Good thoughts! I'm overworked and also not tech savvy, so it's all over my head, I think. One thing I know is I can look up an unfamiliar number and often Google pulls up a name. I suppose LE needs to get that info through the right procedures, though.It's possible! But another answer might be simpler at least in respect of T-Mobile...
I agree that the T-mobile numbers warrant likely originated from the t-mobile geofence warrant (from memory both those warrants were very early days, around 17th November). But, IMO, the T- mobile nos aren't connected to BK, but were other numbers that came up after geo-fence. I assume that after the warrants, LE eliminated the subscribers. If they had traced back to BK on 17th November I guess we would have seen a much earlier arrest. Or is the point that burner phones cannot be traced back? So LE met with a dead end on return of warrants? Honestly can't recall but there was some kind of return I think. There were similar numbers in a warrant for another provider- Verizon wireless-that appear to be linked to the geo fence warrant for Verizon - also mid November from memory. MOO
RE this latest AT&T warrant, I think it's different though.
Scope begins 23rd June which is date BK opened his AT&T account. My reasoning is that investigators had the return on the forensic analysis of BK's phone (unlike the Nov 2022 warrants) and that maybe they recovered deleted call logs from his phone. If this was the case then those two unknown numbers for which infois sought might have been in a deleted call log. That would make sense of the scope beginning June 23rd. MOO