SC - Heather Elvis, 20, Myrtle Beach, 18 Dec 2013 - #14

[jillycat]

I worry if LE is even able to get any of the text content from T-Mobile. I know a few years back when Deutsche Telekom and France Télécom merged T-Mobile did not retain any of the content from SMS for more than 24hrs. (Although they did retain 5 years of call info.)

As late as July/August 2013 T-Mobile still did not retain any SMS content. This information was provided during an investor board meeting conference call. I do not have a link, so please feel free to doubt me, but it should be accessible somewhere in their investor relations link online...(happy digging:scared **Edited to provide this link for their Investor Relations Site - http://www.telekom.com/ir **

If they aren't retaining that content more than 24 hours, I worry how this will turn out. I wonder if that could be the reason nothing more has been done...The answer could very well never be gained if it comes down to having to strictly rely on T-Mobile to gain the content of those texts...especially if the person on the other end of that communication had T-Mobile and deleted their texts and/or is uncooperative. I do wonder which provider the other person or persons were utilizing and what possible other services were utilized during any communications.

Sorry, I was referring to someone else's remark that she probably said/texted something somewhere about where she was going, hence the conclusion of LE, in addition to other indicators, that she drove to PTL. But I've always assumed her activity log is what LE is using for the communication timeline.

Who knows what forms of communication she was using. But if it was anything that can be viewed by LE, I would think any PTL reference would contain other useful info.

I appreciate the info on TMobile. I've heard Verizon stores actual content for a time. Perhaps we can ask the NSA. :giggle:

LE mentioned private messages through social media but I took that as basic info on what was targeted in warrants for routine investigative purposes, particularly in a case where the person was an avid user of social media sites.

I still wonder at what point her phone or perhaps her social media might have been under someone else's control. I remember reading about Brookelyn Farthing sending texts that she was scared and wanted a ride, then a text was sent that she was fine and decided to go to a party in another county. The latter was sent by the POI. Of course they had the record of the text on the recipients phone in that case, but my point is, we don't know if there was a point where communications on Heather's phone were no longer generated by her.

I assume ping records help sort that out.

 

[hockeymom4]

There was a game mentioned many threads ago, believe that it was something HE referenced on SM that she enjoyed. Do these have PM's.

Also, a FB acct. with a fake names for both parties , would give them access to chat and opened posting.

Just a thought.

Agree. Also, she said they haven't ruled out runaway because "Most 20-year-olds who live by social media would've posted something by now," Rhodes said. How do they know she hasn't set up a new page and name? With all the fake accounts, she could be following along with her friends. Her fb had over 2000 followers. If they thought it wasn't possible, it would have been said. I think it would be interesting for the family and close friends to see if they had a recent friends request in the last three months.

 

[bettiepageturner]

How are PMs conducted? Via what method?
...
What gadgets include PMs that aren't considered social media?
Email is email not PMs, right?

PMs aren't texts, right? Texts are texts.
So, did PMs stop shortly past 2AM too?
If so, does that only leave the possibility of her phone which would be voice or text.? (She could do internet stuff on her phone though too, right?)

PMs aren't tweets. PMs aren't tumblr. PMs aren't FB. PMs aren't emails. Where do PMs come into play for HE?

snipped

I would put money on the PMs being FB chat messages, perhaps kik. Even texts. I don't know why texts *wouldn't* be considered private messages—I just took it to mean any social media communication that isn't visible to anyone but the parties communicating within it. Which brings me to a question I've had for a while... is it possible to get text transcripts if the phone is missing? I know warrants come into play with getting certain forms of cellular data, but are there actual *transcripts*, and if so, what is the likelihood of HE's having been retrieved? (and I don't mean voluntarily via the people she was texting)

 

[Woe.be.gone]

LE seems to be talking now and so I think they know what they are doing.
I won't be surprised now if they are crossing their T's and dotting their i's.
Something seems to be further along then we could of guessed.
Just my opinion when I read "As a mother, obviously it's important to me," Rhodes said. "When I go home at night, I don't have to wonder why there's an empty chair. I would like to give this community a sense of peace." by Ms. Rhoades.

Here's the thing though, does her statement mean the community should not be at peace? We know HE's family isn't at peace.
This statement was unsatisfying imo and confusing. Everything they say is confusing and nobody seems to agree.

Where's the peace coming from? If anything the statement hints at not being at peace because there's no answer why Heather is missing.

Just words, empty words.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

snipped

I would put money on the PMs being FB chat messages, perhaps kik. Even texts. I don't know why texts *wouldn't* be considered private messages—I just took it to mean any social media communication that isn't visible to anyone but the parties communicating within it. Which brings me to a question I've had for a while... is it possible to get text transcripts if the phone is missing? I know warrants come into play with getting certain forms of cellular data, but are there actual *transcripts*, and if so, what is the likelihood of HE's having been retrieved? (and I don't mean voluntarily via the people she was texting)

If so, the PMs ended around 2AM, cuz FB is social media.
But, I've never heard anybody call texts PMs. Everyone says I'll text you. Text your dad. Be sure to send me a text.

I just read a post where they referred to IM's - now I have to go back and look.
The reporter stated, "private messages not previously reported". So, PMs.

 

[jillycat]

How are PMs conducted? Via what method?
We have PMs on WS meaning private message. But it's unlikely they're referring to HE's PMs on WS!

Since HE's social media stopped just past 2AM, is there a way she could have been sending PMs up until 6AM?
What gadgets include PMs that aren't considered social media?
Email is email not PMs, right?

PMs aren't texts, right? Texts are texts.
So, did PMs stop shortly past 2AM too?
If so, does that only leave the possibility of her phone which would be voice or text.? (She could do internet stuff on her phone though too, right?)

PMs aren't tweets. PMs aren't tumblr. PMs aren't FB. PMs aren't emails. Where do PMs come into play for HE?

Reminding, we know nothing about Pings from LE.
Also, I continue to be confused more than I would anyway because of the reporting - they take too much liberty when interpreting what's been said by officials.
Even LE and Rhodes gave different messages. Rhodes said "fairly comfortable" and LE said "Everything" points to - about HE driving herself to PTL. Then the reporter used "Strongly".

The info given today was for the purpose of pacifying the public, nothing more imo.
Also the reporting should have been clean - not mixing the old in with the new as they did.
They should have kept what was reported to what was said today imo.

This really is the weakest press/police communications I've encountered even when they do speak out. Terrible. Rhodes couldn't stand in front of a TV camera and let everybody hear her answers? Really bad and other than the PMs mentioned, nothing has been clarified at all. Sex trafficking is off the table but that's the only progress that's been made (as far as the public is concerned).

I think you make some good points about the format in which we are receiving information. That's why TE's statements have stayed with me. I know they're his words as opposed to that of media interpretation of his remarks. I put that alongside how easy it is to see what a phone's last usage was, and I wonder about a couple of things.

And I think you're right that there's some loosey-goosey language and terminology getting kicked around. When discussing electronic communications, the language matters. Because texting or 'PM'ing' or 'DM'ing' are specific kinds of messaging, and could potentially be done by anyone. But it's hard to fake a phone call.

And, a phone can ping when it's not in use. And usage can be calls, texts, email, accessing data...anything your phone will do that leaves a trail on an activity log.

So I think there are simply some reports out there that say calls were made when it's not clear they were calls. And pings have been mentioned in the same breath as calls, when pings are still an unknown.

Frankly, I've never seen this as a case where Heather was that busy using multiple communication formats for chatting it up with the BFF and a former lover, then planning a meeting at a boat dock. It seems to me this was more straightforward than that, and I think that applies to what happened to her as well because I think it had some planning.

As for LE's remarks, I don't know if they felt some pressure to say something, or they wanted to toss a pebble and see what ripples back. But I think the questions are still the same and I think/hope they have more answers than we do.

 

[Aeronomy]

Perhaps we can ask the NSA. :giggle:

:floorlaugh: I'll wait for their press conference.

I still wonder at what point her phone or perhaps her social media might have been under someone else's control. I remember reading about Brookelyn Farthing sending texts that she was scared and wanted a ride, then a text was sent that she was fine and decided to go to a party in another county. The latter was sent by the POI. Of course they had the record of the text on the recipients phone in that case, but my point is, we don't know if there was a point where communications on Heather's phone were no longer generated by her.
I assume ping records help sort that out.

You're right, we don't. I have wondered about that at times and wonder how it could proven or rather what exactly would need to be stated to offer reasonable proof. Even if two pings (one of which being HE) were within the same proximity in MB and a text from HE's phone stated "I'm in Georgia and never coming back" or whatever...it still proves nothing as far as who had the phone. It would be within reason that she could be saying such just to get someone's attention...sigh....so unless it's major...I don't think the ping activity would help too much.

However, if SIM's were swapped...that can definitely be detected.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Agree. Also, she said they haven't ruled out runaway because "Most 20-year-olds who live by social media would've posted something by now," Rhodes said. How do they know she hasn't set up a new page and name? With all the fake accounts, she could be following along with her friends. Her fb had over 2000 followers. If they thought it wasn't possible, it would have been said. I think it would be interesting for the family and close friends to see if they had a recent friends request in the last three months.

If she took off though, it would really be a shocking conclusion imo.
I'm not sensing that option because of the timing involved and no indication of preparation whatsoever. It's very unlikely she took off on her own or in the middle of the night with someone (because nobody else who knows HE is known to be missing).

 

[cluciano63]

I think BW may hold at least some of these answers...Heather may have indicated she had agreed to meet SM later on. Or maybe the last call or text, which came from the area of her condo, indicated she was on the way to meet him.

As far as wanting to bring "peace" to the community...I took that to mean they hope to find her (body) and proceed with charges. If they do not find her, nothing more can be done. JMO

 

[bettiepageturner]

I could be alone here, and anyone's guess is fair game at this ambiguously informed point, but I didn't read it as Private Message so much as "message that was private." It was mentioned in contrast to her social media, so that does add to the confusion. If a warrant is used to access someone's social media, that obviously includes their messages/chats.

I don't think Twitter is used as a major private-message-sender (messages are limited by character just as tweets), same with Snapchat (pain in the butt). But I am officially out of the loop based on the fact that I had to google what Kik was as a result of discussion here..

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Lol, you mean before it becomes a discussion as opposed to a communication? I'll leave that terminology adventure to the media. :twocents:

But the xojane article reference is the one in the context of finding the car.

Yes but if someone PMs, texts, leaves vm, stands on their head and quacks, "meet me at PTL" and nobody answers, then it is not considered to be a discussion, only a communication.

I'd better call it a night, night peeps!

 

[Aeronomy]

snipped

I would put money on the PMs being FB chat messages, perhaps kik. Even texts. I don't know why texts *wouldn't* be considered private messages—I just took it to mean any social media communication that isn't visible to anyone but the parties communicating within it. Which brings me to a question I've had for a while... is it possible to get text transcripts if the phone is missing? )

Yes. Some carriers retain them for a defined amount of time. However, each state has ruled differently on if it violates the 4th Amendment. I'm personally not aware of any federal law defining anything specific regarding texts.

I know warrants come into play with getting certain forms of cellular data, but are there actual *transcripts*, and if so, what is the likelihood of HE's having been retrieved? (and I don't mean voluntarily via the people she was texting)

Since she had T-Mobile, I think it's very slim. From what information I know (which is about 6 months old) T-Mobile doesn't retain text content on their servers (unless the server goes down)at all anymore.

There's a few bills that keep going back and forth in Washington, but nothing has been passed to mandate a text content retention period...or whatever it's called.

The majority of carriers do retain them, but for most it's generally less than a week. There is one carrier that retains them for a few months, but I can't remember who.

If someone else with a different carrier were on the receiving end...I wonder if SC would deem the info a 4th Amendment violation. IDK?

 

[Ghostwheel]

I am still catching up, but I notice this statement most:
"Although police chief Saundra Rhodes said Thursday that the investigation remains "very active," she said police still lack any probable cause to make an arrest."BBM.

Now, they didn't say they have no thoughts on who might have done this. They didn't say they have no idea who to arrest. They didn't say that they don't believe this was foul play. They didn't even say they had no reason to make an arrest. They say there is no probable cause to make an arrest. That makes me think someone is on their radar, but they don't have enough evidence just yet for what they consider probable cause ("a reasonable amount of suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficiently strong to justify a prudent and cautious person's belief that certain facts are probably true".)

The way statements are phrased are what strikes me. JMO, as always.

 

[Arione]

Regarding the phone calls, do we even know if there was a landline in the apartment or if she could have been using skype? I realize the way the msm is written would lead us to believe the communications were with HE's cellphone, but when we take into consideration other questions about how the article is written, it doesn't seem farfetched to think that the later communications may not all be on her cell. (after 3:41 am) IMO Sorry if this sounds a bit disjointed, I think I need sleep now.

 

[jillycat]

:floorlaugh: I'll wait for their press conference.

I changed my phone email signature from 'Sent from my iPhone' to 'Monitored by PRISM'.

You're right, we don't. I have wondered about that at times and wonder how it could proven or rather what exactly would need to be stated to offer reasonable proof. Even if two pings (one of which being HE) were within the same proximity in MB and a text from HE's phone stated "I'm in Georgia and never coming back" or whatever...it still proves nothing as far as who had the phone. It would be within reason that she could be saying such just to get someone's attention...sigh....so unless it's major...I don't think the ping activity would help too much.

However, if SIM's were swapped...that can definitely be detected.

I think it could perhaps be a constellation of things that point to someone else posing as Heather for the purpose of an alibi. I can see where pings could fit into that.

I still think the phone records tell a story.

 

[Snowyowl]

:floorlaugh: I'll wait for their press conference.




You're right, we don't. I have wondered about that at times and wonder how it could proven or rather what exactly would need to be stated to offer reasonable proof. Even if two pings (one of which being HE) were within the same proximity in MB and a text from HE's phone stated "I'm in Georgia and never coming back" or whatever...it still proves nothing as far as who had the phone. It would be within reason that she could be saying such just to get someone's attention...sigh....so unless it's major...I don't think the ping activity would help too much.

However, if SIM's were swapped...that can definitely be detected.

I've also heard there can be multiple pinging from different towers..
here's some more info
http://johnbminor.com/index_files/Page798.htm
http://www.sophisticatededge.com/how-to-ping-a-cell-phone.html

 

[Aeronomy]

I've also heard there can be multiple pinging from different towers..
here's some more info
http://johnbminor.com/index_files/Page798.htm
http://www.sophisticatededge.com/how-to-ping-a-cell-phone.html

Thanks. I guess I should have clarified what I was thinking and meant when I said pings. I didn't mean the actual tower...but the geolocation of the phone after any triangulation. Sorry.

 

[JulesInVA]

PMs...You can send private messages on Twitter. They're called Direct Messages. And you can do it on FB, and any number of games. Also could be referring to regular tweets on her private Twitter account. Or messages through a dating site. I know this isn't very helpful, just brainstorming.

ETA: Or deleted tweets.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[hockeymom4]

If she took off though, it would really be a shocking conclusion imo.
I'm not sensing that option because of the timing involved and no indication of preparation whatsoever. It's very unlikely she took off on her own or in the middle of the night with someone (because nobody else who knows HE is known to be missing).

I agree with you, but I don't understand why they couldn't rule it out. If they know someone did it, but just can't arrest them, because they don't have probable cause, then they could say, we know she didn't run away. That's my point. That's why I don't feel they are sure who did it.

 

[SharetheLight]

I am still catching up, but I notice this statement most:

"Although police chief Saundra Rhodes said Thursday that the investigation remains "very active," she said police still lack any probable cause to make an arrest."BBM.



Now, they didn't say they have no thoughts on who might have done this. They didn't say they have no idea who to arrest. They didn't say that they don't believe this was foul play. They didn't even say they had no reason to make an arrest. They say there is no probable cause to make an arrest. That makes me think someone is on their radar, but they don't have enough evidence just yet for what they consider probable cause ("a reasonable amount of suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficiently strong to justify a prudent and cautious person's belief that certain facts are probably true".)



The way statements are phrased are what strikes me. JMO, as always.

I agree completely.
The fact that it was said they still lack probable cause to make an arrest tells me someone is in their sight.

Direct statements were well crafted.

As someone else mentioned, I too wish the article had only contained the information obtained in the interview. It didn't need to have older previously reported info, IMO