IA IA - Elizabeth Collins, 8, & Lyric Cook, 10, found deceased, Evansdale, 13 Jul 2012 #38

[Kell1]

I agree with where you are coming from and I would consider going one step further and using analytical skills by a trained analyst to look at the data dump of all the cell phone numbers utilising the masts in the area
( setting parameters from a couple of weeks before the abduction all the way through to the girls being found) which will run into thousands but it would be easy to write a computer programme to pick out cell phone numbers from the data dump that have been in the area of abduction and the area of body deposition more than once . An analyst would be able to chart how many of the thousands of cell phone numbers passing through the two areas using the timeframe parameters detailed above , were in both areas and see of those that were in each area more than once , looking at what date and time so that regular people going between home and work for example, can be filtered out . Other filters can also be applied accordingly when compared to the intelligence that LE already has and that will significantly reduce the hits until you have a select number that cross reference both the abduction site and deposition site and once the girls are found, the number tails off and is not prolific in the area from there on in. That way you can have a starting block of cell phone numbers and their owners that you can rule out. It’s not as mammoth a task as first appears when utilising a specific programme designed to weed out the irrelevant numbers when looking at days and times of occurrence and then potentially stopping once girls are found . DYKWIM?

I agree, its a very good idea at this point what could it hurt?

You may also be able to scrutinize fuel receipts, traffic cams, and compare them to people who live near the area where the girls were abducted any traffic tickets ,

A friend of mine once suggested taking a flier and trying to obtain satellite pictures, of the areas in question that day , i feel that's a bit of a long shot , Ive tried it on the old google earth , but it proved fruitless. Though it does give you a good idea of where the suspect most likely stopped his vehicle etc..

I don't now how that works, but its WAY beyond my pay scale , but at this point at least, outward the investigation looks stymied again, what could it hurt if they could?

I feel the key is someone coming forward and saying they saw someone in the area where the girls were found ... hes a local, someone there knows or suspects something they just arent talking or need that one tip to push their suspicions over the edge

Or scare them enough that they believe they are going to be implicated for aiding and abetting that they talk

 

[rosesfromangels]

I would like to point out that taking DNA from a Perp was not a requirement until 2014. As such, if the Perp in question committed another offense after these murders that landed them in prison before 2014...they might just be already locked up unbeknownst. Something to think about.

More Iowa offenders required to submit DNA samples | wqad.com

Amateur opinion and speculation

 

[JnRyan]

I agree with where you are coming from and I would consider going one step further and using analytical skills by a trained analyst to look at the data dump of all the cell phone numbers utilising the masts in the area
( setting parameters from a couple of weeks before the abduction all the way through to the girls being found) which will run into thousands but it would be easy to write a computer programme to pick out cell phone numbers from the data dump that have been in the area of abduction and the area of body deposition more than once . An analyst would be able to chart how many of the thousands of cell phone numbers passing through the two areas using the timeframe parameters detailed above , were in both areas and see of those that were in each area more than once , looking at what date and time so that regular people going between home and work for example, can be filtered out . Other filters can also be applied accordingly when compared to the intelligence that LE already has and that will significantly reduce the hits until you have a select number that cross reference both the abduction site and deposition site and once the girls are found, the number tails off and is not prolific in the area from there on in. That way you can have a starting block of cell phone numbers and their owners that you can rule out. It’s not as mammoth a task as first appears when utilising a specific programme designed to weed out the irrelevant numbers when looking at days and times of occurrence and then potentially stopping once girls are found . DYKWIM?

I would hope that LE did just that at the time. However, since then I believe US laws have changed to the point where a search warrant may be required and some courts may consider that a fishing expedition and thus not sign off on such. The same thing has been suggested of the Delphi murders but LE hasn't said anything one way or another about that. I believe they may be able to pull down a history or at least have the carriers maintain that history for a future time. In any event in 2018 the US Supreme Ct ruled in Carpenter vs. US that certain broad searches violate the Fourth Amendment (illegal search and seizure). So whether the use of such a date dump is legal may be problematic but an attorney could best address that issue.

 

[Yemelyan]

I agree with where you are coming from and I would consider going one step further and using analytical skills by a trained analyst to look at the data dump of all the cell phone numbers utilising the masts in the area
( setting parameters from a couple of weeks before the abduction all the way through to the girls being found) which will run into thousands but it would be easy to write a computer programme to pick out cell phone numbers from the data dump that have been in the area of abduction and the area of body deposition more than once . An analyst would be able to chart how many of the thousands of cell phone numbers passing through the two areas using the timeframe parameters detailed above , were in both areas and see of those that were in each area more than once , looking at what date and time so that regular people going between home and work for example, can be filtered out . Other filters can also be applied accordingly when compared to the intelligence that LE already has and that will significantly reduce the hits until you have a select number that cross reference both the abduction site and deposition site and once the girls are found, the number tails off and is not prolific in the area from there on in. That way you can have a starting block of cell phone numbers and their owners that you can rule out. It’s not as mammoth a task as first appears when utilising a specific programme designed to weed out the irrelevant numbers when looking at days and times of occurrence and then potentially stopping once girls are found . DYKWIM?

I'm guessing this was already done at the time; however, I do know that if, for some reason, it wasn't, it is no longer possible to do a search with the parameters you suggested (several weeks prior to the time they were found). Since mid 2018 courts in the US have upheld that this type of broad search is unconstitutional; what LE can do, however, is get a warrant for that same data that is limited in scope to the very narrow (I believe courts have ruled it's 12 hours) time period that they can demonstrate a crime occurred. Not sure that LE can pinpoint the dumping of the victims' bodies that accurately in this case, so if they did not obtain this info and develop leads in the beginning of the investigation they might be out of luck, legally.

Courts will allow LE to ask "was this particular cell number associated with this specific person in the area at the time of the crime" but they will no longer, typically, allow LE to ask "what are all the numbers that interacted with this tower for weeks preceding and/or after a crime." The latter has been ruled too broad a scope. They might allow a warrant to ask a question like "what are all the numbers that interacted with a particular tower between noon and 5 pm on December 12th when we can prove this crime occurred."

I believe the area where they were abducted from is adjacent to a busy highway, which is a major complicating factor for the tower dump from the abduction site. Nevertheless, I have trouble believing this wasn't already done and analyzed, especially since we know that LE were ruling out some POIs (Klunder etc) by saying they were demonstrably not in the area at the time of this abduction.

 

[Kell1]

I'm guessing this was already done at the time; however, I do know that if, for some reason, it wasn't, it is no longer possible to do a search with the parameters you suggested (several weeks prior to the time they were found). Since mid 2018 courts in the US have upheld that this type of broad search is unconstitutional; what LE can do, however, is get a warrant for that same data that is limited in scope to the very narrow (I believe courts have ruled it's 12 hours) time period that they can demonstrate a crime occurred. Not sure that LE can pinpoint the dumping of the victims' bodies that accurately in this case, so if they did not obtain this info and develop leads in the beginning of the investigation they might be out of luck, legally.

Courts will allow LE to ask "was this particular cell number associated with this specific person in the area at the time of the crime" but they will no longer, typically, allow LE to ask "what are all the numbers that interacted with this tower for weeks preceding and/or after a crime." The latter has been ruled too broad a scope. They might allow a warrant to ask a question like "what are all the numbers that interacted with a particular tower between noon and 5 pm on December 12th when we can prove this crime occurred."

I believe the area where they were abducted from is adjacent to a busy highway, which is a major complicating factor for the tower dump from the abduction site. Nevertheless, I have trouble believing this wasn't already done and analyzed, especially since we know that LE were ruling out some POIs (Klunder etc) by saying they were demonstrably not in the area at the time of this abduction.

I agree it would be a daunting task both legally and technically to try to pinpoint a cellphone travelling that corridor and back

Theyve used cell locations by pinging phones in the past, but trying to capture data from thousands of phones in that area would be aspirational at best, but again what could it hurt at this point

Im also sure there are POI's not named (for any variety of reasons, which I wont get into)

I stay to my points
-Male
-Most likely White
-Lives or works in the area, where they were abducted
-Will have several residence changes, in his past , usually one within a year of the offense
-Hunts/fishes/Hikes or does something that affords him a lot of time in the body recovery area
-Between 27-32 yo at time of offense (i could be off depending on time incarcerated)
-Lives with parents or a parental figure
-Unemployed or underemployed at time of offense
_Not under any tyoe of custody status at time of offense (Parole/Probation)
-Work will be blue collar unskilled or semi skilled, usually in the construction industry
-Sexually motivated
-Will have a criminal past that includes, sex offenses of some type, though he may have not been prosecuted for some, but issues with impulse control would be evident
-Social marginal thought of as odd by those around him
-Few real friends
-May be in a relationship but not without problems
-No triggering event prior
-Victims were selected due lack of an adult presence
-Con/ruse or threat of physical violence was used to get them out of the park
-Alibi will account for the time he was away, though there may be an excuse to explain extra time away
-Post offense would have had an almost palpable seemingly odd interest in the case
-May have displayed visible anxiety in the days following the crime (increased use of tobacco /alcohol/drugs)
-Unexplained, scratches bruises, or cuts on person
-Possibly in possession of items that are suspicious.
-Likewise may have turned to religion or become deeper involved in religion following
-Shedding or destroying personal belongings, he was wearing the day of the crime this includes the vehicle (cleaning, altering, painting, removing contents such as the carpeting etc..
-May have confided in someone
-Returned to the girls bodies possibly up until they were discovered
-Slightly more often the offender is a stranger, but he may have been acquainted with the victims or known them (possibly why they may have left their bikes that far from the road and went with him)
-Most likely has been interviewed by police
-May have injected himself into the investigation.
-Once the pressure was off may have left the area

 

[Angleterre]

I'm guessing this was already done at the time; however, I do know that if, for some reason, it wasn't, it is no longer possible to do a search with the parameters you suggested (several weeks prior to the time they were found). Since mid 2018 courts in the US have upheld that this type of broad search is unconstitutional; what LE can do, however, is get a warrant for that same data that is limited in scope to the very narrow (I believe courts have ruled it's 12 hours) time period that they can demonstrate a crime occurred. Not sure that LE can pinpoint the dumping of the victims' bodies that accurately in this case, so if they did not obtain this info and develop leads in the beginning of the investigation they might be out of luck, legally.

Courts will allow LE to ask "was this particular cell number associated with this specific person in the area at the time of the crime" but they will no longer, typically, allow LE to ask "what are all the numbers that interacted with this tower for weeks preceding and/or after a crime." The latter has been ruled too broad a scope. They might allow a warrant to ask a question like "what are all the numbers that interacted with a particular tower between noon and 5 pm on December 12th when we can prove this crime occurred."

I believe the area where they were abducted from is adjacent to a busy highway, which is a major complicating factor for the tower dump from the abduction site. Nevertheless, I have trouble believing this wasn't already done and analyzed, especially since we know that LE were ruling out some POIs (Klunder etc) by saying they were demonstrably not in the area at the time of this abduction.

Wow really
I’m in the U.K. and we don’t run into those problems , we can just obtain that data and it’s not often we go to court to get a judge’s permission for access unless it’s to look at bank accounts . We can’t look at legal privileges.
Same with the likes of mass dna screens
Albeit we can only take it by force with a court’s approval
We have so much more scope to investigate crimes without our hands being tied by legislation fortunately or unfortunately whichever way you view it but obviously your constitution and amendments don’t allow it like your HIPPA laws etc
Thank you for informing me of this
Maybe it has been done but I don’t know the scope of the investigation and how involved the FBI were ( if they were) as some small towns only have very small police departments and the cost of some investigative tools are very expensive

 

[Angleterre]

I would hope that LE did just that at the time. However, since then I believe US laws have changed to the point where a search warrant may be required and some courts may consider that a fishing expedition and thus not sign off on such. The same thing has been suggested of the Delphi murders but LE hasn't said anything one way or another about that. I believe they may be able to pull down a history or at least have the carriers maintain that history for a future time. In any event in 2018 the US Supreme Ct ruled in Carpenter vs. US that certain broad searches violate the Fourth Amendment (illegal search and seizure). So whether the use of such a date dump is legal may be problematic but an attorney could best address that issue.

Sorry I read @Yemelyan post before yours @JnRyan so thank you for informing me of this and see my response to @Yemelyan
Can I ask, as the offence pre dates 2018 law USA v Carpenter can it still be applied retroactively / retrospectively ( whichever is your correct terminology)?

 

[Angleterre]

I agree, its a very good idea at this point what could it hurt?

You may also be able to scrutinize fuel receipts, traffic cams, and compare them to people who live near the area where the girls were abducted any traffic tickets ,

A friend of mine once suggested taking a flier and trying to obtain satellite pictures, of the areas in question that day , i feel that's a bit of a long shot , Ive tried it on the old google earth , but it proved fruitless. Though it does give you a good idea of where the suspect most likely stopped his vehicle etc..

I don't now how that works, but its WAY beyond my pay scale , but at this point at least, outward the investigation looks stymied again, what could it hurt if they could?

I feel the key is someone coming forward and saying they saw someone in the area where the girls were found ... hes a local, someone there knows or suspects something they just arent talking or need that one tip to push their suspicions over the edge

Or scare them enough that they believe they are going to be implicated for aiding and abetting that they talk

@Kell1
I absolutely agree with you but I’m told that it’s been ruled unconstitutional by @JnRyan and @Yemelyan due to recent caselaw USA v Carpenter and in any event was likely done at the time
See my reply to them both
I’m not sure if you are LE in USA but I’m U.K.

 

[Yemelyan]

Sorry I read @Yemelyan post before yours @JnRyan so thank you for informing me of this and see my response to @Yemelyan
Can I ask, as the offence pre dates 2018 law USA v Carpenter can it still be applied retroactively / retrospectively ( whichever is your correct terminology)?

My answer, IMO...it's complicated. There does exist a "good faith exception" that applies in some cases to permit the government to use unconstitutionally obtained evidence to convict defendants if such evidence was collected in reliance on prior law....which would possibly be the situation here IF these records were collected and analyzed around the time of the abduction or bodies being found. Whether it could be introduced in a case now would depend on many factors, most of which are not publicly known. Again...my opinion only.

If you want to read about the case law regarding our Fourth Amendment and how it's applied to privacy concerns like cell phone tracking, here's a good overview: The Impact of Carpenter v. United States in the Lower Courts and the Emerging Carpenter Test

 

[Yemelyan]

Thank you for informing me of this
Maybe it has been done but I don’t know the scope of the investigation and how involved the FBI were ( if they were) as some small towns only have very small police departments and the cost of some investigative tools are very expensive

Respectfully snipped by me because I forgot to address this part of your post...

In general, the state police crime labs and analysts come alongside smaller police departments and provide that support to them of expensive analysis, investigative tools, and forensic expertise. So it's very unlikely in current times that even smaller jurisdictions would not have all tools at their disposal. In cases like Evansdale where there are "victims of tender age," the FBI gets involved immediately as a resource to the investigating department. We know, for example, that the FBI was involved in the process of questioning suspects and that the FBI Behavioral Analysis Unit worked closely with investigators to develop a profile of the offender (portions of which were even released to the public).

 

[Angleterre]

My answer, IMO...it's complicated. There does exist a "good faith exception" that applies in some cases to permit the government to use unconstitutionally obtained evidence to convict defendants if such evidence was collected in reliance on prior law....which would possibly be the situation here IF these records were collected and analyzed around the time of the abduction or bodies being found. Whether it could be introduced in a case now would depend on many factors, most of which are not publicly known. Again...my opinion only.

If you want to read about the case law regarding our Fourth Amendment and how it's applied to privacy concerns like cell phone tracking, here's a good overview: The Impact of Carpenter v. United States in the Lower Courts and the Emerging Carpenter Test

Thank you I appreciate it x

 

[dotr]

Fwiw, very lengthy article by Kevin Donovan, regarding cell tower dump search performed by Toronto LE in the quest to find the killer of billionaires H&B Sherman.
Jan 2022
Sherman murder detectives get hits from cell tower ‘dumps’ | The Star
"To understand how the Toronto police have been investigating this case, put aside images from detective shows like Baltimore-based police drama Homicide Life on the Street, or British police procedural show Scott & Bailey, with scenes of detectives pounding the pavement and knocking on doors. The lone full-time detective on the Sherman case, Det. Constable Dennis Yim was charged with investigating by cellular communication.

First, they collected roughly 300 cellular telephone numbers from the Sherman family, friends, business associates, and people who worked for the Shermans. Those numbers and the associated names went into a spreadsheet. According to the documents, these were numbers that came from several sources. First, interviews police conducted — detectives asked people for their cellular phone number or numbers of people that the interviewee speculated could have committed the murders. Documents released reveal that the Sherman family and some friends were pointing fingers at three individuals not named in the documents (police say they have found no evidence these individuals were involved.) Police also received 18 cellphone numbers from tips the public made directly to Toronto Police; 41 numbers from tips made to a dedicated Sherman murder tip line police set up a year into the case; and 184 numbers passed on by the Sherman family’s private investigation team led by criminal lawyer Brian Greenspan.

Then, in early 2019, police went before Judge Leslie Pringle of the Ontario Court of Justice, asking for permission to obtain “tower dumps” from Bell, Telus, Rogers and Freedom Mobile for areas around the Sherman home and Apotex on the night of the murders, and also weeks and in some cases months previous to the murders. The mechanics of this are relatively simple: When a cellular telephone is used to make a call or receive a text, it communicates with a cellular tower in the area, creating a “handshake.” This data is specific to an area — think of drawing an invisible electronic box around a property or section of the street.

As the newly released documents from September 2020 show, the police order was granted, under the proviso that police use a strict protocol to maintain the privacy of innocent people whose cellular communication patterns were picked up in the massive tower dump sweep.

The next step was to run a comparison to those roughly 300 “person of interest” numbers and the tower dump. This was at least a partial success. Sometime in 2020, police started getting “hits” — person of interest numbers showed up in the tower dumps.

That set police to conducting “background investigations ... for the phone numbers, from phone records obtained by way of production order, that were common to the tower dump transmission data results.”

It’s likely that most, if not all of these numbers found in the “tower dumps” are people innocent of the crime, but who just happened to be in the area at the time. What the documents do not reveal (due to redactions) is whether police identified “pings” to cell towers approximating the movements of the “walking man” and whether those pings correspond to the lengthy list of “persons of interest.”

 

[Yemelyan]

Fwiw, very lengthy article by Kevin Donovan, regarding cell tower dump search performed by Toronto LE in the quest to find the killer of billionaires H&B Sherman.
Jan 2022
Sherman murder detectives get hits from cell tower ‘dumps’ | The Star
"To understand how the Toronto police have been investigating this case, put aside images from detective shows like Baltimore-based police drama Homicide Life on the Street, or British police procedural show Scott & Bailey, with scenes of detectives pounding the pavement and knocking on doors. The lone full-time detective on the Sherman case, Det. Constable Dennis Yim was charged with investigating by cellular communication.

First, they collected roughly 300 cellular telephone numbers from the Sherman family, friends, business associates, and people who worked for the Shermans. Those numbers and the associated names went into a spreadsheet. According to the documents, these were numbers that came from several sources. First, interviews police conducted — detectives asked people for their cellular phone number or numbers of people that the interviewee speculated could have committed the murders. Documents released reveal that the Sherman family and some friends were pointing fingers at three individuals not named in the documents (police say they have found no evidence these individuals were involved.) Police also received 18 cellphone numbers from tips the public made directly to Toronto Police; 41 numbers from tips made to a dedicated Sherman murder tip line police set up a year into the case; and 184 numbers passed on by the Sherman family’s private investigation team led by criminal lawyer Brian Greenspan.

Then, in early 2019, police went before Judge Leslie Pringle of the Ontario Court of Justice, asking for permission to obtain “tower dumps” from Bell, Telus, Rogers and Freedom Mobile for areas around the Sherman home and Apotex on the night of the murders, and also weeks and in some cases months previous to the murders. The mechanics of this are relatively simple: When a cellular telephone is used to make a call or receive a text, it communicates with a cellular tower in the area, creating a “handshake.” This data is specific to an area — think of drawing an invisible electronic box around a property or section of the street.

As the newly released documents from September 2020 show, the police order was granted, under the proviso that police use a strict protocol to maintain the privacy of innocent people whose cellular communication patterns were picked up in the massive tower dump sweep.

The next step was to run a comparison to those roughly 300 “person of interest” numbers and the tower dump. This was at least a partial success. Sometime in 2020, police started getting “hits” — person of interest numbers showed up in the tower dumps.

That set police to conducting “background investigations ... for the phone numbers, from phone records obtained by way of production order, that were common to the tower dump transmission data results.”

It’s likely that most, if not all of these numbers found in the “tower dumps” are people innocent of the crime, but who just happened to be in the area at the time. What the documents do not reveal (due to redactions) is whether police identified “pings” to cell towers approximating the movements of the “walking man” and whether those pings correspond to the lengthy list of “persons of interest.”

I noticed that a key difference between what Canadian authorities did here and what is sometimes proposed for US cases (post Carpenter) is that they started with a "list of phone numbers and associated names" that they could compare to the tower dump. This is different than getting all the data from the dump and then working backwards to establish which names are associated with unknown numbers that happened to communicate with the tower in question and then developing investigative inquiries into those persons. It's a distinction that makes the difference, IMO, in US law.

 

[Kell1]

@Kell1
I absolutely agree with you but I’m told that it’s been ruled unconstitutional by @JnRyan and @Yemelyan due to recent caselaw USA v Carpenter and in any event was likely done at the time
See my reply to them both
I’m not sure if you are LE in USA but I’m U.K.

Yes im in the US

 

[Angleterre]

Fwiw, very lengthy article by Kevin Donovan, regarding cell tower dump search performed by Toronto LE in the quest to find the killer of billionaires H&B Sherman.
Jan 2022
Sherman murder detectives get hits from cell tower ‘dumps’ | The Star
"To understand how the Toronto police have been investigating this case, put aside images from detective shows like Baltimore-based police drama Homicide Life on the Street, or British police procedural show Scott & Bailey, with scenes of detectives pounding the pavement and knocking on doors. The lone full-time detective on the Sherman case, Det. Constable Dennis Yim was charged with investigating by cellular communication.

First, they collected roughly 300 cellular telephone numbers from the Sherman family, friends, business associates, and people who worked for the Shermans. Those numbers and the associated names went into a spreadsheet. According to the documents, these were numbers that came from several sources. First, interviews police conducted — detectives asked people for their cellular phone number or numbers of people that the interviewee speculated could have committed the murders. Documents released reveal that the Sherman family and some friends were pointing fingers at three individuals not named in the documents (police say they have found no evidence these individuals were involved.) Police also received 18 cellphone numbers from tips the public made directly to Toronto Police; 41 numbers from tips made to a dedicated Sherman murder tip line police set up a year into the case; and 184 numbers passed on by the Sherman family’s private investigation team led by criminal lawyer Brian Greenspan.

Then, in early 2019, police went before Judge Leslie Pringle of the Ontario Court of Justice, asking for permission to obtain “tower dumps” from Bell, Telus, Rogers and Freedom Mobile for areas around the Sherman home and Apotex on the night of the murders, and also weeks and in some cases months previous to the murders. The mechanics of this are relatively simple: When a cellular telephone is used to make a call or receive a text, it communicates with a cellular tower in the area, creating a “handshake.” This data is specific to an area — think of drawing an invisible electronic box around a property or section of the street.

As the newly released documents from September 2020 show, the police order was granted, under the proviso that police use a strict protocol to maintain the privacy of innocent people whose cellular communication patterns were picked up in the massive tower dump sweep.

The next step was to run a comparison to those roughly 300 “person of interest” numbers and the tower dump. This was at least a partial success. Sometime in 2020, police started getting “hits” — person of interest numbers showed up in the tower dumps.

That set police to conducting “background investigations ... for the phone numbers, from phone records obtained by way of production order, that were common to the tower dump transmission data results.”

It’s likely that most, if not all of these numbers found in the “tower dumps” are people innocent of the crime, but who just happened to be in the area at the time. What the documents do not reveal (due to redactions) is whether police identified “pings” to cell towers approximating the movements of the “walking man” and whether those pings correspond to the lengthy list of “persons of interest.”

Thank you @dotr
This is exactly the approach which I was trying to explain ( Albeit probably not successfully)
I can’t believe only one full time detective is allocated to do all that cellular follow up
Prior to going up in rank where I ended up leading such investigations, I spent many years learning all aspects of the Detective trade in real time on the street as Detective Constable and in 2000 I was an investigator on a gruesome murder with many suspects involved and my role within that investigation was with another full time Detective, to go through all cellular communication and OMG it was a HUGE role for 2 people then and that was 22 years ago. Technology has come on leaps and bounds since then as has the proliferation of even more cellular devices and I can’t imagine being the ONLY Detective allocated to such a task
I know that I said about it not being as onerous as first appears but in my mind I was thinking about a small team being responsible for all the cellular evidence collection so 3-4 Detectives and an IT specialist and 2 Analysts.
But to do it alone- wow just wow
Kudos to that officer
These are the things we need to remember when we are ( understandably) wanting LE updates as there may not have been any for a year or more and often times members believe that LE have gone cold in relation to the investigation but this goes to show in actuality that we never know just what is happening behind the scenes
Thank you again @ Dotr

 

[Angleterre]

@dotr i can’t access the article unless I pay a subscription
Is there any way around this ? Thank you In anticipation of your reply

 

[FromGermany1]

What kind of rehab? Its an interesting theory.

Maybe orthopedics, substance abuse, mental health issues. Maybe a "Luxury Rehab" or "Destination Rehab", perhaps, but hasn't to be.

 

[Betty P]

Maybe it has been done but I don’t know the scope of the investigation and how involved the FBI were ( if they were) as some small towns only have very small police departments and the cost of some investigative tools are very expensive

Like many other WS members, including those in this thread now, I followed the search and investigation very closely in the early days. Local LE brought in the FBI right away and they seemed to be involved in the investigation at many levels. They were very circumspect about how they conducted the investigation, so we didn't know too many details, but they were looking everywhere. It was 24/7 for a long time and there was an impression that local and state LE worked very well with the FBI.

 

[dotr]

Like many other WS members, including those in this thread now, I followed the search and investigation very closely in the early days. Local LE brought in the FBI right away and they seemed to be involved in the investigation at many levels. They were very circumspect about how they conducted the investigation, so we didn't know too many details, but they were looking everywhere. It was 24/7 for a long time and there was an impression that local and state LE worked very well with the FBI.

In the very early days there was still some hope that the girls were alive, wondering now, why they thought that was possible..

VIDEO at link..
FBI Believes Missing Iowa Girls May Be Alive; Family of Lyric Cook Morrissey and Elizabeth Collins Plead for Their Return | Fox News Video
''FBI Believes Missing Iowa Girls May Be Alive; Family of Lyric Cook Morrissey and Elizabeth Collins Plead for Their Return
Jul. 22, 2012 - 3:39 - The FBI has told the family of missing Iowa girls, Lyric Cook and Elizabeth Collins that they believe the girls may be alive. The mother of Lyric Cook, and the aunt and grandmother of the girls, spoke to Shannon Bream about the latest developments''

 

[watcher9]

In the very early days there was still some hope that the girls were alive, wondering now, why they thought that was possible..

VIDEO at link..
FBI Believes Missing Iowa Girls May Be Alive; Family of Lyric Cook Morrissey and Elizabeth Collins Plead for Their Return | Fox News Video
''FBI Believes Missing Iowa Girls May Be Alive; Family of Lyric Cook Morrissey and Elizabeth Collins Plead for Their Return
Jul. 22, 2012 - 3:39 - The FBI has told the family of missing Iowa girls, Lyric Cook and Elizabeth Collins that they believe the girls may be alive. The mother of Lyric Cook, and the aunt and grandmother of the girls, spoke to Shannon Bream about the latest developments''

Maybe because of the way Elizabeth Smart's case ended a decade earlier??

Lyric Cook and Elizabeth Collins: Bodies Found in Search for Missing Iowa Cousins