MA - Vanessa Marcotte, 27, murdered, Princeton, 7 Aug 2016 #3

[rosesfromangels]

If LE had talked to 1306kayaker, rather than him leaving a recorded message, and got all the info they needed, would they call him back?

I would think so....if the lead goes somewhere they might want kayaker as a witness at trial, etc. All just speculation as I am not LE.

 

[femalejogger]

If LE had talked to 1306kayaker, rather than him leaving a recorded message, and got all the info they needed, would they call him back?

Probably not. If the tip did pan out or had promise, they might ask Kayaker to give a statement to memorialize what he/she saw, but given that the tip is somewhat attenuated from the crime, I don't think this would be a high priority for LE right now. Kayaker's info is more likely to add value by corroborating a working theory - something they wouldn't necessarily want to share at this point.

 

[ThinkHard]

I mentioned 2:45 only because I read it someplace here. I may have mentioned 2:30 in a post as well. No info from LE, or the news, just what I read here.
Where did the 2:25 come from?

2:25 came from one of the original news articles WAY at the start of this case, and long before your arrival here. Some posters rounded to 2:30 but I don't recall ever seeing a 2:45 time anywhere.

 

[ThinkHard]

Good point. I think a lot hinges on how long her body was burning, and if it was left to burn. If the area where her body was was hot. I would think that would delay the arrival of bugs. JMO. This was such a short window as far as the timeline goes.

I don't think he left her burning at all. I think whatever burning happened was very much out when he left that scene. After all why risk the crime scene you just left being found even sooner when it gains attention from smoke or flames? That would just increase your chances of being seen in the area of the crime.

How can you garantee that other things in the woods don't catch on fire? I'm sure if THAT was the intent it would have been easily accomplished given the drought.

Also Her family started looking for her around 3/330....if there had been some fire going 100ft down that path, I don't it would have gone unnoticed.

 

[FindHG]

Rocky - we've been discussing the actual time of the cell phone ping. Some of us have it in our early case notes as 2:25 but you have 2:45 and I think I've seen it elsewhere as 2:45. Do you know where the 2:45 came from? Thanks!

I recalled 2:45 from the one off the PC's maybe, mistakenly maybe, not sure?

 

[Rocky1]

Yes, a watcher, Roses. And Vanessa was going back to NYC on a 4:30 bus. Her family started looking for her not too long after she didn't return from her jog. One of the first places they checked was the Barn because of the cell tower ping. Admittedly, it could have pinged from anywhere nearby.

If her phone had been turned off, to make finding her more difficult before the 2:45 ping, then perhaps that's when he turned it on again. She was said to jog for an hour and half, and that would've been fifteen minutes after, so maybe the creep knew when his safe zone in terms of timing was, exactly.

If he snatched her, car or not, and he's relatively local, and he has marks on him, which may have faded some, could he take part in some kind of personal combat sports type stuff locally? Could he have gotten tattoos recently to hide scars? Could he be a gym member in some place who hasn't shown up recently?

Roses, remember the last POI we saw in MSM with the footwear fail? Thank you so so much for reading through the thread.

Thank you, Rocky, TH, Zoso, Razz and lurking sleuthers for pitching in, and good to hear of people in the area concerned and active.

This is where I first read about the 2:45 ping
Post #455
Page 31
Sept 6th
Two days after I joined the WS forum.

 

[ThinkHard]

This is where I first read about the 2:45 ping
Post #455
Page 31
Sept 6th
Two days after I joined the WS forum.

Yes and FindHG was new on the thread around that time to and was still likely trying to get the lay of everything. The 2:45 was probably them not quite having all the facts quite straight at that point.

If you go back the thread 1 and read through stuff from within the first few days of the murder, you will likely find when the time of the ping first surfaced. It's been discussed a lot, particularly because it was her aunt that said it pinged there, so we were all trying to figure out what she meant by a ping, and how they would have known this precise time.

 

[Mskin]

And what possible significance it has. If any.

At this point, the ping means nothing. It means her phone was on. It doesn't mean it was in her possession, it doesn't mean it was in his. It possibly contains a geo location within a few meters (which WOULD be significant - but the existance of that data is neither guarenteed or known). In terms of time line... Please help me with this one.

So what if her phone pinged at 2:25 or 2:45. It does nothing to inform either time of abduction, incident or death.

 

[ThinkHard]

And what possible significance it has. If any.

At this point, the ping means nothing. It means her phone was on. It doesn't mean it was in her possession, it doesn't mean it was in his. It possibly contains a geo location within a few meters (which WOULD be significant - but the existance of that data is neither guarenteed or known). In terms of time line... Please help me with this one.

So what if her phone pinged at 2:25 or 2:45. It does nothing to inform either time of abduction, incident or death.

I agree with you, there are a lot of unknown that make it significance questionable. Though I'd bet it's important to this case and important to LE because they likely have far more details about it then we do.

The one thing that could make it significant is that if the mnt barn tower is not the closest tower to the location she was found....and she was taken at the beginning of her run....as far as we know she would never have ended up going past the mountain barn on her run....so why did it ping there? Therefore some simple possibilities like closest tower are of course possible.....but it leaves the doubt that it could have pinged there for different reasons.....and then the questions become if it did ping at that time because the phone was near there....was she with it? Was she alive?

 

[1306kayaker]

I mentioned 2:45 only because I read it someplace here. I may have mentioned 2:30 in a post as well. No info from LE, or the news, just what I read here.
Where did the 2:25 come from?

In my early notes I had written down 2:25 with a link to this forum (forum 1, post 309, I think to the Boston Globe) but that article no longer contains the time of the cell phone ping. Just wanted to see if you had more accurate info - thanks.

 

[1306kayaker]

I agree with you, there are a lot of unknown that make it significance questionable. Though I'd bet it's important to this case and important to LE because they likely have far more details about it then we do.

The one thing that could make it significant is that if the mnt barn tower is not the closest tower to the location she was found....and she was taken at the beginning of her run....as far as we know she would never have ended up going past the mountain barn on her run....so why did it ping there? Therefore some simple possibilities like closest tower are of course possible.....but it leaves the doubt that it could have pinged there for different reasons.....and then the questions become if it did ping at that time because the phone was near there....was she with it? Was she alive?

Does anyone know how her family would know where her cell phone pinged? Perhaps I'm missing a simple answer, but all the information I find about "pinging" (which I know nothing about) talks about how LE can use it to track a cell phone location but nothing mentions using it in a practical sense. This is completely my theory and not supported by any evidence but my guess is that her family actually used a location app to track her location and not something that would show them the closest cell tower. As discussed earlier in this forum, perhaps they just used the terminology "pinged". JMO, if LE knows that her phone was at the Mt Barn at 2:25 and not just near it, that would narrow down the timeframe and location. Also, again pure speculation, if LE knows that the killer was gone from the scene by 3:00, chances are that VM's abduction occurred prior to 2:25 and so the cell phone and/or VM would have been with the killer at this time. And, for some final speculation, if LE knows that the phone was at the Mt Barn at 2:25 and then found it somewhere destroyed, with a final ping prior to 3:00, that, combined with autopsy results, could have led them to change the time window from 4:00 to 3:00.

 

[Mskin]

I recall a case years ago in new york city. Bouncer raped and killed a college girl. Was driving around in a van with her body wrapped in a carpet. I'll have to look this up later, but the guy had her cell phone and somehow LE located him via triangulation off of multiple cell towers. Again, I don't recall the exact details. This was before smart phones. So, I imagine it can be done, but in that case he and the phone were actively being sought. Not the case here for VM at 2:45.

The fact her phone pinged off the barn cell tower only means she was within up to 45 miles of the cell tower. Obviously we know she closer. The ping in no way means she was adjacent to the tower. I am unclear if long lat info is transmitted regularly via normal phone/tower hand shaking. I suspect based on what I've read that it does not. It makes sense from both privacy and data management points of view.

Of course, software she had on her phone - she may have specifically allowed to transmit location is a different story.

I don't know. The phone just doesn't seem to be helping us much here. Maybe LE, but not us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[1306kayaker]

(snipped by me) You may be right. They could have found something else that determined the time of death. what did you have in mind?

I'm not really sure - I'm just brainstorming around that 8/11 press release that not only said that the killer most likely had scratches but that changed the time from 1:00-3:00. We know that her autopsy results were in by that point and that LE removed evidence from that woods earlier that morning. I went back to the video showing the police holding the evidence bag and the contents look small - it could contain anything: a watch; a fitbit, a cell phone, ear buds etc but probably not her missing shoe or clothes. I also read back through my notes and saw that I wrote down that the evidence was removed from the woods 1/2 mile south of where her body was found. That's away from the center of town (the direction we think she was walking) but closer to the Mountain Barn, as the crow flies. Unfortunately the link I had to substantiate that no longer works.

Link w video showing evidence bag - it's around the :59 sec mark: http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/08/11/vanessa-marcotte-princeton-murder-update/
This article used to state that the police were looking for her shoes, cell phone and ear buds and found a burned shoe nearby. It no longer works. http://m.telegram.com/article/20160809/NEWS/160809342

 

[Mskin]

I'm not really sure - I'm just brainstorming around that 8/11 press release that not only said that the killer most likely had scratches but that changed the time from 1:00-3:00. We know that her autopsy results were in by that point and that LE removed evidence from that woods earlier that morning. I went back to the video showing the police holding the evidence bag and the contents look small - it could contain anything: a watch; a fitbit, a cell phone, ear buds etc but probably not her missing shoe or clothes. I also read back through my notes and saw that I wrote down that the evidence was removed from the woods 1/2 mile south of where her body was found. That's away from the center of town (the direction we think she was walking) but closer to the Mountain Barn, as the crow flies. Unfortunately the link I had to substantiate that no longer works.

Link w video showing evidence bag - it's around the :59 sec mark: http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/08/11/vanessa-marcotte-princeton-murder-update/
This article used to state that the police were looking for her shoes, cell phone and ear buds and found a burned shoe nearby. It no longer works. http://m.telegram.com/article/20160809/NEWS/160809342

An initial attack. VM escapes fleeing through the woods being chased. She chooses this because she is familiar with the area and feels it gives her the upper hand. She trips, or the attacker catches up. They fight, she loses. He is angry.

This is not my theory, but a scenerio where she runs to the location, is not dragged or carried. That it was a location not selected by him but by chance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ThinkHard]

Does anyone know how her family would know where her cell phone pinged? Perhaps I'm missing a simple answer, but all the information I find about "pinging" (which I know nothing about) talks about how LE can use it to track a cell phone location but nothing mentions using it in a practical sense. This is completely my theory and not supported by any evidence but my guess is that her family actually used a location app to track her location and not something that would show them the closest cell tower. As discussed earlier in this forum, perhaps they just used the terminology "pinged". JMO, if LE knows that her phone was at the Mt Barn at 2:25 and not just near it, that would narrow down the timeframe and location. Also, again pure speculation, if LE knows that the killer was gone from the scene by 3:00, chances are that VM's abduction occurred prior to 2:25 and so the cell phone and/or VM would have been with the killer at this time. And, for some final speculation, if LE knows that the phone was at the Mt Barn at 2:25 and then found it somewhere destroyed, with a final ping prior to 3:00, that, combined with autopsy results, could have led them to change the time window from 4:00 to 3:00.

No we do not actually know what was meant by ping. But we do know it was her aunt who had said they had a cell phone ping from the mnt barn at 2:25, (which is why they went there to look for her)....which tells us that it was something THEY had acces too....not that it was a ping in the sense of triangulated cell phone signals that LE looks into.

To me what makes the most sense is the conclusion you had come to, that it was an app on her phone, like find a friend. Perhaps her parents had been nervous when she lived in the city, and insisted she have a tracking app on her phone.

Others have suggested that because she was in the tech industry she might have used tech terminology with her family, and so ping could have meant anything from a call to a text. I'm not sure I bite there...but who knows.

We definetly don't have enough info on it to know its significance in the case just yet. I don't think it should be discounted as having possible significance though.

But I tend to think your conclusion is likely spot on.

 

[ThinkHard]

An initial attack. VM escapes fleeing through the woods being chased. She chooses this because she is familiar with the area and feels it gives her the upper hand. She trips, or the attacker catches up. They fight, she loses. He is angry.

This is not my theory, but a scenerio where she runs to the location, is not dragged or carried. That it was a location not selected by him but by chance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I feel this is unlikely. I have been in a situation once where it was very clear someone was deliberately following me after getting off a bus late at night. My instinct wasn't to run down an alley or into a park....my instinct was to quite literally run into the road and pray for a cab! The instinct was to get anywhere I could to increase my chances of being seen by someone else. I was standing in the medium hailing a cab when I felt his hand reach for my arm.....thank f-ing God for that cab!

I just think VM would have run into the middle of the road before she would have run into the woods, greater chance of having intervention and all. jMO of course.

 

[1306kayaker]

I feel this is unlikely. I have been in a situation once where it was very clear someone was deliberately following me after getting off a bus late at night. My instinct wasn't to run down an alley or into a park....my instinct was to quite literally run into the road and pray for a cab! The instinct was to get anywhere I could to increase my chances of being seen by someone else. I was standing in the medium hailing a cab when I felt his hand reach for my arm.....thank f-ing God for that cab!

I just think VM would have run into the middle of the road before she would have run into the woods, greater chance of having intervention and all. jMO of course.

I guess this could depend on who she felt threatened by - if a vehicle, I could see running into the woods but if someone on foot, the road increases her chances of help. Think hard, sounds like your pursuer was on foot?

Remember that weird interview on Greta van Sustern on 8/11 where they talked about a witness who saw VM, saw a car, turned around and no VM but the car was still there? This theory could mesh w that story - maybe VM ran into the woods if she felt threatened by someone in that car. She might have dropped something while running and if she knew about the cart path/Connor Rd, have ended up near there. Not that I necessarily think that's what happened but it's an idea.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Camerabug]

In my early notes I had written down 2:25 with a link to this forum (forum 1, post 309, I think to the Boston Globe) but that article no longer contains the time of the cell phone ping. Just wanted to see if you had more accurate info - thanks.

It has been scrubbed, which makes me think it may have some significance that we may figure out later...

 

[Inthedetails]

An initial attack. VM escapes fleeing through the woods being chased. She chooses this because she is familiar with the area and feels it gives her the upper hand. She trips, or the attacker catches up. They fight, she loses. He is angry.

This is not my theory, but a scenerio where she runs to the location, is not dragged or carried. That it was a location not selected by him but by chance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hmm...that is a new idea to think about.

She was rather petite, so I was assuming she was dragged. But perhaps she was found in that spot because she went there. Could she have run down the cart path as part of her routine?? Just another thought to think about.

What does make me consider the perp wanted her in that spot is the burning aspect. That does not sound spontaneous, but something he either planned specifically or fantasized about in general. He would need a place to do that, and the place where she was found worked for him.

jmo

 

[rosesfromangels]

Hmm...that is a new idea to think about.

She was rather petite, so I was assuming she was dragged. But perhaps she was found in that spot because she went there. Could she have run down the cart path as part of her routine?? Just another thought to think about.

What does make me consider the perp wanted her in that spot is the burning aspect. That does not sound spontaneous, but something he either planned specifically or fantasized about in general. He would need a place to do that, and the place where she was found worked for him.

jmo

And why this location? Well one, I guess, is because she jogged past it on her runs (I assume). He must have scouted the spot out and left his gear there ahead of time. Aside from the proximity to the jogging route, I wonder if there is anything specific about that spot? I know there is a cemetery on that road, but was this area/spot known to be a place where local teenagers hung out to smoke pot or anything like that? A known spot for some particular activity? Only the locals would know.