Truth P,
Thanks, I listened to that segment a couple of times but it really helps to read it. What she said does not make it clear whether they were shut down at the same time or different times.
Yes, honestly, I don't disagree with this.
I mam also unclear about the batteries. It is my understanding that if you power off a phone it will not ping. When I leave the country, I power off and have a full charge when I power back on two weeks later. I would think two weeks of pinging would deplete a battery pretty well. Do all phones work this way? Have they always?
BBM - In your example, did you leave your phone home? I'm really unsure about this, but I think at least some types of phones ping even when turned off--as they enter a new tower zone. (The phone must somehow be physically moving.) Now if the batteries or the SIM card is/are removed, the phone is unable to ping. That was my understanding of older cell phones; however, I'm willing to take my blows on this because my grasp of the subject matter is slim to none.
It never made sense to me that Jennifer would make a special trip late at night just so that some friend of her kid brother could get his phone back a little sooner when he had carelessly left it there in the first place.
I could never quite swallow this, either. Jennifer's girl friend since childhood described Jenn's mood as a little bit funky that night. I take that as meaning a little bit down--just the result of reality setting in after returning from a wonderful vacation. I don't know where that fits, but it could go in the column of intending to stay home.
The damp shower, clothes on the bathroom room floor; damp towel over the washer (in another room), water in the shower corners and under bottles--none of that holds much weight for me when considering clues pointing to a morning abduction. (Never did.) Of course, I have to say right up front--I am not from the area. However, water will stay in my shower corners and particularly under my shampoo bottle until the next morning and beyond if I don't wipe it.
And I don't know if anyone else would agree with this, but I often wonder about the t-shirt and things that were left on the bathroom floor. Why would she have taken time to throw the towel over the washer but not scoop up the things on the bathroom floor? I contemplate that she could have wrapped the towel around herself and walked to her bedroom to get dressed. Maybe on her way out of the bedroom, heading to the bathroom for hair and make-up purposes, she put the towel to dry on the washer as she walk passed the washer/dryer area. That might make sense--but were the clothes in the middle of the floor? I think I heard that, but I'm not sure. As she was doing her hair and putting on make-up, wouldn't they have been in her way? Maybe this is an age thing, but they could create a tripping hazard.
The missing contacts are probably the best indication that Jenn was home and preparing for work in the morning--but if the abduction happened shortly after she talked to Rob the night before, maybe she hadn't gotten around to removing them.
I truly, truly believe that a forensic team should have scoured Jennifer's condo. It's shocking to think that wasn't done. And I'm sure everyone is aware of this, but evil-doers have been known to use their victim's shower.
Does FedEx even pick up in the middle of the night?
This has been much debated, and I think the conclusion was that it can vary from city to city. In Jenn's area in 2006, I think it was possible but nothing close-by and convenient. Simply taking it to work with her in the morning would have been the easiest and safest thing to do.
Powering off as soon as she found it would have been nice. That would have prevented it from running down so Travis could check his messages as soon as it arrived without having to recharge. I don't know if I would have thought to do that.
Interesting. You know, I can see Jennifer being thoughtful and considerate enough to do this.
Even in 2005, people wouldn't normally power off at home so the fact that Jennifer's phone was powered of is likely significant to the investigation.
And let's remember--well, if true--that Jennifer used her cell phone as her morning alarm clock. Indeed, what you mention above is incredibly significant. But we need to know if it was powered off or the battery/SIM card removed and we need to know when this happened. I do believe LE has this information.
And the big thing for me--the very big thing I want to know is
: whichever event happened--did it happen for both phones at the same time? If so, it would narrow down the suspects considerably. How many people knew she had Travis' cell phone?
At the time, plenty of crimes were solved by tracing the pings of a cell phone. As the public has become more aware of how they work, average criminals have become more careful about cell phones. I am not ready to credit some as a criminal genius because he knew to power off a phone as soon as he abducted someone but it does show a little savvy if that is what he did.
Yes, agreed.
From what I know about the cellular system, phones will ping off every cell tower with in range unless that tower is down or it is maxed out. The system recognizes which available tower, usually the one with the strongest signal, is responsible for each phone in the system. The system is able to reassign a particular phone to a different tower if it is moving in a vehicle or if towers become maxed out or are otherwise unavailable. Apparently all of this information is available and retrievable by the cell company for a while. This information is difficult to obtain(i.e. expensive) and there are glitchs in the system as well as inevitable human error. Very often, no one in either the cell company or Law Enforcement can make an absolutely accurate interpretation of that data. As an example, a phone might ping towers A B and C but be assigned to A. Suddenly assignment shifts to tower C and no pings were detected on A and B. That might mean the phone was closets to tower A but with in range of B and C and then it moved out of range of both A and B but was still in range of C. OR, it may mean that the phone didn't move at all and there was something going on in the system. Probably all that could be reasonably determined would be that the phone was "near" towers A B C but not near a fourth tower X during this time. ( does this make any sense?)
This is a good explanation. Thank you.
The frustrating thing about this is that we, and of course the family, are trying to make inferences based on the information available when we know that Law Enforcement has one piece of information that might change everything.
Exactly. I wouldn't be surprised if LE has more than one piece. Also, LE has been known to allow an unconfirmed leak or two if it serves their own purposes. I sometimes wonder if we are seeing a bit of that in this case. They are taking much public criticism over their handling of it, and perhaps they have tried to make people understand that Jennifer's disappearance has different elements that we should consider. I don't, though. Who does?
One thing I want to add is I hope the podcast continues because it could reach a lot of people. It could make people aware of Jennifer, make them care, get them talking--even if everything is all wrong. The important thing is that it creates awareness. And somebody knows. Maybe after all these years, something will slip out. The final little something that will allow LE to go "bingo."
As always, I would love to know Logan's first impressions of the condition of Jennifer's condo--and his thoughts on the Chinese food found in Jenn's fridge.
