phone records

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by Charlie, Aug 14, 2006.

  1. Charlie

    Charlie New Member

    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm so sorry to all that read this thread if the 'phone record' confusion has been gone over and over again but i just wanted to know exactly for fact which phone records the police WERE and WERE NOT able to obtain from the ramseys including both home phone and cells.

    thanks :)
     
  2. Loading...


  3. Jayelles

    Jayelles New Member

    Messages:
    2,389
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There is controversy over the records for a cellphone owned by the Ramseys. It's not clear whether the records were missing altogether or whether they were available but showed no calls for the month of December.

    John Ramsey apparently lost his cellphone and ordered a new one through Access Graphics. Meanwhile Patsy bought one - supposedly for John's Christmas - but he saw it when she had it out of its box on charge and he just took it to use.

    However, we must bear in mind that this is the Ramseys' version of events and they have been notoriously vague and inconsistent.
     
  4. sharkeyes

    sharkeyes Queen of Swords and Cups

    Messages:
    275
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Had this been ordinary working stiffs Mr. and Mrs. John Q. Public, not only would the cell phone records have been obtained, but home phone records, business phone records, ATM transactions, debit card purchases, credit card purchases, hard drives pulled from work and home....you get the idea....but, if you have enough money and have enough dirt on others (whether they be friends or business associates) you can pretty much buy and lie your way out of anything (IMO)
     
  5. LI_Mom

    LI_Mom New Member

    Messages:
    3,268
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree.

    I never could understand why Team Ramsey would object to turning over any & all records so the investigators could quickly exclude the Ramseys.
     
  6. Rupert

    Rupert Former Member

    Messages:
    342
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think I was a Ramsey believer until I heard about the missing cel phone records. That was my turning point. Believe me I have tried to invent every possible mystery as to whom was the intruder.

    Steve Thomas and the BPD could not get the cel phone records. The DA office held them up for ever on that one. Now after time, I am sure they have disappeared conveniently.

    I alsways wondered how anyone after such a traumatic event could write such a note. Maybe it was councilled over a cel phone.
     
  7. Charlie

    Charlie New Member

    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    thanks for the replies everyone. So the cell phone records were not obtained because of either the records went missing or there was no activity to report? the latter would obviously signify the records were obtained but didnt yield any information for investigators.

    We all know that on the night of the 23rd of december 96' the Ramseys had a xmas party, where a 911 call or rather 'hangup' was made and subsequently lead to policemen comming over to the ramsey house to check that everything was alright. Did the BPD learn of this because they obtained the ramseys home phone records or was it picked up through a routine check by the BPD for '911' calls before the 25th?

    I really should re-read ST's book again i'm sure he goes over this phone records...pity ive lent the book to a friend who has no intention of reading it i bet :snooty:

    just to reiterate:
    - cells phone records either missing or not obtained
    - home phone records not obtained


    how the hell did the ramseys being major suspects get away with not giving these to police...was it the Police dept or the DA's office the dropped the ball on that one? From watching way too many law and order eps i would say it would be Sam McCoys duty to get warrants for phone records...aka Hunter
     
  8. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    You know, some people say I'm cynical because I believe that money can buy justice and because I believe that the GJ was naive. Well, I'm NOT cynical; I'm realistic. Remember: I, like Rupert, was a die-hard Ramsey believer at one point, so maybe I too was naive. But I found the CAUSE of my ignorance!

    "Law & Order" is a good example of how this case SHOULD have been handled. (Don't get me started on Law & Order in regard to this case!)
     
  9. sandraladeda

    sandraladeda Inactive

    Messages:
    2,588
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oh come on SuperDave, now you have me curious. I am a huge Law and Order fan, but I don't know what you're talking about.

    Can I please get you started on Law and Order? :)
     
  10. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Remember, YOU asked for it!

    A few months ago, I was watching Law & Order. It's my favorite show, or was. Well, as some of you may know, back in 1997, they did a two-parter based on this case. Well, a few months ago, they did a follow up. Sadly, Law & Order was now part of the "Innocence" Brigade." The ersatz John is now a widower (Patsy was still alive in real life) still claiming that he was innocent. The cops find the REAL killer, obviously based on David Westerfield. The guy's lawyer even did what Westerfield's real lawyer did: admit his client did it and asked for a plea. When Jack McCoy, the ADA that Sam Waterston plays, refused, the lawyer got the ersatz John on the stand and tore him to pieces, KNOWING that his client was guilty! Number one, that's a good illustration of what people like the Poz and that fat PIMP Merralyn Jerrit do. Two, it's a good example of what the defense would be if some "intruder" ever came to trial. But what bothered me about the episode (I say bothered. Enraged would be more appropriate) is that the writers didn't see what everyone else, Nancy Grace, Marc Klaas and us included, can see: the Van Dam murder bears NO RESEMBLANCE WHATSOEVER to JB's murder! NONE! AT ALL!

    David Westerfield grabbed Danielle. He was in and out of the house in a flash, IF he ever went in their at all. Half the San Diego cops think he lured her out of an open door. He took her to a place where HE felt safe, did his horrific acts, then dumped her body.

    Alejandro Avila grabbed Samantha Runnion out of her yard. He took her to a place where HE felt safe, did his horrific acts, then dumped her body.

    Dennis Dechaine grabbed Sarah Cherry from her neighbor's home. He took her to a place where HE felt safe, did his horrific acts, then dumped her body.

    The JB intruder camped out, wrote a phony note, fed JB pineapple, waited two hours for it to digest, did his horrific acts, which didn't even APPROACH the kind of violence perpetrated on those other girls, in a place where he was constantly at risk of getting caught, staged a scene to LOOK like an intruder (WHY!?) and got out without taking the body!

    Anyone ELSE see the problem here? Nancy Grace does! Robert Ressler does! Greg McCrary does! And I SURE AS HELL do!

    Bottom line!

    That's my problem with "Law & Order," in regard to this case.
     
  11. sheba1

    sheba1 Guest

    Do you happen to know when this all was, approximate time period he lost it, got a new one, and when Patsy bought the new one? Also, this is an ignorant question, and thanks for your patience, but why couldn't the phone records of all cell phones and land lines be obtained by subpeona from the relevant phone companies even during the GJ. These records just seem so relevant to the case it unfanthamable (sp)to me.

    Was the lost cell phone ever found, see if someone here finds a cell phone for instance
    they can call the phone company and they can tell you who owns it by it's serial number which is registered when bought. Or I, like others would call the cell number and tell the owner I've found it. There's also a way to check what phone number the cell phone belongs to by punching something in. I know because I couldn't remember my hubby's cell number (which I had with me), while with a friend, so she could call us with the results of a dog show she was participating in I wanted to give her the # so she just punched something in and the number came up on the display. If it was really lost anyone could have returned it to him, it's of no use to them anyway, they couldn't get a new phone number for it.

    Is there some suspicion all the company's involved were bought off to get rid of their copies? I know I can call my phone company and ask for a copy of a certain month last year! Geesh, even Access Graphics could tell when John ordered a new one and wouldn't they at least have a copy of all the calls made on it since it's a business phone?
     
  12. sandraladeda

    sandraladeda Inactive

    Messages:
    2,588
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks, SuperDave. I guess I missed that episode....must have been driving kids to sports that night, my all time, number one favorite activity!
     
  13. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I'm always surprised when I bring up that episode on these forums to find that I'm always the ONLY one to see it! Well, I imagine that if you had seen it, you'd be upset. too!
     
  14. smurf86

    smurf86 Est. 1986 Dragon apprentice

    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I saw the episode that bore resemblance to caci Anthony with Hillary duff as the caci counterpart.
     
  15. DeeDee249

    DeeDee249 New Member

    Messages:
    8,022
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's easy. The only reason had to be that there were phone calls made from the R home or cells at "suspicious" times and to "suspicious" people. For example- a phone call between 1 am and the 6 am 911 call would be suspicious, as the R claimed to be asleep and saw/heard nothing till Patsy 'found" the note.
    But if a call was placed to either a R lawyer or the Governor (as some suspect) BEFORE the 911 call I'd say that would be a major factor in exposing that they knew JB was already dead and hadn't been "kidnapped" at all.
     
  16. LadyL

    LadyL Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,424
    Likes Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    48
    re: Law & Order and any other fictional shows ... I thought that they have to be creative enough to cover their butts

    don't they have to throw in enough details that aren't like the real people to avoid being sued? that was my impression anyway but I could easily be wrong

    they also often combine details from more than one crime and use 'what if' scenarios because well, they wouldn't be creative 'writers' otherwise, they'd be doing a documentary

    JMO
     
  17. RANCH

    RANCH Active Member

    Messages:
    9,803
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I brought this post over to a more appropriate thread. I provided a link that supports my belief that Steve Thomas, a law enforcement officer, could have gotten a search warrant for the phone records. You don't have to believe or trust my source. If you wish to dispute what I have found please provide a link to back up your claims.

    I'm willing to consider whatever you may find.
     
  18. bettybaby00

    bettybaby00 New Member

    Messages:
    3,981
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think you forgot your link?

    It is my understanding that warrants and/or subpoenas are requested by the DA, not LE.

    This was posted in another thread...

    [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10416398&postcount=478"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Intruder theories only - RDI theories not allowed! *READ FIRST POST* #2[/ame]

    And speaks to this issue, as well as highlighting another!
     
  19. RANCH

    RANCH Active Member

    Messages:
    9,803
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I didn't forget my link, you must have missed it. Here's a link to my post with the link. LOL.

    [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10417849&postcount=511"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Intruder theories only - RDI theories not allowed! *READ FIRST POST* #2[/ame]


    I just read the post you linked and it has a quote were an AirTouch employee said that he get's subpoenas and warrants every day. And apparently ST himself said that a search warrant may have answered questions about phone calls.

    Why didn't Steve Thomas get a search warrant for the phone records?
     
  20. bettybaby00

    bettybaby00 New Member

    Messages:
    3,981
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oh I guess I did miss it!

    Once again I wish we a an "ask a lawyer" thread on this forum.

    First off, in the case of phone records, I think a subpoena would be what was needed, b/c they would be asking for records from a company. The police can't go in and "search" the phone companies premises to do that. That's what a warrant does. Search a specific place, for specific items.

    Like the warrants that were obtained for the Rs house.

    Regardless though, I'm fairly certain that the DA files the paperwork to a judge to get a warrant/subpoena, and the police "execute" it, meaning that they present the subpoena to the company/office for the records to be pulled together, or as in the case of a warrant, they execute it by showing up at someone's house, and preform the search.

    I don't see anywhere in your link a clear statement as to who exactly "gets" the warrant/subpoena.

    I of course could be wrong about this, if someone is more knowledgable please chime in. :)
     
  21. MyBelle

    MyBelle Active Member

    Messages:
    9,814
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I posted a link that explains the difference between a subpoena and a search warrant.

    Phone companies require subpoenas:

    http://smallbusiness.bellsouth.com/subpoena/
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice