Found Deceased MO - Toni Anderson, 20, North Kansas City, 15 Jan 2017 #5

[misslu]

The Andersons said their daughter's phone was still connected to the T-Mobile network until around 9:30 p.m. Sunday.

http://www.kmbc.com/article/parents-issue-plea-for-help-to-find-missing-umkc-student/8609411

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

[Gunslinging Granny]

I'm out for the night guy and gals. I am happy they found Toni and hope we can continue to question this case and hold those accountable who want to keep the truth hidden from view. Take a look at this video and see with your own eyes that Toni and two cars behind her turned south on burlington. That is totally nuts! I haven't seen better evidence that we've been lied to about Toni's disappearance. 3:15 WRONG TURN! ​


What we need is the footage that shows whether the third car follows Toni. I think the cop is safe with him braking.

[video=youtube;gGMFd5OFij4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGMFd5OFij4[/video]

What do you think is strange about other cars turning south on Burlington?

 

[Gunslinging Granny]

Being connected in my understanding (information given to me by unrelated federal agent) means connected via internet and things being transmitted TO her phone. Not her actively utilizing the phone for a phone call, or "to check her FB" for example.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Being connected to her network means her phone was using her network to ping off the cell phone tower.

 

[MaxManning]

There are those that believe the body was in the car when they pulled it out ... guy taking photos then both choppers cut live feed. I felt she was removed by divers and placed on boat earlier . Bodies tend to "deglove" after being submerged that long. Towing with open windows could have cause more deteriorating to what was left. If the windows were smashed in an accident she must have been wearing a seat belt or she would have eventually floated out of the car.

The link is a good read on drowning forensics.

http://killingkillers.blogspot.com/p/drowning-forensics.html?m=1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for that, very helpful and highly pertinent to this case!

 

[VictoriaH]

Ok so this says that a friend of Toni and Toni's BF searched this area by the direction of a metro psychic.

Am I the only one that wants to hear from this psychic?

... cmon guys, this is not at all what I've been hearing. I have seen on social media that the parents were told by a psychic.

Now it's toni's BF and his friend?

Boy.... just when you thought the sketchiness might be ending haha

I'm beyond surprised that what I have just heard has not been mentioned by anyone.

LOL
Well maybe BF had more influence on the parents than we realize!
Funny though I didn't hear any more about a psychic on the 10:00 news. Maybe it's a reporter thing......I mean she also was the one who said the car's front end was all smashed in.

 

[Gunslinging Granny]

Assuming the accident angle where Toni is in the driver's seat with seat belt on.. anyone else find it strange in the footage of the car being pulled from the water that one of the guys on the bank appears to be taking pictures or video with his phone of the drivers side area? Just wondering if the body was in fact in the driver's seat, would it be protocol to have a crime scene photographer taking pictures with a "real camera". And if that did not occur does that mean the body was in the trunk.

I watched live as it was pulled out. Somebody had a real camera because there were very bright flashes at times.

 

[n_6CC]

Thanks so much for this. Can you tell me how you know #2 is the case. I want to understand if that is what they are truly saying -- that the phone was connected to tmobile all day long. Or if it last connected at 9:30pm.

I understand what you are saying, but I want to verify how you know that is the case. Not doubting you, but I hope you can understand that this case is soooo full of this kind of thing where it's unclear what is reality.

We all can make assumptions, but this should be a solid state answer as if the phone was truly connected all day long if someone texted her... called her etc. A notification would be sent to that phone or at least attempted. Unless they were turned off, correct? So, whether she had push notifications enabled is important. I can only speak for myself and those around me, but most everyone I know has push notifications on. I know when I turn mine off, but it's not something I do often. I'd be quite suspicious if no push notifications were sent to her phone and yet the phone was connected all day long.



Maybe my understanding of this is flawed, but I am eager to determine if what we believe is accurate or just simply something we've been told and are assuming makes sense.

edit -- to add to this, if the push notifications were received, the device would then basically respond with data that it has received the notification. At that point the push notification is marked as received on the provider side data.

So if.... that is true. Unless that phone was maybe on shore??? That means the accident couldn't have occurred until 9:30pm-ish. right?

But even with a waterproof phone, if underwater, it still cant communicate with the tower. It's not going to be 21 feet underwater and connected all day. 0% chance of that, for those talking about waterproof cases etc.

Ok- I hope I answer this in the way you need it. If not PM me. From reports that Toni Anderson's parents made, as well as LE, the phone went "black" at 9:30. What that means is this, (from government agency). A "ping" is a needed transmission from phone to tower for communication. We also have another means of communication- the internet. She had a smart phone. You are correct with the push notifications and how they work. So, there are two ways this phone is "live". Her last transmission FROM the phone was her text to her friend stating "OMG just just pulled over again." The phone was ON, but not "being actively used" the rest of the time. Am I making sense? Please let me know if you have any other questions about this I have not answered. Thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[darkstar105]

I agree. I go to that park all the time. I don't see how one would end up at that park by accident...much less on the boat ramp or in the river.

 

[MaxManning]

http://www.ucidiver.com/vehicle.html

Not a whole lot of specifics in terms of distances, but the article has some good information :

Where to Search
One of the best places to search for stolen vehicles or any vehicle that someone wanted to get rid of quickly is your area's public boat ramps. These locations are usually out of the way from the public's view and provide a nice "launching ramp" (the boat ramp itself), which makes placing the vehicle in the water very easy. Usually, all it takes is driving the vehicle to the top of the ramp, placing it in neutral, making sure the wheels are straight, getting out and letting her roll.

[FONT=&amp]As the vehicle descend, the weight of the engine causes the noise to dip. As the vehicle goes under, in shallow water, the vehicle will usually settle to the bottom right-side-up. In water 2 to 3 times deeper than the vehicle is long, the vehicle will usually flip upside down.[/FONT]

[FONT=&amp]the current speed and its strength has a lot to do with how far a vehicle can be moved away from its entry point. It all depends basically on whether or not the depth of the water (usually just above the tires) is enough to allow a strong current to "push" the vehicle. Also, the current speed and strength has to be strong enough to overcome the negativeness of the vehicle and the hold the bottom composition will have on the vehicle. If the vehicle is floating, the current can move a vehicle great distances before it sinks and settles to the bottom. Even then the vehicle can still be moved by strong currents, sometimes for miles before it hits an obstruction or the bottom's contour or composition stops its movement.[/FONT]

So, while I don't get any concrete estimates, it seems like the 8 mile trip might not be impossible. Just hard to determine what "great distances" is. I'm interested in what someone familiar with the missouri river might say. It's certainly deep, as the diver said the car was 21 feet down.

That being said, it could also just sink right away off that boat ramp or down the slope and go right where it was found. I have to say based on what I know so far, I'd say boat ramp or slope are still most likely. However, if the police said they checked there before and found nothing, the car moving, would explain that as well, right?

So, nothing conclusive, but certainly informative.

 

[VictoriaH]

Ok so this says that a friend of Toni and Toni's BF searched this area by the direction of a metro psychic.

Am I the only one that wants to hear from this psychic?

... cmon guys, this is not at all what I've been hearing. I have seen on social media that the parents were told by a psychic.

Now it's toni's BF and his friend?

Boy.... just when you thought the sketchiness might be ending haha

I'm beyond surprised that what I have just heard has not been mentioned by anyone.

Like the mother thinking she was involved in human trafficking?
Nothing surprises me with this case.

 

[MrX]

Catching up. I was reading news stories this morning and was shocked by the sloppy reporting. I will not be surprised if the 9:30 ping is a misquote that survived shoddy reporting. I believe LE put the last phone contact around 6AM.

No word from my Pathologist yet, but I talked to another medical man who said there would be little, if anything, left from a forensic standpoint, in terms of tissue.

I know some people that live what I would call "dangerous" lifestyles and one common theme is posting fake ads in order to catch someone "cheating." I guess apps these days are so focused that one has a high probability of catching a cheating partner. What if Toni was going to a meetup that was a setup?

I still can't accept suicide or accident.

 

[MaxManning]

Ok- I hope I answer this in the way you need it. If not PM me. From reports that Toni Anderson's parents made, as well as LE, the phone went "black" at 9:30. What that means is this, (from government agency). A "ping" is a needed transmission from phone to tower for communication. We also have another means of communication- the internet. She had a smart phone. You are correct with the push notifications and how they work. So, there are two ways this phone is "live". Her last transmission FROM the phone was her text to her friend stating "OMG just just pulled over again." The phone was ON, but not "being actively used" the rest of the time. Am I making sense? Please let me know if you have any other questions about this I have not answered. Thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand. So my question is that if she received a push notification, the reply would be verifiable, meaning she had an internet connection. From what I understand your device is not sending any information via internet unless it needs to.

So my point is that how can we tell that the phone was connected all that time, unless we have a push notification that replied to communicate it was received? That should be there and be concrete, not a maybe. Otherwise, it wasn't ACTUALLY connected in a sense where they were sending data between them. Now... how does it become disconnected? was the disconnection at 9:30 sent by the device? Or was it a timeout of some sort.

For instance, when a phone is being turned off or put into airplane mode, then your phone might send a "i'm disconnecting" message. If that was the case, we should believe that her phone was active until 9:30pm.

However, if her phone was connected went under water and wasn't able to send a message like that, would the phone just remain constantly connected -- as far as the provider knows? Or is there some function of the provider to either check if the connection is still valid? or even a timeout that says -- welp, I haven't heard from you in x amount of time, I'm gonna assume you are gone. or... It tries to send a push notification, fails to get a reply and then decided -- ok, you aren't here anymore.

Make sense?

 

[n_6CC]

I understand. So my question is that if she received a push notification, the reply would be verifiable, meaning she had an internet connection. From what I understand your device is not sending any information via internet unless it needs to.

So my point is that how can we tell that the phone was connected all that time, unless we have a push notification that replied to communicate it was received? That should be there and be concrete, not a maybe. Otherwise, it wasn't ACTUALLY connected in a sense where they were sending data between them. Now... how does it become disconnected? was the disconnection at 9:30 sent by the device? Or was it a timeout of some sort.

For instance, when a phone is being turned off or put into airplane mode, then your phone might send a "i'm disconnecting" message. If that was the case, we should believe that her phone was active until 9:30pm.

However, if her phone was connected went under water and wasn't able to send a message like that, would the phone just remain constantly connected -- as far as the provider knows? Or is there some function of the provider to either check if the connection is still valid? or even a timeout that says -- welp, I haven't heard from you in x amount of time, I'm gonna assume you are gone. or... It tries to send a push notification, fails to get a reply and then decided -- ok, you aren't here anymore.

Make sense?

Makes sense- Her phone disconnected from any network (battery died , or shutoff) at 9:30. This is only correct if the report from her parents is correct on when it "went dark". Which, I believe. Both LE and parents would have been given the information. I think if I remember right, the ping came out way before LE said a word. As far as the 9:30 pm statement- the Andersons said that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[n_6CC]

Makes sense- Her phone disconnected from any network (battery died , or shutoff) at 9:30. This is only correct if the report from her parents is correct on when it "went dark". Which, I believe. Both LE and parents would have been given the information. I think if I remember right, the ping came out way before LE said a word. As far as the 9:30 pm statement- the Andersons said that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I might add, that it was CONNECTED to the network in some way, shape, or form until it went dark. (Information provided by F.Govt agent unrelated to case)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[VictoriaH]

I'm out for the night guy and gals. I am happy they found Toni and hope we can continue to question this case and hold those accountable who want to keep the truth hidden from view. Take a look at this video and see with your own eyes that Toni and two cars behind her turned south on burlington. That is totally nuts! I haven't seen better evidence that we've been lied to about Toni's disappearance. 3:15 WRONG TURN! ​

What we need is the footage that shows whether the third car follows Toni. I think the cop is safe with him braking.

[video=youtube;gGMFd5OFij4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGMFd5OFij4[/video]

Thanks for sharing that video.....but it DOES shows more than the original video we've been pondering on for weeks.

 

[MaxManning]

Makes sense- Her phone disconnected from any network (battery died , or shutoff) at 9:30. This is only correct if the report from her parents is correct on when it "went dark". Which, I believe. Both LE and parents would have been given the information. I think if I remember right, the ping came out way before LE said a word. As far as the 9:30 pm statement- the Andersons said that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, the 9:30pm statement was first :

http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/toni-...-facebook-twitter-instagram-text-pulled-over/

This parkville ping came along much later and it originated from PS or PS's father.

you can see that here :

http://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/toni-anderson-searchers-petition-police-focus-on-parkville

That was never reported by LE that I can remember. Even in the CWD video I believe the officer just says "9 corridor".

I honestly don't know what is the truth.

 

[arnott1979]

http://www.ucidiver.com/vehicle.html

Not a whole lot of specifics in terms of distances, but the article has some good information :







So, while I don't get any concrete estimates, it seems like the 8 mile trip might not be impossible. Just hard to determine what "great distances" is. I'm interested in what someone familiar with the missouri river might say. It's certainly deep, as the diver said the car was 21 feet down.

That being said, it could also just sink right away off that boat ramp or down the slope and go right where it was found. I have to say based on what I know so far, I'd say boat ramp or slope are still most likely. However, if the police said they checked there before and found nothing, the car moving, would explain that as well, right?

So, nothing conclusive, but certainly informative.

I automatically thought, "maybe the car was put there after police searched the area," the the idea of the river moving the car makes me feel better than my initial thought.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[MaxManning]

I might add, that it was CONNECTED to the network in some way, shape, or form until it went dark. (Information provided by F.Govt agent unrelated to case)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

wait

Are you saying that a government agent is telling you this?

color me skeptical. Why not just explain way, shape, and form

 

[arnott1979]

A federal government agent?

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[MaxManning]

I might add, that it was CONNECTED to the network in some way, shape, or form until it went dark. (Information provided by F.Govt agent unrelated to case)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am beyond skeptical that a government agent would communicate information to us regarding this case. If so, I'd guess that the CI/Snitch theory would be bolstered by such a thing.

I know many don't like to hear that, but when the identification is made, that might become something LE must divulge if it was indeed the case. It certainly would explain a lot of weird behavior by police imo.

I don't know if there are laws pertaining to this, but I have seen a number of cases while researching this one where the confirmation came after the body was found and ID'd