Found Deceased Canada - Shannon Burgess, 25, Calgary, 26 Nov 2014 - #3 *Arrest*

[news.talk]

True. Would investigators offer solid information or keep their details private in regards to timelines?

Private. Especially if they are investigating a suspect. Since the variance in time is about 3-5 hours, it probably matters less to release the time, and more about protecting a case. Those crazy detectives like to keep all the good info to themselves, especially if they don't want JB to think they suspect him. They did use the "officially" date in the same release as the "last seen by the husband" - Sometimes that is where the truth hides.

 

[deugirtni]

So how do cellphone pings off of celltowers work.. ie.. if LE has SB's cellphone.. they can tell that yes, the phone was in Edmonton, and yes the phone came back to Calgary, and yes the posts made late on the 26th were made from the phone while the phone was in Calgary... but would pings be able to ascertain whether a side-trip was made on the way back home from Edmonton to Calgary, or perhaps see a span of time where the phone stayed in one place mid-way between the two cities, in the middle of nowhere?

 

[news.talk]

So how do cellphone pings off of celltowers work.. ie.. if LE has SB's cellphone.. they can tell that yes, the phone was in Edmonton, and yes the phone came back to Calgary, and yes the posts made late on the 26th were made from the phone while the phone was in Calgary... but would pings be able to ascertain whether a side-trip was made on the way back home from Edmonton to Calgary, or perhaps see a span of time where the phone stayed in one place mid-way between the two cities, in the middle of nowhere?

I have ZERO idea about pings other than they usually are with pongs [emoji6]

Hopefully we have some techies that can help out.

 

[deugirtni]

You've lost me when you said 'the variance in time is about 3-5 hours'... what are you referring to? Are you referring to last seen by the Director in Edmonton, as compared to when the ex husband states he last saw SB? If so, where are you getting your Director timelines?

Private. Especially if they are investigating a suspect. Since the variance in time is about 3-5 hours, it probably matters less to release the time, and more about protecting a case. Those crazy detectives like to keep all the good info to themselves, especially if they don't want JB to think they suspect him. They did use the "officially" date in the same release as the "last seen by the husband" - Sometimes that is where the truth hides.

 

[news.talk]

You've lost me when you said 'the variance in time is about 3-5 hours'... what are you referring to? Are you referring to last seen by the Director in Edmonton, as compared to when the ex husband states he last saw SB? If so, where are you getting your Director timelines?

I am just guestimating... If the post about Yuk Yuk's (not getting back in time) was made just after 9PM - whether it was her or someone else posting, that would put her traveling back from Edmonton (and hopefully arriving) sometime between 7PM and 9PM. It is a three hour trip so she must have left between 4PM and 6PM - Give or take.

My math is horrible, so I may be off by a mile. [emoji51]

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

It seems she might have commonly accessed her Facebook through her smartphone... A phone she "left" at home before disappearing... "Someone, with access to the phone *could* have posted on her behalf.


""Investigators now hows her phone and computer so if you see her online thats why""

Also... I see there is an edit on that 11:54 post - It says 11:54 to me and I am in Calgary.... It doesn't say the time of the edit, but it does say that it was the next day.

So you're saying that whole whoring with some man for funzies post could have been done by someone else?

 

[news.talk]

So you're saying that whole whoring with another man for funzies post could have been done by someone else?

That is my thinking. She rarely ever posted and then...

 

[Sillybilly]

So how do cellphone pings off of celltowers work.. ie.. if LE has SB's cellphone.. they can tell that yes, the phone was in Edmonton, and yes the phone came back to Calgary, and yes the posts made late on the 26th were made from the phone while the phone was in Calgary... but would pings be able to ascertain whether a side-trip was made on the way back home from Edmonton to Calgary, or perhaps see a span of time where the phone stayed in one place mid-way between the two cities, in the middle of nowhere?

Trying to recall prior WS cases where pings and triangulation come into play .. I'm pretty sure the phone pings at regular intervals when it is on. In a possible foul play scenario, if for example a perp had removed the battery between Edmonton > Calgary, and then reinserted the battery while back in Calgary, the lack of pings and subsequent resumption of pings would be a bit of a red flag, if nothing else.

Here's are some articles I've bookmarked in the past (Part 2 talks about pinging):

http://www.hendonpub.com/law_and_order/articles/2012/11/cell_phone_analysis_part_1

http://www.hendonpub.com/law_and_order/articles/2012/12/cell_phone_analysis_part_2

I'm wondering how current the info is about the phone needing to be on to be pinged (or if LE is holding that info close to the vestie ). I've understood that it can be pinged even when off (as long as battery isn't dead or hasn't been removed).

 

[evafiore]

If she got that information from JB and did not suspect him, taking him at his word... It may not be accurate.

This is I think it's possible that someone else saw her in Calgary that evening, before JB saw her. Maybe she had to return a borrowed car to her parents? Or she checked in on the dog? It doesn't seem likely that both LE and her family would just take JB at his word. Not entirely, anyway.

 

[deugirtni]

If she had borrowed her family's car and returned it on Wed evening prior to her disappearance, then I would think, MOO, that they would have stated this at some point, that they had also seen her on same evening as JB. I haven't read any indication anywhere that she was seen at all in between her audition in Edmonton earlier that day, and 12;30am Nov 27th when her ex husband says he last saw her. Has anyone seen an indication of any sightings in between those 2 events?

This is I think it's possible that someone else saw her in Calgary that evening, before JB saw her. Maybe she had to return a borrowed car to her parents? Or she checked in on the dog? It doesn't seem likely that both LE and her family would just take JB at his word. Not entirely, anyway.

 

[evafiore]

All I can say is, you poor thing. Ugh.

Secondly..... notice how in the family press conference, EM says 'and Josh returned home that night'... would that be an automatic thing to come out of her mouth, or would she instead have said, 'when Josh went to the house', or 'when Josh went to her house', or 'when Josh went to see if she had arrived home yet'.. or something other than 'returned home'?

ETA What I mean is.. if the 2 were staying in separate residences through this messy divorce period, then surely EM would have known that, since she is the one who reportedly said they were going through a messy divorce and that SB might be upset, or whatever the word was that she used.. if she knew they were staying apart, then would she have said 'returned home'?

I agree with what you're saying, it's possible...though if they were staying apart and SB and or JB would not have been comfortable with this becoming public knowledge, she may have been sidestepping the detail that JB had to go home and check because he hadn't been there. Or so he said.

 

[deugirtni]

I can understand that, but to me, side-stepping would be more like.. 'when he got to the house and saw she wasn't there', which leaves it completely open, or anything other than 'when he returned home that night'? I don't know.. I guess another interpretive thing.

ETA: Also, after letting the world know they are estranged, going through a messy divorce, and that SB may have been upset (or whatever the word was that was used by EM in an MSM article), then I would think it would make no matter for the world to also know that one may have been staying elsewhere temporarily.. in fact.. it would allow the world to know there was a reason why JB didn't bother reporting the fact that his wife was AWOL while her car sat in the driveway for almost 5 days? The fam wants us to not suspect JB, and that would be a good way to talk us into that, perhaps, so why not mention. Well, the reason is because nobody knew, because JB is temp staying elsewhere. But they didn't, so why not?

I agree with what you're saying, it's possible...though if they were staying apart and SB and or JB would not have been comfortable with this becoming public knowledge, she may have been sidestepping the detail that JB had to go home and check because he hadn't been there. Or so he said.

 

[evafiore]

And then I recall something in MSM .. whether it was a statement attributed to the family in the newspaper, or something said at the family presser, I can't remember, but the sister said something like they were checking all the last places she was known to be at.. ok found it.. so does this mean..
i)the places she went to BEFORE she went to Edm on the Wed, or
ii)AFTER she arrived back in Calgary on Wed night.. before her ex saw her at 12;30am, or
iii)AFTER she arrived back in Calgary on Wed night, and AFTER her ex saw her at 12;30am?

If the third option were the case, then wouldn't LE, family, MSM be saying 'evidence that she was spending money or seen in this area after her ex last saw her'??? But they have steadfastly held to her not being seen after HE last saw her. Hmm

Also...... just occurred to me.. I think we're rehashing again.. but... in the event the family/LE found indication that her bank card was used AFTER her ex last saw her at 12;30am, then who is to say who exactly it was that went in and used it? The wallet is missing, right?

BBM:

Wasn't there a post about LE looking for her in the Lolita's area, as there was the event in that area, that evening? The discussion on that was me prior to joining the thread, so my apologies if I'm completely off...

 

[deugirtni]

Is anyone able to find records of when either of SB or JB first moved into that residence? ie previous phonebook/voting/whatever registries that may show a time before and after? Just wondering.

 

[evafiore]

I really think you're on to something here... The phone thing has always been the weirdest element for me in this case. Why did she take her wallet and keys but left her phone behind, especially at that time of the night?

And also, what you're saying about how she ''conveniently'' posted on Facebook right before her disappearance rings a bell in my head. She did post from time to time but she posted a lot on the days leading to her disappearance. If she had the Facebook application on her cell phone, it would've been a piece of cake for JB to post on her behalf after he did whatever he could've done to her. I mean, all you have to do to access someone's Facebook on their cell phone is click on the icon and tadam!

And finally, I find it very odd that he went to dating sites not long after she disappeared. Even if they were in the process of getting a divorce, didn't he feel the least pained by her disappearance? Maybe people deal in different ways with stress and emotion but this is a strange way to act when you're supposed to be turning everything upside down to find someone that you actually once were in love with! If this type of thing happened to my husband, I would be so worried that I'd probably be sick to my stomach.

Anyway, I agree with everything you wrote in your post. Something is fishy...

The one thing I noticed about that post was that the spelling was poor, and sorry to say, based on some of her other posts, spelling is not her strong suit (see her Cupid profile and FB notes to see what I'm talking about). So the post is consistent that way, unless JB knew that she'd misspell something, and threw "breaks" in there for authenticity...

 

[evafiore]

Is anyone able to find records of when either of SB or JB first moved into that residence? ie previous phonebook/voting/whatever registries that may show a time before and after? Just wondering.

SB posted about moving in 2010 (September 11, 2010: wants to have a house party when the move is finished... this could take a while)...that could be it, as I think they were living together when they got engaged. Not sure though.

 

[evafiore]

I can understand that, but to me, side-stepping would be more like.. 'when he got to the house and saw she wasn't there', which leaves it completely open, or anything other than 'when he returned home that night'? I don't know.. I guess another interpretive thing.

ETA: Also, after letting the world know they are estranged, going through a messy divorce, and that SB may have been upset (or whatever the word was that was used by EM in an MSM article), then I would think it would make no matter for the world to also know that one may have been staying elsewhere temporarily.. in fact.. it would allow the world to know there was a reason why JB didn't bother reporting the fact that his wife was AWOL while her car sat in the driveway for almost 5 days? The fam wants us to not suspect JB, and that would be a good way to talk us into that, perhaps, so why not mention. Well, the reason is because nobody knew, because JB is temp staying elsewhere. But they didn't, so why not?

I think that may be open to interpretation---at first, I think the earliest reports indicated that she'd last been seen by "a family member" at the home, and then it was later revealed/reported to be JB. The "messy divorce" wasn't reported right away either, and when it was, the sister seems to have backtracked and implied that JB and SB were on good terms. It could be due to shoddy reporting, but it seems like the family went from being somewhat vague/inconsistent to being absolutely silent. To me, it seems that either

a)they're being intentionally vague to preserve the integrity of the investigation,

OR

b)they're being vague for SB/JB's privacy (if she had gone willfully, which has been acknowledged as a possibility though unbelievably unlikely, she may not appreciate certain information being public knowledge. Or maybe JB has requested they don't divulge this---doesn't want to involve a third party),

OR

c)they haven't really thought about what is reported and what isn't, but with CPS being involved, I really doubt they haven't been advised on speaking to the media.

 

[deugirtni]

I saw that too, but I don't think that is when she moved into her current residence.

Her Reddit post from 3 years ago (looks like her first one, and it doesn't give an exact date, although I have looked around for one) talks about having met 'Mr. Man' a few months before, who was 3 years older than her, and they got together only a few days after he subsequently broke up with his previous girlfriend of 5 years. The post was written 1.5 months after they had started dating.

The posts are posted in increments of one year. So assuming it would have been posted between 2.5 years ago and 3.5 years ago (otherwise it would automatically go to 2 years or 4 years for the post time), and add a couple of months.. they would have started dating between 2.75 and 3.75 years ago, and they likely didn't move in together on their first date.

http://www.***********/r/relationships/comments/idn81/mutual_friends_bash_my_boy_friend/

SB posted about moving in 2010 (September 11, 2010: wants to have a house party when the move is finished... this could take a while)...that could be it, as I think they were living together when they got engaged. Not sure though.

 

[deugirtni]

You could be right, however imho, if there is a plea out for information regarding SB's whereabouts and she doesn't respond to it, she kind of relinquishes her privacy, because it only fuels sleuthers, neighbours, friends, coworkers, family, etc., to look into the case and whatever information they can find on her, more as time goes on. And I think if someone's spouse is missing, and you were the last to see him/her, then he/she also doesn't get to have a lot of say into what is private. When it becomes public like that, it becomes out of their ability to control. The best thing SB could have done if she cared about privacy, would have been to come forward. Considering all that is 'out there' to see and find, that is another valid indication, imho, that she is not missing by choice.

I think that may be open to interpretation---at first, I think the earliest reports indicated that she'd last been seen by "a family member" at the home, and then it was later revealed/reported to be JB. The "messy divorce" wasn't reported right away either, and when it was, the sister seems to have backtracked and implied that JB and SB were on good terms. It could be due to shoddy reporting, but it seems like the family went from being somewhat vague/inconsistent to being absolutely silent. To me, it seems that either

a)they're being intentionally vague to preserve the integrity of the investigation,

OR

b)they're being vague for SB/JB's privacy (if she had gone willfully, which has been acknowledged as a possibility though unbelievably unlikely, she may not appreciate certain information being public knowledge. Or maybe JB has requested they don't divulge this---doesn't want to involve a third party),

OR

c)they haven't really thought about what is reported and what isn't, but with CPS being involved, I really doubt they haven't been advised on speaking to the media.

 

[evafiore]

First Reddit Mr. Man has a reputation amongst the group for braking things off, finding another girl for a few months, then going right back to her even though he says he wont.

Last FB (that was not a response) And then the breaks on my car went to ****... Starting to wonder who I pissed off enough to curse me

She's mixed up "break" and "brake" again, but the other way around...? Strange coincidence. First reddit post (misspelled break THREE times in post) and last FB post (misspelled brake). Not reading too much into it, but still, a bit weird. And both posts turn to sex as a topic (threesome/the "funzies" comment).

...if someone had seen that reddit post (and remembered it well, because it was about them), and then were pretending to be her, maybe they'd mix up brake/break again, for authenticity? It's quite a reach, but it's a coincidence, no?