NV NV - Steven T. Koecher, 30, Henderson, 13 Dec 2009 - # 7

[hollyblue]

Snipped:

QUOTE=liz b.;4859371]Steven's mother had said how much he liked old cemeteries and genealogy.


I must have missed this. Did she say this at presser or was this a past post, article, etc? TIA

 

[laytonian]

Plus, in order for LE to get a supeona to do forensics on the library computers wouldn't LE need evidence of foul play in Steven's disappearance.

Has LE stated if there has been any evidence of foul play found recently? It's not real clear as to what LE believes may have happened based on the facts.

We don't know if the subpoena included the library computer(s), or if a separate subpoena was issued.

In this case, the family (not LE) spoke of things LE had found....but there's never a statement like "here's everything they searched, found, think's evidentiary, excludes this person...."

I think that's why the family spoke. We don't know if LE supports a crime theory or not, but they're not going to tell us.

 

[laytonian]

Snipped:

QUOTE=liz b.;4859371]Steven's mother had said how much he liked old cemeteries and genealogy.


I must have missed this. Did she say this at presser or was this a past post, article, etc? TIA

It's been mentioned in the past, but that's something all LDS do.

 

[webrocket]

Snipped:

QUOTE=liz b.;4859371]Steven's mother had said how much he liked old cemeteries and genealogy.

Even if true, no one is going to find an old cemetery while visiting SCA. (Old people and soon to be cemetery residents maybe - that is a joke) Also, why would he drive all over creation looking for dead people while not paying his rent? I SERIOUSLY doubt he was doing that and if he was doing that, then he was operating under less mental capacity than I gave him credit for.

 

[laytonian]

I don't know that much about computers, but I believe it was Laytonian that mentioned that after 2 mo the history of Steven's computer usage at the library would have been 'over-ride'. I get that, but don't fully understand it. I don't know how many other users would have had to come after Steven in using the same computer in order for the history to be over-ride. I'm not sure of the correct terms, but I believe you all get my thoughts.

You're clear.

Here's a very basic explanation (non-geek terms):
When you "delete" something on your computer, it doesn't go away. It's still there, and can be easily retrieved. The space that's "reserved" for that data, is now "unreserved". As the hard drive is used, the deleted information may be overwritten.

Overwritten data is much harder to retrieve, BUT it's not impossible. If the forensics examiner knows which content belongs to the fresh file and the overwritten file, they can (supposedly) separate "the layers". ANOTHER BUT is that kind of examination is rarely done, due to the time and expense involved. National security and terrorism would be the kind of cases where layering is analyzed.

The above is how is was explained on a TV crime show. A geek can explain lots of little details where my explanation is wrong....but it's close enough.

The geek will also make you fall asleep

 

[webrocket]

You're clear.

Here's a very basic explanation (non-geek terms):
When you "delete" something on your computer, it doesn't go away. It's still there, and can be easily retrieved. The space that's "reserved" for that data, is now "unreserved". As the hard drive is used, the deleted information may be overwritten.

Overwritten data is much harder to retrieve, BUT it's not impossible. If the forensics examiner knows which content belongs to the fresh file and the overwritten file, they can (supposedly) separate "the layers". ANOTHER BUT is that kind of examination is rarely done, due to the time and expense involved. National security and terrorism would be the kind of cases where layering is analyzed.

The above is how is was explained on a TV crime show. A geek can explain lots of little details where my explanation is wrong....but it's close enough.

The geek will also make you fall asleep

I am no expert on this but the odds of obtaining a subpoena to search a public library computer for usage history of a person who may have committed NO crime is practically ZERO. Besides it would dig up usage history of other totally innocent people. It is not going to happen. Besides, they would need to know which computer he used, at specific dates and times, and that is assuming that he used the computer as "Steven Koecher" and not some other name. So if over the course of six months he used each one, does anyone think they would copy all the computer hard drives on account of this ONE person?

 

[laytonian]

We do not know if Steven was registered with any singles online meeting web-sites.

Yes we do.

I posted about it, a couple of weeks ago and put the contents of one form he filled out, on the website (under "in his own words").

I found two LDS dating websites he'd registered on, in 2005. They are partner sites, and the content is similar. He filled out the forms, never updated anything.

Because I had to register to do the search, I later filled out the forms myself and created a profile. I found that most of what Steven had filled out, weren't his own words....BUT were pre-selected choices from a few options. The cute "I'm not Martha Stewart either" comment wasn't Steven's.

At the request of the family, I have not publicly revealed Steven's commonly-used email address. That email address is being monitored for usage.

We don't know if Steven had more than one email address. Most people do, don't they? I'd be surprised if he only had one.

I also wonder if he ever used friends' computers when visiting their places....but someone would have to come forward with that info.

 

[laytonian]

I am no expert on this but the odds of obtaining a subpoena to search a public library computer for usage history of a person who may have committed NO crime is practically ZERO. Besides it would dig up usage history of other totally innocent people. It is not going to happen. Besides, they would need to know which computer he used, at specific dates and times, and that is assuming that he used the computer as "Steven Koecher" and not some other name. So if over the course of six months he used each one, does anyone think they would copy all the computer hard drives on account of this ONE person?

According to the Washington County Library website, wifi is also available:
http://library.washco.utah.gov/internet-policy/ (paragraph 3).

So he could have easily have taken his own computer there, and used it.

 

[laytonian]

The main reason why I shared this post with you is because we do not know if Steven was in an online chat-room on the St. George Library computers. We do not know if he was using chat-rooms in an attempt to meet someone.

Chat room usage is prohibited at the Washington County Library system, including your own computer on their network:
http://library.washco.utah.gov/internet-policy/

It looks like they closely monitor internet usage there.

 

[liz b.]

WebR.
But,of course, I did not say he was visiting a cemetary in AC at all... As to why he would drive around looking at old cemetaries : we know for a fact that he did this with his family ; as Laytonian sai, it is common for LDS folks to do this. We know, because his mother stated , that he liked to do this. Was it wise when he had not paid his rent ? No, but it goes back to poor judgement and lack of cause and effect thinking...
I think you are stuck on the theory that Steven Koecher had a secret life.IIRC you stated that he was gay, and had met someone online. But, seriously, there's just nothing to indicate these things. I'm thinking that he didn't have any dark secrets at all. I think he had a great vulnerability because he has/had a certain naivite, and a seeming inability to navigate his way in life.

 

[laytonian]

I am no expert on this but the odds of obtaining a subpoena to search a public library computer for usage history of a person who may have committed NO crime is practically ZERO. Besides it would dig up usage history of other totally innocent people. It is not going to happen. Besides, they would need to know which computer he used, at specific dates and times, and that is assuming that he used the computer as "Steven Koecher" and not some other name. So if over the course of six months he used each one, does anyone think they would copy all the computer hard drives on account of this ONE person?

They require you to insert your library card, to gain access to the computer system:
http://library.washco.utah.gov/internet-policy/

(paragraph 7)

7.If you use someone else’s library card to access the Internet on the library’s computers (except for a parent accessing the Internet for pre-school age children), you and the cardholder may lose your Internet and other library privileges.

Since he had a library card, paragraph 10 wouldn't apply.

EDIT:
I've sent your question about when his question was last used. I was waiting to see if we had more, and we really don't.

 

[hollyblue]

It doesn't make any sense to me either. It was Steven's father who said the Powell family made that call. But he said they don't believe there's any connection either.

It would be nice if it were true as it would mean Steven and Susan are both alive somewhere. But sadly, I don't believe it.

I read that comment, the person doesn't say Steven and Susan ran off together, rather, it asks if it's possible Josh could have harmed them both.

"It could be possible that Josh could have done something to both?"

Looks like they may have gotten some info on the timeline mixed up though, easy to do. I'm sure they just didn't pick and choose as to what they wanted to see.

Maybe they were looking at the big picture and not the clinical, minute details, as they did try to bring Steven's case into light of the readers through a case on the Susan Powell story.

Steven's case is more mysterious and may be more compelling than Susan's in many ways, but the commenter invited the readers to the Websluth website to look into both cases. They did take place about the same time and both had ties to the readership; maybe generating more interest and possible tips in both cases.
They both need attention. They were right when they stated there is no connection to anyone---that we know of-- in Steven's disappearance.

 

[laytonian]

I read that comment, the person doesn't say Steven and Susan ran off together, rather, it asks if it's possible Josh could have harmed them both.

"It could be possible that Josh could have done something to both?"

Looks like they may have gotten some info on the timeline mixed up though, easy to do. I'm sure they just didn't pick and choose as to what they wanted to see.

Maybe they were looking at the big picture and not the clinical, minute details, as they did try to bring Steven's case into light of the readers through a case on the Susan Powell story.

Steven's case is more mysterious and may be more compelling than Susan's in many ways, but the commenter invited the readers to the Websluth website to look into both cases. They did take place about the same time and both had ties to the readership; maybe generating more interest and possible tips in both cases.
They both need attention. They were right when they stated there is no connection to anyone---that we know of-- in Steven's disappearance.

Exactly right.

But....it's to JP's benefit that these ideas get planted into people's minds.

In fact, the "write for affiliate pennies" Examiner.com just put up a story, that feeds into that idea: Powell-Koecher link considered by Utah missing person investigators.

The press is picking it up...even when it's the illegitimate press:

The lead paragraph is "Two missing people: both from Utah, both last seen in December 2009, and both around the same age. That has the family of missing mother, Susan Powell, asking investigators to consider a link between her case and that of missing fellow Utah resident, Steven Koecher. "

According to Susan's family (the Cox family), they did not do this. BUT....I wouldn't be a bit surprised if a Powell did it, in preparation for a defense ploy.

 

[webrocket]

I think you are stuck on the theory that Steven Koecher had a secret life.IIRC you stated that he was gay, and had met someone online. But, seriously, there's just nothing to indicate these things. I'm thinking that he didn't have any dark secrets at all. I think he had a great vulnerability because he has/had a certain naivite, and a seeming inability to navigate his way in life.

BBM

we have NO idea what his hard drive contained other than two statements 1. that there was nothing to explain why he was in Vegas that day and 2. nothing that would explain him disappearing.

What is that supposed to mean? Suppose he had been chatting with a dominatrix 4 months before he disappeared. Does that mean he was in Vegas to meet her that day? maybe, maybe not. Does that mean he ran off with her? maybe, maybe not.

What if two months before he disappeared, he was visiting a "get rich quick" website chock full of ideas of how you can make $10,000 a month from home. Would that mean he was in Vegas to meet some schemer that day? maybe, maybe not. Does that mean he ran off or was harmed by such person? maybe, maybe not.

What about if 9 months earlier he had been on websites that suggest how to disappear or get a new identity? That certainly would ring bells with me, but would the family totally discount it because the visit was "old".

Oft times what is more important is not what something says outright but what it means in a larger context. If he had been using his laptop every day up until 6 months ago when usage stopped, that certainly would be out of the ordinary and suggest he was trying to cover his trail by using public computers. There is no crime emailing a friend, business associate or paramour from a yahoo account. The public library is not going to care about that.

I could ramble on here. In short, it is not that I am fixated on one outcome. Rather my frustration is that notwithstanding that press conference, we are not really being told anything.

 

[dreamweaver]

About getting any kind of web usage record from a library:
They have very strict policies about no one being allowed access to
a patron's use of books, and web use.

And I don't think there is anything to find out about Steven's web usage.
I think he was a pretty straight forward guy.

IMO:
He was not being successful at a job he liked/wanted.
He was not able to pay rent on just one room.
He was not able to keep up with a car payment.
He was not in any kind of committed relationship.

He did try to keep up with his church duties.
He did stay in touch with family.
He did plan to be with them at Christmas.
He did take odd jobs, part time kind of work.
He did wander up and down the highway, doing something.

IMO:
Steven would not do anything illegal.
But he might do something for a seemingly good return
on his work, like a commission kind of job.

And what if he was there that Sunday at noon for that kind of job
or to start that kind of job
and he finds out it has illegal undertones?
I know.
It doesn't give any kind of explanation why someone would then
kill him or stop him from leaving.
What if it turns out to be an illegal job and he is working for a friend of a friend situation?

Sigh.
I just wish I had the magic crystal ball and could find him.
(and so many others)

 

[liz b.]

We'll have to agree to disagree on this,Web. I did consider most of those things mysel, but I now concur when Steven's dad says " there was no dark side to Steven " (paraphrase ). I DO think,though, that Steven was highly vulnerable, and more so by being so isolated. He might have been better living at home a while longer IMO. Much of my interest in this case is due to the fact that our oldest child is a lot like Steven Koecher, though much younger. I know the duality of it, the child wants to claim their independence, but is not ready ( and may never be ready). I think too that his naivite and inability to totally cope with the world is the probable reason trhat he had no serious relationships, and was still single.

 

[laytonian]

I could ramble on here. In short, it is not that I am fixated on one outcome. Rather my frustration is that notwithstanding that press conference, we are not really being told anything.

We were told to (basically) "look for Steven" BUT also told they've found no "dark side". The "dark side" (to me) means something evil and inherently criminal.

There was no direct statement to Steven, like "Dear Steven: please contact us and let us know you're happy and living a productive life. We accept you and love you, without judgement."

 

[Lato]

If we wanted media attention for Steven's case, I think the offering of the $10,000 reward is getting it. Before today, I would get one (maybe) new article from Google News email in the morning. Today I got 10. Nothing new to us, but my guess is that
national news is not far behind - and that is exciting. I would love to know that all of SCA and St. George is talking about it!

 

[Fairy1]

I'm just at a loss here right now. IMO, it is critical to determine what brought Steven to Vegas/Henderson on December 13. He had plenty of free time on his hands and somewhere else to be, so it would seem that whatever he was here for had to be done that day. Other than a business-related appointment, what else could it be?

I don't think he came to go hiking. He could have done that much closer to home. I truly don't feel the suicide theory. Could have done that much closer to home as well. There's no indication that he had a relationship with someone here that no one knew about, but he could have. Maybe LE needs to look at SCA residents with ties to southern Utah.

Why would someone hurt him? What would the motive be? Why would someone secretly lure him here for the sole purpose of harming him?

What does GW know???

 

[RubyRed]

I'm just at a loss here right now. IMO, it is critical to determine what brought Steven to Vegas/Henderson on December 13. He had plenty of free time on his hands and somewhere else to be, so it would seem that whatever he was here for had to be done that day. Other than a business-related appointment, what else could it be?

I don't think he came to go hiking. He could have done that much closer to home. I truly don't feel the suicide theory. Could have done that much closer to home as well. There's no indication that he had a relationship with someone here that no one knew about, but he could have. Maybe LE needs to look at SCA residents with ties to southern Utah.

Why would someone hurt him? What would the motive be? Why would someone secretly lure him here for the sole purpose of harming him?

What does GW know???

bbm It doesn't matter what we discuss , it seems to circle around and come right back to GW. I agree with Fairy1 " what does GW know?"