1007 users online (127 members and 880 guests)  


The Killing Season - Websleuths

Websleuths News


Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 66
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,079

    Why did LE seize BD's & SA's phones?

    LE seized Billie's and Shawn's cell phones early in the investigation, prior to Billie's appearance on Nancy Grace on 1/4/2011. As of Billie's 1/20/2011 appearance on Nancy Grace, their cell phones had not been returned. I do not believe LE seized the phones simply to look at the call logs. I have opinions as to why having the cell phones is important to LE and wonder what others think.


    From 1/4/2011 Nancy Grace Transcript (BBM)


    GRACE: I want to go back to Billie Dunn. I understand police have seized yours and your boyfriend`s cell phones. Why?

    BILLIE DUNN: Yes. They`re taking them to check out all the calls that were made on Monday. Hailey did have my cell phone at home and access to it. That would have been the cell phone she was on. She didn`t use Shawn`s cell phone, but they`re checking them both, getting the records off of both of those. And hopefully, we`re going to have answers from the cell phones tonight.

    GRACE: OK. So this has nothing to do with you being under any kind of suspicion at all. This has to do with the fact that your little girl and you shared a cell phone, and they`re trying to figure out who she was calling and who was calling her, correct?

    BILLIE DUNN: Correct. I left the cell phone at home while I was at work, for the kids.

    GRACE: OK. What about your boyfriend? Why do they have his cell phone?

    BILLIE DUNN: They have his cell phone, too. It was around probably just for 15 minutes, and she didn`t use it but they`re looking at his, also.

    GRACE: I want to go to Ben Levitan, telecommunications expert, joining us out of Raleigh. Ben, these phones were disposable phones. What does that mean? Will police be able to track them?

    BEN LEVITAN, TELECOMMUNICATIONS EXPERT (via telephone): It doesn`t matter, Nancy. A prepaid phone, or like you call it, a disposable phone, is exactly the same as any other phone. It can be traced. It can be wiretapped. It makes no sense for the police to take the phones away. All the information they need is available from the phone companies, and that information for every person involved in this should be grabbed right now.
    My opinions only, with respect to all those whose opinions differ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    6,681
    Good question. Maybe they wanted to give them one with bugs in them.But I see they can wire tap so I cant figure that out either why they kept them.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    6,681
    http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/...lice-searches/
    The Fifth Circuit upheld the trial court’s decision that even though the cell phone had been issued by an employer, Finley nonetheless maintained a property interest in the phone because he had a right to exclude others from using it, he had exhibited a subjective expectation of privacy in it, and took normal precautions to maintain his privacy in it.

    Having found that Finley had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the cell phone, the Fifth Circuit turned its attention to whether the search of the phone and seizure of the text messages was proper “incident to a lawful arrest.” [/B]Citing United States v. Robinson, the Fifth Circuit said it is well-settled law that “police officers are not constrained to search only for weapons or instruments of escape on the arrestee’s person; they may also, without any additional justification, look for evidence on the arrestee’s person in order to preserve it for use at trial .. The permissible scope of a search incident to a lawful arrest extends to containers found on the arrestee’s person.”

    Relying upon United States v. Walter, Finley argued that while the seizure of his cell phone from his pocket was lawful, the police had no authority to examine its contents because it was analogous to a closed container. The Fifth Circuit rejected the Walter analogy “because in that case no exception to the warrant requirement applied … whereas here no warrant was required since the search was conducted pursuant to a valid custodial arrest … Special Agent Cook was therefore permitted to search Finley’s cell phone pursuant to his arrest.” The appeals court added: “The fact that the search took place after the police transported Finley to Brown’s residence does not alter our conclusion … In general, as long as the administrative processes incident to the arrest and custody have not been completed, a search of effects seized from the defendant’s person is still incident to the defendant’s arrest. Although the police had moved Finley, the search was still substantially contemporaneous with his arrest and was therefore permissible.”
    Last edited by concernedmother; 02-14-2011 at 09:31 PM. Reason: wrong link

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    36,894
    In some states, LE can keep items for up to 90 days without naming anyone a suspect or charging anyone. Maybe they just kept the phones because they can?

    I really can't figure out why they would need the actual phones. Fingerprints are not going to mean much, or DNA, with everyone living together.
    Just my opinion, of course.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    280
    I wonder how one would determine if tracking/spying software is or has been on the phone at any time in the past? Or, maybe to see if someone NOT on their radar may call.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    6,681
    The phone was seized in the above case for the text messages. At least thats the way I understood it.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,992
    Possibly there were voice mails on them, that LE want to preserve.
    Text messages will be on the phone records.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    6,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Jo in Calif View Post
    Possibly there were voice mails on them, that LE want to preserve.
    Text messages will be on the phone records.
    Bingo. That just may be it.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    9
    IMOP E=yllek;6126689]LE seized Billie's and Shawn's cell phones early in the investigation, prior to Billie's appearance on Nancy Grace on 1/4/2011. As of Billie's 1/20/2011 appearance on Nancy Grace, their cell phones had not been returned. I do not believe LE seized the phones simply to look at the call logs. I have opinions as to why having the cell phones is important to LE and wonder what others think.


    From 1/4/2011 Nancy Grace Transcript (BBM)


    GRACE: I want to go back to Billie Dunn. I understand police have seized yours and your boyfriend`s cell phones. Why?

    BILLIE DUNN: Yes. They`re taking them to check out all the calls that were made on Monday. Hailey did have my cell phone at home and access to it. That would have been the cell phone she was on. She didn`t use Shawn`s cell phone, but they`re checking them both, getting the records off of both of those. And hopefully, we`re going to have answers from the cell phones tonight.

    GRACE: OK. So this has nothing to do with you being under any kind of suspicion at all. This has to do with the fact that your little girl and you shared a cell phone, and they`re trying to figure out who she was calling and who was calling her, correct?

    BILLIE DUNN: Correct. I left the cell phone at home while I was at work, for the kids.

    GRACE: OK. What about your boyfriend? Why do they have his cell phone?

    BILLIE DUNN: They have his cell phone, too. It was around probably just for 15 minutes, and she didn`t use it but they`re looking at his, also.

    GRACE: I want to go to Ben Levitan, telecommunications expert, joining us out of Raleigh. Ben, these phones were disposable phones. What does that mean? Will police be able to track them?

    BEN LEVITAN, TELECOMMUNICATIONS EXPERT (via telephone): It doesn`t matter, Nancy. A prepaid phone, or like you call it, a disposable phone, is exactly the same as any other phone. It can be traced. It can be wiretapped. It makes no sense for the police to take the phones away. All the information they need is available from the phone companies, and that information for every person involved in this should be grabbed right now.[/QUOTE]

    I think LE like me is wondering why BD and SA aren't screeming from the mountian top about the 2:15 tx to MB. My take on that is they(BD,SA) don't want LE digging to deep into who sent the tx to MB. BD didn't mention it in the presser or on NG to my knowledge,SA in the interview didn't either. Why? I missed it in my research.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,079
    Quote Originally Posted by concernedmother View Post
    Good question. Maybe they wanted to give them one with bugs in them.But I see they can wire tap so I cant figure that out either why they kept them.
    I agree; if they just wanted to tap/hear their conversations, they could have tapped their existing phones and given them back. Keeping them attached to their existing phone numbers would have been more effective if they just wanted to listen in on their conversations with each other and their usual contacts (if LE trusted them not to tip off callers that the phones might be tapped, which I don't think they did). However, I think LE would have needed a warrant to tap their phones without their consent.

    I wonder if LE was able to convince them to give up their cell phones voluntarily because both of their cell phones were in the home with Hailey before she went missing. If so, Billie and Shawn probably thought LE would check outgoing calls/texts possibly made by Hailey and then give the phones back, which wasn't the case. Or, maybe LE took the phones after Shawn started deleting calls in front of them. Without either of them being a POI or suspect at the time, I don't know if LE could have just seized the phones against their wishes? It's very curious to me...

    I suspect LE took the phones because they wanted to compare their call logs against phone records (what incoming/outgoing calls did they delete from their phones) and to monitor and control incoming calls for a host of reasons. Interested in hearing if others come up with the same reasons.
    My opinions only, with respect to all those whose opinions differ


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,264
    I think it was for the voice mails. Both BD and SA had their phones taken, which seems to indicate collusion.

    IMO

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    6,681

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,079
    Quote Originally Posted by EnvoyDriver61 View Post
    I wonder how one would determine if tracking/spying software is or has been on the phone at any time in the past? Or, maybe to see if someone NOT on their radar may call.
    BBM

    That's one of my possible reasons for them taking the phones too. I believe LE seriously considered that Hailey may have been stashed by BD and/or SA and are closely monitoring those phones. If LE suspected it may be some kind of game they were playing, LE might not want them to be able to answer themselves... Or, if they thought Hailey had run away, perhaps LE wanted to be the first point of contact for Hailey or anyone that might be holding her.

    I don't believe for a second that LE isn't all over those phones, as we were told by Billie's friend. They kept them for good reasons.

    I also think that LE gave Shawn his phone back after interrogating him about phone calls suspecting that he might delete some. I think it was a good strategic move. Once they had his phone, they could compare the phone records to the outgoing call log on his phone and determine what calls he deleted.

    Imo, Billie is very concerned about not having that phone (though I'm sure LE assured her that they would be monitoring it in case Hailey called). Her message for Hailey not to call her cell phone on 1/20 Nancy Grace is significant to me. Was she talking to Hailey or somebody else? She repeats twice "because I don't have my phone" during that interview. Maybe she's concerned about people calling her number wanting to buy something, maybe her concern ties more directly into Hailey's disappearance.
    My opinions only, with respect to all those whose opinions differ

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    STEELER COUNTRY!
    Posts
    27,137
    traces of blood???
    something that should not be on a phone?
    secial dirt if dropped?
    trace evidence?
    Kyron, HALEIGH, ADJI & Gabriel NEEDS PRAYERS NOW TO FIND THEM!. Zahra & Jonathan in heaven
    Justice for Hailey!!!!
    No Justice for Caylee Marie..........

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    36,894
    Or perhaps to have their phonebook of contacts...
    and to see who tries to call them.

    I think Billie's friend said she or someone else provided Billie with a phone when Le took hers, so if that is true, LE did not give her one to use.
    Just my opinion, of course.

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Police seize dog after baby killed in Wales
    By zwiebel in forum Up to the Minute
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 04-05-2014, 08:32 PM
  2. Police Seize Evidence From Teachers Home.
    By Alta in forum Crimes-Spotlight on Children
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-31-2005, 02:13 PM

Tags for this Thread