Anthony's Computer Forensics

New Posts

ILikeToBendPages said:
Jose needs to remember her "baldy and sneezing milk stories, and how that bit him on the butt, and stay out of the news, but I think he really thinks he can still make money off Casey.

Looking at the time line and phone calls, it shows that Caylee died sometime after Jesse her heard on the phone.
Click to expand...

Not only does he hope to stay in the news but he has a Facebook page to ensure it! He probably twitters too...:rolleyes:
He lets his adoring fans know he's on his way to L.A. today. Big whoopie!
 
Scamperoo said:
6 – Midnight to 1:00 am high user activity on desktop
Midnight to 11:00 am no activity on laptop
1:00-7:00 am no user activity on desktop
3:08 am TL calls KC, 14 minutes conversation
7:00-9:00 am high user activity on desktop
7:45 am Anthony home leaves voicemail on KC’s cell
7:45 am KC calls voicemail
9:00-10:00 am no activity on HP desktop
10:00-noon high user activity on desktop
11:00 am to noon – one file accessed on laptop, most likely system activity
JT states that around noon he saw KC and Caylee at the Casselberry Walmart.
11:27 am KC uploads one picture to her photobucket account from desktop (IP ties to Anthony home).
11:47 am TL calls KC, 18 minute phone call
12:00 noon-1:00 pm no activity on HP desktop. No activity on laptop.
12:50 pm GA states KC and Caylee leave house. KC says she is going to work. They both had backpacks on and KC was wearing charcoal gray pinstriped dress slacks and a beige dress shirt. Caylee’s backpack was white with monkeys on it. Caylee was wearing a blue jean skirt, a pinkish colored top, and white tennis shoes. She had white-rimmed sunglasses on and her hair was in a ponytail. This is the last time Caylee is seen alive by anyone other than KC. KC tells GA she is going to work and will be working late, Caylee is going to the nanny’s and they are both going to spend the night at the nanny’s. KC tells GA she has already spoken with CA about it.
1:00-3:00 pm high user activity on desktop. 6 files accessed on laptop, most likely system activity, but could be very low user activity.
1:00 pm TL calls KC, 13 minute phone call
1:44 pm KC calls AH, 36 minute phone call
2:52 pm JG calls KC, 11 minute phone call. This is the phone call in which JG may have heard Caylee in background. He originally thought that call was on the 24th of June, but since has stated he made have gotten the phone calls messed up. In this phone call KC told JG her parents were getting a divorce and she had to move out and find her own place.
3:00-4:00 pm no activity on laptop.
3:00-11:00 pm no activity on HP desktop. GA works 3:00 pm to 11:00 pm.
3:04 pm GA attempts to call KC.
3:35 pm KC attempts to call TL.
4:00-5:00 pm 5 files accessed on laptop, most likely system activity, but could be low level user activity.
4:10 pm KC attempts to call Gentiva
4:11 pm KC attempts to call CA’s cell.
4:11 pm KC attempts to call CA’s cell. (24 seconds after last call)
4:13 pm KC attempts to call CA’s cell.
4:13 pm KC attempts to call CA’s cell. (25 seconds after last call)
4:14 pm KC calls Gentiva, 1.6 minute phone call.
KC’s cell phone pings showed her at or near the Anthony home until 4:18. At 4:18 she tracked northward.
4:19 pm KC calls TL, 1 minute duration.
4:21 pm KC attempts to call JG.
4:21 pm KC calls JG, 1.25 minute duration. (24 seconds after last call)
4:25 pm KC attempts to call CA’s cell.
4:25 pm KC cell phone pings show her tracking westward.
No activity on phone for 2 hours and 7 minutes. [NOTE: Up until this point KC has gone no more than about 30 minutes at a time not texting or calling some one.]
BB returns home at approximately 6 p.m. from a family vacation.
5:00 pm to midnight no activity on laptop.
5:57 pm KC’s cell phone pings show her tracking northwestward.
6:31 pm KC attempts to call CA’s cell.
6:32 pm KC attempts to call CA’s cell.
6:32 pm KC attempts to call Anthony home. (44 seconds after last call)
6:33 pm KC checks voicemail.
6:53 pm KC checks voicemail.
7:06 pm KC calls Anthony home, 1.38 minute duration.
7:20 pm KC attempts to call AH
7:21 pm KC attempts to call AH.
7:58 pm TL and KC go to Blockbuster and rent a movie. TL states they stayed up late watching the movie.
8:03 pm MH leaves voicemail on KC’s cell
8:03 pm KC calls voicemail
11:00-midnight high user activity on desktop

Someone was on the computer from 1pm - 3pm, bearing in mind George was at work by 3pm it couldn't have been him.

I think George may have gone out that morning and invented the I saw KC and Caylee leave scenario to help his daughter.
Click to expand...

Pulling this forward for another review...

I am curious again about the laptop and the bluescreen Lee found-as well as the length of time it took for Lee to get back to the Anthony's on July 17. I have also forgotten what, if anything, was on the laptop once LE got to it.
 
Please keep this thread focused on the specifics of computer forensics. If you're missing a post, I just moved several over to the Theories thread.
 
? for AZlawyer or JWG

Was John Dennis Bradley given the same hard drive information that you were given access? If so, would he not have to take as much responsibility as the OCSD for not giving the info to the prosecutors?

Thanks
 
?noanswer said:
? for AZlawyer or JWG

Was John Dennis Bradley given the same hard drive information that you were given access? If so, would he not have to take as much responsibility as the OCSD for not giving the info to the prosecutors?

Thanks
Click to expand...

The short answer is no. He was given only the single file recovered from unallocated space. He was never given any other additional files nor was he given the image of the hard drive.
 
JWG said:
The short answer is no. He was given only the single file recovered from unallocated space. He was never given any other additional files nor was he given the image of the hard drive.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I don't know if that makes me feel better or not. As they say hind sight is 20/20 and the persons that were responsible for giving him the information slipped by not doing it. Maybe he should have been more aggressive also and asked for more information. IIRC, LDB made a statement in court that indicated "computers" were not one of her strong suites.

Saying that I don't think had it been discovered and the prosecution had used it during the trial, it would have changed the outcome of the verdict. As JB has said he was waiting for it to come up. He didn't have to say he had another "explanation" as it is apparent that he worked many hours on coming up with "answers" and most of those were "blame GA".

JMO
 
?noanswer said:
Thank you. I don't know if that makes me feel better or not. As they say hind sight is 20/20 and the persons that were responsible for giving him the information slipped by not doing it. Maybe he should have been more aggressive also and asked for more information. IIRC, LDB made a statement in court that indicated "computers" were not one of her strong suites.

Saying that I don't think had it been discovered and the prosecution had used it during the trial, it would have changed the outcome of the verdict. As JB has said he was waiting for it to come up. He didn't have to say he had another "explanation" as it is apparent that he worked many hours on coming up with "answers" and most of those were "blame GA".

JMO
Click to expand...

Bradley wasn't hired to go through the computer and find evidence--that was the job of the Sheriff's Office computer forensics people. I don't think he was hired at all, actually. IIRC he was just called to the stand to explain a spreadsheet that the SO computer people created using his program (CacheBack).
 
AZlawer I just read back to that post from the trial. Looks like JB didn't want to open the door to the pc usage on the 16th starting with the pics of the shot girls. The shot girl photos might start to poke holes in the timeline, and the drowning scenario. Now we know why! JB was concerned it might lead to the suffocation searches and despite his claims in his book of an awesome argument against it being Casey. I doubt he could pull it off.
 
Pattymarie said:
In reading these posts, it is stunning (again) to me what powerful circumstantial evidence existed in this case. The dots so connect. But that isn't enough in our hi-tech world anymore. I wonder how in the world Scott Peterson got convicted in this same era?
Click to expand...

IMO, the Scott Peterson case was quite simple. His lies could be sorted through pretty easily. The evidence was very strong, clear cut, and presented simply. I do not think the evidence was overwhelming to the jury. Although not necessary, the motive was very strong. You could actually picture him doing the crime exactly as the prosecution presented it.

To me, the CA case was much more complex. The prosecution went into areas that weren't helpful (how many times did we have to hear about shot girls? what was Lee saying about not being involved in his sister's baby shower?). The cause of death was muddied and difficult to determine (was the child drugged? suffocated and with what? drowned? what about chloroform?). You dealt with conflicted family members (how many times were CA and GA on the stand, and who's side were they on?). The forensics went into new territory (who ever heard of capturing the smell of decomp in a can? were the levels of chloroform really "shocking high?"). At the end, I felt as though there were more questions than we got answers. :banghead:

I do feel the jury was terribly lazy and didn't do the work, but unfortunately, I think they are kind of right. We knew "who and "why," but the "what" "where" and "how" were hazy, in retrospect. :twocents:
 
momtective said:
I seriously doubt that was George. jmo

kcinethx.jpg
Click to expand...

From the URLs it looks as though she was looking for One Tree Hill episodes on foreign-hosted video sites and got *advertiser censored* pop-up ads. She wasn't searching for *advertiser censored*. :twocents:
 
Mrs G Norris said:
Screenshot2012-11-26at105351AM.png


Thanks JWT .. just a first look and found these, paints a very creepy picture doesn't it? Just such a darned shame the jury didn't see all of these.
Click to expand...

It appears as though the main searches are for Chloroform and Head Trauma, and she's clicking links in the Wiki articles in between...

....and then it's back to Facebook

Leonard Padilla said that Casey lives 20 minutes at a time, but I think it's more like 5
 
ExpectingUnicorns said:
Fox and Friends is also covering this story this morning.

I am exceedingly disappointed that all of the national coverage I have seen seems to be ignoring the most important fact ~ The proof of the time of the search that puts Casey sitting squarely in the computer (hot) seat.

Why are they all missing this?
Click to expand...

Nancy Grace missed the boat too and could have delved into this so much more. She should have had AZLawyer and JWG for the whole hour.
 
mattfz said:
IMO, the Scott Peterson case was quite simple. His lies could be sorted through pretty easily. The evidence was very strong, clear cut, and presented simply. I do not think the evidence was overwhelming to the jury. Although not necessary, the motive was very strong. You could actually picture him doing the crime exactly as the prosecution presented it.

To me, the CA case was much more complex. The prosecution went into areas that weren't helpful (how many times did we have to hear about shot girls? what was Lee saying about not being involved in his sister's baby shower?). The cause of death was muddied and difficult to determine (was the child drugged? suffocated and with what? drowned? what about chloroform?). You dealt with conflicted family members (how many times were CA and GA on the stand, and who's side were they on?). The forensics went into new territory (who ever heard of capturing the smell of decomp in a can? were the levels of chloroform really "shocking high?"). At the end, I felt as though there were more questions than we got answers. :banghead:

I do feel the jury was terribly lazy and didn't do the work, but unfortunately, I think they are kind of right. We knew "who and "why," but the "what" "where" and "how" were hazy, in retrospect. :twocents:
Click to expand...

I only wish Perry didn't allow Cindy's perjury and the nonsense from JB and his innumerable tactics. The whole thing was a train wreck from the beginning.
 
Horace Finklestein said:
I only wish Perry didn't allow Cindy's perjury and the nonsense from JB and his innumerable tactics. The whole thing was a train wreck from the beginning.
Click to expand...

To tell you the truth, I was never quite enamored of Perry like so many, so I kinda kept quiet. He, imo, like Ito, had so many other issues, besides actual justice, pressing on him. I think he caved to the exact same pressures as Ito and look what happpened.
 
Do we have the Mozilla history for the time between March and June? Is there anything of interest there?
 
mattfz said:
Nancy Grace missed the boat too and could have delved into this so much more. She should have had AZLawyer and JWG for the whole hour.
Click to expand...

Would've been tough since JWG refused to go on and I told her I could only spare 15 minutes. ;)

mattfz said:
Do we have the Mozilla history for the time between March and June? Is there anything of interest there?
Click to expand...

I believe that's the time period that was mostly in unallocated (deleted) space. It would be fairly easy to search in that space for key words that would be likely to lead to bits of internet history (e.g., "search," "Facebook," "MySpace," "Photobucket"), but the only way to get the unallocated space would be to get a copy of the hard drive.

The SO told me that if I wanted a copy of the hard drive, it would cost at least $6,000 and take many months to review the entire contents of the hard drive and redact any information not subject to the public records laws. :banghead:
 
I'm not a lawyer, so I do not know-- since the entire contents of the hard drive were not taken as evidence, that means they are not subject to the public records law? Why exactly, was the entire hard drive not searched?
 
Horace Finklestein said:
I only wish Perry didn't allow Cindy's perjury and the nonsense from JB and his innumerable tactics. The whole thing was a train wreck from the beginning.
Click to expand...

Train wreck thanks to the defense, jury and the judge. I won't fault the prosecution at all. In my opinion, this case was much simpler than the Scott Peterson one which I followed very intensely as well.
 
mattfz said:
IMO, the Scott Peterson case was quite simple. His lies could be sorted through pretty easily. The evidence was very strong, clear cut, and presented simply. I do not think the evidence was overwhelming to the jury. Although not necessary, the motive was very strong. You could actually picture him doing the crime exactly as the prosecution presented it.

To me, the CA case was much more complex. The prosecution went into areas that weren't helpful (how many times did we have to hear about shot girls? what was Lee saying about not being involved in his sister's baby shower?). The cause of death was muddied and difficult to determine (was the child drugged? suffocated and with what? drowned? what about chloroform?). You dealt with conflicted family members (how many times were CA and GA on the stand, and who's side were they on?). The forensics went into new territory (who ever heard of capturing the smell of decomp in a can? were the levels of chloroform really "shocking high?"). At the end, I felt as though there were more questions than we got answers. :banghead:

I do feel the jury was terribly lazy and didn't do the work, but unfortunately, I think they are kind of right. We knew "who and "why," but the "what" "where" and "how" were hazy, in retrospect. :twocents:
Click to expand...


I disagree. :)

This case was much simpler. Caylee was a baby. She couldn't have gone off by herself. Not reported missing till 31 days later and that was done by the grandmother. That in itself is a red flag. Evidence of decomposition was found in the mother's car. The child was found with DUCT-TAPE on her nose/mouth.
 
mattfz said:
I'm not a lawyer, so I do not know-- since the entire contents of the hard drive were not taken as evidence, that means they are not subject to the public records law? Why exactly, was the entire hard drive not searched?
Click to expand...

You could never submit a hard drive as "evidence," because not every little thing on the hard drive could possibly be relevant to the case. And I can't possibly explain why the SO didn't go through the hard drive in more detail.

But I think your real question is, why isn't the hard drive subject to the public records laws? The answer is, it IS--but the SO would have to go through every tiny bit of it (for the first time apparently!) in order to redact anything on there that falls within an exception to the public records laws. For example, there could be social security numbers sprinkled around in there.

Here's the exact answer I got from the SO about the hard drives (I asked for the one from the laptop as well):

I had an opportunity to speak with our computer people regarding your
request. Unfortunately, we cannot fulfill it as worded. Specifically,
you ask for "the Encase copies of the computers"; those copies cannot be
copied and sent to you because the hard drives contain information that
is not public records pursuant to Florida law. The nature of an
"Encase" copy is such that one cannot redact and/or delete information.
As such, information that you are not entitled to would be released in
violation of Florida Statute.

In theory we could make a copy of a non-Encase copy of the hard drives,
however, before releasing that copy we would need to go through every
bit of information on the drive(s) and delete non-public record
information. Conservatively, that process would take a person working 8
hours a day for 3 months to complete. Of course, we cannot devote the
time of our forensic computer examiner in that manner, so the process
will take considerably longer than 3 months. In addition, as provided
by law, before something like that was even begun advanced payment is
required. The law allows us to charge both the salary and the benefits
of the computer analyst who will be required to perform the
review/copying/redacting of the material. A conservative estimate is
that figure will amount to something over $6,000.00.

I didn't want to spend $6,000 and wait 6 months...or a year...or whatever, so I narrowed my request.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 90 more.
Total: 4,310 (members: 91, guests: 4,219)

Online statistics

Members online
91
Guests online
4,219
Total visitors
4,310
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,400
Messages
17,968,406
Members
228,767
Latest member
Mona Lisa
Back
Top