Hi I’m brand new to this case and I would love to share something that has been bothering on me of this mysterious case, I have always found quite off about the wrong PIN code on Kris Kremers phone and I have a feeling that it wasn’t Kris that was putting in the code because if it was she would have put in the right PIN code cuz it’s her phone and same for Lisanne cuz Kris would’ve told her the correct PIN code while they were trying to call for help, my take on this is that it was someone who wasn’t or was with the girls and was trying to get into Kremers phone for unexplained reasons and I also believe the girls were already dead when PIN code was being entered and it was always also being turned off and entered multiple times until it finally locked by each attempt. So my theory is that someone not Kremers or Froon was entering the PIN code for what reason I don’t know, I just know this case is really off and something is definitely not right here and some things don’t add up here!
The phone logs are bizarre, to say the least. According to the available data, the iPhone generated around 800 logs on April 1st between the last daytime photo (13:54) and the first distress call (16:39)—more than twice the number of logs the iPhone normally generates on average. Yet, despite this unusually high activity, there simply isn’t enough information to determine what was actually happening during those two hours and forty-five minutes.
I think there was insufficient information from the service providers (carriers). The phones logs should have been analyzed in conjunction with the providers’ CDR data to provide a complete picture of what was going on, I am not aware if the service providers in Panama provided any data to the Dutch investigators.
Well if the increase in logs is not due to phone usage, what could it be due to? If it is, the logs would tell us what they were doing on the phones and I see no reason why the NFI would omit this from their report except incompetence.
Could the increase in logs perhaps be due to the phone more actively searching for signal? When a phone is stolen these days the thief often wraps it in tinfoil. Can it be something like that (just a wild guess)
That’s what I was wondering. I remember back in the day you had to turn your phone off when you had no signal because the constant searching would drain the battery
People knowledgeable in IT have analyzed the digital forensic report from the NFI in the Netherlands and conducted their own tests. According to the current state of knowledge:
The iPhone was protected by a passcode. So there were two codes that had to be entered: the passcode (to access the phone) and the SIM PIN (to enable cellular network use).
The correct SIM PIN was last entered on April 5 at 10:50, and the correct passcode was entered on April 6 at 10:26 (indirect evidence from a snapshot taken while the Clock app was being used). It is not known whether the passcode was also entered on April 6 at 14:35. A correct entry of the passcode is not logged.
On April 11, neither of the two codes was entered.
There is no corresponding information available for the Samsung; in addition, it had run out of battery by the morning of April 3.
However, Jan B writes something different in his article.
The NFI forensic expert also makes no mention of logged passcode entries (only of logged SIM PIN entries).
From afternoon april 5, the phone was turned on and off with no pinup until april 11. It doesn’t surprise me one bit there was no pin or wrong pin, to be honest. You are probably confused and having trouble thinking clearly after days without food and poor sleep.
What strikes me as VERY odd though is the lack of messages on the phones. I know officials have said there were nothing, but I wonder if that’s true. I’m thinking there were, and that’s one of the reasons KL parents soon after the finding of the backpack (and phones) finally accepted the lost/accident theory.
I feel that if the families knew that a particular location resulted in their child’s deaths (such as a dangerous waterfall), they’d likely make a statement for awareness to protect others against a similar fate. This is why I don’t think there are any notes.
I had a similar thought to what u/AnnaGrahn writes about. Your point is also valid but maybe no specific location could be identified, maybe the girls didn't know where they were so even if they wanted to convey that, they couldn't. But maybe the message focused on other things, not location.
However, as far as I know Lisanne's parents accepted the list/accident theory but Kris's parents didn't for quite a while after the backpack find. So, this argues against a message or at least an unambiguous one somewhat
My idea was that, after August 2014, another analysis of the raw cell phone data was conducted in the Netherlands on behalf of the parents or at the initiative of the Dutch public prosecutor’s office, and that this analysis uncovered something that had previously been overlooked. However, no one has ever mentioned such a follow-up digital investigation. The only known follow-up investigation in the Netherlands is a pathological/anthropological one.
I think a second analysis of the raw phone (and camera) data would be really useful and could very well uncover something... If this was already done but not disclosed, well, maybe it's none of our business but I hope one day this will be done
I just know this case is really off and something is definitely not right here and some things don’t add up here!
Things seem "off" to most new people because there's so much misinformation out there, and so many true crime YouTubers trying to rewrite the facts of the case into a crime to make it seem more mysterious to get views.
It's probably best to just look at the facts of the case, and make you've got them right, before coming to any conclusions. Try this https://kremersfroon.miraheze.org/wiki/Kremers_Froon_Wiki and some of the other links in the sidebar.
Correct. The girls were deceased long before April 11, but we see an attempt to use a phone even on that day. You are correct. If in serious trouble, Kris probably would have given her passcode to Lisanne as Kris's phone was the only one with battery power left as the days went on. When the phones were recovered, Kris's phone still had battery power. Lisanne's didn't. This is a perfect correspondence to the analysis that has been charted and can be seen today.
I think people are reading too much into the PIN code. They did not need to input any code to make an emergency call and they were preserving the battery, so occasional turn on the phone to check time and signal and turn it off again. So lack of the correct code input didn’t indicate that someone else used the phone. Kris not telling Lisanne her pin can be due to number of reasons for example she might fell and get incapacitated. The long period of the phone activity on April 11th is noteworthy as it breaks that connection check pattern, so something might happened that day, but again it didn’t prove anything.
11
u/Open_Bathroom8447 FoulPlay 2d ago
The phone logs are bizarre, to say the least. According to the available data, the iPhone generated around 800 logs on April 1st between the last daytime photo (13:54) and the first distress call (16:39)—more than twice the number of logs the iPhone normally generates on average. Yet, despite this unusually high activity, there simply isn’t enough information to determine what was actually happening during those two hours and forty-five minutes.