TX - Hailey Dunn, 13, Colorado City, 27 Dec 2010 - #24

[SubtleGrace]

Okay, so does that mean that during the time of the "break in usage", that it is possible that SA's phone was pinging another tower that was not owned by Verizon, then?

That would be extremely important information.

My understanding is if they have any ping information, they have all ping information.

Meaning, the info comes from the phone, and not the individual carriers. So no matter what carrier you have, if they pull the ping information from your phone, they know exactly what towers they pinged from, no matter who owns it.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[cluciano63]

It does seem as though Billie has gone out of her way to try to validate SA's story, more than she has, really, in trying to make us believe she only cares about getting Hailey back.

 

[Princess of Oz]

If cell phones ping when not in being used, SA had to know how to make it not ping if that is what is meant by "break in usage". I took it to mean he made no phone calls or texts during that time. jmo

I asked my husband, who works with these things and he said some phones won't ping if the battery is dead.

 

[CKay]

Okay, so does that mean that during the time of the "break in usage", that it is possible that SA's phone was pinging another tower that was not owned by Verizon, then?

That would be extremely important information.

They only reference Verizon in the affadavit. Was that because Verizon is SA's carrier? Maybe >> would Verizon know if he had bounced off someone else's tower? Probably? (but not sure).

Maybe sarx needs to call Sparky and pick his brain

 

[Wise Old Owl]

I asked my husband, who works with these things and he said some phones won't ping if the battery is dead.

SA had a Blackberry - don't know if it would make any difference.

 

[KR2tonenow]

Suziq, you are quite correct. The SAR thread downstairs has been operating under the interpretation that there was "no coverage" between 6:56 am to 9:38 am.

As per the affidavit reference below, one must assume that SA took the battery out of his phone at 6:56 am, right?

We have been using Verizon "no coverage" maps etc., to try and zero in on areas within the time frame, he might have been.

IMO, this changes everything.

It doesn't say that SA's phone was in an area that had "no coverage" during the time frame from 6:56 a.m. to 9:38 a.m!

It says:

BBM-
Yes, and the areas in question without towers are a great place to start.

 

[Soulmagent]

Okay, so does that mean that during the time of the "break in usage", that it is possible that SA's phone was pinging another tower that was not owned by Verizon, then?

That would be extremely important information.

It would be but not something they had to put in paper.

They need to only show why they need a warrent and that was because he lied about his where abouts and then they put the supporting information in the write up.

Every thing included in the paper is placed very carefully and dilibrate.

No extra information they have is put in there. Alot of pieces are missing. IMO

 

[Princess of Oz]

SA had a Blackberry - don't know if it would make any difference.

Possible, but would more than likely have to remove the battery IHHO - he works with military grade things, so isn't sure if the basics are the same in there.

 

[vjlaw]

I'm sure since she obviously didn't know MB's or she would have called HD herself. DD spent the night at a friends and came home 4ish, broke in, met Sa in hallway. What time did BD call to give DD the message? Also if Clint looks over there all the time, then he would have seen the vehicle in the driveway if SA had been there at the wrong time.

BD called DD on Tues before noon to have him text his sister to come home. That's when he reported back to BD that Hailey never made it to the friend's house. BD left work and went to police station. Her phone would have been left at home for DD to use on Tuesday. This is the way I understand it so not sure if any is correct. DD came home on Monday as I understand it.

 

[SubtleGrace]

Can LE determine if a cell phone is turned off or in a no coverage zone?

 

[crimejunkie]

Thanks Crime Junkie! Was wondering if we could discount the bloodhound hits that Billie told us about on NG (even though she admitted that LE didn't want her to discuss them). I think she was hell bent on discussing them and positioned them as confirmed in attempt to corroborate SA's story of what Hailey allegedly told him on 12/27. If the bloodhound hits are inaccurate, then there's nothing left corroborating his story and 12/26 p.m. is the last confirmed sighting of Hailey (by DD)...

No problem! Remember how she kept saying....(paraphrasing) "they told me to her dad's house, then to her friend's house and then to the motel." At least I recall her speaking about this/repeating it several times and it would have (if accurate) confirmed SA's story. Then....she also kept mentioning HD walking with the girl and the boy and then the two girls. The witness couldn't remember if it was Sunday or Monday. BD claimed that HAD to have happened on Monday, because she was at home with HD all day on Sunday (which again would help SA's version of events, if it occurred on Monday rather than Sunday)....yet CD said HD was with him on Sunday. However, from what I have heard, LE couldn't confirm her walking with the boy or the girls either. It seems she stresses those things (and even talks about them as if they are confirmed by LE) which may make SA's stories more credible, but none of them can be confirmed by LE----including that 12pm phone call!!

 

[Coldpizza]

Im sorry if this is ot. I wish sometimes there would be a resolutions forum, so many cases to follow, so many unresolved. Today and tomorrow and the next day I just want to sign on to ws and see many more FOUND and SAFE. May Hailey be there tomorrow in the found and safe.

 

[justus4all]

I read earlier here on a theory that maybe S had chased H to abduct her/capture her...and I have given that quite a bit of thought...

IMO...a young girl....13...being chased...by a man ..she is AFRAID of...wouldn't girls that age...would probably.. scream...yell....hollar...SOMETHING...

That to me...would certainly draw attention...

IMO...drugged, at night...darkness....noiseless....much quieter...NO ATTENTION..

just my opinion

 

[SmoothOperator]

Suziq, you are quite correct. The SAR thread downstairs has been operating under the interpretation that there was "no coverage" between 6:56 am to 9:38 am.

As per the affidavit reference below, one must assume that SA took the battery out of his phone at 6:56 am, right?

We have been using Verizon "no coverage" maps etc., to try and zero in on areas within the time frame, he might have been.

IMO, this changes everything.

It doesn't say that SA's phone was in an area that had "no coverage" during the time frame from 6:56 a.m. to 9:38 a.m!

It says:

BINGO!..
I've researched and the only way for it to suddenly quit pinging is for the phone to have died{battery died or was removed} or the SIM card was removed..

So, at 656 he removed battery or SIM card or coincidentally it "just died" at that moment.. and did not "work" again until 938 pinging in Big Spring at mom's..

I am thinking and this is just me thinking as I'm typing about this new way of looking at things.. That maybe just maybe it was not until SA arrived back home at 1804 Chestnut that he made the determination of what he was going to do to Hailey{possibly in his mind not able to pass up such an unbelievable open opportunity with Billie and David for certain not returning any time in the near future}..cuz think about it this was before 7am..He knew DD had gone to spend nite with friend at 9pm the nite before, he knew the kids were out of school, so most likely he determoined DD would not be getting up for any reason whatsoever at such an early morning hour, after most likely staying up most of the nite with his friend playing video games, etc..So, he knows most likely DD, a 16yr oldboy, enjoying Christmas vacation is gonna be sleeping til noon{SA lived with DD as well so he knew his sleeping/awaking habits, ya know}..That means no worry of DD coming home anytime in the very near future..

Then there's Billie..He knew the car arrangements for Billie to and from work for that day..He had the only working vehicle and would be picking Billie up that nite.so he didn;t have to worry about her possibly coming home unexpectedly either..

So, what if when he arrived there at home he realized it was the perfect opportunity that he could not pass up..

Therefor that is when we see the "break in usage"{IMO battery or SIM out}at 656am and SA puts battery or SIm back in the cell when he is safely at his alibi destination{i.e. moms in Big Spring}at 948am..

Wow, this may be beginning to somewhat fit together..just thinking as I'm typing..I'll have to think on this and see what holes I can poke through it, though before I start thinking anything for certain..

 

[sarx]

Suziq, you are quite correct. The SAR thread downstairs has been operating under the interpretation that there was "no coverage" between 6:56 am to 9:38 am.

As per the affidavit reference below, one must assume that SA took the battery out of his phone at 6:56 am, right?

We have been using Verizon "no coverage" maps etc., to try and zero in on areas within the time frame, he might have been.

IMO, this changes everything.

It doesn't say that SA's phone was in an area that had "no coverage" during the time frame from 6:56 a.m. to 9:38 a.m!

It says:

Thanks for this. I'm not assuming that it meant he was necessarily out of coverage, I guess I've been saying it wrong, just that there is a 2 1/2 hour window under that theory to work with.

 

[vjlaw]

Can LE determine if a cell phone is turned off or in a no coverage zone?

I think they can figure it out by where their phones work and don't and comparing it to when SA's quit pinging. Did that make sense?

 

[CONNIEHU]

The number was probably on the phone she left at home??

IIR somewhere BD told son to TEXT MB to have HD come home.

 

[SmoothOperator]

Thanks for this. I'm not assuming that it meant he was necessarily out of coverage, I guess I've been saying it wrong, just that there is a 2 1/2 hour window under that theory to work with.

2 and half hours to do something to Hailey and temporarily "hide her"..arriving at moms at 938{for his alibi}..but that is not taking into consideration that SA had from around 630am-2pm[when Haileys reported gone] or so the following day{the 28th}that is MORE THAN ENOUGH TIME TO DO A HECKUVA ALLOT INCLUDING HIDING AND/OR DISPOSING OF HAILEY..

because remember the day before he walked outta work never to return to.. SO from time Billie went to work early morning 28th til she calls him saying Hailey's missing around 2..HE'S GOT ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD TO DO WHAT EXACTLY HE NEEDS TO DO!

 

[DeepThinker]

does anyone know if they trace a suspect's scent anywhere? For instance, the dogs traced Hailey's scent to a motel....what about SA? Does his scent go to the same motel? KWIM?

 

[sarx]

Possible, but would more than likely have to remove the battery IHHO - he works with military grade things, so isn't sure if the basics are the same in there.

Sorry, I missed it. What military grade things?