 |
www.justiceforchandra.com
Justice for Chandra Levy and missing women
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rd
Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9275
Location: Jacksonville, FL
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 9:58 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Clarified very well. Thanks Nancy.
I haven't considered anything said in that last call as a factor. My more pressing concern is when did the call end and what was the timestamps of the recorded pings?
If no else cares about them maybe we can make some sense of what they indicate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kudo623
Joined: 12 Jul 2018
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2018 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nancy wrote: | | NapQueen wrote: | | Lauren’s comments always bothered me because I don’t know how her phone call fits in the timeline - how did lauren know about me argument was like ones that all couples have if Rob was the last one to speak to Jennifer before she went missing? |
| rd wrote: | I agree with this. Only Rob knows what transpired in last call.
However, the friend she talked to that evening, which I didn't know about until mentioned within last year or two, I would expect that Jennifer gave her the scoop of whatever was transpiring between her and Rob.
I would not expect any less than lovey dovey stuff to come out of the clear blue sky on that last call, so whatever feelings were going on I expect that was the subject of a lot of the conversation that evening.
So I expect that friend to know somewhat what kind of call was taking place based on talking to Jennifer.
Having said that, I have no idea if the friend was the source of any description of the last call either. |
I owe you both an apology.
Here is my exact wording which has caused the confusion--and I see it myself and wish I would have phrased it differently:
| Quote: | Nancy wrote:
Lauren did describe Jenn as being in a little bit of a "funky" mood and the argument "that all couples have" which she had later with Rob are both true and I admit I wish we had a few more details. |
I should have typed the above as two separate, individual statements:
1) Lauren did describe Jenn as being in a little bit of a "funky" mood that evening. Period, full stop. That is not rumor. Their conversation lasted almost two hours on the evening of the 23rd, but no beginning and ending times have been released. (At least as far as I know). However, I think we can safely assume the conversation happened before she spoke to Rob as it has been somewhat officially stated that the conversation with Rob was Jennifer's last landline conversation of the evening.
2) The argument which Jenn later had with Rob that evening occurred during the above mentioned last conversation.
So, it hadn't even occurred when Jenn was talking to Lauren. (But the argument with Rob is not rumor, either. We simply have no idea what it was about--that part is all speculation and rumor).
I really do try to chose my words carefully, but not careful enough, I guess. Sorry.
I hope I've got it making more sense now. :)
I'm going to risk clarification of another point that I didn't address in my long, long comment--Lauren and Jenn knew each other since 2nd grade. They were close, close friends--always together; like sisters, really. Jennifer had told Lauren that she had a lifelong fear of going missing and no-one being able to find her.
My understanding is that this fear was present in Jennifer's mind long before she moved to her condo.
And lastly, I promise, is the following short quote from Rob.
Snipped transcript from about 7:34 minutes in:
Rob: I talked to her, I believe, 9:30 – 10:00, on the Monday evening. We had a disagreement over a phone, like any husband and wife; any boyfriend/girlfriend; any couple might have.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/3642478585001/?#sp=show-clips |
Nancy : Thanks for the info here. I did not know Jenn and Lauren talked for 2 hours that night? That helps me fill in my timeline. I looked at your thread thanks--you are very up on this case no doubt.
Can we put together a timeline of Jenn night of 23rd??
6:15 PM Jenn calls dad after leaving work.
6:30-6:45 PM Jenn arrives at home, moves luggage into condo.
6:45-7:15 PM Jenn looks for and finds Travis' phone, talks with him
on the phone about any texts or calls he might have received?
7:15-7:30 takes a shower, drys hair, etc
7:30PM - 9:30 PM On phone with Lauren.
9:30-10:pm PM on phone with Rob
10PM + ?
Please let me know how this looks? My times may be off a little but I think it may give us a picture from 6-10pm? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NapQueen
Joined: 12 Jul 2018
Posts: 61
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes many thanks Nancy that was super helpful and I really appreciate these details!
Rob was her last landline phone call, and she didn't have decent cell phone reception in her condo.
However, she could have gone onto her balcony to make a call on her cell phone if she wanted to use that phone for some reason in lieu of the landline right? Also, this was right on the brink of texting becoming a big thing. It was still new and limited, but it was definitely happening. Did anyone text Jennifer or did she ever send texts? She was young, smart and good at keeping in touch with her friends and loved ones. She very well may have been on top of the latest trends and utilized texting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NapQueen
Joined: 12 Jul 2018
Posts: 61
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Can we put together a timeline of Jenn night of 23rd??
6:15 PM Jenn calls dad after leaving work.
6:30-6:45 PM Jenn arrives at home, moves luggage into condo.
6:45-7:15 PM Jenn looks for and finds Travis' phone, talks with him
on the phone about any texts or calls he might have received?
7:15-7:30 takes a shower, drys hair, etc
7:30PM - 9:30 PM On phone with Lauren.
9:30-10:pm PM on phone with Rob
10PM + ? |
Kudo - wasn't there also a toll booth photo of Jennifer driving home? I don't know if there was a time given with it, but if that time is known we can throw that in your timeline as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rd
Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9275
Location: Jacksonville, FL
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Also for the timeline, 9:57 pm was time given for the phone call with Rob. (Was there no earlier phone call with Rob that evening?)
We don't know if the time was starting or ending of call, but convention would the starting time of the call. I believe the call was described as a few minutes long IIRC, Nancy has posted some quotes on what exactly that was that was said.
Note the 9:30 to 10:00 time frame quoted above by Rob is I believe a general time frame of when the call took place, not the beginning and end of the call. Although that would be more like what I would expect and the 9:57 the ending of the call, but I haven't seen thel call described that way anywhere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nancy
Joined: 11 Jul 2018
Posts: 460
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2018 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rd wrote: | Clarified very well. Thanks Nancy.
I haven't considered anything said in that last call as a factor. My more pressing concern is when did the call end and what was the timestamps of the recorded pings?
If no else cares about them maybe we can make some sense of what they indicate. |
BBM - Yes, I share these concerns. I side with those that believe the call ended at 9:57 pm, but that's not a popular opinion.
Regarding the timestamps of the recorded pings--well, that would probably settle what time the landline call ended and most likely has something to do with why they won't confirm a start/finish time for the call. Or why they flat-out mislead. {sigh}
I'd like to have the tower locations, too. I know it doesn't mean she was on top of the tower, but I would still like to know at least that much. Eleven pings is a lot of pings in no less than 20 minutes and no more than 40 minutes. I wonder if it pinged the same tower more than once, or how that could work? It couldn't have been "straight-line driving" because the gas mileage wouldn't support it. At least not in Jenn's vehicle--but then all the questions start about why move the dang vehicle. And they make sense, I do appreciate the argument.
| rd wrote: | Also for the timeline, 9:57 pm was time given for the phone call with Rob. (Was there no earlier phone call with Rob that evening?)
We don't know if the time was starting or ending of call, but convention would the starting time of the call. I believe the call was described as a few minutes long IIRC, Nancy has posted some quotes on what exactly that was that was said.
Note the 9:30 to 10:00 time frame quoted above by Rob is I believe a general time frame of when the call took place, not the beginning and end of the call. Although that would be more like what I would expect and the 9:57 the ending of the call, but I haven't seen thel call described that way anywhere. |
BBM - Yes, 9:57 pm is the time; and I probably have a quote saying it's the ending time. (I just like to disagree). :->
No, there was no earlier call with Rob on the 23rd. Or, at least, it was never released that there was one. No mention of one during the day or on her way home from work, either. Even on her way to work that morning--Mrs. Kesse said they talked for about half-an-hour (her and Jenn); but nothing about calling Rob to say she had arrived safely at work or anything.
I agree that the 9:30 pm to 10:00 pm time frame was given and intended as a very general time frame. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nancy
Joined: 11 Jul 2018
Posts: 460
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2018 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kudo623 wrote: | Nancy : Thanks for the info here. I did not know Jenn and Lauren talked for 2 hours that night? That helps me fill in my timeline. I looked at your thread thanks--you are very up on this case no doubt.
Can we put together a timeline of Jenn night of 23rd??
6:15 PM Jenn calls dad after leaving work.
6:30-6:45 PM Jenn arrives at home, moves luggage into condo.
6:45-7:15 PM Jenn looks for and finds Travis' phone, talks with him
on the phone about any texts or calls he might have received?
7:15-7:30 takes a shower, drys hair, etc
7:30PM - 9:30 PM On phone with Lauren.
9:30-10:pm PM on phone with Rob
10PM + ?
Please let me know how this looks? My times may be off a little but I think it may give us a picture from 6-10pm? |
A timeline is a great idea.
I always hesitated because I thought there wasn't enough confirmed events.
However, when I read through yours, I find it interesting.
Maybe we could bounce off the one you've given above, adding quotes and links to support what we can; and perhaps stating "speculation" for other points?
It would give us a sense of direction, and a place to record the precious few "facts" we actually have, (or think we do).
So, count me as a "yes" vote. I have some quotes for a few things, and maybe just some thoughts on others.
(I might be a little bit slow on replying, but that would just mean I am searching for something and I'm a little bit short on time).
Jenn's case is always on my mind, though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nancy
Joined: 11 Jul 2018
Posts: 460
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2018 9:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NapQueen wrote: | | Quote: |
Can we put together a timeline of Jenn night of 23rd??
6:15 PM Jenn calls dad after leaving work.
6:30-6:45 PM Jenn arrives at home, moves luggage into condo.
6:45-7:15 PM Jenn looks for and finds Travis' phone, talks with him
on the phone about any texts or calls he might have received?
7:15-7:30 takes a shower, drys hair, etc
7:30PM - 9:30 PM On phone with Lauren.
9:30-10:pm PM on phone with Rob
10PM + ? |
Kudo - wasn't there also a toll booth photo of Jennifer driving home? I don't know if there was a time given with it, but if that time is known we can throw that in your timeline as well. |
I'm going to risk jumping in here, even though I may not be invited.
Jennifer's car had a transponder of some sort in it and it was the transponder in her car that recorded her going through the toll booth at 6:15 pm on January 23, 2006. (It was the toll booth that she regularly used on her way home).
She was also talking to her father and brother at that same time.
I don't believe it was ever factually stated there was a toll booth photo of Jennifer driving home. The people that started that didn't understand the information came from Jennifer's vehicle, not the toll booth and so assumed there must be a picture.
Maybe it's possible, but I doubt it. If there ever was any actual footage, it was probably recorded over before LE could retrieve it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nancy
Joined: 11 Jul 2018
Posts: 460
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2018 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rd wrote: | | You raise several interesting issues, kudo. It will take some thought to address them all. |
This is a great comment, and I want to make a few remarks on some of the points you addressed (before it gets too far back).
| rd wrote: | First, I think it's important that a night abduction could come in any form. Note that that includes all suggestions of how a morning abduction was accomplished, just after 10 instead of in the morning.
It also includes a voluntary departure and an abduction anywhere from her front door to a nearby destination she drove to. The only thing going for a morning abduction is a belief that she didn't go out willingly. But no one says she went willingly. You have to deal with facts though.
The statements made by her dad on the pings are all factually incorrect. I get that he doesn't think she left her home willingly at 10 at night, but trying to dispute information that her phone was on the move after 10 with incorrect statements isn't going to make it so.
"Inexact science"
There is nothing inexact about it at all. When someone connects with a server, that server can have a log and record that contact - the IP address and time and details about what emitted the contact, such as web browser. There is nothing inexact about that at all.
The cell tower does exactly the same thing. It records contact with a phone, including IP address and phone ID, and the time of contact. There is zero inexact or mysterious about this.
"Can't be in two places at once"
Have you ever used a CB radio or seen it used in a movie? Even in these days it's probable we've all seen Smoky and the Bandit, so yes, we've seen people talking on CB radios.
Let's say you get a breaker breaker I've got a smoky sitting just ahead of you waiting to turn his bubblegum machine on. Your compadre is 2 miles up the highway in front of you. You 10-4 that, mucho thanks, yada yada. Ok so far.
But then you hear on your CB Bandit, Bandit, you left your hound dog back here, get yourself back here, he's waiting for you. And Bandit goes 10-4 I heard that and pulls a 180 at 80 MPH. Okay so we did drift off into some inexact science there, but the point remains.
The point being, Bandit must have been in two places at once. And you go, oh no, he talked to a car ahead of him, and the he talked to the diner behind him he just left. So why would someone think he was in two places at once?
I don't know. Inexact reasoning. Who knows? The point is the phone is a broadcaster, and it broadcasts and can, and does, communicate with any tower in range. Towers are all over the place. We had a nice map of them at one time.
There is nothing that says phone will communicate with tower A instead of tower B if both are within range. I have written that until my fingers bleed, but it does no good. For some reason people can't, or won't, understand that. |
BBM - But the phone (and whoever is traveling with it), has to be in the specific area where the signal range of the two towers overlaps--do you think this is correct? And it could be three towers or maybe more that all overlap coverage?
But the phone, itself, would pick the tower that is offering the strongest signal and make one ping off of that tower? And it would not ping again until it left the coverage area of that tower, (due to physical location movement); and entered another tower range?
| rd wrote: | | There also is nothing that says phone can only communicate with one tower. In fact, if the phone is moving, it makes it more likely that the phone will communicate with a different tower. For little reason at all, a phone can communicate with tower A, lose some signal from tower A and communicate with tower B, and then immediatetely start communicating with tower A again because the signal regained strength. And the phone isn't in two places at once. |
Now this would occur if you were having a conversation on your phone? But if you weren't actually using your phone, would it not just ping the tower as it came into range--letting the tower know it was there and available? And then would only ping again when it left that tower range and came into the range of another tower signal?
The possibility of 11 pings really bothers me. That's why I keep going on about this.
| rd wrote: | People want this to be something we keep telling you it isn't. The phone doesn't automatically communicate with the closest tower, the phone doesn't sequentially migrate to the next closest tower all neat and here's their location and here's where they're going. In a big picture yes, but not down to street level tower by tower.
Big picture with enough time a pattern of towers in a certain direction are used and one can say they headed east or whatever, but this was limited time. The location stuff from police is incompetent stupidity. Just as the phone was not in two places at once, it wasn't necessarily any nearer the towers involved than within broadcast range. |
One word: "triangulation". It's possible that even the Kesse's were not shown the complete study.
_______________
Sorry, I entered that too soon and now I'm in here under edit trying to finish it. oops
Okay. I just cut the last portion because there is something there that really interests me.
I'll respond under a separate comment.
Sorry for this confusion. (Trying to do a couple of things at once has led to this. I am no good at multi-tasking and I know better). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rd
Joined: 13 Sep 2002
Posts: 9275
Location: Jacksonville, FL
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2018 9:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Actually is very good to respond in multiple focused posts. Just because I got to rambling there doesn't mean we have to be stuck with it. :)
But the phone (and whoever is traveling with it), has to be in the specific area where the signal range of the two towers overlaps--do you think this is correct? And it could be three towers or maybe more that all overlap coverage?
Yeah, that's part of the definition of in communications range, and I've referred to this type of triangulation in past. However, the time between recorded pings is also a factor.
Unlike a broadcast used to locate your cellphone (when requested of the carrier by LE via warrant), these are not simultaneous contacts. However when close together in time, it's a given that phone was in a position that could communicate with both towers.
But if the two towers are half a mile apart and the communications range anywhere from two miles to twenty miles (depends), then the overlap is practically 100%. It depends greatly, but the situation could limit in a helpful way areas farther away from the trianglation if any, and the tower if none.
But the phone, itself, would pick the tower that is offering the strongest signal and make one ping off of that tower? And it would not ping again until it left the coverage area of that tower, (due to physical location movement); and entered another tower range?
It gets dicey to count on this. That's like saying it will contact the closest tower and then sequentially contact other closest towers as you approach them. And you just can't count on any of that.
But in general what you're saying there is ideally what's going on.
Now this would occur if you were having a conversation on your phone? But if you weren't actually using your phone, would it not just ping the tower as it came into range--letting the tower know it was there and available? And then would only ping again when it left that tower range and came into the range of another tower signal?
Yes, as you're driving along having a phone conversation, your call is being handed off to a tower coming into range as you leave previous range.
As I understand from research, how this is handled varies by carrier architecture of network, phones, etc. It could be that phone makes these decisions based on signal strength, it could be masterminded by network routing based on info passed to it by towers and phone, or some combination.
The last thing it is though, is an inexact science. It is, and has been for longer than 12 years, a precise engineering architecture.
The possibility of 11 pings really bothers me. That's why I keep going on about this.
What I'm also concerned about is the time range of these pings. We know the ending time, but I never saw a good indication of the starting time. I don't know that the 11 pings are between 10 pm and 10:20 pm or so. If there is an indication it's post-good night call, then that's good and eliminates a question area.
The takeaway on why the phone started pinging is that the phone was moving. There's no assumptions with that, but it's a given that has to be dealt with.
One word: "triangulation". It's possible that even the Kesse's were not shown the complete study.
Personally, I doubt that the Kesses weren't intended to be given the complete study. That's what that "you don't know your daughter" stuff was about.
What I do doubt is the technical understanding by the OP of what they were told by the carrier. And even if triangulation limited the area to say over on Orange Blossom Trail and Americana area, there's nothing for Jennifer over there looking at even today's map, then again it's a really stupid assumption that Jennifer drove herself there and then her phones are destroyed.
That's exactly what someone would want the police to think. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Markybug
Joined: 13 Jul 2018
Posts: 92
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 6:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nancy wrote: | | NapQueen wrote: | | Lauren’s comments always bothered me because I don’t know how her phone call fits in the timeline - how did lauren know about me argument was like ones that all couples have if Rob was the last one to speak to Jennifer before she went missing? |
| rd wrote: | I agree with this. Only Rob knows what transpired in last call.
However, the friend she talked to that evening, which I didn't know about until mentioned within last year or two, I would expect that Jennifer gave her the scoop of whatever was transpiring between her and Rob.
I would not expect any less than lovey dovey stuff to come out of the clear blue sky on that last call, so whatever feelings were going on I expect that was the subject of a lot of the conversation that evening.
So I expect that friend to know somewhat what kind of call was taking place based on talking to Jennifer.
Having said that, I have no idea if the friend was the source of any description of the last call either. |
I owe you both an apology.
Here is my exact wording which has caused the confusion--and I see it myself and wish I would have phrased it differently:
| Quote: | Nancy wrote:
Lauren did describe Jenn as being in a little bit of a "funky" mood and the argument "that all couples have" which she had later with Rob are both true and I admit I wish we had a few more details. |
I should have typed the above as two separate, individual statements:
1) Lauren did describe Jenn as being in a little bit of a "funky" mood that evening. Period, full stop. That is not rumor. Their conversation lasted almost two hours on the evening of the 23rd, but no beginning and ending times have been released. (At least as far as I know). However, I think we can safely assume the conversation happened before she spoke to Rob as it has been somewhat officially stated that the conversation with Rob was Jennifer's last landline conversation of the evening.
2) The argument which Jenn later had with Rob that evening occurred during the above mentioned last conversation.
So, it hadn't even occurred when Jenn was talking to Lauren. (But the argument with Rob is not rumor, either. We simply have no idea what it was about--that part is all speculation and rumor).
I really do try to chose my words carefully, but not careful enough, I guess. Sorry.
I hope I've got it making more sense now. :)
I'm going to risk clarification of another point that I didn't address in my long, long comment--Lauren and Jenn knew each other since 2nd grade. They were close, close friends--always together; like sisters, really. Jennifer had told Lauren that she had a lifelong fear of going missing and no-one being able to find her.
My understanding is that this fear was present in Jennifer's mind long before she moved to her condo.
And lastly, I promise, is the following short quote from Rob.
Snipped transcript from about 7:34 minutes in:
Rob: I talked to her, I believe, 9:30 – 10:00, on the Monday evening. We had a disagreement over a phone, like any husband and wife; any boyfriend/girlfriend; any couple might have.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/3642478585001/?#sp=show-clips |
Is the quote from Rob stating “ we had a disagreement over a phone “ meaning “ on the phone “ or arguing about a actual phone ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Markybug
Joined: 13 Jul 2018
Posts: 92
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 6:59 am Post subject: Nancy grace |
|
|
Was the Nancy Grace episode any good ? Sorry but i had to switch off after 10 minutes as Nancy constantly talked about herself, any time jenns mum spoke , Nancy steered the topic back to her.... is the norm with her?? My ipad was at risk of getting thrown across the room , so i switched off.
Mark. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kudo623
Joined: 12 Jul 2018
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 8:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rd wrote: | Actually is very good to respond in multiple focused posts. Just because I got to rambling there doesn't mean we have to be stuck with it. :)
But the phone (and whoever is traveling with it), has to be in the specific area where the signal range of the two towers overlaps--do you think this is correct? And it could be three towers or maybe more that all overlap coverage?
Yeah, that's part of the definition of in communications range, and I've referred to this type of triangulation in past. However, the time between recorded pings is also a factor.
Unlike a broadcast used to locate your cellphone (when requested of the carrier by LE via warrant), these are not simultaneous contacts. However when close together in time, it's a given that phone was in a position that could communicate with both towers.
But if the two towers are half a mile apart and the communications range anywhere from two miles to twenty miles (depends), then the overlap is practically 100%. It depends greatly, but the situation could limit in a helpful way areas farther away from the trianglation if any, and the tower if none.
But the phone, itself, would pick the tower that is offering the strongest signal and make one ping off of that tower? And it would not ping again until it left the coverage area of that tower, (due to physical location movement); and entered another tower range?
It gets dicey to count on this. That's like saying it will contact the closest tower and then sequentially contact other closest towers as you approach them. And you just can't count on any of that.
But in general what you're saying there is ideally what's going on.
Now this would occur if you were having a conversation on your phone? But if you weren't actually using your phone, would it not just ping the tower as it came into range--letting the tower know it was there and available? And then would only ping again when it left that tower range and came into the range of another tower signal?
Yes, as you're driving along having a phone conversation, your call is being handed off to a tower coming into range as you leave previous range.
As I understand from research, how this is handled varies by carrier architecture of network, phones, etc. It could be that phone makes these decisions based on signal strength, it could be masterminded by network routing based on info passed to it by towers and phone, or some combination.
The last thing it is though, is an inexact science. It is, and has been for longer than 12 years, a precise engineering architecture.
The possibility of 11 pings really bothers me. That's why I keep going on about this.
What I'm also concerned about is the time range of these pings. We know the ending time, but I never saw a good indication of the starting time. I don't know that the 11 pings are between 10 pm and 10:20 pm or so. If there is an indication it's post-good night call, then that's good and eliminates a question area.
The takeaway on why the phone started pinging is that the phone was moving. There's no assumptions with that, but it's a given that has to be dealt with.
One word: "triangulation". It's possible that even the Kesse's were not shown the complete study.
Personally, I doubt that the Kesses weren't intended to be given the complete study. That's what that "you don't know your daughter" stuff was about.
What I do doubt is the technical understanding by the OP of what they were told by the carrier. And even if triangulation limited the area to say over on Orange Blossom Trail and Americana area, there's nothing for Jennifer over there looking at even today's map, then again it's a really stupid assumption that Jennifer drove herself there and then her phones are destroyed.
That's exactly what someone would want the police to think. |
Triangulation should have been able to pinpoint her phone's location very accurately being that there are much more towers in a densely populated area like Orlando.
Yes, you are right, the cell phone data leads to a stupid assumption--that doesn't make any sense--as to why Jenn quickly left her condo right after ending her phone call with Rob at 9:57PM and drove her car directly to that area in the middle of nowhere to then have her phone powered off and disappear? But that's what the cell data indicates.
Not only this, but that when she left she took her personal articles with her that she needed for work--ipod, ipad, attache, purse, etc. Why would she do that if she wasn't going to work? Why would she not take her mace with her at that hour? I mean there has to be a reasonable explanation for all this, but there isn't any, is there?
What the cell data indicates is unreliable and inconclusive--because it says that just after Jenn got off the phone with Rob, someone came out of hiding in her condo and abducted her without a scuffle and scurried her out the door, but not before collecting her phone, ipad, ipod, attache, purse etc and taking them with him, not powering off the phone until 40 minutes later. Then some 14 hours later be seen parking her vehicle at the HOTG apartment complex?
This is the only scenario that could have happened based on this cell phone data. Or tell me that it happened another way? This is why I don't believe in this theory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
myserty64
Joined: 12 Jul 2018
Posts: 82
Location: Gold Coast QLD Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 8:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have been AWOL due to a medical issue. I just thought I'd let you know it wasn't caused by a banned message from RD's site.
I have just read through the posts and there was some good information as far as refreshing one's memory goes.
I'm now going to post some random thoughts that mostly repeat what I have thought and written about over the past twelve years.
Most will be aware of a blog site that now appears 'dead' as it were. This site was detested by WS .
Regardless the blog owner conducted a thorough review of the Jennifer Kesse mystery.
I have a difficult time believing it was a work of fiction but who am I to know.
In the bloggers analysis it was claimed a man's sweater was found in Jennifer's laundry hamper. What do you make of this?
Also the blogger claimed certain items were found in the vicinity of of Windermere. What do we make of this and does this area tie in with RD's ping study?
The grainy images of the POI. At least we know it wasn't JK who parked her car at HTOG. How many unsolved cases have pictures of a perpetrator or at least a person who knew a crime was committed?
Did anyone notice that in Mr Kesse's fund raiser JK's last known boyfriend made a four figure donation. It just proves that these dastardly crimes affect those close to victim the whole of their lives. But I guess we all know that.
Just what is LE holding back? They must have something. I'm not not convinced about a tiny piece of DNA. That technology has advanced in leaps and bounds over the past 12 years.
Then there is the latent print. That hasn't achieved anything either.
Have any of Jennifer's closest friends been interviewed? Either by LE or any private individual. Many people share stuff with their nearest and dearest friends. Many times it is information they would not share with parents.
Nobody is talking. Why not?
If this hasn't been declared a cold case what is the reason?
Finally, has a crack cold case team ever had access to JK investigation files? There is plenty of them and you can't tell me they are full of POI pictures.
If I am out of order with any of these comments the administrator is free to delete any part of this post. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NapQueen
Joined: 12 Jul 2018
Posts: 61
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Funny enough - BOC isn't as dead of a website as it appears. In fact, she actually responded and answered a comment made about a suspect several days ago.
As far as the cold case angle - it's never going to happen. That is, it won't ever be declared cold by Orlando Police without someone being arrested in connection to it or some other resolution. The rationale for that is super frustrating IMO. I've had it explained to me dozens of times by OPD, my local police dept. records manager, FDLE, etc. and I still can't explain it to someone else. All I know is unless there is an arrest or something to that effect, they won't make it "cold." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
