Oct 9th
Family of Lisa handed out flyers at NASCAR
Family also setting up trust fund for reward
LE try to recreate break in through window

I think what your missing is when LE became aware of the phones, not us. I think the guess is that LE knew about the missing phones on day one, hence the metal detectors on day one.

 

[natsound]

When did parents tell LE that the phones were missing?

We don't know, because LE would not comment on the phones.

 

[natsound]

I think what your missing is when LE became aware of the phones, not us. I think the guess is that LE knew about the missing phones on day one, hence the metal detectors on day one.

The timeline does not indicate metal detectors on day one. The timeline indicates metal detectors around the house on the 8th. I realize this timeline did not come from LE, but I'm going off of what's here.

 

[In da Middle]

According to the timeline above, LE didn't search at the house with metal detectors until October 8!

Which version of the timeline is this?:floorlaugh:
I am fairly sure they were out with them before this. Stuff is kind of blending now though. I do know they were out with them before it came out about the phones because we were stumped about why were out in the woods with them while looking for a baby. They were all over the woods with them very early on.

ETA I am talking from us in the neighborhood personally witnessing the metal detectors. I dont know when the media became aware of it.

 

[natsound]

Which version of the timeline is this?:floorlaugh:
I am fairly sure they were out with them before this. Stuff is kind of blending now though. I do know they were out with them before it came out about the phones because we were stumped about why were out in the woods with them while looking for a baby. They were all over the woods with them very early on.

I understand. You're there and you've seen all of this with your own eyes. But I have a strong feeling that DB had opportunity to get rid of the phones after the 911 call was made.

 

[epiphany]

IMO, Picerno does not know whether or not the 50 sec call at close to 12 from DB's got through or not to MW's cell. I believe that's why he spent air time emphasizing that his client would not use her cell had she been awake that evening/morning. According to Picerno, DB supposedly knew at that time that her cell was unable to make outgoing calls because of non-payment. Me: not buying it. In emergencies, I've tried to see if objects work that rationally I know may not. A call could have slipped through.

 

[cityslick]

I understand. You're there and you've seen all of this with your own eyes. But I have a strong feeling that DB had opportunity to get rid of the phones after the 911 call was made.

I respect you're opinion, I just think it would be extremely difficult (more than all the other scenarios) to do that and no one know it, especially JI.

 

[mck16]

I understand. You're there and you've seen all of this with your own eyes. But I have a strong feeling that DB had opportunity to get rid of the phones after the 911 call was made.

Why would she get rid of the phones? What is on the phone physically that is not in the records from the phone company. Pictures maybe??? And if she got rid of the phones to hide anything seems she would get rid of the computers too. It makes no sense to me just trying to think through it. jmo

 

[GoodGurl]

Why would she get rid of the phones? What is on the phone physically that is not in the records from the phone company. Pictures maybe??? And if she got rid of the phones to hide anything seems she would get rid of the computers too. It makes no sense to me just trying to think through it. jmo

And if it wasn't PDI getting rid of the phones, then SODDI was very close to the house up until 3:30 still trying to use the phones, before making them totally disappear too. Makes no sense. There must be a big puzzle piece missing.

 

[natsound]

Why would she get rid of the phones? What is on the phone physically that is not in the records from the phone company. Pictures maybe??? And if she got rid of the phones to hide anything seems she would get rid of the computers too. It makes no sense to me just trying to think through it. jmo

From the very first week of this case, I've questioned on this board whether DB simply didn't know how extensive phone records were. She may have felt at the time that getting rid of the phone was getting rid of any trace of the calls/call attempts.

Someone else has suggested that the actual phone might be needed to see all texts, to hear voice messages, and to see any pictures. I can't imagine how pictures would fit into this, but I'm giving an example of what might be on a phone that could not be retrieved through records.

 

[cityslick]

From the very first week of this case, I've questioned on this board whether DB simply didn't know how extensive phone records were. She may have felt at the time that getting rid of the phone was getting rid of any trace of the calls/call attempts.

Someone else has suggested that the actual phone might be needed to see all texts, to hear voice messages, and to see any pictures. I can't imagine how pictures would fit into this, but I'm giving an example of what might be on a phone that could not be retrieved through records.

I know you can't determine internet use from the phone itself (it would be through the ISP the phone used) and I don't think you can get texts, but I'd be very surprised if there wasn't a method to retrieve voicemails, even if you didn't have the phone. The vm's themselves are not stored on the phone itself.

 

[mck16]

From the very first week of this case, I've questioned on this board whether DB simply didn't know how extensive phone records were. She may have felt at the time that getting rid of the phone was getting rid of any trace of the calls/call attempts.

Someone else has suggested that the actual phone might be needed to see all texts, to hear voice messages, and to see any pictures. I can't imagine how pictures would fit into this, but I'm giving an example of what might be on a phone that could not be retrieved through records.

Maybe fingerprints too. What is SODDI? tia

 

[natsound]

Maybe fingerprints too. What is SODDI? tia

some other dude did it

 

[natsound]

I know you can't determine internet use from the phone itself (it would be through the ISP the phone used) and I don't think you can get texts, but I'd be very surprised if there wasn't a method to retrieve voicemails, even if you didn't have the phone. The vm's themselves are not stored on the phone itself.

A key reason to get rid of the phones would be to get rid of the texts, and I would think the content of the voice mails.

 

[cityslick]

A key reason to get rid of the phones would be to get rid of the texts, and I would think the content of the voice mails.

The texts I can understand, but I think LE is able to get the content of vm's, since vm's are stored at a central location, not the phone itself. Also, cell records (detailed ones) would be able to tell if text messages were sent or not. You just wouldn't get the content.

We haven't heard anything about there being records of texts being sent. It may be there and not disclosed but so far, haven't heard anything, just about the call and vm attempts.

 

[hambirg]

A key reason to get rid of the phones would be to get rid of the texts, and I would think the content of the voice mails.

I do believe that the texts would be important, but you can retrieve vms without the phone. Do we know for sure if there is a way that LE can see texts without the actual phone?

 

[cityslick]

I do believe that the texts would be important, but you can retrieve vms without the phone. Do we know for sure if there is a way that LE can see texts without the actual phone?

Can't see the content, but the report would show a text message sent or received.

 

[hambirg]

Can't see the content, but the report would show a text message sent or received.

Hmmm. . ok. So we either have to assume there weren't any or LE isn't telling us. :waitasec:

 

[natsound]

I do believe that the texts would be important, but you can retrieve vms without the phone. Do we know for sure if there is a way that LE can see texts without the actual phone?

So if there were two voice mail checks, can we reasonably assume there was at least one voice mail on the phone, and LE has heard it?

 

[hambirg]

So if there were two voice mail checks, can we reasonably assume there was at least one voice mail on the phone, and LE has heard it?

Idk. . it could be, if there was a voicemail, that it was listened to and erased. I don't know if erased vms can be retrieved.