NV NV - Steven T. Koecher, 30, Henderson, 13 Dec 2009 - #13

[carbuff]

This has been on my mind for some time. I mean no disrespect to Steven; no matter what kind of person he is, he deserves to be found if he's missing and his family deserves answers.

But.

I am not getting a picture of an honest man.

I'm getting a picture of a man who's so private it borders on secretive, a man who routinely told different people different stories about even everyday activities. Gsmith didn't know about the Texas connections, his job history is inconsistent and incomplete, and his paper trail about any of his activities is thin at best.

I'm getting a picture of a man whose location on any given day is difficult to pin down. We know about several trips; how many others were there that didn't leave food receipts or phone pings?

Double life? No, I don't think so. I think he's just that private, trying to hide the vulnerable parts of himself. I think maybe his final leaving was because he thought that was the only way he could preserve what was left of himself. "I love you but you're killing me."

 

[fasteddy4]

Warning: A bit of rambling ahead


The pings the next morning:

If something bad did happen to Steven, why would somebody keep him alive all night, allow him to have access to his phone the next morning, Dec. 14., and allow him to check his voicemail? THEN, get rid of him? That makes no sense to me. Once again, I guess I am trying to attach the logical to the somewhat unknown and illogical but this scenario sound like a real stretch.

Isn't it much more likely that: I'll use my cell phone for example. I have T-Mobile. I never shut my phone off. . .NEVER! It's on at night even though it's charging and I leave it on when I go to the movies but put it on "silent". So, if I miss a call and I come out of the movies, when I look at my phone, it shows I missed a call. Then, I only need to push one button twice and it will call voice mail. No codes. No seven or 10 digit number. Just the same button twice. Is it not likely that something happened to Steven the night before, whoever did this to him forgot or did not know that Steven had his phone on, then some time early in the morning when they are trying to move him (I know. . .this is ugly stuff), they find the phone, see that messages are waiting, and pressed the button to see what the messages were. . .possibly even inadvertantly calling voicemail when that was not their intention.

It just seems strange to keep Steven alive all night with his phone on then get rid of him the next morning after he checks his voicemail. That's taking a tremendous chance by whoever did whatever did Steven. What if Steven actually called someone that morning? Then wouldn't the bad guy's plan be ruined, especially if Steven told somebody where he was and what he was doing?

It also seems odd to me that Steven would spend the night with anyone he didn't know unless he was there for the expressed reason of spending the night (you know what I'm talking about). If it was people he was meeting for the first time, then at the end of Sunday would he not have requested to be taken back to his car? This is another reason I don't think he made it to Monday morning. I think at the end of Sunday there is no way he leaves his car in SCA until Monday. Plus. . .he didn't bring any additional clothes, toothbrush. . .razors. . .soap. . .etc. He obviously did not think he would be spending the night anywhere else. So, he would be motivated to go back to his car for these reasons as well on Dec. 13 evening.

I know the answer to all of this could be: "They wouldn't allow him to go back." Well, then. . .if they were forcing him to stay, would they not have taken his phone so he could not call 911? And if they took his phone, then he surely could not have been checking his voicemail on Monday morning.

Maybe I am just not writing this all down clearly this morning but there is something there I think. He didn't bring anything with him that would signal he was going to be somewhere else all night. That tells me he did not anticipate it. And when he found out Sunday evening/night that he would not be getting back to his car, would he not have done something? Especially if he is with people he does not know well.

It just seems to me that he would have asked to go get his car. If it was me: If the person told me that it was okay to park in that circle, I would have thrown that person's credibility out the window later that day as soon as the person insisted I stay the night when he/she didn't tell me that beforehand. I would have been like: I AM OUTTA HERE. And in Steven's case, at the point, Steven might have been offed. Once again, that means he did not check his vm on Monday.

That car was his life. He drove all over the place in it. He slept in it. He kept valuable things in it. There is no way he chances getting it towed by allowing it to be any place for very long, unless he was lied to. And being that he didn't take anything with him, that tells me somebody told him he would be back to his car later that day. And when Steven saw that was not going to happen on Sunday evening, I am sure he would have raised a stink, worrying about his car getting towed. Something along the lines of. . ."But you said. . ." and "I didn't bring any clothes. . ." That is when the poop probably hit the fan. Not Monday morning.

I just don't see him leaving his car there overnight by choice. To me, that means he was taken care of on Sunday.

 

[laytonian]

what I don't understand is that if LE had the ping data, they should have plastered the Whitney Ranch area with flyers.

Until we learned of this about a week ago, I don't think we ever hear of that before and people concentrated on the SCA area.

I find it distressing to say the least. I can understand if it was not shared publicly at first, but to my knowledge there was NO LE activity in that area. I mean it has been claimed that LE knocked on the doors around Evening Lights. You would think they would have checked out restaurants and hotels in the Whitney Ranch area had they known his phone last pinged there.

The cell tower is in Whitney Ranch; the phone could have been miles away.

 

[laytonian]

With this said, however, I will go speak with the clerk tomorrow to get some details regarding bus tickets, IDs, & leave a flyer. If you all think this would be a waste of my time please say so.

Knowing for sure that you can buy a ticket there, and what kind of ID you have to have, would be valuable -- even if it rules out his ability to buy a ticket. I'm not sure a flyer would be helpful, because it's been five months and IF he was there, he went there to leave.

 

[laytonian]

One more thing. Well, two.

I guess we can now say for sure that Steven was on Evening Lights to meet someone at noon. He did not just end up on that street randomly. He was meeting someone there at that time. And somehow, at least Steven's phone made it over to the Whitney Ranch. We can't say for sure if Steven went in that direction or not.

The other thing, now, is that we need to figure out who gave him that address and directions on how to get there. My first guess is that he got the address and directions while he was in Utah. I doubt he drove down here the day before. Got the address from whomever. Checked it out. Drove back to St. George then came back the next day.

I've been trying to catch up this morning, but I missed something: HOW can we "now say for sure that Steven was on Evening Lights to meet someone at noon."

We don't even know if he kept walking and turned the corner, do we? Or walked through the golf cart path onto the golf course area.

 

[webrocket]

Warning: A bit of rambling ahead


The pings the next morning:

If something bad did happen to Steven, why would somebody keep him alive all night, allow him to have access to his phone the next morning, Dec. 14., and allow him to check his voicemail? THEN, get rid of him? That makes no sense to me. Once again, I guess I am trying to attach the logical to the somewhat unknown and illogical but this scenario sound like a real stretch.

Isn't it much more likely that: I'll use my cell phone for example. I have T-Mobile. I never shut my phone off. . .NEVER! It's on at night even though it's charging and I leave it on when I go to the movies but put it on "silent". So, if I miss a call and I come out of the movies, when I look at my phone, it shows I missed a call. Then, I only need to push one button twice and it will call voice mail. No codes. No seven or 10 digit number. Just the same button twice. Is it not likely that something happened to Steven the night before, whoever did this to him forgot or did not know that Steven had his phone on, then some time early in the morning when they are trying to move him (I know. . .this is ugly stuff), they find the phone, see that messages are waiting, and pressed the button to see what the messages were. . .possibly even inadvertantly calling voicemail when that was not their intention.

It just seems strange to keep Steven alive all night with his phone on then get rid of him the next morning after he checks his voicemail. That's taking a tremendous chance by whoever did whatever did Steven. What if Steven actually called someone that morning? Then wouldn't the bad guy's plan be ruined, especially if Steven told somebody where he was and what he was doing?

It also seems odd to me that Steven would spend the night with anyone he didn't know unless he was there for the expressed reason of spending the night (you know what I'm talking about). If it was people he was meeting for the first time, then at the end of Sunday would he not have requested to be taken back to his car? This is another reason I don't think he made it to Monday morning. I think at the end of Sunday there is no way he leaves his car in SCA until Monday. Plus. . .he didn't bring any additional clothes, toothbrush. . .razors. . .soap. . .etc. He obviously did not think he would be spending the night anywhere else. So, he would be motivated to go back to his car for these reasons as well on Dec. 13 evening.

I know the answer to all of this could be: "They wouldn't allow him to go back." Well, then. . .if they were forcing him to stay, would they not have taken his phone so he could not call 911? And if they took his phone, then he surely could not have been checking his voicemail on Monday morning.

Maybe I am just not writing this all down clearly this morning but there is something there I think. He didn't bring anything with him that would signal he was going to be somewhere else all night. That tells me he did not anticipate it. And when he found out Sunday evening/night that he would not be getting back to his car, would he not have done something? Especially if he is with people he does not know well.

It just seems to me that he would have asked to go get his car. If it was me: If the person told me that it was okay to park in that circle, I would have thrown that person's credibility out the window later that day as soon as the person insisted I stay the night when he/she didn't tell me that beforehand. I would have been like: I AM OUTTA HERE. And in Steven's case, at the point, Steven might have been offed. Once again, that means he did not check his vm on Monday.

That car was his life. He drove all over the place in it. He slept in it. He kept valuable things in it. There is no way he chances getting it towed by allowing it to be any place for very long, unless he was lied to. And being that he didn't take anything with him, that tells me somebody told him he would be back to his car later that day. And when Steven saw that was not going to happen on Sunday evening, I am sure he would have raised a stink, worrying about his car getting towed. Something along the lines of. . ."But you said. . ." and "I didn't bring any clothes. . ." That is when the poop probably hit the fan. Not Monday morning.

I just don't see him leaving his car there overnight by choice. To me, that means he was taken care of on Sunday.

I'm with you on many of your observations but not your conclusion.

I think he met up with precisely whom he intended and spent the night in the Whitney Ranch area before taking off with this person.

If he felt he was in danger, Steven could have used the phone to call 911. He did not so I think things ended as he planned.

 

[rd_jfc]

The cell tower is in Whitney Ranch; the phone could have been miles away.

Multiple cell towers in that area over hours indicates local to that area. I wouldn't bet everything on one call connecting to a distant tower, but not multiple calls over hours.

rd

 

[laytonian]

Multiple cell towers in that area over hours indicates local to that area. I wouldn't bet everything on one call connecting to a distant tower, but not multiple calls over hours.

rd

The last four tower hits aren't that far apart; in fact, two of them (6:58 and 6:59pm) are a minute apart but two different towers.

Sunday. A weekend in Vegas. Lots of visitors. I'd think cell traffic would be quite heavy, and calls could bounce around.

 

[fasteddy4]

I've been trying to catch up this morning, but I missed something: HOW can we "now say for sure that Steven was on Evening Lights to meet someone at noon."

We don't even know if he kept walking and turned the corner, do we? Or walked through the golf cart path onto the golf course area.

I think it for the following reasons:

1. According to the pings, the one at Bermuda/Cactus specifically, he was in Vegas well before noon time, so he could have gone to that street much earlier if he wanted. Could he have been meeting some one else before? Sure. But no one has come forward. That leads me to believe Steven had some free time before noon and still he chose to show up at noon.

2. We now know that he left the SCA somehow and not in his own car. So, he made it down to Whitney Ranch area somehow. I totally discount him walking because I'm a local. Plus, if he wanted to walk, he would have headed back up Savannah. So, he got a ride from someone.

3. I don't think Steven shows up somewhere with the person giving directions saying, "Park in the circle, walk across the golf course, and I'll pick you up there." Only a complete idiot would not think it was suspicious. So, whoever took him to Whitney Ranch would have had to have been close to Evening Lights and been waiting for him.

4. It wasn't a taxi that picked him up because the cell phone records have no calls to a taxi company. So, it had to be a private individual.

5. I discount a random driver picking him up through hitchhiking because only about 1 in a million people pick up hitchhikers these days. Especially in Vegas.

6. I think the meeting place was on Evening Lights because the other street (Portsmouth) that is in the direction of him walking is more accessible by not going down Savannah but by going straight down Laurel Heights. In addition, something tells me that if the person told him to meet him on Portsmouth then Steven would have driven down Portsmouth even if he still intended to park in the that circle. But, we know Steven headed down Savannah instead.

From this, I deduce that somebody told Steven, "Hey, I'll be on Evening Lights around noon. Meet me there. You can park in the circle. Your car will be fine there." Granted, there are a couple of logical leaps in there but not crazy ones. I think this all still comes back to why was Steven in Las Vegas. What was the specific event that set it all in motion? The alternative is that he randomly showed up in Vegas on Evening Lights and within 24 hours he was gone. Who convinced him to show up here? Why did he show up here? It's not like he just showed up in Las Vegas on Sunday morning for no reason in SCA, just randomly got a ride from SCA to Whitney Ranch, and then disappeared. There had to be some plan in there. Some kind of timing. Some kind of agreement about meeting place and time.

 

[laytonian]

However, it really makes no sense that a killer would take just Steven's phone if he had just killed him. It's one thing to take the phone for 20 mins and throw in a dumpster. It is quite another thing to take it overnight and access voicemail the next morning if the phone's owner is dead.

If you're the perp in such a scenario, you might do just that to see who else is contacting him. After all, you were angry enough to cause his death (over WHAT?????) ... and his connections may lead you to the answer of "what happened to the money"....or whatever.

I don't think we can make sense of crime.

Trying to make logic out of the illogical, then throw in some criminal "logic" -- and it's brain-fry.

 

[webrocket]

If you're the perp in such a scenario, you might do just that to see who else is contacting him. After all, you were angry enough to cause his death (over WHAT?????) ... and his connections may lead you to the answer of "what happened to the money"....or whatever.

I don't think we can make sense of crime.

Trying to make logic out of the illogical, then throw in some criminal "logic" -- and it's brain-fry.

why would a murderer care who is calling his victim? you dispose of the body and presumably anything that connects you to the victim. (there are exceptions like when killers keep trophies like ladies undergarments) But a phone? turned on and ringing or text messages coming in? calling voice mail?

That is not the type of souvenir/trophy I have ever heard of a killer keeping. There is always a first for everything, but this one does not sound like it to me.

 

[SleuthyMcSleutherson]

Just theorizing, here. . .

With regard to the phone ending up in WR and someone checking the voicemail: What about the possibility that it was dumped by someone other than SK (the "bad guys") and that someone else, a completely random someone walking to school or elsewhere, came upon it in the morning, checked the voicemail to see if the owner had called his own phone to say, "Hey, if you find my phone, contact me at *advertiser censored*-xxxx to return it. Thanks!" And of course, I'm not sure what said stranger would have done with the phone after that, but the battery was likely close to dying anyway. . .

 

[fasteddy4]

I'm with you on many of your observations but not your conclusion.

I think he met up with precisely whom he intended and spent the night in the Whitney Ranch area before taking off with this person.

If he felt he was in danger, Steven could have used the phone to call 911. He did not so I think things ended as he planned.

I take it you think he is still alive. I guess that's our big difference. I don't think he is with us anymore, for the simple fact that when people disappear and their phone, credit cards, etc. are never used again it is because they are not alive anymore.

It also stands to reason that if Steven disappeared with someone, then who else is missing? How did Steven know this other missing person? Where did they meet? Was it a man or was it a woman? How did they carry on this relationship without Steven saying anything to anyone about him/her? And there's a ton of other questions as well if Steven took off with someone else. And I have said this before: I can see getting away from his parents. But everyone else? Friends, church members, etc.? I don't see it.

Plus, everything that he bought for Christmas the night before. Just add that to the pile. There is absolutely no indication that he ran away or intended on ending his life. There are tons of indications he was looking for a job and was desperate to do so, including 99 percent of his emails having to do with finding work. It is probably that one of these emails got him in some trouble.

I just can't buy into the "ran away" theory. Or the suicide theory. Just too much stuff that adds up to the contrary.

 

[hollyblue]

Maybe he was bringing something from the Ruby Valley drive. Maybe he went to Ruby Valley to pick it up. He supposedly left a church function and started driving. He put over a 1,000 miles on his car in 2 days. Wow!

The only thing I can think of that anyone in Las Vegas would want is $$$. And who better to trust than a Morman with a good background.

Now, who & why?

Whatever he was doing in northern NV or UT, he didn't bother to tell the family or stop and say "Hi, I just thought I'd stop by because I'm looking for work...or etc". He had talked to sister multiple times and didn't mention it. It was something he did not feel like sharing.

 

[laytonian]

why would a murderer care who is calling his victim? you dispose of the body and presumably anything that connects you to the victim. (there are exceptions like when killers keep trophies like ladies undergarments) But a phone? turned on and ringing or text messages coming in? calling voice mail?

That is not the type of souvenir/trophy I have ever heard of a killer keeping. There is always a first for everything, but this one does not sound like it to me.

IF this is a murder, he wasn't killed because he looked cute walking down the street in SCA.
He'd have been killed over something he was involved in - with other people. Those other people would have suspected him of something else, and if his phone kept ringing, you don't think they'd be suspicious?

 

[laytonian]

Just theorizing, here. . .

With regard to the phone ending up in WR and someone checking the voicemail: What about the possibility that it was dumped by someone other than SK (the "bad guys") and that someone else, a completely random someone walking to school or elsewhere, came upon it in the morning, checked the voicemail to see if the owner had called his own phone to say, "Hey, if you find my phone, contact me at *advertiser censored*-xxxx to return it. Thanks!" And of course, I'm not sure what said stranger would have done with the phone after that, but the battery was likely close to dying anyway. . .

Thank you. :woohoo:

I've mentioned that here about 47,392 times, and it's always greeted with laughter or "I wouldn't do THAT!"

Well...people DO do that. I've done it lots of times.

 

[SleuthyMcSleutherson]

Thank you. :woohoo:

I've mentioned that here about 47,392 times, and it's always greeted with laughter or "I wouldn't do THAT!"

Well...people DO do that. I've done it lots of times.

LOL! Yes, it's true. I've done it a few times and I've known lots of others who've done it, too.

And even if the random stranger wasn't checking the VM for that express purpose, it seems that on some phones it's not hard to do inadvertently.

 

[carbuff]

Two things I've concluded based on the new cell phone information:

1. I think it's very unlikely that's not Steven in the video. With just one or two isolated pings, I could picture a murderer who resembled Steven dumping the car and the phone, but the location and apparent content of the calls makes that unlikely.

1b. Also makes it unlikely that he was offed by a drug dealer who then used the cell phone to conduct his own business.

2. I doubt that anybody who lives in SCA was in any way involved in whatever happened. He might have met someone there, and it might be someone who occasionally had reason to be in the area (delivery truck driver?), but I think the whole point of parking there was to be far away from the ultimate destination.

2b. I think Steven was alive at 7am when he called voice mail.

 

[jmarple]

why would a murderer care who is calling his victim? you dispose of the body and presumably anything that connects you to the victim. (there are exceptions like when killers keep trophies like ladies undergarments) But a phone? turned on and ringing or text messages coming in? calling voice mail?

That is not the type of souvenir/trophy I have ever heard of a killer keeping. There is always a first for everything, but this one does not sound like it to me.

We have a case locally that is being prosecuted now where the husband murdered his wife and kept her cell phone and continued to text her out-of-state family for 2 MONTHS after her death.

 

[carbuff]

why would a murderer care who is calling his victim? you dispose of the body and presumably anything that connects you to the victim. (there are exceptions like when killers keep trophies like ladies undergarments) But a phone? turned on and ringing or text messages coming in? calling voice mail?

That is not the type of souvenir/trophy I have ever heard of a killer keeping. There is always a first for everything, but this one does not sound like it to me.

There was a case in Connecticut a couple of years ago where some teens murdered another girl, kept her phone, and used it to call her parents to torment them.

Apparently not the case here, but there are a lot of weird reasons to do something like that.