AZ AZ - Daniel Robinson, 24, remote job site, Buckeye, 23 Jun 2021 #2

[Skyblueday32]

We know the phone got the ravine at 10:05am and didn't leave again, at least not while it was turned on. And it stayed on for about a day before it started going to voicemail.

If it's foul play and you don't want anyone to know it, you can't have the Jeep and phone be separated. Maybe the clothes were left that day as well, and they decided that if someone found Daniel's phone and clothes without the Jeep, it would all but prove foul play.

But you know, you are right, and its one of the biggest reasons I don't shut the door on the Jeep coming back that same day, because if you go through the trouble to drive it out of there, why not just get rid of it all together? How would you transport it without someone finding it?

Do you remember/know about the blurry photo of a Jeep that was taken 2 days before Daniel's was found?

On July 17th, David got a call from a guy saying he saw a Jeep that looked like Daniel's by Jack Rabbit Wash, this is close to the location of the 1st well site on Verrado. He told David the jeep had damage to it as well. David contacted Biffin who immediately told him the Jeep couldn't be Daniel's because the wheel color didn't match. You take a look at the photos below and tell me if you can make that determination, they look similar to me side by side-

View attachment 628230

David headed out there and by the time he arrived the vehicle was gone. The photo you see on the right was actually taken a few hundred yards north of the 1st well site on Verrado-

View attachment 628231

If this was Daniel's Jeep, how did they move it? Had to be a flatbed, Jeff said they used a flatbed to tow the vehicle from the ravine, maybe they got one up there, proving its possible? If i was guessing I'd say they pulled it out of the ravine, rolled it down the hill, then loaded it on flat ground, but i have no idea really.

I see, unfortunately the photo of the found jeep is too blurry to tell for sure, but is there no license plate? The back window doesn't look as dark and I cant see the taillights, Daniel's appear prominent, but again the photo is pretty fuzzy to tell. Shame we couldn't make out the plate or it wasn't a bit clearer.

 

[Skyblueday32]

I think if we believe Daniel wasn't in a depression, that his behavior was not self harm, or he was panicked and fled, or was being chased and/or that foul play happened, we would need a list of suspects. From there we could look at behavior/movement of those individuals, the colder the case gets the less you find clues/motive, unfortunately. If the crash was a staged diversion it certainly worked since so much effort and discussion was spent on this. Still the question remains, where is Daniel, if he never wandered from the crash?

 

[Valiant]

To me, the blurry car looks like a different car.

• It looks silver rather than gray.
• It doesn't seem to have the same taillights.
• The rear window height seems different.
• The bumper looks different with les black.

 

[Bluedreamer]

Here is another way of interpreting the correct way to read the infotainment data and MileIQ data together-

If MileIQ is doing what it’s designed to do (log phone movement), and the infotainment system is doing what it’s designed to do (log vehicle ignition and mileage), then the two datasets only reconcile in one way. The phone stops moving at 10:32am. The Jeep later restarts at 12:54pm and accumulates 11 additional miles without the phone. Those events cannot describe a single crash in the ravine and walk away scenario.

Every alternative explanation people try to offer ends up breaking one of the underlying assumptions:

• If the phone was in the Jeep during the 11-mile drive, MileIQ would have recorded that movement. It didn’t.
• If the 12:54pm entry were an “off” event or a crash timestamp, it wouldn’t be followed by additional mileage. It is.
• If the Jeep never moved after 10:32am, there wouldn’t be 11 new miles added to the odometer. There are.
• If Daniel crashed once in the ravine and walked away, the phone and vehicle timelines would still have to agree. They don’t.

The pushback I get is never a competing explanation that fits all the data at once. It’s always selective, ignore MileIQ, ignore the restart, call the mileage an anomaly, or avoid the 12:54pm event entirely. But you can’t keep all the data and keep the official narrative.

There are multiple ways to avoid the conclusion, but there is no other way for the data itself to work together. Any explanation that doesn't involve foul play requires at least one dataset to be wrong, ignored, or mischaracterized.

That’s also why this hasn’t been “debunked.” To debunk it, someone would have to show a mechanically plausible scenario that doesn't include foul play, where the phone stops moving at 10:32am, the Jeep restarts at 12:54pm and drives 11 miles without Daniel's phone, only to return and have the phone placed back inside the vehicle. No one has shown that, because it isn’t physically or technically plausible.


One of the only alternative explanations that comes close is this-

Daniel crashed the Jeep upright into the ravine sometime between roughly 10:00 and 10:30am. He later managed to restart it at 12:54pm and attempted to drive out of the ravine, ultimately tipping the vehicle onto its passenger side. Under this theory, the additional 11 miles would have been accumulated by the Jeep spinning its wheels in place while Daniel tried to free it.

That explanation doesn’t hold up for several reasons.

First, there were no tire tracks indicating attempts to exit the ravine. The only visible tracks were those leading into it. If Daniel had been repeatedly spinning the tires in an effort to climb out, there would be clear evidence of that activity, marks showing repeated attempts uphill. None were documented. In addition to that, Jeep Renegade Active Drive systems are specifically designed to limit wheel spin in these types of situations. Adding 11 miles of odometer distance without actual forward movement would require an extreme amount of wheel rotation, on the order of thousands of revolutions, which would leave physical evidence.

Second, even if this explanation were mechanically possible, it would resolve nearly all of the inconsistencies Buckeye PD has struggled with. They could acknowledge the 12:54pm restart, explain the added mileage without having vehicle relocation, and still maintain that the Jeep never left the ravine. But they have not done that. Instead, they avoid the 12:54pm event altogether and continue to label the additional mileage as an anomaly. That reluctance is weird, because this explanation, if viable, would actually support a non criminal narrative rather than undermine it.

The fact that law enforcement has not advanced this explanation themselves suggests that it does not align with the physical evidence or the vehicle data. It comes closer than most alternatives, but it still fails to account for what the data and the scene actually show.

Anyone who thinks Daniel Robinson simply walked off into the desert after an accident really needs to reconcile that with what the data actually shows.

 

[Bluedreamer]

One of the biggest problems with Buckeye PD’s official narrative is that they state Daniel’s Jeep and phone were already in the ravine by 10:32am. If that is true, then the infotainment log at 12:54pm still has to be explained.

Why did the Jeep record both time and mileage at 12:54pm?

If the 12:54pm entry is interpreted as an" off" event, the implication is that Daniel shut the vehicle off more than two hours after the crash, and then he tried restarting it while it was on its side in the ravine, ultimately giving up, removing his clothes, and walking off. But that still doesn't explain the vehicle being found in DRIVE.

If the 12:54pm entry is interpreted as an “on” or restart event, it creates a different problem. It would require Daniel to successfully start the Jeep at 12:54pm while it was already in the ravine, on its passenger side. According to Jeff McGrath, this would not have been mechanically possible. Even if it were, it still does not explain the additional 11 miles recorded after that timestamp.

Either way, the 12:54pm entry cannot be dismissed. Any explanation that places the Jeep in the ravine by 10:32am must account for what that log represents, both ways. To date, no explanation has been offered that reconciles the infotainment data with the rest of Buckeye Pd's narrative.

 

[Skyblueday32]

The whole scenario is definitely bizarre. I'm wondering, what do technology experts think about damage from the crash/impact corrupting the computer data? Most newer vehicles have so many computer components, they can go bad, and then data doesn't transmit or the part of the car that component is made for just doesnt work. Im wondering what if any the impact of the crash could have on the computer data?

 

[Bluedreamer]

The whole scenario is definitely bizarre. I'm wondering, what do technology experts think about damage from the crash/impact corrupting the computer data? Most newer vehicles have so many computer components, they can go bad, and then data doesn't transmit or the part of the car that component is made for just doesnt work. Im wondering what if any the impact of the crash could have on the computer data?

Yeah crashes can damage electronics. But most if not all of these systems, especially on a Trailhawk, are designed to withstand all types of accidents.

If the crash had corrupted the infotainment system, I’d expect less data, not a single, well timed event at 12:54PM that looks exactly like a restart.

Interpreting the 12:54 PM entry as the Jeep being started outside the ravine actually clears up most of the inconsistencies in this case ,the mileage issues, the Jeep being found in DRIVE, the 40+ ignition attempts, the damage that didn't match the ravine, etc.

Calling the 12:54 PM log an error creates more problems than it solves. You’d have to assume the system was damaged enough to misreport reality, but not damaged enough to show any other signs of corruption.

I’m not saying every question is answered, but reading the 12:54PM entry as a real restart makes the timeline make more sense, not less.

 

[Valiant]

For the discrepancy between MileIQ and the Jeep, what if MileIQ was intentionally disabled or location tracking blocked?
I don't think we can discount that possibility. As I understand it, the phone ended up inside the Jeep but never said it traveled there.

 

[Bluedreamer]

For the discrepancy between MileIQ and the Jeep, what if MileIQ was intentionally disabled or location tracking blocked?
I don't think we can discount that possibility. As I understand it, the phone ended up inside the Jeep but never said it traveled there.

I’ve thought about that, but disabling or blocking MileIQ actually creates more problems than it solves.(Daniel's google maps history was deleted as well, so there is precedence, but that data was recovered and there were no extra trips)

For MileIQ to be intentionally disabled, it'd be a choice. Someone would have had to physically interact with Daniel’s phone before the 11 miles were driven. Yet the phone continued to log missed calls, timestamps and there’s no indication it was placed in airplane mode or had location services toggled off. MileIQ doesn’t selectively stop logging distance while everything else stays the same.

More importantly, even if MileIQ somehow failed to record that movement, it doesn’t explain the vehicle data. The Jeep shows a clean ignition event at 12:54 PM, the vehicle was found in DRIVE, and the system logged 40+ ignition attempts. Those facts exist independently of MileIQ and don’t rely on phone data at all, including the 11 miles driven.

If the explanation is “MileIQ was disabled” we’re still left with explaining how the Jeep started at 12:54pm, accumulated additional mileage, why it was in DRIVE, why the damage doesn’t match the ravine, and why a single, well timed infotainment event appears that aligns perfectly with a restart. And why someone, especially if people think it was Daniel, would go through the trouble of disabling it before driving 11 miles in an area he has never been to.

I can think of a reason someone else driving Daniel's Jeep wouldn't want that information out there, I can't understand why Daniel wouldn't, even if he was in the middle of mental health crisis.

 

[ElijahWoods]

I’ve thought about that, but disabling or blocking MileIQ actually creates more problems than it solves.(Daniel's google maps history was deleted as well, so there is precedence, but that data was recovered and there were no extra trips)

For MileIQ to be intentionally disabled, it'd be a choice. Someone would have had to physically interact with Daniel’s phone before the 11 miles were driven. Yet the phone continued to log missed calls, timestamps and there’s no indication it was placed in airplane mode or had location services toggled off. MileIQ doesn’t selectively stop logging distance while everything else stays the same.

More importantly, even if MileIQ somehow failed to record that movement, it doesn’t explain the vehicle data. The Jeep shows a clean ignition event at 12:54 PM, the vehicle was found in DRIVE, and the system logged 40+ ignition attempts. Those facts exist independently of MileIQ and don’t rely on phone data at all, including the 11 miles driven.

If the explanation is “MileIQ was disabled” we’re still left with explaining how the Jeep started at 12:54pm, accumulated additional mileage, why it was in DRIVE, why the damage doesn’t match the ravine, and why a single, well timed infotainment event appears that aligns perfectly with a restart. And why someone, especially if people think it was Daniel, would go through the trouble of disabling it before driving 11 miles in an area he has never been to.

I can think of a reason someone else driving Daniel's Jeep wouldn't want that information out there, I can't understand why Daniel wouldn't, even if he was in the middle of mental health crisis.

For sure this has to do with Buckeye PD to some level internally. They continue to affirm long debunked theories. Nothing’s added up after all these years and seems it never will.

 

[buyerninety]

@Bluedreamer
(I may make a longer post on these matters, but first
I should try to clarify this point, with what you believe)...
The well-known police report 'robinson-report-9-23-21.pdf'
on page 37 of 54 states "OBSERVED THAT THE
ODOMETER DISPLAY ON THE DASH WAS 11 MILES
HIGHER THAN THE CDR REPORT INDICATED THE
ODOMETER WAS AT THE TIME OF THE CRASH"

What do you understand are the two sources of that 11
Mile difference, i.e.;
>is it a difference of the 'Crash Data Recorder mileage
last record' compared to the (vehicle) 'Infortainment
mileage display last record' display?, or
>is it a difference of the 'Crash Data Recorder mileage
last record' compared to 'what other thing last record?'?

Also, how does the 'MileIQ readings' compare/factor into
comparison with the CDR record(s) (which I assume are
those records as shown on page 33 of 54 of the
aforementioned pdf).

 

[Bluedreamer]

@Bluedreamer
(I may make a longer post on these matters, but first
I should try to clarify this point, with what you believe)...
The well-known police report 'robinson-report-9-23-21.pdf'
on page 37 of 54 states "OBSERVED THAT THE
ODOMETER DISPLAY ON THE DASH WAS 11 MILES
HIGHER THAN THE CDR REPORT INDICATED THE
ODOMETER WAS AT THE TIME OF THE CRASH"

What do you understand are the two sources of that 11
Mile difference, i.e.;
>is it a difference of the 'Crash Data Recorder mileage
last record' compared to the (vehicle) 'Infortainment
mileage display last record' display?, or
>is it a difference of the 'Crash Data Recorder mileage
last record' compared to 'what other thing last record?'?

Also, how does the 'MileIQ readings' compare/factor into
comparison with the CDR record(s) (which I assume are
those records as shown on page 33 of 54 of the
aforementioned pdf).

CDR/ODOMETER

Ok, so the CDR is the crash data recorder. When Daniel's jeep crashed for the 1st time and the airbags deployed, the CDR took a reading of the odometer, which read 58,154 miles.

When the private investigator got control of the vehicle, one of the things he immediately noticed was that the odometer reading was 11 miles higher than that, 58,165 miles.

The PI believed that this meant the vehicle must have crashed once somewhere else, had the CDR record the mileage, then it drove an additional 11 miles before going into the ravine, which is why the odometer is 11 miles higher. There is other evidence that supports the ravine not being the first crash site like damage to the vehicle, speeds during the 1st crash, etc.

Police say the 11 miles are anomaly, possibly caused by wheel spin after the first crash, tow mileage or a just a regular anomaly seen by jeep techs. They assert the jeep was in the ravine the entire time, only crashing once. They even hired their own expert to counter any findings that would counter the 1 crash narrative.

It doesn't really make sense that the police would go through all the trouble to discredit the 11 miles driven. It wouldn't prove foul play on it's own. Daniel could have crashed once, driven 11 miles, then crashed again in the ravine. BUT THE POLICE REFUSED TO EVEN ENTERTAIN THAT SCENERIO.

INFOTAINMENT DATA

Another thing the PI did when he gained control of the vehicle is send it's infotainment system off for analysis, This system controls most of your entertainment controls, but it also stores data in the background, like time and mileage logs.

On page 32 of that same police report, you can find these logs. The last log on the infotainment data was at 12:54pm and the mileage matched the CDR crash mileage.

The PI saw this match and from that believed the jeeps first crash was at 12:54pm. While that police report you have doesn't say it was the crash time, it also doesn't say it wasn't. If you know this case you'd know the media ran with this version of a events for awhile, saying Daniel drove around the desert for 4 hours before ultimately crashing into the ravine.

The PI is actually reading the infotainment logs incorrectly. Each time a Jeep Renegade turns on, it logs the time and the mileage on the odometer. Every log you see on the police report is a car start time, and all of them correlate to Daniel's movements that morning.

This means that at 12:54pm Daniel's jeep was started, not crashed. When it started the infotainment system logged the time and mileage. The mileage matches the crash data mileage because the vehicle was being turned on after an accident that deployed the airbags and caused the CDR to activate.

This means the vehicle was 100% started after crashing once, and if you remember, Daniel's jeep was on its side in the ravine when it was found, and when you crash a Jeep Renegade and deploy the airbags it won't just restart by pressing the button. There is a specific sequence in the Jeeps own manual that you have to go through(hence the 40+ ignition attempts).

Whoever restarted that jeep at 12:54pm didn't do it while it was on its side in the ravine. They did it while it was upright and operational. The Jeep then drove 11 miles, which went on the odometer as the jeep moved but isn't on the CDR data because the miles were driven after the first crash and they aren't on the infotainment data because the Jeep has never been restarted since.

If you reconnected the Infotainment system right now and got the jeep started, it would then record the current time and the 11 additional miles that were previously driven.

Either Daniel's jeep crashed once, drove 11 miles, ultimately driving into the ravine under its own power. Or it crashed once, drove 11 miles, and was brought back there later not under its own power.

MILE IQ

Mile IQ can tell you where the first accident happened, before the Jeep restarted at 12:54pm and drove 11 additional miles. I could walk you through it, I have it posted here in this forum, but see if you can figure it out on your own first. The May 2023 police report that has the MILE IQ app is attached to this comment. It starts on page 70.