http://www.gzlegalcase.com/index.php/discovery-log/state-s-12th-discovery
http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/court-documents/122-state-s-12th-discovery
http://www.gzlegalcase.com/index.php/discovery-log/state-s-11th-discovery
I guess it’s a flip-phone now huh? 
Interesting he is using Google for a code, Google saves your videos, bookmarks, other passwords a trove of information on their servers. I wonder in MOM and West are on this.
Nothing surprises me anymore. Dayumnn
If his phone was synced, to a Google account, that information is retrievable
The phones extraction report 2nd page has the gmail account blacked out but still can read it.
yes that is correct. I have an Android and it is synced to my google account. So everything should be retrievable via google.
This is one of the problems I am having with the police story about the phone and being unable to retrieve information from the phone. All they needed was this device, most major PD now have them, even have a portable version. All they needed was a warrant to search the phone, and the Ufed, for they to access the phone. Watch the video.
more evidence that someone is not telling the truth.
That same device can download all the data in the phone, make a clone, etc. I believe this is how Sgt. Brenton downloaded the information out of the phone.
So why was it necessary to send the phone for further testing? What was missing from the phone? What is the prosecution trying to find? If everything matched as they claimed, you think it would be the Defense performing the phone forensics, not the prosecutors.
I think that is something that we will need to find out. I simply do not trust anything done by the persecution.
I had never heard of a Cellebrite until I read the Sanford police reports from that night where they say they tried to use one but the phone was too wet or the battery too far down or something for it to work.
So, they had one. That night, 02/26/12.
It’s in the OCR’ed 184 page PDF, on page 16 of the PDF and by coincidence says “page 16 of 18″ at the bottom.
It’s Joseph Santiago’s account.
unitron
I missed that before, I remember the mention of the battery being dead, but did not recall the rest. That makes the travels of the phone even more suspicious, if they had the ability to get the information in-house. The prosecution must have been looking for something in particular for them to send the phone for these forensic tests.
“too many pattern attempts”
Thanks Dman and Nettles….
Shame the GZLegal site like to save bandwidth by not linking to stuff via any normal means.
It does save on bandwidth usage if nobody knows about the stuff I guess?
Glad you guys are keeping them honest.
Dman I am adding your blog to the other 22 tabs I have open.. to monitor. I will read but may not have time to comment much
Flip phone? Phone switcheroo?
Or a phone taken apart made to look like a flip-phone.
That could be. I love your new site and the animation is a nice touch once in awhile too.
Is this showing that there a two phones in evidence or am I nutz?
Looks like one phone to me. Let me rearrange the photo’s, it’s like a little story that way.
Thanks! I’m nutz! No really, I can see the evidence bag is empty when picture taken with bag. Why remove it from the evidence bag without breaking the seal?
Perhaps it’s broken on the side we can’t see.
Aaahhhhh, now I want more pics! Enquiring minds and all… Thanks for laying that out like you did
There’s a flip phone in that sealed evidence bag labeled “DMS-7″. Interesting, that.
Oh, nevermind; I see now that it’s the same phone. The evidence bag is empty in the one photo…
In the grass evidence pix, there is a long scratch on the phone, I do wear glasses, but does anyone see it on this phone? on the back side.. Dman can you do a pix of them side by side? Thank YOU!
There’s grass on the phone, I don’t see a scratch.
After I posted that, I enlarged and your correct it looks like grass to me also. Thank you!
I just hope that piece of grass has been subpoenaed by MOM/West. I want confirmation that it really told Dee Dee what she claims.
LOLOLOLOL!!!
Jello you crack me up.. No wonder you owe so many cakes.
“No wonder you owe so many cakes.”
!!!!
There are visible dents small on the phone found at the scene, and the heart is almost intact, but this one does not show any of that.
I can see the lil dents your talking about too. I was talking about the long up by the lil 2 dot/holes
That looks like grass.
The icon next to the missed call icon in the top left corner of the phone looks like a “Text message” icon
Missed Text Message: “did u get dat cracka?”
Saw that. I am interested when were this pictures taken.
You guys are something else, lol.
Cell phone side by side comparison.
You are wonderful! Thanks!
Hey! Nice seeing you again…
Hi Mr. Jello333!
You are the man!, I knew those 2 photos did not look alike, even before your side by side. Oh, boy!
The sticker doesn’t concern me as much (though, why would it have been removed?); what does concern me, however, is the obviously missing, half-inch, diagonal gouge between the sticker and the “bil” of “T-Mobile”.
looks like a little piece of grass to me.
I don’t think it’s grass, for 3 reasons:
1) Scale. It is far too small to be grass
2) Jagged shape
3) Given the location of the light source (flash), if it were a piece of grass, the shadow produced would be on the other side. The location of the shadow is with respect to the light source implies an indentation into the phone, not a piece of debris sitting on the surface of the phone.
Side note: there also appears to be a blemish above the lens in the 12th supplement phone, that is not present in the original photo.
Side note 2: the “with” in “with Google”: can photo resolution explain why “with” appears to be a solid block of white in the 12th supplement photo? It looks like it’s been covered with white-out, it’s so blurred.
Same thing with the “tm”.
Some observations re: Chip’s points:
1) There are blades of grass or other lawn debris that are roughly the same shape and color as the “blemish” – see just to left of the case even with the lens.
2) The jagged shape could be a torn grass leaf
3) The shadows in the grass to the left of the camera indicate that the flash was above and to the right a little – perfectly aimed to illuminate the inside of the lens optics. Also, I can’t see any shadow from the “blemish”, indicating that it could be in direct contact with the phone case. My display might not show what you see, though…
WRT the 12th Supp image, it looks to me like:
1) the camera/flash was placed towards the bottom of the frame, angled towards the top, so the illumination of the camera optics is reflecting off the side of the optics assy.
2) the “blemish” above the lens could be a specular reflection from the flash from something in the “sparkly” case material. There is a similar reflection from the bottom-left corner.
3) Of more interest, looks like someone removed the Heart sticker and what’s remaining is glue residue or paper backing from the sticker. The heart shape is distorted on the right side, kind of like someone dug under the sticker with a fingernail or other object.
Re: the “with Google”, looks to me that the 12 Supp image is lower resolution than the grass image, or out of focus to the point that the “with” is filled in, like the “tm” on the other end of the “Google”. You can also get this kind of effect if you use too low a resolution when you convert the picture to a .jpg from the camera format.
Small Correction:
Others may have mentioned this, but In the 12th Supp image, the case back has been removed from the phone, so the reflection from the lens hole must be the table top behind.
Agreed, it looks like someone replaced the back of one phone, removed the sticker and then placed it on another.
These are the first close ups that I have seen of the “heart phone”. From these pics it is apparent that someone (TM?) had already removed the sticker before the night of 2/26.
They look the same to me.
Me too.
Should I start a POLL?
Recall that Mr. O’Mara was handed this supplemental right before court on Feb. 5th. He quickly scanned through it and told the judge the chain of custody wasn’t in it. The State was order to provide it by Feb. 8th.
They did and the defense team posted it on Feb. 8th.
http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/0213/response_motion_discovery_cell.pdf
During the February 5th hearing is the one in which MOM made a comment along the lines of “when we finally found the phone”.
So I wonder what the tmtm2199@gmail.com is? is that an email? found on the back of the extraction pg.
That would be Trayvon’s gmail account.
LMBO wonder what they found there!
Is this what MOM was after, his gmail account information.
at least we know that was TM email add
Remember, the phone was in TRACY Martin’s name… so maybe it’s Tracy’s gmail account, not Trayvons.
Could be, but tmtm, I think it stands for Tracy Martin, Trayvon Martin.
test image post
I looked at your comment but don’t see anything there.
It seems as though the last time Daisha talked to TM was on Friday, two days earlier.
[sorry about that, have to fix something, DM]
I vote same phone.
I wonder what video’s and photos are on that mini SD card. you can tell from the wear and tear on the battery that he used the SD card a lot.
Here is that phone in another light,
https://mobile.twitter.com/PPacking/status/257842425534492673/photo/1
It is really beat up in this photo.
It could have been laying around awhile. We have old cell phones the kids play with and I find them everywhere after they leave.
But look at the markings, I don’t see all that chipped paint on the side by side photo above. This is from TM’s crime scene.
I know. Do you remember MOM saying something after the phone was sent to California that he had discovered the sim cards were different? I remember that.
I’ll search and see if I can find anything in his interviews, i’m not remembering much about the sim cards, but it wouldn’t suprise me after all the games the state has played.
Wow I missed that. I will try and go back and listen, was it the Feb 5th hearing? thx.Hope your doing better!
Yes, thank you, you just put it behind you and move on. My daughter will be getting much needed counseling, it was much harder on her. I think it might have been the hearing before the Feb. 5th one. Omara had discovered this on hisw own I believe.
Good! and Thank you!
I keep going back and forth, but I believe that is water droplets or moisture on the phone in the crime scene pics and the glare from the flash. Where as the other it is dry. Could be why the heart appears to be coming off too, if it were paper and being exposed to the dripping water and they didnt find it right away IIRC. JMO
I’m just thinking back to Casey A trial. I remember they had lost the heart sticker print due to the process of lifting the fingerprints. It had something to do with the glue they use(weird another heart sticker) If they tried to get prints using that process, would that process take any superficial marks away from the phone. I know it wouldn’t do anything to cover scratches though.
They determined there was no heart sticker, the FBI.
Or fingerprints either, IIRC
maggie, no fingerprints or forensic tests were done on the phone. It is part of the discovery.
Oh man! Effective Immediately no more GZ daily threads at the TH.
Well, D-man, you and Rumpole will be inheriting a whole bunch of nutty people!
ROFL!!!
We got shook out of the tree, lol.
bahaha I still hanging on, so dont move….
Okay sister!
We just sprouted a different tree that is all, now there are 2 treehouses.
There you go.
I’m sure many familiar faces will show up here or Rumpole’s place.
I am sure they will too.
So all they had to do is Subpoena Google for the password or have it reset so they could get into the phone with out taking it apart. Google is very good at complying with law enforcement. This just shows that BDLR did not want to open up the Google account. he did not want the emails to become discovery.
There might not be any emails to or from that account. It may have been set up just for the purpose of password recovery, backups, etc. The account name, if it is tmtm2199, looks like one someone would pick just for utility and let google supply an arbitrary number to make it unique. It doesn’t seem personal to me. But who knows for sure. It’s worth checking the account regardless.
Pingback: State’s Supplemental Discovery |