• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

New Evidence for Steven Avery

BeeBoop

BeeBoop

Golden Member
Cell phone evidence shows that Teresa left Steven's property. Can someone explain what the lawyer means? Does she mean that cell towers knows your location even if you are not talking or texting?

http://www.bustle.com/articles/146555-steven-averys-new-alibi-draws-an-eerie-comparison-between-making-a-murderer-serial
 
My understanding is that yes "cell towers knows your location even if you are not talking or texting".

Fern
 
if you haven't removed the battery from the cell phone, then the GPS is still powered, and your phone is being tracked by cell towers.
 
Didn't read the article but generally a phone's gps is turned on by default. You have to adjust your settings to disable it.

Not sure when the murders occured but it had to been sometime in the 90's. I don't think most phones at that time had GPS. But in theory, they should be able to narrow down where you are if your phone pings 2 or 3neighboring towers.

4.) By using Operator/Carrier MSISDN triangulation. This method is not available to the general public and there are strong contracts between whoever has this technology and the carriers to prevent abuse. There you basically send the MSISDN (phone number) to the operator via a computer interface (API) and they will give back a lat/lon location and an accuracy based on the cell towers the device is interacting with (triangulation). For this method, the device does not need to be equipped with GPS. In most countries legally every location request will have to be prompted by the user, i.e. giving the operator the consent to locate the user. Operators charge per request but those costs are usually passed on by premium SMS to the end consumer. Example service: Send an sms text message containing the word "GAS" to short number xzy and receive the address of the closest gas station. 50p per request.
Click to expand...

https://www.quora.com/How-do-I-ping-a-cell-phone-in-order-to-obtain-its-location
 
Your phone logs the cell towers transitions from one to another. That being said, the phone could have been moved by anyone. It would be interesting to get the log and see where the phone went.

All you have to do is turn your phone on and move about. No GPS required.
 
While the cell phone is powered on it is communicating with a great number of cell towers for a variety of reasons, such as power optimization. Cell towers tell your cell phone to power down until it loses the cell phones signal and then tells it to power up a level thereby insuring the minimal amount of power is in use by both tower and handset. This happens with many cell towers simultaneously and is how triangulation can be conducted.
 
twinrider1 said:
So, now we know the phone didn't do it.
Click to expand...
Ehhhh, maybe. Maybe not.

Z8L5k0n.jpg
 
Even if GPS is turned off phones ping the towers so the carrier knows where (what tower) to send a call or text. This data can be triangulated to give an approximate location.
 
This is new evidence, but it doesn't really mean he still didn't do it. All it means is the phone moved from the house. What is odd though is how it then ended back up in Steve's house after it allegedly left the property.
 
No GPS involved with the cell tower tracking. If your phone is on, it is talking to the towers near you.

If there is a robbery on the east side of town at 1PM, and you were on the west side of town with your phone simply turned on, the cell towers would show that your phone couldn't have been near the scene of the crime at the time.

Merely having the phone on and with you provides a rough estimate of your location via the cell towers.

This cell tower info was used in the Duke Lacrosse case to show that certain players were not near the scene of the fake rape at the time it supposedly happened.

Wifi spots also give rough location info.
 
z1ggy said:
This is new evidence, but it doesn't really mean he still didn't do it. All it means is the phone moved from the house. What is odd though is how it then ended back up in Steve's house after it allegedly left the property.
Click to expand...

He probably put it in his pocket and then brought it back home with him.
 
z1ggy said:
This is new evidence, but it doesn't really mean he still didn't do it. All it means is the phone moved from the house. What is odd though is how it then ended back up in Steve's house after it allegedly left the property.
Click to expand...

Well, it means he couldn't have done it in the manner that the prosecution described, assuming the time frame is relevant.

It's also very hard to comprehend the logical idea that Avery would take Teresa away from his house, kill her, and yet bring the corpse back to burn in front of his own door. It makes no sense at all.
 
Chiropteran said:
Well, it means he couldn't have done it in the manner that the prosecution described, assuming the time frame is relevant.

It's also very hard to comprehend the logical idea that Avery would take Teresa away from his house, kill her, and yet bring the corpse back to burn in front of his own door. It makes no sense at all.
Click to expand...

there is so much crap in the case that doesn't make any sense at all and i really can't understand how someone could watch making a murderer and say there is no reasonable doubt.
 
TwiceOver said:
He probably put it in his pocket and then brought it back home with him.
Click to expand...

Her body was found on his property and we know from cell phone data that she left. Police theory says that she never left and was killed on his property. For what reason would he kill her and leave his property with her body only to return? Doesn't add up.
 
purbeast0 said:
there is so much crap in the case that doesn't make any sense at all and i really can't understand how someone could watch making a murderer and say there is no reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...

they car key being magically found days later is what gets me... and by whom

there is shady stuff going on... it amazes me stuff like this can happen in real life (vs the movies)
 
Elganja said:
they car key being magically found days later is what gets me... and by whom

there is shady stuff going on... it amazes me stuff like this can happen in real life (vs the movies)
Click to expand...

that is just one of like the dozen or more things that simply make absolutely no sense. even the way the lady found the car "by powers of god" is so fucking suspect when you see that topdown view of the entire junkyard, and she literally made a b-line for it.
 
TwiceOver said:
That's generally how things end up back at my house. You asked.
Click to expand...

Oh, didn't know you killed people, shoved them into their own car, take their phone and drive away after but then come back and put said dead person's phone inside your house.

Makes total sense.
 
BeeBoop said:
Her body was found on his property and we know from cell phone data that she left. Police theory says that she never left and was killed on his property. For what reason would he kill her and leave his property with her body only to return? Doesn't add up.
Click to expand...

z1ggy said:
Oh, didn't know you killed people, shoved them into their own car, take their phone and drive away after but then come back and put said dead person's phone inside your house.

Makes total sense.
Click to expand...

You guys do know people's phones can be moved without the owner attached, right?
 
TwiceOver said:
You guys do know people's phones can be moved without the owner attached, right?
Click to expand...

And my point, albeit looks lost on you, was there was huge amounts of reasonable doubt in this case. I'm not sure what conclusive evidence you have that would point to him taking the phone, or doing anything with the phone really at all.

All we know about the phone if memory serves is that the police (who shouldn't have even been there) found it in his house after missing it the first time through. furthermore, weren't some voicemails deleted after her alleged time of death? If he did touch the phone, why the hell would he leave evidence in his house? I know the dude isn't a genius but... destroying a phone is pretty elementary, not rocket science.
 
z1ggy said:
And my point, albeit looks lost on you, was there was huge amounts of reasonable doubt in this case. I'm not sure what conclusive evidence you have that would point to him taking the phone, or doing anything with the phone really at all.

All we know about the phone if memory serves is that the police (who shouldn't have even been there) found it in his house after missing it the first 7 times through. furthermore, weren't some voicemails deleted after her alleged time of death? If he did touch the phone, why the hell would he leave evidence in his house? I know the dude isn't a genius but... destroying a phone is pretty elementary, not rocket science.
Click to expand...

fixed.

also, i believe it was the brother who deleted messages from her phone. can't remember exactly though. he was an odd ball and i wouldn't be surprised if he had something to do with it.
 
purbeast0 said:
fixed.

also, i believe it was the brother who deleted messages from her phone. can't remember exactly though. he was an odd ball and i wouldn't be surprised if he had something to do with it.
Click to expand...

Haha wow it was 7?? Jesus, I thought it was found on search #2. Wow that is brutally sketch.

Yeah, he was so wrapped up in the media frenzy. He loved the lime light.

Either way, this evidence IMO doesn't really help SA too much, it just proves there's more to the story that has yet to be told.
 
TwiceOver said:
You guys do know people's phones can be moved without the owner attached, right?
Click to expand...

Yes, but if Steve Avery is running the phone away as some crazy diversion, he can't be back at his house/garage killing Teresa at the same time. He just can't be in two place at the same time.

This depends on the time frame being relevant, of course, but if it's not than this new evidence isn't nearly as interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top