Kemp acknowledged in brief answers to Schaffer's lengthy questions that cell phone records obtained after the raid showed an array of calls from four cell phone numbers traced to Swinton, who lives in Colorado Springs, Colo., including calls to NewBridge Family Shelter in San Angelo, a shelter in Everett, Wash., and former sect member Flora Jessop in the days before the raid.
Kemp also testified that Texas law enforcement authorities learned that Swinton had an extensive record of such vexatious calls. She posed as Sarah Barlow, a 16-year-old girl living on the YFZ Ranch, mother to one child and pregnant with another, who claimed to have been abused by her husband, Dale Barlow, in calls to both the San Angelo and Everett shelters, Kemp testified. Swinton, Kemp said he was told by Colorado authorities, had posed variously as persons named Erica, April and Jennifer in calls reporting she had been raped, forced into incest, forced to have multiple abortions, and held against her will in a basement by drug dealers.
In the call to Flora Jessop, Swinton pretended to be Sarah Barlow's sister, Laura, Kemp said.
The information came out after the raid, Kemp said, and he learned about it when he was sent to Colorado on April 16, 2008, to consult with authorities there.
It was only in the days after the raid that authorities determined that no such person as Sarah Barlow existed, the state has said.This is testimony. In Court. Under oath.
A commenter named "First Amendment" at the Plural Life blog pointed me to this transcript of the Nancy Grace show on April 23, 2008.
Video clips featuring Flora Jessop and a recorded conversation with the then-revealed-as-hoax-caller regarding the FLDS were played during the show, comprised of the following, as transcribed by CNN.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Texas authorities raided the polygamists` compound in Eldorado after they received frantic calls from a 16-year-old girl named Sarah, who they still haven`t found. She said she was being abused and held against her will. Three days before the raid, Flora Jessop, a former member of the FLDS, who now works to rescue children of the sect, received a frantic call, too.
FLORA JESSOP, FORMER FLDS CHILD BRIDE: She told me her name was Sarah. She told me that she was beaten all the time, she was on medication, she was locked away in a basement.
. . .
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
FLORA JESSOP, FMR. POLYGAMIST & CHILD BRIDE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE CHILD PROTECTION PROJECT: Well, how old are you now?
UNIDENTIFIED CALLER: 16.
F. JESSOP: 16?
UNIDENTIFIED CALLER: Am I going to get in trouble?
F. JESSOP: No, you`re not going to get in trouble. Oh, well, if you get caught by your dad, you will, but we`ll just have to make sure you don`t get caught. You`re never going to have to have sex with your dad again because that`s not right. You are going to be safe.
UNIDENTIFIED CALLER: Don`t trick me.
F. JESSOP: I`m not going to trick you, baby. I promise I`m not going to trick you. I`m going to protect you. Remember how you told me that your dad hurt your mom, too, sometimes?
UNIDENTIFIED CALLER: Yes. Did I say too much?
F. JESSOP: You didn`t say too much, baby. I know you`re scared. I know you`re scared, and I`m not going to trick you. I`m not going to trick you. OK?
UNIDENTIFIED CALLER: Will anybody else know about me?
F. JESSOP: No, baby. Nobody will know. Just me and Jessica.I found this exchange interesting, first, because of the reference to a picture. What picture is that? What picture would Flora have that the caller would be concerned about someone else seeing? Where did the picture come from? Did Flora give the picture "to the people at the shelter?" And which shelter is she referring to?
UNIDENTIFIED CALLER: What about the picture?
F. JESSOP: Nobody has to even see the picture. We`ll just give it to the people at the shelter.
Second, because the statements don't match - there has been no allegation of father/daughter incest at the YFZ Ranch. And Flora states "You`re never going to have to have sex with your dad again." If something this salacious had been alleged, it would have been all over the media, and they would not have let it go.
Third, it is recorded in the 2005 Colorado Arrest Warrant that Rozita had portrayed herself to be someone named Jessica. But here, Flora is not talking to "Jessica". Flora is talking to "Sarah". Flora is referring to another Jessica.
Wasn't the intake caller at the NewBridge Shelter named "Jessica"?
Were Flora and "Sarah" talking to Jessica at NewBridge in a 3-way call? Is that why the call was "blocked", or might take up to "40 days" to determine its origin?
The Tribune's coverage of the same day in court included this:
Kemp said he began reviewing Swinton's phone records in May 2008. He said Swinton's phone records showed numerous calls to and from the New Bridge Family Center beginning on March 29 and, beginning on March 30, to anti-polygamy activist Flora Jessop. Jessop arranged three-way calls with the family center and Swinton, who told Jessop she was the sister of "Sarah Jessop Barlow," who is now believed to be fictitious.Oh, but wait. The document referenced here states:
On March 31, 2008, Flora Jessop, . . . called Investigator Sam Brower and hooked up a three-way telephone conversation with Rozita Swinton (claiming to be "Sarah Barlow"). Brower promptly took the telephone number of Swinton's phone and provided it to Gary Engels, the Mohave County, Arizona District Attorney investigator. In that telephone conversation, Ms. Swinton was telling Brower and Flora Jessop that she was being taken to Texas. Again, both Brower and Engels were in regular contact with Texas authorities.So if Brower could get the phone number on a three-way call, what's the problem with Texas? They lack the technical expertise?
And we have TWO references to "SARAH" talking to Flora. Not "Laura", Sarah's sister in Colorado City. "SARAH".
And is this why it took until April 3rd to execute the raid, after the first call allegedly came in to NewBridge on March 29? Were they waiting for "Sarah" to get to Texas?
21 comments:
Such a web of lies!
The "40 days" BS line, as I recall, was what they told regarding how long it could take to determine "the location(s)" the calls were made from (the records showing locations of the cell tower(s) in which the call originated from). All BS no matter what record they are looking for (number, location...). The arrest warrant for Swinton, used by the CSPD, told us of how quickly CSPD had obtained the cell records needed to locate someone in danger who was using a cell phone!
"The information came out (Swinton had an extensive record of such vexatious calls) after the raid, Kemp said, and he learned about it when he was sent to Colorado on April 16, 2008...
Kemp said he began reviewing Swinton's phone records in May 2008..."
The reality of the situation is that all cell phones are in contact with at least one tower whenever they are turned on and in range, as they transmit a signal which identifies the phone in range of the tower(s). If reception is good at the ranch where they use cell phones, then there are probably 2, 3 or more towers that "ping" the cell phones to know where they are (triangulation). If 3 or more towers receive the transmissions, the location could be narrowed down to a building or even a specific portion of a building.
If a caller is in danger, the LE can get the location of that cell phone immediately.
That "40 days" may apply IF the LE is looking for the records (location) in some slow moving investigation, but it is pure BS when used as an excuse for not having the location of someone in danger.
kbp your knowledge of cellular calls to towers is somewhat lacking. How long does it take to trace a three way call, if the first two-parties were on a call forward to the New Bridge Family Shelter, say a caller from the YFZ Ranch to a second caller then forwarded to New Bridge. Wouldn't the New Bridge call just trace back to the second caller's cellular phone? How long to trace back from the second caller's phone to the YFZ phone caller? Can that original first callers call even be traced?
Seems you don't have an answer for that situation, so how can the CSPD/Texas Rangers prove it without phone bill logs and known dates and times between callers. Careful you might be giving the second caller an alibi that they weren't the caller!
Then somebody today presumed to be guilty may actually be innocent of making a 'hoax' call.
Yes, Jam, the original call can be traced from the second phone, just as the second phone can be traced from the third one. I doubt seriously that would take longer than two hours. Certainly not 40 days.
If Rozita wants to clear her name, let her come out publicly with the phone records, and the whole truth. Identify whoever was using her phones, and why. I'd just love to be able to apologize to her.
If she didn't make the phone calls, she's protecting someone else. Why?
LOL!!!
For any phone call connection to be made to a cell phone, which tower(s) made such a connection will be logged in the records. Any call connected to the cell phone can be traced to the tower(s) it came from.
If the call was made to or from a cell phone, where that cell phone was is in the records. I should not have used "originated from" in that post.
The records would show the location of the cell phone that made OR received a call. A tower has to transmit the call to the phone.
FYI, that information is from one that owns such equipment which is rented for use by T-Mobile and Sprint/Nextel - ME!
It's a shell game. They're trying to make the facts fit their explanation of them, and they don't.
In addition, we have Sarah in the Basement. I knew I'd heard it somewhere.
The referenced 40 days is not the time it takes to actually perform the trace but rather the time it takes law enforcement to request go through the legal red tape and finally receive the O.K. to trace the call which needs a judges approval. Your referring to it as BS is more reflective of your uninformed knowledge than what it takes to receive a court order and yes it was somewhat an emergency so Ranger Long acted without this delayed step but your second guessing the proper preceedures now that the results don't meet your approval.
I can add my own personal experience about 10 years ago - I bet the technology is better today.
I fax machine kept calling my home phone - the number was blocked.
I simply made a report to the local police and then called the phone company. The whole process to find the name only took a day or two.
As for the Court order - how long did the process take to get a court order to take all the kids? A matter of hours, right?
That's the same amount of time it would have taken to get a court order for the phone records.
So Ranger Kemp didn't have a court order when he got Rozita's phone records? Is that what Jam Inn posted?
But Jam just said the 40 days includes the time for the "required" court order?
So if none was really required - why did it take so long?
Or was a Court order, finally, obtained?
Who presented it, when and to what judge?
Anonymous, are you paying attention? the CSPD/Texas Rangers did to Rozita exactly what they did at the YFZ Ranch but with the eldorado sheriff/Texas Rangers, i.e. they didn't wait for the court Order to phone record/tap they just proceeded with their search warrant and arrest warrant. Don't you grasp the same premise and technique employed at the YFZ Ranch was employed against Rozita less than two weeks later, Duh?
The difference is the evidence against Rozita isn't enough to bring charges that can stand up in court like the 27 charges brought against the YFZ Ranch indictees.
So, as I was pointing out any defense lawyer for Rozita doesn't have to produce records or alibis for Rozita just a scenario that creates reasonable doubt which is defense enough on a misdemeanor charge. "POOF" there won't be any charges brought against Rozita concerning the YFZ Ranch removal because the evidence is insufficient to convict in a trial by Jury.
Jam Inn,
LE can obtain the information in a matter of minutes.
K-
I am certain of it, particularly in a 9/12 world.
Jam,
Are you saying that Rozita's phones were "tapped", without a Court Order?
As far as I have know, the only recordings of phone calls were made by Flora Jessop, who was a participant in those calls. I don't think you need a court order to do that.
There's a big difference between obtaining cell phone records, that is, a history of what numbers were called, and "wire-tapping", that is, actually listening in on and recording a phone conversation by a third party.
If Rozita's phones were recorded/tapped without proper authorization, then I would have to agree that there has been a violation of her rights as well.
Of course, I'd like to know when that occurred.
"If she didn't make the phone calls, she's protecting someone else. Why?"
What if she's protecting someone within the FLDS itself? It has long been speculated that someone was talking to her from within the ranch itself as she had details no one else could know. Perhaps (and this is purely speculation on my part - I have no particular reason to believe it, just theorizing) she is protecting someone who is waiting to grow up or waiting for a better situation to leave that won't hurt their family so much. There are many more possibilities than "she's protecting someone in the government". (Yes, I know you didn't actually say it, but that was the implication I read into the "she's hiding something" statement.)
Rebeckah,
If you're going to speculate that, there is now far more evidence to speculate this:
Rozita was voice talent for region wide internet sex sting operations targeting adults havings sex with minors. There is now an admitted connection between her and CSPD Lt. Maggie Santos.
It was "common knowledge" around CSPD that some kind of "relationship," personal or professional existed between Maggie and "Rozie."
Your explanation is PURE speculation. It could be true, but it's PURE speculation. There is no circumstantial evidence to support that, other than as all classic "unprovable" conspiracy theories go, "it could have happened that way."
Yeah. It could have.
Space Aliens could have also telepathically linked Rozie with a girl at YFZ and the cry for help was real. There is no way to prove or disprove those theories.
There is however our now documented link that is so contemporary that CSPD officers regarded the Rozie/Maggie connection as a sort of "duh!" connection.
There is the fact that Maggie headed up the sex crime unit at CSPD and is said to have overseen many prominent internet sting operations.
There is the fact that they used "little girl imitators" (we have no names of those people) to do the final "luring" of marks to arrest.
The FBI had to be involved in interstate sting operations.
The FBI DID know what the interior of the ranch looked like.
Rozita had all the talents to be CSPD/CBI/FBI voice talent for stings.
Rozita DID convince people in Texas that she was, a little girl abused, abused and pregnant, locked in her room, and told at least one person, Flora Jessop, that she was "Sarah" and "locked in a basement.
An administrative note:
I have rejected two comments today, due to being off-topic.
If you comment here and do not have a readily available e-mail address to which I can courteously notify you of rejection and the reasons therefor, do not whine about my not allowing your comments to be published.
"Rozita was voice talent for region wide internet sex sting operations targeting adults havings sex with minors. There is now an admitted connection between her and CSPD Lt. Maggie Santos."
There was already and "admitted connection" between Rozita and Lt. Santos. Your speculation has no more fact that my own. You have one comment which you may well have misinterpreted and I have the observations made that the phone calls had information only someone within the ranch or the removed women and children could have. I have at least as much "evidence" as you do. But yes, it is pure speculation and your aliens theory is JUST as plausible as either of our given the level of evidence at the momen. I was just trying to point out that it doesn't always have to have been an evil, government/corrup cop/secret lesbian hate group plot.
No Rebeckah, there's no corroboration at ALL for your speculation, it's merely POSSIBLE.
Linking these people as I have, and establishing a current close relationship (nature unknown) and what it is they DO for a living, and what it is that Rozita is known to have done, makes my speculation a THEORY.
Yours is a HYPOTHESIS.
You test a HYPOTHESIS with facts, and when you find supporting facts, it becomes a THEORY.
I have a working THEORY, you have bubkis.
CITE FACTS or your just spinning a yarn.
And by the way, there was NO "on the record" admission of a relationship. What everyone at CSPD "knew" but didn't put down in warrants, affidavits or in writing of any kind IS NOT KNOWN TO US.
It is "on the record" that the relationship was for an unknown length of time, "employer/nanny".
It is "on the record" that Santos was involved with one investigation regarding Rozita.
It is "on the record" that people around the Department had "common knowledge" of them at least knowing one another.
Any other relationship is unknown at this point.
Until I did the investigation, it wasn't "on the record."
Thank you, Toes, for making my point for me.
"and establishing a current close relationship (nature unknown)"
No, that has not been "established" it is merely being speculated by you.
Post a Comment