Cell Phone Activity Timeline as of 11/11

[Sigh Sister]

If it were during the time that DB was switching sim cards, updating contacts, maybe that is why he would get a "no service" message.

That would explain it, but it the timeline of events that evening, DB was supposedly out on the stoop all night after dinner until 10:30, except for the one time she went in and found Lisa standing in her crib. She did say she was reprogramming the phones, but never says when she did this. I think maybe she was reprogramming the phones earlier in the day. I don't believe she left her friends sitting on the stoop while she went in to mess with the phones. Now, it could be that she did this after she went in for the night, but she doesn't say that she did, only that she told the boys they could sleep with her, and then went to bed. Phew.....does this make sense?

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Maybe she was not where the phone was so she didn't hear it ring. It would then go to voicemail and/or message.
IF he tried after midnight, maybe the phone receiving status changed. Maybe after midnight the phones were totally inoperable and couldn't even receive calls.

Ok, breaking this down for the cell phone challenged!:seeya: When you are not inside to answer your landline phone it goes to your answering machine (voicemail). If your answering machine is not on, the call goes nowhere.

I think JI called and DB wasn't able to get to the phone and that's why she checked her voicemail. You don't have to access you vm unless there's actually a message. If you hit the *86 and it says, "No messages", no need to go into your vm, right?

*Wilma picks up the pterydactyl and checks.* Yup.

 

[Hopeful2]

Once again, we have conflicting stories. Didn't JI eventually say that he called 911 from his phone while he was at neighbors? In that version, there wasn't any running around looking for cell phones. Or did my mind make this up?

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1111/01/ng.01.html

"DEBORAH BRADLEY, MOTHER: I said, Call 911. And he said, Where are the phones?"

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Ha, it is quite possible I made it up as well. I could have sworn I heard say in an interview she was yelling at JI to get the phones but I will make coffee then search for link.

Maybe we should start a list/ thread of facts we know in this case as confirmed by LE:
1) Baby Lisa is missing
2) The phones were reported as missing
3) Um... Er... Anyone got anything else?

It's in that first interview with reporters outside their house. She says she screamed, "Call 911! Call 911! " and then JI says, "Where are the phones?"...and they were gone.

 

[LisaB]

Well her lawyers are stating that the FBI indicated that it was DB's phone that had all the activity. The "borrowed" phone, if it did come with some paid airtime, would not be considered DB's phone in the context of what her lawyers are saying. DB's father also indicated that the phone from her grandfather was a "plain jane" phone and likely did not have access to the internet.

Here is a link to my post regarding the borrowed phone from the previous thread.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Missing Cell Phones #2

The phone was not borrowed due to the non payment of the other phones. It was borrowed so that DB could have a phone that she could make calls on. Her phone was likely still fine and could be used for every other feature so she didn't care that it was a "plain jane" phone that her grandfather gave her.

MOO

Do you mean that she intended to continue to use her existing phone for everything except actually dialing calls, and the borrowed "plain jane" would be used when she needed to place a call? If not, I apologize for misunderstanding, but Verizon won't let you put the same number on more than one phone at a time. In order to activate the loaner phone, she'd have to deactivate her regular phone. She might still have internet access on the "broken" phone, via wifi, but that would probably NOT appear in the usage logs. All you need to do to activate a new phone on Verizon is turn the old one off and dial #228 from the new one and follow the prompts. The loaner phone, therefore, could have been quickly and easily activated to work on Deb's number the day they got it (Sunday?), or early on Monday, before the account was restricted. Then all activity on the new handset would STILL be considered activity on Deb's phone, since it was the phone with her number. It could even be at the time they activated the loaner (prior to Jeremy leaving for his first night shift, so he and Deb could get in contact) that they learned of the restriction.

 

[In da Middle]

I think JI called and DB wasn't able to get to the phone and that's why she checked her voicemail. You don't have to access you vm unless there's actually a message. If you hit the *86 and it says, "No messages", no need to go into your vm, right?

*Wilma picks up the pterydactyl and checks.* Yup.

Except for the fact that most cells you dont have to call your voicemail to see if you have one. It will tell you on the screen. Like your pterydactyl, when you have a message, the light (or whatever alert it has) blinks so you know immediately if you have one or not. If he couldn't leave one, it would not say 'new voicemail'. She would not need to even check then.

 

[Sigh Sister]

Ha, it is quite possible I made it up as well. I could have sworn I heard say in an interview she was yelling at JI to get the phones but I will make coffee then search for link.

Maybe we should start a list/ thread of facts we know in this case as confirmed by LE:
1) Baby Lisa is missing
2) The phones were reported as missing
3) Um... Er... Anyone got anything else?

That was the original story. I'm thinking both things happened. They realize she wasn't in the house, go to call 911 and the phones are gone. Then JI thinks to check with the neighbor, Lisa isn't there, and calls 911 on his phone while at the neighbors. Confusion around this, imo, is because every time they were interviewed, they would give a little more detail and/or varying accounts.

There is a thread called "just the facts" or something like that.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Do you mean that she intended to continue to use her existing phone for everything except actually dialing calls, and the borrowed "plain jane" would be used when she needed to place a call? If not, I apologize for misunderstanding, but Verizon won't let you put the same number on more than one phone at a time. In order to activate the loaner phone, she'd have to deactivate her regular phone. She might still have internet access on the "broken" phone, via wifi, but that would probably NOT appear in the usage logs. All you need to do to activate a new phone on Verizon is turn the old one off and dial #228 from the new one and follow the prompts. The loaner phone, therefore, could have been quickly and easily activated to work on Deb's number the day they got it (Sunday?), or early on Monday, before the account was restricted. Then all activity on the new handset would STILL be considered activity on Deb's phone, since it was the phone with her number. It could even be at the time they activated the loaner (prior to Jeremy leaving for his first night shift, so he and Deb could get in contact) that they learned of the restriction.

Okay, I'll have to read this about 20 times to understand what you're saying, but...HYPOTHETICALLY, if someone were to report that the plain jane phone wasn't able to accept contacts numbers, so DB switched her account to the plain jane phone...would that mean her plain jane phone worked just fine? :waitasec:

See where I'm going with this...HYPOTHETICALLY?

ETA: Today is the day I have to give my kitties babies to new mommies (sigh), so I probably won't see your response until later.

 

[Marple]

That would explain it, but it the timeline of events that evening, DB was supposedly out on the stoop all night after dinner until 10:30, except for the one time she went in and found Lisa standing in her crib. She did say she was reprogramming the phones, but never says when she did this. I think maybe she was reprogramming the phones earlier in the day. I don't believe she left her friends sitting on the stoop while she went in to mess with the phones. Now, it could be that she did this after she went in for the night, but she doesn't say that she did, only that she told the boys they could sleep with her, and then went to bed. Phew.....does this make sense?

Yeah, not likely. Yes, makes sense and yes PHEW!

 

[Hopeful2]

I think JI called and DB wasn't able to get to the phone and that's why she checked her voicemail. You don't have to access you vm unless there's actually a message. If you hit the *86 and it says, "No messages", no need to go into your vm, right?

*Wilma picks up the pterydactyl and checks.* Yup.

not that LE would tell us, but it would be on JI's work phone record or the Starbucks phone record maybe?

 

[josie1986]

Okay, I'll have to read this about 20 times to understand what you're saying, but...HYPOTHETICALLY, if someone were to report that the plain jane phone wasn't able to accept contacts numbers, so DB switched her account to the plain jane phone...would that mean her plain jane phone worked just fine? :waitasec:

See where I'm going with this...HYPOTHETICALLY?

ETA: Today is the day I have to give my kitties babies to new mommies (sigh), so I probably won't see your response until later.

im so confused :floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[LisaB]

"This phone problem that they had was when the phones were cut off and could only recieve incoming phone calls and incoming texts from early in the afternoon. She recieved a uh, her husband, uh not her husband, her fiance Jeremy tried to contact her early in the evening to tell her that he was going to be late coming home, it went direct to the verizon message, stating that the phone is not operable. "

This statement is a problem to me because it suggests that Jeremy was calling from his personal phone that couldn't make outgoing calls because of unpaid bill. If he had called from the work phone (which I think is probably on a different payment plan) DB should have been able to receive the incoming call and Jeremy wouldn't have been routed to Verizon. But his personal phone was supposedly on the counter being stolen.

:crazy:

THANK YOU! I has trying to figure out how to word this. If he was an incoming caller from another account, it makes no sense that he would be routed to the Verizon payment center. Verizon would have no business telling an incoming caller from another account about the Bradley/Irwin's unpaid balance, or asking them to satisfy the debt. So why would they have routed an INCOMING call from a phone NOT ON THE PLAN to the PAYMENT CENTER?

It makes sense that any attempt to place an outgoing call to anyone (on or off the same plan) would result in the caller being detoured to the payment center, told why he/she could not make the call they were attempting, and asking them to pay the bill.

 

[natsound]

Link-
Bradley & Irwin lawyer John Picerno on Megyn Kelly Fox Show. 2 videos on the page. Article highlights:

11:57pm - 50 second call to MW phone number
3:17am - attempt to get into voicemail and use internet
3:22am - attempt to get into voicemail and use internet
Pings were never more than 1/3 of the mile from Irwin residence. It does not give a time when the pings stopped.

The 2:30am phone call was a rumor.

It is also not mentioned whether this was DB's broken cell or the one she received from her grandfather on Oct. 3rd.

Where did we hear that the 2:30 call was a rumor?

 

[tehcloser]

No, he meant they could receive calls in the early afternoon but service was cut off early evening. See post 57. He jumbled his words.

:waitasec: That post said something about 3rd hand info, but the lawyer said it himself. :waitasec: He jumbled his words? :waitasec:

 

[natsound]

THANK YOU! I has trying to figure out how to word this. If he was an incoming caller from another account, it makes no sense that he would be routed to the Verizon payment center. Verizon would have no business telling an incoming caller from another account about the Bradley/Irwin's unpaid balance, or asking them to satisfy the debt. So why would they have routed an INCOMING call from a phone NOT ON THE PLAN to the PAYMENT CENTER?

It makes sense that any attempt to place an outgoing call to anyone (on or off the same plan) would result in the caller being detoured to the payment center, told why he/she could not make the call they were attempting, and asking them to pay the bill.

I understood it differently... that JI couldn't call DB's phone and connect because her phone was restricted. Did Picerno actually say the call went to the Verizon PAYMENT center? I thought he just said it went to a Verizon messag that said the phone was not operable. Maybe he was being purposely vague because he knows it doesn't make sense.

I agree that this train wreck with the phones is all to plant reasonable doubt right now. There's no way, if the parents had nothing to hide, there would be this much confusion over phone service.

 

[mysteriew]

Link-
Bradley & Irwin lawyer John Picerno on Megyn Kelly Fox Show. 2 videos on the page. Article highlights:

11:57pm - 50 second call to MW phone number
3:17am - attempt to get into voicemail and use internet
3:22am - attempt to get into voicemail and use internet
Pings were never more than 1/3 of the mile from Irwin residence. It does not give a time when the pings stopped.

The 2:30am phone call was a rumor.

It is also not mentioned whether this was DB's broken cell or the one she received from her grandfather on Oct. 3rd.

The biggest thing that stands out for me is that this info was given by the defense. Of course they are going to release what they think might be helpful to them. But there is no guarentee that they will release everything. Notice there is no mention of text messages? They specifically state that the rumor of a 2:30 am call was a rumor.
The rumor about 2:30 phone usage was a text message. Of course there is no mention of the texts.

Also in the message they are saying attempts were made, but unable to complete because the phones weren't working. A. You don't get a 50 second call to MW on a phone that wasn't working. B. Attempts were made to access the voice mail. If you just stole a phone, and a baby why would you be trying voice mail a short time later? Why would you even care about their voice mail?

Defense says that DB and JI did not know MW. Yeah, ok we know that MW says that she did not know them. But did DB or JI know anyone else in the HH? The defense isn't saying.

 

[LisaB]

Link, please.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34409.pdf

 

[Sigh Sister]

THANK YOU! I has trying to figure out how to word this. If he was an incoming caller from another account, it makes no sense that he would be routed to the Verizon payment center. Verizon would have no business telling an incoming caller from another account about the Bradley/Irwin's unpaid balance, or asking them to satisfy the debt. So why would they have routed an INCOMING call from a phone NOT ON THE PLAN to the PAYMENT CENTER?

It makes sense that any attempt to place an outgoing call to anyone (on or off the same plan) would result in the caller being detoured to the payment center, told why he/she could not make the call they were attempting, and asking them to pay the bill.

Where does it say it went to Verizon payment center? JP said that it went to Verizon message saying that the phone was inoperable, not anything about an unpaid balance. I've tried to call people on restricted service before and got a message like "the number you are trying to reach is not currently in service".

 

[GoodGurl]

THANK YOU! I has trying to figure out how to word this. If he was an incoming caller from another account, it makes no sense that he would be routed to the Verizon payment center. Verizon would have no business telling an incoming caller from another account about the Bradley/Irwin's unpaid balance, or asking them to satisfy the debt. So why would they have routed an INCOMING call from a phone NOT ON THE PLAN to the PAYMENT CENTER?

It makes sense that any attempt to place an outgoing call to anyone (on or off the same plan) would result in the caller being detoured to the payment center, told why he/she could not make the call they were attempting, and asking them to pay the bill.

WOW. That's what he said, and yep, you are right. I knew something about it didn't feel right!

 

[natsound]

Not true. Any defense team is going to obtain their own copies/records of something that is obtainable for what they are up against, unless there is no other source (eg; video from interrogation room, crime scene photos LE took). In this case, this is a provider in which the client of the defense team can obtain these records from. No defense team, especially in the capacity of JT is going to rely on records from LE unless the records in question are records that LE specifically documented as in the example I gave up above, especially after making the accusations against LE that they suggested their clients were potential suspects.

I simply cannot buy into this topic until a reliable source such as LE has officially released records, or a timeline in records.

When you have someone saying a 50 second phone call was made, then turn around and say the service was restricted, it makes no sense. Furthermore, it makes no sense for one of the owners of the phones to attempt to make contact with one of the other owners of the phones that night when it should have already been clear service was restricted?

Agreed, agreed, agreed.