[sno man]

This Sun article is a curious scatter-shot of tid-bits and fun facts of various stories...

Kathy sure that she hasn't incriminated her brother despite talking to the police that are investigating him.
Rob and Doug believe their phones are tapped.
There were residents of Dixon Rd. under investigation as a part of Brazen2 (?) Were they not actually part of Traveler?
McLean (former cop, crime specialist) believes it could become a “significant development” in the case. (Kathy's having talked to police) *LOOK FOR THIS ONE TO BE THE HINT* & then goes on to suggest people who talk to police have "varying motivations".
Kathy not being very good at court dates or community service (goes to character and motivation questions brought up by McLean)
Scotty Mac gets some love, with the not exactly true dismissal news of the lawsuit suggesting RoFo arranged his prison beating.
And I'm a little surprised we weren't being asked to "put the dots together", but it looks like they may be suggesting more of an actual relationship (read history, maybe) with the FoFam and McRobb... Family. Not just Rob...

curiouser and curiouser...

 

[FraudNation]

FoFam... Wow. Just wow.
"Sure. I talked to the cops, but I sure said no nothing bad about Robbie!!"
Family Criminal Hotmail Lawyer... What the fuck?

Are you Most Biased Political TO Media Ever going to continue letting these reprobates humiliate you?
I'm serious, the pussy footing around the FoFam really is the main reason TO is a worldwide laughing stock. The skeletons you allow the FoFam to continue hiding have contributed more to the disgrace than anyone else, except MoFo and her demented spawn.

Start reporting with out fear or favour, for fuck's sake, this family is not worthy of any respect whatsoever. None.

 

[FraudNation]

Oh, and LOL at the jammable Stintz. Had she had a non-deferential attitude towards FoFam, she would be looking pretty good after the Jamming comments, but haha nope, chose to parrot the Best Mayor Ever, now paying the price.

 

[pud99]

I am, and I certainly haven't!

And so we seem to be back at scratch: If shielding seized mobile 'phones was not the reason (and leaving aside that the TPS are not milliners), what would have been the reason for bringing tinfoil to a raid?

 

[pud99]

Thanks pud99, glad you got the pun, I wasn't sure if anyone remembered Chatty Cathy.

And Chatty Patty:

And especially Talky Tina:

[video=youtube;wb8PxjhwsDE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb8PxjhwsDE[/video]

 

[Cooper]

Joe is confusing me again. Wasn't the story about the second crack the Globe's scoop?

ETA: Oops. Skimmed the lead on Joe's story before I had my coffee. He credits the Globe for the video story. My mistake. Apologies.

 

[sno man]

And so we seem to be back at scratch: If shielding seized mobile 'phones was not the reason (and leaving aside that the TPS are not milliners), what would have been the reason for bringing tinfoil to a raid?

I wonder (truly have no idea, so forgive me whatthe) how often the lawyer is there for the raid/search warrant execution... When typically would be the first time you would see a client's device that had been held as evidence?

Keep in mind too, the ability to remotely 'brick' a phone is pretty new, I'm late to the party, my new (1 year old) smart phone is the first one I've owned that I could do that with. Maybe just 5 years or so(?) and not yet universal.

 

[sno man]

Joe is confusing me again. Wasn't the story about the second crack the Globe's scoop?

HA! maybe Worms was who they bought the stills from.

/only half kidding

 

[pud99]

View attachment 27598

[video=youtube;sEHHlGNUiB8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEHHlGNUiB8[/video]

 

[whatthe]

I wonder (truly have no idea, so forgive me whatthe) how often the lawyer is there for the raid/search warrant execution... When typically would be the first time you would see a client's device that had been held as evidence?

Keep in mind too, the ability to remotely 'brick' a phone is pretty new, I'm late to the party, my new (1 year old) smart phone is the first one I've owned that I could do that with. Maybe just 5 years or so(?) and not yet universal.

Generally speaking a lawyer is never present for a search warrant execution. And the defence would never see the actual phone itself until a trial in court (when it usually arrives in a see-through plastic evidence bag), but we'd get pictures of it after it was seized. And, of course, we'd get copies of anything that was taken off of it such as text messages, call records, videos, etc.

 

[pud99]

Generally speaking a lawyer is never present for a search warrant execution. And the defence would never see the actual phone itself until a trial in court (when it usually arrives in a see-through plastic evidence bag), but we'd get pictures of it after it was seized. And, of course, we'd get copies of anything that was taken off of it such as text messages, call records, videos, etc.

Can one not prevent a remote wipe by turning off wi-fi (in case the 'phone is on a wi-fi connection, which does not require a SIM card) and pulling the SIM card?

 

[pud99]

Can one not prevent a remote wipe by turning off wi-fi (in case the 'phone is on a wi-fi connection, which does not require a SIM card) and pulling the SIM card?

But, I suppose - to answer my own question, I know - that if the 'phone was locked with a password that you did not have then you would not be able to get in in order to turn off wi-fi, so you would still need to shield it against the risk of it being on a wi-fi connection and so vulnerable to a remote wipe.

 

[L23]

Exactly.

Also, she would know exactly who filmed it, and likely how to find them. I'm assuming that is why the police wanted to talk to her.

he police probably already knew that though, since it was the dealer who was selling the video. The report also mentioned that they'd also already talked to him too, suggesting to was before the interview with Kathy.

 

[sno man]

But, I suppose - to answer my own question, I know - that if the 'phone was locked with a password that you did not have then you would not be able to get in in order to turn off wi-fi, so you would still need to shield it against the risk of it being on a wi-fi connection and so vulnerable to a remote wipe.

Not just wi-fi though, if the phone has a voice and data plan, and data is on, if the phone has cell service it has internet.

Also the cops wouldn't want to be poking buttons and adjusting settings at the evidence collection stage, it's pretty much bag it and tag it.

 

[basic]

The last we heard, iirc, was that Giroux was looking for the dealer but unable to find him. He may have been the interview after Kathy.

I wouldn't be surprised if she got the police in touch with him in order to smooth over her recent dental problems. Technically she wouldn't have said anything incriminating, it's the dealer who would get to do that. It explains her disclosing the incrimination piece as well, to ensure her butt is covered should anything come of this.