Cell Phone Activity Discussion Thread #2

[4Jacy]

Do you have a question about my post?

I believe the cell phones were in the kitchen. Did "intruder" stop for a snack before or after he grabbed the baby? Seriously, how would he know where the phones were?

Being a parent myself, I hate to think they are responsible, but it's the only theory that works for me.

 

[cityslick]

What time did JI get home? Was it about the same time as the the last activity at 0324?

He arrived home at 3:45am according to his story. The public has no way of verifying what time he would of left Starbucks but I'm sure LE has a good idea. This is another reason why I don't think LE is focusing on JI as much. IMO I think they have some sort of way (either via a camera or maybe even another witness at the Starbucks working with him) that verifies that JI was not in the area the phones were pinging because he was at Starbucks.

 

[cityslick]

I believe the cell phones were in the kitchen. Did "intruder" stop for a snack before or after he grabbed the baby? Seriously, how would he know where the phones were?

Being a parent myself, I hate to think they are responsible, but it's the only theory that works for me.

One possible theory and I admit the probability of it is low, is that the intruder breaking in the house never had the intention of abducting BL. The intention was to steal. In that way, a thief is going to grab what he/she sees first. If the phones were out in the open as soon as he was in the house, he/she would grab it, because they are small and easy to carry, plus the parts could sell on the street. The intruder could of been in BL's room at some point (not going to know it's a baby's room right away until he's in the room), BL could have woken and in a panic grabbed the baby.

 

[RANCH]

I believe the cell phones were in the kitchen. Did "intruder" stop for a snack before or after he grabbed the baby? Seriously, how would he know where the phones were?

Being a parent myself, I hate to think they are responsible, but it's the only theory that works for me.

Maybe he had been in the house previously and saw were they keep the phones. Or like I said, they were in plain sight so he saw them and grabbed them.

I'm not a parent and I have no problem with Lisa's parents being responsible for her disappearance. I just haven't seen much evidence to support that theory. JMO.

 

[redheadedgal]

The intruder could of been in BL's room at some point (not going to know it's a baby's room right away until he's in the room), BL could have woken and in a panic grabbed the baby.

so he'd rather grab and carry a baby --which would be very hard to sell on the black market b/c what's he gonna do? put ads on ebay and craig's list? lol-- then grab the actual goods he entered to home to steal? (goods that would have actual "street value")

and what exactly would this "created on the spot kidnapper" do with the baby now that he's instantaneoulsy escalated from petty thief to baby-napper? (which does not happen)... kill her b/c she can identify him to LE?

totally unrealistic imo.

 

[cityslick]

so he'd rather grab and carry a baby --which would be very hard to sell on the black market b/c what's he gonna do? put ads on ebay and craig's list? lol-- then grab the actual goods he entered to home to steal? (goods that would have actual "street value")

and what exactly would this "created on the spot kidnapper" do with the baby now that he's instantaneoulsy escalated from petty thief to baby-napper? (which does not happen)... kill her b/c she can identify him to LE?

totally unrealistic imo.

One possible theory and I admit the probability of it is low, is that the intruder breaking in the house never had the intention of abducting BL. The intention was to steal. In that way, a thief is going to grab what he/she sees first. If the phones were out in the open as soon as he was in the house, he/she would grab it, because they are small and easy to carry, plus the parts could sell on the street. The intruder could of been in BL's room at some point (not going to know it's a baby's room right away until he's in the room), BL could have woken and in a panic grabbed the baby.

Bolding emphasized.

 

[Melon]

BBM

I understand the point that your making. Lets say that DB did make the phone call to MW's phone that night. That would mean that she was trying to contact either MW or someone else in the house. We haven't heard of any connection between DB and anyone of those people. Perhaps LE has found a connection that we don't know about. If that's true then getting rid of the phones doesn't make the connection or the record of the call disappear. Anyway you look at it Debbie doesn't have an alibi. All she can do is claim she was asleep. She has no way to prove it. JMO.

BBM Since there hasn't been any established connection between MW and DB, I have always wondered if that call was a mis-dial. The way some phone numbers are handed out, especially at small stores, it's quite possible that people in the surrounding neighborhood could be a digit or two off. Assuming they have the same provider. I have often wondered how close MWs number is to any number of DBs friends and family.

 

[redheadedgal]

yes-- i read that...

and, as had been said over and over: KISS or Occam's razor usually tells the story of what occurred, not scenarios with such "low probability"

 

[cityslick]

yes-- i read that...

and, as had been said over and over: KISS or Occam's razor usually tells the story of what occurred, not scenarios with such "low probability"

Actually, evidence whether it's circumstantial or direct, tell the story of what occurred. IMO we have very little of either in this case, thus why we have a ton of scenarios as to what happened in the past year.

 

[RANCH]

Actually, evidence whether it's circumstantial or direct, tell the story of what occurred. IMO we have very little of either in this case, thus why we have a ton of scenarios as to what happened in the past year.

Well said City. Your post explains why I'm on the fence in this case.

 

[GoodGurl]

totally agree there is no direct evidence whether she was asleep or not. the phones are simply clues.

I just can't rationalize the scenario that an intruder took phones + baby and attempted to use them for hours no more than 1/3 mile of the house. Those two things don't fit together.

So I go back to DB using the phones herself. I don't really care why, or who. Just the simple fact that she was awake.

 

[hambirg]

BBM Since there hasn't been any established connection between MW and DB, I have always wondered if that call was a mis-dial. The way some phone numbers are handed out, especially at small stores, it's quite possible that people in the surrounding neighborhood could be a digit or two off. Assuming they have the same provider. I have often wondered how close MWs number is to any number of DBs friends and family.

Or maybe she was calling a number she saw on CL. :waitasec:

 

[redheadedgal]

hambirg--

CL? (should i know this? lol)

 

[4Jacy]

hambirg--

CL? (should i know this? lol)

I believe hambirg meant Craig's List.

 

[redheadedgal]

thanks jacy-- i never would've gotten that. here in canada, kijiji is our popular CL lol

 

[Whisperer]

Actually, evidence whether it's circumstantial or direct, tell the story of what occurred. IMO we have very little of either in this case, thus why we have a ton of scenarios as to what happened in the past year.

I only see two scenarios. She was either abducted or she wasn't.

 

[cityslick]

I only see two scenarios. She was either abducted or she wasn't.

True, but there are many scenarios as to the how to either of those.

 

[RANCH]

totally agree there is no direct evidence whether she was asleep or not. the phones are simply clues.

I just can't rationalize the scenario that an intruder took phones + baby and attempted to use them for hours no more than 1/3 mile of the house. Those two things don't fit together.

So I go back to DB using the phones herself. I don't really care why, or who. Just the simple fact that she was awake.

I can see an intruder taking Lisa along with the phones and trying to use one of them to contact someone. For one thing, using the stolen phone means that LE can't trace cell phone activity in the area back to you. And for another, I'm not sure that LE would try and trace the phone pings that quick, so why not use the phone.

As for proving the simple fact that DB was awake at 11:57PM, what does that prove? It either proves that she's lying about when she went to bed, or it proves she was too drunk to remember. Some have said that DB may have called MW by mistake. Well, maybe in a drunken stupor she did and when she realized the mistake she hung up and went to bed. How do you prove which one is right? JMO.

 

[RANCH]

Or maybe she was calling a number she saw on CL. :waitasec:

That's a possibility. But why would she be calling people on Craigs List at midnight to buy things when she couldn't even pay her phone bill?

 

[Whisperer]

Which phone was it that was allegedly used to call MW? How many phones do they have? JI had a working phone with him. That makes four, at least. I can't imagine DB EVER being w/o a working phone. That is why she borrowed her grandpa's (just in case).

Exactly what was MW selling on Craigslist? Did we ever find out? I bet we have not been told the whole/real story about what was going on with that phone line. She started out claiming six or seven different people use that phone. Do we know who they are? Of course, if any of them knew anything, they would claim they have no idea, particularly if drugs are involved.

...but most of all, why hadn't DB kept a phone with her in the bdrm. That makes no sense. Of course, none of her story does.