CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #25

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #261
The last text he sent to his friend was shortly after 8 pm.

Between 8:01 and 9:27pm. And a reporter said that Elaine said Dylan last used his phone at 8:00 -

The distraught mother said her son's cellphone records show the last time he used it was Sunday night at 8 p.m

http://www.koat.com/news/new-mexico.../17553118/-/1uht3d/-/index.html#ixzz2HdJnaneh


Other than that, it's people on here saying the phone was shut off at 8:00. The police have never mentioned 8pm.
 
  • #262
Between 8:01 and 9:27pm. And a reporter said that Elaine said Dylan last used his phone at 8:00 -

The distraught mother said her son's cellphone records show the last time he used it was Sunday night at 8 p.m

http://www.koat.com/news/new-mexico.../17553118/-/1uht3d/-/index.html#ixzz2HdJnaneh


Other than that, it's people on here saying the phone was shut off at 8:00. The police have never mentioned 8pm.

The very last text sent from Dylan's phone was at 8:01 pm.
 
  • #263
I'm still in favour of the 'seemed like a flat phone battery, but it was actually totally kaput' scenario... but I've been trying to imagine other scenarios that could also fit.
If it was still working, I've wondered if MR may have taken the phone from Dylan to stop him from texting friends or making other arrangements - resulting in a sulky or resentment filled evening (as an alternative to one of violence). If this carried over until morning I could see an angry young man gathering up all his gear (including his phone, which by morning would probably have been well and truly flat) stomping off on foot, determined to make his own way by grabbing a ride. Even if it wasn't his intention to hitch a ride with a stranger, Dylan may have thought he had a good chance of getting a ride with a known local.
If MR did confiscate the phone the night before, he may not want have wanted to admit that things had been tense between them that night.
JMO and all a product of my own imagination, of course.
:moo:
 
  • #264
The very last text sent from Dylan's phone was at 8:01 pm.

There's one text from Dylan at 8:01pm, then 9 texts back and forth between R and Dylan with no times, then a text from R to Dylan at 9:27pm.

Dylan: (time 8:01 p.m. Nov. 18) yea

R: Oh ok

Dylan: can I come over early lkke 6 30 early tomarrow

R: Yeah

Dylan: you better let me in

R: I will

R: im gonna be at my gmas

Dylan: i call (you) all day if you dont

R: Ok

Dylan: will you gma care or be up

R: Just come around to were the sliding door is were that room is and knock on it and i will wake up

R: (Time 9:27 p.m. Nov. 18) Call me when you get here too
 
  • #265
So still nothing new? I think Dylan wont be found now until spring :banghead:
 
  • #266
There's one text from Dylan at 8:01pm, then 9 texts back and forth between R and Dylan with no times, then a text from R to Dylan at 9:27pm.

Dylan: (time 8:01 p.m. Nov. 18) yea

R: Oh ok

Dylan: can I come over early lkke 6 30 early tomarrow

R: Yeah

Dylan: you better let me in

R: I will

R: im gonna be at my gmas

Dylan: i call (you) all day if you dont

R: Ok

Dylan: will you gma care or be up

R: Just come around to were the sliding door is were that room is and knock on it and i will wake up

R: (Time 9:27 p.m. Nov. 18) Call me when you get here too
So your saying that this exchange of text messages between Dylan and R started at 8:01 PM and ended at 9:27 PM. That would suggest that Dylans last text message was well after 8:00 PM.

It doesn't seem like Dylan was texting a lot that night. Five text messages in almost an hour and a half doesn't seem to be very much to me. MOO.
 
  • #267
So your saying that this exchange of text messages between Dylan and R started at 8:01 PM and ended at 9:27 PM. That would suggest that Dylans last text message was well after 8:00 PM.

It doesn't seem like Dylan was texting a lot that night. Five text messages in almost an hour and a half doesn't seem to be very much to me. MOO.

There's no way to tell from the news article what time Dylan's last text was, except that it was between 8:01 and 9:27.

There were more texts (shown in the news article) prior to the 8:01 text. They were all slow going back and forth - gaps of time in between.
 
  • #268
So your saying that this exchange of text messages between Dylan and R started at 8:01 PM and ended at 9:27 PM. That would suggest that Dylans last text message was well after 8:00 PM.

It doesn't seem like Dylan was texting a lot that night. Five text messages in almost an hour and a half doesn't seem to be very much to me. MOO.

Here is the link with times of the other texts & times. Some texts have times others do not. Is there a pattern that can be derived that could give a better clue?

To see the texts you have to scale way down and they are on the left side of the screen. http://www.durangoherald.com/article/20121215/NEWS01/121219687/-1/news01&source=RSS
 
  • #269
So your saying that this exchange of text messages between Dylan and R started at 8:01 PM and ended at 9:27 PM. That would suggest that Dylans last text message was well after 8:00 PM.

It doesn't seem like Dylan was texting a lot that night. Five text messages in almost an hour and a half doesn't seem to be very much to me. MOO.

who said thats the only texting he was doing? for all we know he could have been texting half a dozen other friends as well.
 
  • #270
Originally Posted by cluciano63
Possibly cell pings could help, if someone known to LE had their phone ping at the site where Dylan is ultimately found, if he is.
__________________
*with below post in reply to the above post*
Originally Posted by Confusion
If they have GPS on their phone, or made a call while there. MOO
__________________
Again this above claim of a cell phone ONLY PINGING WITH THE USE OF TEXT OR CALL is just not accurate..

Pinging is totally different and is alone in a category all to itself apart from gps.. GPS IMO is obviously the more preferred, more accurate method for tracking a cell phone's movement..while pinging is a seperate, not as accurate way of tracking..

To be clear when I say not as accurate I mean that while GPS can often pinpoint with fair accuracy the exact, damn near close spot that the cell phone is at, or has traveled..where as pinging is done via triangulation of cell phone towers and gives a more broad, or wider range of where a phone is at, or has traveled..IMO even tho pinging is not as pinpoint accurate, it is still however quite a useful tool in tracking, or tracing back the movements of a cell phone(obviously the more populated an area is with cell phone towers, the more accurate your traced or tracked movements and locations will be).

So, tho pinging is not the most accurate way of tracking a cell phone, nonetheless it is still a key important piece of information available in a criminal investigation.. the cell phone DOES NOT have to be equipped with GPS in order for a phone to ping(as has earlier been inaccurately claimed).. nor does a cell phone HAVE TO BE IN CURRENT/ACTIVE USE(as in call/text) in order for a cell phone to "ping".

The "pinging"is referring to the fact that a cell phone is "pinging" the nearest or closest cell phone tower to the cell phone at any given time..this automatically is registered and noted to the cell service provider(ie. AT&T, Verizon, etc, etc).. when looking at your cell phone screen(regardless of whether its the screen of a smart phone or a much more basic capabilities cell phone) on the screen of the cell phone you will see at any given time how many "bars"(ie. The measurement of the amount of reception your cell phone has) you have..AT ANYTIME SO LONG AS YOUR CELL PHONE IS REGISTERING ANY "BARS" AT ALL THEN YOUR CELL PHONE IS INFACT "PINGING" THE NEAREST CELL PHONE TOWER..therefor registered and noted to your cell phone service provider.

This has nothing at all to do with actively using the cell phone to call or text<-- THIS IS NOT REQUIRED AT ALL IN ORDER FOR A CELL PHONE TO BE ACTIVELY "PINGING".

ETA: Confusion, I am curious about your awaiting verified status WRT to cell phones and their usage?.. strictly due to the fact that you have numerous times expressed what little experience and knowledge you have of cell phones ..as well as your not having/using cell phones..??..and to be clear I mean zero disrespect whatsoever, but rather am just genuinely curious due your having posted in the past about how little you know or have experience with them:waitasec:
 
  • #271
who said thats the only texting he was doing? for all we know he could have been texting half a dozen other friends as well.

Good point. He may have only texted with R sparingly and was having a frenzied conversation with someone else. I wonder if that was his normal behavior? Without seeing his phone records it's impossible to say. IMO.
 
  • #272
*with below post in reply to the above post*

Again this above claim of a cell phone ONLY PINGING WITH THE USE OF TEXT OR CALL is just not accurate..

Pinging is totally different and is alone in a category all to itself apart from gps.. GPS IMO is obviously the more preferred, more accurate method for tracking a cell phone's movement..while pinging is a seperate, not as accurate way of tracking..

To be clear when I say not as accurate I mean that while GPS can often pinpoint with fair accuracy the exact, damn near close spot that the cell phone is at, or has traveled..where as pinging is done via triangulation of cell phone towers and gives a more broad, or wider range of where a phone is at, or has traveled..IMO even tho pinging is not as pinpoint accurate, it is still however quite a useful tool in tracking, or tracing back the movements of a cell phone(obviously the more populated an area is with cell phone towers, the more accurate your traced or tracked movements and locations will be).

So, tho pinging is not the most accurate way of tracking a cell phone, nonetheless it is still a key important piece of information available in a criminal investigation.. the cell phone DOES NOT have to be equipped with GPS in order for a phone to ping(as has earlier been inaccurately claimed).. nor does a cell phone HAVE TO BE IN CURRENT/ACTIVE USE(as in call/text) in order for a cell phone to "ping".

The "pinging"is referring to the fact that a cell phone is "pinging" the nearest or closest cell phone tower to the cell phone at any given time..this automatically is registered and noted to the cell service provider(ie. AT&T, Verizon, etc, etc).. when looking at your cell phone screen(regardless of whether its the screen of a smart phone or a much more basic capabilities cell phone) on the screen of the cell phone you will see at any given time how many "bars"(ie. The measurement of the amount of reception your cell phone has) you have..AT ANYTIME SO LONG AS YOUR CELL PHONE IS REGISTERING ANY "BARS" AT ALL THEN YOUR CELL PHONE IS INFACT "PINGING" THE NEAREST CELL PHONE TOWER..therefor registered and noted to your cell phone service provider.

This has nothing at all to do with actively using the cell phone to call or text<-- THIS IS NOT REQUIRED AT ALL IN ORDER FOR A CELL PHONE TO BE ACTIVELY "PINGING".

ETA: Confusion, I am curious about your awaiting verified status WRT to cell phones and their usage?.. strictly due to the fact that you have numerous times expressed what little experience and knowledge you have of cell phones ..as well as your not having/using cell phones..??..and to be clear I mean zero disrespect whatsoever, but rather am just genuinely curious due your having posted in the past about how little you know or have experience with them:waitasec:

BBM
I don't use cell phones, but I do know electronics and telecommunications.
 
  • #273
Speaking of phone records I just went to Bell & checked my son's 1457 texts lol & I can hit detail & see the individual times noted. Perhaps the times listed on the friend's report were incoming & outgoing??? IDK but I am sure Elaine had Dylan on her plan and therefore have access to Dylan's times. She said 8:00 & if it is really 8:03 lol, that is close enough for me.
 
  • #274
I have thought the same thought all along, that even if Dylan's body is found, what will it prove unless there is SOME forensic evidence, and after this long, what would the body reveal? Even if there is trauma to the body, would it reveal who caused the trauma? I want him to be found at least for his mother's sake.

It might be telling WHERE he is found. Like there would be a difference imo, if he was found hidden in the woods near the Walmart as opposed to being found down in the Bayfield area. Or if he was found in New Mexico or somewhere further away.
 
  • #275
*with below post in reply to the above post*

Again this above claim of a cell phone ONLY PINGING WITH THE USE OF TEXT OR CALL is just not accurate..

Pinging is totally different and is alone in a category all to itself apart from gps.. GPS IMO is obviously the more preferred, more accurate method for tracking a cell phone's movement..while pinging is a seperate, not as accurate way of tracking..

To be clear when I say not as accurate I mean that while GPS can often pinpoint with fair accuracy the exact, damn near close spot that the cell phone is at, or has traveled..where as pinging is done via triangulation of cell phone towers and gives a more broad, or wider range of where a phone is at, or has traveled..IMO even tho pinging is not as pinpoint accurate, it is still however quite a useful tool in tracking, or tracing back the movements of a cell phone(obviously the more populated an area is with cell phone towers, the more accurate your traced or tracked movements and locations will be).

So, tho pinging is not the most accurate way of tracking a cell phone, nonetheless it is still a key important piece of information available in a criminal investigation.. the cell phone DOES NOT have to be equipped with GPS in order for a phone to ping(as has earlier been inaccurately claimed).. nor does a cell phone HAVE TO BE IN CURRENT/ACTIVE USE(as in call/text) in order for a cell phone to "ping".

The "pinging"is referring to the fact that a cell phone is "pinging" the nearest or closest cell phone tower to the cell phone at any given time..this automatically is registered and noted to the cell service provider(ie. AT&T, Verizon, etc, etc).. when looking at your cell phone screen(regardless of whether its the screen of a smart phone or a much more basic capabilities cell phone) on the screen of the cell phone you will see at any given time how many "bars"(ie. The measurement of the amount of reception your cell phone has) you have..AT ANYTIME SO LONG AS YOUR CELL PHONE IS REGISTERING ANY "BARS" AT ALL THEN YOUR CELL PHONE IS INFACT "PINGING" THE NEAREST CELL PHONE TOWER..therefor registered and noted to your cell phone service provider.

This has nothing at all to do with actively using the cell phone to call or text<-- THIS IS NOT REQUIRED AT ALL IN ORDER FOR A CELL PHONE TO BE ACTIVELY "PINGING".

ETA: Confusion, I am curious about your awaiting verified status WRT to cell phones and their usage?.. strictly due to the fact that you have numerous times expressed what little experience and knowledge you have of cell phones ..as well as your not having/using cell phones..??..and to be clear I mean zero disrespect whatsoever, but rather am just genuinely curious due your having posted in the past about how little you know or have experience with them:waitasec:
Can a cell phones exact location via triangulation be derived from historical cell phone records? I think that's what's relevant to this case.
 
  • #276
Can a cell phones exact location via triangulation be derived from historical cell phone records? I think that's what's relevant to this case.

No, it can't. MOO
 
  • #277
No, it can't. MOO

I tend to agree with you. I think that phone records will show which cell tower handled the call or text. That will give you a general area but not an exact location. MOO.
 
  • #278
I tend to agree with you. I think that phone records will show which cell tower handled the call or text. That will give you a general area but not an exact location. MOO.

The problem with Vallecito area is that it doesn't have many towers.
So the location will be very general.
 
  • #279
The problem with Vallecito area is that it doesn't have many towers.
So the location will be very general.

And that can explain sporadic service whether it's voice or text. If a tower has a problem, the next nearest one may be out of range for good service. MOO.
 
  • #280
And that can explain sporadic service whether it's voice or text. If a tower has a problem, the next nearest one may be out of range for good service. MOO.

But there would be a record of that, wouldn't there? If a tower was not taking calls?

What might be more telling is the human factor. If, for example only, MR said to LE he was one place, but his phone showed he was elsewhere, and Dylan is eventually found near where MR's phone actually traveled, that would be a strong piece of circumstantial evidence, IMO.

Unless Dylan has the DNA of a stranger on his body, things like cell pings and tracking may become more important, if difficult due to the scarcity of towers. In any event, a case like this is bound to be a circumstantial one, as a confession with matching evidence is unlikely.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
155
Guests online
3,354
Total visitors
3,509

Forum statistics

Threads
632,276
Messages
18,624,206
Members
243,074
Latest member
nousernameimagination
Back
Top