Phone Calls and Phone Records

[BigCityAccountant]

Tis ok... I get frustrated and close them down... I know I mentioned it to you on private, but will mention it here..... I would like to know where she would have been at 1:52pm because the tower numbers are so close/similar to the call at 2:41..... 1:52 was 21103, and 2:41 was 21101.

And if we look at her calls with the times that we "know" she was at home, her tower was either 21112 or 21111, which kinda tells me that the tower might have different numbers, but they would be "close" JMO

Maybe in 33 days we will know more BCA :giggle:

I've been saying that for weeks!!! Who was she talking to...and where the heck was she????

 

[missy1974]

I've been saying that for weeks!!! Who was she talking to...and where the heck was she????

I was looking at the map yesterday.... just a plain old map of Wisconsin.... I think she was not far from Schmitz, but I can't figure out why she was back that way later. And it's not close to Avery's or Zipperer's.... so it confuses me LOL Do we know of anyone else that was from New Holstein in this case? or close to it? Wonder where her maybe bf (BC) lived at the time? Chilton is not far.... Hilbert is not far (isn't this where RH lived?? with his parents?)

IIRC in Schmitz testimony he said she went the way of Chilton.... but I would have to go look again.

 

[dexter75]

The cow?

I was looking at the map yesterday.... just a plain old map of Wisconsin.... I think she was not far from Schmitz, but I can't figure out why she was back that way later. And it's not close to Avery's or Zipperer's.... so it confuses me LOL Do we know of anyone else that was from New Holstein in this case? or close to it? Wonder where her maybe bf (BC) lived at the time? Chilton is not far.... Hilbert is not far (isn't this where RH lived?? with his parents?)

IIRC in Schmitz testimony he said she went the way of Chilton.... but I would have to go look again.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

I was looking at the map yesterday.... just a plain old map of Wisconsin.... I think she was not far from Schmitz, but I can't figure out why she was back that way later. And it's not close to Avery's or Zipperer's.... so it confuses me LOL Do we know of anyone else that was from New Holstein in this case? or close to it? Wonder where her maybe bf (BC) lived at the time? Chilton is not far.... Hilbert is not far (isn't this where RH lived?? with his parents?)

IIRC in Schmitz testimony he said she went the way of Chilton.... but I would have to go look again.

Yes, yes and YES!!! That's what I was thinking!!! and I think there is something to the seeing her on the side of the road taking a picture of the cow. That was in Valders...not far from Chilton!!!!

 

[BigCityAccountant]

The cow?

Ok...Poke! Yes!!

 

[missy1974]

Yes, yes and YES!!! That's what I was thinking!!! and I think there is something to the seeing her on the side of the road taking a picture of the cow. That was in Valders...not far from Chilton!!!!

So what do you think that means BCA? was she done her appointments at Zipperer's and Avery's? It is absolutely not logical that she would go to one place (zip's or Avery's)... then all the way back to take a picture of a cow... then back to the next place.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

So what do you think that means BCA? was she done her appointments at Zipperer's and Avery's? It is absolutely not logical that she would go to one place (zip's or Avery's)... then all the way back to take a picture of a cow... then back to the next place.

No, I don't think she would have done that--unless she was waiting for someone to go with her because she was uncomfortable with SA. A trusted friend perhaps? I'm not closed minded--I'm open to other ideas.

 

[Sarah]

OK I'm sure that this is going to end with the loss of my sanity LOL
I'm just trying to digest the last piece of this conversation and what it means for her possible movements that day.

And if we look at her calls with the times that we "know" she was at home, her tower was either 21112 or 21111, which kinda tells me that the tower might have different numbers, but they would be "close" JMO

I don't think that's quite right Missy - although I could be interpreting it completely wrong.
Looking at the pdf explaining base station numbering schemes that BCA posted further up thread, it looks like those cell towers are numbered using GSM1 i.e. the tower is <65536 and they're using the final digit to denote the sector - either 1,2 or 3 depending which sector antenna is activated.

So that means that her "home tower" was 2111 and depending on exactly where she was in relation to the tower or which antenna was getting the best signal we have records of her being picked up by either sector 1,2 or 3 - giving us a mixture of 21111, 21112 or 21113

It also means that in addition to her "home tower" she also connects with two other towers on the 31st October

Tower 2110 at 1:52 and 2:41 - in sectors 3 and 1 respectively (21103 and 21101)
Tower 2192 at 2:12, 2:13, 2:24 and 2:27 - all in sector 3 except for the 2:27 call which was sector 1.

Therefore the question that we really need to know the answer to is how far apart were towers 2110 and 2192 and what was their range/overlap.
Unfortunately, I suspect that they're probably too close together for us to draw anything really meaningful from it.

a) The LCell i.d. remains the same for calls connected via both 2110 and 2192 *
and
b) There's only 10 minutes difference between one of the calls via 2110 and one of the calls via 2192

*My understanding is that iCell=initiating tower and lCell=last tower and that calls may flick between towers during the duration of a phone call depending on signal strength.
Given that both 2110 and 2192 flip over to 54096 it would suggest that they're pretty close geographically, possibly even overlapping.
Again, my understanding is that the 5xxxx tower refs denote a different frequency to the 2xxxx, so it doesn't necessarily mean a physical movement from iCell to lCell but rather the phone tuning into the best signal.

 

[Sarah]

While my brain is in cell phone mode, I've had another random thought about the CFNA call.

You know how we've all been bashing our heads trying to work out why it's just that one odd call that's marked CFNA?
Why are other calls appearing to go to VM but not showing as CFNA?
Does it mean that somebody activated CFNA immediately after the Autotrader call and deactivated it again before the 4:35 call?
etc etc and round & round we go again!!!

Are we really, really sure that the CFNA notation means that TH activated that function on her phone?
What if the CFNA on the record relates to the origin of the call instead?
i.e. Somebody set call forwarding on their phone to transfer it to TH if it wasn't answered.
So the cell phone records are telling us that the 2:41 call isn't a direct call to TH, but a call that's been forwarded and re-routed from somewhere else.

My brain is just about cell-phoned out at the moment, and I can't find whether CFNA is explicitly explained in the testimony or not.
I'm also not sure what if any relevance it may have to the case other than offering a possible alternative to a niggly loose end.
But it's puzzling me, so I thought I'd throw it out there so it can puzzle everyone else too LOL.

 

[Madeleine74]

My opinion is no answers will come and no enlightenment will be realized without an expert who is familiar with that particular cell company, their specific tower arrangement in Oct 2005, who has access to the detailed cell company records for TH's phone (and possibly others' phones too). People will guess and guess and guess and guess some more, but it won't be put to rest without an expert who has seen or has the records.

 

[missy1974]

Sarah, you are braver than I am LOL I come back and look... then try to look away haha

But it does make sense that 1:52 and 2:41 were around the same area, right? it's just a matter of how close is that one to the 21923 tower. Interesting for sure.... still can't believe they didn't enter it into evidence. The closest thing to talking about the cell towers was Buting asking a question about the 2:41 call having a tower location and Kratz objecting.

 

[missy1974]

I do remember hearing or reading that she might have been on her way to Green Bay that day.... according to her missing poster, it says she may have been travelling to Green Bay or the Fox Cities. Of course... because I'm not from the area, I googled Fox Cities... which is East of Avery's... and back "near" to where she would have been after leaving Schmitz (the first appointment).

ETA: sorry, that's the best missing poster I could find

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Since Sarah is taking over sleuthing the cell phone towers, I thought I would post this link too:

http://www.forensicfocus.com/Forums/viewtopic/t=9691/

According to the FCC records, the Kellnersville Tower has a maximum transmitting (ERP) of 159 degrees. I dropped that into Google Earth Pro and it is a rather large radius. Sorry, I haven't had time to go back and do that with the other towers yet. I will when I have some time.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Not sure if this will help or not... It changes when you zoom into different locations, show more than what you see when you first enter a site. The website is a little slow.
http://opencellid.org/

 

[Sarah]

Sarah, you are braver than I am LOL I come back and look... then try to look away haha

Braver . . . or crazier? I'm not sure which yet! LOL
I'll admit to opening that pdf file about three times over the last few days before shutting it straight back down again.
Curiosity finally got the better of me though, so I took a deep breath and dived in.

Since Sarah is taking over sleuthing the cell phone towers

<cough splutter!> (choking on my tea)
I'm not sure I volunteered for that honour, but I guess us accountant/finance types need to stick together

To be honest though, I think Madeleine is right with this one.

My opinion is no answers will come and no enlightenment will be realized without an expert who is familiar with that particular cell company, their specific tower arrangement in Oct 2005, who has access to the detailed cell company records for TH's phone (and possibly others' phones too). People will guess and guess and guess and guess some more, but it won't be put to rest without an expert who has seen or has the records.

If it was as easy as just picking up those tower references from the cell phone record then the defense would have been all over it at the time. I don't like our chances of finding much information about how things were 10 years ago either - and that's before we try to acquire enough information to interpret it correctly.

To somebody with real expertise in this area combined with other ping data there might be story to be told, I just don't think that we'll find it.

I'll have a look at those other links when I get time though and see whether I can I find anything interesting or enlightening.
Mainly because I want to satisfy my own curiosity.
But also because I'm seeing a lot of speculation about cell phone records being presented as fact in the media and on the web.
I want to educate myself enough so that I can differentiate between reasonable deductions and wild guesses.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

OK I'm sure that this is going to end with the loss of my sanity LOL
I'm just trying to digest the last piece of this conversation and what it means for her possible movements that day.



I don't think that's quite right Missy - although I could be interpreting it completely wrong.
Looking at the pdf explaining base station numbering schemes that BCA posted further up thread, it looks like those cell towers are numbered using GSM1 i.e. the tower is <65536 and they're using the final digit to denote the sector - either 1,2 or 3 depending which sector antenna is activated.

So that means that her "home tower" was 2111 and depending on exactly where she was in relation to the tower or which antenna was getting the best signal we have records of her being picked up by either sector 1,2 or 3 - giving us a mixture of 21111, 21112 or 21113

It also means that in addition to her "home tower" she also connects with two other towers on the 31st October

Tower 2110 at 1:52 and 2:41 - in sectors 3 and 1 respectively (21103 and 21101)
Tower 2192 at 2:12, 2:13, 2:24 and 2:27 - all in sector 3 except for the 2:27 call which was sector 1.

Therefore the question that we really need to know the answer to is how far apart were towers 2110 and 2192 and what was their range/overlap.
Unfortunately, I suspect that they're probably too close together for us to draw anything really meaningful from it.

a) The LCell i.d. remains the same for calls connected via both 2110 and 2192 *
and
b) There's only 10 minutes difference between one of the calls via 2110 and one of the calls via 2192

*My understanding is that iCell=initiating tower and lCell=last tower and that calls may flick between towers during the duration of a phone call depending on signal strength.
Given that both 2110 and 2192 flip over to 54096 it would suggest that they're pretty close geographically, possibly even overlapping.
Again, my understanding is that the 5xxxx tower refs denote a different frequency to the 2xxxx, so it doesn't necessarily mean a physical movement from iCell to lCell but rather the phone tuning into the best signal.

So, if you think about this--when she was around home is was pinging off of Sector 2. (21112) (last digit) Which means she was "120° clockwise from 1--Approximately SE to S." (from the doc I posted the other day) So that means the tower has to be North or Northwest of her home.

Then she traveled to the same Tower and was pinging off of Sector 3 of the same tower (21103). "Sector 3---is 120° clockwise from 2---approximately WEST" (from the doc I posted the other day)--which means she was WEST of that Tower.

Then her phone is picked up by tower 21923, which means she was in Sector 3 of a different tower. (21923)--which means she was "120° clockwise from 2--approximately WEST" of that tower.

Then her phone is picked up by the same tower 21921, except she is now in Sector 1 approximately N to NE of that same tower.

So, just by that I conclude that when she was West of that tower (that Tower is east of GZ's), then she enters 21921 directly North. (Avery's is directly North). So, I would have to say she was at Avery's AFTER she visited GZ's.

BUT--then--she goes back to Tower 21101, which would be NORTH of original tower.

So, if we can figure out where Tower 2110 is--then we know the vicinity, she was at when that last call came in.

I going to check towers that are North or Northwest of her home. I hadn't done that before--I was checking the Manitowoc area and surrounding vicinity--but I'm thinking that that tower has to be SE or South of her house. Which would make sense as she was at Schmitz at around 1:30 pm - 1:50 pm and was picking up a stronger signal off the same tower.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Ok, Found Tower SA was using....

 

[Deleted member 39678]

So, if you think about this--when she was around home is was pinging off of Sector 2. (21112) (last digit) Which means she was "120° clockwise from 1--Approximately SE to S." (from the doc I posted the other day) So that means the tower has to be North or Northwest of her home.

Then she traveled to the same Tower and was pinging off of Sector 3 of the same tower (21103). "Sector 3---is 120° clockwise from 2---approximately WEST" (from the doc I posted the other day)--which means she was WEST of that Tower.

Then her phone is picked up by tower 21923, which means she was in Sector 3 of a different tower. (21923)--which means she was "120° clockwise from 2--approximately WEST" of that tower.

Then her phone is picked up by the same tower 21921, except she is now in Sector 1 approximately N to NE of that same tower.

So, just by that I conclude that when she was West of that tower (that Tower is east of GZ's), then she enters 21921 directly North. (Avery's is directly North). So, I would have to say she was at Avery's AFTER she visited GZ's.

BUT--then--she goes back to Tower 21101, which would be NORTH of original tower.

So, if we can figure out where Tower 2110 is--then we know the vicinity, she was at when that last call came in.

I going to check towers that are North or Northwest of her home. I hadn't done that before--I was checking the Manitowoc area and surrounding vicinity--but I'm thinking that that tower has to be SE or South of her house. Which would make sense as she was at Schmitz at around 1:30 pm - 1:50 pm and was picking up a stronger signal off the same tower.

Is it possible that the towers which where connected with are not always the one closest to the phone because of terrain, foliage or buildings blocking the signal?

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Is it possible that the towers which where connected with are not always the one closest to the phone because of terrain, foliage or buildings blocking the signal?

Absolutely, the terrain comes into play.

 

[Jaiddie]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/artic...aims-airtight-alibi-in-making-a-murderer-case

From a BBC news article:

"The lawyer claims only details of the incoming and outgoing calls were heard during Avery's original trial and that there is now more detailed information available."

This sounds very promising, I must admit. Sounds like she definitely may have new evidence and also may have grounds for a Brady violation if the prosecution kept this new evidence from the defense team during the original trial. I am also happy to see that some mainstream media is countering the prosecution's attempts of a media blitz.