Found Deceased IN - Abigail (Abby) Williams, 13, & Liberty (Libby) German, 14, The Delphi Murders 13 Feb 2017 #145

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
But what about the following quote from the transcript?



If the subpoena was sent to Comcast for the IP address, it seems the warrant would include any and all devices that are used at that address. Or does each individual device have its own unique IP address even if they are connected to wifi? Now that I am typing this out, I think I've answered my own question. lol
All of the devices would have their own “private” addresses inside the house (generally starting with 192.168.x, 172.16-31.x., or 10.x.x.) but they’d all share the same external or NAT (Network Address Translation) address from Comcast. That’s the address that Snap, Instagram, etc. would see.
 
I agree. I need to really look into this more but after reading the transcripts I kept having this feeling that TK was the owner of the Samsung 4 that was messaging from the Peru home at the early hours of February 13, 2017. With that being said I’m thinking KK had the Samsung 5 all along. He didn’t just find it in a seat cushion of a rental car. Too far fetched to try to fit his timeline and narrative. I think TK upgraded KK’s phone to get another phone. IMO TK may need KK’s technological advancements more than we know hence the upgrade.

Side note - as a parent my kids have better phones than I do. I know this is not the case with some but I don’t feel I need the same amount of technology. Plus I get used to using my old phone so upgrades are not always easy for us as an older generation. I think if TK had the Samsung 4 and KK had the Samsung 5 it may be out of comfortability and need but he helped finance it as KK does not seem to hold a job.

Overall, I think Samsung 4 was TK’s and Samsung 5 was KK’s. To be noted I think they shared phones.

I am wondering if the Samsung S4 and Samsung S5 phones had face unlock enabled and if there is a way LE/FBI can use special software to see whose face unlocked the phone and when. Or if there is a way they can link face unlock being used to who was using to who was using the phone at the time. The Samsung S5 also had the feature of a fingerprint sensor added to the home button so users could choose to unlock the Samsung S5 either with their face or fingerprint. I don’t know if any of these security features would be useful to law enforcement in providing data on who unlocked the phone and was most likely using it at the time.

The iPhone didn’t get Face ID and Touch ID until the iPhone 5S was released

“Oxygen Forensic® Detective
is an all-in-one forensic software platform built to extract, decode, and analyze data from multiple digital sources: mobile and IoT devices, device backups, UICC and media cards, drones, and cloud services. Oxygen Forensic® Detective can also find and extract a vast range of artifacts, system files as well as credentials from Windows, macOS, and Linux machines.

The cutting edge and innovative technologies deployed in Oxygen Forensic® Detective include, but are not limited to, bypassing screen locks, locating passwords to encrypted backups, extracting and parsing data from secure applications and uncovering deleted data.

Furthermore, multiple extractions can be investigated in a single interface to gain a complete picture of the data. By using the integrated industry-leading analytical tools to find social connections, build timelines, and categorize images, law enforcement, corporate investigators and other authorized personnel can help make this world a safer place.”

Source - oxygen-forensic.com

It is likely there will be recoverable forensic data on the mobile phones even after a factory reset has been done. Law Enforcement and the FBI have access to specialist software programs like the one above from Oxygen Forensics to retrieve data from mobile phones etc. I searched online and it appears it may be possible for them to view data from an android mobile phone to see a history of when factory resets have been done on the handset.

Thankfully it appears some criminals and sexual predators have a false sense of security that doing a factory reset on a phone completely deletes all the data and everything on it. In order to delete all the data from a mobile phone so that none of it can ever be retrieved by law enforcement I think they would have to physically completely destroy it.

I’m sure it is likely law enforcement would be able to find out whether KK claim about finding the Samsung S5 was true or not. The person who previously owned the phone he allegedly found would most likely have set up some security on it even if it was just a basic passcode and not face unlock or fingerprint unlock. He would have had to bypass the security that the person set up. It was possible for Samsung S5 owners to use Find My Mobile and go online to see the location of their phone on a map if had been lost or stolen. You could erase the data on the phone remotely.

It seems unlikely KK would be able to find a Samsung S5 in the back seat of a cab that had no security at all set up like a passcode, face unlock or fingerprint unlock. Or he would need to be able to bypass that security some how. You would expect the owner of a lost phone to try and use the Samsung Find My Mobile website to find its location to try and get it back and erase the data on it remotely for security.

The owner of a lost phone would also likely report the phone as lost or stolen with their network provider and law enforcement. The Samsung S5 may have been purchased on a cell/mobile phone contract and been locked to a particular cell network/phone network. He would need to use his own SIM card from the same network to use it or get it unlocked so he could use the SIM card of another service provider.

I don’t know if you could possibly buy a Samsung S5 as a burner phone but if it wasn’t a burner phone law enforcement should be able to obtain data from the phone service/network provider as to when a cell number started calling from it. It may not be the same in the USA as it is here in Scotland but my mobile phone provider/cell service provider knows what model of mobile phone I am using my SIM card in even though my iPhone was purchased network unlocked sim free from another retailer.
 
But what about the following quote from the transcript?


If the subpoena was sent to Comcast for the IP address, it seems the warrant would include any and all devices that are used at that address. Or does each individual device have its own unique IP address even if they are connected to wifi? Now that I am typing this out, I think I've answered my own question. lol
I know you already got an answer to this, but I just wanted to clarify. All devices on a network will have the same public IP address if they are all connected through the same router, and then also have a private address from the router to the device. If not, they will each have it's own public IP address.
 
I am wondering if the Samsung S4 and Samsung S5 phones had face unlock enabled and if there is a way LE/FBI can use special software to see whose face unlocked the phone and when. Or if there is a way they can link face unlock being used to who was using to who was using the phone at the time. The Samsung S5 also had the feature of a fingerprint sensor added to the home button so users could choose to unlock the Samsung S5 either with their face or fingerprint. I don’t know if any of these security features would be useful to law enforcement in providing data on who unlocked the phone and was most likely using it at the time.

The iPhone didn’t get Face ID and Touch ID until the iPhone 5S was released

“Oxygen Forensic® Detective
is an all-in-one forensic software platform built to extract, decode, and analyze data from multiple digital sources: mobile and IoT devices, device backups, UICC and media cards, drones, and cloud services. Oxygen Forensic® Detective can also find and extract a vast range of artifacts, system files as well as credentials from Windows, macOS, and Linux machines.

The cutting edge and innovative technologies deployed in Oxygen Forensic® Detective include, but are not limited to, bypassing screen locks, locating passwords to encrypted backups, extracting and parsing data from secure applications and uncovering deleted data.

Furthermore, multiple extractions can be investigated in a single interface to gain a complete picture of the data. By using the integrated industry-leading analytical tools to find social connections, build timelines, and categorize images, law enforcement, corporate investigators and other authorized personnel can help make this world a safer place.”

Source - oxygen-forensic.com

It is likely there will be recoverable forensic data on the mobile phones even after a factory reset has been done. Law Enforcement and the FBI have access to specialist software programs like the one above from Oxygen Forensics to retrieve data from mobile phones etc. I searched online and it appears it may be possible for them to view data from an android mobile phone to see a history of when factory resets have been done on the handset.

Thankfully it appears some criminals and sexual predators have a false sense of security that doing a factory reset on a phone completely deletes all the data and everything on it. In order to delete all the data from a mobile phone so that none of it can ever be retrieved by law enforcement I think they would have to physically completely destroy it.

I’m sure it is likely law enforcement would be able to find out whether KK claim about finding the Samsung S5 was true or not. The person who previously owned the phone he allegedly found would most likely have set up some security on it even if it was just a basic passcode and not face unlock or fingerprint unlock. He would have had to bypass the security that the person set up. It was possible for Samsung S5 owners to use Find My Mobile and go online to see the location of their phone on a map if had been lost or stolen. You could erase the data on the phone remotely.

It seems unlikely KK would be able to find a Samsung S5 in the back seat of a cab that had no security at all set up like a passcode, face unlock or fingerprint unlock. Or he would need to be able to bypass that security some how. You would expect the owner of a lost phone to try and use the Samsung Find My Mobile website to find its location to try and get it back and erase the data on it remotely for security.

The owner of a lost phone would also likely report the phone as lost or stolen with their network provider and law enforcement. The Samsung S5 may have been purchased on a cell/mobile phone contract and been locked to a particular cell network/phone network. He would need to use his own SIM card from the same network to use it or get it unlocked so he could use the SIM card of another service provider.

I don’t know if you could possibly buy a Samsung S5 as a burner phone but if it wasn’t a burner phone law enforcement should be able to obtain data from the phone service/network provider as to when a cell number started calling from it. It may not be the same in the USA as it is here in Scotland but my mobile phone provider/cell service provider knows what model of mobile phone I am using my SIM card in even though my iPhone was purchased network unlocked sim free from another retailer.

My guess is that KAK (and/or TK) never put a SIM card in the Samsung. As it is, he told LE during the interview in 2020 that he didn’t even have service on his primary phone at that time and couldn’t even remember his number (“Uh, I honestly don’t know.”). Of course, as with everything he says, he could have been lying. Did he have any SIM cards at all in 2017? Maybe he did or did not but he could have just chucked his SIM card right before/after he committed (or was in the presence of) a crime; if he suspected he may be or had been tracked; after he “found” the phone on top of the microwave. It could be be that’s why LE only mentioned tracking him via the WiFi that he connected to, rather than saying that they knew which cell towers he pinged off of on 2/13/17. Maybe he had a burner SIM that LE doesn’t know about or just can’t definitively tie to him because he paid cash for it and it no longer exists. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
My guess is that KAK (and/or TK) never put a SIM card in the Samsung. As it is, he told LE during the interview in 2020 that he didn’t even have service on his primary phone at that time and couldn’t even remember his number (“Uh, I honestly don’t know.”). Of course, as with everything he says, he could have been lying. Did he have any SIM cards at all in 2017? ... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

A+ on the shrug. :) I suspect you're right about that--he was going places where he could use wifi to communicate, wasn't he? I know even a phone without a SIM card can make emergency calls (in the USA) and so I suppose it must ping cell towers as it travels.

And gregjrichard's very interesting post: all very logical, thanks! As a datapoint, here in the US it's easy to buy unlocked phones, and I've always been able to switch my SIM card from this Motorola to that iPhone and then to another phone, perfectly freely and without any problem other than having a little adapter to suit various phones' SIM card slots. I don't know how much of that applies to KAK's phone(s). My own service has always moved with the card, while I tried this or that phone, never a problem other than a brief but toxic experience with iTunes. :-/
 
I am almost 100% certain they know who BG is, and I think there is good information out there that cuts down the pool of possible persons fairly narrowly, which I would love to get into here, without naming full names. The entire strategy of ISP since at least 2019 (and probably much before that) has been focused on the community itself, the search party -- even though they will not come out and say it directly -- and individuals they have interviewed before. I also think the circumstances point to more than one individual involved, and in my opinion, there are at least two with up to four or five principal actors in the murders, with more possibly involved peripherally.

The KAK/TK push in the last few months is a controlled leak by law enforcement. I do believe they have involvement in what transpired on 2/13-14, but they are being used as a smokescreen to throw off (even if subtly) their main POIs. It is my opinion that KAK has turned state's witness, possibly much before the August 2020 charges and arrest. The well-known podcast group that broke the stories, along with the more mainstream NewsNation, are a part of this operation by ISP. I have written a bit about this elsewhere and would be willing to share more on this forum if there is interest, as I have just signed up here after reading for a while. I do not have any inside information, just a synthesis of public knowledge that I believe points in this direction

Dear @jluther377,

Thank you for your insightful post!

My view is that there was more than one person at the crime scene and possibly only one of them was the murderer. I also believe that the KAK transcript was a controlled leak and served a purpose.

When you bring up the term "smoke screen", are your thoughts that the perpetrators were not involved with the a-shots account? I'm very interested in what your thoughts are with this if you would like to share them.

Your post is so well-thought-out and I greatly admire the way you look at the whole picture.
 
All of the devices would have their own “private” addresses inside the house (generally starting with 192.168.x, 172.16-31.x., or 10.x.x.) but they’d all share the same external or NAT (Network Address Translation) address from Comcast. That’s the address that Snap, Instagram, etc. would see.

I know you already got an answer to this, but I just wanted to clarify. All devices on a network will have the same public IP address if they are all connected through the same router, and then also have a private address from the router to the device. If not, they will each have it's own public IP address.

Thank you both so much for explaining this! I kind of had an idea that each phone had it's own private address, but had no idea how it would all connect.
So, knowing all of that, and knowing that the investigators were notified that there was CSAM coming from a particular IP address, how would they know what devices to ask for in a search warrant? Maybe I'm just assuming that they were only given one IP address that was coming from the router? Maybe I'm overthinking this part :confused:
 
Thank you both so much for explaining this! I kind of had an idea that each phone had it's own private address, but had no idea how it would all connect.
So, knowing all of that, and knowing that the investigators were notified that there was CSAM coming from a particular IP address, how would they know what devices to ask for in a search warrant? Maybe I'm just assuming that they were only given one IP address that was coming from the router? Maybe I'm overthinking this part :confused:

Not clear that they would, a connection from the router out to the internet has additional info apart from the IP that allows the router to forward the reply to the right phone/computer.

Here's a nice explanation: https://askleo.com/how_does_nat_work/

However, that mapping is transient, and I think unlikely to be useful to LE.

There may have been other identifying info in the network request, e.g. `User-Agent`.

Note that comcast gave LE multi IP addresses which went to the Peru location.
It could be multiple devices, or probably more likely the public IP changing over time.
Your router is not assigned a fixed address, so it can change.
 
The thing about the Samsung Galaxy 4 is that per the search warrant, that phone was last used in June 2015.

The only devices being used in 2017 are the iPhone 5 and Samsung 5. If KAK owned the S5 before the Vegas trip, whose account was it attached to? LE would know, imo. The factory reset is suspect.

But, if that phone was truly new to KAK in Vegas, then what other active device was in that home on the 13th? Because it doesn't appear to be one of the ones seized during the 2/25 search (again, if not the S5).
TK has a Facebook post talking about the new iPhone 6 that his son just gave him and how he was going to need help figuring it out. I want to say this was early 2016?
 
I know you already got an answer to this, but I just wanted to clarify. All devices on a network will have the same public IP address if they are all connected through the same router, and then also have a private address from the router to the device. If not, they will each have it's own public IP address.
Thank you. This I understand.
 
Honestly, I just want to know why the dads phone was not taken during the search since he lives at that address. Then again, maybe it was taken and nothing was found. Or maybe one of the phones that they have in their possession was the phone he was using during that time.
Not clear that they would, a connection from the router out to the internet has additional info apart from the IP that allows the router to forward the reply to the right phone/computer.

Here's a nice explanation: https://askleo.com/how_does_nat_work/

However, that mapping is transient, and I think unlikely to be useful to LE.

There may have been other identifying info in the network request, e.g. `User-Agent`.

Note that comcast gave LE multi IP addresses which went to the Peru location.
It could be multiple devices, or probably more likely the public IP changing over time.
Your router is not assigned a fixed address, so it can change.

Thank you so much! This is all so confusing to me so I'm glad someone understands how this all works.
 
Honestly, I just want to know why the dads phone was not taken during the search since he lives at that address. Then again, maybe it was taken and nothing was found.

IMHO I think it's simply they had no cause to seize TK's phone at that time.

I think the sequence is:

1. Evidence of illegal activity at the Peru house using snapchat/instagram
2. TK says KAK uses snapchat/instagram
3. KAK admits to illegal activity
4. LE seizes any phones that belong to KAK

Nothing according to the probable cause affidavit implicates TK at that point in time.

https://www.wishtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Kegan-Anthony-Kline-PC.pdf
 
Not clear that they would, a connection from the router out to the internet has additional info apart from the IP that allows the router to forward the reply to the right phone/computer.

Here's a nice explanation: https://askleo.com/how_does_nat_work/

However, that mapping is transient, and I think unlikely to be useful to LE.

There may have been other identifying info in the network request, e.g. `User-Agent`.

Note that comcast gave LE multi IP addresses which went to the Peru location.
It could be multiple devices, or probably more likely the public IP changing over time.
Your router is not assigned a fixed address, so it can change.
Plus maybe they used someone else's wifi to connect some of the devices? Seems awful coincidental that their neighbors had the same last name as the bogus profile KAK created. AJMO
 
Plus maybe they used someone else's wifi to connect some of the devices? Seems awful coincidental that their neighbors had the same last name as the bogus profile KAK created. AJMO

There's no evidence of that, the electronic trail from snapchat/instagram through comcast only led to the single location, being the TK/KAK house in Peru.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
147
Guests online
1,955
Total visitors
2,102

Forum statistics

Threads
600,665
Messages
18,111,776
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top