Subzero1037

IP trace

10 posts in this topic

Pregnant-Slay Probe Followed Cyber Trail

1 hour, 16 minutes ago  Top Stories - AP

By MATT SEDENSKY, Associated Press Writer

KANSAS CITY, Mo. - In the end, it wasn't a fingerprint or a blood spatter that led authorities to the woman suspected of strangling a mother-to-be and cutting the baby from her womb. It was an 11-digit computer code.

 

Police zeroed in on Lisa Montgomery in the most 21st century of ways, by trolling computer records, examining online message boards and — most important — tracing an IP address, 65.150.168.223, to a computer at her Melvern, Kan., home.

"That in and of itself led us to the home," Jeff Lanza, an FBI (news - web sites) spokesman here said of the IP, or Internet protocol, address, the unique number given to every Internet-connected computer.

Investigators say that just before the slaying, Montgomery had corresponded over the Internet with the victim, Bobbie Jo Stinnett, about buying a dog from Stinnett. The same technology that makes instantaneous communication possible enabled authorities to crack the case in a matter of hours and rescue the premature baby.

Montgomery, 36, awaited her first court appearance Monday at the federal courthouse in Kansas City. She is charged with kidnapping resulting in death. Authorities said she confessed to the crime. The 4-day-old girl was reported in "remarkably good" condition Monday.

Within hours of Stinnett's killing Thursday at her Skidmore, Mo., home, investigators realized the potential information her computer could hold in finding her killer.

Stinnett, 23, raised rat terrier dogs at home and had been expecting a potential customer the afternoon she was killed. In fact, she had to get off the phone with her mother because the customer was at the door, according to investigators.

When Stinnett's body was discovered, detectives collected not just physical evidence; they also took her computer.

In addition to trying to find the killer, investigators were racing against time to find the baby, who was one month premature when she was cut from her mother's belly and, it was feared, may have suffered oxygen loss or other trauma when her mother was strangled.

At the lab, clues seemed to pour out of the computer within minutes — who Stinnett had been e-mailing, what sites she had been visiting. Important tips from the public came in, too. Among them: a North Carolina dog breeder pointed to communications on a rat terrier message board.

"My adrenaline just started rushing," said the breeder, Dyanne Siktar. "I knew they could track the IP."

It turned out that at 4:22 p.m. on Wednesday, the day before Stinnett's slaying, someone identifying herself as Darlene Fischer posted a message to the victim on a rat terrier message board. "Please get in touch with me soon as we are considering the purchase of one of your puppies," it said.

About an hour later, Stinnett communicated with Fischer for about 20 minutes, investigators said. Then, at 7:44 p.m., Stinnett posted a message to Fischer: "I've e-mailed you with the directions so we can meet. I do so hope that the e-mail reaches you. Great chatting with you on messenger. And do look forward to chatting with you tomorrow a.m."

Investigators traced Fischer's IP address back to a dial-up connection from the Melvern home of Montgomery and her husband. He has not been charged with any wrongdoing.

On Friday, less than 24 hours after the slaying, investigators pulled up to the couple's home in Kansas, found the baby and arrested Montgomery.

As for how the killer knew Stinnett was about to become a mother, Stinnett had a Web site about her dogs that investigators said may have included a picture of Stinnett pregnant. The FBI would not comment on whether the pair had ever met before last week, or how the killer knew Stinnett was still pregnant.

Authorities most often use computers to catch sexual predators, hackers and other white-collar criminals. But they are increasingly being used to solve violent crimes, too.

Experts say IP addresses are not foolproof; they can be made up, like nearly anything else in the Internet age. But they often are part of a package of evidence that can lead to a conviction.

"Quite often, in the past, detectives would walk past the computers at the crime scene and look at the hairs and fibers and fingerprints," said FBI agent Tom Maiorana, director of the bureau's Regional Computer Forensic Laboratory here. "Now we're seizing the computers and finding out a tremendous amount of information about the lives of the people involved."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor..._woman_slain_19

LoL anyone wanna mess with the ip? lol kidding..

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thats funny that they put the IP in the article.

Sure is: :grr:

OrgName: Qwest Communications

OrgID: QWDL

Address: 950 17th Street

Address: Suite 1900

City: Denver

StateProv: CO

PostalCode: 80202

Country: US

NetRange: 65.128.0.0 - 65.159.255.255

CIDR: 65.128.0.0/11

NetName: NET-QWEST-3BLKS

NetHandle: NET-65-128-0-0-1

Parent: NET-65-0-0-0-0

NetType: Direct Allocation

NameServer: DCA-ANS-01.INET.QWEST.NET

NameServer: SVL-ANS-01.INET.QWEST.NET

Comment: ADDRESSES WITHIN THIS BLOCK ARE NON-PORTABLE

RegDate: 2000-08-23

Updated: 2002-12-17

Edited by Majest|c
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thats funny that they put the IP in the article.

Yeah no kidding... It means that whoever is assigned that IP next might receive some unwarranted attention. That or will have a basis to sue everyone who posted up this article (more likely) for some kind of infringement on some other infringement... I'm sure some lawyer will think up of something to sue about.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would make a very interesting test case. I mean you can't sue Whatever Records because your number happens to be 867-5309 since your name isn't attached to the number...and would it be covered like a phone number, where it is considered public information if it's not a non-listed number? Interesting questions...

Anyone know if any precidents have already been set?

The Abstruse One

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if there are any legal precidents, but IPs are generally considered public information (as they should be IMO) and I don't know that there would be a case, but when has that stopped a lawyer... :D

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That would make a very interesting test case.  I mean you can't sue Whatever Records because your number happens to be 867-5309 since your name isn't attached to the number...and would it be covered like a phone number, where it is considered public information if it's not a non-listed number?  Interesting questions...

Anyone know if any precidents have already been set?

The Abstruse One

I think Hollywood precautionary actions are precedence enough: notice they're all 555- numbers in movies? They never even try a random set like 765-4321. IPs are public information to the same extent as phone numbers... still can be sued over by a good lawyer :(

Edited by Seal
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I HATE 555 numbers...it's horrible when you're getting into a movie and see a phone number 555-xxxx...it's like just screaming out "HEY, YOU'RE WATCHING A MOVIE!!!!"

I don't know if I've mentioned this before, but I'm an aspiring filmmaking (shooting a short film in a couple of weeks as a matter of fact), and I'm trying to collect as many non-555 dead numbers as I can (error message recordings and stuff like that).

The Abstruse One

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now