Laura Babcock Murder Trial 11.14.17 - Day 15

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jealoushe said:
He definitely used heroin, you can pretty much tell just by looking at him, but also the information that has been out.
Click to expand...

IMO heroin isn't really the type of drug that one can keep to social, periodic use, unless it's being used strictly to take the edge off a stimulant come-down... and even then there are less risky alternatives. Dabbling in heroin can quickly become an all-in situation, particularly if one is selling it and keeping inventory on-hand.
 
dar107 said:
Well if so there should be a number on Laura's phone bill that they cannot connect to anyone?
Click to expand...

There very well could be. There may not be a way to prove it’s DM she’s talking to. It could have been thought to be a clients number perhaps.
 
LE managed to track burner phones back to DM in the TB trial and track them IIRC. They even found out where he purchased them.
 
Grey-St said:
There very well could be. There may not be a way to prove it’s DM she’s talking to. It could have been thought to be a clients number perhaps.
Click to expand...

I'll hazard a guess that all available phone activity/contacts were looked into during the investigation, and that any number potentially belonging to a client was most definitely followed up on.
 
Tealgrove said:
LE managed to track burner phones back to DM in the TB trial and track them IIRC. They even found out where he purchased them.
Click to expand...

Thats because they had the number from when it called TB. From there its easy. If Millard had a burner that he was using for texts only, it would be virtually impossible to discover if both the burner and LBs phones were at the bottom of the lake.

Also, the made the mistake of using that burner to contact multiple people. Burner should be used for its purpose only, then tossed.
 
gremlingrrl said:
I'll hazard a guess that all available phone activity/contacts were looked into during the investigation, and that any number potentially belonging to a client was most definitely followed up on.
Click to expand...

Without LBs phone, they have no idea who was texting her.
 
gremlingrrl said:
I'll hazard a guess that all available phone activity/contacts were looked into during the investigation, and that any number potentially belonging to a client was most definitely followed up on.
Click to expand...

LE can only do so much. They could have contacted/investigated every number on her phone bill, but if that number is no longer in service it won’t really go anywhere. And that’s only if they spoke on the phone, if they texted only, it wouldn’t even be on the bill.
 
Coldpizza said:
Good morning. Today's trial thread is open for posting.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?356261-Laura-Babcock-Murder-Trial-11-15-17-Day-16

This thread will close once the proceedings begin.
Click to expand...

Nov 15 2017 10:14 AM
Crown Ken Lockhart calls for the next witness, Shane Schlatman.

We heard about him in court yesterday. He's one of Millard's employees, who ordered the animal incinerator from an agriculture company in Winnipeg, in June 2012.

Closing up now
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 113 more.
Total: 4,364 (members: 114, guests: 4,250)

Online statistics

Members online
114
Guests online
4,250
Total visitors
4,364
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,404
Messages
17,968,448
Members
228,767
Latest member
Mona Lisa
Back
Top