Cell Phone Activity Discussion Thread #2

[Sparklin]

No... Picerno told Megyn Kelly that the defense lawyers could not subpoena DB and JI's phone records because no one has been arrested yet. He's only looked at "what the FBI has shown them".

Why hasn't DB and JI gotten their own phone records to show their own attorneys?

[ame]http://video.foxnews.com/v/1270739314001/exclusive-cell-phone-records-released-of-irwin-family/[/ame]

They have the regular phone records. They could not subpoena in-depth info that does not appear on their regular phone records.

MW's # did not appear on the regular records, but it could be shown as having been dialed on more in-depth reports that FBI has.

That is MY take on the phone records.

 

[Littleone48]

Here is a link with a bit of information. Not sure how much it helps.

http://www.ehow.com/how_6890639_cell-phone-transcripts.html

 

[katydid23]

Your phone company is not going to do any favor for you if you have not paid them IMO. Mine was also happening in real time, as in the phone was being used as I spoke to them about it being lost/stolen which we then concluded that mine was in fact stolen and not just lost.

I had a similar experience. My daughter's Blackberry went missing at a party on a friday night. She thought it had been taken out of her purse because some $ was missing as well.

Saturday we went to Sprint and they instantly read to us the most recent texts and calls that had been made. They had the word for word texts instantly before them on the computer. They gave us access to that info just because we wondered if the phone was stolen and being used. I imagine if I had a missing child they would do the same thing.

 

[Abby Normal]

http://kansascitypi.blogspot.com/2011/11/baby-lisa-irwin-investigation-megan.html



So...Dane says he was trying to get his phone hooked up THAT night, but MW is disputing that. Why? It's very possible that he took his moms advice and decided to deal with it on his own no? I knew it wouldn't be long before we got a rebuttal from MW

So MW had no idea who had her phone, barely knew this "guy" who happened by, had to find out from her roommates who had her phone that night bc she was downstairs... but now he had her phone more than her. It was a totally different night that he had some other observable conversation in front of MW. She knows for a fact he didn't talk about getting his phone turned on that night. :waitasec: from downstairs, where she didn't even know he had it :waitasec:
She may be innocent, but I can't follow this woman's story lines.

 

[natsound]

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1270739314001/exclusive-cell-phone-records-released-of-irwin-family/

They have the regular phone records. They could not subpoena in-depth info that does not appear on their regular phone records.

MW's # did not appear on the regular records, but it could be shown as having been dialed on more in-depth reports that FBI has.

That is MY take on the phone records.

I hope we all realize what is going on here.

1. Megyn Kelly says, in the above interview, "we have in hand the phone records". That's false.. Fox News did not have the phone records in hand. They're going off what Bill Stanton claims to have seen on the phone records. Bill doesn't even have them.

2. Bill speaks of red-lined phones, which can't make outgoing calls. Can they take incoming calls? Picerno says JI's call to DB on the evening of October 3 was routed to Verizon. Why didn't that call go through to Deb?

3. Bill says there's a number of reasons why that 11:57 call "MAY" not show up on the phone records. Either he doesn't know, or he's using semantics. He says he's seen the records. Either the call is there, or it's not. Be straight with us, Bill.

4. Picerno contradicts this conversation when he says they DON'T have the phone records, and they're going off of what the FBI has shown them.

5. Did the FBI really show the family's attorneys anything, and why would they?

 

[In da Middle]

I hope we all realize what is going on here.

1. Megyn Kelly says, in the above interview, "we have in hand the phone records". That's false.. Fox News did not have the phone records in hand. They're going off what Bill Stanton claims to have seen on the phone records. Bill doesn't even have them.

2. Bill speaks of red-lined phones, which can't make outgoing calls. Can they take incoming calls? Picerno says JI's call to DB on the evening of October 3 was routed to Verizon. Why didn't that call go through to Deb?

3. Bill says there's a number of reasons why that 11:57 call "MAY" not show up on the phone records. Either he doesn't know, or he's using semantics. He says he's seen the records. Either the call is there, or it's not. Be straight with us, Bill.

4. Picerno contradicts this conversation when he says they DON'T have the phone records, and they're going off of what the FBI has shown them.

5. Did the FBI really show the family's attorneys anything, and why would they?

1.Megyn Kelly has aired MANY false reports! So many that I dont even pretend to take what she says as fact.
2. The call may have rang on her end, but if she was outside and did not hear it, the phone would then default to the not able to take calls info from the phone co. It would not have let them leave a voicemail. This info would not show up on basic phone records.
3.I don't think BS has any real info to offer either. He is getting all of his info from others so I vote doesn't know. He has only seen the basic phone records if he has seen anything.
4&5. I believe Picerno on this because why outright lie when it could easily be contradicted? He says they only shared a powerpoint presentation with some of the ping info. He isnt going around spouting he has all of the records and he isn't going around spouting that the ping info is miles and miles away like he could if he was lieing about it.

 

[cityslick]

I hope we all realize what is going on here.

1. Megyn Kelly says, in the above interview, "we have in hand the phone records". That's false.. Fox News did not have the phone records in hand. They're going off what Bill Stanton claims to have seen on the phone records. Bill doesn't even have them.

2. Bill speaks of red-lined phones, which can't make outgoing calls. Can they take incoming calls? Picerno says JI's call to DB on the evening of October 3 was routed to Verizon. Why didn't that call go through to Deb?

3. Bill says there's a number of reasons why that 11:57 call "MAY" not show up on the phone records. Either he doesn't know, or he's using semantics. He says he's seen the records. Either the call is there, or it's not. Be straight with us, Bill.

4. Picerno contradicts this conversation when he says they DON'T have the phone records, and they're going off of what the FBI has shown them.

5. Did the FBI really show the family's attorneys anything, and why would they?

BBM

I don't know the true answer to this, but IMO it would be incredibly bold to specifically call a press conference to state that they spoke to FBI about all this as fact. It's not like this info was slipped out during a news interview. He was pretty detailed as to what they were told.

 

[DeAnn]

For the record.....John Picerno said Verizon was the provider in question with DB's phone.

Kelsey Smith's family says they were delayed in finding their daughter's body because Verizon refused to cooperate with authorities. Verizon didn't release the info for three days. When they finally did, her body was found within 45 minutes.

Thus the fight in Kansas and Missouri (she was kidnapped from Kansas Target parking lot, killed in Missouri) to pass Kelsey's Law.

Same phone company so Sprint may do one thing. What Verizon does is what matters here.

 

[Kamille]

For the record.....John Picerno said Verizon was the provider in question with DB's phone.

Kelsey Smith's family says they were delayed in finding their daughter's body because Verizon refused to cooperate with authorities. Verizon didn't release the info for three days. When they finally did, her body was found within 45 minutes.

Thus the fight in Kansas and Missouri (she was kidnapped from Kansas Target parking lot, killed in Missouri) to pass Kelsey's Law.

Same phone company so Sprint may do one thing. What Verizon does is what matters here.

And they may have changed their policy in regards to what information they will give to LE without a supeona because of that case. LE supposedly had MW's number by 8:30 in the morning. They likely didn't get it with a supeona.

MOO

 

[DeAnn]

And they may have changed their policy in regards to what information they will give to LE without a supeona because of that case. LE supposedly had MW's number by 8:30 in the morning. They likely didn't get it with a supeona.

MOO

It's all about the telephone company and the employee(s) that LE deals with at said company and the employees that family deals with.

I know someone who was murdered and their Iphone stolen. AT&T could have required a court order but chose to cooperate with LE quickly and provide information on last number dialed and text messages etc. That allowed LE to identify the killer within 24-48 hours. I believe AT&T helped supply vital information within five hours of the body being discovered without a court order and for that I was and am very grateful. Facebook, however, wasn't as helpful in a voluntary capacity when it came to the killer using the phone and Facebook being accessed. They declined, as I understand it, to voluntarily provide the info without a court order to LE, citing company policies. Which, of course, is pretty frustrating when someone has been murdered and you want to catch the killer quickly.

As far as Natsounds point....Kelsey Smith's parents were devastated. They desperately wanted the phone records. Kelsey's father had been a police officer. And for three agonizing days they did not know what happened to their beautiful daughter because their cell phone provider, Verizon, refused to give them or LE the vital records. There is no proof that DB has refused to get important records from Verizon. And there is plenty of proof that she may not be entitled to said records beyond what's on a normal bill. Verizon may have quickly provided the information to the FBI or they may have done so with a court order. We simply don't know at this point.

 

[tlcya]

I have only one question.

Does this Dane person know/associate with Tanko/Jersey? If so - what sort of relationship do they have?

 

[justamommy]

If the post anybody is referring to is about a son's phone, then it was not me. My experience was with my own phone. Otherwise, I totally agree with you!

I think they are referring to me. I posted about having my daughter's phone restricted during school/late night hours.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7367961&postcount=330"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Irwin Attorney: ‘Jersey’ Bragged About Kidnapping Lisa Irwin[/ame]

Is this what you are referring to?

 

[justamommy]

This is all so convenient. Phones missing on the night a baby goes missing, two voicemail checks and a mysterious call that didn't connect which lasted 50 seconds, unknown people on both ends of the phone, and even though mom is devastated that her baby is missing, she just can't get those phone records for herself or for the defense attorneys. A court order might be needed? I find that hard to believe in the case of two parents searching for their stolen baby. But in the chance that a court order is needed, is that just too much trouble for these parents? Do they need another day of rest? Where is that crucial court order to find out more about that key 50 second call attempt?

I would guess the phone company figures... We've already shared this info w/ FBI/LE; we don't need to share it w/ anyone else, period.:twocents:

 

[justamommy]

Absolutely no problem here! Confusion happens! Just trying to clarify before it became fact that I had an unknown son!

What are his initials? :lol:

 

[Karmaa]

1.Megyn Kelly has aired MANY false reports! So many that I dont even pretend to take what she says as fact.
2. The call may have rang on her end, but if she was outside and did not hear it, the phone would then default to the not able to take calls info from the phone co. It would not have let them leave a voicemail. This info would not show up on basic phone records.
3.I don't think BS has any real info to offer either. He is getting all of his info from others so I vote doesn't know. He has only seen the basic phone records if he has seen anything.
4&5. I believe Picerno on this because why outright lie when it could easily be contradicted? He says they only shared a powerpoint presentation with some of the ping info. He isnt going around spouting he has all of the records and he isn't going around spouting that the ping info is miles and miles away like he could if he was lieing about it.

I don't have any faith in MK anymore (sad to say) but I don't know that she was lying about having the records. As we have seen in this thread the word "records" refers to at least three different things. She may have been given the easily obtained "numbers called" records. I actually pay a few dollars extra and get those numbers listed on my bill each month, so surely THOSE are easily available and any phone owner should be able to get that list. And THAT list was to prove to MK that DB/JI's phones had never dialed MW's number before. (ie: evidence that DB/JI did not KNOW MK.)

So, if MK did not have the subpoena-only records, or the ping records, she still could have had "the records" - and not been lying.

 

[serveitup]

If you are taking abut when I said my phone was stolen, I could not see the calls on the phone records, AT&T told me calls were showing up. My actual bill showed nothing after the time I reported it lost/stolen.

That sounds right. You can only see what you are charged for. If the service is disrupted there will be a record at the phone company as attempted call will go to an automate message but it won't be on your copy.

 

[NotSoSherlock]

According to what the parent's legal team has told us, as well as what we can perhaps imply from the various search locations, the phone pings where coming from the wooded area(s) to the west, southwest and/or south of the JI/DB home.

I don't know how many of you have ever been hiking at night. I have. Even with a flashlight it isn't as easy as you might think. Just staying on a well-worn path can be a trick--especially if you aren't familiar with the trail.

Of course these woods are in the city so it wouldn't be pitch black. You would have the city lights and the moonlight to help. The moon was at about half-full that night. I'm not sure if it was overcast or clear.

My thoughts are that if a person went into those woods in the middle of the night then they must have been familiar with them. Either that or they didn't go very deep into the woods and stayed on the outskirts.

I wonder if DB was familiar with those woods? Or Jersey?

All JMO.

 

[tink92]

According to what the parent's legal team has told us, as well as what we can perhaps imply from the various search locations, the phone pings where coming from the wooded area(s) to the west, southwest and/or south of the JI/DB home.

I don't know how many of you have ever been hiking at night. I have. Even with a flashlight it isn't as easy as you might think. Just staying on a well-worn path can be a trick--especially if you aren't familiar with the trail.

Of course these woods are in the city so it wouldn't be pitch black. You would have the city lights and the moonlight to help. The moon was at about half-full that night. I'm not sure if it was overcast or clear.

My thoughts are that if a person went into those woods in the middle of the night then they must have been familiar with them. Either that or they didn't go very deep into the woods and stayed on the outskirts.

I wonder if DB was familiar with those woods? Or Jersey?

All JMO.

It makes sense that Jersey would be a lot more familiar with those woods than DB. DB is a busy, overweight mom to 3 little ones...I can't see her ever deciding to go for a hike through those woods.

Jersey is a shifty, fit, drifter withan extensive rap sheet who seems to like
roaming and often has nowhere to lay his head at night.

I can imagine he would be familiar with those woods.

All IMO and all that jazz!:crazy:

 

[NotSoSherlock]

It makes sense that Jersey would be a lot more familiar with those woods than DB. DB is a busy, overweight mom to 3 little ones...I can't see her ever deciding to go for a hike through those woods.

Jersey is a shifty, fit, drifter withan extensive rap sheet who seems to like
roaming and often has nowhere to lay his head at night.

I can imagine he would be familiar with those woods.

All IMO and all that jazz!:crazy:

It's hard say say for sure. Who knows? Maybe DB spent a lot of time back in those woods.

But what would she be doing back there that night? The first thing that comes to mind is: Disposing of a body. LE has gone over those woods with a fine-toothed comb and haven't found a body or (presumably) any cell phones.

If you have ever been backpacking or camping and had to set up camp at night you know how tricky that can be. The scene the next morning in broad daylight can be comical.

A person disposing of a body at night would face a similar situation. No matter how good the scene looks at night under the light of a flashlight, it will be fairly obvious in broad daylight.

I just don't see how DB or anyone else could dispose of a body in those woods at night and LE not find it. Even during normal daylight hours it would be tough. A really deep hole would need to be dug and then all traces of that hole would need to be eradicated.

I'm convinced there is no body in those woods. If there truly isn't then what would DB be doing back there that night?

ETA: All this is JMO.

 

[justamommy]

It's hard say say for sure. Who knows? Maybe DB spent a lot of time back in those woods.

But what would she be doing back there that night? The first thing that comes to mind is: Disposing of a body. LE has gone over those woods with a fine-toothed comb and haven't found a body or (presumably) any cell phones.

If you have ever been backpacking or camping and had to set up camp at night you know how tricky that can be. The scene the next morning in broad daylight can be comical.

A person disposing of a body at night would face a similar situation. No matter how good the scene looks at night under the light of a flashlight, it will be fairly obvious in broad daylight.

I just don't see how DB or anyone else could dispose of a body in those woods at night and LE not find it. Even during normal daylight hours it would be tough. A really deep hole would need to be dug and then all traces of that hole would need to be eradicated.

I'm convinced there is no body in those woods. If there truly isn't then what would DB be doing back there that night?

ETA: All this is JMO.

I agree with all...

To add, I don't think there is a body there because I think the HRDs would have hit again, if not found it. The HRD hit in the home is the only thing that leaves me :fence:. I would think by now the lab results would be in. If they are in and proved anything then why no arrests. That being the case, I have a strong feeling Lisa is still alive. I know alot of posters don't believe that to be true, but I just have a strong feeling about it.:twocents: