Missing cell phones

[Oriah]

I really strongly disagree. They know what phone it came from, for sure, they don't know who made the call. That is the billion dollar question.

They were quick - licketysplit quick - to come out and announce the family isn't cooperating when they asked for a break.

I think they would be at the microphone before you could blink if they knew one of the Irwins made that call. (I don't mean "guess", I mean "know". As in, they talked to the person who answered the call and she/he said oh yeah, that was my friend Deborah Bradley and she wanted to know if she could borrow my car).

Oh- I don't think anyone necessarily knows who MADE the call. Just the phone it was made FROM. Sorry to confuse.
If the number was in the memory on the phone- then they know that- and they likely know what tower or satellite that phone pinged off of when that call was made. Regardless of whoever made it.

 

[NancyA]

BBM:
If that ain't the truth, lol!

(Then again, there's that blanket transferring of contact numbers/picture/videos/ etc that the cell provider will do for you when you purchase a new phone. :crazy: )

LOL, yes. they did do exactly that for my husband but for some reason on BOTH occasions they couldn't do it for me - favouritism I tell ya - but I guess it's entirely my own fault for having a 'blonde' moment both times because I didn't think to just switch the SIMS. :crazy:

 

[Nannn]

So true. I think the cell phones are really important to the solution but only if the solution is found.

What I mean is.. There are two scenarios and I find both equally possible. The person who took Lisa also grabbed the phones and pocketed them either because he/she assumed (rightly) that they didn't have a land line and it would delay LE or they just wanted free phones-making me think a younger perp.

OR

DB took the cell phones and hid them because of some bizarre reason. If she follows true crime she knows the records are available so it wasn't because of that imo. Crazy thinking after she discovered Lisa was dead perhaps. I still think IF she is involved then the phones are with the baby. Why in the world throw them away separately and they clearly aren't easily found.

It seems to me that the phones right now can be massaged into a theory of guilt or innocence which is why a solution is needed before their importance will be known.

Agree and disagree lol (respectfully). DB was admittedly at the very least intoxicated to some degree that night. When questioned by the police she claimed that the cells phones were stolen. She is bound by and to that story now and forever. She may have gotten rid of the phones while her brain was not thinking properly (intoxicated) A sober, smarter "criminal" might have thought differently..but if there was something incriminating on them, her knee jerk reactive (impaired) thinking might have been "I have to get rid of the phones!!" as always (moo)

 

[Oriah]

A cell phone contains a memory chip like any other computer device. The contents whether it be voice mails, text messages, call log, will be stored inside even if deleted until it's overwritten by other data. A foresnic examiner will be able to retrieve its history as long as it wasn't overwritten. In the US cell carriers retain logs of text messages and in some cases voice mail messages for a period of at least 6 months.

Thanks SoCalSleuth- you said that a lot better than me.

I think I better get some sleep, lol.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I also wonder if the drinking buddy neighbor knows MW. But that's a theory for another day.

I'm off to get some sunshine in my bones.

 

[Hopeful2]

LOL, yes. they did do exactly that for my husband but for some reason on BOTH occasions they couldn't do it for me - favouritism I tell ya - but I guess it's entirely my own fault for having a 'blonde' moment both times because I didn't think to just switch the SIMS. :crazy:

Thank you, Nancy A. You partially answered the question I was just about to post. I was wondering why anyone has to program phones at home at all anymore when it can be done in 10 minutes at your cell service store. Maybe I missed it, but was DB borrowing her dad's WORKING phone since both her and JI had no service due to their lack of payment? And so was she ADDING numbers into her Dad's phone from their phone so they could use his? Why would she then say NONE of them were functioning? I am missing something...:waitasec:

 

[my_tee_mouse]

I understand it perfectly. The problem with her lame story is that it is not credible unless she can prove her phone was lost or stolen prior to October
4. I think maybe she was scripted by LE for some reason and leaked to the press. Then, maybe she's a whack job who made up the whole story as a prank for attention. I mean what other reason for hair like that?

Wow. One of the smartest, most put-together people I know is a cohort getting her psych rehab degree. In other words, she will be a psychotherapist after her coursework and clinicals are completed (as will I). She also happens to have bright pink hair. She would also be one of the first persons to protest the use of the term "whack job," and she would be one of the first people to protest stereotyping anyone based on their appearance.

 

[NancyA]

Personally, I never bought the "programming the phones" routine. I think she needed to come up with a reason why JI's phone would be in the home if he wasn't. Don't believe all 3 were conveniently sitting on the counter just waiting on this mysterious kidnapper/phone snatcher either.

JMO

JI's had a work phone perhaps? And the phones were on the counter because that's where they normally keep them when not out and about as we do right above the drawer where we keep the charger in fact and right next to our car and truck keys.

 

[Evan's Mom]

I understand what you're saying, but I have a degree in sociology and loved my social statistics classes. So I'm really into statistics, cause and effect, and likelihood and predictability.

Women who color their hair in colors that aren't natural human hair colors are a subgroup, of their own choosing. (this is going to bore everyone to death) Any subgroup of people who "self select", that is, they're in that group by choice as opposed to groups of people with the same eye color, same initials, etc. have things in common that as a GROUP, you can predict. (At this point people usually jump up and start naming anomalies, things that surprisingly don't fit into the group, just to point out you can't predict individuals, but you can predict groups). So ok.

People who are PTA presidents have lots in common, people who are cat owners have lots in common, people who own sailboats have lots in common, etc. You can make predictions about populations of people although obviously there are red herrings out there who completely don't fit the mold.

When you see someone with the haircolor of MW, you can make some inferences that are very likely to be true. One of them, I believe, is that she's likely to have more odd or unsavory friends than people in her exact other circumstances who do not color their hair nonhuman colors.

I have two friends with nonhuman hair color, and they themselves are delightful and I love them to death. But BOTH of them have other dear friends who are dangerous. Not just quirky, that's great, I'm talking dangerous. So when I get together with these friends over a glass of wine, the subject of how these other friends are doing typically comes up - it's always an interesting story, always makes me glad that those people are not MY friends.

SORRY THIS IS LONG. But wouldn't you agree that people with nonhuman hair color are, in fact, more tolerant of other people behaving oddly, and more likely to have a few friends, a few connections who seem scary to the mainstream of society? People who are shunned by the mainstream for cause, and yet people with pink hair accept their friendship anyway and are connected to them?

Just my own observations on life.

I do have to agree with you, but not based on anything statistical, just my own life experience. While I am 42 and this is the first time I've ever chosen a non human hair color, I am a very tolerant person. And while I don't have any unsavory friends currently, I have in the past.

 

[SilkySifaka]

Agree and disagree lol (respectfully). DB was admittedly at the very least intoxicated to some degree that night. When questioned by the police she claimed that the cells phones were stolen. She is bound by and to that story now and forever. She may have gotten rid of the phones while her brain was not thinking properly (intoxicated) A sober, smarter "criminal" might have thought differently..but if there was something incriminating on them, her knee jerk reactive (impaired) thinking might have been "I have to get rid of the phones!!" as always (moo)

Oh we agree that is possible.. thats why I said crazy thinking perhaps!

 

[katshep]

Please don't judge someone by their hair color.
My hair is close to that same color. I'm not a whack job, I work full time, have two kids in college and one still in high school, pay my bills and am overall, pretty dadgum functional for the most part.
I colored my hair bright fushia like that in support of October being Breast Cancer Awareness month. After Halloween, I'll either go back to a normal color or do something else fun with it.

I am not condemning her because of her hair color, but it is so-o-o 1998. I'm not saying that she's crazy, evil or dysfunctional. My point is choosing hair that color is made with the knowledge that one will get attention.That is why you did it for Breast Cancer Awareness Month to draw attention to the issue through your hair.
My comment about her possibly being a whack job was related to whether she possibly could be trying to get attention in this case and making up a story--my throwing that out because it has happened before. I used her hair color as evidence of someone trying to get attention. But, she could be part of a group that's really into 1990's fashion or maybe she is also supporting Breast Cancer Awareness Month.:truce:

 

[In da Middle]

Thank you, Nancy A. You partially answered the question I was just about to post. I was wondering why anyone has to program phones at home at all anymore when it can be done in 10 minutes at your cell service store. Maybe I missed it, but was DB borrowing her dad's WORKING phone since both her and JI had no service due to their lack of payment? And so was she ADDING numbers into her Dad's phone from their phone so they could use his? Why would she then say NONE of them were functioning? I am missing something...:waitasec:

their phones may not have been working for lack of payment. His phone may not have been activated in a long time with another carrier or was a prepaid type phone without any minutes. Somebody could have used one of the phones if they had inserted prepaid minutes in it (I think).

 

[Lera213]

Here you go how about this scenario: The drinking buddy that was over at DB's house had a cell phone with her...when she went to the bathroom, suppose DB grabbed a number from her contact list. Now suppose when DB or her helper as they were leaving to dispose of the cell phones dialed that number thinking that the call will be traced, throwing police in another direction of kidnapping to give credence to the kidnapping theory. I mean criminals are not smart. They would think, OK we have to set a call to a person who we can blame is the kidnapper. Anyone get what I'm trying to say?

Edit to add: Maybe the pink hair girl did answer it but doesn't remember because she was sleeping. My son sleeps with his phone and sometimes will hit the answer button and hang up. She might not even remember she answered it.

 

[katshep]

If MW had lost the phone or it was stolen prior to October 4, she would not know anything substantive about the call, i.e., who answered the phone, who placed the call or where the phone was. Through cellphone pings, the police can narrow the location of the person placing the call and eliminate certain people who have alibis and the same holds true for the person receiving the call.
Clarification: Pink hair does not make one a whack job. It is indicative of someone seeking attention or trying to identify with a sub-group. Going to the press with a fabrication about one's tangential involvement in a media-intensive criminal case in order to get attention---whack job. BBM

 

[not_my_kids]

Or MW has kids/neices/nephews that really love Lazy Town (it's a TV show, and my kids are nuts over it). Maybe she lost a bet, maybe she had an early Halloween costume that included the dyed hair.

We get very judgmental about things we don't understand, and that means all of us, but in this case, unless one of us knows MW, we really can't use her hair color as a marker of anything. We need more actual media, that way we won't get bored and start picking people apart for things like hair color. MOO.

 

[Lera213]

MW phone might have been stolen but that is the one fact she didn't relay to the media. Suppose DB stole it. Part of the planning stage.

 

[Evan's Mom]

Thank you, Nancy A. You partially answered the question I was just about to post. I was wondering why anyone has to program phones at home at all anymore when it can be done in 10 minutes at your cell service store. Maybe I missed it, but was DB borrowing her dad's WORKING phone since both her and JI had no service due to their lack of payment? And so was she ADDING numbers into her Dad's phone from their phone so they could use his? Why would she then say NONE of them were functioning? I am missing something...:waitasec:

Before reading it here, I had no idea I could take my new phone to AT&T to get programmed with all of my old information. If I get a new phone because I lost the old one, can they still do it?

 

[not_my_kids]

MW phone might have been stolen but that is the one fact she didn't relay to the media. Suppose DB stole it. Part of the planning stage.

We don't know what she relayed to the media, we only know what the media chose to air. That's the problem with media. They control what we think we know.

 

[Hopeful2]

sooo.... Three cell phones. None with service. One broken (which must have been discovered before service was turned off- or broken in an obvious manner, like having been smashed). Enter kid napper. Takes baby Lisa. Takes the phones (including the broken one). Carries all 4 out of the house (lotsa pockets?). Chooses the one that DOES happen to have service that DB thought did not. Able to make a call. Do i have this correct?
I am still :fence: and hanging on tight... It is just VERY windy up here...

 

[Hopeful2]

Before reading it here, I had no idea I could take my new phone to AT&T to get programmed with all of my old information. If I get a new phone because I lost the old one, can they still do it?

Only if you had synched it onto your computer. The cell service provider does not keep those records for you.