Missing Cell Phones #2

[mck16]

They got MW's number from D/J phone records. They either couldn't trace the phone because it was prepaid and unregistered, OR they didn't have probable cause to get a court order for MW's information. I would assume they had probable cause in the case of a missing baby, but that's just my perception.

The FBI has no need to scour craigslist and find an indirect way to contact a potential witness if they already have their name/address IMO. They aren't looking for a "gentler" way to break the ice. So it stands to reason that craigslist was a method of finding this individual and figuring out their physical location.

But yes, if they don't know who she/he is- it's better to find them rather than call and let them know they are being tracked. I think that it still affirms one of the two above as reasons they wouldn't have her name and physical location for themselves though. They wouldn't find an indirect way just for the hay of it. IMO it's a clear indication that they did not have her name and location for whatever reason.

For whatever reason I am thoroughly impressed with the FBI/LE. This shows me that they are on top of this case and using every means at their disposal to solve it. Just because they are not disclosing everything they are doing does not mean they are not working diligently. Again, I am very impressed. jmo

 

[Evan's Mom]

Ever since Craigslist came up yesterday as a way police tracked MW (she was listing a GPS for sale, I think), I've been thinking about it. What if the kids wanted a kitten really bad? DB may have looked up free kittens. (I know this should be in the kitten thread and I will post this there as well). This may have led her to write down a number for free kittens. OR DB found free kittens and looked up lost kittens on Craigslist and found a number to contact. What if someone got a call and couldn't connect with the person who called? I can see someone young trying to break in through the screen window if they could see the kitten in the house. The person also decides to take Lisa in retaliation (way over the top, I realize).

I've been skimming through Craigslist Kansas City missouri for some clues re the stolen cell phones. When electronic items are stolen, I think cops go on these sites to check to see if similar items are listed for sale. Maybe they found something. Also, there was a larceny charge related to Jeremy Irwin in early August. We're not sure if the charges are him being charged or if he placed the call. What if JI had a GPS stolen from a vehicle? JMOO

Great post.
I've done the same exact thing on CL. Skim it looking for a an item and if I can't contact the person through email because they ask that they be called instead, I will often write the number on my hand. And you bring up the GPS possibly being what was stolen back in August...it really brings up many scenarios of what could be going on.
Of course it's a giant leap from stealing a gps to stealing a baby, but there could have been some bad blood brewing for a while. Then you throw in that there 8 people living in that one house using one cell phone and I don't know what to think.

 

[Twelve of One]

That would be even more disturbing, because that's saying they are using people involved in the case to make statements to the press instead of talking to the press themselves. So either what you said is true or everything she's saying the LE told her is bull.

I was unclear; I don't mean they're trying to manipulate the press. I just meant they needed info from her but I'm sure they were very careful about what they revealed to her. Maybe they don't care if she blabs b/c she doesn't know what's really going on. Just a thought.

 

[katshep]

Don't you think it could be possible LE is using her somehow? She seems flaky so I don't think LE would let her know anything valuable that they didn't want the general public to know.

I don't find MW credible at all. She is extremely nervous in that first interview. She changes her story about what she told the FBI in mid-sentence, saying that she told them she had been in the neighborhood, that she knew that her ex boyfriend had been... and then she abruptly drops that thought and says that she doesn't know the family....etc. So, what is it that she didn't say?

 

[Abby Normal]

ITA, and I didn't mean they wanted to be gentle just to be nice (it doesn't sound like they were nice at all if it's true that they came with the guns pointed at her) but they wanted to get her contact details without tipping her off and giving her a chance to get out of Dodge.

Right... I figured that's what you meant. So, if they don't have contact details that leaves you to question why. The only two scenarios I can think of are 1)couldn't trace the phone or 2)couldn't get a court to approve phone trace.

Since a child is missing, and a court order would be probable, some are deducing that she likely had an unregistered/pre-paid phone.

Stolen phone is a possibility, too, I suppose.

ETA- and, hey, I may have quoted the wrong person. Someone was asking about why it would be thought that it was an unregistered phone. It may not have been you! Sorry if I clicked quote on the wrong box!!

 

[Abby Normal]

For whatever reason I am thoroughly impressed with the FBI/LE. This shows me that they are on top of this case and using every means at their disposal to solve it. Just because they are not disclosing everything they are doing does not mean they are not working diligently. Again, I am very impressed. jmo

That is one reason I feel so patient to wait it out and let the information run its course. I do believe they are doing a good job, especially the FBI. If it can be solved, they will solve it. They got this.

 

[Donjeta]

I don't find MW credible at all. She is extremely nervous in that first interview. She changes her story about what she told the FBI in mid-sentence, saying that she told them she had been in the neighborhood, that she knew that her ex boyfriend had been... and then she abruptly drops that thought and says that she doesn't know the family....etc. So, what is it that she didn't say?

That's what I thought too, she had a few false starts.

Yesterday JVM had a neighbor saying MW used to hang out with someone who lives there so I'm guessing she didn't want it to be known how familiar she's with the neighborhood and who all she knows there.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1110/31/ng.01.html

 

[nursebeeme]

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=153189"]"Jersey" and MW - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

MW and Jersey thread is reopened

 

[Kamille]

Don't you think it could be possible LE is using her somehow? She seems flaky so I don't think LE would let her know anything valuable that they didn't want the general public to know.

Well the 8:30pm phone call could be perfectly innocent. The drinking buddy may have even verified that DB did make a call then. To inquire about an electronic item she saw online while on the computer that she said she was on at some point that day/evening. Doubtful with this cast of characters but lets just say it was.

The problem with that would be, that after being confronted with the possibility of a 2:30am phone call, DB insisted that was impossible because her phones were restricted to outgoing calls. And when pressed that the call was made and who could have done this, she immediately came up with the person who took the phones, and the baby.

When confronted about why he never called home to tell DB that he was working late, JI said he couldn't call because the phones were restricted to incoming and outgoing calls.

But someone used one of the phones to possibly make an innocent call at 8:30pm.

So if the phones were working, why did they both lie about this? And why wasn't there any phone contact between them during the time in question?

LE would not be searching so hard all over the house and property for those phones if the last ping they got on the phone was at 8:30pm before Lisa was supposed to have been missing. They have to have some information that the phones were around the house later than that.

The 2:30am leak came out early. DB responded to it with an apparent lie. Now this leak confirms the lie. But we still don't know if a call was made at 2:30am and what number that may have been to. Maybe another prepaid phone that they can't trace. But they know a call was made and that DB lied about the status of the phones?

MOO

 

[LadyPirate]

LE and the FBI are not displaying their hand. They're keeping it all close to the vest and why shouldn't they? If they just hold on, keep looking, keep asking questions, keep letting people "leak" info to the media, eventually somebody is going to trip up and that will be it.

They don't have to say anything. This circus is doing all the work for them!

 

[Donjeta]

Quoting Mountain Kat from a closed thread:

JVM: Wait a second, this phone that was purportedly stolen, the call goes out between 8:00 and 8:30. So that would belie the whole idea that the phone was stolen after she went to sleep at 10:30, if the call is made between 8:00 and 8:30. Jim, what do you make of it?

Is something wrong with JVM's critical thinking process? How in the heck does a call from a phone at 8:30 suggest that the same phone couldn't have been stolen after 10:30?

That's what I thought too at first but maybe JVM is jumping over a couple of gaps, and expressing herself in a muddled way. It kinda makes sense to me if I build bridges over the gaps. (I could be wrong and she meant something else.)

We have been reasoning that if DB didn't make this rumored phone call that she says LE is lying to her about it was made by the abductor. And it made sense when it was rumored that this phone call was at 2:30 am.

But now if DB denies a phonecall that was made at 8:30 it doesn't really make sense any more.

It has been claimed that Lisa's abductor stole the phones. It was thought that the stolen phones show (or purport to show) that DB didn't make these phone calls LE was asking her about since she didn't have her phones at the time any more. It was implied that Lisa must have been taken after 10:30 or even 11:30pm because the abductor allegedly put on the lights and the lights were out at 11:30 pm. DB alleges that she didn't make this phone call (cuz she didn't have service and LE is lying to her about the phone logs)

Now putting all that together we have four options. The abductor made this phone call and had already made off with her phone at 8:30 even though it was still supposed to be on the counter. He then came back after 11:30 to put on the lights and take Lisa. Alternatively there was another thief who took the phones earlier and the abductor had nothing to do with them. Or Lisa and the phones were taken before 8:30 and mom and her friend who sat out drinking were too phased out to even notice. Or the phones were not stolen and DB made this call herself and it's a stupid excuse that doesn't even make sense with the timing.

And I'm thinking that maybe JVM is thinking that options 1, 2, and 3 don't make much sense overall.

 

[Abby Normal]

ETA forgotten quote :blush:

LE and the FBI are not displaying their hand. They're keeping it all close to the vest and why shouldn't they? If they just hold on, keep looking, keep asking questions, keep letting people "leak" info to the media, eventually somebody is going to trip up and that will be it.

They don't have to say anything. This circus is doing all the work for them!

It certainly isn't hurting. Having people making public statements to the media when they don't really know what is going on is awesome. 1) more exposure, more people to call tip line and say "wait, that isn't true... yada yada yada" or just giving more facts they thought may have been unrelated 2) they can easily make statements (publicly) that don't line up with facts that are known 3)if the media/public are watching and digging dirt on people, the police get more tips

I think it's great that they have kept it close to the vest. I bet some have already inserted their foot into their mouth, and that can either credit or discredit them to a jury later on.

 

[djm41]

Got it. She had a prepaid phone for cash with a prepaid card for cash. MW doesn't want to be traced. This gets me rapidly back to spoofing and various other cellphone trickeries. I just doubt that the call was made from DB's phone, it may have been from that number, but maybe it wasn't from DB's phone.

If MW's number shows on DBs cell phone records at all, it wouldn't be a spoof. We will have to wait and see what LE has to know for sure.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

For Donjeta:

Yeah, but it is possible that DB called someone at MW's at 8:30 (for whatever reason), then went to bed at 10:30 and the phones were stolen after DB was in bed. Now, I don't think this is what happened, I'm just pointing out the flaws in JVM's logic (as she stated it).

It's like saying little Billy couldn't have thrown a baseball through the window at 7 pm because he was eating dinner at 5 pm.

 

[djm41]

For Donjeta:

Yeah, but it is possible that DB called someone at MW's at 8:30 (for whatever reason), then went to bed at 10:30 and the phones were stolen after DB was in bed. Now, I don't think this is what happened, I'm just pointing out the flaws in JVM's logic (as she stated it).

It's like saying little Billy couldn't have thrown a baseball through the window at 7 pm because he was eating dinner at 5 pm.

I don't see how DB would be able to explain making any calls at all since we all heard from her own mouth that the phones couldn't call out. She is stuck with that story now.

 

[Donjeta]

For Donjeta:

Yeah, but it is possible that DB called someone at MW's at 8:30 (for whatever reason), then went to bed at 10:30 and the phones were stolen after DB was in bed. Now, I don't think this is what happened, I'm just pointing out the flaws in JVM's logic (as she stated it).

It's like saying little Billy couldn't have thrown a baseball through the window at 7 pm because he was eating dinner at 5 pm.

Yep, and I suppose the drinking buddy or one of the children could have made a phone call using that phone for whatever reason, or the abductor could have been spending time with them and using the phone like it was his.

But if the unexplained phone call was hours before the intruder arrived it pulls the rug from under the whole "there was an unexplained phone call that LE was asking DB about - that's because the phones were stolen, the intruder did it" theory.

Now the question is, where did we get that theory? Did we just make it up from scraps of information that meant something else, or was there something intentionally misleading?

 

[SurfieTX]

If MW's number shows on DBs cell phone records at all, it wouldn't be a spoof. We will have to wait and see what LE has to know for sure.

Debbie said herself that LE showed her "doppler pings" of the phone(s) and the burnt clothing. So, it sounds like LE retrieved the phone records pretty quickly up to when/if they became "restricted."

 

[cityslick]

When did DB say she 'blacked out' and how does that coincide with the 8:30pm phone call?

MK we can continue the debate from the MSM thread here if you like.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Yep, and I suppose the drinking buddy or one of the children could have made a phone call using that phone for whatever reason, or the abductor could have been spending time with them and using the phone like it was his.

But if the unexplained phone call was hours before the intruder arrived it pulls the rug from under the whole "there was an unexplained phone call that LE was asking DB about - that's because the phones were stolen, the intruder did it" theory.

Now the question is, where did we get that theory? Did we just make it up from scraps of information that meant something else, or was there something intentionally misleading?

Yeah, but it sure stretches the imagination to think that the drinking buddy neighbor, or some other party guest, knew DB's phone could dial out, but DB didn't know that.

Uh uh. She made that call. Bet my farm on it.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I don't see how DB would be able to explain making any calls at all since we all heard from her own mouth that the phones couldn't call out. She is stuck with that story now.

Right. And therein lies the problem. Let's say I know perfectly well that at least one of my stolen cell phones work fine. LE shows me cell phone pings. What is my reaction? Something along the lines of, "Holy cow! They used the phone? Have you guys searched the area of the pings? Let me think if I know anyone in that pinging area! Hold on...let me think!". My reaction isn't going to be, "That's not possible. My phones can't dial out!"

So, if DB knew at least one of the phones worked, what reason would she have to state it wasn't possible for that phone to dial out? Surely she must know that LE can check that info. It's a lie, obviously, but it's such a stupid lie that it boggles the mind. UNLESS...there was no call made later that evening, and DB knows that. But do cell phones ping even if they aren't dialing out? I honestly don't know...never owned one.