Yes, I do know all of this.
LE uses tower dump request as one of their extra investigative tools to help to see if they see something unusual or to see if someone who they are suspecting was around. For example let say by child abduction LE request it to see if any known pedophile was somewhere around who wasn't living there, or maybe even if he was living in the area. Then they have a reason to question him. Nothing less, nothing more. They request it to have a starting point or to strenghten their theory. The key is indeed the time of their request and what exact data they are requesting the cell company to preserve. But LE knows this as I have seen this requests in several cases here before. In Europe is used too.
It's not a proof of anything, not a solution. It is a helping tool, a filter. Sometimes it can help, sometimes not, as some perps are smart enough to know not to bring their phone to the scene of a crime, or yes, in case they live somewhere there they can say yes, I was home.
Only if they use the phone to make a call/text, then there will be a record that can be tied to a tower.
The court orders in the Colorado case show police got "cellular telephone numbers, including the date, time and duration of any calls," as well as numbers and location data for all phones that connected to the towers searched, whether calls were being made or not Police and court records obtained by USA TODAY about cases across the country show that's standard for a tower dump.
For providing the data, T-Mobile received $11 million from law enforcement, while AT&T received $10 million. Verizon was paid around $5 million in 2012.
Respectfully this is IMO not true. Maybe it was true 7-8 years ago, but not in the last few years. The cellphone companies are keeping record of more things than they are advertising.
As you also know every cell phone is pinging the nearest available tower to be in signal range in order to keep sending and receiving text, data and calls at any time. Naturally, there is also a record of this which is included in the tower dump.
LINK
The cell phone providers even get paid for providing the tower dump, although in the big scheme of things those paid amounts are not that big of a sum.
[URL="http://www.scmagazine.com/tower-dump-of-consumer-mobile-data-a-popular-police-snooping-tactic/article/324789/]LINK[/URL]
With this I leave this subject as it is, because I don't want to derail the thread any further.
I love that expression; but what do you mean?The game is afoot.
I love that expression; but what do you mean?
Respectfully this is IMO not true. Maybe it was true 7-8 years ago, but not in the last few years. The cellphone companies are keeping record of more things than they are advertising.
As you also know every cell phone is pinging the nearest available tower to be in signal range in order to keep sending and receiving text, data and calls at any time. Naturally, there is also a record of this which is included in the tower dump.
LINK
The cell phone providers even get paid for providing the tower dump, although in the big scheme of things those paid amounts are not that big of a sum.
LINK
With this I leave this subject as it is, because I don't want to derail the thread any further.
I love that expression; but what do you mean?
Thanks for your helpful contributions. Information from someone such as you who has knowledge is NOT derailing, and is much appreciated.
My opinions only, no facts here:
The term the game is afoot is widely-attributed to what Sherlock Holmes would say when a crescendo of information has the potential to yield a break-through in understanding and solution of a criminal case. This term is originally from Shakespeare, King Henry IV Part I in 1597.
As long as the Prosecution holds exclusive title to evidence in a criminal case, we know nothing. Once the evidence is shared with the Defense (Discovery), there is potential to know something about what actually happened, BEFORE the trial begins. If the evidence is overwhelmingly harmful to the Defendants, the Defense should remain fairly silent. If the Prosecution evidence is wishy-washy, the Defense would be expected to imply this in a news conference or whatever, before the trial.
Thanks for asking.
The information she provided/implies isn't true.
I used to listen to prank calls on youtube all the time.
Any of you heard of ip relay, caller id spoofing, spamming, Skype, voiceover ip apps, etc...?
If someone with basic internet knowledge wanted to, they could call your house, and have your caller id, ip reader and whatever other identification systems you may have say that the call came from Tokyo, when it actually came from Cleveland. I don't know about "pings", but I'm sure the data could just as quickly be manipulated.
I couldn't convict anyone based on cell phone pings...
I appreciate you folks passion, but I must clarify that cell phone data is as easily falsified as a name on yahoo.
Wait, what photo at the coon hunt are you talking about and what about a creepy man staring at Holly? IF Zach had that bad of a rep, didn't Holly and Ms Wood know him on site? Also, how many men were involved with this abduction? And how do we know Holly was raped?
Wait, what photo at the coon hunt are you talking about and what about a creepy man staring at Holly? IF Zach had that bad of a rep, didn't Holly and Ms Wood know him on site? Also, how many men were involved with this abduction? And how do we know Holly was raped?