CO CO - Kelsey Berreth, 29, Woodland Park, Teller County, 22 Nov 2018 - #51 *ARREST*

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
LittleBitty said:
Been gone for a few weeks (hello fellow crime solvers) been following the threads as much as I can and following any news reports:
Have they reported back on any DNA from the tooth/teeth mentioned in the SW? I feel like I’m fairly caught up again but I couldn’t find that anywhere. TIA.
Click to expand...
Ha! Believe it or not, but pretty much nothing has happened in the weeks you’ve been away.

We almost certainly won’t hear anything regarding lab results until trial.

Nothing on the landfill search either.
 
This is a no body murder prosecution. If Prosecutors decided to pursue a murder conviction solely based on kk own words then they are probably the only ones to ever do so.

I believe they have mountains of evidence that ties pf to KBs murder and I believe it will be very hard for any logical juror to overlook. My own ethical opinion
 
ab01 said:
This is a no body murder prosecution. If Prosecutors decided to pursue a murder conviction solely based on kk own words then they are probably the only ones to ever do so.

I believe they have mountains of evidence that ties pf to KBs murder and I believe it will be very hard for any logical juror to overlook. My own ethical opinion
Click to expand...
Yeah. And the search warrants and arrest affidavit make it clear that this isn’t based on KK’s word.

No matter how many times that claim is made, it doesn’t make it true.
 
ab01 said:
This is a no body murder prosecution. If Prosecutors decided to pursue a murder conviction solely based on kk own words then they are probably the only ones to ever do so.

I believe they have mountains of evidence that ties pf to KBs murder and I believe it will be very hard for any logical juror to overlook. My own ethical opinion
Click to expand...

BBM: Right. Let's all picture in our mind's eye how this would play out come trial time:

"Mr. May, is the state ready to call its first witness?"
"We are, Your Honor."
"Proceed."
"Your Honor, the state calls its first, last, and only witness, KK.
After the jury hears her testimony, the state intends to rest its case.
There will be no other evidence presented, as none is needed."

JMO.
 
FromGermany said:
I followed your link, thanks! :)
No. 3 shows:
You're in control
It's easy to change or delete locations, days, or your entire Location History. You can turn it on or off at any time. Learn more

So did KKL the days around TG, when her location was deleted?
Click to expand...
I have an older Android smartphone. It has a very obvious "Location" button that you can easily turn off. If I understand correctly, this prevents apps from tracking your location via satellite technology, AKA GPS. What it does NOT do is prevent your phone carrier, AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, etc., from recording the cell tower from which your call was placed or received. That technology, if I understand correctly, is antenna- and switch-based. So if I were to place a call right now, my phone would send a wireless signal to the nearest cell tower (more accurately, the cell tower with the strongest signal) , which would transmit the call. My provider saves the call data, including the cell tower location. This is what tripped those two fools up.
 
Kapua said:
I have an older Android smartphone. It has a very obvious "Location" button that you can easily turn off. If I understand correctly, this prevents apps from tracking your location via satellite technology, AKA GPS. What it does NOT do is prevent your phone carrier, AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, etc., from recording the cell tower from which your call was placed or received. That technology, if I understand correctly, is antenna- and switch-based. So if I were to place a call right now, my phone would send a wireless signal to the nearest cell tower (more accurately, the cell tower with the strongest signal) , which would transmit the call. My provider saves the call data, including the cell tower location. This is what tripped those two fools up.
Click to expand...
Exactly. And we do know that KK deleted her Google location history, but we don’t know if that was the case for PF.

One of the search warrants was for a Google email address in his name.

The cell tower information will be gold, but his Google data could be a goldmine.

Either way, he’s in a bad spot.
 
<modsnip: quoted post was removed>

It’s easy to say kk is a liar and everything she has said is a lie, doesn’t make it true. But it’s any easy argument to make.

On the other hand the physical and circumstantial evidence is much more difficult to argue <modsnip>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ab01 said:
<modsnip: quoted post was removed>

It’s easy to say kk is a liar and everything she has said is a lie, doesn’t make it true. But it’s any easy argument to make.

On the other hand the physical and circumstantial evidence is much more difficult to argue <modsnip>
Click to expand...
For me, she offers clarity.

But I don’t have to believe her or disbelieve her, in order to be convinced that the case against him is solid.

His provable lies, and the fact that he was communicating with a dead woman for two days, tells me all I need to know.

<modsnip>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MassGuy said:
For me, she offers clarity.

But I don’t have to believe her or disbelieve her, in order to be convinced that the case against him is solid.

His provable lies, and the fact that he was communicating with a dead woman for two days, tells me all I need to know.

<modsnip>
Click to expand...

I agree!

I mean <modsnip> kk had kB phone and pf and kk were communicating back and forth on it.....how can that possibly be explained away?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MassGuy said:
For me, she offers clarity.

But I don’t have to believe her or disbelieve her, in order to be convinced that the case against him is solid.

His provable lies, and the fact that he was communicating with a dead woman for two days, tells me all I need to know.

<modsnip>
Click to expand...

Like I've posted before, technology doesn't lie. PF's phone was on and PF was making calls on it. Every single one of those calls pinged off a cell tower and that information was recorded by the service provider. And KB lived in Woodland Park and PF in Florissant. LE knows when he was at/near KB's and when he was at/near his house. PF was captured on video in Woodland Park on 11/22 two times that we know about. There may be a lot of other video evidence that we haven't yet seen or heard about. Video camera evidence is the best eyewitness you can get. MOO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kapua said:
Like I've posted before, technology doesn't lie. PF's phone was on and PF was making calls on it. Every single one of those calls pinged off a cell tower and that information was recorded by the service provider. And KB lived in Woodland Park and PF in Florissant. LE knows when he was at/near KB's and when he was at/near his house. PF was captured on video in Woodland Park on 11/22 two times that we know about. There may be a lot of other video evidence that we haven't yet seen or heard about. Video camera evidence is the best eyewitness you can get. MOO
Click to expand...
Yup. The camera doesn’t lie.

<modsnip>

Technology is going to play a major role here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kapua said:
I have an older Android smartphone. It has a very obvious "Location" button that you can easily turn off. If I understand correctly, this prevents apps from tracking your location via satellite technology, AKA GPS. What it does NOT do is prevent your phone carrier, AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, etc., from recording the cell tower from which your call was placed or received. That technology, if I understand correctly, is antenna- and switch-based. So if I were to place a call right now, my phone would send a wireless signal to the nearest cell tower (more accurately, the cell tower with the strongest signal) , which would transmit the call. My provider saves the call data, including the cell tower location. This is what tripped those two fools up.
Click to expand...
What is presented throughout the SW's are RTT hits. PCMD, or what Verizon calls RTT hits, are absolutely not GPS location data. RTT hits are only estimated distance to cell tower information for the use of the phone company. An RTT hit is expressed as an arc band of potential positions in a given cell tower sector at an estimated distance.

The closest LE ever got to putting KB's phone in PF's hand can only be expressed as "somewhere between 88 yards and 12.185 miles". LE states this is "margin of error" and "evidence of phones traveling together". IMO it's laughable. A Defense expert would completely demolish the nonsense in the SW's. Some of it is truly offensive, clearly just slapped together.

(Ref. SW18-112, p.19, for 11-24-18.
KB phone 7.01 miles from tower,
PF phone 7.06 miles from tower,
both phones RTT hit at 12:58:27)

Do the math.
 
Thread is open again.

Bickering and personalizing type posts have been removed. Stick to discussing the case and not other members.

If you have a different opinion than other members, state your case and move on. Don't try to force your opinion on someone else. There is no thread where members will agree 100% of the time and nobody knows for sure what the evidence is or how it will be interpreted by a jury until the case is over and a verdict rendered.

Please tone down the attitudes and just be civil to one another.
 
 
Bringing this here from the media thread, with credit to @gliving

@SamKraemerTV
A couple more notes: - The civil lawsuit brought by Berreth's parents against Frazee has been stayed until the criminal proceedings play out. - We still have not heard any updates on the landfill search for Berreth's remains. #KelseyBerreth #PatrickFrazee#KrystalKenney @KOAA
1:26 PM - 2 Apr 2019
 
Don’t you feel that if PF were to plead guilty, he would have done that by now? He already knows much of what LE has against him, right? He must think he can beat these charges? Or at least is willing to roll the dice? He doesn’t seem like the type of person who would want testimony and details to get out. Although I guess much would get out either way.
 
sun16 said:
Don’t you feel that if PF were to plead guilty, he would have done that by now? He already knows much of what LE has against him, right? He must think he can beat these charges? Or at least is willing to roll the dice? He doesn’t seem like the type of person who would want testimony and details to get out. Although I guess much would get out either way.
Click to expand...
He’s still got plenty of time to plead guilty, and the arraignment doesn’t change much in that regard.

He can plead not guilty (which I fully expect him to), and still change his plea later.

There’s really no incentive to plead guilty, and even with a powerful case against him, he seems like the type to roll the dice.

I get the feeling that they could have caught this whole thing on video, and he’d play it the same way.

Defiantly.

*Edited to remove “tomorrow.” Arraignment is on Friday, and today is not Thursday (unfortunately).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 98 more.
Total: 566 (members: 99, guests: 467)

Online statistics

Members online
99
Guests online
467
Total visitors
566
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,893
Messages
18,194,438
Members
233,624
Latest member
Missing wonder
Back
Top