Rebecca's cell phone records

[SophieRose]

Which is the real reason it has not been released imho. Not necessarily JS, but someone does not want the phone examined. Calls, messages, history, can be retrieved.

Who doesn't want the phone examined? It either belonged to RZ or JS, so it would go to JS or RZ's family.

 

[SunnieRN]

I think it is an issue because the family isn't happy with LE. That said, JS doesn't dictate policies to LE as to how they handle the return of seized items. Through his attorney, it is pretty clear JS is not happy at all the innuendo the family has thrown at him or his family so I don't see a real spirit of cooperation happening any time soon.

JMO

MyBelle, imho, law enforcement can not set policies or treat the Zahau family differently, just because they do not agree with LE findings.

Whether JS is happy or unhappy should also have no bearing on whether or not Rebecca's belongings are turned over to Rebecca's family.

 

[SunnieRN]

I'm sure they've looked at JS's phone and contacted his service provider. The message isn't lost, even if it's deleted. There are all kinds of ways to get deleted messages these days, even if the cops claim they don't have it.

Exactly!!! So what is going on?? Seems a bit fishy to me.

 

[CDS22]

So why didn't cops get the message? Because they can't or just won't?

I think they probably have it now. They don't tell the public everything, you know, for a variety of reasons.

IMO

 

[jjenny]

I think they probably have it now. They don't tell the public everything, you know, for a variety of reasons.

IMO

They clearly didn't tell RN's family that they have the message.

 

[MyBelle]

The KFMB article was updated shorty after initial posting from "family members" to read:

"Zahau's sister, Mary Zahau-Loehner, said detectives told her that Jonah Shacknai left the voicemail on Rebecca's phone around 12:30 a.m. on the morning of her death.

Detectives said the message was erased and officials will not confirm who left the voicemail."

I believe detectives would have confirmed the time JS made that call to RZ's voicemail by looking at his cell phone outgoing billing logs. Only JS can release those logs at this point, and obviously he will not. The content of that message is solely based on the word of JS.

The audio of that voicemail should be retrievable from AT&T servers. Voicemail audio does reside on the phone itself. AT&T certainly has routine and constant backup technology installed on its servers. However, it is unclear if LE ever attempted to retrieve the audio of the voicemail and the more time that goes by, the more likely the backup audio will be written over.

I don't believe AT&T keeps deleted phone messages on servers.

JMO

 

[SunnieRN]

Who doesn't want the phone examined? It either belonged to RZ or JS, so it would go to JS or RZ's family.

If I knew that my dear, I wouldn't be asking questions on a forum board. Certainly the phone, according to the phone company (Rebecca's name on the bill) and according to LE, (in statements concerning the phone, belongs to Rebecca.

On my family share plan, my name is on the bill. Each phone/pages on the bill have, phone #. the phone number; phone #, the phone number, etc., with all the incoming/outgoing calls listed beneath each phone.

They are not distinguished by name, what so ever. I have had Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, all in family share plans. They have never listed the phones by individual names, on the bill.

 

[MyBelle]

MyBelle, imho, law enforcement can not set policies or treat the Zahau family differently, just because they do not agree with LE findings.

Whether JS is happy or unhappy should also have no bearing on whether or not Rebecca's belongings are turned over to Rebecca's family.

Who says LE are treating the Zahau family any differently than anybody else?
I believe they are treating them exactly the way they handle other cases.

LE seized the phone from JS's residence. I can't see LE just handing it over to RN's family without being ordered to do so by a Court.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

I think they probably have it now. They don't tell the public everything, you know, for a variety of reasons.

IMO

I'm betting they don't have the message because they refused to confirm who left it. If they knew for sure, they'd say so.

JMO

 

[CDS22]

I'm betting they don't have the message because they refused to confirm who left it. If they knew for sure, they'd say so.

JMO

They might be witholding the information for other reasons. For example, they didn't offer information about the suicide note. RZ's family did that.

 

[jjenny]

They might be witholding the information for other reasons. For example, they didn't offer information about the suicide note. RZ's family did that.

Well if they have any info they are withholding, then they didn't share it with RN's family either.

 

[SunnieRN]

I think it is an issue because the family isn't happy with LE. That said, JS doesn't dictate policies to LE as to how they handle the return of seized items. Through his attorney, it is pretty clear JS is not happy at all the innuendo the family has thrown at him or his family so I don't see a real spirit of cooperation happening any time soon.

JMO

Who says LE are treating the Zahau family any differently than anybody else?
I believe they are treating them exactly the way they handle other cases.

LE seized the phone from JS's residence. I can't see LE just handing it over to RN's family without being ordered to do so by a Court.

JMO

There is an implication in your first post listed here, that brought on my response. I also listed your response to my statement that LE can not treat someone differently because they don't like a decision made by LE.

 

[MyBelle]

They might be witholding the information for other reasons. For example, they didn't offer information about the suicide note. RZ's family did that.

LE provided the info it had to RZ's family. But they can't provide content to a voice message if they do not have it. They can't confirm it was JS who left it if they haven't heard it themselves. I don't see it as some conspiracy, I just see it as information they don't have.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

There is an implication in your first post listed here, that brought on my response. I also listed your response to my statement that LE can not treat someone differently because they don't like a decision made by LE.

I don't believe LE is treating someone differently in this case.

 

[SunnieRN]

Who says LE are treating the Zahau family any differently than anybody else?
I believe they are treating them exactly the way they handle other cases.

LE seized the phone from JS's residence. I can't see LE just handing it over to RN's family without being ordered to do so by a Court.

JMO

If this statement is true, then nothing could ever be released without going to court. I know that this is not the case. When a case is closed, items can be and are distributed. My friend was robbed. LE recovered some of the items from their house. When the case closed, it was returned to them.

LE also released the jewelry my friend from work had on when she 'committed suicide', after the ME released the body.

 

[MyBelle]

If this statement is true, then nothing could ever be released without going to court. I know that this is not the case. When a case is closed, items can be and are distributed. My friend was robbed. LE recovered some of the items from their house. When the case closed, it was returned to them.

LE also released the jewelry my friend from work had on when she 'committed suicide', after the ME released the body.

LE seized the phone via search warrant. There is a protocol for returning seized items.

JMO

 

[CocoChanel]

I'm sure they've looked at JS's phone and contacted his service provider. The message isn't lost, even if it's deleted. There are all kinds of ways to get deleted messages these days, even if the cops claim they don't have it.

I believe the second part of your post. However I take issue with your first sentence, BBM. I think we have no way of knowing if LE has looked at JS's phone OR contacted his service provider to retrieve the alleged voicemail. This voicemail, it it did occur, was most certainly still on the providers servers in the days after RZ died, no matter if it had been erased from her phone or not. I HOPE they subpoenaed all of JS's phone records to verify the story he gave them in the investigation into RZ's death. We heard at the CONCLUSION of that investigation that there was a voicemail to RZ from JS that triggered her suicide. We don't know for certain how they came to believe that because they have not told us if they checked that voicemail or not. They only told us it was erased and not able to be retrieved. Is LE covering for themselves for not issuing a subpoena for that info? That would point to a botched investigation. Or did they try to get it and were denied access, perhaps due to the power and influence of JS? That would point to a corrupt investigation.

JS COULD allow the answer to the voicemail question to come out by releasing his phone records, no? Or even at the least, release the one part that would verify a voicemail was left at all for RZ. We still have nothing to prove he left a voicemail at the time he says he did. What would be the privacy issue that would prevent him from doing that? Although I'd like to know the actual transcript of that audio voicemail he left, at this point I just want to know for sure he made the call. THEN I would go to the next logical question(s). The reluctance to prove this call was made is the first red flag I have to solve in my own mind, and I can see no reason for it other than to cover up something nefarious.

 

[JBean]

FWIW I used to have Att. The bill was in my name but I could change any of the user names for each line on my account to reflect the actual user. So, if all we have is a bill with a user name it doesn't really tell us who owns the account or number. I think this will change the caller ID when you are calling out.

http://www.att.com/esupport/article.jsp?sid=KB100449&cv=820#fbid=zqS6xEQb61a


Update the user profile name/nickname for a phone number associated with my account

1. Go to the Profile page in myAT&T.
2. Select the telephone number associated with the user name/nickname you wish to update.
3. In the Primary User box, select the Edit User Information link.
4. Complete the desired information: First name, middle initial, last name, email address, gender, and browser language.
5. Select Save Changes.

 

[SophieRose]

I believe the second part of your post. However I take issue with your first sentence, BBM. I think we have no way of knowing if LE has looked at JS's phone OR contacted his service provider to retrieve the alleged voicemail. This voicemail, it it did occur, was most certainly still on the providers servers in the days after RZ died, no matter if it had been erased from her phone or not. I HOPE they subpoenaed all of JS's phone records to verify the story he gave them in the investigation into RZ's death. We heard at the CONCLUSION of that investigation that there was a voicemail to RZ from JS that triggered her suicide. We don't know for certain how they came to believe that because they have not told us if they checked that voicemail or not. They only told us it was erased and not able to be retrieved. Is LE covering for themselves for not issuing a subpoena for that info? That would point to a botched investigation. Or did they try to get it and were denied access, perhaps due to the power and influence of JS? That would point to a corrupt investigation.

JS COULD allow the answer to the voicemail question to come out by releasing his phone records, no? Or even at the least, release the one part that would verify a voicemail was left at all for RZ. We still have nothing to prove he left a voicemail at the time he says he did. What would be the privacy issue that would prevent him from doing that? Although I'd like to know the actual transcript of that audio voicemail he left, at this point I just want to know for sure he made the call. THEN I would go to the next logical question(s). The reluctance to prove this call was made is the first red flag I have to solve in my own mind, and I can see no reason for it other than to cover up something nefarious.

LE said there were search warrants for many many phones. I'm sure that included JS's phones.

 

[MyBelle]

I believe the second part of your post. However I take issue with your first sentence, BBM. I think we have no way of knowing if LE has looked at JS's phone OR contacted his service provider to retrieve the alleged voicemail. This voicemail, it it did occur, was most certainly still on the providers servers in the days after RZ died, no matter if it had been erased from her phone or not. I HOPE they subpoenaed all of JS's phone records to verify the story he gave them in the investigation into RZ's death. We heard at the CONCLUSION of that investigation that there was a voicemail to RZ from JS that triggered her suicide. We don't know for certain how they came to believe that because they have not told us if they checked that voicemail or not. They only told us it was erased and not able to be retrieved. Is LE covering for themselves for not issuing a subpoena for that info? That would point to a botched investigation. Or did they try to get it and were denied access, perhaps due to the power and influence of JS? That would point to a corrupt investigation.

JS COULD allow the answer to the voicemail question to come out by releasing his phone records, no? Or even at the least, release the one part that would verify a voicemail was left at all for RZ. We still have nothing to prove he left a voicemail at the time he says he did. What would be the privacy issue that would prevent him from doing that? Although I'd like to know the actual transcript of that audio voicemail he left, at this point I just want to know for sure he made the call. THEN I would go to the next logical question(s). The reluctance to prove this call was made is the first red flag I have to solve in my own mind, and I can see no reason for it other than to cover up something nefarious.

Why would JS want to release anything at all at this point? I don't see him offering to assist those who have been pointing fingers at him as being responsible.

JMO