Police search for murder clues in e-mail

  • #41
Jenifred said:
IMO, Raven seems like the person who would think that would be too much work. And Raven doesn't seem like he would be the kind of person to wait in line while Janet typed out her email. I just think that they probably had two computers. One upstairs and one downstars.

IDK, but I have a feeling that Raven kept his info consolidated on one computer. Too much work transporting info back and forth between machines when you can just plug and play these days.
 
  • #42
Jenifred said:
IMO, Raven seems like the person who would think that would be too much work. And Raven doesn't seem like he would be the kind of person to wait in line while Janet typed out her email. I just think that they probably had two computers. One upstairs and one downstars.
I see your point Jenifred, totally, but, I also think that having JUST the laptop, the port, etc., would give a controlling person complete and total control over the computer.... it could always be with them, no chance for anyone to have opportunity to dig around on it, etc..... and further, while I also see your point about Raven waiting in line, etc., I guess my thought is, if anyone would have to wait to use the computer, ever, it would have been Janet, not Raven. JMO of course....
 
  • #43
Back to the disk though. Do the free email outlets out there (AIM, Yahoo, hotmail, gmail, etc) keep copies of all emails sent? Is it possible that LE could find out which services that Janet and Raven were using and then get the emails from where ever they were sent.
 
  • #44
SouthEastSleuth said:
I see your point Jenifred, totally, but, I also think that having JUST the laptop, the port, etc., would give a controlling person complete and total control over the computer.... it could always be with them, no chance for anyone to have opportunity to dig around on it, etc..... and further, while I also see your point about Raven waiting in line, etc., I guess my thought is, if anyone would have to wait to use the computer, ever, it would have been Janet, not Raven. JMO of course....

Although unconfirmed, I've heard through the grapevine that there was only the laptop.
 
  • #45
golfmom said:
Although unconfirmed, I've heard through the grapevine that there was only the laptop.
Easy enough. All information in one place and make Janet wait to use the computer--got it.
 
  • #46
Jenifred said:
Easy enough. All information in one place and make Janet wait to use the computer--got it.

And he had his little ole pocketpc deal. He controlled the entire gateway to the internet.

Makes me think about the cars too and how it conveniently worked out that Janet had no vehicle to escape that night.
 
  • #47
Jenifred said:
Back to the disk though. Do the free email outlets out there (AIM, Yahoo, hotmail, gmail, etc) keep copies of all emails sent? Is it possible that LE could find out which services that Janet and Raven were using and then get the emails from where ever they were sent.

This is an interesting question. I know that if you, the user, leave emails on Yahoo for example, they are stored there indefinitely, or until you use of your storage capacity. If they are deleted? I have no idea if they can be retrieved by the service, or not.

But, I also wonder what ISP they used at home? IT was suggested that they must have had a cable connection, as they did not have landline phone service. That said, it Durham it would be Time Warner cable, and a road runner address. Interesting that we've never heard of an actual ISP email address for Raven and/or Janet... for Raven we know at some point he used a ravenstree.com address, and later a gmail address... but still, they would had to have had a basic ISP at home as well, right?
 
  • #48
Jenifred said:
Easy enough. All information in one place and make Janet wait to use the computer--got it.
If the above is accurate then for a coworker to be online exchanging IM's or emails with Janet, Janet would have to be on the laptop....the one that was "stolen"...do I have this right so far?
 
  • #49
chicoliving said:
If the above is accurate then for a coworker to be online exchanging IM's or emails with Janet, Janet would have to be on the laptop....the one that was "stolen"...do I have this right so far?

Yes!!!
 
  • #50
golfmom said:
And he had his little ole pocketpc deal. He controlled the entire gateway to the internet.

Makes me think about the cars too and how it conveniently worked out that Janet had no vehicle to escape that night.

Seems from what we've heard, he controlled most EVERYTHING in his and Janet's life. Computers, cars, etc.

I've known of controlling people like that - who tell their spouses what to wear, how to do their hair, whether they look physically "right" or not, what to eat, basically, taking away CHOICE - and controlling the person, down to every detail. Scary stuff.

So controlling the computer would seem basic. And certainly, controlling access to vehicles could possibly be right up there too, who knows....
 
  • #51
SouthEastSleuth said:
This is an interesting question. I know that if you, the user, leave emails on Yahoo for example, they are stored there indefinitely, or until you use of your storage capacity. If they are deleted? I have no idea if they can be retrieved by the service, or not.
Not too long ago I recall watching some news coverage about a soldier who had died in the line of duty and his family was attempting to get yahoo or similar email site to let them have the emails in his account. I don't know if it every got solved but the company was not cooperative even under those circumstances...so they have the capablility but its protected by their TOS, IIRC. Seems a court order would be different though.
 
  • #52
chicoliving said:
Not too long ago I recall watching some news coverage about a soldier who had died in the line of duty and his family was attempting to get yahoo or similar email site to let them have the emails in his account. I don't know if it every got solved but the company was not cooperative even under those circumstances...so they have the capablility but its protected by their TOS, IIRC. Seems a court order would be different though.

Good info chico!

Ok, so I've established today that I love computer forensics. But now I also love court orders and warrants!!

(Ok, so I'm easily amused sometimes...."
 
  • #53
SouthEastSleuth said:
Good info chico!

Ok, so I've established today that I love computer forensics. But now I also love court orders and warrants!!

(Ok, so I'm easily amused sometimes...."

My bet on this is that the article is taking Raven by surprise. I sincerely believe that this article isn't just an update to the case, but a MESSAGE to Raven.
 
  • #54
golfmom said:
My bet on this is that the article is taking Raven by surprise. I sincerely believe that this article isn't just an update to the case, but a MESSAGE to Raven.
I agree--a message to Raven. Maybe giving him a little more rope to hang himself.

But in my mind, I like the scenario of Raven coming out of court this coming August 26th and thinking that everything is all fine and dandy and then WHAM here come the officers arresting him for the murder of his wife. But I'd like to make sure that Janet's family safely has Kaiden in their arms.
 
  • #55
golfmom said:
My bet on this is that the article is taking Raven by surprise. I sincerely believe that this article isn't just an update to the case, but a MESSAGE to Raven.
Ok, I'll bite, and speculate on the message -


MESSAGE TO MR. RAVEN ABAROA:

We, the Durham Police Department, have requested, and received, information regarding emails from your's and Janet's email account(s).... Just letting you know, we're still on the case, and exploring any and all options to solve this case and bring Janet's murderer to justice. Who knows what we may find in this information. But, computers and email always leave a trail...and now that we have the trail, rest assured, we will follow it, relentlessly... Just wanted you to have an update, as we haven't heard from you, and surely you want to be kept apprised of how the investigation is going.

Regards,

DPD

BTW: "Vaughan asks anyone with information about Abaroa's murder to call him at 560-4440, ext. 275, or CrimeStoppers at 683-1200."
 
  • #56
My understanding of the article is that the disk is what they received after they issued a warrant to the ISP. I don't believe this is two separate entitites, just one single one.

I had to read the article several times to catch this though.

Also of importance when going through the SP Trial, how Scooter searched Tidal Flows and Currents after buying the boat, along with looking for I believe Umbrella Stands.
 
  • #57
This is the section that's a little murky to me. Requesting versus seizing.

"Durham police Detective S.W. Vaughan seized a computer disk Aug. 10 containing the relevant information.

In requesting the disk, Vaughan states in the affidavit that he was seeking connection and disconnection dates and times, all files that have been accessed by the two accounts and all stored communications to and from the accounts."
 
  • #58
I left off this too ....

"The e-mails would provide police "with the ability to verify any suspicious activity, threats, and/or the identity of any possible suspects associated with the murder of Janet Abaroa," the affidavit states."


So what exactly is there to verify?
 
  • #59
golfmom said:
This is the section that's a little murky to me. Requesting versus seizing.

"Durham police Detective S.W. Vaughan seized a computer disk Aug. 10 containing the relevant information.

In requesting the disk, Vaughan states in the affidavit that he was seeking connection and disconnection dates and times, all files that have been accessed by the two accounts and all stored communications to and from the accounts."
I agree GM... murky at best. But, perhaps it's all just semantics, who knows.

The important thing is this -

From whatever source, they got the email activity. Now, let's see what, if anything, they find....
 
  • #60
SouthEastSleuth said:
Now, let's see what, if anything, they find....
Waiting? No, I won't do it! I won't go back there!!!
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
124
Guests online
2,277
Total visitors
2,401

Forum statistics

Threads
632,825
Messages
18,632,316
Members
243,307
Latest member
Lordfrazer
Back
Top