CO CO - Kelsey Berreth, 29, Woodland Park, Teller County, 22 Nov 2018 - #10

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
First time posting on here! I've been keeping up with the threads and I must say that a lot of these theories are interesting. Like a lot of people I've seen, I do not think she is alive. I really hope I end up wrong about this. It's honestly sad, especially so close to Christmas. I feel for her baby girl, as well.
 
I am just saying it is mathematically and physically possible, for a phone with a booster, on high ground, in a pickup truck, on a proper weather day to transmit a single ping, out of millions it is sending, to a single tower pointed in the right general direction."

Rangerover, I respectfully disagree. What we colloquially call a "single ping" is actually a series of bidirectional packets transmitted between the phone and the tower.

As an example this document illustrates the protocol necessary to establish an LTE connection. The mobile phone is known as "UE" and the tower is known as "eNodeB". (Note this document is more complicated than the simplest case because it covers contention between three UEs attempting to connect).

The basic protocol for LTE to connect is:
  • Communication begins with the phone observing the signal transmitted from the tower and synchronizing the PSS and SSS signals. The phone next has to decode specific configuration information being sent from the tower (MIB, DCI, SIB, SIB2).
  • With the above synchronized timing and configuration information the phone knows when it is allowed to send a RA-RNTI message to the random access channel. This is basically means "knock knock". The phone does not identify itself at this time. This signal must be sent within a defined time window of receiving the above information. After that window new information is needed.
  • The tower responds with a RA-Response signal that basically means "I hear you, you are authorized to talk back to me at the following frequency and time slot."
  • The phone then sends an RRC Connection Request on the specified frequencies and time slot (accurate to within a few microseconds). It is only during the connection request that the phone first identifies itself to the tower.
  • Two additional commands need to be sent (RRC Connection Setup from tower to phone and RRC Connection Complete from phone to tower) before the connection is complete.
Therefore please understand that for a phone to identify itself a series of handshakes must be completed.

Now, note my above bolded statement "This signal must be sent within a defined time window of receiving the above information." The maximum time window for LTE is 667 microseconds for the base to send the information and the phone to send the RA-RNTI message. At the speed of light this means the absolute maximum distance that an LTE ping could happen is 100 km (62 miles).

GSM phones have a different handshake but similar constraints. The maximum distance for standard GSM is 35 km and for "extended range" GSM is 70 km.

In short, it is impossible for a cowboy in a truck with a yagi sticking out the roof to establish a ping a tower 100 miles away. This is dictated by the timing of the protocol, not by the physics of radio transmission.
 
"They cannot remove a child from a parent unless they have reason to believe that child is in danger. They have no proof that he has ever harmed the child or even that he has committed a crime. They can't remove a child based on speculation. Imo"
That's what I'm saying. It kinda surprised me in the beginning when the news said child services was on the scene but found the baby was fine with PF. I even said to the TV, "but isn't he close to being a POI?" The TV said nothing.:confused:
 
Last edited:
What is the absolutely fastest, simplest, , with lowest chance of detection, for PF to dispose of a body?

What has been suggested?

Assume, for scope, he needed to do it in less than 2 hours.

Just so we use the same info, let's say their homes are 20 minutes apart.
Apologies if my last reply was perceived as rude. I just think it would be more productive to put any theory you may have out there right off the bat rather than go back and forth with leading questions.
 
They cannot remove a child from a parent unless they have reason to believe that child is in danger. They have no proof that he has ever harmed the child or even that he has committed a crime. They can't remove a child based on speculation. Imo
That's what I'm saying. It kinda surprised me in the beginning when the news said child services was on the scene but found the baby was fine with PF. I even said to the TV, "but isn't he close to being a POI?" The TV said nothing.:confused:
Lol. I’m glad the tv didn’t respond!

“Close to being a POI” isn’t enough.

Although I think that most of us hope that there are grounds with which to remove that child.

If they have evidence of his involvement, of course.
 
I agree that it is based on something found elsewhere, possibly in relation to that trash dump.

I’ve seen CSI teams return to the scene of a murder, on multiple occasions.

Doing it now, doesn’t mean it wasn’t done before.

They did it atleast twice in the Jayme Closs case, for instance.
I also think it's possible that CBI/FBI just got some forensic test results back from evidence they previously collected at the house. I still have those steep stairs to the loft in the back of my mind. MOO
 
The question is whether the phone ping in Goodling was a "rustled" ping or a "stray" ping. Given the direction, location, and distance it seems likely that the "ping" was "rustled" from KB's "rustled" phone.
This is a very informative article that was originally posted by Massguy.

According to Mark Pfoff, who worked as an El Paso County Sheriff’s Deputy for 20 years before launching Rocky Mountain Computer Forensics. He’s now a court-qualified expert on cell phones and computers.
Cell phone data is key to cracking Berreth case, expert says
 
Can you site any other cases where a person was innocent and behaved in this way?

First and foremost, I want to make sure that everyone understands that I have taken a totally neutral position with this case. I have accepted the fact that I know close to nothing about anything that would allow me to get on one side of this fence or another. I spend my time trying to come up with as many possible scenarios that could've played out based on the info I feel to be provable fact, using my thoughts, beliefs and knowledge of basic human behavior. The desired end result, for me is not to determine if someone committed a crime and who that person right now. If I put any focus into trying to figure those things out, my thought process is altered dramatically. Basically, I just can't come up with as many and neutral scenarios.

Again, this is not what I believe took place. This is simply an idea that came to me after looking through information, that is all. What if PF did end up back at KBs home, probably to pick up the child. I am going to assume that he is able enter the home freely, with his own key or with one that is kept in a hiding place. He enters the home and finds KB unresponsive. There are a couple of possibilities that lead to him finding her in this state. A) Someone else had been there before he arrived and committed a crime against KB(I am trying really hard to avoid certain terms here. I apologize if it reads weird because of that.) It could've been someone she knew, a friend, someone who was more than a friend or maybe a complete stranger. At some point KB and this person got into an argument, fight, whatever and something was done to put her in the state that PF found her in. If I am going with a complete stranger that did this, it was a home invasion or something of that nature gone wrong. Or, B) she experienced some sort of reaction to medication, she drank too much and tripped down the stairs, she could have overdosed on something. There is always a chance that she really did have issues with substance abuse, she was having a difficult time with something and she went too far with whatever she was using that day. She passed out, stopped breathing and that was that. I am not sure which one I would lean more towards at this point. It doesn't really matter, one or the other was the cause of how PF found her when he walked into the home. Due to such recent cases like CW and the many, many others that seem to be taking place all over right now, PF goes into a complete panic for a number of reasons. He just found the woman he loves in an unresponsive state. He likely would've experienced intense fear when he realized he was going to be the primary suspect. He then realized his child would not have both parents if he was blamed for this happening. The baby would've been somewhere in the home, probably crying unless she was napping. That would add to the panic. Trying to figure out how to handle the situation, the pain that one would feel when realizing something awful just happened to the woman you love, the fear of being blamed for it, a crying baby somewhere, the extreme emotions in a moment like this would make it very hard for some people to think logically. If it was the overdose or substance related he might've given thought to making sure nobody found out how this happened. Maybe he did not want that to be last thing anyone thought about her. All of those emotions and that thinking could cause some people to be extremely irrational and impulsive. These two things, in an such a traumatic situation, could lead to someone taking steps to cover it up, to make it seem as though the other person just disappeared. Once it was all said and done this person realized what he had just done but, there was no way to go back on it. If he was to come clean about covering up the crime he walked into, nobody would believe a word of it. His situation would end up being worse than it would've been if he had told the truth from the beginning. So, it was too late for that. The following days consisted of the various things we know about through the press releases. He would've obtained the attorney, possibly being honest with that person, which led to him being told not to talk to any media or LE. It is possible they have been trying to come with a plan that would allow him to the tell the truth and also show he did nothing wrong. I could go on and on about how something like this would explain this, that and the other thing but, I hope everyone gets the ideas here.

When I give it even more thought, I believe something like this is very possible. I have read about people reacting in very irrational ways when overcome with intense fear and other emotions. I am interested in reading what you all think about this. Just me thinking out loud, that's all. I have no idea what happened in this case. It is baffling to me.
 
A new thread has been created and is ready for posting. Please make your way over to the new thread linked below:

CO - CO - Kelsey Berreth, 29, Woodland Park, Teller County, 22 Nov 2018 - #11

threadclosed.png


link for graphic
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
148
Guests online
259
Total visitors
407

Forum statistics

Threads
609,241
Messages
18,251,320
Members
234,583
Latest member
WhyWouldIWearUnderwear
Back
Top