katshep
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 96
Quote:
Responding to your arguments sequentially:
1.
No, the spoofer's true phone number would not show up on the spoofer's bill. If the spoofer used one of the Bradwin's phone it would.
The spoofer does not have a phone bill. The spoofer purchases a prepaid phone and prepaid minutes for cash-- potentially untraceable.
Just to be clear, one can spoof from one's own phone and without all the James Bond drama. You can do it at WalMart. No bills. No questions asked. The call shows up on the spoofed phone's bill and counts against the spoofed phone owner's minutes and the spoofed number is reflected on the account of the person who received the call. There is no record for the spoofer unless LE can assiduously figure out the spoofing and trace to a specific spoofing company and subpoena records. BTW,one of the major targets of spoofers is 911. It doesn't matter whether or not the spoofer knows the phones are suspended, the spoofer just uses a phone number to make a call to MW or whoever has her phone for whatever reason--maybe so that when the call is traced, the spoofer's number is not id'd. I don't know what the framing aspect is, but I do know that spoofing conceals who made the call on caller id and on the bill and buys time.
2. We have no evidence that the phone pinged from inside the house, outside the house or down the street. DB says she was told by LE that one of the phones pinged. If it was a spoof call using one of the Irwin numbers, it may have caused the ping. As long as the battery is in the phone, it pings. One has to turn off the phone and pull out the battery to deactivate the GPS.
3. That was my fast typing. Apologies. MW did not say that the phones were deactivated, DB did. Probably the wrong terminology by DB. Phone companies do not "deactivate" the phone for nonpayment without an initial window of suspension of phone service which is why DB was apparently reprogramming her phones. "Deactivation" occurs when the entire phone account is closed and terminated with loss of phone number. In contrast, during account suspension the number and the account still exist. Spoofing does work on suspended accounts because the suspended account still has a phone number. So long as the spoofed party has the same number, they continue to be spoofed. Suspension of the account does not affect spoofing. If a person who is spoofed, terminates his account and gives up his phone number, the spoofing usually stops unless the spoofer gets wind of the new number..
4. No, it will not show as the spoofer's actual number on the bill. It shows as the spoofed number. If it did show up on the bill as from the spoofer's actual phone number, this would not be the enormous identity theft problem that it is. You should learn more about it. It really is nefarious and hard to investigate and prosecute.
It was made on JI or DB's phone, it will or has shown up on their bill as an outgoing call.
5, As to the framing, I don't know... that was not my theory. What I do know is that if spoofing is involved, that person is obstructing and delaying the disclosure of their identity from whomever might trace the call to MW.
6. I also think they will subpoena MW's phone bill or have her produce them voluntarily, if she hasn't already produced them.
I agree there 
P
Last edited by katshep; Today at 09:12 PM. Reason: clarity
