NV NV - Steven T. Koecher, 30, Henderson, 13 Dec 2009 - #20

[Fairy1]

I guess just come out and say it? people do take things personally sometimes but they will get over it. the only times I get into trouble are when I have a "tone" to my post or people perceive that I do. I am working on sounding more neutral and I think it is working lol. also some things seem like they would be easy to look up but with 20 threads and thousands and thousands of posts and it is soooo easy to miss something or take a long time to catch up. I think when I first started posting I just felt like I was expected to know everything already and I still don't! trust me, your information *is* helpful, esp the timeline etc but it can be hard at first when you have questions. also sometimes people have read bits of info given out but they still question how thoroughly something was checked, or they just see it differently?? like phone records etc being checked, stuff can always be missed so even though I know they were checked, I find it hard to believe there are not some major clues there.

I truly believe there are major clues in the phone records. Perhaps if some folks (not here!) would expand their definition of "out of the ordinary," it would become more evident??? Looking for a stranger with ties to SCA may be a bit short-sighted, I'm thinking.

BBM. It seems counter-intuitive right? But there dont seem to be any major clues whatsoever. I am also a fan of the "bat phone" theory IE disposable cell phone where Steven's actual plans and calls might have been communicated.

Now, we did find out he used the library computers, which *appear* not to have been checked for his activity. Forgive the astericks-it is because I am not 100% sure

He did use the library computers and no, they were never checked. Personally, I assume if there was an electronic trail, that's where it would be.

 

[JaneDoe91]

The same thing I gave up trying to interest anyone in, after trying for months: the incoming call patterns after the car was parked through Dec 16th.

A couple of random calls.
No family calls.
No calls from church "friends"
But two people (boss and landlord) called incessantly, with one calling 9 times.

OMG...I didn't even know about the phone call activity. It seems to me that on it's own, it might not be significant, but we're talking about a man who disappeared. Something like that takes on a whole new context, doesn't it? But I do have one thing to add...in addition to being interested in who was calling after SK went missing, I would also be very interested in who STOPPED calling after that date. I wonder if this was something ever persued by LE. It had to be, right?

 

[SouthWestHiker]

I know!
That happens to me a lot here. It happens to everyone.
Thanks for mentioning it.
We're here to help find Steven, and that's pretty important.

Do we take everything as a purposeful insult, or consider that someone's trying to add information to the mix?

How would you suggest handling a post that has two pieces of false information in it, that could easily have been checked before posting?

If it's challenged, the person gets angry and believes they were attacked.
If it's not challenged, the other readers will believe it.
(snipped)

there is a major difference between challenging a statement and shutting it down.

Not everybody has time to read 20 threads of more than 20 pages each or go through your timeline everytime they have a thought about Steven... and if anybody wants to revisit the road trips or phone pings or certain elements of the timeline, they should be able to do it without getting a "we've been over this before."

If all information and all clues had been uncovered and perfectly analyzed, Steven would have been found already.

This is a discussion board and everybody should be able to discuss any aspect of the case and revisit any part of it (within TOS obviously) regardless if it was discussed previously.

New eyes may bring something new and should be encouraged to participate.

 

[laytonian]

BBM. It seems counter-intuitive right? But there dont seem to be any major clues whatsoever. I am also a fan of the "bat phone" theory IE disposable cell phone where Steven's actual plans and calls might have been communicated.

Now, we did find out he used the library computers, which *appear* not to have been checked for his activity. Forgive the astericks-it is because I am not 100% sure

You're right.

According to the library system, they don't keep records of the sites visited by their users (wifi or computers themselves).

Of course, we know that the information should be available if the entire computer system at the library was shut down and everything forensically examined. But that ain't gonna happen (darnit)

 

[believe09]

Seems to make sense Jane!

 

[believe09]

there is a major difference between challenging a statement and shutting it down.

Not everybody has time to read 20 threads of more than 20 pages each or go through your timeline everytime they have a thought about Steven... and if anybody wants to revisit the road trips or phone pings or certain elements of the timeline, they should be able to do it without getting a "we've been over this before."

If all information and all clues had been uncovered and perfectly analyzed, Steven would have been found already.

This is a discussion board and everybody should be able to discuss any aspect of the case and revisit any part of it (within TOS obviously) regardless if it was discussed previously.

New eyes may bring something new and should be encouraged to participate.

So now that we have the guidelines, what is your gut at this point? I think I have made my belief clear. I know there are some who dont feel they have enough information.

 

[laytonian]

there is a major difference between challenging a statement and shutting it down.

Not everybody has time to read 20 threads of more than 20 pages each or go through your timeline everytime they have a thought about Steven... and if anybody wants to revisit the road trips or phone pings or certain elements of the timeline, they should be able to do it without getting a "we've been over this before."

If all information and all clues had been uncovered and perfectly analyzed, Steven would have been found already.

This is a discussion board and everybody should be able to discuss any aspect of the case and revisit any part of it (within TOS obviously) regardless if it was discussed previously.

New eyes may bring something new and should be encouraged to participate.

I think you're right.

New eyes, and a completely fresh start.

 

[hollyblue]

For the newbies. I will post a link to SK's FB that was set up to help find him, but please remember we cannot cut and paste and bring to WS. WS doesn't consider information on FB as fact unless it is also stated in the MSM. You can give a date and time and initials of person making the post. Anything from it can be discussed tho.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=225335012614#!/group.php?gid=225335012614&v=wall

 

[Fairy1]

I have no problem being challenged. I do have a problem with disrespectful and insulting comments that are specifically meant to bait other posters. The fact that there are 20 threads should make it pretty clear we haven't been sitting around twiddling our thumbs for a year and a half. A lot of folks have been dedicated to finding Steven. The fact that it hasn't happened yet becomes more frustrating with each passing day.

But as Steven's Mom told me at the search last April, "we have to find the 100 things it isn't before we can find the one that it is."

 

[hollyblue]

You're right.

According to the library system, they don't keep records of the sites visited by their users (wifi or computers themselves).

Of course, we know that the information should be available if the entire computer system at the library was shut down and everything forensically examined. But that ain't gonna happen (darnit)

They might have had software to "see" a person's activity and could download without shutting down. Especially if the computer he was using was one of theirs and was logged as the one he had been using.

I worked for a company who had this software and have used computers at libraries where they log which computer you were assigned.

Just sayin.....

 

[Fairy1]

They might have had software to "see" a person's activity and could download without shutting down. Especially if the computer he was using was one of theirs and was logged as the one he had been using.

I worked for a company who had this software and have used computers at libraries where they log which computer you were assigned.

Just sayin.....

I'm pretty sure that ship has sailed. But if you feel strongly about it, you should alert LE or the PI and inform them about the software to which you refer.

I imagine it would require a search warrant???

 

[Fairy1]

there is a major difference between challenging a statement and shutting it down.

Not everybody has time to read 20 threads of more than 20 pages each or go through your timeline everytime they have a thought about Steven... and if anybody wants to revisit the road trips or phone pings or certain elements of the timeline, they should be able to do it without getting a "we've been over this before."

If all information and all clues had been uncovered and perfectly analyzed, Steven would have been found already.

This is a discussion board and everybody should be able to discuss any aspect of the case and revisit any part of it (within TOS obviously) regardless if it was discussed previously.

New eyes may bring something new and should be encouraged to participate.

Yes, but we are not privy to all information nor are we in a position to analyze it. All we can do is work with what we have.

If you have something NEW, I would love to hear it. New - that we can actually work. You're in Vegas, I'm in Vegas....find a direction for us to go and I'm there!

 

[Lady LEO]

Yes, but we are not privy to all information nor are we in a position to analyze it. All we can do is work with what we have.

If you have something NEW, I would love to hear it. New - that we can actually work. You're in Vegas, I'm in Vegas....find a direction for us to go and I'm there!

What we have isn't new. If users are only going to entertain something NEW, then it would probably present itself as a big break in the case that would hit the news before it would hit the posts here.

So, unless we recognize the truth of what you said about "all we can do is work with what we have" we are going to be working old theories. That isn't a bad thing, though.

Like reading a good book for the second time or watching a good movie again, new things will stand out that were missed the first time around. The original material hasn't changed but the viewer's perspective and approach to it has. The mind also has a chance to take in different and new details the second time because it isn't devoting so much energy into taking in the totality of what is being presented and can then start to notice some of the finer details and nuances.

 

[Lady LEO]

They might have had software to "see" a person's activity and could download without shutting down. Especially if the computer he was using was one of theirs and was logged as the one he had been using.

I worked for a company who had this software and have used computers at libraries where they log which computer you were assigned.

Just sayin.....

The technology certainly exists. Every library that I've been to require that you use your library card to be able to use their computers, so it wouldn't be much of a challenge to trace a specific user's activities.

I'm guessing that all of the library computers in that city or county would all be linked by the same server which would make the process very easy. The only hitch is that unless the library voluntarily granted access to LE to examine the computer histories and back up logs, LE would then have to obtain a warrant with a probable cause statement which I don't think they would have much of a chance in getting a Jdg to sign off on it in the absence of foul play.

However, LE could certain reach out to the library admin or, I wouldn't be surprised if the city/county had their own IT dept that could perform the search for LE and could hand the audit results over, eliminating the anticipated concerns surrounding the privacy issues related to disclosures about other library patrons.

 

[hollyblue]

I'm pretty sure that ship has sailed. But if you feel strongly about it, you should alert LE or the PI and inform them about the software to which you refer.

I imagine it would require a search warrant???

We don't know everything LE may have found or done. I'm not sure about the relationship between LE and the library staff, but they are both under the umbrella of the city as far as the search warrant. IDK. ?

The library, if they had the capabilites would prolly scan for certain material, words, etc also on a frequent basis. At least I hope so.

 

[OldSteve]

Laytonian - Curious what happened to your signature line with link to all your SK info?

 

[SouthWestHiker]

Yes, but we are not privy to all information nor are we in a position to analyze it. All we can do is work with what we have.

If you have something NEW, I would love to hear it. New - that we can actually work. You're in Vegas, I'm in Vegas....find a direction for us to go and I'm there!

A few points on my mind:

The Sacramento thing has been glossed over IMO. Why did he say he was going to Sacramento when visiting Ruby Valley? Because its a city in that direction to explain his visit? Why didn't he say Reno or San Jose or San Francisco? It seems he had no ties at all to Sacramento so why that one? Just random or a slip of his mind on a crazy random trip when it seems he was trying to grab unto something from his old life?

I dont know why there is such strong pushback to any discussion of an off the grid escape... Look at what we know of his emails and how he conducted his job search. Completely old style, using the internet in the way I would think someone in their 50s or 60s would use it. Obviously, there wouldnt be any trace of any interactions online about that.

I have no ties or friends among the LDS community but some people here do... how would you connect to some of the more remote, "conservative" elements? Would those people show up once or twice a year at "regular" LDS events or meetings trying to see if they can find people to join their communities? Do they go door to door? There has to be some networking or meetings.


That passport found in a box month later... Was it neatly stacked away? Could Steven also have considered it missing and obtained a new one?


Steven would have been late if he was in SCA for a meeting at noon... but it could well have been a casual type of meeting like "come by anytime between 12 and 1pm"... If I was desperate for a job like he was, I would be there at 12:02 then, but certainly not before 12 to avoid looking desperate. House cleaning job? moving job? pills and supplements needing to be counted and separated before hitting the road later in the afternoon?


Steven seems so restless in that last month with those trips all over the place, meetings, gifts left in the car. It looks like someone unable to keep steady waiting for something to happen.


Someone Steven talked to in the last few days before his disappearance has the clue.

 

[SheWhoMustNotBeNamed]

Please continue here:

NV NV - Steven T. Koecher, 30, Henderson, 13 Dec 2009 - #21 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community