IA IA - David Schultz, 53, Wall Lake, 21 November 2023

[Inthedetails]

I’m sorry I meant why le would use his phone? Wouldn’t you think they would bag the phone as evidence and it be fingerprinted ?

Maybe they were confirming it was David's phone and not someone else's? A quick way to do that would be to call "home" from the phone.

Again, just guessing. jmo

 

[Inthedetails]

Maybe they were confirming it was David's phone and not someone else's? A quick way to do that would be to call "home" from the phone.

Again, just guessing. jmo

Or call last number dialed?? idk

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

Maybe they were confirming it was David's phone and not someone else's? A quick way to do that would be to call "home" from the phone.

Again, just guessing. jmo

This is my understanding of why LE will call numbers from the phones they find. Confirming the phone's owner.

 

[tarabull]

Maybe Sarah lived on that road. Idk. Why would le call Sarah from his phone asking about her friend who almost hit the truck? Weird imo

Where do you get the idea LE asked Sarah about her friend????

 

[Mauig’ma]

That reminds me, (so jumping off your post because as you point out no one ever would have thought David would take that road, so his boss never would have seen it there but yet) Sarah's friend saw his truck parked there at 5:30AM.

Snipped...
...Sarah said the police called her from his phone Tuesday afternoon. She added that a friend of hers had nearly hit the truck earlier around 5:30 a.m.

Here but I think I read it wrong?

 

[tarabull]

Here but I think I read it wrong?

That's my trick lol

Regardless, where is David???

 

[Auntie Cipation]

I don't know if I got the idea from actual cases or from legal shows on tv, but I had the impression that LE could basically clone a person's phone so that they can check out data such as prior calls, texts, web searches, etc, without having to physically handle the phone, to not compromise any evidence such as fingerprints or DNA. Is that real or am I thinking of something fictional?

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

I don't know if I got the idea from actual cases or from legal shows on tv, but I had the impression that LE could basically clone a person's phone so that they can check out data such as prior calls, texts, web searches, etc, without having to physically handle the phone, to not compromise any evidence such as fingerprints or DNA. Is that real or am I thinking of something fictional?

It's real, but it takes time and is only done if deemed necessary.

My understanding it that it depends on the circumstances. If you crash your car, they might call next of kin using your phone because fingerprints/DNA on the phone are unlikely to be relevant to the case, and using the phone can help them identify you quickly. In contrast, if you're found murdered, they'd probably bag up your phone along with everything else.

David's truck falls into a grey area, IMO.

 

[JerseyWasHome2]

It's real, but it takes time and is only done if deemed necessary.

My understanding it that it depends on the circumstances. If you crash your car, they might call next of kin using your phone because fingerprints/DNA on the phone are unlikely to be relevant to the case, and using the phone can help them identify you quickly. In contrast, if you're found murdered, they'd probably bag up your phone along with everything else.

David's truck falls into a grey area, IMO.

It is weird. I would say since the phone was left behind it should be fair game for analysis. I would assume they’d swab for fingerprints and/or DNA and then access the phone and clone it immediately, so if anything happens to the phone,they’ve got a copy to work from. Obtaining cloud records takes a subpoena, I believe, and they did say in the press release that is something they’re waiting on. For example, he could have deleted data and apps from his phone but they still may be in the cloud somewhere. But I’ve also read Apple won’t easily release phone data so I’m not sure what will happen here if his phone was IOS.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

It is weird. I would say since the phone was left behind it should be fair game for analysis. I would assume they’d swab for fingerprints and/or DNA and then access the phone and clone it immediately, so if anything happens to the phone,they’ve got a copy to work from. Obtaining cloud records takes a subpoena, I believe, and they did say in the press release that is something they’re waiting on. For example, he could have deleted data and apps from his phone but they still may be in the cloud somewhere. But I’ve also read Apple won’t easily release phone data so I’m not sure what will happen here if his phone was IOS.

From articles and the press release, it's not clear if the LE officers who found the truck even knew David was missing when they found it.

The press release says Sarah reported David missing to the Lake View Sheriff's Office at 2:23PM, but it was a Sac County road worker who reported the truck to the Sac County Sheriff's Office at around 3:04PM.

When the truck was first found it was just a random truck parked where it shouldn't have been. That probably wouldn't be enough for a relatively small Sheriff's Office to start doing forensic analysis on a cell phone.

 

[BuySellTrade]

I don’t think he left on his own but whomever did this has created a scene where it almost seems that way.

I’m trying to recall how Jake got involved. I seem to recall LE searched for three days and gave up, as if they felt he walked away. Then Jake got called in about a week after he disappeared and then DCI got involved? If Jake never got involved would this all have been written off as a willing disappearance?

Started watching this thread at very beginning. Here is what murkily recall.

Linked to Sarah Schultz's FB via WS. Rowley on behalf of the Cajuns contacted Sarah Schultz offering services on FB. Have wondered if the early Brushy Creek search was a longshot but suggested to the Cajuns to separate them from the initial investigation site near the abandoned truck.

Anyone else?

Posted from several pages behind.

 

[tarabull]

DBM, sorry I see it's been covered already...

 

[tarabull]

Where is David?!

 

[JerseyWasHome2]

From articles and the press release, it's not clear if the LE officers who found the truck even knew David was missing when they found it.

The press release says Sarah reported David missing to the Lake View Sheriff's Office at 2:23PM, but it was a Sac County road worker who reported the truck to the Sac County Sheriff's Office at around 3:04PM.

When the truck was first found it was just a random truck parked where it shouldn't have been. That probably wouldn't be enough for a relatively small Sheriff's Office to start doing forensic analysis on a cell phone.

Right. Any data like prints on the phone could have been obliterated.

 

[TenaciousTBacon]

One of the many other things that points towards foul play is Jake Rowley’s search efforts. He is getting information from LE. If there was evidence pointing towards David just up and leaving would that kind of effort be made? Those searches cost the organization money which I assume is hard to come by these days.

I’ve pretty much discarded the idea of a medical emergency. The area round the truck was searched by LE with their resources (on foot, dogs, and aircraft with FLIR). Then Jake searched it again with people and drones.

Seems pretty clear that David left the area in a vehicle, one way or another.

The only hope in my opinion is getting back the information on a tower dump. Hopefully whoever is responsible, had their cell phone with them.

Bbm
This reply is a general one, not directed at you, Knox.

Tower dumps are frequently mentioned on WS. A tower dump requires a search warrant. Grounds for a search warrant must be specific to what's being searched for and why it's likely to be both found at the place being searched and be related to the crime being investigated.

This case doesn't meet the grounds for a search warrant since at this point a crime hasn't even been determined to have taken place. A search warrant that's overly broad or fishing for information violates the Fourth Amendment.

 

[Knox]

That reminds me, (so jumping off your post because as you point out no one ever would have thought David would take that road, so his boss never would have seen it there but yet) Sarah's friend saw his truck parked there at 5:30AM.

Snipped...
...Sarah said the police called her from his phone Tuesday afternoon. She added that a friend of hers had nearly hit the truck earlier around 5:30 a.m.

David's truck is pretty distinctive, I always wondered why the friend didn't call her to see if David was ok. But it looks like sunrise is 7:30 AM around there. Maybe the friend didn't get a good look or doesn't even know what he drives.

Still scratching my head over the fact no one called it in -"At 3:04 p.m. on November 21, a Sac County Secondary Road employee reported to the sheriff’s office that a semi-tractor trailer had been parked at the intersection of 190th Street and Union Avenue, which had been sitting there for several hours".

Despite lead, Sac County officials still searching for missing man

It’s been more than two weeks since a local man was reported missing, and officials are still on the case with the hopes of locating him. On Saturday, officials released an update on the inve…

www.siouxlandproud.com

 

[Knox]

Bbm
This reply is a general one, not directed at you, Knox.

Tower dumps are frequently mentioned on WS. A tower dump requires a search warrant. Grounds for a search warrant must be specific to what's being searched for and why it's likely to be both found at the place being searched and be related to the crime being investigated.

This case doesn't meet the grounds for a search warrant since at this point a crime hasn't even been determined to have taken place. A search warrant that's overly broad or fishing for information violates the Fourth Amendment.

The sheriff says his office has sent about a dozen search warrants, subpoenas and preservation letters. They’ve requested documents like phone records, bank records and social media records.

Many of those have yet to be returned, but should be available shortly, hopefully prying loose a lead.

Sheriff: No theories ruled out after western Iowa trucker vanished more than two weeks ago

It’s been more than two weeks since a 53-year-old Sac County man disappeared, with a semi truck and a load of hogs left on a rural highway.

www.kcrg.com

 

[stickb0y7]

Still scratching my head over the fact no one called it in

It's a rural road that is only paved for a few miles and then turns to gravel, so not likely a well-used road north of 190th. Only the people living on the couple farms north of there (less than 10, I think before the next paved cross-street) would drive past it, probably once, in the morning, assuming they went to work to the south.

And if I saw a truck sitting there as I drove by, I'd assume they either had already called for help, or was broken down and left with someone to get help. Everyone has cell phones and people assume trucks have CBs, too. I don't think I'd ever "call in" a truck, unless I saw it there fr an unusual amount of time and I noticed it had live animals in it. By 3p, I don't think anyone would likely have driven by it twice that day.

 

[B4igo2it]

It's a rural road that is only paved for a few miles and then turns to gravel, so not likely a well-used road north of 190th. Only the people living on the couple farms north of there (less than 10, I think before the next paved cross-street) would drive past it, probably once, in the morning, assuming they went to work to the south.

And if I saw a truck sitting there as I drove by, I'd assume they either had already called for help, or was broken down and left with someone to get help. Everyone has cell phones and people assume trucks have CBs, too. I don't think I'd ever "call in" a truck, unless I saw it there fr an unusual amount of time and I noticed it had live animals in it. By 3p, I don't think anyone would likely have driven by it twice that day.

Thank you for this information. Someone chose a good location to park it here, stayed under the radar for 12 hours.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

It's a rural road that is only paved for a few miles and then turns to gravel, so not likely a well-used road north of 190th. Only the people living on the couple farms north of there (less than 10, I think before the next paved cross-street) would drive past it, probably once, in the morning, assuming they went to work to the south.

And if I saw a truck sitting there as I drove by, I'd assume they either had already called for help, or was broken down and left with someone to get help. Everyone has cell phones and people assume trucks have CBs, too. I don't think I'd ever "call in" a truck, unless I saw it there fr an unusual amount of time and I noticed it had live animals in it. By 3p, I don't think anyone would likely have driven by it twice that day.

Other than farm workers and people who live on the farms, it doesn't sound like many people would have reason to drive up to where the truck was found.

If the friend lives up that way, I wonder if David could have been heading up to see them for some reason.