The Alarm/Security System

[Dmacky]

I keep thinking that MS and CWW were still communicating via burner phones. That way, MS could have told CWW the system was already unarmed. I have thoughts on that side garage door being "unlocked" as well. I believe that MS did that purposely so his buds wouldn't have to go through the front of the garage and risk being seen. Especially being that BS nor Dr. P even knew that door existed. I think they went in the house at 6:09 that Sunday morning to get an idea of where to hide. A rehearsal of sorts.

 

[creepingskills]

"Should have" are the key words. Statewide should also have noticed and explained how two separate events which occurred nearly two hours apart could be logged as the same number -- #14 on that display.

IMO, CWW was capable of tampering with the system after arriving and disarming it at 6:09a. Whatever he did, he could have undone after the murder.

It's important to remember that Teresa could have easily armed the system as soon as she entered the house. All it would take is to press Stay on the keypad. But she didn't. Why not?

Rereading BS's interviews, at 6AM alarm was turned off with BS code. BS entered later around 7:45AM on the morning of the 28th, the alarm was not on. After feeding the dogs, BS successfully arms around 8AM. I wonder if the reason why the two events share the same event # (0014) is because with the individual user codes in use, it appears like BS entered at 6AM, deactivated with her code and then reactivated with her code at 8AM when she left. Perhaps that is viewed as one event because one specific user enters the house, disarms and two hours later and arms the system with same code, leaves. Its almost as if the system thought that BS was in the house from 6AM-8AM.

BS's alarm activation on the 28th at 8:01AM is logged twice as 0013 and 0014. IMO, this makes sense. If the system recognized BS's code as the same code that deactivated the system at 6AM, closed out that "0014 session" if you will.


If CWW tampered with the system between 6AM-prior to BS's 8AM arrival, how did she set the alarm without issue at 8AM? I'm assuming the purpose of tampering would be to prevent the successful arming of the system after CWW's first visit at 6AM.

 

[Scout]

Rereading BS's interviews, at 6AM alarm was turned off with BS code. BS entered later around 7:45AM on the morning of the 28th, the alarm was not on. After feeding the dogs, BS successfully arms around 8AM. I wonder if the reason why the two events share the same event # (0014) is because with the individual user codes in use, it appears like BS entered at 6AM, deactivated with her code and then reactivated with her code at 8AM when she left. Perhaps that is viewed as one event because one specific user enters the house, disarms and two hours later and arms the system with same code, leaves. Its almost as if the system thought that BS was in the house from 6AM-8AM.

BS's alarm activation on the 28th at 8:01AM is logged twice as 0013 and 0014. IMO, this makes sense. If the system recognized BS's code as the same code that deactivated the system at 6AM, closed out that "0014 session" if you will.
View attachment 87147View attachment 87148

If CWW tampered with the system between 6AM-prior to BS's 8AM arrival, how did she set the alarm without issue at 8AM? I'm assuming the purpose of tampering would be to prevent the successful arming of the system after CWW's first visit at 6AM.

All of what you said is logical, but there are other sequential Openings and Closings with BS's code that are each logged with a separate number -- 20, 19, 18, and 17, for example.

IMO there was an issue with BS setting the alarm at 8:01a. It Armed in Away Mode. She knows not to do that because the dogs would set off the alarm through motion sensors. I don't see her making that mistake. On top of that, the dogs should have tripped the motion sensors at some point between 8:01 am and 4ish when she returned and deactivated it. They did not.

 

[jtate0702]

All of what you said is logical, but there are other sequential Openings and Closings with BS's code that are each logged with a separate number -- 20, 19, 18, and 17, for example.

IMO there was an issue with BS setting the alarm at 8:01a. It Armed in Away Mode. She knows not to do that because the dogs would set off the alarm through motion sensors. I don't see her making that mistake. On top of that, the dogs should have tripped the motion sensors at some point between 8:01 am and 4ish when she returned and deactivated it. They did not.

This!!! Exactly what I was thinking. It would be interesting to see what the messages on the 601am entry were, and if a "special closing" or any other weird system messages appeared on or after the 601 am enry. I can't for the life of me read those particular images,. Too dark on my phone and computer to make out. Can anyone read those?

 

[creepingskills]

All of what you said is logical, but there are other sequential Openings and Closings with BS's code that are each logged with a separate number -- 20, 19, 18, and 17, for example.

IMO there was an issue with BS setting the alarm at 8:01a. It Armed in Away Mode. She knows not to do that because the dogs would set off the alarm through motion sensors. I don't see her making that mistake. On top of that, the dogs should have tripped the motion sensors at some point between 8:01 am and 4ish when she returned and deactivated it. They did not.

Re the event logs and the other BS sequential openings/closings (each logged with a different number). What I see is this: event 0014 is created, logged as the 6AM "opening" by BS's code. Then there's a prompt that I've only seen once (secure system before arming). Obviously, CWW did not arm nor secure the system with BS's code so the system is off. When BS shows up at 8AM, she checks the alarm puts in her code. The system reads this input as a response to the "secure system before arming". I'm thinking this is when the sensors were bypassed. CWW was probably trying to do this at 6AM but failed to put in the code again to bypass the sensors in away mode and the alarm was left off (which BS notices at 8AM) and probably wasn't part of the plan.

When BS taps in her code at 8AM, it acts to "accept" the bypass that CWW left incomplete. There isn't a new number until BS arms the system in "away" mode, ignoring the open window/door/motion in that room. In short, at 6AM there was an opening, but there was an error that prevented a proper closing and new number until BS showed up at 8, entered the code again, arming the house in an unsecured state.

And, if I'm reading correctly, there was a call from BS to MS that day and BS told MS that (because the alarm was off) that stay mode was not working. She was in a rush to get to church, and IIRC she said something about MS not having service at the lake in NY. What I think happened is BS hit away mode, and at the time she did this the house was not secured, so the motion sensors were useless. At some point after arming in away mode, MS calls her back and she tells him about having issues arming in stay mode and used away mode. MS tells her not to do that again because the dogs would trip the sensors. BS is thinking, okay if that's true, maybe I didn't hit away because the dogs did not trip the sensors.

Bates #5402
BS: So when I got there, the alarm was off (at 8AM 6/28). So I told Mark the stay didn't work. He's calling the guy, "what do you mean, it doesn't work?" and all that.

Bates #5410
BS: I don't think I hit away. But even if I did, that was the whole point... (goes on to say how the dogs should've triggered the alarm immediately but didn't and that's why she's so sure she hit stay vs. away).

And then here...when she's lamenting herself for not setting the alarm anyway, despite MS's instructions not to

Bates #5362
BS: So we -- uh, and then when I left, I should've just done what I did before because it worked.

What did BS do differently "before" if she only armed in "stay" mode?

I think what's going on here is that BS can't reconcile the fact that the sensors didn't trigger an alarm in away mode, so therefore she didn't hit away. Once she's looking at the event logs with LE it is clear, that yes she did hit away mode and it worked, because the alarm was on when she returned at 4 and no sensors went off. However, because MS was so worried about the sensors, she doesn't arm the system in away mode like she did before (at 8AM) when the system wasn't arming in stay mode and MS wasn't answering his phone.

I guess the only solid facts to work with here are (1) the system was armed in away mode at 8AM and (2) the dogs were in the house and did not trip the sensors. This is explained by an open door or window in one of the armed zones at the time the system was set to away. So it follows that when CWW/JR entered at 6AM, they must have left a door/window either unlocked or open which renders the sensors useless.

 

[debbiegarcia36]

Re the event logs and the other BS sequential openings/closings (each logged with a different number). What I see is this: event 0014 is created, logged as the 6AM "opening" by BS's code. Then there's a prompt that I've only seen once (secure system before arming). Obviously, CWW did not arm nor secure the system with BS's code so the system is off. When BS shows up at 8AM, she checks the alarm puts in her code. The system reads this input as a response to the "secure system before arming". I'm thinking this is when the sensors were bypassed. CWW was probably trying to do this at 6AM but failed to put in the code again to bypass the sensors in away mode and the alarm was left off (which BS notices at 8AM) and probably wasn't part of the plan.

When BS taps in her code at 8AM, it acts to "accept" the bypass that CWW left incomplete. There isn't a new number until BS arms the system in "away" mode, ignoring the open window/door/motion in that room. In short, at 6AM there was an opening, but there was an error that prevented a proper closing and new number until BS showed up at 8, entered the code again, arming the house in an unsecured state.

And, if I'm reading correctly, there was a call from BS to MS that day and BS told MS that (because the alarm was off) that stay mode was not working. She was in a rush to get to church, and IIRC she said something about MS not having service at the lake in NY. What I think happened is BS hit away mode, and at the time she did this the house was not secured, so the motion sensors were useless. At some point after arming in away mode, MS calls her back and she tells him about having issues arming in stay mode and used away mode. MS tells her not to do that again because the dogs would trip the sensors. BS is thinking, okay if that's true, maybe I didn't hit away because the dogs did not trip the sensors.

Bates #5402
BS: So when I got there, the alarm was off (at 8AM 6/28). So I told Mark the stay didn't work. He's calling the guy, "what do you mean, it doesn't work?" and all that.

Bates #5410
BS: I don't think I hit away. But even if I did, that was the whole point... (goes on to say how the dogs should've triggered the alarm immediately but didn't and that's why she's so sure she hit stay vs. away).

And then here...when she's lamenting herself for not setting the alarm anyway, despite MS's instructions not to

Bates #5362
BS: So we -- uh, and then when I left, I should've just done what I did before because it worked.

What did BS do differently "before" if she only armed in "stay" mode?

I think what's going on here is that BS can't reconcile the fact that the sensors didn't trigger an alarm in away mode, so therefore she didn't hit away. Once she's looking at the event logs with LE it is clear, that yes she did hit away mode and it worked, because the alarm was on when she returned at 4 and no sensors went off. However, because MS was so worried about the sensors, she doesn't arm the system in away mode like she did before (at 8AM) when the system wasn't arming in stay mode and MS wasn't answering his phone.

I guess the only solid facts to work with here are (1) the system was armed in away mode at 8AM and (2) the dogs were in the house and did not trip the sensors. This is explained by an open door or window in one of the armed zones at the time the system was set to away. So it follows that when CWW/JR entered at 6AM, they must have left a door/window either unlocked or open which renders the sensors useless.

All I can say is brilliant deduction! All of the above sounds like rocket science! Way over my head but you all are super sleuths to figure out the whole alarm debacle!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

 

[nifwor1967]

Re the event logs and the other BS sequential openings/closings (each logged with a different number). What I see is this: event 0014 is created, logged as the 6AM "opening" by BS's code. Then there's a prompt that I've only seen once (secure system before arming). Obviously, CWW did not arm nor secure the system with BS's code so the system is off. When BS shows up at 8AM, she checks the alarm puts in her code. The system reads this input as a response to the "secure system before arming". I'm thinking this is when the sensors were bypassed. CWW was probably trying to do this at 6AM but failed to put in the code again to bypass the sensors in away mode and the alarm was left off (which BS notices at 8AM) and probably wasn't part of the plan.

When BS taps in her code at 8AM, it acts to "accept" the bypass that CWW left incomplete. There isn't a new number until BS arms the system in "away" mode, ignoring the open window/door/motion in that room. In short, at 6AM there was an opening, but there was an error that prevented a proper closing and new number until BS showed up at 8, entered the code again, arming the house in an unsecured state.

And, if I'm reading correctly, there was a call from BS to MS that day and BS told MS that (because the alarm was off) that stay mode was not working. She was in a rush to get to church, and IIRC she said something about MS not having service at the lake in NY. What I think happened is BS hit away mode, and at the time she did this the house was not secured, so the motion sensors were useless. At some point after arming in away mode, MS calls her back and she tells him about having issues arming in stay mode and used away mode. MS tells her not to do that again because the dogs would trip the sensors. BS is thinking, okay if that's true, maybe I didn't hit away because the dogs did not trip the sensors.

Bates #5402
BS: So when I got there, the alarm was off (at 8AM 6/28). So I told Mark the stay didn't work. He's calling the guy, "what do you mean, it doesn't work?" and all that.

Bates #5410
BS: I don't think I hit away. But even if I did, that was the whole point... (goes on to say how the dogs should've triggered the alarm immediately but didn't and that's why she's so sure she hit stay vs. away).

And then here...when she's lamenting herself for not setting the alarm anyway, despite MS's instructions not to

Bates #5362
BS: So we -- uh, and then when I left, I should've just done what I did before because it worked.

What did BS do differently "before" if she only armed in "stay" mode?

I think what's going on here is that BS can't reconcile the fact that the sensors didn't trigger an alarm in away mode, so therefore she didn't hit away. Once she's looking at the event logs with LE it is clear, that yes she did hit away mode and it worked, because the alarm was on when she returned at 4 and no sensors went off. However, because MS was so worried about the sensors, she doesn't arm the system in away mode like she did before (at 8AM) when the system wasn't arming in stay mode and MS wasn't answering his phone.

I guess the only solid facts to work with here are (1) the system was armed in away mode at 8AM and (2) the dogs were in the house and did not trip the sensors. This is explained by an open door or window in one of the armed zones at the time the system was set to away. So it follows that when CWW/JR entered at 6AM, they must have left a door/window either unlocked or open which renders the sensors useless.

Yes!! Creeping Skills! Exactly what I was thinking! Hence, why the detectives were asking BS if she ever spent more time there. I vaguely remember the interview, but, they were asking if she was ever there for two hours or so one morning.

 

[creepingskills]

Yes!! Creeping Skills! Exactly what I was thinking! Hence, why the detectives were asking BS if she ever spent more time there. I vaguely remember the interview, but, they were asking if she was ever there for two hours or so one morning.

Yep, it seems as if LE assumed BS was there from 6-8AM because of the single "event" which was really CWW deactivating/opening but never activating and thus closing out the 0014 event since the system wouldn't arm unsecured without a bypass. BS's input at 8AM bypassed the 0014 "error" and 0013 was assigned when she closed/activated the alarm.

 

[Scout]

Re the event logs and the other BS sequential openings/closings (each logged with a different number). What I see is this: event 0014 is created, logged as the 6AM "opening" by BS's code. Then there's a prompt that I've only seen once (secure system before arming). Obviously, CWW did not arm nor secure the system with BS's code so the system is off. When BS shows up at 8AM, she checks the alarm puts in her code. The system reads this input as a response to the "secure system before arming". I'm thinking this is when the sensors were bypassed. CWW was probably trying to do this at 6AM but failed to put in the code again to bypass the sensors in away mode and the alarm was left off (which BS notices at 8AM) and probably wasn't part of the plan.

When BS taps in her code at 8AM, it acts to "accept" the bypass that CWW left incomplete. There isn't a new number until BS arms the system in "away" mode, ignoring the open window/door/motion in that room. In short, at 6AM there was an opening, but there was an error that prevented a proper closing and new number until BS showed up at 8, entered the code again, arming the house in an unsecured state.

And, if I'm reading correctly, there was a call from BS to MS that day and BS told MS that (because the alarm was off) that stay mode was not working. She was in a rush to get to church, and IIRC she said something about MS not having service at the lake in NY. What I think happened is BS hit away mode, and at the time she did this the house was not secured, so the motion sensors were useless. At some point after arming in away mode, MS calls her back and she tells him about having issues arming in stay mode and used away mode. MS tells her not to do that again because the dogs would trip the sensors. BS is thinking, okay if that's true, maybe I didn't hit away because the dogs did not trip the sensors.

Bates #5402
BS: So when I got there, the alarm was off (at 8AM 6/28). So I told Mark the stay didn't work. He's calling the guy, "what do you mean, it doesn't work?" and all that.

Bates #5410
BS: I don't think I hit away. But even if I did, that was the whole point... (goes on to say how the dogs should've triggered the alarm immediately but didn't and that's why she's so sure she hit stay vs. away).

And then here...when she's lamenting herself for not setting the alarm anyway, despite MS's instructions not to

Bates #5362
BS: So we -- uh, and then when I left, I should've just done what I did before because it worked.

What did BS do differently "before" if she only armed in "stay" mode?

I think what's going on here is that BS can't reconcile the fact that the sensors didn't trigger an alarm in away mode, so therefore she didn't hit away. Once she's looking at the event logs with LE it is clear, that yes she did hit away mode and it worked, because the alarm was on when she returned at 4 and no sensors went off. However, because MS was so worried about the sensors, she doesn't arm the system in away mode like she did before (at 8AM) when the system wasn't arming in stay mode and MS wasn't answering his phone.

I guess the only solid facts to work with here are (1) the system was armed in away mode at 8AM and (2) the dogs were in the house and did not trip the sensors. This is explained by an open door or window in one of the armed zones at the time the system was set to away. So it follows that when CWW/JR entered at 6AM, they must have left a door/window either unlocked or open which renders the sensors useless.

Ok. I follow what you're saying. I don't know enough about the system to be sure you're correct, but there's as much chance of you being correct and me incorrect as vice versa. I still think the 8:01 closing should have been 13 instead of 14. All other Openings and Closings are logged separately.

As for what she was doing differently, it's whether or not she was putting in her code before pressing Stay that is the difference. Mark had told her that she didn't need to use the code to arm the system when she leaves. Just press Stay. When this is done, it shows up as Special Closing. That's what she did on Friday afternoon. For some reason on Saturday morning she used her code to Close. Then Saturday evening she just pressed Stay. When she got there Sunday morning and found it not armed, she thought just pressing Stay had not worked. So she used her code to Close Sunday morning. Some time after that she talked to Mark and he told her to leave it off.

It puzzles me that she seemed to say that his reason for leaving it off was the motion detectors. They aren't active in Stay mode which was the whole reason for using it.

 

[Satchie]

This!!! Exactly what I was thinking. It would be interesting to see what the messages on the 601am entry were, and if a "special closing" or any other weird system messages appeared on or after the 601 am enry. I can't for the life of me read those particular images,. Too dark on my phone and computer to make out. Can anyone read those?

There are 2 messages definitely associated with that 6 am entry:

0014-system
6:09a 06/28/15
*
Opening by user Code 03

Then there is the next message, which isn't associated with a system log number or time and doesn't appear in any other photos of the alarm system messages review:

*Secure system before arming*

Now I'm asking - why the heck does that even show up?

As Scout says, this is a standard message that appears when any doors or windows are open. It must appear often, for eg the family is home and the door to the pool is left open. If you are going to bed and want to set the alarm, but see that message, you can find out what zone the open door or window is in, go shut it, come back and the system should show 'Ready'. You can then set the alarm.

I don't understand why this particular message was recorded by the system log, and doesn't appear in the other photos of the log.

 

[Scout]

(Snipped)

I guess the only solid facts to work with here are (1) the system was armed in away mode at 8AM and (2) the dogs were in the house and did not trip the sensors. This is explained by an open door or window in one of the armed zones at the time the system was set to away. So it follows that when CWW/JR entered at 6AM, they must have left a door/window either unlocked or open which renders the sensors useless.

Are you thinking that leaving a door/window unlocked was done deliberately in order to render the sensors useless?

 

[howonkee]

Maybe this is too simple or I'm not understanding all of this correctly, but what if CWW used BS's code at the 6:09 am deactivation on Sunday the 28th?

 

[irishchook]

From: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B717FUtKwdU8WmMteDA0V1hjMzA
Page 5
"Enter Data"

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[creepingskills]

Ok. I follow what you're saying. I don't know enough about the system to be sure you're correct, but there's as much chance of you being correct and me incorrect as vice versa. I still think the 8:01 closing should have been 13 instead of 14. All other Openings and Closings are logged separately.

As for what she was doing differently, it's whether or not she was putting in her code before pressing Stay that is the difference. Mark had told her that she didn't need to use the code to arm the system when she leaves. Just press Stay. When this is done, it shows up as Special Closing. That's what she did on Friday afternoon. For some reason on Saturday morning she used her code to Close. Then Saturday evening she just pressed Stay. When she got there Sunday morning and found it not armed, she thought just pressing Stay had not worked. So she used her code to Close Sunday morning. Some time after that she talked to Mark and he told her to leave it off.

It puzzles me that she seemed to say that his reason for leaving it off was the motion detectors. They aren't active in Stay mode which was the whole reason for using it.

BBM. I'm also puzzled by that. I can't figure out what the difference between stay with code and stay, no code. I get that 'special closing' will come up if no code is entered but how that affects the sensors is beyond me. I think BS might have been confused, mixing up user code/AWAY v. stay/no user code.

Bates #5381
BS: So when I left I'm guessing I did the -- the code I did before and hit stay. Im not sure about that one. Cause Mark had said in between that time on Sunday don't worry about the code because the stay wasnt working and he's concerned if I do the code and hit stay, um, it could do a motion detector with the dogs in the house .

 

[Scout]

The following is what I see in the photos of the keypad display. I used tricks such as selection highlighting, brightening my screen, and looking at the screen at an oblique angle to see all of it. There were some things I couldn't see but discerned by logic and by statements of investigators in the reports. Those things I put in red font.

0028-System
1:11a 06/25/15

Special Closing

0027-System
1:11a 06/25/15

Armed
in Stay Mode

0026-System
6:07a 06/25/15

Opening by
User Code 40

0025-System
2:02a 06/26/15

Special Closing

0024-System
2:02a 06/26/15

Armed
in Stay Mode

0023-System
5:31a 06/26/15

Opening by
User Code 03

0022-System
4:18p 06/26/15

Special Closing

0021-System
4:18p 06/26

Armed
in Stay Mode

0020-System
8:54a 06/27/15

Opening by
User Code 03

0019-System
8:58a 06/27/15

Closing by
User Code 03

0018-System
8:58a 06/27/15

Armed
in Away Mode

0017-System
4:11p 06/27/15

Opening by
User Code 03

0016-System
4:19p 06/27/15

Special Closing

0015-System
4:19p 06/27/15

Armed
in Stay Mode

0014-System
6:09a 6/28/15

Opening by
User Code 03

Secure System
Before Arming < >

0014-System
8:01a 06/28/15

Closing by
User Code 03


0013-System
8:01a 06/28/15

Armed
in Away Mode

0012-System
06/28/15

Opening by
User Code 03

0011-System
____ 07/01/15

Keypad 1
Query. Trouble

 

[creepingskills]

Are you thinking that leaving a door/window unlocked was done deliberately in order to render the sensors useless?

I'm not sure. It might have been accidental, like CWW jimmied the other door that showed evidence of tampering to stage the scene, but wasn't aware that when he tried to set the alarm, there would be an error because of the unsecured door and it wouldn't set and BS would notice this.

Or, it was planned. A door was left open and CWW attempted to arm the home before BS arrived at 8AM but it failed to set because of the door jimmying and he didn't realize.

The other thing, not sure if its possible but maybe that wireless "zone" had something to do with the sensors and that zone was off the entire time. I think if CWW turned off the sensors during the 6AM trip, there would have to be an electronic record of that. I don't think CWW could erase evidence of tampering like that unless he smashed the panel to pieces.

 

[Scout]

From: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B717FUtKwdU8WmMteDA0V1hjMzA
Page 5
"Enter Data"

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Thanks, irish! I had overlooked those pics. Hmmm.

 

[creepingskills]

There are 2 messages definitely associated with that 6 am entry:

0014-system
6:09a 06/28/15
*
Opening by user Code 03

Then there is the next message, which isn't associated with a system log number or time and doesn't appear in any other photos of the alarm system messages review:

*Secure system before arming*

Now I'm asking - why the heck does that even show up?

As Scout says, this is a standard message that appears when any doors or windows are open. It must appear often, for eg the family is home and the door to the pool is left open. If you are going to bed and want to set the alarm, but see that message, you can find out what zone the open door or window is in, go shut it, come back and the system should show 'Ready'. You can then set the alarm.

I don't understand why this particular message was recorded by the system log, and doesn't appear in the other photos of the log.

BBM. I think this shows up when an entry point is unsecured. The system won't arm with, for ex, a door open so the panel is telling the user, shut the door and arm, or bypass monitoring that door.

 

[Satchie]

Are you thinking that leaving a door/window unlocked was done deliberately in order to render the sensors useless?

From a bit of googling, it appears that alarm systems won't allow you to set the alarm with a door/window unlocked. You get that message "secure system before arming' and it won't accept any attempt to arm it. You either have to lock the door/window, or bypass that zone from the keypad. I believe all alarm systems basically work this way, here's a description from one of them: http://www.alarm4home.com/DSC_Operation.html

 

[Scout]

Users Manual

https://www.adt.com/content/dam/adt-core/downloads/manuals/manual_dsc_power832_version1.pdf

Look at page 13 and compare to the displays in the file that irishchook linked above.