Cell Phone Activity Timeline as of 11/11

[Kamille]

Children that age are easily manipulated and easily fooled. They will also say what their parents convince them of. I am not going to completely accept what they have to say at this time. Especially because the neighbor has not said she saw her after 4:30. That is very worrisome, imo.

Believe me...the boys were questioned about that the first day, October 4th. LE has not indicated that they believe Lisa was missing any earlier than during the time DB was home alone with the children or JI would have been given a poly.

MOO

 

[In da Middle]

I'm sure the boys have indicated when the last time they saw their sister was. I don't recall seeing that information in the media at all. Can someone refresh my memory as to what type of "meal" an 11 month old baby would have before bed? I know they are still on the bottle (I guess Lisa was not breast fed) but don't they have a pretty good solid food diet at this point too? If so, then I would think the boys at least must have seen Lisa at the dinner hour.

MOO

I am sure they did too and on the very first day. I am glad for the boys sake that their information has not been leaked. I am only stating that just because we dont have all of the information doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just because WE don;t have information if she was seen or not after a certain time doesn't mean it doesnt exist and just because WE dont have information that she was or wasn't out of her crib between 4:30 and 6:30 doesn't mean she wasn't. That is all I am saying.

 

[In da Middle]

IMO if I were to go with the theory I came up with, I believe (just using 5 minutes as an example since we don't know how often a phone pings):

I believe LE knows the phones pinged at that residence until x:xxam
I believe LE knows the phones pinged at one additional location away from the Irwin residence, 34th & Brighton.
I believe there was enough time (going off my "if a phone pinged every 5 minutes theory") inbetween a ping at 34th & Brighton and some access point to the Missouri River (even driving across the I-435 bridge or the Cheateau bridge) for someone to throw all of the phones in the river.


I believe based off of the pings, LE knows where the attempted call to MW was made from IF it was 11:57pm. I also believe based off of the pings of the voice mail access attempts at 3:17 and 3:22 am IF these times are correct. I hate to speculate on the actual times at this point given the source.


Not sure about ping time intervals- but I do know that I can get my childs phone "pinged " every minute and sent to me with Celltrakr software..

So Im guessing its possible that LE could know the speed walking vs driving in additional to direction of the phone if its GPS capable....

Where is the 34Th & Brighton info coming from? Is there a link for that?

 

[katydid23]

Was it said that Lisa was not at the dinner table? What source is the people mag timeline going on, SB? Who was in the house at 5:30?

This gets cleared up quickly by asking the boys during the first interview if Lisa was at the dinner table or if they knew she ate something. We don't know this so we are assuming she wasn't.

It was said that the LAST time SB saw the baby was at 4:30 in her crib. So that means that she was NOT at the dinner table at 5;30, imo. Otherwise she would not say it was the last time she saw her at 4:30.

And I am not sure that anything the brothers say now will clear it up. They could have been coached to say anything by now.

 

[In da Middle]

Well, looking at it logically, there are only a few people that were reportedly present in the last hours before the baby went missing. There was Mom, the boys and the neighbor and her 4 yr old. That is it according to everything we have heard. There was a report at one time that the 20 yr old brother was there, but that seemingly has been denied since then.

In People magazine there was a published timeline which purports to explain the last sightings of the baby. The neighbor says she saw the baby in her crib when she checked on her, while mom was at the store. Then they have a sighting at 6:30, apparently by the 4 yr old girl. These are given as facts in the timeline.

As far as I know, there are no other sightings, except possibly by the brothers. But I am not sure those would be that credible at this point.

Why would the boys account of that night NOT be credible????? They were interviewed within hours of this happening.

 

[katydid23]

There is nothing to indicate that she was not at the dinner table. I don't suppose she was eating macaroni and chicken but she may have been having baby food in her high chair. Why the details of where Lisa was ALL DAY have been left out of every media article is beyond me too though. :waitasec:

There is another article that claims a "source" close to the family said that JI had dinner with his "family" before going to work also.


Irwin came home from his day job as an electrician about 2:30 that afternoon, which was the first Monday in October. He stayed long enough to have dinner with his family and play with the children.

About 4:30 p.m., Bradley and her brother, Phillip Netz, left to go a neighborhood store to buy a box of wine and baby supplies. Irwin stayed with Lisa and her half-brothers, ages 8 and 5.

About 5 p.m., Netz and Bradley returned from the store.

Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/01/3243027/a-look-back-at-a-critical-night.html#ixzz1dcpQNnXR

But this article is in conflict with the People mag timeline. So it confuses me. Why would they have dinner at 4:00 and then she makes dinner again at 5:30? Seems odd. I could see dad eating at 4ish because he is on his way to the second job of the day. But Lisa was put in her crib at that time, while mom and brother go to the store. And apparently no one other than possibly fmily sees her after that time.

 

[katydid23]

Why would the boys account of that night NOT be credible????? They were interviewed within hours of this happening.

Because it is possible that IF something bad happened to the baby, that mom tried to cover it up and may have fooled the boys into thinking they saw her alive. Or even scared them into saying so. imoo

 

[SmoothOperator]

Re: neighbor sees Lisa at 4:30pm

IMO we do not have a clue what SB truly states about the night in question.. We have a bunch of "media outlets" reporting on this subject.. That is why I will not personally nail to the wall any of the times associated with SB.. IMO that's what causes such an uproar is that people are solely dependant upon media reports to prove or not prove human beings guilt..this IMO just is NOT RELIABLE IN THE VERY LEAST.. we've all seen and read and watched with our very own eyes MSM reportings made by supposed legitimate reporters stating ABSOLUTELY INCORRECT INFORMATION, DETAILS, AND TIMES..

Why then would it be the info coming from sources we've seen be mistaken and/or downright reporting false information.. How can those sources be reliable to the point of people making a decision of a human beings guilt or innocence of murdering a child..

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being on the fence and after witnessing the extremely faulty, all out crappy and false reporting done in this case I do not feel that there is anything reliable to the point of deciding someone is guilty..

That is not being blind to the existence of particular details(as was stated upthread about DB supporters).. And personally I don't see anyone hailing their support of DB and I would be placed in the DB category when the truth is far from that.. I have been extremely open about issues and details that I find disheartening and do not condone.. Just because I do not judge DB with Bashings over the head DOES NOT EQUAL MY BEING A DB SUPPORTER..

I have no problem being "on the fence" and moo but with the inaccurate bunk we've got as the basis Of this woman's guilt.. I have no desire to be anywhere else than on the fence until we actually have facts to work with.. And here on the fence there is nothing that is ignored, disregarded, or turned a blind eye.. It's all looked at equally.. I just refuse to base an opinion of someone's guilt when the vast majority of info and details are extremely questionable and unreliable..

Jmo, tho!

 

[Jaxson]

It was said that the LAST time SB saw the baby was at 4:30 in her crib. So that means that she was NOT at the dinner table at 5;30, imo. Otherwise she would not say it was the last time she saw her at 4:30.

And I am not sure that anything the brothers say now will clear it up. They could have been coached to say anything by now.

I thought the neighbor hadn't said anything herself. Can you link me to her comments? I guess I thought someone else had said SB checked on the baby at 4:30. and no one knew when she saw her last. also I tend to think that if she was in her crib at 4:30 and put to bed at 6:30 she was up at some point or she would have been 'put to bed' at 4:30. Or was she put to bed somewhere other than the crib?

 

[katydid23]

I am sure they did too and on the very first day. I am glad for the boys sake that their information has not been leaked. I am only stating that just because we dont have all of the information doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just because WE don;t have information if she was seen or not after a certain time doesn't mean it doesnt exist and just because WE dont have information that she was or wasn't out of her crib between 4:30 and 6:30 doesn't mean she wasn't. That is all I am saying.

Biut if she was out of her crib, then why wouldn't the visiting neighbor have seen her? She places the last sighting of Lisa at 4:30. If Lisa had been at dinner table at 5:30, or playing with the other kids at 6:30, then why didn't SB make her last sighting then and not 4:30?

I think a very cunning and manipulative mom can make her two young kids believe anything she needs them to believe.She can tell them they woke the bay, do you hear her crying, when that is not true at all. For one example.

 

[MissFine]

Why would the boys account of that night NOT be credible????? They were interviewed within hours of this happening.

Why wouldn't their accounts be credible? :waitasec:

Let's see, the boys are children. Young children. Not the most credible sometimes. Children go to school and often don't remember their homework assignment for the night or what day music class is or when a project is due.
moo

 

[katydid23]

I thought the neighbor hadn't said anything herself. Can you link me to her comments? I guess I thought someone else had said SB checked on the baby at 4:30. and no one knew when she saw her last. also I tend to think that if she was in her crib at 4:30 and put to bed at 6:30 she was up at some point or she would have been 'put to bed' at 4:30. Or was she put to bed somewhere other than the crib?

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7347233"]Lisa Irwin-Timeline - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

Above we have the link for our trusty WS timeline. The comments about SB were made by SB herself as far as I can tell from the People magazine article.
They are worded as if they are coming from her.

 

[MissFine]

Biut if she was out of her crib, then why wouldn't the visiting neighbor have seen her? She places the last sighting of Lisa at 4:30. If Lisa had been at dinner table at 5:30, or playing with the other kids at 6:30, then why didn't SB make her last sighting then and not 4:30?

I think a very cunning and manipulative mom can make her two young kids believe anything she needs them to believe.She can tell them they woke the bay, do you hear her crying, when that is not true at all. For one example.

bbm

I believe you're right katy! Parents have a huge influence on their children. moo

 

[Jaxson]

Re: neighbor sees Lisa at 4:30pm

IMO we do not have a clue what SB truly states about the night in question.. We have a bunch of "media outlets" reporting on this subject.. That is why I will not personally nail to the wall any of the times associated with SB.. IMO that's what causes such an uproar is that people are solely dependant upon media reports to prove or not prove human beings guilt..this IMO just is NOT RELIABLE IN THE VERY LEAST.. we've all seen and read and watched with our very own eyes MSM reportings made by supposed legitimate reporters stating ABSOLUTELY INCORRECT INFORMATION, DETAILS, AND TIMES..

Why then would it be the info coming from sources we've seen be mistaken and/or downright reporting false information.. How can those sources be reliable to the point of people making a decision of a human beings guilt or innocence of murdering a child..

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being on the fence and after witnessing the extremely faulty, all out crappy and false reporting done in this case I do not feel that there is anything reliable to the point of deciding someone is guilty..

That is not being blind to the existence of particular details(as was stated upthread about DB supporters).. And personally I don't see anyone hailing their support of DB and I would be placed in the DB category when the truth is far from that.. I have been extremely open about issues and details that I find disheartening and do not condone.. Just because I do not judge DB with Bashings over the head DOES NOT EQUAL MY BEING A DB SUPPORTER..

I have no problem being "on the fence" and moo but with the inaccurate bunk we've got as the basis Of this woman's guilt.. I have no desire to be anywhere else than on the fence until we actually have facts to work with.. And here on the fence there is nothing that is ignored, disregarded, or turned a blind eye.. It's all looked at equally.. I just refuse to base an opinion of someone's guilt when the vast majority of info and details are extremely questionable and unreliable..

Jmo, tho!

I for one will state straight up that I believe DB had nothing to do with this and that the various media have screwed up every thing they have printed to date with a few exceptions. I don't think she has lied either. I think LE knows her timeline and has been aware of what went on that night from the beginning. I don't think her story has changed significantly. Just because WE heard about some things later doesn't mean she hadn't already told LE.

I think she has questioned her own ability to remember based on the fact that she was drinking. I don't think she blacked out and she hasn't said she did, (just maybe she had or it was possible) but I don't think she has ever had a blackout, nor do I think she understands what that is.

So much has been twisted around by media and then LE won't say anything. I think they made a big mistake when they said the parents weren't cooperating at the time that Jeremy said he needed a break.

As far as a perfect storm goes, don't forget to add homeless handiman arsonist in the area that knows a number dialed from one of the stolen cell phones and there is a dumpster fire. You can't just pick out cohinkydinks that point to the parents.

 

[Peepers]

You could be right Jaxson.
There's allot of spin
the more players that are dragged in to this circus, the less convinced I am of anything.

 

[katydid23]

I for one will state straight up that I believe DB had nothing to do with this and that the various media have screwed up every thing they have printed to date with a few exceptions. I don't think she has lied either. I think LE knows her timeline and has been aware of what went on that night from the beginning. I don't think her story has changed significantly. Just because WE heard about some things later doesn't mean she hadn't already told LE.

I think she has questioned her own ability to remember based on the fact that she was drinking. I don't think she blacked out and she hasn't said she did, (just maybe she had or it was possible) but I don't think she has ever had a blackout, nor do I think she understands what that is.

So much has been twisted around by media and then LE won't say anything. I think they made a big mistake when they said the parents weren't cooperating at the time that Jeremy said he needed a break.

As far as a perfect storm goes, don't forget to add homeless handiman arsonist in the area that knows a number dialed from one of the stolen cell phones and there is a dumpster fire. You can't just pick out cohinkydinks that point to the parents.

I am on the fence about DB's guilt or innocence. But she did lie. She originally said she put the baby to bed at 7:30 after giving her a bath, then checked on her again and changed her diaper at 10:30. That was a LIE. She has since admitted that was a lie and she actually put her to bed at 6:40 qnd has ne memory of checking on her again. So she did lie, and it was not the media messing that up, it was her.

 

[natsound]

Because it is possible that IF something bad happened to the baby, that mom tried to cover it up and may have fooled the boys into thinking they saw her alive. Or even scared them into saying so. imoo

The person doing the interviews should be able to tell if the boys have been coached. IMO, there's a reason DB didn't want to sit down with her own children and ask them what they heard that night.... Because she's scared of what they will say. An 8 year old should be pretty on the ball. I do think police have learned some things from the interviews.

 

[RANCH]

But this article is in conflict with the People mag timeline. So it confuses me. Why would they have dinner at 4:00 and then she makes dinner again at 5:30? Seems odd. I could see dad eating at 4ish because he is on his way to the second job of the day. But Lisa was put in her crib at that time, while mom and brother go to the store. And apparently no one other than possibly fmily sees her after that time.

Why is the People magazine article timeline the only believable timeline?

 

[katydid23]

Why is the People magazine article timeline the only believable timeline?

It is not. Not at all. I am just saying that when two articles conflict with each other, then both should be questioned.

 

[Whisperer]

But this article is in conflict with the People mag timeline. So it confuses me. Why would they have dinner at 4:00 and then she makes dinner again at 5:30? Seems odd. I could see dad eating at 4ish because he is on his way to the second job of the day. But Lisa was put in her crib at that time, while mom and brother go to the store. And apparently no one other than possibly fmily sees her after that time.

I just watched a video of DB on the second day and she said only ONE cell phone wasn't working. I'm confused.... She said she was reprogramming the other two. WTH!