Cell Phone Activity Timeline as of 11/11

[tehcloser]

This is unique to Verizon. From their own website. . .

To access your voice mailbox:

Press *VM (*86) and SEND.
Follow the prompts to enter your password and retrieve your messages.

Note: If you hear your own system greeting when you dial *VM (*86), press # to interrupt it and follow the prompts to enter your password.
To access your voice mailbox (while roaming off-network or from any phone):
Dial your mobile number.
Press # to interrupt the greeting and follow the prompts to enter your password and retrieve messages.
http://support.verizonwireless.com/clc/features/calling_features/basic_voice_mail.html

Plus there are a plethora of posts out there of people asking how to get around this with their Verizon phones. Some people don't like it because it takes too long and it eats up minutes, but it is a security feature.

I can't get past the last phone activity being at 3:32am. . .roughly around the time JI came home. . .depending on if we believe that he was home at 3:30 or 3:45am. If we are going with the call to MW at 11:57 that would mean a stranger (assuming Jersey) would only have had roughly 27 minutes to break in, turn on all the lights, take the phones and baby Lisa and make that call. He was supposedly seen at 12:15 just around the corner. Did he call MW from inside the house? It just doesn't add up for me.

I can't get past that we are only hearing about activity on DB's phone. Was there any activity on JI's phone? If some stranger took the 3 cell phones and BL, why would they attempt to use only one of the phones? Wouldn't it be logical that they would try all three cell phones, especially if they couldn't get service on the first one they tried?

DB herself told us she knew the phones didn't work because she had "tried." When did she try? Are there records of an earlier outgoing phone call?

PN dropped DB off at 5:30pm, but yet says he knew DB was drunk that night. When did he return and how long did he stay?

Things I wish I knew.

:banghead:

BBM

Exact-a-mundo..........A stranger would have tried ALL three phones, not just the one that HAPPENED to be Debs.

 

[askfornina]

This is unique to Verizon. From their own website. . .

To access your voice mailbox:

Press *VM (*86) and SEND.
Follow the prompts to enter your password and retrieve your messages.

Note: If you hear your own system greeting when you dial *VM (*86), press # to interrupt it and follow the prompts to enter your password.
To access your voice mailbox (while roaming off-network or from any phone):
Dial your mobile number.
Press # to interrupt the greeting and follow the prompts to enter your password and retrieve messages.
http://support.verizonwireless.com/clc/features/calling_features/basic_voice_mail.html

Plus there are a plethora of posts out there of people asking how to get around this with their Verizon phones. Some people don't like it because it takes too long and it eats up minutes, but it is a security feature.

I can't get past the last phone activity being at 3:32am. . .roughly around the time JI came home. . .depending on if we believe that he was home at 3:30 or 3:45am. If we are going with the call to MW at 11:57 that would mean a stranger (assuming Jersey) would only have had roughly 27 minutes to break in, turn on all the lights, take the phones and baby Lisa and make that call. He was supposedly seen at 12:15 just around the corner. Did he call MW from inside the house? It just doesn't add up for me.

I can't get past that we are only hearing about activity on DB's phone. Was there any activity on JI's phone? If some stranger took the 3 cell phones and BL, why would they attempt to use only one of the phones? Wouldn't it be logical that they would try all three cell phones, especially if they couldn't get service on the first one they tried?

DB herself told us she knew the phones didn't work because she had "tried." When did she try? Are there records of an earlier outgoing phone call?

PN dropped DB off at 5:30pm, but yet says he knew DB was drunk that night. When did he return and how long did he stay?

Things I wish I knew.

:banghead:

BBM. jumping off your post here. if the voicemail call was at 3:32, and JI was home at 3:45, depending on where the phone pinged when the voicemail call was attempted, wouldn't that mean that DB would have 15 minutes to get from the river (if the phones were dumped in the river) all the way home, into bed with the younger son (if he was in the bed when JI got home) all without either boy seeing anything. (if they didn't see anything. we don't know.) unless there was an accomplice, but how would she have gotten in touch with the accomplice without a trace?

just thinking out loud here. none of this makes sense. intruder or DB.

 

[justamommy]

Since someone tried to access the internet I assumed it was not a plainjane. Doesn't it have to be a smartphone to have internet capabilities?

Don't know if this has been answered yet. I'm catching up here. I had "plain-jane" that could access internet. It was a real pain and slow though. I have smart-phone now and it's much better for that.:twocents:

 

[Eileen730]

I have a question?
Dont know if it was asked.

If the phones were not working for lack of payment can they call 911 and that would be put thru?

 

[DeAnn]

A link to all above seize cell phone pings and record data. tia

Nobody can walk into Verizon or Sprint and get cell phone records and that's a fact. I cannot retrieve or request my own family members records if the family members are over 18.

It doesn't matter if LE seized the cell records or not because that is LE's right.

You cannot give people permission to see your phone records and retrieve them from your cell carrier.

You can get a copy and give that copy to someone but they can't waltz into cell phone companies and get one.

Giving misinformation is what's wrong with much of this case. moo

My daughter has been employed with Sprint for years. I asked her about all this stuff earlier tonight.

I have no idea.....but could KCPD get a court order for the phone records AND a court record that they be sealed and not provided to DB, JI or their attorneys?

Minus that then any of DB, JI's attorneys should be able to get a court order to review the records.

Kelsey Smith's death and Kelsey's law in Missouri and Kansas has been a big issue in the KC area.

 

[beach]

I have a question?
Dont know if it was asked.

If the phones were not working for lack of payment can they call 911 and that would be put thru?

Yes...

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I have a question?
Dont know if it was asked.

If the phones were not working for lack of payment can they call 911 and that would be put thru?

Yes, it's a FCC rule.

The FCC’s basic 911 rules require wireless service providers to transmit all 911 calls to a PSAP, regardless of whether the caller subscribes to the provider’s service or not.

http://www.fcc.gov/guides/wireless-911-services

 

[DeAnn]

But they didn't give phone records to their attorney, oddly enough... Earlier on Sat. on the Judge Jeanine Pirro show, their attorney said that he had not seen the phone records and was going on what LE told him. Also another really odd thing-- I doubt LE would share this kind of info with a defense attorney..... No link to transcript yet.

Picerno said Friday that when he got involved in the case that he spent three hours with an FBI agent. Since the attorney could get a court order to see the records, why wouldn't the FBI show them to him? Bill Stanton said he has seen the records but NOT reviewed them "extensively."

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

"Verizon requires all subscribers to set up PIN codes to access voice mailboxes, says spokeswoman Brenda Raney."

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2011-07-18-hacking-into-phones-is-easy-say-experts_n.htm

 

[justamommy]

Someone on one of the threads related to the calls (can't keep track, might even be this thread) posted today that when you hit the standard key for "messages" your Verizon phone actually automatically dials *86 and that's what shows up on the records. The poster had technical experience with phone records. So, if that's true, it could be that someone actually either hit the "messages" key on one of Debbi's stolen phones like most of us would do OR dialed *86. Something to think about - I found it interesting and makes sense to me. JMO...

I hadn't thought about that. I have tmobile. I hit the number 1 to access my v/m, but on the call log it comes up as a regular phone number (###)###-####. Good point.:twocents:

 

[beach]

I have no idea.....but could KCPD get a court order for the phone records AND a court record that they be sealed and not provided to DB, JI or their attorneys?

Minus that then any of DB, JI's attorneys should be able to get a court order to review the records.

Kelsey Smith's death and Kelsey's law in Missouri and Kansas has been a big issue in the KC area.

I am not familiar with Kelsey's law, but I am a paralegal and can shed some general light re. subpoenas, sealing records, etc...


This case is in the investigative stages. By proffering to the Court that they need the records to further the investigation, local LE and/or the FBI can subpoena the cell records and at this point, they can review and not have to disclose the contents of those records to anyone.

Only after someone has been charged and the case enters the "discovery process" will they be obligated to turn them over to the defense team. Right now those records are simply an investigative tool.


eta: That said, the person who owns the accounts can request the same records through Verizon. So, they may know but it would not require a subpoena...only the owner to request and agree to pay any fees incurred. (Research, retrieval fees... and they can get costly.)

 

[hambirg]

This is an important piece of the puzzle. If DB is responsible for BL's death or disappearance, how was she able to contact an accomplice without leaving a phone trace? She needed help to dispose of BL; don't you all agree? Unless...the brother was living out back in the trailer and she didn't have to call anyone. Brother's whereabouts that evening are not documented anywhere, are they? Yes, there is a lot I liked to know about PN that night. But here's a thought, maybe DB called PN from SB's phone. We don't know what happened that night and SB is very mum too.

I haven't documented my 'theory' on line yet, because there is always a piece of the puzzle left. All pieces need to fit, and getting all this erroneous info from the press and then posters (here and other places) repeating it and making errors/omissions makes it even more difficult to have a theory.

It seems most people are so wanting to hang this on DB that they are ignoring any piece of information that doesn't point to her.

Here's a question that I have. Why would DB try to access the internet on a cell phone? She has a computer in the house. Why would anyone try to access voice mail/or internet when they knew (after trying to call out at 12:58) that the phones didn't work? Not done by DB. MOO.Maybe she wasn't in the house during that time. Maybe she was but was thinking the computer records could be traced, but thinking the phone searches couldn't if she got rid of the phones. We don't know what DB's understanding of cell phones is. I'm thinking it's not much considering that she seemed to assume that the pings that LE showed her implied calls.

The cell phone pings were coming from what is said to be a baseball field width from DB's house, leading many to believe the calls were made from inside the house. I believe those calls were made by Jersey (calling Megan) from somewhere close by.
But why would he attempt to call her at 11:37pm, but hang out for another 4hours in the same small area before attempting anymore calls?n That doesn't make sense either.

Maybe the missing cell phones are not connected to the disappearance of BL. Stranger things have happened.
But DB sure wants us to think they are. When this all first came out, it seemed to be very important that the cell phones were missing, almost as important as BL being gone. They made a point of telling everyone that the phones were taken so they couldn't call 911. How on earth would they know why the intruder took the phones? Sounds like spin to me. JMHO

A question to DB would be "when was the last time you saw those cell phones on the counter"?
She can't even remember for sure when the last time she saw Lisa was. Grrrr!

Jersey (even Shane) could have snatched them up earlier in the evening. Heck, years ago I had a couple over for dinner and later found my husband's expensive watch missing from the kitchen counter. Some thieves are pretty brazen.

My comments above in red.

 

[DeAnn]

This is unique to Verizon. From their own website. . .







PN dropped DB off at 5:30pm, but yet says he knew DB was drunk that night. When did he return and how long did he stay?

Things I wish I knew.

:banghead:

He dropped her off around 5, not 5:30. He never has publicly said such a thing. That came from a discredited news article from Springfield, MO that I wish WSers would realize has been debunked. It's my pet peeve about this case

 

[GoodGurl]

Question - if I dial someone's phone that is restricted, what message will I get? or will it just ring and ring?

 

[DeAnn]

I am not familiar with Kelsey's law, but I am a paralegal and can shed some general light re. subpoenas, sealing records, etc...


This case is in the investigative stages. By proffering to the Court that they need the records to further the investigation, local LE and/or the FBI can subpoena the cell records and at this point, they can review and not have to disclose the contents of those records to anyone.

Only after someone has been charged and the case enters the "discovery process" will they be obligated to turn them over to the defense team. Right now those records are simply an investigative tool.

But I would think that Short, Picerno, Tacopina etc etc could go to a judge and say their clients are under a suspicion of guilt, their daughter is missing and they need the phone records to find out what happened to her and a judge would order company to turn over the records. Of course by now the bill should be due and a detailed phone record available etc.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

I hadn't thought about that. I have tmobile. I hit the number 1 to access my v/m, but on the call log it comes up as a regular phone number (###)###-####. Good point.:twocents:

I just looked on my Verizon account. All calls to voicemail are logged as "000-000-0086"

 

[artzypantz]

All the phones I've had through ATT, Sprint, TMobile don't ask for a pin if you call vm from your phone. They assume you are you because they recognize your phone when you call. All mine had the option of securing it with a pin code. I have never used a pin code on any of my phones. Probably half careless half just can't be bothered to have to put the number in each time. I am also not paranoid about that stuff although perhaps I should be.

ive only had US Cellular for a provider and only 2 different phones over the last 7 years so idk about any other providers; also idk if it is different per phone type but i have had one LG phone & one motorola and they both made me use a 4 digit pin to access voicemail which i dont like its a pain to me...my son has had the smart phones on my account with US Cell and ive tried to get into his VM but could not because of the PIN code...so idk if its the providers rules or per phone type or what

 

[justamommy]

I still wonder why it's such a big secret what type of phones we're dealing with here. What is the possible benefit, especially now with phone call and ping records coming out, to keep this information from the public? If one or more of the phones were actually sold, wouldn't it have been more beneficial for LE to ask the public to be on the lookout for someone selling these type of phones? Or at least now that so much time has passed, perhaps they can get some information from someone who has already purchased one of the phones.

Why haven't the lawyers given out this information either? They're telling us everything else, why not the colour and model of phones? They obviously think they are tied to the "kidnapping" so why don't they get a description of the phones out there?

:waitasec:

They could withhold that info in case as time passes someone would feel comfy w/ using the phones again or even start using the phones not knowing they are tied to the case. Maybe they are hoping the phones will start pinging again leading them to the phones. Of course, this could only happen if the phones are even still around or in tact. I don't have a clue. Does anyone know if w/ Verizon (assuming they are) phones if they have sim cards or is the number tied directly to the phone? TIA

 

[hambirg]

BBM. jumping off your post here. if the voicemail call was at 3:32, and JI was home at 3:45, depending on where the phone pinged when the voicemail call was attempted, wouldn't that mean that DB would have 15 minutes to get from the river (if the phones were dumped in the river) all the way home, into bed with the younger son (if he was in the bed when JI got home) all without either boy seeing anything. (if they didn't see anything. we don't know.) unless there was an accomplice, but how would she have gotten in touch with the accomplice without a trace?

just thinking out loud here. none of this makes sense. intruder or DB.

Only if it was DB that dumped them in the river. I'm more inclined to think it was PN. Also, I wonder if the tapping noises the brothers heard wasn't someone smashing those phones up with a hammer. Just thinking out loud.

 

[beach]

But I would think that Short, Picerno, Tacopina etc etc could go to a judge and say their clients are under a suspicion of guilt, their daughter is missing and they need the phone records to find out what happened to her and a judge would order company to turn over the records. Of course by now the bill should be due and a detailed phone record available etc.

I "edited to add" my original response after I realized it could be confusing.

The owners of the account can request their own records through the carrier. They would not need a subpoena. I feel sure someone from the defense team has done that by now.