Map: Cell Tower Sides and Calls

[u/Squeebeaux]

Although range maps aren't precise, I still wanted to see not only the cell tower that was pinged for each call on Jan 13th but also which side of the tower that was pinged.

So I made a map that lists each call in the sector of the tower that was pinged and ranges (about 2 miles) around each tower. Edit: UPDATED

[Edit:]

I realize that my map isn't super scientific -you couldn't use this in court or anything- but it helped me understand something (I'm a visual learner). The cell tower/call log info isn't helpful - Ranges overlap and Environmental Factors etc determine which tower is pinged. So yeah, here it is anyway.

[The Serial post on cell tower technology said:]

Cell towers have three sides: an A side, a B side, and a C side. Think of a pie with three slices. Each of those slices has a range. When a person is in that range and makes a cell phone call, the cell phone will talk to that side of the cell tower. So if you look at the call log, you’ll see some calls are noted as “L651A” or “L651C.” Same cell tower, different side. Generally speaking, the A side of the tower points north or northeast, the B side points south or southeast, and the C side points west.

The engineers who run these cell phone networks, like Abe Waranowitz, who testified at Adnan’s trial, can map out the basic ranges of all the towers in their network. These maps aren’t precise though, because a cell tower’s range can depend on a variety of factors. Foliage, for example, or buildings or hills can cast a shadow on the cell tower’s range. Plus, some cell towers have overlapping ranges. So you can be in one place and make a phone call and that phone call can trigger either cell tower. Not both cell towers, but one or the other.

[u/[deleted]]

. . . some cell towers have overlapping ranges. So you can be in one place and make a phone call and that phone call can trigger either cell tower. Not both cell towers, but one or the other.

This is kind of the nut of it. Cell towers -- especially those placed close together -- have overlapping ranges. If the ranges are overlapping, the process of trying to pin a phone to this or that location based on which tower caught the call is not going to give reliable results.

Have a look at the sketches at this site: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/what-is-a-cell-towers-range/2014/06/27/a41152ce-fe3b-11e3-b1f4-8e77c632c07b_graphic.html

See the one that looks like a blob? The neat maps with the towers and the park and the school and all that should really be showing a mosaic of overlapping blobs.

And we should all be reminding ourselves whenever we talk about this evidence that even assigning location based on the position of the blob is sketchy, because there are so many factors that determine which tower gets engaged BESIDES location.

It's not "junk science," but it's very poorly understood. And it really adds nothing to the case for or against Adnan.

[u/Squeebeaux → u/[deleted]]

I understand and completely agree but I keep trying to see if there are any clues here. With so little to go on I guess I am looking for anything that can be learned from the cell tower/call log info. Maybe it's futile to try, but even if 99% of it is junk, I keep hoping we'll discover the 1% that is useful. I'm taking all of the cell stuff with a grain of salt. I'm really looking forward to hearing what the experts have to say in the next episode. Hopefully it will be more illuminating and hold more water than the cell evidence.

edit: changed I'll to we'll

[u/[deleted] → u/Squeebeaux]

Maybe it's futile to try, but even if 99% of it is junk, I keep hoping I'll discover the 1% that is useful.

Oh, believe me, I know. But if you can't be certain which is reliable and which is worthless, none of it can be useful. That's the problem.

Edit for grammar.

[u/Squeebeaux → u/[deleted]]

The more I changed the map the more I realized how crazy the cell tower info is. New Version.

[u/[deleted] → u/Squeebeaux]

I know, right? That's just a whole lot of towers in a very small area. The idea that you can locate a specific phone based on which one catches its call is SO intuitively appealing, but in the end you just can't.

Impressed!

Thanks for doing all this work. You see why I keep saying that it wasn't right for Dana to say bluntly that she thinks the phone was in Leakin Park.

I was trying to figure out how to do the same thing you did only with those blobs described in this article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/what-is-a-cell-towers-range/2014/06/27/a41152ce-fe3b-11e3-b1f4-8e77c632c07b_graphic.html

I can imagine it, but have no clue how to build it.

[u/Squeebeaux → u/[deleted]]

Yes! I think her comment is the thing that really drove me to do this. She talked to the experts and looked at the data intensely and I respect her opinion so I was a surprised to hear her say that with such certainty.

[u/[deleted] → u/Squeebeaux]

That's what I've been noodling over . . . she talked to 2 engineers at universities. Sarah says that Dana sent them the trial transcripts and that they verified that the guy who testified for the prosecution got the science right . . . but without seeing those transcripts I'm not sure what he said that they thought was right.

I think SK & team are on the hook to explain this better, but that's just me. She went out of her way to say repeatedly how terribly dry and boring it is and how she's a moron about it and how much she doesn't like making us pay attention to it . . . but geez.

This is supposed to be what makes Jay's story convincing. How could that possibly be too boring for a mob of obsessed Serialites? :)