www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index www.justiceforchandra.com
Justice for Chandra Levy and missing women
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Jennifer Kesse, 24, missing from Orlando
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 33, 34, 35, 36, 37  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index -> Jennifer Kesse and similar disappearances
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 12:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I still find the fact that Jennifer had two phones on her and this doesn't help LE. I'm sure it is entirely possible that both phones pinged on the same cell tower. But didn't LE or Drew Kesse state something to the effect that Jennifer couldn't be in two places at the same time? Were the phones pinging off two cell towers? If that were so, wouldn't that make it easier to triangulate the position where both were turned off?

The portion of her dad's guestbook post was: "The ping study was not an exact science then and gave us little the investigators can use, i.e. one can't be in 2 places on the same phone miles away a few seconds apart."

There's a couple of problems with this. Recording pings is not something that changed from 2006 to a few years later whenever he made this post. I thought it was around 2013-2014 time frame but I've seen some earlier dates given. A tower records communications with a cellphone. It either did or it didn't. There's nothing inexact about it.

A cellphone can switch back and forth between two towers within range. I am assuming this is what is being referred to in that the cellphone was recorded by two towers miles apart a few seconds apart. This is not unusual, especially if the phone is moving. You'd expect behavior like this if the phone is moving due to having the controlling tower temporarily obstructed so the cellphone switches to another tower and then back.

Drew specifically mentions "the same phone" in his statement.

That is the entirety of what I've seen besides the two phones being powered off at 10:40pm, from Drew's guestbook post. Based on the info posted, there was no contact with the phones after 10:40pm. To know that means that they have ping info at 10:40pm. Obviously the towers involved in those pings say a lot. The fact that towers miles apart is mentioned indicates some change from the situation at 10pm.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 1:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the official report on the two phones in Jennifer's possession, was that they were "powered-down" by 10pm on the 23rd. But this may simply mean they didn't ping. Doesn't mean that the battery was removed, or that they were turned-off. They could have been in airport mode.

It's not exactly official, it's the next best thing we have, information posted by the Kesses. He states they went silent at 10:40pm by manual shutdown and presumed removal of cell batteries.

I posted on this a few weeks back, did research back in 2007 and again a few weeks ago, and probably have done some searching on cell phone technology every few years because it keeps coming up. It was involved in both Laci Peterson's and Theresa Parker's murder cases and who knows how many others, I retired from following new cases around that time.

You can't get a decent answer from a search on removal of batteries but the gist of it I think is that some phones are said to ping even when turned off although it may be more paranoia talking there than anything fact based.

However I did speculate one thing which I couldn't confirm with a search, and that might be (and I would suspect expected to be) a coded signal to the tower to notify ending transmission. The lack of this signal (and it would be lacking in two different phones at about same time) after last ping would indicate presumed removal of batteries INSTEAD OF manual shutdown and going through shutdown process.

So there's a couple of speculations. The presumed removal of batteries after a manual shutdown is highly speculative in that I would think it's not common to have a phone model that continues to ping after power off. I didn't even see a solid list of any such phones if there are any. That's referring to designed behavior from the phone manufacturer, not any of the phone was hacked to spy on you stuff.

I wouldn't be suprised to see that there's some indication of going through a shutdown process to the tower, but then they wouldn't have said manual shutdown because the indication of it would be missing. So I'd have to go with the phantom pings after power off are missing because of battery removal except we wouldn't expect those pings anyway. So not a solid logical conclusion to draw.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 1:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

JK's family has stated that LE has never revealed when the phones were powered off, even they, the family, have not been told this.

Jennifer's dad posted in their guestbook that the phones went silent at 10:40pm and presumed removal of cell batteries. He didn't state where he got the information, but it's information of the nature of a carrier diagnosis of cell tower logs.

In a way, it doesn't matter through who it was conveyed to him because law enforcement would not be adding anything of value to it. It is what it is, only the examiners of the tower logs would be able to glean anything meaningful from it.

However, the statement that LE has never revealed when the phones were powered off would lead people to believe they had no authoritative information on it. The guestbook post was I think a number of years later, maybe 2013-2014, and maybe they got the info since that statement. If the statement was made after the guestbook post, then it would indicate they didn't receive the info from LE.

But Drew carefully answered a question while not wanting to open up expectations of answering multiple questions in the guestbook, and he gave credence to this information. So if not LE, it was someone he respected as a source of conveyance of the diagnosis of the tower logs.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 1:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is it true that both local LE and the FBI have stopped taking tips ?

What I saw some years ago was a disturbing statement by the family I think that Orlando Police considered the case turned over to the FBI and the FBI didn't consider it its case. So they sort of refer people to each other seems to be the gist of it.

I don't know if that's changed since then but the only thing Orlando Police ever did was searches based on tips and they probably consider that scenario played out by now.

I'm going to guess that the one thing police count on, that being someone naming someone for another crime to try to save their own skin, they would accept a drop a name as a tip irregardless.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 6:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Having listened to the latest unconcluded , it's amazing how you can still find out new things about this case.

1. Ex boyfriend had to travel half an hour to get to the Blue Martini bar. (Hardly local?)

2. Ex boyfriend did not make his work on the Tuesday.


also

According to the podcast, the ex-boyfriend was one of the men who spent the weekend in Jen's condo with her brother. I thought it was the brother of her ex-boyfriend. Anyone know for certain which it was?

I have seen repeatedly posted that one of her brother's friends staying there that weekend was her ex-bf. There were numerous comments about the emotional implications of that. I only learned in postings a few months ago about this presence in nearby bar that night.

And now I see that he traveled a half hour to have that nearby presence and wasn't at work the next day?????

And none of this was mentioned in beginning and who knows how many years. I still say like I have said since finding this out that to me there is a very good chance that she was taking phone over to him to get rid of it and was abducted in mall parking lot, among other scenarios involving this development.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

But it wasn't her ex BF who left his phone there at JK's condo. It was her brother's friend. This info about the ex bf is interesting. Would she have gone out to meet him on the night of 6/23 ? When did he leave the bar ? with whom ? Also, hadn't JK been with her new bf for about a year ? seems like a long time for the ex to still be into JK...?

Local phone calls were not itemized on phone bills back in the day. (I have a landline phone bill but frankly haven't logged on to look at it in many years but I expect local calls still aren't itemized where there's not an accounting of a time limit or whatever, but not sure.) IIRC she had a landline as well as cell phone and I don't recall seeing anyone mention possibility that calls may have been placed or received on landline.

In fact so little attention to it I keep wondering if maybe I'm confused on that. Chandra Levy also had cell phone and landline (and so do I) and details may drift across cases after all these years. There are others who have much better tabs on details of Jennifer's disappearance.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2017 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think she would have mailed it from work. My company has mailing services, and CFI certainly did too. Many times, if employees need to mail something personal, they throw a couple of dollars in miscellaneous and it's fine.

I have asked for confirmation of Jennifer's package mailing situation at her employer for eleven years now and no answer. There are those close to the case who are sure that she would send the package from work.

But when I ask is it known that Jennifer availed herself of sending packages from work before no answer. Or even is it known that employees at her company routinely sent packages from work. I have worked in companies large and small all over the country and have never heard of employees use the mailroom to send packages. At most you could buy stamps at some of them, and of course could put self stamped mail in outgoing.

The concepts of "put some money in Miscellaneous" and "it's fine" are alien to any corporate culture I ever worked in.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2017 6:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The way FedEx and other shipping companies work is that you must have an account with them. You attach a label with your account number along with address to be delivered to. You can then drop it off in one of their boxes that are generally located in Commercial neighborhoods or you can have them pick it up in the course of some drivers route. Companies that do a lot of shipping might have one ore more regular pick ups.

The USPS (the post office) has similar service and is easier for someone who only does personal shipping. If Jennifer did not have her own account she would probably use the USPS unless she intended to use her employer's acct. She would not have been the first employee to ship a small package at her employer's expense.


Oh, I see here an answer to what I've been asking. So employees just say ship it and no one knows it's personal? Well, I can see why I never heard of it before.

Your comment is good info. I wrote on this in 2006. Police were quoted in news as saying they think Jennifer was out dropping a package off to send the phone. As if she had a personal FedEx account and packing in her condo and packaged up this phone and went to drop it off in a FedEx pickup box. Give me a freaking break. That was just the first of many idiotic Orlando Police statements on this case.

The whole point was that the friend requested it be shipped overnight to him, he needed it. That would allegedly be thr reason for going out at night, except that a package doesn't get shipped overnight any faster dropping it off in a box at 10pm than in the morning. So just utter stupidity on many levels, which they never managed to surpass at any point in this case.

Now if they had said we think she was looking for a 24 hour FedEx location or possibly (although would go against express wishes of friend) attempting to handle with 24 hour Post Office facilities then that's something to consider. That's what I focused on in beginning until this "Jennifer will send the package from work" thing which I have never seen one iota of information about.

And yet Jennifer dealing with the phone after that overnight it request is completely dismissed based on no information whatsoever. As in, yes, Jennifer sent packages from work or even yes employees at her company used the mailroom to send personal packages.

Nothing. Nada.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I tend to find that the more recent the report, the more accurate. Sometimes it isn't the interviewee that gets things wrong, but the person interviewing who makes an error.

Maybe we should pull up the Drew interviews on this and compare them with UnConcluded...Do you have links?

Question: if you believe that Jennifer was abducted at night, as opposed to morning, what is your reasoning around when the car was moved, why it was moved, and why it never traveled or got very far?


A post in their own Guestbook with a bunch of details of what they were told isn't same category as two conflicting vague statements in interviews. Goodness knows I wrote a book dealing with innumerable conflicting information in Chandra Levy's case to sort it out. It happens, but most recent isn't the overriding criteria. Most detailed with best sourcing and ideally corroborating information is the overriding criteria.

I will look for the post but I don't know state of their Guestbook and retention in search access.

I believe Jennifer was abducted at her car just like everyone thinks happened in the morning, but not in the morning going to work. It could be in her parking lot leaving to take the phone somewhere, it could be the mall parking lot if she was taking the phone over to the Blue Martini, it could be anywhere close she was at at 10:40pm. Whoever powered off the two cell phones was not a novice.

It's a big assumption that no gas was put into the car. A lot of it stems from abducted a little before 8, parked 4 hours later, didn't get gas, didn't go far. Everything changes with a nighttime abduction. And what would we expect? Not going far means that Jennifer and all her cases and bags were hidden in the area of her condo between 8 and 12 and never found all these years. That's not even taking into account why a woman is abducted to start with. I mean this isn't cozy murders territory. (Actually a crime genre believe it or not.) I have no interest in delving into the mind of someone like this but an abduction and disappearance is for a reason.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I want to get Drew's full post on the phones being powered off on record here with the Jennifer Kesse Guestbook link. Obviously if you have anything to share with the Kesse's on Jennifer's disappearance they have multiple ways to contact them including her guestbook, or the Orlando Police.

http://jenniferkesse.123guestbook.com/?page=27

Dear Kesse family my condolences again. Has there been any information on Jennifer's cell phone pings? There is someone stating that the phone stopped pinging around 1040pm the night before her car was found due to the phone battery being removed.

Replied on: 7:23am 07-24-2014

We really don't want to start answering questions here on guestbook otherwise we will end up with 100's of them. However there are 2 cell phones still missing and never found. Jennifer's and an additional one left in her condo by a family friend staying at her condo while she was away. Jennifer was going to mail the second phone presumably whenever she was able upon her return to Orlando 1/23/2006. Those phones we were told were pinging a little after 10pm on 1/23/2006 and went silent at approx. 10:40p by manual shut down and presumed removal of cell batteries. The ping study was not an exact science then and gave us little the investigators can use, i.e. one can't be in 2 places on the same phone miles away a few seconds apart. Just another heartbreaking reality of Jennifer's case. Technology isn't always cut and dry which is another thorn in our side. So what you heard is true and to this day those cell phone, Jennifer's pocketbook, Ipod and her work attache are still not located nor anything of hers used that is trackable.

The Kesses

end quote

I just want to say once again how painful I realize this is for the Kesses. This is their missing daughter. They handle the awfulness of this with a grace that does Jennifer's memory proud.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 12:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A couple of more things.

Regarding an inoperative tower, this would be the situation from the time she got home. It would be the tower where she made her cell phone calls that evening. What would be significant is if the primary tower changed at any time, especially up to the phone ceasing pinging. Which tower was primary all evening wasn't significant, a change in towers is significant. I have no idea how many towers might have been within cell phone signal range, I have read usually about a mile and a half.

The comment about can't be in two places at once indicates to me a cell phone switching from tower A to tower B and then back to tower A in a relatively short amount of time. But this isn't rocket science and no it wasn't any less exact and unknown in 2006. A tower recording a ping is not a vague inexact science. There is nothing complicated about interpreting the results. A cell phone ID is either in a tower's logs or it isn't, and the timestamp when it is is not open for interpretation.

Batteries presumably removed appears to reference some unknown models that were said to continue pinging after shutdown. The whole area is murky and rife with CIA hysteria, so searches on solid information worthless. The gist of it appears to be that no more pings were seen. And of course this was in a time when battery removal was still a thing. (I have a Blackberry and not the popular things and can still remove the battery, but I don't keep up with popular stuff.)

The car returned to HOTG from wherever is to return the abductor to an area where he can get home but not back to the Mosaic where he could be seen. Obviously an abduction just 4 or so hours earlier doesn't leave a lot of time for an abduction and disappearance of Jennifer and all her cases and bags in her car. But someone doesn't do all this in a short amount of time. There is no matchup with the crime and criminal behavior.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2017 8:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As far as how it would be known what distance her car traveled that day. However, if the CNN/Nancy Grace article is correct there was no forensic evidence of Jennifer being transported in her vehicle. And there was almost no forensic evidence with regard to an unknown driver. I can't see the driver cleaning the car of his DNA, hair and fingerprints that well so maybe the car was only driven 1-2 miles to HOTG. That is what make me believe the car was not driven far.

That means we have another vehicle? When was Jennifer's vehicle moved from the condo complex? And if Jennifer wasn't transported - alive or deceased - in her car why move it? To confuse LE? If this was a morning abduction in a 2nd vehicle the abductor could have driven for an hour, did what he did and driven back to complex. If Jennifer was murdered - and I believe she was - he could have done that quickly and driven back. Then move Jennifer's car to HOTG. Anything further he needed to do at the crime scene he drove to earlier he could have taken his time to go back and clean up - toss the briefcase, purse and cell phones. Considering this scenario, I would hope LE vacuumed the interior for any soil or plant evidence. I've never heard if LE checked traffic cameras or business surveillance cameras on the roads leading to HOTG either. If LE did and saw her car hopefully that can come into play later if they ID a suspect.

And if we have an evening abduction that changes things somewhat. And then I'm back to my question as to whether or not Jennifer's car was there at 0730. In any event, Jennifer's car was somewhere else if only to be driven from her parking spot to HOTG.


Kesses had a card payment at gas station I believe it was said Monday morning which would be on her way to work from S. Florida. The location of the gas station and mileage to work, then work to home would gve them their computation. It's something to go on but pretty rough. Also I believe was said they considered her normal use of trip odometer but that's pretty rough too.

If supposed to have taken place within four hours then there wouldn't be much driving anyway, although where Jennifer and her bags are within a few miles of her condo is hard to imagine. If a nighttime abduction there is no way to know if gas was put into the car. They are just assuming the morning abduction on that not far thing.

"No evidence of transport" I think this is another way of saying no hair or other evidence in trunk. If Jennifer was subdued as in rendered unconscious and placed in passenger seat I don't think they could distinguish from indications from her driving the car daily. I do agree nothing left behind by POI would seem to be a short duration in car. Even a short duration you would think would be hard not to leave some trace, maybe just hard to find as far as traces in the car. Gloves (even latex) would take care of fingerprints and DNA.

I think you're on to something about another car, but not from Mosaic. My belief is that Jennifer was abducted when she drove somewhere near, say parking lot at mall. Thinking about it it is more probable that in an abduction she would be forced to abductor's vehicle and rendered immobile, possibly unconscious. Then abductors vehicle would be driven to wherever.

The return and driving Jennifer's car to HOTG would be to not be obvious what happened, as for example studying surveillance video of where her car was found (shades of HOTG). Her car wasn't even parked at HOTG in a spot close to the street or across the street in the strip mall parking lot, but parked to make it look like abductor lived at HOTG.

So Jennifer's car would be driven next to no extra miles, just to wherever she was abducted (a short distance at most I think we would all agree) and then from there to HOTG. From corner at HOTG POI could take bus back to whereever Jennifer's car / his vehicle had been parked.

That also accounts for no forensics in Jennifer's car and I think anyone savvy enough to disable both cell phones would not make her car a crime scene, thus no forensics except short drive to HOTG.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Are we certain that the phones were powered off at 10:40? Jennifer's mom stated in the podcast that was not accurate.

We are certain that Jennifer's dad posted the specific information in Jennifer's Guestbook back in 2014 or so as told to him. Her mom's statement has been described in various ways, I have never seen a post that quoted her as saying it was not accurate. I saw something about her saying they were not told the info by law enforcement, then someone shortened it to they were not told that info, now shortened to the info is not accurate.

There is an actual quote in the video, and it can't be any more than one of these three. There are several possible ways to interpret the gist of the statement. It can range from it's not official, we weren't told this by the police to we no longer trust the source of this info.

The statement is accurate insofar as Drew was given this info. He carefully quoted it and elaborated on it, adding more info he was given about can't be in two places at once which is also carrier technical analysis based.

And by analysis here, I need to re-assert a problem people are having mixing the various and evolving technologies of locating a cell phone in a certain area. Analysis here does not refer to locating the cell phone, it refers to matching Jennifer's and the friend's cell phone id's in tower logs and determining what tower was in control of each phone when. This is basic stuff.

It is totally irrelevant for this purpose whether some closer tower was out of commission, it's just a matter of timewise when was last logged communication with each phone at any tower. It is not a given as far as reporting goes that this cell phone ping communication information had been retrieved by the carriers for law enforcement for years until this specific information was posted by Drew, and this only in the sense that it clearly refers to carrier analysis of the logs.

So the original post was very precise, this one statement in a video, which was originally pretty clear that she said they weren't told this info by law enforcement, is not being portrayed very precisely.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2017 3:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

How is there a determination that a phone was shut off? As far as I know, a cell being off can only be determined by calls/text messages not going through, and has virtually nothing to do with data or anything like that.
I feel like that might be something that can be tracked now, but in 2006? No way, but I could be very wrong.


Basic pinging and cell phones switching controlling tower is how cell phones work. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to move with a cell phone.

The phone carrier has to know what tower to direct a call for a call to get through to you. That tower is known to them by your cell phone pinging and establishing communications with towers, one of which will be designated as tower to send calls to you. When you move out of range the controlling tower will change. If there is no tower within range you have "no signal".

Basic ping recording for tower locations and making that info available to law enforcement is well known from many cases, one that preceded Jennifer's disappearance was Laci Peterson's disappearance and the determination of Scott Peterson's movements from his cell phone pinging. This is very basic stuff.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rd



Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9273
Location: Jacksonville, FL

PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2017 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Huntington on the Green is described as condos. I am looking for reasons the car was left there. I had originally thought that it was to make LE think JK went over there to HOTG, ostensibly to score drugs. Now, I wonder if there is another connection to HOTG that was missed.

When described is condos, I have no idea if HOTG was converted to condos since 2006 like Mosaic was, but it was apartments at the time of the crime, and Mosaic was in midst of completing conversion. Converting to condos was a big deal in Florida in that time frame, prior to the mortgage collapse. I moved to Florida in 2005 and several apartment complexes I went to look at had signs up about selling condos.

Texas is the first major intersection on Conroy-Americana from Mosaic other than the very busy John Young Parkway. I don't think it's any more complicated than that, and of course parking the car as if that person lived in HOTG was a distraction. Car could have more easily been parked in strip mall parking lot across Texas from HOTG but was instead parked front and center at HOTG in front of the main walkway.

rd
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    www.justiceforchandra.com Forum Index -> Jennifer Kesse and similar disappearances All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 33, 34, 35, 36, 37  Next
Page 34 of 37

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group