Part 4 with the Latest UPDATES and TECHNICAL aspects (phone logs, camera functions etc) in the disappearance case of Kris Kremers and Lisanne Froon (Part 4; updates + archive)

  

The missing Dutch girls in Panama
Part 4 - the latest updates and info

LATEST UPDATES. This is part 4 - See the main article on this disappearance case here and follow up part 5 with the opinion of other people here. And in part 6 you can read the most important interviews with the parents and families of Kris and Lisanne. I share publicly available information here about this disappearance case, as well as other relevant theories and views. I may not agree with all of them myself, but here you can read a lot of varied information. Some items in this part 4 stay up, other announcements are temporary and more like bulletin board notes. When I tried to make some sense out of this disappearance case back in 2018/2019, there was on the one hand very limited public information with regards to what actually happened to Kris and Lisanne, and on the other hand a lot of journalistic work done on the matter which had not always been highlighted much. It was clear that the story had some gaping holes and that there was conflicting information out there. I have tried to shine a light on all this publicly available info about the disappearance of Kris and Lisanne and I tried to bring all this scattered information together here. I also tried to broaden the narratives about what may have happened to them accordingly. In the hope that when more people know about this case, chances would increase that we'd ever find more facts and answers. This part 4 blog post has (so far) been written over the course of 2020/2021, but in order to have it appear more neatly in chronological order within this blog, where I like readers to first see part 1 - the main story -, I added an earlier publication date after I had to reupload large sections of this blog due to a blogger glitch of sorts. Below you will find the latest updates at the top, and the older updates further down the post. I keep an eye on current developments and continue to update this blog series, so you read the most up to date version always. 

September 5, 2024

MY VIDEO COVERAGE OF
THE NEW SLIP BOOK 

    

July 30, 2024

I posted a new blog post here. With the help of Dave and Power-Pixie, I reviewed and summarized a new book about this case, Still Lost in Panama. 

April 1st 2014 

-

April 1st 2024

April 1st 2024, the anonymous note

On the ten year anniversary of this sad disappearance case, a new article from Adelita Coriat appeared in newspaper La Estrella de Panamá. Most of the article covered the main facts in this case, taking the reader on a fast overview of its timeline. The times of Adelita Coriat going all out against Betzaida Pittí and her troublesome investigational choices seem long gone (although there still seems to be some subtle criticism). But she did publish a case fact which until now had not been made public. It may sound a bit dull of me to say this now, but I had heard of this (what I assumed to be) rumour before already, as someone from Boquete wrote me about it. But now Adelita confirms it in this newspaper article: "In the file, the prosecutor's office did not identify suspects. The investigation closes with an anonymous note that arrived at the Dutch embassy in Canada: “Please do not stop the search, there is evidence, you searched in the wrong place, the criminals are free.” Matt from Imperfect Plan confirms the authenticity of the note on Reddit, and he also read the note. As did the German authors who have a new book out about this case, which I will review soon. But not even Matt confirming the existence of the note and its incorporation in the case files convinces some people that it is real 👈😄 But it appears that nobody knows who sent that note. In any case, that detail belongs on this blog. I do wish that with al the people currently already having copies of these case files and NFI files, they will at some point soon finally be leaked to the public. As there may be so much in there that is still overlooked, or for which the people in the know have no time or know-how to research it. Names can be made anonymous if need be, but I think mostly of the detailed phone logs which Tharindu and Power-Pixie would be able to masterfully analyze in its completeness.

December 25th 2023

Series of tests and experiments with the iPhone4, the Samsung Galaxy S3 mini and with the Canon Powershot SX270HS camera. By Power-Pixie and Dave M. 

Below you will find a series of experiments from Power-Pixie and Dave M. with the same types of camera and phones which Kris and Lisanne also used. Most were conducted in November 2022 and during the first half of 2023. Both men have been going through the publicly available information with a fine comb and have tried to find out more from personal experiments. We used the known phone log data as they have been made public by people like the men from ImperfectPlan and Jeremy Kryt. Unfortunately the full logs have so far not become public. From what we understand, there was a RAW data extraction done of both phones. This would be the most original form of the mobile forensic evidence. This RAW data would then have been analyzed by the NFI and then the NFI would have created a Phone Log Analysis Report, which we believe is in circulation.

The access to the RAW data is key to understanding events, like the mystery restaurant that Kris and Lisanne supposedly ate at on Monday afternoon since Kris’s iPhone connected to the Wi-Fi of this restaurant. Or knowing why Kris’ iPhone does not log anything between 16:44 pm when her iPhone connected to the Spanish By The River Wi-Fi, and 11:05 am when her iPhone connected with the cell tower near the Pianista trailhead. (The iPhone was not turned off during this time nor was it in Airplane Mode). Did Kris not use her iPhone at all? Did she not receive any phone calls, texts, WhatsApp messages, reminders, etc, during this 19 hour gap? Below I will cover the following subtopics: 

• CANON CAMERA; Video of Night Tests with the Canon Auto-focus Feature (green light) and flashlight
• MOBILE PHONES; Video Showing how much Light the Two Mobile Phones produce (camera flash, assistive light, flashlight)
  
• MOBILE PHONES; the iPhone 
• MOBILE PHONES; Test Dialing the Emergency Number without service with the iPhone
• MOBILE PHONES; Test Dialing the Emergency Number without service with the Samsung Galaxy
• MOBILE PHONES; the Missing Phone Logs  
• MOBILE PHONES; The GPS Feature on Both Phones 
• PASSWORDS 
• MOBILE PHONES; Power-Pixie's iPhone SIM CODE experiment
• COMPASS FUNCTION ON BOTH PHONES
• HOW ARE PASSCODES AND SIM CODES LOGGED
• MOBILE PHONES; Observation of Samsung's Battery Performance 
• CANON CAMERA; Trying to Recreate Photo 580
• CANON CAMERA; Dave M's Photo Experiment Recreating the Orange Shapes
  
• Plus a bonus: Testing how to Change the date in the Canon Camera and Fake dating the Photos

Based on the currently publicly available information about both the phones and the camera, combined with our own experiments with these devices, we believe we can discuss some interesting findings below. We also take a bit of time to discuss and debate these findings, providing some reflection. I made it obvious in the running text when the experiment info stops and the discussing amongst each other starts, so you can easily skip those parts if you want. Thanks for reading and for thinking along in the various comment sections :) 

The arsenal:

Intro by Power-Pixie

"The lead-in for me has been the lack of proper data provided by the NFI for Sunday, Monday and Tuesday until 11:05 am for Kris's iPhone (whenever it was turned on). This got me wondering if the NFI purposely or accidentally excluded or ignored the analysis data for these days. Or whether there was no data recorded. Based on my testing with the iPhone however, waking the phone up brought about subsequent and consistent logging. My suspicion is that the NFI ignored/excluded the data from those days. Either there was nothing to report from the data extracted, or they just didn't do it for some reason. There is also no mention or analysis from the NFI of the true condition of Lisanne's camera in their case report. They would have had to take that camera apart to completely do a full forensic examination of it, excluding the photos. This would inform them about the state of the camera when found, and what was affected physically, optically and electronically. So I also don't know what the NFI did in this respect. We also have never seen a list of all applications on Kris's and Lisanne's phones. As standard procedure into mobile forensics, I would expect that this information would have been easily obtainable using screenshots/photos of the phones' apps and data extraction that would list all the apps on the phones as part of each phone's profile. Which would then allow the investigator to dive into each app individually.

I have also compiled more information about the GPS/Location Services, which has helped confirm my suspicion about the iPhone 4 and Samsung phones containing native and 3rd party apps that used GPS and Locations Services. Although having that list of apps from Kris and Lisanne's phones would have helped us cross-reference which ones used GPS/location services. I know now for a fact for instance that the Facebook app for the iPhone required Location Services to be turned on if or when Kris would have wanted to upload images from the "Photos" on the iPhone to her Facebook account. Here is the link to the source. This would enable tagging and also show the location from where she was posting. This is an important feature that was used in 2014. And it was especially important to social media users on Instagram and Facebook. But there were many more tests to be done with both phones and with the Canon camera.

These experiments were conducted over roughly the past year. Apart from having a deep interest in these topics, we're simply trying to seek the truth by clearing up doubts and by understanding the devices a bit more, especially with regards to how they could have worked for Kris and Lisanne during their final days and nights."

CANON CAMERA; Video of Night Tests with the Canon Auto-focus Feature (green light) and flashlight

Both Power-Pixie and Dave M. purchased the exact type of Canon camera which Lisanne and Kris also used; the Canon Powershot SX270HS camera. During this test experiment, Power-Pixie stayed up in the dark of night, out in the back of secluded cabin in the woods and he tested the strength of the camera's flash output plus the camera’s auto-focus green light that comes up when pressing the shutter button. Could Kris and Lisanne have looked around them for wild animals or intruders with the help of the green light? We were interested in discovering just how much Kris and Lisanne would have been able to see at night when using the camera's flash or auto-focus green light. And which of the two is a better light source. Was the momentary flash enough to set up the so called "SOS" scene with paper and the pringles can, or photo #550 with the red plastic attached to sticks? Because both those scenes would have needed some setup time and how did they do so in the pitch dark? And how could the photographer then frame those scenes as perfectly as was done in those photos? Were these lucky shots, or did the photographer have a way to first light up the scene? And IF we assume for a moment that they used the auto-focus green light for illumination, how realistic is it then to assume they did so without ever taking an accidental fluke photo in the process? Because we know of none such photos within the April 8th nighttime photo group. How sensitive is the shutter button? Could the use of the flash in the night photos have been the unwanted outcome of trying to press the button just enough to get the green light to shine? And how about the Canon cameras' Photo Review screen feature? And its option to show an earlier made photo on its search screen? Could the light from such a daytime photo like photo 508 have served as a light source? 

Power-Pixie stresses about the camera's flashlight: "Until you sit in the pitch dark environment like I did, you cannot comprehend how harsh the flash is on your eyes. Now imagine trying to fire off 100 photos with 28 or so coming out so fast, when it takes a few seconds for your eyes to acclimate to the dark again. Then you may also have had to review the photos, in case there was any instinctual need to see what or who was in the frame. This is a very powerful little flash. It has enough lumens to give you a headache after taking photos for a while in pitch darkness. The flash can actually throw light at a distance of 13 metre [43 feet].

As for the green light: when I turn on Flash (which is in Auto Mode, like what Lisanne had on her camera), the auto focus green light will stay on as long as I have my finger depressed halfway on the button. When the flash is turned off, it only lasts 0.5 seconds. During both instances it makes a chirping sound, and during both instances I can hold the buttons half depressed without taking a photo. However in certain circumstances you could accidentally press the button, as it is a little sensitive to pressure from your finger. The Auto focus green light will also light up depending on how dark it is. When it is pitch black, like in my walk-in closet, the green light is very bright and from my 3rd floor balcony at night I was able to easily make out trees and ground that were 30 feet below me.

Auto-focus light (green light)
*If the flash is turned off, then the green light does not remain lit for the duration of the button being pressed. It only lasts for 0.5 seconds with a chirping sound. This chirping sound and the green light are related and the chirping sound is an indicator that the camera has "focused" on the subject. The chirping sound is loud and distinct each time, whether flash is turned on or off.

*When there is adequate (day)light the green light does not show. It is very sensitive to the lack of available light. A green rectangle shows up on the LCD screen that indicates where the focus is taking place.

*If the flash is turned on, then the green light stays on until you fully press the shutter button to create a photo or release the button without taking a photo.

So if Lisanne and Kris were supposed to be in pitch dark conditions (think a "cave" setting or shelter) then it's highly likely  this auto-focus green light would turn on each and every time a shot was fired off as it would try to find focus on something initially, and illuminate the foreground. But when looking up at the canopy and taking shots,  with the rain drops falling the camera’s auto-focus greenlight would be harder to use to “see” as the camera would focus on the nearest falling drop. But with shots that had subjects within inches or a few feet away, the green light would have been extremely noticeable. If Lisanne (assumedly) was taking the night photos as she was laying on her side under the so-called rockface overhang (a weak theory that tries to explain away Kris’s pristine hair condition) and in the pitch dark and rain, then this green light would not go missed. Given their desperate situation, this would have now become a revelation after a number of shots were fired off, especially the ones that had objects in front of them, and Kris’s hair. These photos could not have been all accidental shots taken when trying to “see” using the green light. At some point, given their physical and mental condition after 7 days/nights, there would be a few accidental presses of the button and we would see random images of perhaps their limbs, torso, shoes, clothes and other belongings, including more of the surrounding area they were supposedly in. All of this would have been in focus too, since the light lasts long enough to fall onto a subject and allow for the camera to focus before the shot is taken. I even tested by cupping the camera in my hand and firing off a shot to prevent it from "focusing" with the green light, but each time the green light and chirping sound came on, the flash fired and a blurry photo of my hand was taken. So it is near impossible to only get "dark/black" photos unless the camera is pointed at empty space."

Power-Pixie: "Here is the video I made related to my discussion with Dave regarding photo 580, which took 1 minute and 30 seconds of time to pass before it was made. Photo 579 was of the canopy, looking up at the rain. This test is showing you that due to the Auto focus assist being turned on by default, it emits a green light. Remember that it was raining so there would have been no stars or moon in this supposed ravine/riverbed or whatever. This green light would have aided the photographer in seeing a little bit in the dark, followed by a lit up preview photo which remains for a second on the LCD screen. The shot of Kris's hair could have been the result of Kris "asking" Lisanne to check to see if she had something in her hair or if she was bleeding, or Lisanne trying to check on her and accidentally firing off the shot. But since we don't have 581 to compare it to, we have no real context other than #582 again, looking up at the trees and up at part of the rock wall."

Dave M. said about this: "Most of these night photos were aimed in the distance however, lighting that forked branch for example. When you are working with a camera outdoors like this, the repetitive flash is perfectly tolerable for the eyes. Where it might be too much is when it is used for a shot like #580. Someone spent over a minute arranging that shot and just seconds after they were back to snapping trees again, presumably. And that would be odd given that the eyes would have adjusted to dark again for over a minute and you take a shot in extreme close quarters..."

Power-Pixie: "The auto-focus lamp is like a flashlight, you just need to have extremely strong but nimble fingers to keep it pressed and not fire off accidental photos, which in Kris and Lisanne's scenario - in my view - would have been extremely difficult to not come away with accidental shots."

Dave M: "And as for using the camera's display screen for light by selecting a daytime photo on it; the snag is that you couldn't use this for shots like #580 and #550 as they both require very accurate framing in the viewfinder display screen. Mixed in with all of this is that it is hard to find and use the camera's selection buttons in the dark. Finding the 'display' button is tricky. And differentiating between the fire button and power button is harder still - I switched the camera off unintentionally just now, as I was testing out the green light! The camera review button is also located next to the video record button, and mistakes in the dark were bound to happen there. But we see no such mistake in the night photo series. And I also don't believe the night photos' were taken accidentally while using the green light. If the timings of the photographs are true then these are very repetitive and show someone who is intentionally snapping away. The speed of photography that night was for stretches so fast-paced, that it really does not allow for a lot of intermittent lighting of the surroundings through separate actions. Those night photos show often a very clear pattern, interrupted by the need to set up #580 for instance. There's that close-up of Kris' hair, and then straight back to taking pictures of distant trees just nine seconds later. But there must have been great difficulty this night in seeing anything, never mind arranging these shots."

Power-Pixie added: "My tests were predetermined, but the accidental shots were not, as I didn't realize how buggy the environment was. And I had to contend with insects (mosquitoes buzzing around my ears) so I would instinctively try to swat them, and my finger clicked the camera in the process. Some people assume that Kris and Lisanne were in an insect-free zone for some reason. But the closer you are to a body of water, the higher the chances of encountering insects and other wildlife, especially in warm environments at night. You can't keep moving the goalposts to suit theories. (And if Kris was dead, you can bet her body would have attracted flies and insects). These simple questions that you ask is what never gets a proper explanation. The usual, oh they fell and had an accident or they shacked up somewhere. But move the goalposts and some people have some insane reasons for not just one, but both women to act so calm and collected among ants, spiders, snakes, mosquitoes and other species that would have both women screaming every second they came into contact. Add all of those effects and it makes those sharp and well-composed 100 night photos to be quite an impressive feat for Lisanne in her state, after being "lost" for 7 days and nights. (The photos of the v fork branch are staged in my opinion)."

"Notice by the way how we are to believe they could go no further from this point of the night photo location, yet the landscape is never further photographically explored by either Kris or Lisanne. For example, one of them could have extended the camera using their hand to take a photo to "see" (in the daytime) how far down or up they were, if they had planned on trying to get out of this place. Yet we have nothing from the two, just these 2-3 directional night views of some place they both supposedly fell into, and then sat there for 7 days and nights wondering who's coming to get them? And then that unexplained fixation the photographer has with that forked branch.. Where is the panic in these photos? Even when bored, what it the logic behind the same photos over and over. When there is also a backpack supposedly to picture, Kris, feet, legs (if they did not want to take a selfie). But why no selfie? Having the camera and testing it in a pitch dark environment has been extremely helpful and really helps put to rest the various theories claiming Lisanne could masterfully fire off photos in the dark with or without the aid of the auto-focus green light. It's possible, but not probable that after 7 days and nights she's able to pull out the camera and at a moment's notice start taking so many photographs with near precision accuracy when it comes to photos like 550 and 580, and all of them being taken without framing anything else other than what we are supposed to see. This exercise has made me believe even less that Lisanne took these photos on April 8. Had it just been the photos of the downpour and rock face, it would have been easier to assume it was Lisanne or Kris flashing to signal someone. Or if these photos were taken across 7 nights it would be easier to believe it is/was Lisanne. It is certainly not what we are led to assume, that these night photos are NOT about signalling to someone, especially photos 550 and 580. That image of the SOS toilet paper and backpack strap; Losters champion the theory of attempting to flash the sign to whoever was supposedly up on the rock face or somewhere in the cloudy, rainy sky. Yet how would this have even fared in that rain? This is delicate paper and the area is extremely confined. So what was the point of this photo?"

Dave M replied: "Yes, what is missing is any human element that shows that Lisanne or Kris is actually behind these activities. There really is nothing here to show them as definitively alive and active; no messages, no attempt to contact either Miriam or their parents, no photographic selfies or audio recorded. All there is is a lot of superficial use of both phones and camera suggesting they *could* be alive and active. I would like to add that I find that when using the camera in the dark like this and experimenting, I take photos that I immediately know are unwanted. And so I will delete them. This might seem irrelevant to the April 8th activity, and maybe it is, but my point is that the Camera IS tricky to use in the dark. It's partly down to it being so small and compact - all the buttons are small, tightly packed, and you are completely reliant on both touch and best guesses to find them. Apart from unintentionally pressing the power button instead of the 'fire' button, you can end up taking shots you didn't intent. I'm not for a second suggesting #580 or #576 were accidental, I am quite sure they were not. But in the state Lisanne would have been in by day 8, she would not have been so precise in her use of the camera. Not in these very challenging conditions.

You do have to keep putting yourself there, in those condition, after seven hours of sitting in the darkness, and think on what is going on here. What is Lisanne thinking? Just one snap of the branch marker boulder and that area, one photo of Kris' head, one of the SoS display, but why just ONE?! No shot of the backpack, no second shot of Kris, no shots of Lisanne's feet or leg, and definitely no selfie. Looking at these night photos, you would come away believing they are either in a cave or in a hole, as the restricted 'vision' you come away with is so extreme. But the very limited movement in those images isn't really down to the restriction of their location - we see with #550 for example that there IS another dimension to this location. It's just that the person taking these photographs doesn't want us to see it... All they want us to see is the same patch of distant trees and bushes, and three or four props. And that is all they want 'us' to see. The lack of phone activity that night is also hard to explain, it feels to me like the Camera and iPhone are not in the same hands. That these items are in two seperate locations that night."

Power-Pixie: "Yes, the iPhone and Camera are never used simultaneously enough to back up either photos or the phone logs. Like whoever used the phones only focused on that, while the camera sat unused in its case, and when April 8th arrived, it was time to use the camera and leave the phones behind. And to your point about the photo 580 for example, only one photo is made, in portrait mode, like the photographer was thinking about the composition more than an attempt of desperate flashing of their marker, which would have needed a few more shots if this was really signaling to someone. However it is well-composed shot that ensures we do not see anything of the surrounding area which you would do if this was taken in landscape mode, which is the easiest/default mode or taken haphazardly using at least 2 or 3 more shots. Lisanne’s not interested in who is going to see this photo later, more than she is about someone that night noticing their marker. And then there’s the time taken to review the photo. Like why would Lisanne care to review it? She’s supposedly signaling in desperation here, isn’t she?"

Scarlet: I think what this experiment showcases most of all, is that there is little merit to the assumption of some people that those night photos were only made because Kris and Lisanne would have wanted the light of the flash in order to look around them. Because the flash gives barely any light and it is far too short lasting and blinding to have been the real goal of those hours worth of night photos. Besides: the initial night photo batch had often only 10-20 seconds between photos. Seemingly not enough time to take the photo, turn the camera around, press the right buttons to allow them to review the photo on the display screen to see if anything could be seen in the surroundings. Then turn the camera again, aim it back up for a very similarly framed photo and do it all over again. Add to this that no animal or intruder or whatever was ever actually captured on their camera. And if they wanted to be able to look around them, why were the majority of photos aimed at the sky? Not capturing what was around them on ground level? And as Power-Pixie also stated at the end of his video: Kris and Lisanne never used the flashlight option of their phones either during that first week of April. Were they not panicked, disorientated and afraid enough during those first 7 days and nights then to want to use their camera or phones for some light in the dark of night? Apparently not. 

Could the flash have been the unwanted side-effect then of them trying to press the shutter button just enough to engage the auto-focus GREEN light to illuminate? And use the camera in such a way as a primary light source? As both Power-Pixie and Dave M. discovered; this is no easy feat given how quickly and easily that button is pressed too far down, resulting in a photo. And press it firmly for more than 5 seconds and there follows a flash picture as well. Even though Power-Pixie's video proves that the green light would have been a much more steady and useful lightsource in a dark jungle than the flash light, it still does not appear a satisfying explanation for all those night pictures. Because the chance of taking unwanted accidental pictures while trying to press the button just enough for the green light to appear (in the pitch black darkness outside) is very high. And the SD card showed no such accidental, failed photos. They were all well composed and taken with purpose. I went past them all again and the only night photos that could, perhaps, with a lot of good will have been accidental shots are 547, 556, 559, 561 and 597. But they are all aimed at the same sky and the treetops, like so many of the other sharp night photos. So they appear to have been made with the same intention. Those are not the type of photos you'd expect if they were truly taken accidentally, swinging that camera around while trying the look at your direct surroundings. 

And as for a daytime photo on display: that would have provided a steady light source with a pretty far reach, but from the known photo times and sequences it does not appear that they used this method either.. The night photos are often very repetitive in subject and show someone who is intentionally and mechanically snapping away. Without the time to fiddle with buttons to get an older photo on the display screen and then going back to shooting a new photo and then back to the displaying of a daytime photo again. That is not a pattern we actually see in the night photo sequence. As for the theory that Lisanne was 'trying to signal to someone' in the night of April 8th, there were with 100% certainty no helicopters flying at night. And if Kris and Lisanne had heard or seen a helicopter flying over during the day, wouldn't they have tried to make it to one of the many open spaces in that area and wave their coloured shirts there? There were also no planes taking off or landing in the vicinity after midnight. There is zero information or evidence or even indication that searchers had been actively moving around in the dark of night then either. Sinaproc and search members have communicated regularly at the time with the local and international press, and never even hinted at such after midnight search operations. It seems fairly safe to state therefore that there was no active searching going on that night and this not being the reason for nearly three hours of systematic photo taking between 01:29 and 04:10 AM. As far as anybody knows, there was noone to try to flash to for attention for nearly three hours in the dark of night. Not consistent with this either are the hair, paper SOS and branch on boulder picture shots. These photos contradict the theories that those night photos were only the result of either creating a light source or attempts to signal someone. They are too composed and make no sense during a so called urgent attention signalling photo session. Those plastic on sticks/paper on the rock arrangements weren't going to help being discovered that night. So why would they put them out there in the dark while it was raining? Why waste your minimal possessions to put it out in the dark of night in the rain, only for it to be destroyed or washed away before the sun came up. And then take one single photo of it to... document? If truly desperate, these girls surely would have taken a few more photos of their hard work? 

As Power-Pixie said about this: "The reports put the helicopter upon day 4, 5 and 6 of the disappearance. So if we look at the terrain on the map, and where their belongings were found, downstream from the Mirador, then they would have been within earshot of these helicopters. It is not a very big area to cover when you're sky high. On the ground it around 900+ km of trail according to the SINAPROC director. So if this was Kris and Lisanne taking these night photos, I would have imagined them to try and use the camera to signal on previous days and nights, possibly even try their phones thinking they could somehow reach the people in the helicopter via the emergency numbers that would relay their whereabouts. I know this sounds foolish, but put ourselves in two inexperienced women lost in this place and scared to death, they'd try anything by day or night 4."

Scarlet: Those still life SOS and red plastic scenes to me seem composed for effect. Once that camera was discovered and shown to the world, it were those photos in particular which steered the opinion towards an accident. Or as Dave M. puts it: "The night photos seem to exist as a means of recording a certain narrative in 'telling' a story, using pictures of a stage set to do so. And there is nothing human to be seen here. Just a hint of Kris Kremers laying here, but nothing more than that." I think the night photos were not taken by accident because the camera was used as a source of light. And neither because someone was using the camera to directly alert someone. But rather to create a visual trail of 'evidence' that Kris and Lisanne were 'lost', stuck, alone in the wild and still alive by day 8.. The super abstract and non-personal night photos were taken well after midnight and ended in the early hours of dawn. Nothing else related to the case was going on during this time-frame. So that allows for a perfect time to set such a thing up for a 3rd party. Some people paint such a scenario as a completely unrealistic exercise that would have demanded way too much effort from a criminal involved. But seriously, what's the big deal with taking some 100 photos in 3 hours time, to show people a fabricated perspective of lost tourists in the wilderness and save your own ass? So anyway, long story short: in our view, the theory that the night photos were simply made as a light source can really go in the bin now.

MOBILE PHONES; Video Showing how much Light the Two Mobile Phones produce (camera flash, assistive light, flashlight) 

Power-Pixie also purchased the specific phones which Kris and Lisanne possessed and used in Panama: the Samsung Galaxy S3 mini and the iPhone 4. He tested how much light producing capacity both phones have. Now keep in mind that according to the NFI who (arguably) worked with the original phones and their phone logs, and ImperfectPlan who had access to a copy of their findings, there is no known phone log data that shows the use of the phone's flashlight function during or after April 1st 2014. So this is just a theoretical experiment out of curiosity, in extension of the main test of the Canon camera's light producing features. That one is the main test because there are no logs for this digital camera, so we can freely base ourselves on the known photos taken with this Canon device. We basically wonder why Kris and Lisanne sat in the dark supposedly for a whole week, without ever using the flash or torch functions. And we wonder how several night photos were taken, including the one with the "SOS" sign and the plastic on sticks. Because both would have had to have been staged in the pitch dark. So how likely is it that Kris and Lisanne/the photographer used a light source to create those scenes? 

This video shows just how easy the flashlight can be found on both mobile phones. Both phones had an inbuilt camera flash option. On the iPhone 4 you don't need to use a passcode, as you can access the camera app directly from the icon that shows up on the main screen. (along with Video, Photo and Square options). As for the Samsung, Lisanne never had a passcode. Just swipe and access. Lisanne's and Kris' first immediate extension to the outside world were these phones. Both girls were very familiar with their phones and used them all the time before their disappearance. And yet, it is highly unlikely that the phones were used as serious light sources for Kris and Lisanne, since there is no phone log info that supports this. And we also know through the phone logs how little these phones were powered on at all between April 1st-11th. The fact these flashlights were so easy to use on both phones, but were not even activated during their first night out there continues to surprise us. 

Power-Pixie: "Without seeing the actual logs I cannot be sure what is or should be in them. By connecting the Samsung phone to my laptop and using an Android based program, I am able to view the real-time logging of the Samsung phone. I did the same with the iPhone to view the real-time logging on the screen to understand what the phones are doing when you do something on it. All I can tell you is that the Samsung indicates in the logs whenever you turn on or off the Assistive Light. Example:
Assistive Light Being Turned On

2022-05-20 17:31:05.556 714-819/? D/LightsService: setLightLocked is called

Just letting us know that the Assistive light is still engaged.

2022-05-20 17:31:07.058 714-810/? D/LightsService: setLightLocked is called

2022-05-20 17:31:07.588 714-819/? D/LightsService: setLightLocked is called

Turning off the Assistive light (flashlight)

2022-05-20 17:31:07.719 714-1116/? D/LightsService: [SvcLED] setSvcLedStateLocked:: id = 4, color = 0, mode = Off, set = Off

That would have been clear as day, if you looked for it. The iPhone doesn't inform you about the flashlight, but does inform you of the functions that are also available when used, that sit right next to the Flashlight. These are Music Player, Camera, Timer, calculator. This really grates me: the Samsung logs the flashlight, the iPhone doesn't. The iPhone logs something else, the Samsung doesn't. It's like Kris and Lisanne were just doomed to oblivion or something."

Scarlet: A much heard argument from those defending an Accident scenario is that Kris and Lisanne would have been religiously, military style disciplined with those phones in order to save battery life. But apparently those dire battery saving considerations were suddenly forgotten by Lisanne during the 2nd day and 3rd night, when her phone was kept powered on and burned through as good as all its remaining battery, while Lisanne barely used to phone for anything at all. She seemingly just left it on to drain its battery, while reminding herself by 2:21 AM that it really was still powered on by checking a weather app... The phone logs show only that short use of a weather app and the short use of an unknown android app during that night. By morning the battery was drained to 1%. But the phone's flashlight function was not used at all in the meantime, and neither were draft messages made, messages checked or microphone function activated, for instance. Likewise, the iPhone 4 was also never used as a light source through its Flashlight function. We continue to find this very strange. 

Power-Pixie: "A thorough phone logs analysis is probably going to be key to making any progress in this case, unless someone finds the Pate De Macho trail and appears on the Mirador to show us the link between Palo Alto and the Pianista."

If anyone reading this is in the position to visit Boquete and look for this Pata de Macho trail (it is covered in the Lost in Panama podcast, read all about it here), then please let us know :) 

MOBILE PHONES; THE iPHONE

Power-Pixie purchased the exact same iPhone4 as Kris had. "I have attached a short video of how to make an emergency call without a passcode. Kris and Lisanne never had to enter a passcode for this, as far as I can tell from using this same model iphone. For me it sheds a very different light on the usage of the iPhone during the first eleven days of their disappearance, especially the 2nd day."

Power-Pixie: "Here is a reference document of both phone activities based on their SIM PIN code and PASSCODE entries, where applicable. I can't wrap my head around the fact that Kris never entered her SIM PIN or Passcode to dial the emergency number at 4:39pm on April 1st. It tells me that she knew she didn't need to (just swipe left and press the 'emergency' button), and that she was still in charge of the phone. The Samsung models also have their emergency buttons available without the need of entering the passcode. The rest of the time, starting April 2, is weird as now Kris suddenly has to enter her SIM PIN to dial emergency numbers. And then enters it incorrectly or does not enter it at all, but never dialing the emergency numbers?"

Dave M replied: "The thing that hits me very hard on that chart is the switch-on and offs - those timings show me someone is in an enormous hurry to switch the phone on, try a call, and switch it off as quick as humanly possible. Is this not fear we are seeing? One minute switched on - there is not even time for a phone to find and connect to a signal in my opinion. What is going on with these two phones? Both are also being used the same way, with very brief power-ons, and I cannot see two different people using their phones in the same manner like this. Incidentally, this is what the login of a Samsung-8 looks like, the emergency button placed in the center. [The Samsung models also have their emergency buttons available without the need of entering the passcode]. - Is this because they were trying to hide their phones, while also sneaking out very quick attempts at switching on for a call attempt? One minute is simply not enough time to connect to a signal, but one minute switch ons were apparently all someone dared to attempt...."

Power-Pixie: "Yes it does seem like an extremely short period of time for anything. At times the logs show that no SIM PIN was entered. Passcode and SIM PIN code are two separate codes. I was confused by what ImperfectPlan posted in the logs. They nearly always posted the logs as showing the SIM PIN code was entered correctly or incorrectly, or not entered at all. The iPhone Passcode seemed secondary in the way they described it. Now that I am having the actual model phone and am testing it with a dead SIM card, I was able to reset the SIM PIN code with the help of the SIM provider. The passcode is the numerical code you first enter after sliding to open the iphone to access the passcode screen. The SIM PIN code refers to the numerical code for locking/unlocking the SIM card. This is an extra layer of protection. On the iPhone this method of unlocking the SIM PIN only comes second after you enter the Passcode. The passcode always has to come before the SIM PIN code and you do not need any codes to dial the emergency numbers."

Dave added: "If the 'swipe & press' is what happened on the afternoon of the 1st, then that makes sense in a dangerous situation where speed (and discretion) is needed." 

Power-Pixie: "From April 2 onwards Kris and Lisanne, we assume, are lost. Occam's razor says they are at leisure to dial with their phones however many times they wish to, until their battery runs out. So what's with the haste? If they are not lost and are captured/held somewhere, how come the perps didn't take their phones from them nearly 14 hours later? Why would the perps risk leaving, not one but two phones with Kris and Lisanne? If Lisanne was the only one hiding somewhere with the phones while Kris was taken away by the perps, then how come she knows Kris's passcode and SIM PIN code? That's a bit much for anyone to recall, especially during stressful situations in case one of them whispered it to the other on April 1. I find this usage very strange after April 2, and it makes me believe that Kris and Lisanne were not in possession of their phones."

MOBILE PHONES; Test Dialing the Emergency Number without service with the iPhone

Power-Pixie: "I’m in two minds as I have a different theory for April 1’s phone usage, but for now I think Kris herself used her phone to dial the emergency number on April 1st. This is Kris's iPhone and she is most familiar with this feature. [Scarlet: and the Dutch emergency number 112 was called that first day]. Imperfect Plan did not state anywhere in their analysis of the phone logs for April 1, that a Passcode and/or SIM PIN code was entered. I think they would have seen that very clearly when seeing the rest of the days/nights' entries in the phone logs. I tested dialing the emergency number on the iPhone with no service and a bunch of related gibberish gets reported on the console log screen besides the constant reporting of various events without even touching the iphone. The console log screen is the app on my macbook pro, which I used to view the real-time logging of the iPhone as I was using it. This helps me see which features are reported by the iOS."

Power-Pixie: "Please note the following settings on my iPhone are somewhat similar to what may have been on Kris's phone, although the log entries did not report this nor did the NFI indicate this anywhere. So....

*I have Cellular Data toggled ON

*I have 3G toggled OFF

*I have Data Roaming toggled ON

*I have Airplane Mode toggled OFF

*I have Wi-Fi turned OFF

*The Carrier setting is set to Automatic and toggled ON

Following Kris's iPhone Sequence for April 2 (Source: Imperfect Plan)

• At 8:12am I power on the iPhone.
• I have to physically hold the top button for a second or 2 to get my iPhone 4 to turn on. 
• I have to wait for ~30 seconds for it to bring me to the main screen. 
• I have to swipe right to "slide to unlock" the phone that takes me to the passcode section. 
• I have to enter a 4-digit passcode and I'm at the home screen when the SIM pin code challenge pops up.
• I have the option to tap OK or Unlock (OK will take me to the phone home screen but I will not be able to make regular calls since the SIM is still locked).  
• At 8:12am the SIM Pin code is entered. 
• Since I did not tap OK, I tap Unlock and enter the 4 digit SIM pin code. 
• At 8:13am the Network is switched from 2G to 3G. 
• I have to tap Settings -> Cellular -> Toggle the 3G switch to Green or ON status. 
• At 8:13am 112 is "dialed". 
• I have to tap on the Phone icon at the bottom of the screen. It opens up to the phone call history right away. 
• I then have the option of tapping the last 112 call in the call history or tap on the "keypad" icon at the bottom to "dial" the 112 number. 
• Tapping 112 from the call history would make most sense in this instance. 
• I tap it and it shows me "Emergency Call - calling..." the number, and then says 'call failed'. 

In the phone log that I'm simultaneously watching, it reports "call failed".

• The phone then presents me with two options: "cancel X" or "Call Back". 
  
• So I tap Cancel. I'm back at the phone history screen. 
• At 8:14am the phone is Powered off: I have to press the top right button and hold it for 2 seconds. 
• The phone brings up the "slide to power off" and "X cancel" screen. 
• Then the phone shuts down in under 10 seconds. 
• Notice by the way that the 'recent' screen can easily be used as a convenient shortcut of sorts to make a repeat call. 

This event would also be logged by the phone by the way. Now check this out. I wanted to review the real-time logging, going on my laptop since my phone is still hooked up to my laptop via USB. I use the Console log screen to see what the phone is reporting. So I decided to repeat the sequence again, up until the emergency call from the call history. It failed in the same way. Then I imagined I was lost in the jungle and out of frustration or desperation I thought; let me try again while watching the laptop screen for the phone to report its current working state. So... I tapped 112 from the call history again. It started with the same message "Emergency Call - calling..." and then it connected!!! I heard a voice on the other end of the line that announced they were emergency services and what is my emergency. Since I did not expect to connect and it was not on speaker phone, I froze in surprise and 30 seconds later the call was disconnected. I feel like a total schmuck now. Maybe they will think it was pocket-dialed since only the hum of my heater can be heard. But anyways, IT CONNECTED on a second try, with an old, disconnected SIM card in the phone**, with 3G turned OFF and after unlocking the SIM (not that unlocking the SIM needed to be done). I did not see the 112 call logged on my laptop screen unlike the "call failed" message. I don't know why at this point.

IT CONNECTED on second try, with an old disconnected SIM card in the phone, with 3G turned OFF and after unlocking the SIM

I also tried calling my regular phone to see if it would connect, but it failed right away, after a couple of seconds went by, before I get the "Cancel X" or "Call Back" options on the screen. I tap on "Call Back" and it fails right away, unlike the emergency call back, which tries for 30 seconds before failing during previous attempts. I know there are cell towers much stronger in the city I'm in, so that is one reason it could have relayed the connection. But what this shows me is that this 12 year old phone still managed to connect me to emergency services on the second try with a disconnected SIM card (you don't need a SIM card or SIM pin code to dial an emergency number and connect to the service) and without any fancy up-scaling of the network to 3G. It does not "boost" any signal for this phone, is what I'm saying. However, the emergency calls never worked from my basement or when using Airplane Mode on before, when I had tested both the Samsung and iPhone 4. I had tried both 112 and 911 then. It never connected. I also had tried it from my apartment. I hope the police are not going to show up at my doorstep now! I'll just tell them my friend Scarlet dialed it because she is from the Netherlands and thought she dialed 411 for information. Anyways I'm elated as well as a bit apprehensive, since I don't know if the call will connect again if I try to test other sequences again. I can try, but I think I will get into trouble if I do, as they can still try to locate me using the GPS location services that is turned on. Remember that feature? It's mysteriously omitted from the phone logs."

**"I had the SIM enabled until March of 2022. Then I disabled the service on it and it became defunct since. I made 3x 911 calls, and 1x 112 call when the SIM was active and inserted into the iPhone 4. The phone calls were disconnected by me on these occasions as I was not testing a full connection, because I feared it would connect due to the phone having an active connection. After March 2022, I made 6x 911 calls, and 13x 112 calls. At no point did the phone connect from the same locations (apartment and basement). I did not cancel the calls thinking I had no connection, I was confident it would not connect, just like Kris's phone did not connect. The SIM card remained in the phone until today (Jan 14 2023). In the video above, I removed the SIM card as you will see. So no need for a SIM pin code. I don't have any Wi-Fi connection, Cellular option and the Phone option is disabled due to no SIM card. I attempted to call 112, 3 times today. It connected on the 3rd attempt. Each call attempt lasts only 30 seconds or less, when a call does not connect. When it connects it can last as long as the connection lasts or until the caller or receiver hangs up. In my case three days ago, the first surprise connection to 112 (with the SIM card inserted) had lasted 30 seconds. Today, without the SIM card inserted it lasted 23 seconds. All I can tell you is that the phone logs for Kris's iPhone is not telling me the whole story. I refuse to believe that she only tried those calls intermittently and once or twice when the phone was turned on briefly. And once more: you can "dial" the number, use the call history to recall the number to dial out, and use the Emergency button without entering the SIM pin code for the SIM card when it is inserted."

Dave M. replied: "Great work. Does your phone list this 112 call as an actual 'successful' connection? The way the 'Emergency Call' button is configured seems to bypass certain internal functions and barriers of the Phone, and while I have no reason to think Kris' phone would have made a connection in 2014, the practical experiment you tried is exactly what I was hoping for. Apart from showing how friendly and easy to navigate this phone is, you have just given a breakdown of what the person handling the phone would have seen and experienced. More than that though you showed that the 'recent' screen can easily be used as a convenient shortcut of sorts to make that call.. We can't say whether this was Kris or someone else, both choices are valid. And yet as you proved, the 'recent' screen is the easiest function to use in principle as it is auto dial. Someone chose though to lean much more on the actual keypad itself to make the calls, which means the need for entering the Sim password each time and physically dialing the number each time. I can't decide if this is important or not, physically having to enter a password and then dial a number each time doesn't suggest someone injured. My strong suspicion is that the main screen password WAS deactivated, but if Kris chose to deactivate that, then it is entirely logical she would have done away with the SIM requirement as well. Take this breakdown of the Thursday April 3 iPhone activity for example:

-9:32: The phone is turned on and the PIN is entered correctly.

-9:33: Two 911 calls are made but do not establish contact with the network. Automatic creation of a screenshot when closing the call screen (the keyboard screen for writing numbers).

-9:33: The phone is turned off.

This is the first time the iPhone has been switched on since yesterday/Wednesday morning. We see evidence of the phone being turned on, two calls being attempted, a screenshot of the dial-screen proves these attempts were physically entered, and a shut down showing all this is within a minute or so. What IS the rush here?! If you are trying to hide your phone, why have you left SIM password active, trying physical dial-ups *twice* and instantly shutting down - the phone probably hasn't even had time to find a signal! But is that the point then, to avoid the possibility of connecting to a roaming signal?"

MOBILE PHONES; Test Dialing the Emergency Number without service with the Samsung Galaxy

Power-Pixie: "Here is a test I did today. I dialed the emergency number 112 with the Samsung SG3 Mini, while the phone had no SIM card or Wi-Fi connection. This 2012 phone connected instantly! And I'm going to get into trouble so I have to find some good excuses. The Samsung phone is incredible and works better than the iPhone 4 at times. Anyways, both phones connect to Emergency services without Wi-Fi connection, cellular network connection or (connected) SIM cards in them, when I did not expect them to connect. It just depends on how many times you try and how close you are to cell towers. I've moved to a new location so maybe the towers are closer, I'm not sure. Or maybe it's because I now live in a high-rise apartment. So there's a mild increase in altitude/elevation. The previous tests with the phones were from my basement and ground floor apartment in another part of the city."

Dave M. replied: "Power-Pixie, what is the science here if you have no Wi-Fi, credit or a Sim? Okay, so let's accept that your Samsung can connect to the emergency number on the simple basis that that function allows the phone to bypass these obstacles and just connect IF there is an ambient signal to connect with - whoever was using the phone on April 1st and 2nd wouldn't necessarily realise how potent this Emergency facility is? So even if they are in a dead-zone for any signal, they are still with a reasonable chance of connecting to this number... IF they just left the phone ringing? That doesn't seem to have happened though, as the logs seem to show that the phones were powered on and switched off within, on average, a minute. Which is demonstrating to me an increasingly obvious awareness that there WAS a risk of connecting, and it had to be minimised. The same attitude is seen at work during the 16.00 to 07.00am timeframe of April 2nd and 3rd, where we see the Samsung being left on with some functions being accessed in the early hours, but not one attempt to try a phone call or message. And based on the above it seems to be becoming very clear that whoever is using these phones, is very aware of the risk of making an unintentional connection if they leave a phone ringing more than a few seconds... But that video you made adds more weight to the apparent strangeness going on. We see on that call screen a Call, Video call, Message option being offered as the phone is ringing out. Three highly prominent Icons on the screen, showing that this phone is childsplay to navigate and use. And yet whoever was using it for those two days, made only basic efforts to exploit its potential to message or record, and wasn't willing to dial out and keep calling until they got through... Instead there is apparently a strange tactic used to just let the phone make a few rings, and quickly switch off before a signal might be found. It says a lot."

Power-Pixie replied: "That is the main reason why I find these phone logs to be suspect. Not the logs but what was reported in them. They are reporting a behavior that is only seen when someone is deliberately trying NOT to be discovered. Dialing once or twice and then waiting 25 hours is not evidence of someone who is lost or in desperate need of help. The gap in between the phone calls make it seem like they were wandering around and making calls intermittently, but it could be a poor attempt at obfuscating the truth. When changing position you want to retry your connection sooner. And had a 3rd party made repeated attempts throughout the day(s), they would have had us all fooled early on. Having both phones and demonstrating it for you and Scarlet has helped me appreciate how advanced these devices were underneath their simple exterior and user interfaces. To not make a single phone call outside of the emergency calls, write/send a text message, take more photos/videos with it for their loved ones is bizarre. To me it only furthers my suspicion that the phones were not being used by Kris and Lisanne after 5pm on April 1."

Power-Pixie also wrote: "It is a pity that the Samsung wasn't explored in great detail by the NFI or Panama officials. It was the first of the two to be in working condition and didn't need to be charged if I recall correctly. And from what we have seen it is very easy to read and use. Here is an article on how a phone can make an emergency call and what is behind this feature. Some key points: "The FCC has regulations to ensure that 911 calls are accepted by all providers, even if you don't have a phone plan. This feature was introduced back when GSM standards were created in the 1990s. You can make an emergency call with no service, as long as there is a cell phone tower nearby, and you're using a local SIM." This makes a lot more sense now. If you don't have a local SIM it is harder to connect, as the cell towers in foreign countries do not understand or may not accept your foreign SIM card. 

So did Kris and/or Lisanne purchase a local SIM at any point during their travel in Panama? Did they use it in their phones? If yes to both, then both their phones would have connected to the cell towers if within decent enough range, obviously if they had allowed the phone to ring and made several attempts in quick succession. If a 3rd party took out their SIM card and tried to make those fake calls, thinking it would not connect, it would show up in the logs, just as I have been able to note the number of times it reports the last used SIM card ID number. There is a distinct call out for removed SIMs. "But, when you make an emergency call (either from the dialer or from the lock screen), the authentication process changes. For such calls, the signal can piggyback using the infrastructure of another network provider. An interesting chain of events is triggered when you place an emergency call in such circumstances. The internal phone software quickly analyzes available signals in the region and identifies the strongest for fielding the emergency call. This emergency call is then tagged, thus giving it priority as specified by FCC guidelines. You don't even need a SIM card in your phone for this to happen! The priority tag is very important because if the cell phone tower is running at maximum capacity, it'll simply bump a call with no priority status to allow an emergency call to connect. It does seem like a lot is happening at once, but you should know that all of this happens in a matter of a few seconds! That's why you get such a quick response when you dial an emergency number in most cases."

So hence why my phone connected. Today (according to the article) they have outfitted the cell towers - even defunct ones - with E911 or Enhanced 911 that gives away your phone and location. This feature was added in recent years. Prior to however, 911/112 calls were allowed to piggyback and get priority off cell towers, as mentioned previously from the article. So: you don't need a paid subscription or a phone plan to make an emergency call. However, if you're in another country or if there are no cell phone towers nearby, then there's simply no tower for the signal to latch on to. If you're completely out of the network, you can't make an emergency call. If you have no bars on your phone, it simply means that there are no towers nearby that support your carrier. We all know that Kris's phone had (increasing/ decreasing) bars on her phone throughout their hike, all the way to the top on the Mirador, before losing connection past the Mirador. Then it's also safe to assume she had bars all the way since she entered Panama."

THE MISSING PHONE LOGS 

Power-Pixie: "The 2 hours and 45 minutes void on April 1st is a major hole that even the phone logs do not fill. I am completely at a loss as to how two phones that I have tested now and of which I know they report incessantly on anything and everything and how their algorithm is structured and designed to report... just somehow never did this for Kris and Lisanne's situation. iPhone Console Log Messages: 

Turning on Airplane Mode

default 16:20:14.000000-0500 misd  Airplane Mode is ON

Turning off Airplane Mode

default 16:21:05.000000-0500 misd  Airplane Mode is OFF

Opening SMS/Text Messages App And Sending a Text without connection

default 16:31:24.000000-0500 backboardd  HID: The 'Passive' connection 'MobileSMS' access to protected services is denied.

default 16:31:29.000000-0500 locationd  Location icon should now be in state 'Inactive'

default 16:31:38.000000-0500 MobileMail  (Note ) MC: Loaded Message.framework

default 16:31:38.000000-0500 CommCenter  queuing sms message with id 69283

default 16:31:38.000000-0500 imagent  mms: queued messageId 69283

Opening Clock App (Native iPhone App)

default 16:34:09.000000-0500 backboardd  HID: The 'Passive' connection 'MobileTimer' access to protected services is denied.

Opening Maps App (Native iPhone App)

default 16:35:12.000000-0500 backboardd  HID: The 'Passive' connection 'Maps' access to protected services is denied.

default 16:35:13.000000-0500 Maps  Could not determine current country code: Error Domain=GEOErrorDomain Code=-2 "The operation couldn’t be completed. (GEOErrorDomain error -2.)"

default 16:35:14.000000-0500 locationd  Location icon should now be in state 'Active'

default 16:35:15.000000-0500 locationd  NETWORK: requery, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, items, fQueryRetries, 0, fLastRetryTimestamp, 680646647.2

Opening Weather App (Native iPhone App)

default 16:38:04.000000-0500 backboardd  HID: The 'Passive' connection 'Weather' access to protected services is denied.

default 16:38:05.000000-0500 geod  Can't get bundle identifier for process 191

default 16:38:06.000000-0500 Weather  Could not determine current country code: Error Domain=GEOErrorDomain Code=-2 "The operation couldn’t be completed. (GEOErrorDomain error -2.)"

Opening Camera App (Native iPhone App)

default 16:38:57.000000-0500 backboardd  HID: The 'Passive' connection 'Camera' access to protected services is denied.

default 16:38:58.000000-0500 backboardd  HID: The 'Rate Controlled' connection 'mediaserverd' access to protected services is denied.

Opening Compass App (Native iPhone App)

default 16:41:17.000000-0500 backboardd  HID: The 'Passive' connection 'Compass' access to protected services is denied.

default 16:41:18.000000-0500 backboardd  HID: The 'Rate Controlled' connection 'Compass' access to protected services is denied.

default 16:41:18.000000-0500 locationd  Location icon should now be in state 'Active'

HOW can an iPhone AND a Samsung phone go through 2 hours and 45 minutes without any type of background OS activity, and not log any of this information (while still using a lot of battery)? It has to be there in the logs. I've seen evidence of everything in there; from opening apps, to swiping, to more detailed functions like emergency calls, SMS, etc. How is it that the phone logs do not show any of this for 2 hours and 45 minutes, and then for another 55 minutes after the emergency calls? [While the phone's battery is heavily drained in this timeframe]. The only way for these phones to not report anything is to be shut off. [Which is also an action that was not logged]. Even in Airplane mode, it would state "AIRPLANE MODE" in the logs. I see this problem, so why didn't the investigating authorities? By the way, about airplane mode: Turning on airplane mode prevents your phone from making connections to the cell towers around it. You'll no longer be able to accept calls or text messages. Airplane mode disables all wireless communication on your device, including cellular networks, Wi-Fi, and Bluetooth. Since WhatsApp requires an internet connection to send and receive messages, photos, and other media, it won't function while in airplane mode."

Dave M: "The Camera was probably put away around 2pm or not long after. The phones don't come into play until 4.40pm. But the way the Samsung Galaxy S3 mini phone shows a huge drain on power that afternoon is hard to explain away. I can see how a background app and resources might be trying to connect in the background, but I have real trouble seeing this draining power causing such extreme battery drainage. So we have a possible missing element here, that might even be indicating an edit of the log subsequently by a 3rd party, to remove an 'event' or two."

Scarlet: The Samsung phone’s sudden and unexplained surge in battery use between 13:40 and 16:53 on April 1st of 2014 just keeps coming back to my thoughts now and then. I really want to know what was the reason for this, especially as it may directly link - chronologically - with the moment photo or video file #509 was created. And why the NFI report does not account for this event.

The GPS Feature on Both Phones 

Power-Pixie: "As for the phone logs, I also wonder about the GPS feature of both phones. This feature existed on the same phone models. Here is a link to the video that someone else has made. In it you will discover that there is GPS enabled, similar to what I have on my larger model Samsung Galaxy.  For me this answers the question of whether Lisanne's phone had GPS on her phone or not. Now why the logs do not show any indication of GPS is beyond me. The same with the iPhone 4. Why was it turned off? Why is there no logged information of this for either phone? This is one of the fundamental aspects to mobile forensics; to establish a footprint of the victim or suspect. And in the Samsung Galaxy S3 mini phone real-time console log (when I attach the phone using the phone cable to my laptop) I see a very distinct call out for "GPS". 

tail -f /tmp/android-debug.log | grep GPS (this is me extracting just instances of GPS from the log file)

GPS turned on

12-31 19:42:00.870  2114  2114 D STATUSBAR-LocationQuickSettingButton: GPS onClick(false) mGpsActivated=true

GPS turned off

12-31 19:42:06.215  2114  2114 D STATUSBAR-LocationQuickSettingButton: GPS onClick(true) mGpsActivated=false

Without GPS how was Lisanne accessing accurate weather or maps prior to getting lost on April 1? Did she not use GPS at Nelvis to download the most updated Google Map? Would she not receive the message to turn on GPS or Location Services to get more accurate map? Did Lisanne not use weather or maps applications at all since leaving the Netherlands and decided to leave GPS turned off since entering Central America? I don’t buy the theory that they both turned of GPS when they arrived in Panama to save money or data or battery. That’s absurd as a lot of their apps, both native and 3rd party, would need to be accessed when they had internet/Wi-Fi connection, and some apps do explicitly call out Location Services like Facebook. The same goes for while they were in Boquete. And turning off GPS while hiking is just as ludicrous, because it’s as if Kris and Lisanne knew they were going to get lost on April 1, so they both simultaneously turned off GPS/Locations Services to save battery?

I don't trust the logs, but I trust even less that Kris and Lisanne did not look at their phones to simply check for the time. That to me is preposterous. They are not locals who can go by the sun and shadows of an area. As I demonstrated in the short video, the iPhone need not have anything entered when switched on to make emergency calls, nor does the Samsung Galaxy S3 mini. So with emergency calls made on April 1, the situation only dawns on them the following day to make more emergency calls? Also: No Google Maps was used during those 12-14 hours in between. If lost (or held captive), why not at least try to use the shortly beforehand downloaded Google Maps offline? And there was no use of the weather app for the first 24 hours either.

I don't trust the logs, but I trust even less that Kris and Lisanne did not look at their phones to simply check for the time. That to me is preposterous. They are not locals who can go by the sun and shadows of an area. As I demonstrated in the short video, the iPhone need not have anything entered when switched on to make emergency calls, nor does the Samsung Galaxy S3 mini. So with emergency calls made on April 1, the situation only dawns on them the following day to make more emergency calls? Also: No Google Maps was used during those 12-14 hours in between. If lost (or held captive), why not at least try to use the shortly beforehand downloaded Google Maps offline? And there was no use of the weather app for the first 24 hours either."

Scarlet: "Part of the ongoing interest in this case lies in the bizarre amount of details we do know, thanks to the Camera and Phones. But then it just never quite gels together to form a logical explanation of what happened. I also don't understand the phone logs. I'm very grateful for people like yourselves and Tharindu to weigh in on this subtopic to the extent you do. As I didn't understand much about the technicalities of mobile phones to start with. But there are several things that keep me thinking about these phone logs:

• The lack of explanatory phone log information for the heavy battery drainage between roughly 2-6 PM on April 1st, when we're told the phones were barely used and had no background activities to talk of. 
  
  
• The fact that both phones were powered off around roughly the same time and were not used for fourteen hours. To me this makes no sense for two phone loving young foreign women who are supposedly out in a dark jungle unexpectedly.
  
  
• Then for the Samsung phone to be left powered on during the second night and have its battery as good as drained, without actually using that phone for anything constructive. While the person handling that phone was aware that the phone was powered on, as a weather app and another unknown app were checked by 2:21 AM. But not once was any attempt made to call the families at home, the boyfriend of Kris at home or even Miriam in Boquete (who's number wás looked at in Whatsapp) or Spanish by the River. 
  
  
• The very short, ineffective and systematic switching on and off of the iPhone at fixed "office times" and never at night, when reception signals tend to be stronger. The iPhone was very efficient with its power management, but the person handling it would not even try to send out a single SMS message. Kris was described as a more feisty and impatient person, but nowhere do we ever see the girls' different personalities reflected in these sterile and uniform phone uses. 
  
  
• They also had a digital camera and had every opportunity to record or document their predicament in a more straightforward manner. But no... To me it is unimaginable that the homebodies Lisanne and Kris, who documented their every day in diaries and were in daily touch with their parents, would opt out of documenting anything at all at any time during their predicament. Despite someone being physically capable of shooting vague and mysterious photos for nearly three hours by day 8. Despite the brain not usually allowing people to be in the exact same constant state of stress, but instead usually alternating hope with fear, so to speak. I suspect they were physically unable to properly reach out (because they were captured by a 3rd party in my opinion). The only thing making slight sense to me is that a 3rd party staged the 112 and 911 call attempts and the night photos, in order to mimic the behaviour of two lost hikers. Although there are arguments to make against this, such as the brains, planning and dedication it would have demanded from this 3rd party to come up with this scheme and to execute it.

These phone records remain a red flag, no matter how many people try to rationalize and normalize them. They are not normal or even natural or logical. They don't make sense. To have two very young women, just out of their teenage years, sitting outdoors, lost, deep in foreign wilderness for a good ten to twelve hours in the deep darkness of the night. And they never switch their phones on or try to call home or Miriam even once. That is an unfathomable scenario to me.

Or as Dave M. put it: "The use of these two phones, like the April 8th Photographs, is very sterile. There is nothing in any of these that shows Lisanne or Kris definitely at work here... The phone use looks and feels mechanical. Impersonal. Two people with two distinct personalities, who would have handled the situation differently and thought differently. Realistically, at some point one of them would have caved in and tried to use their phone to call home, irrespective of the battery life. Fear is not easily overcome by people as inexperienced as Kris and Lisanne in an alien place like Panama. And yet I maintain that the phones do show that ONE hand is very likely in charge of the two phones. The way they are used is not showing two independent people. The only reason the iPhone is used so heavily after day 2 is probably due to the Samsung being exhausted, and in hindsight you do have to return to the old suggestion that since its battery was the weakest, did someone perhaps deliberately exhaust it that night? The iPhone is the more sophisticated, expensive and impressive of the two phones, is this not the one you would choose over the Samsung and its poor battery strength?"

Power-Pixie agreed with this: "There is no evidence that they are waiting for help, because the calls are so limited in time and frequency to create a probability that they might accidentally connect. You have to try to know. How is it they only know to try at those "certain" time frames (and numbers) and then stop? Yeah I heard the "oh they were tired and hence slept most of the time when they didn't use the phones." To that I say: then what were they doing that made them so exhausted? And when were they immobile? It is not clear to me from these logs. It is at best a very sterile use of the two very advance devices in a situation of desperation, the longer the situation went on. A 3rd party on the other hand could have been relying on the 'recently dialled numbers' to guide these switch ons and actually make the calls - the call/activity history would list the time and dates of their call history, and I suspect this might be what is informing the users switch ons. If it is a third party using them, then a glance at the phones activity tells them how the two girls were using their phones, and all they have to do is keep to that timeframe. It explains how Kris or Lisanne could ever be so accurate in the time of day for those five days - it wasn't them switching the phones on. I do feel the evidence is starting to support Marguarita's claims."

PASSWORDS 

Scarlet: "The NFI confirmed that there were two passwords active for Kris' phone after they went missing. The SIM pin being 0556. They did not publish the other PIN number.. But why were there attempts to get access to the phone (with no or wrong PIN codes) when you do not need to enter those in order to call 911 or 112? Nothing else was seemingly done with those phones, after all. You do not even need a SIM card as Power-Pixie proved in the above video. So is it a fact that Kris has deactivated her iPhone's main password? Where does this claim come from?" 

Dave M: "The main confusion about the subject of the passwords comes down to that roaming claim that Kris had deactivated the main password access requirement, and the repeated claims (ImperfectPlan for one) that it was the SIM Pin that someone was failing to enter by Sunday 6th April... so presumably Kris HAD deactivated the main screen password. This was said to have happened on the Wednesday morning, if I remember correctly. So for the two minutes the iPhone was powered on, Kris deactivated the password requirement, upscaled to 3G, made one call attempt, and switched the phone off again. (Then no phone use for the next 25 hours..?!). It is astonishing. What could have been going on here? It has to be Kris doing this as only she would know where to find her 3G function so quickly, but given the speed of all of this, I do have to think she and Lisanne were trying to hide the use of their phones. These are lightning speed switch-ons we see for these five days, and even if there was only one of the two in charge of the phones she still had TWO phones to choose and use initially."

Power-Pixie: "In the context of the times and dates this was attempted, it does not make sense. However if you compress these dates and times, then it makes sense, since there is a sense of urgency there and it is Kris and/or Lisanne trying their best to get help before they go further into danger with the Pendejos on April 1. (Was this all during the missing 2 hours and 45 minutes of nothing being logged? And the 65 minutes before the shut offs on April 1?) And how about the GPS? By default that is turned on. I was looking at the iPhone 4 logs and cannot imagine how and when Kris turned off her passcode as there is no passcode entered as shown in the logs. Similar to the 2G to 3G switch, there is no mention of disabling or enabling passcode. Did the NFI leave this passcode information out of the phone logs intentionally? Or do we [óutsiders'] just not have the complete logs? The Passcode should have been a glaring and obvious logged entry, just like the switch from 2G to 3G since it is within seconds (not hours or days) when the passcode was turned off. Why disable such a thing or anything really in that situation? Did or didn't Kris turn off her passcode? Because mysteriously it suddenly appears on the Wiki page on August of 2021 with no source cited. I'd be more appreciative of a source mentioning, so we know what's actually going on.."

'Without entering the SIM PIN code you cannot see the signal strength'

Scarlet: "May the NFI simply have left those details out of the phone logs?"

Power-Pixie: "I'm just not sure who has what documents at this point. Both the IP and the book should have stated identical phone log entries. Then the Wiki page has different/new information added. So who is updating or revising all of this and where are they sourcing this information? Does anyone have the original computer files where the data was extracted? Or are people looking at copies and leaked recopies?"

Scarlet: "I wished I knew. What seems a more likely scenario here? That the NFI overlooked things and did not dig deep enough in these phone logs? Or were those phone logs manipulated? Authorities made a public statement at the time after all, about the Samsung phone: "An initial forensic investigation in Panama shows that the data from the Samsung can be immediately read out, including all the apps and text messages. Immediately... The Samsung was still in good condition. I don't believe Pitti would accept letting that phone go back to Europe without feeling entitled to knowing what it held inside (like we know that she and her team also first looked at those Canon SD card photos, which have since received some brightening and rotation adjustments at the very least in post-editing). She had them on June 17th while the Dutch NFI received them later." 

Power-Pixie: "But who did this initial forensic investigation? And under whose supervision? Was it done in a controlled isolated [reception free] room? Where is the evidence log for this investigation? And of the mobile forensics done by Panama, then reviewed and appended to by the NFI? And how is it possible that none of the "electronic" devices sustained any damage, and just got partially waterlogged after going through the same river that was able to supposedly grind up two adult bodies? For the logs to have been manipulated, I do think that such a thing would have been detected. As you both know by now, if NFI or any mobile forensics team deep dives they will surely detect any manipulated or deleted data. However this data they work with has to be the original copy of data from the phones. Not the one that Pitti and her team first extracted and 'looked at' using mobile forensics technology. So it depends on who is doing the detecting and when. If they are already looking at a tainted copy of the logs, then that is what they have to work with. 

Another open question is: could Pitti and her direct team have messed with the mobile phone logs to such an extent that it changed (manufactured) the timeline? To make it look like these girls walked straight into the jungle and nomansland? Permanently removing a digital photo from an SD card is not difficult. But for mobile phones this is a different story. WhatsApp, SMS, phone calls, phone cameras etcetera each have a database. When you use any of these apps, this information is written into the database of that app. You can delete the photo on a smartphone, but not the information in the database since only the records within the database are removed. Therefore that data can be recovered even after deletion. So manipulating the mobile phone logs would have not been easy. The only way to completely delete this information from the database is to delete (and then reinstall) the app. Not something that happens unnoticed. 

As for the digital photos on the phones; Samsungs have SD card slots along with their SIM card slots. iPhones do not have an SD card slot, just the SIM card slot, but how would Pitti know the passcodes? Another theoretical possibility would be for Pitti and her team to hook up the phone to a computer with a USB cable and to use the Graphical User Interface that comes with most of these software to look up information, manipulate or delete it. I'm unsure if this can be used to wipe the data completely from the flash or memory though. However it requires someone with programming knowledge and this method can also be later recovered using a Physical Extraction method by NFI Forensics. And jailbreaking a phone will also leave traces. And that leaves only special forensic software to hack into the phones and perform the extraction as a final option. Possible, but farfetched.. On the other hand; the NFI may have totally missed that sort of thing. Even with the physical extraction method they would have been left scratching their heads about the deleted data, just like they never were able to explain the missing file #509."

Dave M: "ImperfectPlan does State about the challenges with reading the logs: 'It is not always possible with absolute certainty to determine when a phone was on and in use or only on and at what exact time it was turned off. The data presented here is the best judgment of the forensics expert.' So we do have to bear this uncertainty in mind when talking over the subject of the Logs. We are wondering over passwords, when the Logs and NFI print-out show the phones powering on and off. They (iPhone at least) also list even very minor events like a screen being swiped. So I think (as you do) that a problem with the information we have from the NFI print-out is that the people trying to translate it are missing things, confusing some things (two 13.37 switch-ons), and *assuming* some things... I don't think the logs, or the NFI print-out, has ever been fully and professionally looked at and translated. In the end I have long suspected that the reason why no one has ever really made any headway in understanding what happened to Lisanne and Kris is coming from the reality that the evidence we rely so heavily on (Camera and Phones) is simply not telling us an accurate or truthful story. The Camera we know is dubious - the phone logs though seem accurate and untampered with. We fix on the implication of missing file #509, but maybe it should be the phones we should be seriously questioning too, because whatever your feelings are (Lost or Suspicious circumstances) these phones and their logs are the very thing that are preventing either verdict from being fully embraced... it may be that editing of the phones in Panama was undertaken, purely to bring them in line with what the camera card seemed to be showing and supporting a much more acceptable 'Lost' narrative to sell to the public."

Scarlet: "We also - ideally - need the full logs, including everything done with those phones before April 1st. Also those prior to 4:39pm on Tuesday April 1. Why didn't the NFI investigate that? There may be hidden clues lying there as well, such as strange changes in login fashion or discrepancies and deviations from the normal behaviour, which the 'specialists' have overlooked. Or indications of WHO they interacted with or visited even (through IP addresses and phone ping info) before they went missing."

As Hans Kremers also stated: "What surprised us a bit in the NFI report, is that the phone data has been printed out from April 1st onward. Or at least from what we have been able to see. But what also interests us is the SMS and whatsapp history of before April 1st; from the moment they arrived in Panama." 

Power-Pixie: "Exactly. You start to see a pattern emerge. If we had March 30, 31, and April 1, we would surely have at the very least had a chance to understand how they used their phones."

Scarlet: As far as I know there is no phone data from before April 1st printed or analyzed by the NFI or in the case files. It is bewildering to contemplate this and I hope it is not true and that I am just badly informed here. Because that would be very shoddy decision making, considering how much potential information could have been extracted from phone ping locations and use in the days leading up to their disappearance. Or contacts that they had with others (and their mobile phones). 

Power-Pixie's iPhone SIM CODE experiment

Power-Pixie:  As you can see in the 1st photo below, I have the SIM card inserted in the phone and it is locked. However I was able to connect to my Wi-Fi router and you can now see the network bars, even though the SIM card is locked. So technically you don't need to enter the SIM pin code to see the network connection bars. But Kris and Lisanne supposedly were lost in a place with no network service. So by that logic they had no Wi-Fi connection either. So they would not see these bars at all. If they were lost Kris would have needed to enter the SIM pin code each time to find connectivity and view the network status and bars. But if she just wanted to call 112 / 911 she would not have needed to do this. Also please note that my iPhone 4 automatically connects to my Wi-Fi router, without entering the password for the router since it was entered once before. I would have really liked to have been able to see what Kris and Lisanne's phones activity and Wi-Fi connections were for all those days and nights before April 1st."

 

The 2nd photo shows when I had a SIM card inserted. I have a defunct SIM card in the phone. The SIM card I had used was disabled on March 2022, but was left inside the phone, hence why a SIM pin code can be set and used. I had turned off Cellular and 3G. I enabled Wi-Fi connection to my router at home. Hence why you see full signal strength. I tried calling emergency services and the duration of his attempts ranged between 24 - 30 seconds. My attempts maxed out on 30 seconds when I just let the call run. Most of the time it would fail between 24 - 30 seconds. The only times it failed before that was when I canceled the emergency phone call. All of this would make sense if Kris did not turn off the phone and wait 25 hours to call again and then NEVER called even once over the next 9 times she turned on the phone and unlocked the SIM card. Why unlock the SIM card if all you want to do with your phone is call emergency services? Perhaps because someone also intended to send text messages, to make phone calls other than emergency calls or go through the photos on that phone? Strangely enough, no regular phone calls were attempted though, nor were any text messages written and sent.

The following images below are photos I took while playing around with the phone to show you how the iPhone 4 with iOS 7.1.2 functions. Sequence: Power on the phone - Press and hold the power button on the top of the iPhone 4 for 1 second. After that the phone boots up and shows a screen with "slide to open". And if you have a SIM pin code as you see in the photos, it will say SIM Locked. The network status also shows Locked SIM. 

And you can make emergency calls and take photos without the passcode. To otherwise access the iPhone 4 you HAVE TO enter the passcode. You cannot bypass this unless you use a hack or jailbreak the phone. If you have a passcode (login code) set, then you slide to open and it takes you to the dial pad that has "enter passcode" and also has the emergency button on the bottom left. (You do not need to enter the passcode to dial the emergency number using the emergency button. Here you can see that without entering the passcode, you can also take photos by tapping on the camera icon (bottom right corner). Since I did not see a passcode or SIM PIN Code entered in the phone logs, this is what I assumed Kris did when she took photos on the Mirador. Notice the Locked SIM and SIM Locked notifications on my phone. Btw there is no SIM in my iPhone here, just so you know. I will now enter my passcode to enter the phone. Since I did disable the passcode like Kris supposedly did, I slide to open and it takes me to the home screen, but I get the pop-up message. I get this pop-up message even after I enabled a passcode as in the previous step/photo.

Now if I wanted to dial emergency services, I don't have to unlock the SIM card. I just press OK, and then tap on the green and white phone icon, and it takes me to the phone history to dial that way. However if I'm someone who may not know how emergency phone numbers work on an iPhone, then I would assume that I need to unlock the SIM card and then dial the emergency number. Now if Kris had turned the passcode off, thinking she needed to get access to the phone faster, then a 3rd party would not have to enter any passcode if in possession of the phone(s). Or beat those codes out of Kris of course if he wanted access to the contents of the phone.. 😔 Anyways, for this round, I will keep the SIM locked. For all features discussed below, I access the "Settings" above.

How to turn on 3G? Once you come into the Settings listing of options, you tap on Cellular. Tap on Enable 3G to enable the phone to search for 3G network. Switching from 2G to 3G can be known by anyone who owns a smartphone and if it has the feature. It is not as intuitive or obvious as Kris's iPhone 4. Now I'm not sure if Kris and Lisanne both knew about this feature. Kris, we assume, had disabled her phone's SIM pin code on April 2, more than 17 hours since the first emergency call. Then she dialed the emergency number, waited a couple of minutes before turning off her phone and she did not turn it on for another 24 hours. (WTF was the point of that?). To turn off Passcode, you have to go to Settings, then tap on Passcode."

Enter the known passcode. Then tap on Turn Passcode Off.

So this would be a very deliberate step. Each tap, each selection of the option gets logged in the system logs. This is the iOS features, not an arbitrary application. So it would be stored as an event. Entering the passcode would also log the event. It is a major security feature of the iPhone. To not log this is idiotic on Apple's part to say the least. However I don't think Apple's idiotic. To disable or enable the SIM PIN code, you have to go to Settings, then tap Phone. Tap SIM PIN.

And here you can unlock the SIM or lock it or disable/enable it. It will challenge for a 4-digit SIM PIN code. This exercise was to show you that setting a SIM PIN code is also a deliberate and involved operation on the phone, similar to changing the passcode. Setting a SIM PIN is not part of the factory settings. It is an option you have at your discretion if you need to lock your SIM card when you purchase it at a store. The company that sells the SIM card when you purchase an iPhone may inform you that you can do this. So I would think Kris set this SIM pin code as a precaution before she left for Panama. I don't know anyone who sets SIM pin codes. Passcodes yes, but not SIM pin codes. I certainly don't and never have. SIM card is for making regular phone calls and text messages. None were ever made. If Kris turned off the passcode as I showed earlier, anyone can gain access to her phone.  

So...Kris decides to remove the passcode option, to go directly to the SIM PIN code entry that pops up as I showed, rendering the shortcut sort of moot. If Kris knew how to turn on the SIM PIN code, when was this done? If Kris turned this on any time before April 1, then there would have been multiple previous attempts at gaining access to the SIM PIN code. Why? Because without entering the SIM PIN code you CANNOT see the signal strength. And last but not least, WHERE IS THE GPS logging for both phones? From Settings, Tap on Privacy.

Then Location Services. If this is turned off, then the phone cannot be detected or use any GPS functionality. My Location Services was turned on by default when I received the phone. It is a second-hand phone no doubt, but it was factory reset when I received it and cleaned out.

COMPASS FUNCTION ON BOTH PHONES

Power-Pixie: "This always gets me. Kris had Camera, Maps, Weather and Compass apps active on her phone by default. The iPhone 4 has active Compass on the Maps app. Just so you know, even though the maps is not functioning accurately, the compass functions in real-time. I do not have the compass app activated or running in the background. I also get notification if I load the Maps app or Weather app, to turn on Wi-Fi for better accuracy. This is something Kris would have seen before April 1 if she accidentally opened the two apps and wanted to check either a map or the weather of where she was. I think Kris would have had other apps, including online games, or whatever. These would all require Location Services to be turned on to work properly. So Kris never ever checked the Weather in Panama? Or in the Netherlands? Never used the Maps app even once? Or any other apps that uses Location Services? 

If we find out which apps were in use or used, or just simply what apps did the iPhone and Samsung last have, I will be able to tell you which ones required Location Services to be turned on. This is easy to do in retrospect, since every app if they are still available will have a change log; that is a log kept for every version created and its subsequent update. Through this you can check to see what features were in it and if it required LS. Sometimes it may not contain this, but the internet is vast and full of information we will find it. If I could get a list of the apps she had on her phone I can deep dive and find out exactly which ones used Location Services, other than the default four I mentioned. GPS is logged. I have seen it on my iPhone 4 and I have already shared this syntax from what I saw with you, "GPS". You can't beat this. Where is that data in the phone logs the NFI reviewed? And after disappearing, why would Kris or Lisanne never have even checked the GPS function to check where the heck they had ended up? It may not have worked, but if I had nothing to do but wait in the jungle next to my severely injured or dead friend, then I would at least try that GPS function once to get an idea of where I'm at, and hope that GPS turned on (since it doesn't need a network service to function) and might be received by a cell tower or something. But we see no such curiosity in the logs. None of it. No matter what theory we look at - lost or foul play - there is no sense of urgency in her usage. No fumbling about on her phone if she was injured that would have shown erratic behavior. No opening of her emails or other messages, no attempts to write a draft message, no toggling with airplane mode to try to reset a network connection, nothing. 

Now I don't have Camera turned on to use Location Services. So perhaps that's why Kris did not have any GPS coordinates recorded on her photos, or did she? However by default, the Compass app, Maps app and Weather app all need Location Services to be turned on to use them accurately. So did Kris never bothered to check the weather before April 1? Nor did she bother to use Maps at any point before Bocas or Boquete? Why would she turn off Location Services for all of these apps? Any traveler would know they need to use a Maps app or Weather app at some point. Why would they turn it off? Lastly, I found this video on iPhone Location Forensics. It is very comprehensive, but I highly recommend you both at least give it a try and watch it, specifically when the lady discusses location services and GPS. It is amazing how much is logged.

On the Samsung phone, when I connect to Wi-Fi and turn on GPS I see that Google Maps has a blue arrow icon. It works as I turn around with my phone to point in a direction. You can also see the compass marked in Red and White that shows True North. That does not change. The 1st photo here on the left shows when I turn off GPS. The icon is no longer there, but the blue arrow icon works in real time as I move the phone around. Now I turn off Wi-Fi, and the blue arrow disappears, replaced with a flashing grey dot, unlike Kris's iPhone. So you cannot know where you are moving about. Then if I was desperate, since I have no network connection, I'd be trying to see if I could turn on my GPS to see if I can get a position or anything for that matter. So here I turn on GPS. Still nothing, then I simply tap in the positioning icon to see if that would work. 

The point of this exercise is for me to see what options were available to Lisanne, given I have the same exact phone and it has GPS feature in a very obvious place to turn on. If she ever used Airplane mode, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, I can bet you Lisanne was at least aware that GPS existed on her phone and would have been curious about using it. Now the info or video on Location Services informs us that Location Services is the same for Samsung/Android phones, in that there are both native OS apps (Weather, Maps) and 3rd party apps for example Facebook that use GPS/Location Services. The options Lisanne had were sparse, which would make it imperative to at least try whatever else was available to try. Why it is not logged is beyond me, as this is a feature that is on a superficial level and ultimately an OS level function that has to talk through the application, network and OS layers. It just baffles me that none of the other applications, especially the applications that the IP mentioned, were accessed that early morning. But there was no listing of these. One of them could have simply required GPS/Location Services to be active. Here is my case and point with this location services. When you activate Google Maps, without any network connection or GPS turned on, it is made very obvious to me as the user of the phone to do what is necessary to get a better response for the app to work. Hence why I really would need the forensic software, because I would be able to track this information somehow as I did using real time console logging, hooked up to the phone and laptop. It is the closest I can come to seeing GPS iterations being thrown out on the screen. I want to know where this gets logged? Both Kris and Lisanne turning off their GPS before their hike makes no sense, and it makes even less sense that in their time of desperation (if lost) they decide to turn off GPS."

Dave M. wrote: "Whenever you go into showing the actual layout and navigation of your Samsung-3, I am always left both amazed and greatly informed by how incredibly user-friendly this phone is (compared to my Samsung-8), and just how easily available the options would have been for Lisanne. You have the GPS Icon prominently displayed, and as you say with it being so prominent you do have to think Lisanne had a good idea what its purpose was."

HOW ARE PASSCODES AND SIM CODES LOGGED

Power-Pixie: "I searched for "Passcode" in the phone logs from IP and in the book, and nowhere is the Passcode turned on/off or the passcode being entered officially mentioned. I have scoured the internet and developer forums to find out which log file passcodes and SIM codes get logged to. Someone on the thread helped find out that it is logged, but that only Apple Developers will know this information or Law Enforcement since they have the tools/means to look up the phone's main system log files. It is not hidden and it is encrypted (remember the same encrypted SQL database files I was trying to access on the Samsung and iPhone?). I need the forensic tools and I will be able to crack this. Now here is a method to "view" the iOS phone logs in real time. Though it is not entirely complete, it is still a way that I had tried before with both phones. So I did a quick test. It is a little technical, but I will do my best to break it down to help you understand how verbose the logging is and that the iOS does log information.

*TEST 1, SLIDE TO UNLOCK EVENT

When I “slide to unlock” the phone and get the passcode (login) challenge to enter the phone Home Screen, I get the following message on the system log output:

default 18:41:07.000000-0500 backboardd MultitouchHID: detection mode: 5->0

BackBoardd is an iOS daemon that logs physical button click and screen touch events with timestamps. Note the detection mode. It has some gibberish numerical values. Keep this in mind for the next test. A daemon (pronounced demon ) is a program that continuously runs in the background. It only wakes up when a process (like a swipe/tap for example) is invoked to then handle this process request. This is just one process and one daemon. There are many daemons that handle different processes like a Wi-Fi connection, or logging information or texting, etc. All of this is logged in the system log files. This is just to show you how basic logging works here on the iPhone. 

*PRESS THE POWER BUTTON

Now when I press the power button (top right button on the phone) to "wake up" the phone, you can see below that the daemon (background process) I mentioned earlier that logs all screen taps and button presses, is now showing a mode of 5 -> 5. That is gibberish to me, but to Apple iOS or developer super nerds it means something and IS logged somewhere: default 18:57:53.000000-0500 backboardd MultitouchHID: detection mode: 5->5

So with the above tests of touch events, we are already seeing how this phone logs. My phone is really old and has gone through the "grinder" so to speak. So it may not be logging everything accurately, but it IS logging.

*SIM PIN CODE ENTRY

While I cannot show you the actual log file that would have stored everything I did, I can show you what I see as soon as I entered the SIM PIN code. While this is not conclusive and arbitrary, it is always showing up each time I enter a passcode or SIM PIN code: default 18:41:07.000000-0500 UserEventAgent (Note ) PIH: Lock status changed.

*NO SIM CARD

The following messages are logged because I had taken out my SIM card since it no longer works. However you can see that the iPhone is smart enough to recall the last known SIM card that was inserted and used, by looking for the ICCID number that it is trying to match since I used the correct SIM PIN code: 

• default 18:41:19.000000-0500 lockdownd 3ad8f18c lookup_baseband_info_old: The SIM status has changed
• default 18:41:19.000000-0500 lockdownd 3ad8f18c load_activation_records: Could not extract ICCID from record
• default 18:41:19.000000-0500 lockdownd 3ad8f18c dealwith_activation: No care flag. Looking for a record that matches the SIM.
• default 18:41:19.000000-0500 lockdownd 3ad8f18c dealwith_activation: Looking up the record for ICCID 8901240160111709328
• default 18:41:19.000000-0500 lockdownd 3ad8f18c dealwith_activation: No record for the SIM. Looking for wildcard.

Now these tests are not going to prove Kris or Henry was using the phone, but this is just basic logging that I expect to see on the surface. Since I've confirmed the main log files are proprietary to Apple, the only way to really access them is to have the forensic tools since there are files that need to be translated to legible information to read. However I have one more method to to try based on a developer's suggestion. It is to use a program on mac called Xcode. This is a developer tool and I have to be signed in using my AppleID. I don't think I will get far, but it does allow me to hook up the phone to my laptop and then use the program to drill down to the base level. I don't know what I will see or access from there, but it sounds promising. One caveat is that I have an old iPhone, and the Xcode software is not compatible, so I'm waiting to hear if there's a way to hack this and create some backward compatibility.  Fark you too Apple!

*THINK ABOUT THIS

Now that we can at least see some type of logging for taps and slides or button presses to turn on/off the phones or wake it up.... How many times did Kris turn on and off her iPhone? How many times did she "slide to unlock" the phone to get to the passcode (login) screen, then enter her passcode and then enter the SIM PIN code? Why didn't the NFI explicitly call out the passcode attempts, given they had access to the encrypted database log files? Why don't we see any verbose information for the two days/nights leading up to the disappearance? We only get tidbits. Yet the only events we see is hurried power on/offs emergency calls "dialed" and switching networks. This is not telling me they are lost and have the time to work out some strategy to improve their phone signal strength and/or conserve battery (convenience sake if Kris was injured) by reducing the number of sequences to access features. Holding a phone can be tiring and painful, even more so if you are injured or fatigued or sick. If this was Henry then that message would have been a challenge (initially). However see photos below: Henry and company would have realized or at least been curious about that phone icon to see who was contacted. He has that much smarts I would gather from using his own smartphone or those of the other 3. Then he would have full access to what was dialed to try to make sense of it. If this was Henry, then it makes more sense to me that he would do this, thinking it is needed to dial the emergency number. Especially if you bypass the passcode when it was disabled, since he would not see the emergency button. And then see what calls were made. Like the 112 call on April 1 for example. He would be able to see the history by tapping on the "i" if needed, or just tap the number to redial.

Then anyone could drill down further on the logged call to see the history of what took place. Here is an example. That is why I was wondering why there was no passcode logged anywhere or set since makes the phone is wide open for exploration. This is the same case with Lisanne's phone. No passcode is ever mentioned anywhere. So both phones were compromised by their owners? Makes no sense either, but it's very easy to take ownership by a 3rd party. I've never been absolutely clear on how detailed the NFI actual breakdown of the phones data was. It does make me wonder if the NFI report was a complete data dump of the two devices. And it also depends on what they extracted and how they extracted this data. And if the devices were returned as is, meaning nothing was wiped off. But we are missing so much in just not being able to see the actual phone logs and understand the patterns of use via the entries. To have the phone logs and not have this important information makes it even more perplexing. Bear in mind the 13.37 repeated timing for one example comes (I assume) from the NFI, and demonstrates how an error can be made in reading and converting that data, and how that basic error can then dramatically skew and misinform for years after.." [Scarlet: That, or another error from those authors of course]

Scarlet: And in how far can someone see 'evidence' of sorts in the iPhone's several "Auto Screenshots" that were made when the phone was accessed? For example during the 'Mytiam' contact lookup? If Kris was handling this phone, she would know how to use her phone and not fat finger it every time, some can argue? Maybe once or twice, but four times as recorded in the logs?"

Dave M: "The record of activity on those phones doesn't follow logic, not when looked at closely. Each time I look at the breakdown of their activities, the less sense I get of two friends sat together, trying to work out a strategy for getting 'found'. Lisanne could have tried accessing her Map, and maybe she did? But based on what we know, 'logic' wasn't what was going on with the two phones, I was looking again and the sheer illogic of the activities recorded by them can be summed up in the below:

-15:59: The phone is turned on and the PIN is entered correctly.

-16:00: The phone fails to establish contact with the network. However, the screen displays a signal bar.

-16:02: Automatic creation of a screenshot when closing the address book (Contacts). The screenshot is about the last open contact which is none other than "Mytiam". The phone is turned off.

So you switch on the Phone, don't dial a number but see that the screen lists a signal bar, go to Whatsapp and look up Miriam, don't try to message her for help, but just switch off again - all in four minutes or less. That isn't logical. Why not use everything at your disposal if you are lost and becoming desperate. Your only extension to some sanity and familiarity, besides your friend, is your smartphone. Someone is using these phones and using their brief time switched on to explore the content a little. What Miriam was saying in the Whatsapp conversation seems to have been a source of interest, and since her name had been mentioned in the local media this very day, and Feliciano knew her personally, that curiosity probably may not be a coincidence."

Power-Pixie: "Yes and this is the type of illogical information some people are basing their lost theories on. And to sit there and deliberately dial out an emergency number requires some nerve. If I was lost or desperate I would be filling up the call log with as many taps as I could possibly try as long as I see even 1 bar (Kris would see No Service and 1 bar on her phone, which doesn't mean the phone had connection strength as bars are an arbitrary interpretation of signal strength. It is easier to work with what Tharindu had mentioned which is dBm numbers). Come daylight, walk around some more and check to see if you have signal. No signal, how about switching back from 3G to 2G, try turning on Wi-Fi, turn on Airplane mode and turn it off again, toggle Cellular option off/on, and so forth. Nothing. Just "dialed" 112 or 911 after entering without any evidence of a passcode, then entering the SIM and then turning it off. Btw I tried the following after:

- removing the Passcode option

- toggled off Wi-Fi

- toggled on Cellular

- toggled on 3G

- toggled on Data Roaming

Then turned off the iPhone using the top button. Turned it back on. The phone turns on. I slide to unlock it to the main screen. The SIM unlock pop-up appears. I tap on unlock, enter the 4 digit code. The iphone will show a status of "Searching..." for 5 seconds before it goes back to "No Service". So there's a brief attempt by the phone to try and locate a cell connection."

Dave M: "Someone could look at this screen and see a record or the most recent calls and activities the phone was used for and this might be what influenced the set times we see in the next five days - 10am, 1pm etc. Now clearly the snag is that Lisanne and Kris used the computers at the School for Skype chats with their parents at those times. What they used their phones for here is unclear, but they DID appear to have used them via the school's Wi-Fi going by reports, just the same as when they used them at Nelvis and potentially elsewhere. We do know that the two would also transfer Video and photography from their phones by Bluetooth(?) in order to send home. This might actually have been done via Whatsapp at the school, but the point still stands - that 'recent calls' screen would probably still list their set times of Phone activity each day - 10am, 1pm & 4pm. So the 10am, 1pm & 4pm timeframes we see over the next five days can potentially be explained here if a third party was indeed able to see this screen and deduce the two friends' set patterns of activity."

Power-Pixie: "Great observation. Now we can see how 3rd party - whoever it was that had access to the phones - could setup that time table. They would know via WhatsApp the entire history of the call log and who it was, especially since most people have their photos and full names in WhatsApp listed. Is it any wonder why no calls or text attempts were made to the families of all people?"

Power-Pixie: "I also did not see any passcode deactivation happening or recorded in the phone logs. I don't think Kris deactivated the passcode, as it is not logged anywhere. This would mean that there had to be a major security flaw in Apple's 7.1.2 iOS release for that year prior to April 1. There was nothing like this reported in the release notes or changelog of the iOS for that year. The NFI has a lot to answer for in my opinion, as this business with the passcode information needed to be called out. It is the most fundamental security feature on the iPhone (and Samsung) models I have in my possession. Yet not a single iteration, no evidence of this in the log files. Did that NFI forensics expert consult with Apple iOS and Android high-end developers to engage them in some of the proprietary information that needed to be obtained or clarified? Every detective has to go to a coroner to get a proper understanding of what they found at the murder scene. Remember in a span of 2 minutes, we can have 100s of lines of code (logged in one log file). Now imagine how many lines of code there are for each application on the phone since each app has its own log file, then the OS has its own log files. 1, 24 hour day has 1440 minutes. 10 days = ~240 hours with 14400 minutes. During this time, imagine how many lines of code are generated each second. Sometimes the code can have two of the same lines or more. How do some people know how to distinguish these lines of code? You have to know every iteration and if you look at the types of messages, it is obvious (to me at least) that a developer of some app, or segment of a network app, or section of the OS put his/her own remarks in there to make sense, like: 3d7d018c determine_activation_state_old: This device is a phone. It supports factory activation. 

I have 26 apps in total on my iPhone 4. Kris probably had much more since my iPhone was set to factory default with everything erased. Same with Lisanne's phone. So each app will have roughly 240 hours or 14400 minutes worth of logged lines of code. Sounds daunting. Well until you isolate it to the 11 days of their supposed ordeal. April 1 begins 12am on Tuesday. So starting at 12am and ending on April 11 at 11:56am, the phone was active for a total of ~1460 minutes or ~24.3 hours, far less than the 240 hours if the phone was active 24/7. The log files would contain a lot of information, but not as much as we think in theory. And when looking at the NFI report or whatever version of log files are circulating, there is the benefit of hindsight of honing in exactly the dates and times that were previously reported in the media and online sleuths since the case began. But we have no idea of what these files look like. And how did the authors obtain this 2G to 3G information when the IP never reported this, if they were reading the same log file data sets? Are we seeing different versions here? Without the original devices and memory cards to access directly as the NFI found them, it is impossible to have any first generation raw data to look at. You know, this is the problem with many cold cases. Even with law enforcement. The Zodiac, Nightstalker and some other cases never got solved or never got solved early because everyone in their respective jurisdictions hoarded information or did not trust other departments or investigative forces. So things were not widely shared. It ended up costing more lives."

Observation of Samsung's Battery Performance 

Power-Pixie: "Here's a video I made as I observed the battery performance of the Samsung phone. It will help shed some light on how the battery performs as it gets down to the final 18%. I decided to try an experiment with my phones video function - three tests I took using the video-record for 5 minutes each time. The results were varied, but amazingly the average battery drain was between 3-5%. Much lower than I had expected. A full five minutes is quite a long time to use your phones' video function after all. The snag is that over the three hours from 10.40 am to 13.40pm, Lisanne's Samsung phone had used just 8%. And three hours later, from 13.40pm to 16.51pm, it has used an additional 19%. Without any background apps shown in the phone logs. So: unexplained. I think 3 to 5% is a big chunk of battery usage if you consider the 11% increase in battery usage from the 8% average that was recorded on the early part of the day of April 1. The question for me is if Lisanne perhaps made a video which we don't know about. And if so, then what would it have been about? This all makes me question further the 19% drop in Lisanne's Samsung battery performance over those 3 hours and 14 minutes on April 1." 

WEATHER APP

About the weather app/feature on the Samsung. We know that the weather app needs a network connection to update the weather. I thought it was not possible without an app like the iPhone's weather app. However I was able to turn it on from the Settings for the Lock Screen feature. So with the Wi-Fi and full Service connection it does show me the weather. The iPhone with no Service shows me blank when I open the Weather app. When I shut off the service on the Samsung, it still shows the time, my location and weather on the Screen without me having to swipe to get into the phone. While in Airplane Mode, No Wi-Fi and service bars. It shows "No Service" on the screen, somehow it is also updating the time as well.

FARADAY BAG

I also placed the Samsung phone into the Faraday Bag to see if it would freeze the clock at 1:24pm and the weather app temperature reading at 44F and my location. Btw I have tested these faraday bags to be sure that I cannot call or text with the phone that is inside the bag. The Samsung phone (and the iPhone) both show me the current time, the weather app shows 44F and my location. I don't think it updated the weather or location. The iPhone shows neither temperature nor location.

NEXT TEST

I turned on Flight Mode to disable all network services. Opened Gmaps. Opened up the downloaded map of Boquete. Set an alarm on my phone for 3 hours. Slipped the Samsung phone into the Faraday Bag for good measure, carried me to lunch yesterday (while dealing with the shooting that took place during those 3 hours). Came home and took out the Samsung phone from the Faraday Bag to record the results. (see screenshots). Here are the results before and after 3 hours of the above conditions on the Samsung:

After 3 hours...A total of 3% drop in battery power. Note the idle time and GMaps usage. While I didn't take photos, I expected this minimal drop based on my experience with phones, and now with this Samsung model. To me it states that I have to be actively using the phone to see a major decrease in battery usage, especially a sharp decline of 19% as you had noted when compared to the 8% average prior to the Mirador.

GMAPS

The phone logs what is done with Gmaps once it is opened up. The GMaps processes and the app itself get recycled during a reboot, but unless explicitly told not to startup on reboot or power on, it will start up and is logged by the operating system. To get to this I'm not sure if it can be hacked using software, as it is Google's proprietary software. But if it is simply a line of text that references date and timestamp and activity of Google Maps doing something, then I suspect one can get to it. When I tap on the Target button of the offline map, the app tries to check for a network connection and informs me that I don't have one and so the action to obtain a location marker of my present position is not possible. I suspect that this would get logged somewhere, as it also access the phone's networking app to talk to it and ask for a check on the connection. Apps like Google apps do not get reset. They remain in the same state they were, that is if you searched for a location, driving/walking directions, etc, all that information is still stored, and does not get reset or deleted. Apps and processes like Google Maps do get reset, but that only means the app comes back to run and consumer resources on the phone. All past Google maps search history, directions, etc, are not cleared on reboot or power cycle. That itself would show us any further activity was performed using Google Maps and would remain on the phone's micro SD card or local storage until deleted using the phone's keyboard, or hooked to a computer.

IMPORTANT

Please note the activity at 2:41 AM: Applications of the Android OS were used but it is not known which ones. How come? Why are some apps logged while others are not? I wonder which applications were used from 2:41am - 7:20am when it was switched off after registering 1% battery power? Conveniently enough we don't have any shred of data about any of these apps?? WTF?!? Any and all phone call logs, Google Maps searches, text messages are stored on the phone's internal storage (and can be accessed by anyone with a passcode to Lisanne's phone) no matter how many times the phone is power cycled. That's a fact now from where I sit. Here is a little article outlining the applications of the Android stack.

SO
Now we have some visual means to understand how a simple, consumer phone like the Samsung is so verbose in its logging, not just of processes and apps but in the screenshot below you can see the Phone app tile has "Logs" as well to show you. It logs EVERYTHING...!! We just never had the privilege to view the original phones and the camera. And no explanation for the 2 hours and 45 minutes of silence. 19% battery loss in the meantime, and then emergency phone calls. This is well edited I must say, to have us believe they did get lost and called for help late in the day. And while it works off a completely different system, Kris' iPhone doesn't show such a dramatic power drain as Lisanne's. Or does this void in the phones log that afternoon link to whatever file missing #509 was? It would be nice to at some point have the original phone logs to work with ourselves. 

Dave M: "I want to sincerely thank you once again Power-Pixie for taking this time and trouble in showing off how the phones actually work in practice, and for the insight that seeing this older model gives. This is great. It makes some sense that booting up the phone and thereby restarting its processes and functions would take more power from the battery but looking at Lisanne's log for the Wednesday, this doesn't seem to be happening here. Regarding GPS: between the two phones, one of them had to have it active. But it is more than likely that both were as judging by their use of the Canon Camera, neither were very technical or fancy in their use of these things. The 19% power drain on Tuesday afternoon is a mystery. I had begun to think it may have been down to a bad samsung battery, but the evidence refutes this. One other valid suggestion is that the phone was busy searching for signal in the background, this seemed plausible to me based on my own clunky inefficient Samsung-8, but again the performance of Lisanne's phone on the days before and after seem to refute this as being so. If her phone is idle all afternoon, it really isn't doing a thing. It uses 3% between 16.53 and 17.40 there, which might be down to the screen being kept lit for example, and therefore not in idle mode. In the three hours earlier though it used twice that amount, while supposedly being in idle mode... I don't know what else to say here. We know the Samsung log wasn't a very detailed one. A lot to think over, so thanks for your time and efforts on this Power-Pixie!"

Scarlet: "Fantastic work again. Yes, one possible explanation would be (in line with the podcast info) that they were led down another path by these guys at that moment and could not safely use their phones without stirring up suspicions or who knows what. I do wonder; does the fact that after 13.40 those phones did not get activated again also definitely point against them returning to the Mirador? Connectivity aside, but they would have most likely also simply stopped again up there and taken some more photos."

Dave M: "These two log records show something is going on that afternoon that most probably isn't solely down to active background functions draining the phone's power. The book suggests the Map App was turned off on the summit, but either way, I'm not sure if the three hours between 13.40 and 16.51 would be enough time for an open app like Google-maps to drain 19%. It's the sort of drain I expect if I were to be using internet that afternoon, and what we know of her phones log is actually a little sketchy when you think about her use of the Map. It seems to me that if she was accessing even a downloaded map it should still register on the log, as it did at 1pm. I now wonder if that gang may have held their attention and they might have been so concerned and intimidated that perhaps they didn't get a chance to take their phones out during the first afternoon, or that they were too worried about where they were going. I mean, try to imagine what you and your friend would do if you met these four guys on the way up from River 1."

Power-Pixie wrote: "I also think if they had made it to the Mirador and not run into the guys there, they would have noticed the cell connection, and maybe even tried to send a message or post a FB photo. I mean this is like some once-in-a-lifetime experience for them. So of course they would have tried to do so. Whether they wanted to or not or planned on using their phones on the Mirador again, according to Margherita they did not get a chance to do so. This latest finding was in light of trying to see how their phones would reconnect without them using it. If this was a possibility, it is very possible that Kris and Lisanne did not get a chance to use their phones at all. No mental gymnastics, at least not what I can see because I took the very same log file information and used it against the Losters. Of course if we don't have the complete details of those logs then all this is void. And sure, the phones could automatically reconnect, blah blah, and we're back to square dancing again. I would say that after taking photo 508, Lisanne might have:

- checked Google Maps (where are they really heading)

- checked her WhatsApp (do I still have connection, no..then...)

- checked Messaging (do I still have connection, no...then...)

- checked the time (It's 2pm...we left for this trail at 11am...nearly 3 hours now, and another 3 hours back...and then we need to catch a taxi back). 

These would be base checks, but not something that would consume 19% battery usage. But I think just out of instinct as tourists in a not so inviting section of the trail that they had no clue about since passing the known/talked about Mirador. We need to keep in mind throughout these tests and investigation into the phones that.....the most battery drain occurs when an app is recalled or opened AND used, because the system uses "background" and "cached" features to "smartly" allocate resources like memory to all the apps and processes that are competing for system resources to run and keep running until they are terminated or closed. - You know the funny thing is the iPhone 4 loses battery power faster than the Samsung phone. It may have something to do with the battery being so old or that I received a lemon. The Samsung phone I have is a thing of beauty. I can't help it, but it reflects the two women in some weird way. Samsung being so open, pliable and forthcoming. The iPhone being a stubby brick that couldn't be bothered to utilize it's extensive capabilities despite its outdated software."

Dave M: "I decided to try a little test with my Samsung-8. This phone of mine is largely run by Wi-Fi connections, so I took the opportunity to leave it alone with the Wi-Fi turned off, meaning no signal in or out, and after four hours in idle state, with a couple of windows open in the background, I came back to it four hours later and it had used just 3% power. This fully reinforces your own test results Power-Pixie, but the implications are that it verifies the core of our debate here - I am fully satisfied that the overnight live-action on the 2nd April, of around 16 hours by the Samsung-3, is a legitimate power drain. It uses about 17% battery strength over that time, which supports our own findings on how the phone would work without signal, and if left mostly idle. The comparisons to the afternoon of April 1st is obvious - over the course of just 3 hours, and under the same theoretical conditions, there is no credible way the phone can use 19% power without some sort of an active and determined use of its functions... So something is missing from the phones records. The Dutch authorities who examined the Canon Camera and Phones had to have noted this. There is no way they couldn't have noticed that 19% drain. But they said nothing in public about it. The spectre of log-manipulation does have to be considered as an option; were entries and information deleted in the weeks after, is that the missing element?" 

Power-Pixie replied: "The following activities might have theoretically added to the battery consumption during those 3 hours:

-Lisanne's phone was trying to actively/continuously connect to the network since it was not on Flight Mode.

-Lisanne possibly took more photos with the phone (I doubt this, since she had her camera with her, assuming it was Lisanne taking all those photos past the Mirador)

-Lisanne tried to make outgoing calls (more than what was reported in the phone log) by using the Phone App.

-Lisanne tried to send outgoing messages (none of which was reported), using the Messaging App, WhatsApp.

-Using Facebook and WhatsApp (none of which was reported in the phone log) takes a big drain on the phone usage, even if/when they are running in the background. So if Lisanne opened some or all of these apps while on the Mirador and did not deliberately close them or set the phone to close apps when locking/turning Screen off, then the battery will be consumed. How much so is hard to say without looking at the original phone and battery. However none of this was reported in the phone log, like Gmaps was explicitly reported to have been opened and closed."

Scarlet: "I understand that not everyone had the data from the Samsung phone leaked to them. Some people did get the entire extract from the iPhone data, but not the Samsung. I wonder why this is? Did NFI properly investigate that phone or not?"

Power-Pixie: "I guess it is no surprise to me that there is a plethora of data from the Samsung that has not been shared. This data is what I have been harping to you two about all along, because I have seen the Samsung/Android phone model spew out so much information and in such great detail, often times even more intuitively than the iPhone 4. And those 2 hours and 45 minutes of silence are important to investigate. We need a proper analysis of this crucial time frame. I'd also love to know how many times in the iPhone power log does the 113dBm show up along with the power reading."

CANON CAMERA; Trying to Recreate Photo 580

Power-Pixie used the Canon Powershot SX270HS camera and a model to try to recreate photo #580. He specifically tested how far the camera was away from the (presumably) back of the head for this photo. He also tried to figure out whether the photo shows the back of Kris' head and if her head was held up or laying down, or perhaps if her hair was flipped over her face.

Power-Pixie: "What I'm after is seeing some of the nuances that went into yielding an original photograph like 580. In other words, rather than try to recreate the exact same one, give everyone a chance to see what hair on a female's head looks like when flashed in the dark at certain distances, and with different camera orientations. While it does not prove if this is Kris or not, it is to get a frame of reference with some concrete measurements and interactions with the camera, like I also did with the cabin night photos for example. If anything it might satisfy my and some others curiosity, so we can move forward with our own theories or dismiss them. So this set of test photos is not to recreate the photo 580 of Kris’s hair, but to get a better understanding of the proximity of Lisanne’s camera to Kris’s hair and other nuances of the camera, flash and lens perspective. I used the Canon Powershot SX270 HS and a measuring tape. I shot all the photos in complete darkness as I used blackout curtains in the room at night. I used the green auto-focus light to “see” the measurements in the dark. I took photos of the model in various positions and used both portrait and landscape orientations. All of the images I took are maintained in their original state. I then made a working copy of the originals in order to logically categorize them for my own purpose of noting down my observations. (Hence image file names have been changed). No image manipulation has been conducted on the originals or the copies. Even in a controlled environment, it was not easy to take these photos with mistakes made due to lens blur/out of focus at times. I chose the best photos that illustrate what I wanted to show.

Each photo EXIF shows the following:

For Landscape photo dimensions: 3000px x 4000px

For Portrait photo dimensions: 4000px x 3000px

DPI: 180 for all images

Power-Pixie's Photos

Model sitting up, camera at 12, 6 and 3 inches distance, landscape mode.

Power-Pixie was kneeling down when he took these photos. The subject was sitting on the floor, hugging her knees and slightly hunched over. The 12 inch distance photo shows details on all four sides of the model. But the 3 inch distance appears to be a little closer than the original photo 580. Please notice the shadow of the camera at the bottom right corner of the 2nd and 3rd photo. This shadow shows up in nearly all close up landscape photos.

Model sitting up, camera at 12, 6 and 3 inches distance, portrait mode

Power-Pixie was kneeling down when he took these photos. The subject was sitting on the floor, hugging her knees and slightly hunched over. The camera flash is to the left side (this way of holding the camera felt natural/comfortable). At 12 and 6 inches distance there’s more detail of the subject shown compared to the landscape version of these photos. At 3 inches distance there’s less detail of the subject shown compared to the landscape version of my photo.

Model lying down, face away, 12, 6 and 3 inches distance, landscape mode

Power-Pixie was kneeling down when he took these photos. The subject was lying on her side facing away as seen in these photos. At 12 and 6 inches distance there’s ample amount of detail shown on all 4 sides of the subject. At 3 inches distance there is little detail to be seen on 4 sides of the subject. Please note the camera lens casts a shadow on the bottom right corner of these photos as PP lowered himself to get these shots of the subject. Some of the hair is slightly out of focus as Power-Pixie took all the photos in pitch dark, with only the green auto-focus light temporarily illuminating the subject as he took the photos. Some of the hair is in focus. Gravity is also working to pull the hair down to the floor.

Model lying down, face away, 12, 6 and 3 inches distance, portrait mode, flash

Power-Pixie was kneeling down and was slightly lowered when he took these photos. The subject was lying on her side facing away as seen in the photos. Flash is to the left side, and was natural/comfortable for him to hold the camera in this orientation. At 12 inches distance there’s a lot of detail on 4 sides of the subject. At 6 inches distance there's enough detail shown on all 4 sides of the subject. The subject’s scalp is slightly visible as gravity works to pull the hair down. At 3 inches distance there is slight detail to be seen on 1 side of the subject. 

Model lying face down, 12, 6 and 3 inches, portrait + landscape mode, flash

Power-Pixie was standing over the subject when he took these photos. The subject was lying face down as seen in the photos. Flash is to the right side in the 12 inch and 6 inch distance photos, and was uncomfortable for him to hold the camera in this orientation. Flash is to the left in the 3 inch distance photo and here the camera lens’ shadow shows up at the bottom right corner. At 12 and 6 inches distance there’s ample detail on 4 sides of the subject. At 3 inches distance there's detail see on 1 side of the subject. Gravity works on pulling the hair down and parts of the scalp can also be seen. In the close by photos the shadow of the camera lens can be seen.

Model facing the camera, 3 inches, portrait mode, flash from left + right

Power-Pixie was was sitting up and beside the subject when he took these photos. The subject was lying on her side facing the camera as seen. At 3 inches distance there is still some detail to be seen at this distance. Flash is to the left side. The camera lens’ shadow shows up at the top right corner in the 1st photo and in the bottom left corner of the 2nd photo. Subject’s facial features are visible.

Model facing the camera, 6 + 12 inches, landscape mode, flash from left 

Power-Pixie was sitting up and beside the subject when he took these photos. His camera is elevated, so the tape measure left in the shot is a bit misleading since the camera is 12 inches away and raised above the ground. The subject was lying on her side facing the camera as seen. There is a lot of detail to be seen at this distance. The camera lens’ shadow shows up in the bottom right corner. Subject’s facial features are visible, as is her forearm, t-shirt and foreground and background.

Discussion

Scarlet: "Kudos PP. 6 inches appears to be the correct distance. Great fit this. I seriously wonder where those authors got that "12 inch" info from, which they claim was the actual camera lens distance from Kris' head in photo 580? But since they lazily never use any source links, or solidify their writings in any way, distinguishing personal errors of thought from actual case facts... we just never know where they juggled this 'fact' from. But this 12 inches camera distance they write about seems incorrect? Or else that photo 580 must surely have been cropped? It looks like the camera was very close behind the hair tbh. Photo 580 also shows some space around Kris' hair and head. I don't think she is lying face flat on the ground therefore, but instead sat up or held up. We tried to recreate photo 580 as well in the dark [see results below], but had to take SO many photos just to 'see' where to aim. We must have made two dozen photos before finally deciding to switch on the light and get the near exact camera angle and composition. Then had one of us switch the light back off and take the photo. I still find it surprising that there are no variants of #580 found on Kris and Lisanne's camera. Just one pristine shot. But of course we were trying to recreate an existing photo, which is bound to produce more trial and error pictures in the process. Nevertheless, 580 is a standout solo photo in the night picture sequence and for that it is surprisingly clear, well framed (as in straight) and sharp. But at the same time the photo quality - to me - does not look sharp and crisp enough for a high resolution 3000 px x 4000 px photo?" 

Power-Pixie: "It cannot be 12 inches away, using that wide angle lens. I already showed you what it looks like from 7 inches away from the camera's LCD screen in this photo. Even if my model had voluminous hair, it is not enough to fill the frame from this distance. Let alone from 12 inches. This is exactly what I think I'm debunking with these hair photos as well. Simple measurements and a view of what it looks like at these different distances. There can be no sane argument after that. Original dimensions produced by this camera's JPG files are 3000px x 4000px (landscape) and 4000px x 3000px (portrait). And any alteration of these dimensions will show up in the EXIF. You don't need elaborate software to tell this difference when you look it up. So if 580 was cropped, it would be less than the above said dimensions, and the resolution would also change. What were the dimensions of the original photo?" [We don't know, as we do not possess the original photos. Only leaked copies, leaked to Juan. He received 580 in the dimensions 1191 x 894. As I understand it the photo originals as the families have them and as they were found on the camera are larger. But the original photo should be 3k x 4k pixels in dimensions.]

Scarlet replied: "I seriously wonder what the NFI would have done with any findings of dubious EXIF data, if they had encountered them."

Dave M wrote: "It LOOKS like a cropped image to me, it always has. It might even have had some Photoshop work done to it. But people like Imperfectplan and Juan(?) have dismissed this I believe, as the image has the correct pixel count and resolution that they would expect from the photograph. And whatever that is in the bottom-right, it isn't just shadow - the object itself is dark in colour. Is it a sign of old dried blood...?"

Power-Pixie replied: "The closer you are to the subject, the more you have to account for the slightly wider angle distortion. Though it will not be as apparent in a photo of hair since it is too random and irregular in shape. But the right bottom corner of picture 580 seems to catch less flash and it is a valid question to wonder about cropping here. This question of the flash is something important to keep in mind. Go back to the photos I took of my trusty assistant in crime, and see the photos of her hair from 7 inches and then at ~4 inches. Note the corners of the photo to see if you can make out any distortion. The default resolution for this canon camera's photo/JPG is 180 dpi. The dimensions are 3000px x 4000px landscape. If you cropped it, say to 300px x 400px, you will see a smaller file size, and smaller image due to the obvious dimensions that it was reduced to. And the dpi will stay the same, that is 180 dpi. I tested this with a photo I took with the camera. The resolution is poor of the 300px x 400px when you try to view it as a larger file or zoom in. My example is extreme, so we need to see the leaked photo and its dimensions to see how many pixels were cropped out. Now, say they cropped the original photo, then resized it back to 3000px x 4000px using Photoshop, and still having the same 180 dpi: then it would not be as sharp as we see it to be today, since the cropping deletes the original photo's data which is worth 10px x 10px. 

Lesser photo resolution may also be linked to things like the photographer not having steady hands, a slower shutter speed (especially if things are set to AUTO) and the camera adjusting the Shutter Speed as per the amount of light it has to work with. Or if the lens is dirty. But we need to ask: If the original photo showed more information, why did a 3rd party who took this photo not delete it with a computer, like they did 509? Why bother framing this and giving themselves away like this? If the authorities did crop this and resized it back to the original dimensions, did they do this because it showed Kris dead or bloodied? Even if it showed Kris slightly bloodied, they could have said she fell down and broke her head in the process hence why she is in this state. But it would be good to see the original photo 580 and compare it to the leaked photo 580 to be absolutely sure there are no discrepancies. This is what Hans and Roelie and the Froons should have checked right away when they were given the originals (assuming they were originals) on a CD."   

Dave M wrote: "That is a very worthwhile experiment and test you did. It demonstrates the auto-focus on the camera, the way the flash works to light the image and the distance between Camera and head. I think your experiment is generally a complete success Power-Pixie, and does parallel #580 *extremely* well. One particularly interesting effect in your 'four inches' shot though is the way the camera has focused on the main body of the head, and the surrounding edges are blackness. It perfectly duplicates the #580 image. Most of the key shots that night appear to be being made with the photographer being at more or less eye-level with the subject. For example the SoS display is appearing to be being taken at eye-level, with the photographer perhaps sat or crouched down. The 'Boulder' shot may be being taken stood up, and so slightly looking down at the Marker branch. So #580 would seem unlikely to be taken at floor level. It would be too difficult to get such a shot. Either this is Kris kneeling, or she is sat propped up or leaning.

Power-Pixie replied: "I favor Kris kneeling (though not sure why she would be during this shot), or sat hugging her knees to keep warm? If she is exhausted, injured or sick, I find it hard for her to be in either of the above positions. I personally would have my back against the rock wall to rest or lie down. As for the portrait vs landscape orientation, the EXIF for this image should read 3000px x 4000px. There is no getting round this technical information. Anything less is pure BS. One thing I did notice and perhaps Dave you can try/test. The camera "learns" when you have it in portrait mode. What I mean is take a photo of an object in landscape mode, then rotate your hand counter-clockwise taking a photo, until you reach full portrait mode. Examine the photos to see at which degree of rotation the camera senses you are holding it in portrait mode. I tried it and at a certain rotation degree it goes into portrait mode. Not that this proves anything, but it is a feature to keep in mind when considering photos taken in either orientation. And seems like it especially the camera lens shadow that keeps showing up in the frame when I get closer. I firmly believe that is a shadow of the camera lens in bottom right corner of 580 as well. I never quite thought that dark area was hair, but like Dave I thought it was coagulated blood that is a few days old. For it to be Lisanne's hair, is she lying down and holding the camera pointed at herself, while lying next to Kris and took this photo? That is the only way possible for it to be Lisanne's hair. Like taking a selfie or accidental selfie while lying down. There's no real other possibility of her taking this photo because this camera is not a smartphone that has reverse/rear lens capability. And since we don't have photo 581 for any context of what followed, we cannot be sure why this was taken by Lisanne. But Lisanne's hair [unlike Kris' hair) is ordinary in colour and in the dark even more unrecognizable unless you show us her face."

Dave M: "I cannot get my head around the notion this could be Kris sat up, propped up, or laying. HOW can you spend two and a half hours, ninety shots, and the only thing you capture of your friend - or yourself - is pretty much this shot of the hair... A very deliberately framed shot, that shows not a hint of neck, shoulders, or even orientation. And completely dry. None of it rings true. [..] The 'green finder light' is something I am slowly moving away from myself. It's especially difficult to use with this shot - #580, because to arrange the hair just right and to frame this shot so perfectly, is more than I think is possible if all you had is the green finder light available you you. You are having to use one hand on the button, the other to arrange the hair, and I don't believe it is possible to do this difficult juggling. The phone would have been last used two days previous to this, and it is baffling as to why it isn't switched on this night. It's as if the Phones and the Camera are in two different places, but I have wondered whether another possible reason might be the fear of it connecting to signal if switched on in this location...  It used to be the case that I would excuse all of this as Lisanne being traumatised, not thinking rationally. But a study of the SoS display and Branch marker shows someone who is still determined, and showing a fair bit of ingenuity. So unless she was at this location early on, by the 2nd or maybe even 3rd, and her psychological state deteriorated in the days after, I can't explain to my own satisfaction what is going on by the 8th. Look at it this way as well - if Kris' hair is in that good a condition by the 8th, would Lisanne be similarly 'clean', dry, and in good order?"

Dave M: "The question that arises from this: this experiment of yours strongly supports #580 as being a shot taken with the head being vertical. It isn't lying down. How then is this shot possible if Kris were to be sat up, awake or unconscious, but the only shot of her is... this one?! We can add that if this was pitch black, just how did the photographer set this extreme close-up up so perfectly? And more importantly, why take the shot at all? Imagine Lisanne, for whatever reason shooting random worthless images of distant darkness and hazy branches and trees, decides on a shot of the 'boulder' for reasons, then a little later decides on a shot of the back of Kris' head. Twenty seconds after that shot its business as usual and more meaningless shooting of crap out there in the pitch black distance... Kris had to have been sat up for that picture somehow during all of this, yet she was only captured on camera this ONE time? There is no second shot of Kris to be had this night, just this one. None of it makes much sense, all things considered. And then linking this to 'The Narrative' - I keep returning to the origins of this early assumption that these night shots showed the two friends having come to grief and Kris injured or dead. It was an assumption jumped to very early on [by Jeremy Kryt in his earlier Daily Beast articles, Scarlet], probably in the wake of Feliciano's statements about the cable bridge being the centre of the 'accident'. And the people who looked at the camera contents jumped to the understandable conclusion that these photos lined up with the guide's conclusions... Some time later Jeremy Kryt indeed reinforced that conclusion, and by now it is so embedded as being a 'Fact' that it is almost impossible to get away from this "Accident at the Bridge and river" verdict. Especially on reddit. And the photographs were so important to reinforcing Feliciano's conclusions.

Imagine for a moment that there were no night photos recovered, that all there was was that breadcrumb trail of remains up the river, ending with the denim shorts being the last found. Would THAT in itself be enough to make people believe completely in the old man's conclusions as being fact...? I think possibly not. There had to be something else, an additional layer of provenance to fully support his claim, and the night photographs DID that. They filled in a very important blank, and visual corroborative evidence like this is almost impossible to challenge. The backpack is found on what was technically his (or his family's) land. He himself was key to searching upstream and recovering the few remains. He is the one who directly created the entire Lost/accident/Bridge narrative that officially closes the investigation and supplied and reinforced the misadventure verdict that came forth. And the incredible shadow this man has, reached all the way back to the very morning of their disappearance, and his own premonitions on April 8th of a walk all the way to the bridge and river for the two. The level of coincidence here goes beyond being coincidence."

Scarlet: "ImperfectPlan estimated that by April 8th the iPhone would have had a bit more than 22% battery power left. Just powering that thing on would have required some significant battery demand I think? And to then also use the touch screen light.. I can see why in a theoretical lost situation, these two would have opted to leave the phone alone? But that doesn't take away from the fact that it is bizarre that they never used that phone's touch screen light during the first night."

Power-Pixie: "And even if they were in a "cave", the question of when they reached this sheltered place is a mystery, and the fact that there is not a damp strand that can be visible, from sweat, rain, mist, fog, etc, makes me think this was a more controlled environment and photo taken without interference."

Scarlet: "Is it possible that the night photos were not taken on April 8th but much earlier? I know that I can manually change the time and date settings of my Sony Cybershot camera and at this very moment can take photos as if it is April 8th 2014. With that date showing on the photo's EXIF data. Can we do a separate test with the Canon camera to see if it works for that camera as well? Seeing how easy it was to reset the date and time and thereby imprinting a different date on these photos? The camera as well as their other belongings contained strange fingerprints and DNA of at least three different and strange people (two women, one man) after all. I don't rule out that either this photo of Kris' hair was taken much earlier than April 8 or she was kept indoors that entire week in between, either dead or alive."  

Power-Pixie: "Yes the date and time can be manually altered on the camera. Scarlet: 'Go to the camera settings and manually change the time and date to April 8 2014, 01.00 am'. Here are stills from the date, time and time zone setting changes I made:

'Take the photo with the camera using those date and time settings. EXIF of this photo would show 2014, April 8, 1:00am'. Was daylight savings set on the camera? I left it alone. Original Photo #299 that I took with these settings. Screenshots Preview App on my Macbook to look up the image data.

'Then change the camera date and time settings back to today's (so the correct date and time).' 

Original photo (#300) taken after date and time set to the current date and time.

'NFI going through the photos on the camera could then conclude that there is a photo taken on April 8th at 1 AM, as shown on the camera?' Yes they could conclude this. As I showed above, you can easily change the date and time, on the camera. After changing it back to the current date and time, it then stamps the current date and time in the EXIF data on the next image I took which is photo 300. 'If so, then those night photos could have been taken at any date between April 1st and the day before the backpack was found, technically?' Yes. NFI would have been able to tell what edits were made on the original photos and the SD card as the IP have explained, in that if you tried to edit photos or delete them, there are ways to tell if errors or inconsistencies exist within a given file or storage device. These are what we tech-heads call Checksums. They are very precise and will show up with anomalies if the two scenarios I mentioned take place. However if you read back the simple test I did with the canon camera and my laptop using a basic disk tool software, I was able to extract the thumbnail. Because I was able to access the original SD card and remnants of the deleted file. How the NFI wasn't able to see the 509 deleted file's thumbnail is beyond me, but I suspect it was deleted using a computer. And that the night photos were taken by the same person(s) who deleted the photo first, before taking the night photos. Anyways I digress here. How to Change the Date of your Digital Photographs. The actual changing of the date and time in camera shows indeed that you can easily do this: take photos and revert back to whatever time and time zone you need to set it at after taking the photos. No need for all this complicated technology stuff. - So if Pitti and crew only copied the files to the hard drive, opened it up in some photo editing tool, brightened, zoomed or cropped the photos, then saved the file, then the EXIF would still not be changed with this method. As it is not possible to change these specific EXIF data properties. And you cannot redo a cropped photo. This would have been immediately picked out by the NFI though, since I explained to you the original dimensions of the photo has to be consistent throughout the entire set, i.e., 3000px x 4000px or 4000px x 3000px depending on the orientation of the photo taken. Actually, anyone with the software like Preview can pick this anomaly out and raise their eyebrow. Example of Image viewers to review EXIF data on Windows back in Jan of 2014."

Scarlet: "Great Power-Pixie, thanks so much for testing this out with the Canon Powershot SX270HS. I guess this proves that there was at least the possibility in theory, that the night photos could have been taken at another date than April 8th. Practically they could have been taken at any time between April 1st and June 11th, when the backpack was reportedly found. We have to take into account here that Kris' hair was pictured. So I don't think it is realistic that those night photos were taken closer to June than to April 1st. But if the 3rd party was particularly smart and able to think 3 steps ahead, they could have taken those night photos early on, near the start of the disappearance (hence the clean looking hair of Kris). Or later than April 8th (allowing them more time to think this out and plan it all) when we are effectively looking at the red hair of a dead woman..."

Power-Pixie: "My view is that Pitti and Panama's job was already done by Henry and F. in a speculated scenario like this:

- H & F deleted the most important file with no trace to rebuild from, due to using the computer to erase the file from the SD card. Most likely between April 2 and 8th.

- They changed the camera date and time (not the year) to April 8, 1am, (not sure about daylight savings time) sometime before the backpack was set to be discovered, and took the night photos. As this would have allowed them the most sure planning and doesn't feel rushed.

- They then changed the date back to the current date and time (leaving the year, time zone setting and daylight settings alone)

- They placed the camera back into the backpack for the clown Pitti to get her hands all over it.

- Then Pitti investigates and they take it a step further by copying the files to the hard drive. If they did not make a copy of the originals and work on the copies, then the NFI has another layer of tampering on these files and the SD card.

- If the SD card was formatted for any reason, and the files were copied back to the SD card, then the NFI will be left clueless. As it is extremely difficult to get anything out of this in the form of a trace.

I still favor the April 8 staging date as opposed to doing it later, since it seems so fresh and spontaneous, and the rainfall seems to be the one unifying element that cannot be carefully planned for or revisited months later. I cannot account for the photos 550 and 580 though. These look like they have been taken days earlier. What I think Pitti was silent about and probably scratching her head on was photo 509. So the NFI picked this out in their investigation and brought it up, but nobody every followed up in depth on this missing file. Just some lame Dutch program released on Dec 3rd 2014, stating they discovered a missing file - perhaps a dig at Pitti as Dave mentioned previously. But not enough to actually have a proper go at her and her investigation. And by then she was off the case anyways, so everything's lost in translation by the end of the year. And the parents didn't bother to really sift through this and have a proper go at the missing photo either. I don't recall seeing any mention of this by the Kremers or the Froons. Pitti continues to ignore this or avoids anybody's hard questions about this missing photo. Perhaps we should build up a list of the toughest questions yet. 😄"

Dave M: "The trouble with these photos' is that many of them have been artificially brightened, via Photoshopping. And so it gets very hard to work out what has been (artificially) brightened and what hasn't. I don't know for certain how much of the dazzling strobing seen in some of these 'finger?' photo's is genuinely caused by a combination of the flash and the conditions, of whether some of these images were brightened subsequently. In principle the cameras auto-focus would hone in on the nearest object and capture that, at the expense of whatever is behind it. And one of the key facts about picture 580 of the hair seems to be that the red hair is not laid against the ground or a rock. It appears to be laid vertical, and so there is nothing in the background able to be picked up in the flash and focus. This is suggesting that either Kris was sat up, or that her hair or her head is laid on a surface. We can see that it is likely horizontal from the long lock of hair at the bottom of the picture which is laid on 'something' and travelling to the left...  But none of this is apparent in #580. I concede that what we see has to be the back of Kris' head logically, but all we see is the hair. There is no hint of how it orientates with her body - where her shoulders might be, or even where her neck is here. All there is is the wildly unkempt hair. Kris kept a centre-part, its there in all the Bocas and Boquete shots and this helps to dictate how her hair fell around her. This night shot though, there is no centre-part to be seen, we have no idea where the front of the head actually is in this picture, and by contrast the picture of Power-Pixie's subject makes a lot more sense visually. I could still work out that this is definitely a shot taken from behind, and I can still work out where the front would be..."

Power-Pixie: "The photos were unedited by me, so you could see how much was visible without any brightening effects added. I was pleasantly surprised to be able to make out shapes, and objects, especially the ones closest to me with no problem. The photographer has staged these night photos in a remote place and the background (even if it was lit up) does not show us much. I don't think it was taken with that intention, otherwise it would give up too much information. My photo suggests that to take this photo from the said distance, you would start to see obvious details. Seems like for it to be Kris's hair:

1. It was Kris's dead body on the ground, with the hair tousled and photo taken or..

2. It was Kris's severed head and hair or...
3. It is an accidental or intentional photograph taken by Lisanne for whatever reason. Otherwise, what other explanation could there be? Out of the three, only the last one fits into the April 8 photo project in a "natural" way, or so it was meant to look. It is definitely taken in landscape orientation and as Dave mentioned, gravity seems to be acting on the hair in terms of pulling it in a certain direction. To me #580 is taken carefully. I bet you if it didn't turn out right, the photographer would have been forced to take another shot of Kris's hair. So some luck was needed here. But overall I think he had all the advantage - a remote sheltered place (no interference), a dead tourist's body (no resistance) and possibly assistance from someone else. The fact that we don't see a body leads me to believe based on the tests with the camera:

1. The photo was taken with Kris being close to the camera, but not too close. In other words; I think it is cropped. If you get too close, say more than 5 inches or 15 cm, then it is possible that the photo ends up with blown out sections due to the flash.
2. The photo was not blurry at all and taken in landscape orientation, since the flash is located to the left of Kris's head (if this IS the back of her head). If Kris was lying down and this was taken in portrait mode, it is impossible as Lisanne would need to be lying down while Kris was sitting up. It's just not physically possible, given what has been speculated in this supposedly tight space.
3. The photo of Kris's hair may be out of sequence, as there is no rain water on her hair. Go back to the list of photos with a shielded attempt. There are 7 previous photos made prior to 580, in which something is shielding the lens for those bright blobs to appear. So rain is falling on Lisanne and her camera lens, we get it. We also can entertain that all those 7 photos had Kris's hand, arm, head or whatever in the way, since she is in front of Lisanne. Then how is it that Kris's hair has not gotten wet if she is literally 5 cm - 15 cm in front of Lisanne's lens, accidentally during her hair photo and the previous 7 "blob of light" photos, as speculated by IP?

The key thing I took away from this was that Lisanne was, according to Losters, trying to signal to someone. So for her to accidentally shoot photos was not really as much her consideration as it was for her to keep pressing the button to "flash" someone's attention. However, what is not consistent with this is the hair, paper SOS and branch on boulder shots. They are too composed and given where they are located, it doesn't even make sense as to how they would have been taken during that initial rapid response from Lisanne to whoever or whatever it was she was signaling to."

Dave wrote: "Picture 580 is a near 'perfect' shot, there is no obvious moisture on either the lens or in the atmosphere. The lighting is very good, the camera is held still while taking the shot and there is no interest in any second shot, as the person who took it must have been satisfied with the brief image shown on the screen after the shot was taken. One nice shot of this very distinctive red hair - Job Done. "Frankly, this picture seems to be a 'Prop'. It exists to suggest Kris is here, in this location out in the wilds, and those 'fingers' across the camera lens may be just as artificial and there to suggest someone handling the camera - because as both me and Power-Pixie have pointed out, getting a finger across the lens like this is actually a difficult thing to do with this camera and its telescopic lens. And if the space the two are supposed to be in is well protected like this, it can't be being done to keep the lens dry in my opinion. Certainly not in the dark like this either. It's pointless to do so, particularly as there isn't really 'Photography' happening, just a lot of random snapping away in the dark."

Power-Pixie wrote: "Tbh, why didn't Lisanne just take a video and speak to everyone instead of this bizarre, avant garde photo project you'd find at MOMA or some place like that? Why not tell a story earlier on, during the day when you don't have to contend with the flash having to go off and guess at the blacked out images on the screen? Who the heck is she telling the story to at 2am in the morning, lost somewhere in F's backyard? Unless...this is indeed Lisanne trying to tell us a story, but we are missing photos or parts of the story that were deleted, and the person who deleted forgot about the traces of photo 509 or didn't know what to do about photo 509? But it's Kris's hair for sure. It is the only recognizable detail of the two women who vanished at 1:58pm on April 1. H & F were quite clever to select their subject carefully. For me 580 looks more like the back of the head. If we believe Margherita's/Murgas's/Osman's story, Kris would have had quite a bloody face, with hair possibly stuck to dried blood. I've seen some nasty forensic photos of victims and when the front of the face is severely injured, it is very unpredictable how the hair will interact and remain this way, especially after a lot of time passes."

Dave M: "My attitude is that if missing file #509 was made public in late June, and Betzaida Pitti made no response whatsoever (even eight years on), then that is her covering up. She saw those camera contents first, she would therefore be able to say whether she saw this missing file, because if she didn't then that points to someone having edited that card before her, and therefore suggests an incriminating event from some other party."

Power-Pixie: "I agree with you Dave. The missing file would be noticed once they opened the directory/folder on the SD card containing the images. It would be clear as day to see that 509 is missing. You don't need forensic tools for this, but for seeing what existed, and if it was deleted and how it was deleted. Also as I had tested the camera/SD card back in 2022, a thumbnail would exist of the deleted photo. I was able to extract this when I tested deleting the photo using the camera's delete function. You cannot recover it if it was deleted using a computer or if you following this process:

1. Insert SD card into computer
2. Copy all files onto computer
3. Format SD card.
4. Delete photo 509 from computer.
5. Copy all files back to SD card."

Scarlet: "Even when cropping Power-Pixie's photo with my hand, blocking the left side of it and just zooming in on the hair, I can still detect the general shape of subject's scalp and see the indications that this was a face down sideways or facing away position. Likewise 580 hints slightly at the overall shape of a scalp in the top half of the photo. The hair seemingly draping around it and moving downwards also hints at this. Now whether we look at the back of the head or the front of it with the hair draped over it, that I am still not entirely sure about."

Scarlet’s interpretation of the general direction the hair was falling down at:

Scarlet: "I do not believe that the original photo #580 shows a wig. The hair quality of your average affordable (synthetic) wig lights up very differently under a camera flash than real hair does. The photo original shows Kris' hair in my opinion. The hair structure, colour and length all match the hair we know (from other photos) Kris sported at the time. I do not believe that someone in Panama could find a matching wig within a week's time to fool us with. Kris' hair looks clean. I don't care how many women write online that their hair can still look this clean and fresh after a week without shampooing it, but the finer the hair, the quicker it becomes greasy and the easier it is to have leaves, twigs and dirt get attached in it. We see none of that in photo #580, despite having to believe according to some that this is a woman who had been desperately tracking through a jungle for a week by then, through rain and thick foliage. Just no. And fine hair like that usually also has a tendency to cause some frizz when there is a lot of moisture in the air. Especially when coming in contact with moisture directly. But we don't see that either in the photo. Her hair may have been tousled by herself or someone else, but it looks more draped like the neat hair of a mannequin doll than of someone who desperately tried to escape a hostile jungle. As for how shiny Kris' hair seems, I do not know what to deduce from that. The flash may have created that shine. But bluntly put: according to science the hair of a dead person can shine just as nicely as the hair of a living person."

Scarlet's Photos taken outside

I also tried to recreate photo #580 with two different red wigs. I used my own Sony Cybershot digital camera for this, so the cameras do not match in my series. So all I can look at here, realistically, is if I manage to capture the exact composition in one shot. And how difficult this is to do in the dark. And how many takes it costs me to do so properly. My camera's lens was at the widest angle and around 23 centimeters/ 9 inches distance from the wig. 

Scarlet's Photos taken inside:

My model also suggested that 580 *may* have been taken by having the camera positioned on the ground, with Kris lying on her back. We tried some photos in that manner (wig attached to him or to a guitar casing) but I feel that this is probably not the right angle for 580. Because the hair flows visually towards the camera then. While in 580 we see strands fall downwards, not horizontally towards the lens. 

The main thing I take from my little experiment is that 580 would not have had to be cropped per se, in order to look the way it did. It is possible to take such a photo, and it would have meant that the photographer stood most likely behind Kris and held that camera up and fairly closely behind her head. As for her exact position, I still believe that the top shape of the head/scalp and the way her lightweight hair drapes and falls, she most likely was slumped, seated or standing vertically.

CANON CAMERA; Dave M's Photo Experiment Recreating the Orange Shapes

I asked Dave and Power-Pixie: With regards to those orange blobs, what do you think could have caused those most likely? A thumb or finger that came in front of the lens? Dave highlighted how difficult this is to achieve, because of the small size of this camera and the way you hold it in your hand normally.

Dave M: "You were asking about the problems of getting the April 8th 'Finger' photographs, and Power-Pixie and I share the same view that getting your finger to go over the (telescopic) lens of the Camera is quite challenging. Not impossible, just... not natural. This camera is so small and compact that it can be comfortably held in one hand. From the first minutes I was holding the camera it was almost immediately clear that this was a camera that was (and is) made for Selfies. However it is when you hold in in one hand that you also realise how strange those 'finger?' photographs are because what I do find is that when holding it in your hand to take a shot, you are limited by the position of the firing button and the telescopic lens would make it very difficult (perhaps impossible) to place a finger over the lens as the photographs show that night.

When I stepped outside to use this camera I was using it in normal Landscape fashion, it's the natural way to use a camera after all. It took me some time to remember what I stepped out for and I had to force myself to start using it Portrait-style. It really isn't a natural way to hold or use a camera, certainly not this one. So below you see me trying to replicate the 'Finger' shots, and you can see that the shape is easy to see as a finger. The way in which #541's distinctive lack of a background and its main image was created almost certainly lies in the fact that the flash is being covered. But it does leave me baffled on whether the image IS a finger or not. The fact is it really is hard to get your hand and finger to do that in front of the lens. Maybe not impossible, just very hard. You are doing something with your hand and fingers here that is just not natural, or easy to do with this camera and its telescopic lens. And yet it is important to note that the 'finger' images that night do only appear when the camera is held portrait style - not landscape. And it appear most or all are appearing on the left of the shot, just how I took the above three. So I think the camera would be held something like this, the flash being on the left-hand lower side, firing button just above:

It's a strange way to hold the camera, awkward. The problem with the April 8th images is also that they have been altered so much, that it is now impossible to know what they looked like originally, when the camera was found in June 2014. The 'finger' photographs look to have been altered, to the extent that the objects covering the lens are just white strobing Blobs. If they were actually fingers, you would be able to make them out to be such, and I wish it was possible to know whether these did look like actual fingers when the camera was opened in late June that year... Anyway, below are three images, taken from three different angles, but showing what you have to do to get a finger over the lens. The April 8th 'Finger' photos were taken in portrait mode, as below, and the 'finger' in the images is mostly (or all?) on the left. So the way I am holding the camera below is roughly accurate to that....

I was curious about the torch feature, and the flash feature. So took some quick snaps using flash and found the results very interesting... When I have used the Canon camera to recreate the 'finger' shots the results were usually showing it was flesh and blood over the lens - definitely a finger. With my Samsung-8 on the other hand what surprised me is how much closer the results showed 'an object' much more in line with what we see in the April 8th images. The way the detail is washed out to result in a glowing object, the way the light creates an aura or light around the finger, and how easier it is to get your finger in front of this lens. This isn't me saying the April 8th images are from a phone. But nevertheless the results do make me think.... Three examples:

Tharindu replied: "I have tested the photo #541 and some observations regarding the night photos back in 2021. I agree with Dave. I too was able to recreate those images after covering the flash. I was able to recreate that kind of photo during the daytime. When it comes to their camera, we have to remember that Lisanne’s camera was relatively new, because it was officially released in March 2013. Generally, these cameras are reliable and can be used without technical faults for at least 5 years."

Power-Pixie replied: "I agree. My camera was manufactured back in 2013. I bought it via eBay, so it was used, though it looked and worked as good as new considering 9 years had passed when I purchased it."

Tharindu: " SX 270 HS has a pop up flash light, so there is less likely to have a dirty surface. Generally, camera lens is protected with a lens cap. According to the EXIF data, the night photos were taken in Full Auto mode. In other modes, you can change the Flash Exposure Compensation and Exposure Compensation manually. Still the dark image captured by myself looks brighter than the unedited versions of #542 and #594. Therefore, I can’t be 100% sure whether the flash intensities of the night photos were optimal in Auto Mode (in complete darkness, camera flash has the maximum intensity in Auto mode), but a camera specialist would easily recognize the difference, if he has the original dark photos. #542 and #594 have the original dark versions."

Dave M: "I did wonder whether these strange light effects on these photographs might possibly be caused by a separate lightsource next to the Camera. Someone's headlamp perhaps. But testing the idea myself I can confirm that that definitely isn't what is happening here - the camera's own flash drowns out any other lightsource. So if someone were to be using a seperate lamp or light here we would have no way to tell from looking at these photos. The orange, lit up objects are almost certainly fingers. I think even #541(?) has to be a finger most likely, as I just cannot think of what part of Kris' anatomy it could potentially be. But it is not natural, or even easy, to put your finger across the projected (telescopic) lens of this camera. I cannot offer a rational explanation for why or how someone is 'accidentally' doing this for this many shots on April 8th."

Power-Pixie replied; "I agree. It seems like it is more likely a hand that is shielding the flash or lens, though it is quite awkward and as Dave pointed on, why bother if Lisanne was trying to signal someone or trying to scare away someone? If this was some desperate attempt at trying to “see” in the dark I don’t agree at all, given my recent tests at the cabin in the woods. And so this leaves me with only a couple of scenarios - that these photos were taken much earlier by Lisanne, maybe on April 1st evening/night or it was H. and his stepfather being clever and creating their night art project."

Dave M: "I don't think they are trying to shelter the lens from rainfall, but I cannot completely dismiss that possibility either. I am speculating a bit that perhaps someone is doing this deliberately, to add some 'flavour' to the shots that night and to suggest that there was indeed someone (Lisanne) here that night and she was just out of the shot... in other words what we have is a tease. Just as the close-up of hair is a tease. And the Branch Marker, and the SoS display. Those 'fingers' across the camera lens may be just as artificial and there to suggest someone handling the camera - because as both me and Power-Pixie have pointed out, getting a finger across the lens like this is actually a difficult thing to do with this camera and its telescopic lens. It's a curious way in which to take these photos, and given the lens is telescopic I want to know how this object we see (finger?) is coming to be over the lens like this - you don't see this occuring in the daytime shots from Lisanne and Kris, and while it is possible to argue they may have deleted any such shots as they made them, I beg to differ and instead pursue the idea that they were seen as being confident enough in using that camera to both take selfie's with it at arms' length.

Above you see three images taken as I begin to remove my hand and fingers from over the flash. The intention here is to show that #541 may have been unintentional, but also that whatever the photographer was actually aiming the camera at, it wasn't the distant dark background at night. It's just that by covering the flash, they created a moment where there was not the light from the flash to actually light the background they had aimed at. I stress again that this is an odd way to hold and use the camera. My fingers not only block over the flash, but are extending to partially cover the (telescopic) lens. It's an awkward way to hold and use the camera, just like it was awkward and bizarre to create a shot like #541 with a curled finger or thumb just in front of the Lens... this is why the shot is really puzzling me. Note that it is not raining on this night, and the 'sparkles' on the second and third images are purely a fluke of lighting and the lens - they have similarities to the 'sparkles' appearing on some of the April 8th photo's obviously, but it isn't happening due to rain or dust in the air. Also, you see the camera strap on the top right coming into view, I forgot to wrap it around my wrist and out of the way!

On the left here is a bonus image, which I shot as it was raining lightly. This shot is a fluke, I was stood under the veranda outside, the rain had almost ceased, the lens was dry as far as I know, and yet this surprising effect was the result of one particular shot.... It surprised me obviously, as I had always assumed the Canon Camera that April night had got raindrops on the lens on at least two occasions, and yet the result of this shot I took is making me question that assumption. It seems that the effect is possibly caused by moisture in the air yes, but not because the camera lens has got wet."

Tharindu replied: "I agree with you Dave. This effect is not a result of the camera lens being wet. If you half press the shutter button, the red lamp will switch ON and it will stay as it is until you keep the finger at half press position. When you try to block the red lamp using your fingers, you would see these red orbs on the screen. Depending on the position of the fingers, the red orb count may differ but they always try to appear at the same location. If you carefully examine the April 8 photos, the orb count differs from photo to photo, but some of the orbs are located at the same location. This light source is effective to see closer objects in a dark environment. I was surprised to see that my camera battery was not fully drained even after 1+ year ( I have kept it in my locker for almost 2 years now)."

CONCLUSIONS

Dave M: "The idea that someone was trying to protect the lens sounds like the most probable explanation but as I said, this is pitch black conditions. You aren't shooting anything interesting, and your display screen wouldn't really be showing you rain on the lens anyway... Because it is mostly shooting in darkness! It is meaningless shooting. One other thing about these shots on April 8th that now stands out, is that most of the 'finger' shots are very overexposed, blurred, and indistinct. When I try to replicate them, the results I get are not overlit like these. They show more detail on the whole - much as #541 does. So either those shots are edited and brightened later on, or it is the moisture and conditions that night that are creating these really strobing and indistinct results. It now seems to me that #541 is probably the purest of these shots, because it isn't just a white-out effect like all the others and you can see traces of detail. But are these really a finger? Logically yes. But it bothers me that by and large there is nothing here, other than a lighting effect essentially. When I tried covering the lens with a finger, what I tended to get was still an identifiable shape. I can see the basic outline of my fingernail and it is easy to see that this IS a finger over the lens. Which isn't the case in the April 8th shots, all you see here is a white light effect. But let's stick with what we know is practical with the camera, when looking at #541. And keep in mind what you can, on a practical level, get to cover that lens at extreme close up? Because there is almost no way that that shot is a failed selfie. I have tried this, and it is impossible to get this result. The shot (541) shows an object that is almost touching the lens itself, and because of the distinctive shape of it the short hairs just coming into view on it. I am at a complete loss to explain it as anything but a finger coming into view. But how?!! How has someone created such a shot on this camera, showing a finger here?  It is not a natural or easy thing, with this cameras' telescopic lens sticking out like it does. I am realising that the *practical* reality with the camera, is a world away from the assumption."

Scarlet: "Interesting! I agree that in these Samsung 8 pictures the fingertip before the lens DOES indeed more resemble what we see in some of the night photos. I am not sure either what sort of conclusion can be attached to this, but at the very least it makes it (for me) more clear that we DO see fingers when viewing the lit up blobs in the night photos.  Possibly someone was using their right hand to take these photos and the left to shield the lens somewhat. There are at least eleven photos that show arguably a finger in front of the lens: #541, #547, #556, #559, #561, #562, #573, #585, #590, #591 and #597. Opening the door to the possibility that we also see a knuckle in one of the night photos. With hair.. seen in #541... Not a very feminine knuckle". 

Power-Pixie: "I agree with Dave. It is physical gymnastics in the dark, to what end? What is Lisanne trying to do here with all this hand positioning, if it is her? Why would she be so concerned about composing and framing a photo like 550 when she is trying to signal to someone desperately? For me the thumb and finger are pure speculation. It would seem like someone's covering or cupping the flash to some extent, but it is physically very challenging for me to replicate and for Lisanne in her state in the pouring rain, it makes no sense at all. 

Power-Pixie also tried to replicate photo 541

"I was trying to make out the shadow, which is the lens that is protruding when you take the photo in this way. So it is not just fingers and weird orientation of taking these photos; the lens also creates an impression when it extends out, and the flash does not exclude it when held so close to the subject. It creates a small, unmistakable shadow on the subject at close range."

Dave M. replied: "Very Nice Power-Pixie! While we can't say for certain what #541 is, I do believe we need to stick with the limitations of how you can hold the Camera, and then bear in mind as well that there ARE strict limits as to what part of the human shape this object can actually be. My suspicion is that this object is likely related directly to all the other similar photos with 'something' coming over the lens. It is a significant point that these objects appear in the photographs taken in Portrait mode, meaning it is likely/possibly being caused by the way the camera is being held in order to take 'Portrait'.... You made a comment in the past: "The knuckle photo may not be about shielding from the rain, but more like someone trying to test to see why they are not able to see anything on the LCD screen." This  comment has stuck with me, and the more I have turned it over in my mind I see your logic more and more clearly. The initial 34 shots taken on April 8th were shot over an 18 minute period, and most have not been released. But we know #511 is a shot of the forked branch in the distance, so it may be that most of the first thirty photos are of this nature, before the photographer's attention moves to taking a shot or two closer at hand, at ground level... Now, we do know that most of the shots of the forked branch and vegetation that we have available to us have been brightened later on by authorities etc, so originally it seems like due to the limits of the flash on the camera, these shots would indeed have been 'black' to anyone looking on the display screen on the back of the camera. Which does make your suggestion that the photographer here could have become concerned the camera wasn't working correctly make real sense. Hence, lowering the angle and trying a quick shot at ground level, accidentally(?) taking one shot of their own hand - resulting in #541? And they follow it up with a 'correct' shot of the rock face in front of them (#543), in order to satisfy themselves that the camera really is working fine. Encouraged by the picture they continue by taking shots of the immediate ridge, and move back to the forked branch in the distance once more."

Face or hand knuckle?

Power-Pixie: "May I add that the contorted manner of holding the camera to capture all these photos over such a long period of time for someone who should be exhausted and incapacitated to some degree is surprising? I think #541 is a profile of one of the girls and their hair. Anything else, I have to go through mental gymnastics or physical handheld gymnastics with the camera to convince myself it is finger/knuckle/palm/hand. If Lisanne camera was 12 megapixels the quality of a well lit image would be pin-sharp, flawless in detail. And looking at the camera like this Kris' hair (#580) would have had to have been just inches from Kris' head."

A very big thank you to Power-Pixie and Dave for their dedication to this case and for all the time, money and energy they put into their research until now. Also big thanks to Tharindu. We're also indebted to Imperfect Plan and Jeremy Kryt and all their excellent publications, allowing us to learn so much more about the photo's EXIF data, for one. I sincerely hope that in time to come, everyone committed to this cold case will help push matters forward and that this case will ultimately be solved, one day. Scarlet

December 2nd 2023

A young woman who disappeared in a national park in Texas, United States, has been found by rescue workers after an 8-day ordeal. Christy Perry (25) had gone on a solo hike in Big Bend National Park on November 9th, 2023. She planned on hiking the Lost Mine Trail; a popular, 5 mile long trail. Near the summit of Lost Mine Trail she went missing. National park Service started looking for her after Christy's family had contacted them to report her missing after Christy did not show up on her camping reservation that evening in Chisos Basin campground. Park Rangers and US Border Agents looked for her for over a week, with the help of two helicopters and an airplane surveying from above. Texas Game Wardens and Los Diablos fire crew also helped comb the area. After 8 days she was found, a quarter mile (less than half a kilometre) from the summit. It turned out that she had wandered through the wild for 8 days without anything to eat, but able to drink rainwater. Interestingly, she took photos of her ordeal and they contain more than one selfie.. Showing us once again that even when desperate and alone in the wild, people do sometimes resort to selfies to document what they're going through. Christy's photos, which she uploaded in a TikTok video (see below), show herself during her ordeal. She also took several clear daytime photos of the places she was stuck at. No night photos. Christy is roughly the same age as Kris and Lisanne were, give or take and they all are/were social media users. Although back in 2014 Facebook was mainly still very big (Kris and Lisanne both had already posted different photos from their Bocas adventures on their facebook accounts by the time they went missing). And people used Twitter and Skype a lot. Kris and Lisanne's photos show nothing personal though, except for the back of Kris' head once. And they also do not show clearly where they're at. It remains a mystery to me how they behaved after April 1st. 

November 28th 2023

Power-Pixie created this video of the night photo montage, allowing you to go through the night photo sequence in real time. Many thanks to him. Dave added the rain fall soundtrack for extra effect, since it was raining that early Tuesday morning. Many people who have carefully followed this unsolved disappearance case of Kris Kremers and Lisanne Froon will already know what the night photos look like and at which exact times they were shot on April 8th 2014. But this video allows you to experience the night photo sequence exactly as they were (claimed to have been) taken*. For those interested in such a thing. The video of the night photo montage is based on exact timestamps of the night photo published by the Imperfect Plan in this article and is meant to provide a visual reference of how the night photos look based on the findings of the Imperfect Plan analysis. As for the focus of the collage made, it is subjective, but based on photo 550 and 599, since the V shaped branch originates from the base of Photo 550 and 599 when put together. From that Power-Pixie used the V shaped branch to orient all of the other photos so that it forms the anchor point. 

It makes it all more immersive and allows you to get a real feeling of the time the photographer sat outside in the rain, making the (often bizarre seeming) photographic choices he/she did. Yes it is a long sitting to watch it all, but especially the length of the periods in which no photos were taken becomes extra obvious when you watch it as if you were there.

*Keep in mind though that this is simply a visualization of the sequence of night photos as they are claimed to have been taken. We have to rely on other parties here. First of all on investigators such as Imperfect Plan and Jeremy Kryt, who have copies of these photos in their possession and who have written about them and confirming that these photos are the actual ones that are in the file cases. They also confirmed their EXIF data and stated that the few photos that were not either leaked or published, do in fact fit in and show nothing of interest; just more darkness and reflecting waterdrops. On the other hand we have to trust the Dutch NFI, who investigated the camera and phones and who hopefully have made sure that their EXIF data are correct and unaltered and not manipulated. But I am a little but doubtful still, considering it was Betzaida Pittí and her team in David who first handled that camera and those phones on June 17th 2014. Before sending them to the NFI. And we know that on that same date, night photos were viewed in a photoshop program and some were brightened and rotated, at the very least. I still don't know if that is really all that was done to them and I certainly do not trust Pittí. But this video shows the official narrative regarding these night photos. It is up to everyone of you to decide what to think of this representation and narrative.

I will add some comments from other people and some thoughts Power-Pixie, Dave and myself have about this video

Power-Pixie wrote: "Yay! Thanks for posting the video Scarlet and thanks to you, Juan and Imperfect Plan for the hard work in gathering the photos, that helped me put these photos together. For maximum effect in understanding the context of how/when these photos were taken, this video is best viewed in one stretch, but you are welcome to view it however you wish. It may not be 100% accurate, but it is as close as I could come based on the official posted information. I look forward to reading everyone's thoughts and theories if they manage to sit and watch the entire video. If anything sit through it for Kris and Lisanne as we need to help find the truth for them and their families. 👍🏽🕵🏽‍♂" 

kanayanfantv wrote: "Why to see almost 3 hours of video of not even 50 pictures in 3 hours span? This video makes no sense, at all." 

annem6714 replied: "The timeline! Extremely interesting, makes a lot of sense. It’s creepy as well…

dosvidaniya397 replied: "I think the point is they are being displayed in real time as per when the shots were taken with accurate spacing between shots. Gives an idea to the passage of time as they were taken." 

Dave wrote: "It's strange and puzzling watching this - the first photograph is taken at 1.29am, and it is 25 seconds till the next one, which as shown here is quite a long time. Then #511 is taken, and another 26 seconds until the next one... Now maybe we can argue that Lisanne was spending the time before #510 looking through the images ON the camera, and after doing so started aimlessly taking random images of her surrounding area. The pace picks up after #511 though, and I would point out that while this is pitch blackness they are supposed to be sat in, the viewfinder screen only stays lit for about five seconds after taking a picture. Might this be prompting the faster pace after #511? Possibly. But when you look at the firing rate like this, the gaps between shots taken is actually quite leisurely. It isn't someone going mad on the firing button in an emotional state. What was striking though was the first 30 images being mostly black or shots of the distant forked branch, and suddenly we are given #541... this is someone's finger, I am convinced of this. Possibly taken in landscape. It has to be the same object seen over the lens in later shots, but because the viewfinder turns off after five seconds or less, the person taking these wouldn't have realized their finger was going to be caught on Camera like this. They might well have seen it caught on the viewfinder for the three to five seconds the screen stays lit, but that would have been it - on to the next shot." 

Power-Pixie wrote: "Were the photos taken looking upwards? Yes. Without a doubt in my mind I can now state this. It becomes apparent once the intervals of times are in place to allow for us to take in the composition of the images. That is what I get once it is slowed down in actual time, based on the available information. It comes off as controlled curiosity about rainfall more than anything else at this point and in this sequence. Unless of course photos are missing which do show Kris and Lisanne in some photos. Without the EXIF we cannot be sure if there were multiple attempts at taking photos of the same scene like the rock with branch, SOS marker, and even if Kris was in the way multiple times. What would be the one deciding factor to base all your aim and photos in that one direction? There are no helicopters around, it is raining, and nothing else is in view except for what we know from the night photos. We have no context of previous days/night attempts at anything. Just April 8th morning and 100 photos of rainfall, more or less. Did they just wake up and realize they needed to take photos of everything they had and point upwards to the sky for some reason? What I find lacking is any curiosity on Kris's and Lisanne's part to take any photos from the previous nights to light up just to see where they were. Or even to "see" her/their way around this area if they were stuck there. Nothing. If they used their phone flashlights, then this activity on the phone certainly does not show up in the logs. In order to use either phone's flashlight feature in the dark of this shelter, which we all three are now aware of were on their phones, the phones have to be TURNED ON. They were turned off 47 minutes before sunset (which was 6:39pm). Then turned on 12 hours later on April 2 (6:58pm). And why was the camera just used on the 8th of April? When viewing these night photos across the actual time span, everything is SLOWED down and feels like in real time. It also has sections that makes me think it was an immobile Lisanne who was taking these photos at the time. If this was staged then it is a very successful staging. However when viewing the entire set of night photos over 2 hours and 41 minutes, I'm not convinced that these photos and their times are authentic. But still I'm trying to make sense by viewing them in this way. If this was indeed Lisanne taking them, then I find that there are photos missing (not the unpublished ones) or times that do not match up to what they are showing."  

Dave wrote: "Watching this, and trying to imagine the person sat here taking these, in supposedly pitch blackness, is a baffling experience. I have this Camera, I know it is a little tricky to use in the dark due to the buttons being so close together and in these conditions the viewfinder screen wouldn't be giving off much light as it is photographing mostly darkness out there in the distance... add to that the screen goes idle after five seconds or less after you take an image. So apart from the use of the flash you are sat there in the dark. With this little pocket camera in your hand. The gaps between photo's are surprisingly leisurely when seen like this. I do question how long the battery lasted this night, as mine doesn't last all that long, and this Camera hadn't been recharged in at least eight days, supposedly. When the battery exhausts there will be a warning message on the viewfinder and the camera shuts down - telescopic lens retracting. That might be what begins to happen at we get past 2am, it's impossible to say for sure though. I have no idea where #550 fits in with this location, but the fact this one image was taken is as remarkable as the one very deliberate shot of Kris' hair. I don't sense anxiety or any sort of stress in these 90 images, in fact as I have studied them there is actually an order and a sense of purpose in the taking of them. Someone is sat there, for over two hours at least, in a sheltered spot, snapping away at a calm and relaxed pace. In pitch blackness? But if so how do they take that well framed image of Kris' hair if that is the case, or #550? It's questions like these, and the lack of I-Phone use this night, that bring the April 8th images into some doubt. For one night only the camera comes out, the phone with its torch, inbuilt camera, and other functions does not. I feel as I always have - I am chasing two ghosts here. There is no hard evidence that either Lisanne of Kris are here after that Tuesday. All I can say is that someone is using their phones and their Camera, but there is no convincing evidence that it is either of them..."

user-ri4lf5ly4x wrote: "If the parents wanted to understand the causes of the tragedy, they would not hide the rest of the photos. Because the photos, which allegedly "for ethical reasons" were not shown, can be decisive." 

fortpark-wd9sx wrote: "Good day, Imperfect Plan and other groups are known to have seen the originals or their equivalent. The understanding was that there was nothing exciting or particularly different from what had been officially released or supposedly leaked. Regarding content, Imperfect Plan has mentioned there are more photos of them at Boquete that have not been publicized but investigators are not able to specify the day and time which these photos have been taken. Therefore, unless shown otherwise, this meant after visiting the Coffee Flower Fair and having lunch at Bistro de Boquete at around noon time on 30 Mar 2014, there were no further photos of them wearing the same clothing at various parts of Boquete. Regarding the investigation, perhaps they met some unfriendly persons but the outside world, with the exception of perpetrators if any, had no idea who these people were and what happened. Much of the arguments for foul play was based on the investigators not being able to give a reasonably definite answer on what happened." 

I replied: "Not just the people from Imperfect Plan have access to copies of the photos, but also the parents for instance, lawyer Arrocha and Jeremy Kryt have seen all the night photos. As have various other people. They do confirm that all the important photos have been made public by now. And that only a couple of night photos have not been leaked, but that they show nothing of interest, just darkness. The Dutch investigators hinted at the same and the parents also confirmed this indirectly. The parents were told for quite some time by Panamanian prosecutor Betzaida Pitti to keep the photos and phone info private. But I don't understand either why they continue to stay silent and not reveal everything that is known. They are probably too traumatized by this tragedy to want to continue working on the mystery. There are more photos indeed which have not yet been made public: also various daytime photos and some Pianista photos for instance. The NFI and investigators looked at all the photos on the camera and for some reason decided not to focus on March in their investigation, and solely on April 1st and onwards. A real shame, because we want to know what Kris and Lisanne were doing in the days leading up to their disappearance and who they may have met. But it seems safe to assume for now that the non-published Boquete photos are not showing anything of interest. Nevertheless I would also like to see everything for myself. Without all the evidence I am also not certain what they were doing exactly on Monday afternoon. The phone logs show a gap that afternoon. And I think there are many reasons why some people suspect they met foul play. The case is one big riddle with many starting points for a crime scenario." 

eliaslima5506 replied: "I agree with you! No matter how experienced, observant and competent these investigation professionals are, one detail or another always escapes even the brightest minds! Therefore, the right thing to do would be to publicly disclose all the material produced by the girls' cell phones and cameras, from the moment they arrived in the city until the last moment recorded after the day of K&L's disappearance." 

kennethmacalpin7655 wrote: "Unfortunately, I don't think we actually know the sequence of the photos that were taken. The numbers and timestamps are suspicious. As you've pointed out on your blog, #576 and #577 are the same image. We can assume 577 is the real one, and 576 was brightening by someone afterwards. But then it shouldn't be called 576, so where is the true photo 576? Is it 577? Then where is the true 577, do we have to move all the numbers along by 1? We cannot trust these numbers." 

seancidy6008 wrote: "After midnight in a rainstorm is redolent of the covert. There are many [photos taken] around  ten to twenty second intervals, with several being nine seconds exactly, a longer gap of a minute and a half before the back of Kris's head is shown and then another nine. After Kris's astoundingly dry clean hair is shown (hooded?) the intervals go to minutes and start getting much longer and even doubling, as if the photographer had lost interest in what he was doing. I think the most likely explanation is Kris being shown was the entire point, and the other photos were done to muddy the waters." 

Dave replied: "Agree with you. It looks and feels like a stage set, being photographed before the actors arrive. These 90 images are shot over two and a half hours, in near pitch black. The pace is actually quite leisurely when you watch them in real time like this, and having studied the available photographs, I get the sense of a small confined space, with a protective overhang of rock over it, and what are actually images taken with some care for the most part. We never see the to extreme left of the person sat/stood there, we never see to the extreme right either. Meaning either a confined space, and/or the person doesn't want to show anything about this location they are in other than into the distance and nighttime trees fading into the distance. t might not be the 'shelter' and rainfall that are responsible for the constriction of shots, but necessity. Someone wanting to get a certain amount of shots, but deliberately not show too much of the actual location. It's like a stage, one prop sat there, the other prop sitting over there, here is the forest/jungle I am in, and this is the hole I am trapped in, and this is the face of a cliff or rockface... and look, here's Kris! But in reality what those 90 shots show is almost everything BUT Kris or Lisanne. The red hair is indicating Kris yes, but it has no context to it. No follow-up. These images have never rung true for me. Like the phone use in these days, there isn't actually anything there that shows either Lisanne or Kris are here, alive and still trying to get out of this situation. Someone is using the phones and the camera yes, but when the phones are only ever switched on for no more than two minutes at a time I have to conclude that that person using them isn't very serious about making a connection to signal...." 

evelynhope3334 wrote: "Nice to hear your thoughts. You and your team have done a lot for this case. #580 is an enigma, and so many theories that it was accidental, but then there are no more accidental shots, and so that is why I can agree when you asked why only one shot of plastic branch thingy on the boulder? Your question made me wonder that in Lisanne's haste to signal somebody, why she would think to bother about taking a vertical shot? It's not like she is going to show this photo in a photo exhibit or competition later where the composition is of importance. Right? And the amount of time in between, even when it is like 10 seconds it feels like an eternity goes by in real time which is why I'm more impressed now with this video because it does not show me a desperate tourist who is lost and trying to signal. It feels like somebody thinking about the photo maybe they had a way to also see what to take next, like a head lamp. If this is a desperate attempt by someone who is supposed to be in a very poor condition, in the pouring rain or cold and is needing to flag someone down, why does the shot #550 looks well composed, like as if photographer is careful to not show us anything else, just like the shot that comes much later I think it is #599? Why is Lisanne switching between vertical and horizontal? When I think about it, the question is really, why is the 3rd party trying to take these photos in this manner? I think it is because they don't want to reveal the details if #550 and #599 were taken in horizontal position. Something about the details of this place would be immediately recognizable they must have thought."

Power-Pixie replied: "Those are fine points especially about the intervals. I've seen the timestamps of these night photos so many times, I took it as gospel that these intervals especially the ones that seem to show a sporadic burst of "signaling" was initially just that. It wasn't until I started editing it to the timeline of the video and playing it back, that even 9 or 10 seconds is a long time for me to review each time, never mind someone who is lost and desperately trying to signal, what a plane? That was doing what exactly in the sky for 20 odd minutes or 2 hours and 41 minutes in the sky? All in one quadrant in a rain-filled cloudy sky? I think Kris taking off her top and tying it to a branch would have yielded better results if they saw a helicopter in the sky. Further conviction for me that this isn't Lisanne is the orientation of the camera as the photos keep coming. I along with Dave Mullen own the same model cameras. I have also made videos of my tests in pitch darkness at a cabin in the woods. To theorize is one thing, but to actually put it in practice reveals so many nuances and more questions. It is very taxing on the wrists to hold the camera a certain way, even for someone like me who is not in the same physical condition or (location) of a supposed tourist who has been in the wild for over 6 days/nights. To take a photograph like #550 makes me think someone was trying hard to capture in portrait orientation, which to me means someone cares or is aware enough that these photos will be seen later. But what does the composition have to do with "signaling"? And why just one photo, when it is assumed by the lost theorists that this is a marker and the photographer is trying to flash it to whoever or whatever at the time? The easiest way to photograph this is in landscape orientation, especially after 19 or so odd minutes of taking photos in the dark as it would have been tiring for Lisanne. Was she also reviewing photos in her state of disorientation and hallucination as claimed by the Lost Theorists? And not one accidental photo or subsequent photos of this branch with plastic bags in photo 550, informs me, as you alluded to in your comment, that along with Kris being "shown" to us, the plastic bag contraption helps cement the thought that it was them and they were trying to "signal" someone during the day time or had been anticipating to do so. It's all a little too clever if you asked me." 

Power-Pixie wrote: "The photographic pattern is not the same as what we have seen Lisanne/Kris go through naturally in their day time or past photos of their vacation in Panama. Even with the night photos, I expected to see a familiar pattern, especially photos of the two of them, curiosity in the dark, etc. Remember as human beings we do not abandon curiosity in an instance, even when thinking irrationally. Kris and Lisanne had over 144 hours (6 x 24 hour days), in which their minds would focus on other things temporarily, other than just being in the state they were in. Have you ever been depressed or sad about something or someone The initial anger/hurt/shock wears off. You get hungry, you need to take a nap, you have to listen to a friend or partner over the phone or in person about something else, etc. Our minds are not made to stay focused on one thing 24 hours a day for 6 days on end. So during those breaks I imagine that Kris and Lisanne would have held much more thoughts related to their situation. Think about the branch marker with the bags for example. While it is born out of the necessity to survive their current situation and possibly hearing helicopters overhead somewhere during the days of April 3 - April 6, both women would have started thinking outside the box in order for them to make this contraption. They would have to stop their woes to wonder how to catch rescuers' attention if they come by in helicopters. Both Lisanne and Kris's minds would be temporarily distracted from it, curiosity built up and new lines of thoughts along with the desire to document their situation or attempt to contact their families and friends would occupy their minds more and more to help curb some of the woes and distress. From reading their diaries and seeing their home videos and photos before Panama and including Boquete and the events prior to their disappearance, both of them come across more optimistic than pessimistic. I think they would have still been optimistic of being rescued if they were both alive and truly lost after April 1."

I replied: "100% this! Very good point. brains often go through waves and motions indeed. Even when faced with absolute adversity. Being exactly as hopeless and depressed every singly day, for nearly a week on end does sound unrealistic, from a brain point of view. They were indeed young and fairly optimistic by nature and the last thing that dies in people typically is Hope. It may not be there all the time, but hope has a knack of showing up here and there. I don't believe that Kris and Lisanne would not have felt periods of hope, where they thought brightly and sharply and outside the box. And yet NOTHING of what we know of them and their actions after April 1st shows this clearly. To me, the mini mini plastic wrappers on sticks seem beyond absurd, as they are so small and so useless. There were obvious better choices to try to wave for attention in case they heard a helicopter approaching (which was factually not the case in the night of April 8th as there were no helicopters flying at night), such as waving their coloured tops. And why hide under a canopy then? Why no markers made with large branches and sticks or even stones on the trail? Along the way? Why did they not make arrows with them or words, or messages? Every Dutch child knows about this through the German fairytales. Why no paper attached to tree branches, to show their route? No, we are instead supposed to believe that on the one night it was raining (no rain or barely any rain to mention in the week prior), exactly on that night they used the paper they apparently carried with them to make a pile of, and place it on a rock under a canopy of sorts, having it go wet and sloppy.. in the middle of the night. For which purpose exactly? Seemingly the only function for it was to be photographed and shown to the world as such."

karlconfucius5324 wrote: "There is no reason at all to assume that Kris or Lisanne took these "Blair witch'' photos. From what I read and heard about this, the most likely scenario is what Osman's mother, Margarita (a very brave lady) said; Edwin and Tito (Henry) took those photos some time after they had killed the girls. May Kris, Lisanne and Osman haunt them forever." 

Dave wrote: "There is one phot in there that strongly hints to this - #541, and someone's thumb or finger in front of the lens. I cannot think of anything else that it can be, other than a thumb or finger. And those hairs shown there on that thumb/finger are certainly not of 20 year old women..." 

lyndoncmp5751 wrote: "As somebody who camps, it's not really a big deal to sit under a shelter (tarpaulin etc) in a rainy forest to snap lots of random pictures for shits and giggles. Sit there with a mate, have some beers etc. On the face of it, neither theory seems to make much sense but obviously one of the options WAS done, and I favour the one that was carried out by the perpetrators for some silly purposely cryptic nonsense. Cheers." 

selenabianchi5201 wrote: "This is a great video Scarlet to show finally how the photos looks and how long for the time between all photos. For a long time only people talking not showing how long it looks like in this video. Why after 7 days and nights the girls only take the photo now at 1:29am in the morning? In the panama newspapers it said helicopter searches and the teams searching had to stop for the rain. then why they would search in the night or flying helicopters when it is raining? It looks for me more the 3rd party are taking these photos because it do not show desperation of two female tourists after so long in the forest." 

Dave wrote: "Depending on what your view of who is taking these photos is, this real-time recreation you have created seems to support the impression that it is the rain falling that triggered the photography. To go from dark silence, to the noise of rain falling around you in this environment, would likely mean a restless night and some concern over what was happening around you out there in the darkness. The frequency of shots as demonstrated here is not actually all that great- this is not panic or anxiety being shown here, but more of a controlled curiosity. I have to question what the actual situation is here with Kris, assuming this IS her and Lisanne sat here.. If Lisanne has any concern over Kris it isn't being supported by the timings here, happily shooting away regardless. But then if Kris was basically alright and awake it is hard to imagine she would not be present in the flow and content of this lengthy photography, so in the end the whole recreation seen here only adds to the mystery of these night-time shots. But that forked-branch, it sits as the focal point to the bulk of the photography. The *Bullseye* if you will. Shooting away into the distance like this is understandable enough, but everything is focused in just that one direction, and more or less at that one point in the distance. It's strange really when you see this, and the shot of the SoS display, and the thought put into it and the branch-marker (but no convincing shots whatsoever of Kris or Lisanne) that a logical extension to this strategy would be to use the camera and its flash as a further means by which to attract attention during the day from a potential passing helicopter or aircraft, but that clearly didn't happen. Was it an oversight? They have two tools here by the 8th April- phone and Camera, but neither are of any interest by this point. Which is very odd given the context suggested here... There is some ingenuity being shown with their efforts, but it has to be pointed out that in the SoS photo you do appear to see the tissue and paper getting wet - it hasn't been here all that long therefore, that or it has not rained before now. But when you look at the amount of rain that night you have to think that by morning all of that display would have probably been washed away, ruined. This set of photographs do feel too disciplined when you take an overall look at them." 

I wrote: "It was confirmed that no helicopters flew there at night. And despite many people looking for evidence and explanations, there is literally no evidence at all that there were (Sinaproc) ground search troops active at night. Making it unlikely to have taken place, given the amount of Sinaproc communication at the time and media interest. There is no evidence that people were actively searching at that time of night and the photos prove without a shadow of a doubt that the photographer was not on the run but was entirely static, for the duration of that photo shoot. Making sure that all the photos were taken in the dark of night and not at sunrise.. And the question also remains why all this effort was made after a full week out there in the wild? Why were no similar photos or 'flashing attempts' made during the first night? or the second? Why only on the 8th night? Nobody can convince anyone that these two Dutch city girls were not besides themselves with anxiety much earlier on. That they did not realize the severity of the situation by night two or three". 

lyndoncmp5751 replied: "I would still think it very unusual even for people on the ground to be wandering through the mountain forest at night in the rain. That is extreme dangerous itself and those people could end up in need of being rescuing. Most rescues are suspended when dark comes and they carry on in daylight. I wouldn't think anyone would be searching at 2.00 am through slippery sloping rainy forest terrain." 

kennethmacalpin7655 replied: "Yeah it's like the purpose of the photos is just to say "in the jungle" but not reveal a specific location. Juan suggested Cascada Sindigo en Caldera looked like a match. I'm 90% convinced they were murdered, or at least that they were attacked and escaped and then died. But there's so many question marks over both theories. That's why we keep coming back I suppose." 

Dave wrote: "One of the background questions to these night photos is that the Canon camera being used is a small compact camera, little buttons and this is supposedly in near pitch black. I have been wondering, all things considered, whether to use the camera this effectively, and to compose those abrupt one-off shots of Kris' hair and that boulder and its marker, may mean this person has additional lighting to help the - a headlamp for instance. For photographs that are supposed to be randomly taken, in the deep of night, in rainfall, it is very hard to imagine how such perfectly framed shots can be taken in these conditions. It all seems rather orderly and rational. [..] The night photos are an enigma, open to interpretation frankly. My impression is of a confined space acting as a shelter, the Photographer sat or stood in the one spot, and so I can't work out where Kris would be sat or lying. Neither can I quite understand why or how you go two and a half hours without showing either her, or any part of yourself... So yes, those 90 shots do feel like a list of 'things to do', and once the main points have been ticked off the mission is more or less done... After all, just why would Lisanne make a deliberate point in taking a picture of the 'Boulder', the SoS, and Kris' hair in tight close-up? It does look and feel like someone telling a 'story'. If you removed Kris these three shots and imagine they didn't exist then you are left with 87 shots of distant trees and some rock taken in the deep of a rainy night... they would indeed be completely worthless. But its that shot of Kris' hair, and the two other shots showing a 'lost' situation, that actually make these shots important and valuable. Other than that I think they would be largely dismissed if all they showed were nighttime trees and some rock. Kris' hair had to be in there to make it all work..." 

I replied: "I also find it very illogical and strange that there are countless dozens of photos of the same dark sky and V-shaped tree above, but only ONE shot of this very important scene of the back of Kris' head. Only Kris' hair would do here if this pivotal photo was to place Kris and Lisanne on the scene, as Lisanne's chestnut brown hair was not unique enough for this. So we have to be shown they were there in that undefined stretch of forest. But we can't see anything more: no bag, no shoes, no bodies. We cannot even see if Kris is dead or alive in #580. And yet, this seems the photo that was most important of the night photo series. But they took only a single shot of it? Why not take a couple? The digital Canon camera had the memory card space for it and the battery life. This photo is the only one which proves that Kris was there at the time. Her hair allows us to identify her there. None of the other photos show anything personal. Not even one of their shoes, their bag. Nothing. So was #580 staged for us, to convince us these photos were taken by Kris and Lisanne? Was there only one photo (a cropped one seemingly) because more photos could increase the risk of showing unwanted things? Why is there also only one shot of the plastic attached to branches? They were clearly positioned there with care and on purpose. But only one photograph, again. Yet, of the non-significant things the photographer took tons of similar looking photos. People who try to reason this away by claiming Lisanne was delirious when she took these photos, and that is why they make little sense: the photos are sharp though and carefully composed. They do not show a delirious or chaotic state of mind of the photographer. Instead they show a cool, calm and collected photo series, carefully avoiding showing the precise location, avoiding any picture taken by sunrise, avoiding showing any personal items of body parts of these girls or even of the photographer. Aside from a hairy knuckle, seemingly. Which does not match the youthful female delicate hands of Kris and Lisanne." 

Dave wrote: "One of the most distinctive features of those 90 photographs taken in the dark is that they are 'a Batch', a singular collection of images, completely separate from what went before, and all existing in their own bubble. They look and feel artificial when judging them in comparison to the photography that came before. It is one of the main reasons they stand out, as they don't fit with anything that came before. Different style of photography, no selfies, none of the usual interest in water features - such as a river, if there is one there... Someone wanted that shot of the 'boulder' and its marker, and as such you do have to seriously consider whether this one image was a very deliberate shot as someone wanted that branch marker recorded. WHY? Why would Lisanne want to record a shot, one shot, of the marker, but nothing else in that direction...? Over three hours, You do have to ask serious questions on that as the vast majority of the 90 images are of worthless generic forest environment shot (presumably) in the other direction. The logic of all of this is hard to guess at. We are falling into the familiar hole of having to (repeatedly) rationalize 'logical' reasons for the evidence we have given to us, always assuming that Lisanne and Kris had got themselves lost and had some accident that stranded, and ultimately finished them. All of this is because we have been pre-programmed to believe it WAS an accident, and they were lost. I don't know whether these night photographs are genuinely from Lisanne and Kris, it's unknowable, but it seems to me that with their inconclusive content they do fall into 'the guide F. bracket'. By that I mean they are very much like the convenient way the Backpack washed down the winding river for 2 kilometres, parked itself by chance by the Alto Romero banks where by pure coincidence F. happens to live, at a place where two [hired by him] farmers happened to be working and would see it, which in turn leads to a breadcrumb trail of remains upstream, where the final find of jeans shorts just down from the second bridge 'proves' to guide F. beyond any doubt that there was an accident and there is no need to search any further upstream.... you know the rest. This man's influence come June reached its peak. He effectively found the remains, created the entire bridge/accident narrative/myth, closed down any further searches at that time and all things considered I do think it is wise to still treat those night images as suspect, because of this enormous influence he had on the direction and closure of the two's disappearance come June 2014.

He knows the families are in the country, when they leave the country and is equally aware of the search teams and Authorities reaction and movements around all of this. Think on all of that and it is very very strange indeed this obsession to be at the center of it all. Given the Authorities and SINAPROC were rightly in charge of the investigations and searches - how does he know all of this, why does he have such an intense need to know all of this and how does it perhaps influence the progress of the good fortune of the backpack discovery on June 11th and what comes after? Where the Panamanian authorities begin and where he ends, is hard to say. But he certainly seemed to pass through that time without comment from these authorities. On June 27th guide F. says: "It is very fortunate that that backpack has been found." "Until then, the wildest stories were doing the rounds." This coming from the man who was saying to reporters that empty houses on the suburbs of Boquete needed searched. He is aware of the various theories and suggestions that the two were perhaps kidnapped and taken to neighboring Costa Rica for organ harvesting. Or that they may have run into drug runners on the trail. That they were perhaps being held somewhere in or around Boquete. But thankfully the fortuitous discovery of the backpack and its contents showed the truth... but was it the 'truth' he wanted to become known? That there was some accident, and that the night photographs were the key evidence to prove that was what happened?

And yet, those images could have been shot anywhere after the disappearance and anywhere into early June. Imagine a scenario where he has come into possession of the camera and backpack. He reviews the content on his computer. the photographs stop at or after the second stream. This in itself is enough to strongly suggest the two carried on and got lost, but in order to create a story that convincingly shows the two 'definitely' got lost out there, some additional photography will be needed... There were two whole months, potentially eight weeks, in which to consider events, plan, and steer a series of events and discoveries that would take it all to a desired closure. I may be completely wrong to think all of this I will fully admit, but when considering the sheer weight of coincidences that bond this man to Kris and Lisanne's arrival and disappearance in Boquete, I just don't accept that this chain of events that turn around just him, and him alone, CAN be just coincidental. And above all of this is the simple truth that it is a lot easier to look at these 90 images and see *his* hand in them, rather than try and try, and try again, to rationalize them as being Lisanne and Kris sat there. Trying not to get wet... Here is one of the troubling problems I have always had with these photographs, and their suggestion that the two were 'out there' and still alive by at least the 8th. They 'show' us this is what is happening that night, but when you assess the actual pictures they don't really prove it is happening at all. The closest evidence to either Lisanne and Kris you get is the ambiguous shot of #580. There is nothing else however to suggest they are here. Not a thing. But more than that is the implied suggestion that they both died here together, maybe one went before the other, but one would then have been sat there with a dead friend and a steadily decomposing friend, and I find that difficult. The survivor sits there and fades away from exposure and exhaustion and possibly the sight of her dead friend being one of her last experiences... but apparently she also packs her bag and zips it safely shut before she goes. Let's not put aside the later hints after June that Kris must have been basically naked at this time either. But it had to be accidental as that was the only way to make sense of these 90 images, 'obviously' Kris Kremers was injured here and Lisanne is on her own with her comatose partner laid down beside her... I have always had some real problems in all of this. But the fact is if there was a murder taking place anywhere in the world then *this* is the ideal area in which to dump the evidence and use the terrain to mask it. A strange disappearance becomes an accident, never a Murder." 

Power-Pixie wrote: "Out of the 3 odd photos - Kris's hair, Branch plastic flag and SOS signal - if only the photo of Kris's hair existed along with the remaining night photos, would we have believed they were lost? Or did the photographer have to take the other two photos to make this story come to life? Guide F. is so sure that 4 or 5 days after they went missing, he said it would be too late to find them. I also love how he talks about both women casually walking to a monkey bridge and then falling off it, without either of these foreign women ever getting noticed by the many locals who traverse these paths, including himself. Has he ever mentioned it? He just seems to implicate himself without a care in the world at times or so it seems. It's his own backyard and that is what is playing to his advantage. The guy should have been interrogated from the start, along with Eileen in separate rooms. He and Eileen would have been questioned thoroughly and their phones checked for timings etcetera on the confirmed booking." 

lyndoncmp5751 replied: "We know for a fact that Lisanne was a shutter bug who liked taking pictures. What is your explanation as to why there are zero pictures for a week after #508 and the weirdly deleted #509? I can accept saving phone battery but the camera had lots of battery life left and lots of storage space. Why didn't Lisanne take any pictures, either of their camps/shelters they had stayed in or as location markers so they don't walk around in circles to the same spot? In the case of the lost/accident theory I doubt they knew they weren't going to make it back alive already by the second day, so why on earth didn't Lisanne take at the very least a few pictures of their ordeal over the next day or two to look back at and even laugh about when they got home, as a pictorial reminder of their adventure/ordeal? It makes zero sense that somebody who had been taking pictures all the time would suddenly stop taking any after #508/509, despite having a perfectly working camera. I've not heard any reasonable explanation for this. Even if drinking from the stream 'might' have eventually made them ill (I don't buy it myself) it doesn't explain the lack of pictures, messages, SMS draughts, weird emergency phone call attempts over the next few days before the "bad" water took effect. They wouldn't have been delirious already on day two." 

Power-Pixie wrote: "The night photos have always have been an out of sync batch ever since I first saw them and the day time photos. The overall pattern always comes across as someone deliberately leading me towards something. You are also seeing that they come off very precise rather than unfocused and always with some thought behind them, like people who have a predetermined idea of what to compose their photographs of. The language is very subtle, which is why I wanted to carefully study timings and differences in photo orientation, including the photos with the overexposed flash compositions. The batch of night photos on their own simply do not follow a pattern of photography we've been used to seeing since Lisanne started taking photos of their trip back in Costa Rica. Another aspect that creeps me out is the uncanny use of the flash. Lisanne rarely uses the flash during the daytime. Even in low light/overcast situations she does not use the flash. The night photos also feel incomplete to me. Not so much as in they consist of deleted photos, but like the photographer wanted to take more, but either got tired or was bored or ran out of ideas. There is also a subtle aspect of the photographer having limitations in what he could show us. He could never go beyond the close ups of Kris. I sometimes think that Lisanne wasn't even in this location and that it was only poor Kris who was eventually murdered in this location. In the pattern of photography, we saw BOTH Kris and Lisanne take photos with the camera. How come we never see Kris's point of view in any of these night photos." 

I wrote: "It is tempting to rationalize why the photographer suddenly started shooting photos on the 8th night. What was different that night? Why 100 photos that night, but none made during any of the previous 7 nights? Of course there is the possibility that we are being fooled with these times and dates of the night photos and they were in fact taken on the 2nd night. But then the NFI were also fooled. We have no idea though just how thorough and professional (or interested) they really were.
*Yes it rained, but according to (weather) reports it also rained for at least an hour during the night of April 2nd. Why no night photos aimed at the sky then?
*Onset of hysteria and hallucination - We don't see any evidence for this or signs of this in the manner in which the photos were taken. There are no photos that show unsteadiness or wild movement of the hand of the photographer, for instance. This set of photographs in fact feels too disciplined, with an ever repeating compositional idea of how to capture that night's sky and the V-shaped tree. Besides; wouldn't panic and hysteria have been worse during the very first nights out there, alone? When everything would have already felt like a bad dream?
*Did they hear or otherwise sense the presence of search troops in the area? - I have yet to read hard evidence that there were ever search troops moving around at night. Sinaproc never communicated this and there are no known written reports of this either, not even from volunteers. Helicopters are ruled out 100%
*Boredom. This is another decent attempt to explain these seemingly random photos. Lisanne (or Kris) fiddled with the camera when she couldn't sleep. What makes me frown here is that when you are awake and taking photos for more or less three hours in a row out of sheer boredom, it is kind of logical that you'd look for some variety. I would have expected at least some photos of feet, legs, the bag and of other personal belongings. Photos from all angles of their surroundings. I keep having the strong feeling however that whoever was using that camera, made a coordinated attempt to give only very little information away. Only the impression that the photographer was out in the jungle, in the dark and with Kris and Lisanne present, but without informing in any way whatsoever in what state they were, in what state their belongings were, what happened to them and where they were. Or who the photographer was. The only person who could have a motive for this, realistically, is a 3rd party. Sure: Losters say that Lisanne did not want to disturb her family and so didn't want to take selfies or record goodbye messages. But this does not match with their usual daily habits of documenting their days in their diaries and contacting their families.
-Photo #580 - What possible reason could Lisanne have had to deviate from her usual carefully chosen subjects and compositions, and go for such a mystifying photo? A photo that appears to have been made on purpose and with care for sharpness and composition (it even looks cropped). By now we can exclude the theory that Kris fell and had an accident and Lisanne took one single photo to check for a wound. There is no wound visible. But even if there was: would you only take only one picture then? And 99 other photos of rocks and the dark sky?
-What if a 3rd party was pretending to be K+L? The main objections to this scenario are that you'd need a perp who is both patient, thoughtful, able to plan 3 steps ahead, willing to invest all that time into the staging and willing to miss an entire night's sleep. As some people continue to ask: wouldn't it have been sufficient for a criminal to just get rid of that camera altogether? I personally believe that that camera had to be found, just like the backpack had to be found to give closure to the families. To stop the ongoing searches and to manipulate the story into an Accident conclusion. As Dave and Power-Pixie also wrote above, these night photos seem staged and coordinated, pushing a visual narrative of Lisanne photographing their last location in the jungle, with Kris identified through he red hair. Showing us not much else about themselves or their location, but hammering down the notion that they were leaving behind "SOS" markers and were totally lost. Nevertheless this remains one of the weaker arguments of the Crime believers. Many folks like to think of criminals as very lazy, casual types who won't make additional effort when they can just throw away the camera." 

Update November 3rd 2022

You can listen to a new extensive podcast series here or here. The makers, journalists Mariana Atencio and Jeremy Kryt, a well known name in this investigation and author for the Daily Beast, went to Boquete to investigate there. They spoke to locals and gathered more information. In an interview, Mariana explained: "This story called me. There were elements about what supposedly happened to the women that didn’t add up. Kryt pointed to new evidence suggesting foul play: Kris and Lisanne may have been intercepted and assaulted on the hike". Their reporting involved nearly a month in the field – riding horses and reaching key areas only by helicopter – and camping where the women likely went missing. So far I find it a professionally made and enthralling podcast. Below I will write out some interesting details from the first two available episodes. If you are new to this case, I advise you to listen to the podcast in its entirety for full context. And I would like to advise
everybody else to do the same, as it is a great listen.  

[Ep 1.] THE PIANISTA 
The journalists hiked the Pianista themselves and they did so on April 1st 2022. Great to have a description of the trail and the circumstances at that exact same time of year. On the terrible anniversary also of this disappearance. Some of the journalists findings: It is still not obvious on the Mirador now, in 2022, that you reached the end of the trail and have to turn around and go back down. They lose cell reception minutes into their descent down the other side of the mountain, beyond the Mirador. Twenty minutes into that descent they try to call 911, but they cannot make a connection. The call is not going through. This trail beyond the Mirador is very rocky and is muddy when Kryt and Atencio are there. The gully has rock walls, and the makers confirm that you really only can go forward or backwards. No way out when you are in danger. 'Running, you would fall and hurt yourself'. A local man on the trail tells them that it is getting dark and that the trail is too dangerous to descend at night, and that he will take shelter in one of the scattered sheds in the area until sunlight. This highlights the possibility that if Kris and Lisanne also realised by 17:00 that they wouldn't make it back to Boquete before nightfall and were not in the position to make a successful phone call for help, they could have tried to find shelter up the mountain. Jeremy Kryt and Mariana Atencio went to Boquete and interviewed Martina as well. To them she stated that she did see Kris and Lisanne going up the trail, and that she never thought they would disappear after that. When asked what she believes has happened to them, she answered that 'there was definitely someone who killed them'. She doesn't know who, but that it definitely was not due to the river that they died. And that it is all government lies, to say they drowned in the river. She says that right after the girls got lost, a man - a local guide, F. - essentially told her to shut up about this case and not talk to anyone about the fact that she had seen the Dutch girls. You can hear about this in episode 1 of 7 here. Jeremy Kryt and Mariana Atencio state that Martina is afraid of the guide and that he threatened her with jail time 'for telling the truth'. She is visibly shaking and asks the two journalists to protect her. 

Please continue reading in the separate
blog post I made for the podcast HERE.
Or listen to my summary videos:

        

And HERE you can find
the SPANISH version:

Update October 10th 2022

I saw Romain's latest video, with drone footage of one of the streams behind the Mirador:

Interesting for sure, and I was surprised just how many small and bigger waterfalls there are along this stream, away from the trail. There may be many more in the area, at places that are hard to find and even harder to hear anyone from. The significance of a waterfall in theories of what could have happened to Kris Kremers and Lisanne Froon, is the amount of noise it produces. It would make it harder for them to be heard. And there is the fact that search dogs cannot follow a scent through water as easily. Going by Romain's footage, these crossing streams run for long long stretches, so that means a lot of water to get rid of scents and traces. I made a short summary of his footage, to have a bit of a fast forward overview of this stream. As I understand it, it is the stream which Kris and Lisanne pictured in photos #507 and #508. 

I initially was instantly against the notion that Kris and Lisanne would willingly wade through that stream, away from the trail. Why would they do that? Why at that time of day? Why get all wet alongside a difficult to follow stream? But given all the waterfalls that follow, I am no longer entirely 100% sure about this tbh. Because the parents said in interviews that it were the waterfalls that were highest on their to see list. Kris' mother Roelie also said in a Dutch interview about the plans of Kris and Lisanne (as far as the parents were aware): “They had made a plan for that week. They were also going for that volcano…but they were going to do that later on Saturday. They were also going to see the waterfalls in that area later, but they had all planned that.” And Calista Hart wrote this about the girls' disappearance in her blog: "In April my Spanish teacher told me that two young women had gone missing from the sister school in Boquete, Panama. They had left all of their belongings, and not told anyone where they were going that day.  The last anyone saw of them they were talking to two strange men, making plans to see the waterfall." And someone else wrote about hidden waterfalls, for which one first had to follow the Pianista trail and then: "finding the waterfall required us to get off the trail and take another cow path that leads into the cloud forest. We could not have found it on our own." Although this does not sound like the same route nor the same waterfall as the one which could be reached by wading through this stream... But who knows, someone may have tipped them off about this location. It is possible that they believed a short wade through that shallow stream would bring them to a magical hidden waterfall. They may have felt adventurous and in for a silly thing like that on the warm day of April 1st. It seems an unlikely theory, but technically it's possible. So it may be a good addition to the list of theories as to what happened after photo 508 was taken.

The stream is also right there; right there at the time they most likely encountered something that changed everything. Hans Kremers said explicitly: had they continued on the path, the next stream with its small waterfall would have warranted a photo from Lisanne. There was none. And neither of the meadow, of which Romain mentioned that at some point you can see the ocean. So in light of this, a deviation from the path entirely after taking photo 508 is possible, timeline wise. Although you then wonder: why not take a photo of the stream and whatever was luring them there? Fairly soon a small waterfall follows alongside this stream as well, so why not picture that instead? And if something happened down that stream, a fall or whatever, why wouldn't the phone logs show much more clear attempts to consistently try to call relatives or people like Miriam or Ingrid for help? Instead of showing that within 60 minutes they switched off their phones overnight? I can make up explanations for this as well, devil's advocate style, but it doesn't make it any more logical when you take a few steps back and analyse this rationally. And why would the first emergency call then take nearly 3 hours after photo #508 was taken? The pivotal question of what was depicted on missing photo 509 remains as pressing now as it ever was: I doubt it was an innocent photo of the stream or a waterfall (as this would have supported the lost scenario).

I am not at all convinced that this stream theory is correct, because nothing was found there that indicated such a thing; no litter, no personal belongings, no pieces of clothing, nothing. We can see in this drone footage just how winding and narrow and rock-littered these streams are. How is the backpack supposed to have survived multiple elevated drops and so many twists and turns, navigating those numerous rocks without getting stuck along the way? Ending up so far up north near Alto Romero, to where we now know for a fact there is no clear and straight water passage leading to? Without any detectible obvious damage to its contents like the sunglasses and the camera? Due to an assumed flash flood that at the same time obliterated the two bodies of Kris and Lisanne, supposedly... Flooding them and the backpack past all those rocks and twists and turns which we can see in this drone footage, without getting stuck somewhere? It is completely illogical. If the backpack was somewhere along here for April and May 2014, there is no way that it could be flushed down this water channel, into the main river channel, and arrive at Alto Romero all intact. That is just unbelievable. I think some people just want it to make sense, because it fits with their lost theory. Sinaproc also combed through this area for months, as did dog units and helicopters, and you do hear the sound of a helicopter from afar. They found no trace of Kris and Lisanne in this area. Despite declaring to have searched nearly 900km of trail and the entire region in detail, including the riverbeds.

And how complicated must these theoretical instructions have been really, if they were to both make it to the Mirador together without taking wrong turns, and then also getting this stream junction correct? Hikers have documented over time how they got mistaken on the Pianista trail and took wrong turns. But Kris and Lisanne made it up there in record time. Without a guide, and fresh in Boquete. We still don't know if any local(s) gave them instructions on how to go up there. And despite the footage seemingly showing how treacherous it is to follow this stream on foot, through the water (even on April 1st of 2014 probably, with its historically low water levels from the drought at the time), it also seems highly unlikely that along this stream both would have had a fatal accident or fall. One, perhaps (but still unlikely); but believing both could have, would comes down to an argumentation competition. Just because someone can imagine it does not make it plausible. Especially since this stream does not seem to lead to Alto Romero nor to the monkey bridges. A water channel like this is also a dead-end for whomever uses it as an exit route; not an escape route. And as Romain stated: he couldn't get any further on foot as soon as he hit the first waterfall in this Stream 1. And so it is hard to make a convincing case that Kris and Lisanne would have had any interest in making such a turn when they reached this stream. Especially an unprovoked one. Although one consequence of the Lost Theory is always that the two of them hád to have done something very unexpected and unwise in this desolate area with a clear to follow trail, in order to get off the safety of the trail and get themselves 'lost'. So yeh.... Meh. But curious what next videos of the other streams may reveal. Stream 2 is bound to have some waterfalls as well. 

But it is great to have this footage and to slowly but surely get a more detailed picture of this entire hinterland of the Pianista trail. It seems that guide F's statement that 'hikers have no choice but to follow the trail' is not quite correct after all. There are side trails, cow's trails and water (stream)ways that cross the main trail and allow for exits. Although I completely understand that Hans and Roelie did not see it that way during their one and only hike up there, as they were looking for a logical way to get lost or fall down the main trail. A meandering water stream didn't even seem a plausible exit to them, and who can blame them. It IS no logical exit. I am also surprised that that tiny looking stream in fact winds down to all these waterfalls/elevations. Good to know. I also liked the view at minute 02:25. It shows that there wás some elevation visible. I always wondered if they couldn't have just seen where the mountain range with the Mirador was (if 'lost'). Looks like there is such clearly visible variation indeed in the landscape.

We also now have a different view of the way the trail winds up to the stream crossing of photo #508. I read on FOk forum that RapaNui sees a trail at the end of the footage, alongside the stream. I think Rapa means at minute 33:50: 

​

I noticed that Romain paid quite a bit of attention to certain waterfalls. I suspect because he wanted to zoom in on the rocks there and would have wondered if those could have been the night photo location. Personally I saw no match for that location alongside this stream. Neither from Romain's ground view footage. Going by the very specific rock shapes, colours and foliage depicted in the night photos, which we grew so used to. But we mostly see the footage from above so it may look different from a frog's perspective. I didn't see a match though. 

And just because a broken pelvic bone of Kris was found, it is not said that she fell down a waterfall. There are so many ways in which a pelvic bone can break. So unfortunately, eight years after the tragedy, we are still no closer to truly discovering what happened to Kris Kremers and Lisanne Froon.. Personally I still try to keep several options open, including the one in which these girls were kidnapped and were hidden in some cave of sorts near a waterfall. Remember that screams were heard and the noise of someone falling into a ravine. Could this have been Lisanne? The screams and thud were heard on the Quetzal trail, more towards Cerro Punta, more north-west of Boquete. That is also roughly in the direction of where the plastic Romero bag with the fuchsia insole and food wrappers was found. The Pandura cave area where that man found the bag of rubbish. But there is no hard evidence for any of this. Great work though from all the people involved in this case, going out there in Boquete to document the wild north of it and otherwise doing honest investigation work There are also new articles published by Imperfect Plan. You can read them HERE and HERE. I will try to summarize some thoughts on those articles as well, when I have some more free time to do so, hopefully soon. But in any case you can check them out for yourself. - Scarlet

Guide F. gives an interview

July 26, 2022 - A very sad article today in a Dutch newspaper. Guide F. told interviewers that he encounters threats as a result of this case. I will translate the important parts of the article below:

"Since the disappearance of Kris and Lisanne, 'their' guide Feliciano has been threatened: 'I only wanted to help'. "Feliciano Gonzalez was once a regular guide in the Panamanian town of Boquete. But since the Dutch friends Kris and Lisanne disappeared, he has to deal with suspicions and threats. After eight years he hits back: 'What is said is false'. - The search team was about to go home when in 2014, in Panama, there was something to see, or rather smell, on the banks of the Snake River near the town of Boquete. There was a hiking boot, with the remains of what must have been a foot in it. Some bones. Remains of the missing friends Kris (21) and Lisanne (22) from Amersfoort had been found. It was a terrible moment in the life of guide Feliciano Gonzalez. And after this it would never be the same. But Feliciano didn't know yet what was waiting for him, after Kris and Lisanne found their ends in Panama. He was an ordinary guide when the young women settled in Boquete, the town where Feliciano leads tourists who want to do so through the jungle. Kris and Lisanne also booked a tour to a nearby volcano, through the language school where they took Spanish lessons. On April 2, they would meet Feliciano. But instead of the young women, a worried employee from the language school was waiting for Feliciano that day. [Scarlet: I thought we were recently told that the three of them had actually booked that tour for themselves? So why use the word 'instead'?] And so it was the guide, who was one of the first to sound the alarm and who went searching for the Dutch girls, who had disappeared without a trace.

In the Netherlands people soon fell under the spell of the disappearance. In Panama as well. The most horrible rumors started to spread about what could have happened to the women. Were they kidnapped? Killed? Were they trapped in the jungle? Foreigners who had settled in Boquete meddled in the matter and sometimes fueled the rumours. Every detail was discussed and looked at on internet forums. The Panamanian authorities investigated, but many - including Feliciano - thought it was going too slowly. The Netherlands was not indifferent: search dogs were sent to Panama. The families of Kris and Lisanne traveled to Panama. Feliciano helped where he could. Soon after the disappearance, some also began to mention his name, as a person who might have something to do with the disappearance. But it was álso discovered that on the day of their disappearance, the girls had left together, unaccompanied, for a walk through the jungle. They went up the Pianista trail, where birds accompany hikers, a steep climb up. Whoever finally reaches the top of the mountain at Boquete has to turn around and go back the same way. Kris and Lisanne did not travel that road.

That Feliciano eventually found the girls' remains fueled the rumors of his involvement: Feliciano probably knew where to look. Experts concluding that a fatal accident must have surely taken place somewhere on Kris and Lisanne's last walk, did not stop obscure internet forums from speculating. Leaked information, such as the latest photos taken by Kris and Lisanne, were meticulously reviewed and discussed. Official conclusions were questioned. [Scarlet: it is a shame that this one-sided article does not highlight whý there was still so much reason to question official conclusions without a shred of evidence, or even logic behind them]. Conspiracy theories took shape. And also the many, many allegations against Feliciano. "I never met the girls, but they said I was the last to see them." [Uhmmm.. Because you yourself said so in an interview with this exact same newspaper and journalist on May 13, 2014, F... This is poor journalism again. QUOTE: 'I still remember the last time I saw the girls. One was in a hammock, the other was standing by a map of the Spanish school, looking where they could go. Hello, I called out to them. It was just before they disappeared.'**] And, some were certain: he killed them.

The fact [Scarlet: Fact? Can we see the evidence of this?] that Feliciano was in hospital on the day of Kris and Lisanne's disappearance did not stop the rumors about him. It didn't matter that he had been called in because there were suspicions that something might be found along the snake river. Just like it did not matter that Feliciano is simply part of a small group that can get around in the most inhospitable places in the Boquete area. “I just wanted to help. But since the disappearance, I have been threatened via social media. Sometimes people book a tour, but send them a message just before it takes place. "I know what you've done, tell me where the girls are." Recently there was a gringo, a westerner, in the village. He wanted to speak to me. He would surely find out the truth.” Feliciano wisely stayed away from the cafe where the man showed up. “I have become very careful. I also no longer read Whatsapp messages from foreign numbers.” But recently Feliciano's father turned 100 years old. A snapshot of the family celebration was posted on Facebook. And there was yet another response: "The serial killer, the rapist, the man who buries people alive, Feliciano." They don't stop. Feliciano has to face that he cannot shake off what happened in 2014. ,,My sister, who works in a hotel, heard after the disappearance that they no longer wanted to work with me there. That has remained the case. Other hotels no longer do business with me.” [Scarlet: the journalist fails to state here that Jeremy Kryt already heard the same thing back in 2016 from locals; that many did not want their tourists to book guide F. because of his long(er) standing bad reputation with foreign female tourists. So is it true or really even fair, to dump the responsibility for this now entirely on internet sleuths and misbehaving trolls online?] I am called by first and last name, even my son is. He always had such a spotless reputation, Feliciano says wistfully. “I've always enjoyed my job. Nothing bad was ever said about me [Scarlet: this is not true], I had no problems. It makes me so sad that this isn't the case anymore. Sad and angry. Especially because my family is also involved. And I can't help it at all. By repeating all the falsehoods, the door is left open to doubts. And it feeds those sick people who prefer to take the law into their own hands.” - Since there are plans to make a (Dutch) documentary about this case, guide F. has hired a lawyer. Because he wants to prevent his life from further being ruined. 

Comment

Firstly, it is wrong and horrible to threaten someone who is always innocent until proven otherwise. Stop that and leave this man alone in his life and on his socials. But critical questions should always be allowed to be asked out loud. And frustrations should in my opinion be much more felt towards the people who did the investigation (people out of whom the main player uses the media to cast herself as the victim in all this). I still believe that this guide is the victim most of all of Pittí and the rather underwhelming investigation. He features in many aspects of this case, but was not properly investigated and thus, not properly given the justice he may deserve. This is the primary reason why he still features in theories online. We just don't know because he wasn't investigated in a normal manner. **Even regarding his (ever changing) claim that he last saw Kris and Lisanne, so many questions arise that were never answered: wouldn't the three of them have discussed why no one was in the office? Wouldn't Felicano be demonstrating his Dutch language skills with them? And wouldn't they have realised they were talking with the actual person they had planned going to Baru with on Saturday? Why was he there anyway? The Spanish School is located in an area Feliciano would have to go well out of his way to visit. Was it a deliberate visit and did he really only wave at them and say Hola? Did Eileen already know him, despite only having been in Boquete for a few days herself? We don't know...  

As David M. stated: "If this was any western police investigation, Feliciano would have been an immediate figure of interest as his story in those first days is questionable, and his interest in all aspects of the disappearance very odd indeed - why would two young clients who never showed up concern him so much? Even when the authorities had the matter in hand and a search was launching? Eileen meanwhile runs off after the first few days. Why? Did the police not pursue this key witness?"  -  F. most likely has nothing to do with their disappearance directly, but how do we know when nobody asked for his phone records, or his google search history info? Nobody interviewed him as a potential suspect, nobody checked his properties despite the backpack being found near one of them; nobody forensically verified his whereabouts. Criminal and political agencies wére inadequate here. Saying that someone should ideally get to the bottom of this case is what mostly anyone wants. Done by the officials. But they won't. The Dutch Prosecution have declared that they won't reopen the case and cannot do so either, since 'Panama is leading'. It has to be Panama who reopens and they have zero interest in doing so. The status quo is what will remain the status quo here, and we're stuck with a flawed investigation from 2014 and theories going rife. But in order to bring more clarity, professional(!) and neutral(!) specialists instead of opportunistic money-makers should ideally one day get to the bottom of this. 

One of my favourite case analysts, David M. also made also a very good, more general observation in this respect: "I also don't agree or feel comfortable with the direct abuse he has apparently been receiving. And it seems clear by this article that the attention he has been receiving is increasing, which is very interesting as it coincides with the way this disappearance story has evolved and mutated over recent years. And it does actually concern this piece on F. Do note that the abuse and attention he is apparently receiving isn't just coming from an international direction. And the ambivalence from his countrymen is not entirely a result of the strange disappearance of Lisanne and Kris. What he refuses to acknowledge (in public) is that the attention he receives isn't out of nowhere. It comes instead because of his own part in the story of the disappearance. His choices back in 2014. And the way this story has evolved since that year, from being just another holiday statistic, to becoming one of the great disappearance mysteries of the time, do have him as a key part of its genesis. There were the June findings, and how incredibly convenient their location and distance to F. was. The ways he steered the search to the Cable Bridge and declared that this was as far as it goes, for no reason other than.... what? What reason? But nobody ever challenged him. No one. The authorities seem to have embraced his opinion as being a fact, and so an accidental death was recorded and life in Boquete went back to normal and the world moved on. 

I came by this odd disappearance story off the back of a channel by Rusty West. As little as three to four years ago there was not a lot online about the story of Lisanne and Kris, and all I could find was 'Mostly Mystery' and a Reddit page. The discussion four years ago however was based on that leaf, and it being a hazy image of one of the two friends at the bottom of a cliff! That was where the discussion was at back then. No one could argue the accident verdict really, as evidence at that time was slim - some of the night photo's were available to see, but most were kept private. The Phone logs were reported on, but it is only in the last two years a full transcript has been made available. Then Jeremy Kryt did the first of his articles for The Daily Beast... and it was as if the mist had cleared and here was the explanation. Although even Jeremy Kryt initially cemented in his first article for The Daily Beast what F. and the media had reported at the time, that it was an accident at the Cable bridge, that the two had walked too far along the trail and become disorientated and lost, and he also followed the logic set out by F. and the night photo's that the two friends must have fallen from the cable bridge and trapped below it somewhere unable to move. And who were WE to question any of this. Kryt had seen all of the photographs, he had read the police reports, and so followed the received wisdom and cemented what had been set out in 2014. It was an accident. And that was very much the last word, for a while.... [Until his next articles, that was]. 

It is hard today to pause, and remember that it is only in the last two years or so that we have had the full night-time photo's leaked [and the diaries, and the swimming photo, all through Juan], had access to the Police files that began to be leaked, and it is directly because of this rapid release of new information and the photography taken on the Canon Camera, that interest online (probably) exploded. Back then there was a disappearance, then remains were found, and an accident verdict... and while we now see that this closure was also due to F's skilled media patter, we have to also acknowledge that he was almost certainly helped by the Panamanian authorities, who also wanted a closure on this mystery, and to put to rest theories on a crime being committed and Panama being seen as a dangerous place to visit. When I reflect on the way this disappearance was officially declared an accident, two young tourists getting lost out in the wilds, and this being taken by authorities as the official version of events, and then, as the next few years pass by, a semi-obscure story like this refuses to fade away and instead gradually takes on a life of its own... independent investigators start to take a closer look and information begins to be uncovered and released.... Something about this whole story is just not right. People outside of the Panama bubble began to look at the disappearance closely. Noting the peculiarities in the official verdict. And what had seemed a settled matter began to come to rude life again. And you can appreciate why it is that people like F. and Betzaida Pitti are becoming unsettled. We know that Pitti has to know the truth about that missing file on the Camera, that is beyond any doubt. And we know F. is a figure just as key as it was he who was conveniently there at every major turn of the disappearance, indeed he created and managed the whole search in June and declared it an accident, telling us where it happened, how it happened, and why it happened! Incredibly there was not one doubt in his mind. Not one.

I do not know his full role in the disappearance, or the finds in June, and so I don't agree with death threats and the like. And yet clearly he is pushing back here because the way the story has revived in recent years, and gained a growing amount of global interest, is affecting not just his life, but his day to day business. Kris and Lisanne died in early 2014, but eight years later and they won't stay gone. Even in the above interview he continues to try and edit reality, declaring he never saw the two. Which means at best that he is admitting he was telling lies back in April 2014 on greeting the two outside the Spanish School.... but it is this self-promotional streak, this need to be seen and heard, that has seen him arrive where he is right now - a suspicious and manipulative figure who shaped the reception and perception of the way the two tourists disappeared in 2014, was never questioned on his reasons for that declaration, and due to all of this ringleading and management at the time he now stands out as, what the police call, 'A person of Great Interest'. It isn't us who made F. a suspect, it was and is F. himself. And the people who originally helped put a lid on the disappearance and any talk of a crime have moved on." 

I replied: Well said. It is a shame that all those layers, which explain so much more aptly why he has become an unofficial person of interest in the eyes of many, are absent from this news article. Just like we hear no criticism (again) on the Panamanian investigators, who did not do their job properly. I also think that Jeremy Kryts articles were the kickstart of renewed interest and scrutiny of this case and its baffling details. I really like his articles on this case tbh, and especially in light of how absolutely minimal the information in the public eye was at that point around 2016. He kick-started the resistance in a way. Especially Kryt's interest in the coroner's take and Adelita Coriats take were truly an eye-opener. Nothing beats actual 'Boots on the Ground' when it comes to researching these type of cold cases. I wonder now if he managed to get so much information out of there, because people involved (like the criminologist and the coroner for instance) were eager to talk to someone like him, to overturn the ridiculous official narrative that had been enforced on everyone. He also gave true ammunition for countless people on online forums to debate other theories.

Regarding Kryts Daily Beast series: the fascinating thing to me is the evolution shown in his articles. No doubt he went to Panama to write a single story. I am not sure what drew him there, but understand that he reports more often about crime in Latin America for the Daily Beast. This may have felt like a 'backyard crime' to him, something he would be able to poke into a bit, with his connections in that part of the world? In any case, his first article was interesting due to the few new case details he published, but his conclusion that supported the conclusion of the investigators, was unsurprising. But then he seems to have been contacted by other people linked to this case. Suddenly more articles were being published and it is still one of the more fascinating series of investigational journalism to me, to see how he started to shift his beliefs and suspicions. As I took it, based on the new info he was given by for instance the coroner who did the autopsy on the girls' remains. And the anonymous criminologist. And some other people, who all gave him inside information that radically changed his suspicions. In every new article he sounded more and more convinced that we're dealing with a crime here, as he had access to the case files and to key players very early on. That he wrote about a headwound that is supposedly visible in photo 580, ok.. That doesn't seem correct nowadays. But only 2 years after their deaths, he was in Panama, boots on the ground, interviewing people, going out on that Pianista trail and beyond, checking out F's reputation in town, making it known that he was there and open for information. And at the time, it seems to have worked. Nowadays, I bet the locals are on their guard and not happy at all with the renewed worldwide interest in this case. 

Power-Pixie said: "There seemed to be little back then to really go off for anyone examining the disappearance, and with the official verdict from Panama being an accident you could argue that they had up till that time suppressed any of the evidence and information that might attract any further questions. But as time passes, so too do the people who were involved move on, new people take their place, and the active suppression of that evidence and information fades and weakens. And the drip drip on new information and insider records these last four years, inspired by Jeremy Kryt's work, is gradually revealing that there is a good deal that is odd and strange about it all. That we are right to be suspicious, and curious. The case has gone from being a cold one, to taking on a life and momentum of its own. And yes, this has to be unsettling for those in Boquete who had involvement with the two Dutch friends. As for guide F, you have to ask why it is he would be so concerned at the disappearance of two strangers. He had no real reason to think anything was amiss after all. Even after the Police and SINAPROC take over he inserts himself into the investigation, which continues to be odd, after all he is a guide and has a living to make, other clients surely beckon in the days and weeks following."  

Me: Yes the long list of ways in which he mingled with the investigation, changed details of his story, invaded private space of two young women who he now says he never met before? It will probably be explained away as cultural hospitality or something. He also tried to stop the searches (monkey bridges were suddenly death traps). Of course he is innocent until proven otherwise. But when nothing is investigated, nothing ever gets answered either

Power-Pixie confirms NFI's conclusions about the deleted file #509

July 7th 2022.
Power-Pixie bought the same mobile phones which Kris and Lisanne possessed in 2014, as well as the same Canon camera Lisanne used; the digital Canon Powershot SX270HS. Power-Pixie has been doing all sorts of experiments with it. I will share here PP's findings as yet with regards to the camera data extraction process.

"So I ran the most basic test which we have probably read, watched or heard about -- my own version of Occam's Razor in application if you will, with zero assumptions. Using the same model camera and SD card, I did the following:

• Shot a series of random photos
• Photos 107, 108, 109, 110 and 111 were created
• Using the camera's delete function, I deleted Photo 108
• I then took photos 112 and 113
• I then checked to see if Photo 108 was still missing/deleted. It was.
• Using the camera's delete function, I deleted Photos 109, 110, 111, 112 and 113
• Then took a couple more photos, 114 and 115
• So I was left with 107, 114 and 115
• I used Disk Drill to verify and then find the Thumbnail associated with all the photos and it found photo 108's thumbnail as well. Please see screenshot below
  

While this is not anything groundbreaking, what I demonstrated is that Lisanne and/or Kris were quite capable of deleting photo 509, using the same method I used above. However it would have just as easily been detected by the use of amateur methods, just as I did on my laptop and original SD card from the comforts of my sofa. Panama's digital forensics team and NFI would have both done this in their sleep and more, given the type of resources they had. In addition we also know to some degree the following:

• SD card was not damaged or corrupted
• Camera was not damaged at the time the photo(s) were taken
• There were no software bugs that mysteriously deleted photos or renumbered them or formatted the SD card
  
• The camera - like the phones - were found intact and workable
• And there was no second SD card 😂 (sorry had to throw that one in here)

If any of the above showed up, it would have been reported by the authorities and in the media right away and the parents would have been informed about it too, and then the show would begin on recovering the photo and telling the world what was on it". [Scarlet: agreed. Even people who have the case files in their possession have admitted to this. Had there actually been another SD card, or any evidence of text message writing or sending attempts, then the Kremers family would not have been gaslighting us in the media, complaining there was nothing found. The NFI and head of police would not have testified on camera and in a national TV show then that there was only one SD card and no text messages found. We heard nothing about it even from the best secret sources, who leaked other info that turned out to be correct, and neither from the Panamanian newspaper who published all the times and dates on which the phones were used]. "If photo 509 was of nothing of note, then shrug and move on. Why the secrecy even if it contained a bloodied body or something sensitive of that nature? If photo 509 was something that gave the slightest indication of Kris and Lisanne having been elsewhere beyond River 1, it would have only given Pitti ammo to close the case, using more informed opinion and theory. Again Occam's Razor right? However if it showed a hint of foul play, then did that change the perception of whether this file needed to be omitted by the Panama authorities? And if there were more unexplained deleted photos when they had received the backpack, then it would still be the same approach from Panama.
To find Photo 509 missing entirely on the camera's SD card and not recovered with no explanation given by either team as to why and what happened, steers me in the direction that a lot more was found and done to the SD card by someone earlier on, when K&L disappeared or when the backpack was handed over to the authorities. There was plenty of time for an amateur or professional to do this because:

• Who would risk being found out in such an easy way besides Kris and Lisanne?
• How did the NFI know a photo was missing besides the bleeding obvious of a missing number in the sequence? 
• Did they check/test the actual SD card? 
• What methods did they use to test? Should have been straightforward right?
• And is any of this in the case files?

[Scarlet: people with background info seem to state over and over again, that the investigation was a royal shitshow in many ways, and that barely anything was professionally handled or done by the book. So this may have been no exception]. Anything beyond this simple test and explanation is not acceptable to me, because it is inferring anyone other than Kris or Lisanne deleted the photo 509. That is what I had started with when I looked at the case and tested, using my digital camera in the same way as I did with the actual model camera. Ultimately, data on the SD card is logical and still based on a structured process of reads/writes/access. Any deviation is recorded and noted as an anomaly, error, or corruption both physical and logical. All this should be easily accessible to understand in those case files, even if Pitti accidentally deleted the file. Just depends on what that "accidental" process of deletion was... I still don't think you can accidentally delete the one photo that separates the day and night events without it being recovered. It has to be a more involved process, to completely eradicate it in order for the NFI to not be able to reconstruct it at all. Anyways, the camera in this sense did not lie, I think only those who used it did so, and it wasn't poor Lisanne or Kris. 

For all we know it was an accident turned murderous affair, to hide the mistake made. They should have just gotten rid of everything, but the $30,000 is a lot of money to pass up back in 2014. It might have been worth the effort. I do think Feliciano retrieved camera and phone cables from K&L's room, as he was so adamant they were lost and had to get into the room to "see" for himself, when he had no business being in there at all. And certain people were probably more than capable of watching a YouTube video back in 2014 and knowing how to navigate their way around these devices in order to try to erase what they thought would incriminate them or draw suspicion and questions towards them. Accessing a locked phone is easy given the year K&L went missing. Their phones were also popular enough to have information in terms of blog articles and videos made that year and prior to. Both phones were already in existence prior to 2014. But I was able to prove to you with just using a laptop and a disk utility tool anyone can download off the internet for free, that if I looked for a deleted file, that I would expect to see a thumbnail associated with it when I try to deep dive using the amateur utility. Yet none of these detectives seemed to try anything, nor did they ask NFI over the phone or video conference on how to walk them through it to do a quick check. Amazing..."

Dave replied: "My understanding is that the card was opened on a computer, the April 1st and 8th photographs were accessed and many were modified. And while the Dutch did recover some deleted thumbnails, I think they were from before April's shooting. I might be wrong on that however. Since Imperfectplan did their deep-dive into the Camera card content, the reveals that Lisanne had deleted at least one video on the 30/31st March has intrigued me. There is no answer to any of these questions. My feeling is that given the Camera would have passed through Feliciano's (or someone else's) hands in Alto Romero, he would almost certainly have taken the SD Card and wanted to see what was on it - that's just simple human nature. This of course is assuming Feliciano didn't in fact have the card and phones before this point, but either way he (or someone else) could have accessed that card with no problem at all, and it could be there that the deletion of #509 took place. Betzaida Pitti (and others in the Police?) then come along and they too want to see what the card holds, making their own (reckless) adjustments on the photographs, and so what you have left is an undetectable chain of editing having taken place. One where Pitti and others know they were guilty of editing, but no one wants to own up when the Dutch have revealed it goes beyond some brightness and contrast corrections they did... and there is an actual photograph missing... everyone from thereon keeps quiet and doesn't comment on the issue. Ever." [Scarlet: True. Just check Pitti's interviews, she never touches upon the missing file and the night photo manipulations/EXIF data changes].

"I have been nursing the theory that file #509 wasn't so much deleted, as it was either taken and pasted elsewhere in the sequence, or alternately there is no deleted photograph, just the empty space where a lot of editing and chopping took place and this was a side effect of that meddling. The snag is that all the images are timed, we can judge their authenticity by looking at the timing and know that it had to have been taken at that time, and in that place, as that is the reality of those places and the time needed to reach them. However, Someone like Feliciano would have little problem in this regard as he knows the rough timings, and could pull together a convincing timeline if he had to amend the flow of the photography to create an alternate preferred scenario. It was very considerate of Lisanne to pack everything away and zip her bag shut before she passed away. Very environmentally minded to the last it appears. I don't have any suggestions anymore. For example, who brightened the April 8th photographs? Was it Betzaida Pitti? Or are the brightened images a secondary set of copies that were made later? This has also made me question whether the strobing images such as 541, 590 & 591 have been artificially colour adjusted too, for that matter is the image of Kris' hair an 'adjusted' image too...? There is no evidence any of the images were cropped, ImperfectPlan have studied this and found that even the photograph of Kris' hair seems authentic and not cropped at all according to the pixel and exif data. But putting that aside, this is what Imperfectplan's article said: "Another noteworthy observation are the image names of images 505, 506 and 507, which do not have the expected image name of “IMG_0xxx.JPG” but contain an appended string “~RF1xxxxx.TMP”, e.g. “IMG_0505.JPG~RF17df08.TMP”. The comment in the forensics report is, that this is the version before rotation of the image. All three images are taken in portrait orientation and it is likely that they were rotated with image editing software and then saved. I do not know which software would do this and change the file name like that, but I suspect it was Apple software. It should be noted that those file names appeared first in Panama but it is unknown when and by who they were created. It is apparent that someone reviewed and edited those images on a computer. At a minimum those edits consisted of rotating images and deleting thumbnails that were most likely auto generated by the image viewer used. Unfortunately it was not determined when the edits and deletions were made and if it was done before or after the camera was given to the police. With the very limited information in the forensics report it is not possible to determine when all those changes were made. For this access to the disk image of the SD card would be required."

From the above you can see that the photographs in the run-up to #509 all received some attention. It is natural to suspect that #509 might have been deleted at this same time, but we can't assume that as, as I say, it is possible (very likely actually) that the camera card had had at least one other interested party inspecting it closely before the Panamanians in David accessed it. File #509 could therefore have already been gone when #507 etc were edited and saved back to the card. When you look at it like this, the question of #509 is almost a perfect crime - you can't just accuse Betzaida Pitti, as it is possible she had nothing to do with it. But she at least knows by now that someone else had inspected the card before she was handed it. I suspect that if there was a photograph or video then someone erased its existence, as they wanted #508 to be the last image of April 1st. You couldn't ask for a better image to end on if you are trying to sell a narrative that these two walked themselves off into the wilderness... it's a brilliant, but disturbing, last sighting."

Scarlet: "Great feedback, thanks. It is a fair assessment and indeed, we cannot be fully certain that Pitti knows more about the whereabouts or background story of #509. I think she has lost credibility with her statements and non-professional approach in general, but we lack hard evidence. Feliciano and others could have handled that SD card first, and then were lucky enough that the next people to get the camera in their hands were Pitti and her team. Who further ruined the evidence and did not stick to forensic investigation rules and regulations. We know that the night photos which the NFI received, showed in their exif data that they were altered on June 17th, which is when the camera and SD card were still in David with Pitti and her team. That already tells us that they messed with the photo originals and that gives me reasonable doubt about their professionality, or possibly their reliability. I myself am leaning towards a simple (permanent) deleting of #509 and possibly also replacing and renaming and adjusting some Mirador photos which would normally have showed that Kris and Lisanne returned back to the summit, after they took photos 507 and 508. You need to have some stoicism to hand such a manipulated SD card and camera to the NFI, but them again: the Dutch NFI did nothing short of expressing their surprise that they could not retrieve any part or thumbnail from file 509. But they seem to have left it at that. Nothing to worry about when you are Panamanian and complicit in making #509 disappear. I find the 'brightness/rotating' excuse was just that: a convenient excuse. I think they did way more to those photos, but decided to explain it away with the brightness/rotation argument. Who does that on photo originals though? Before the NFI could view these photo originals?"

Power-Pixie replied: "I would also like to believe that there was no 509 and that the simple act of cutting and pasting it would have overwritten the file name. However it is also not possible without leaving digital breadcrumbs or fingerprints. That's the beauty of computers, it is logical and cannot accept anything without reporting it in some fashion, in this case sector gaps or if on the computer then in the syslog files. Another investigative procedure by the Dutch detectives would have been to check the computer on which the operation using the SD card was performed. Take a look at the syslog of that computer or whatever system log based on the type of computer OS was used. There will be traces and history of such large and massive read/writes of files and directories. They'd find the evidence as it will be logged on the computer. It's way too difficult to try to erase everything on the computer without risking deleting your entire disk. You have to be an expert to do this level of erasing digital fingerprints. But it's just something I would have checked out of tech habit. [..] I think it were Pitti and the forensics team most likely. The perps already know where Kris and Lisanne are/were, so I don't think they would be performing this type of manipulation, especially if one of them had gone and taken these photos when there was a break in the searches due to the storm [bad weather break on the 8th].

And why would they need to rotate these three photos? They are in vertical/portrait mode to begin with. When I pop the SD card into my laptop card reader, it brings up the landscape and portrait photo thumbnails, in other words whatever was recorded on the SD card was listed as is. Perhaps their software couldn't interpret portrait photos, but it is an Apple software that was used. I don't know of any Apple software I've used that wouldn't present portrait photos as is. No kidding! That's some amount of evidence tampering going on right there. All I did was a baseline, simple amateur test. Anyone who had possession of the SD card would just connect it to the PC, open up a similar program to dig through. Even if there was corruption to the sectors this would become apparent and show the location of the sectors and like M. pointed out, it would either contain 509's corrupted footprint or not. There's no ifs or buts here. Occam's Razor at its finest.😉"

From IP's article:

"Before exploring this question further, it should first be examined what was found on the memory card when examined by Dutch forensics:

*470 images, 133 of which taken on or after 1 April 2014

*7 videos, none of which taken on or after 1 April 2014

With image recovery software 64 images and 4 videos that were deleted and partially overwritten were found.  No trace of image 509 was found or recovered, but 40 JPG images could be recovered. All recovered images were thumbnails and other formats of images “IMG_0476.JPG” through “IMG_0609.JPG”. Forensics commented that those thumbnails were likely created by the camera to preview images when they are replayed in the camera.  However, this is not correct as the camera does not create or store thumbnails and the review images are created from small versions of the image that are embedded in the EXIF information... "

Metadata
"The above is important to note, what was used to recover and that the Canon Camera does not create or store thumbnails, but the SD Card contains this EXIF information per file. Hence why I was able to use the recovery software to pull up the deleted file's thumbnail from the SD card in my laptop SD card slot and not from the camera which was not connected. Digital photos, particularly those taken with cell phone cameras, hold more information than shows up in the pretty pictures. Stored within the photos is a type of application metadata called EXIF (for Exchangeable Image File Format). EXIF holds camera settings, including the make and model of the camera or phone, time and date information, geolocation coordinates and more. Because it’s application metadata, it’s content stored within the file and moves with the file when copied or transmitted…unless someone or something makes it disappear. Whichever way you spin it, that file #509 cannot be just missing without letting go of sectors. Regarding the missing EXIF from the night photos, it is understandable if these photos are just copies. However the original photos should have the EXIF information intact. No amount of copying and pasting the photos will erase the EXIF information.

There’s a second sort of metadata called system metadata. Its context; data about the file that’s stored without the file, typically in the system’s file table that serves as a directory of electronically stored information. System metadata includes such things as a file’s name, location, modified and created dates and more. Because it’s stored outside a file, it doesn’t move with the file but must be rounded up when a file is copied or transmitted. Precious little system metadata follows a file when it’s e-mailed, often just the file’s name, size and type (although Apple systems include the file’s last modified and created dates). Anyone with a computer can remove the above EXIF information. This is normally done when you want smaller size files to upload or share via email or websites, and for privacy reasons. So it is a very deliberate effort and process and one that has to be thought through carefully before making the decision to strip this information. Here are some methods that I am familiar with and have used to strip EXIF information:

Method 1:
Use a photo editing app like PS (Photoshop) or LR (LightRoom) to save the file for "Web" and set the Metadata to None in PS, or select "Copyright info only" in LR and it will exclude certain metadata information, though LR will still show other EXIF information.

Method 2:
Download and use a program like ExifTool, which requires Command Line syntax to issue commands to overwrite the EXIF information.

Method 3:
Using Windows system, Right Click on the photo file, select Properties, click on Remove Properties and Personal Information, select Create a Copy With All Possible Properties Removed and then click OK.

Method 4:
Various apps today can also strip a photo of all or some of its EXIF information like compressor apps that reduce the image file size.

You can also remove EXIF information from batches of photograph files. However you cannot remove EXIF information by merely copying or pasting files, or dragging or dropping files/folders from SD card to computer or vice versa, unless the original file contained no EXIF information to begin with, nor can you delete it using the camera menu/lcd screen or phone screen unless you run those apps to do so. Some EXIF metadata will change when copying/pasting, dragging/dropping files/folders, depending on the system, like the modification or creation date, etc. But EXIF will not be erased or overwritten in this way. So in my experience, not having EXIF information in the original night photos is bizarre, if this is true. This then, IMO, would seem in direct violation of evidence tampering by the authorities on June 17th, unless these photos had their EXIF stripped before Pitti picked up the backpack.

That Kris and Lisanne made it back to the Mirador, becomes evident to me with photos 506, 501, 500 and 494. After reviewing as many videos of the trail and photos taken, for me 506 is before 505, while 494 comes before 493 and most likely on the way up the Mirador and back down. I know the phone logs never reported a reconnection on the Mirador, but I counter that just like when Kris and Lisanne did not have phone activity on their way up to the Mirador and then a burst of connection and activity on the Mirador, which in itself is bizarre that both phones acted this way. My thought is that their phones (as well as Hans', Romain's and Victor's) had no connection on the Serpent trail. So if they came back to the Mirador wouldn't that cause some latent delay in connection, with just a couple of photos taken before heading back down the Boquete side?"

From IP's article:

"As with all data, the first question that should be asked is if it is correct and complete. There is no doubt that the phones were the actual phones of Kris and Lisanne, which was confirmed by their IMEI numbers, and content found on them. There is also no doubt that the Dutch forensic examination was truthful and correct, which however does not exclude mistakes or omissions being made. It is unknown though who was in control of those phones between 01 April 2014 and 11 April 2014. Most likely it was Kris and Lisanne, but it cannot be ruled out with that there were 3rd parties involved to some degree. It is also not known where the phones were between 02 April and 11 June when the phones were found and who may have been in control of them. Between 12 June and 23 June, the phones were in the custody of the Panamanian police and from 23 June on they were in the custody of the Dutch police. There was ample opportunity to access the phones and make modifications to the data within. It is unknown if this happened. There is no indication in the forensic analysis that there are signs of manipulation, however it was not specifically looked for."

"Take what you will from all of these statements. You'd have thought the phone data would have been conclusive. If not conclusive then why not? I wonder why they would rotate photos when portrait photos show up on the computer in their correct orientation in the thumbnails. Besides the photos listed as being rotated were obviously portraits in their composition."

ACCESSING THE PHONE LOGS

"I attempted to access all the files from the respective apps that are on my phone. This is the only way to go about figuring out whether logs are created, to look them up and if possible to edit them. I am working without the benefit of professional forensic tools like Cellebrite which was available to law enforcement worldwide back in 2014 as well. I have to resort to roundabout ways. But if an amateur like me can access this and edit files, anyone above my level can do so.

WHAT IS POSSIBLE SO FAR

• root the phone, which means I have full access to ALL files on the phone
• copy over the files for each application on the phone
• use a basic command to read the files, in particular, files that end with the extension .db (database); each application has these files and is encrypted.
  
  

WHAT IS NOT POSSIBLE SO FAR

• I cannot cleanly read the .db files. For example I copied over mmssms.db which corresponds to SMS/text messages app that I used. When I use a single command, I can see gibberish mixed with the text messages that I recall sending to my phone and to the iphone. The gibberish needs to be decoded for a clean version.
• For this clean version I need a software to do so, since I don't have forensic software that can already do this.
• The fact that I can easily copy a file onto my desktop (similar to copying photos from an SD card) informs me that it is possible to copy, then using the forensic software to read, edit and save the revisions to each .db file. Of course I need to prove this is possible if I can get my hands on a software that can emulate the forensics software.

Pitti was able to look up this information since she had the benefit of forensic tools. I will continue to work through gaining access to all of the files on the rooted Samsung phone. But regarding the phone logs, I am not convinced they report everything. There’s 2 hours and 45 minutes to account for the lack of GPS or Cell connection bar strength checks. The phones cannot go dead, unless it is powered off. I think I have done enough videos to show you it is constantly logging due to various features and apps that are always on the lookout for some type of phone resource, be it memory, network, battery. Side note: I had recently tried putting the Samsung phone in Airplane Mode. Then turned OFF Wi-Fi, GPS, as well as turned OFF the following under Settings -> Location Services:

• User wireless networks (Location determined by Wi-Fi and/or mobile networks
• Use GPS satellites (Location accurate to street level)
• Location and Google search (Allows Google to use your location data for improved search results and other services)

Then I started up the Google Maps app, and it repositioned me to my current location. I was also able to search Boquete which it pulled up after 15-20 seconds. How is that possible?? I have no service at all! So I tested the downloaded map of Boquete and it needed to be updated. Please keep in mind that in order to access the downloaded map of Boquete, I have no choice but to start up Google Maps. When it starts up, it will automatically try to reposition me to my current location. It may not always be 100% accurate, but it IS attempting and locating. Hence why I’m very skeptical of the phone logs. They are not reporting accurately as I expect when I check my version of their phone."

Regarding the missing signal bar strength for 2 hours and 45 minutes. "From 1:38pm (-94 dBm with 1 bar) to 4:39pm (-94 dBm with 1 bar). The phones should report the same bar strength readings at least once or twice during those 165 minutes, unless the iPhone is in Flight Mode, or is turned off. Therefore, how come it wasn't checking for a signal if it was left on and not in Airplane Mode, and did not report it in the logs for those 2 hours and 45 minutes? And what about the Samsung phone? The iPhone phone log shows the bar strength when the iPhone was first turned on at 8:12am on April 2. At 8:13am it reported -113 dBm with 1 bar. This tells me that the previous GSM signal bar readings were likely stored in memory and erased from the cache to make way for new readings. However we do know it was logged by the operating system, since the phone logs are extracted from those system log files in order to provide the previous day(s) readings.  -  That is why I am having a hard problem understanding why the iPhone would not attempt to check for a GSM connection and report the last known value on April 1 (-94 dBm with 1 bar) before the emergency call. 165 minutes is a long time if you are stranded somewhere in that place, and if you are moving you increase the chances of the phones attempting checks for a connection. Also: the Samsung phone updated my time and date with it being on Airplane Mode. The phone has been on Airplane Mode since my last few tests back in Jan/Feb. So they knew the time and could check it on their phones. Plus it synced up when they had GSM connection on the Mirador."

FLASHLIGHT
"Both the Samsung and iPhone have a flashlight function.

The iPhone 4 Flashlight:

-No need to log into the phone or use passcode to get into the phone.

-Swipe up -> click on flashlight icon to turn on flashlight

-You can turn it on by logging into the phone (entering the passcode that is) and swipe up -> click on flashlight icon.

-You can lock the phone and the flashlight remains on in this instance as well.

-Unfortunately the terminal program I use does not see any events for flashlight functionality unlike the verbose logging of the Samsung Android phones you see below.

The Samsung Galaxy S3 Flashlight (& Lisanne’s Mini version running the same OS versions)

To use the flashlight Lisanne would need to:

-Go to the Widgets Menu

-Select the Assistive Light

-Tap it to click it on.

-Flashlight remains on even if you lock/exit the phone screen."

POWER-PIXIE also wrote:

"Having worked with the camera now I am convinced many are not including the distortion of the wide angle lens. The lens makes the place look larger/ higher/ wider/ taller than it appears to be. I no longer think this is looking down at a ravine, as there's enough information for me to look at when working out the collage that this area is a small fissure/crack or ravine looking up."

ADJUSTING AND EDITING FILES OF THE CANON CAMERA

"I can tell you that it is not easy to go in and edit these files from what I see. So someone like Pitti on her own cannot do this. However it is not beyond the capabilities of an expert mobile forensic specialist. Think back to Calderon vs the David Forensics Examiner. One wasn't in favor of Pitti's conclusion, while of the other Pitti knew they would give her the answer she was looking for, no questions asked. Medical forensics examination is far, far more complex to try to get away with than some log files of an OS on a couple of phones."

Romain's footage of the Pianista trail

Source

           

         

Romain uploaded a total of seven new videos, in which he documented his hike up the Pianista trail and beyond. I highlight two videos here, but you can check them all out here. You can now literally feel like you walk the trail which kris and Lisanne took for yourself. Romain further commented on the Pianista trail: "The path in itself, aside the rocks and the inconvenience of the slope, is not that hard to follow. You just have to follow the path and you'll end up at the rivers down there." Here we see another fork in the road. Somehow Kris and Lisanne appear to have rather quickly figured out the right track, going by their fast ascend time. They also did not pull out their phones to check the google maps, which Lisanne had downloaded before the start of their hike, at this point. So they seem to have been confident about where to go? Did someone either give them clear directions about where to go and what they would find, or was there perhaps even someone with them? I am still keeping the option open in my mind, that Plinio or another local(s) was with them along the hike. It also remains a mystery, watching this footage, what drove Kris and Lisanne to hike beyond the Mirador, beyond the photogenic gully, beyond River 1 even? Romains' footage highlights just how far they had gone already by then, and how uninviting the terrain ahead had become. What goal did they have in mind, at that point? These questions can still not be answered now, based on this new video footage. We can theorize that Kris and Lisanne would have wanted to go as far as River 2 with the small waterfall, but there is no evidence of this. As Hans Kremers stated; had they reached that point, then they would have taken at least one photo of this spot... I therefore assume, for now, that they either returned after reaching River 1, or were intercepted at or just beyond that point... Notice by the way how people either mention running into other people or locals on this trail (also beyond the Mirador), and how Romain runs into local cattle there? Where there is cattle, there are often humans in the vicinity. Romain also stated in a comment below one of the videos, that between the first and second small river behind the Mirador, he could hear the sound of chainsaws in the distance. (Press the play triangle to view the below video of this fork in the road, of which we now know that there were several along the route).

Romain himself also wrote this below one of his videos: "I don't understand why they would keep hiking in that direction toward the monkey bridge. Some people think they could have thought the trail would lead back to Boquete (from miscommunication or ignorance) and took the risk to keep going in the same direction to be back in Boquete not too late, but they seemed pretty well informed about the trail (aside the internet searches, the map app opened, they also went in an hostal to get informations). From the Mirador, you see the cut between Boquete side of the mountain and the vast forest. And when you are down there, you realise you are getting further and further away. If you are at the paddock (on a sunny day), you can even see the islands of Bocas del Toro."  -  Thanks for sharing that, Romain. Not sure I missed the info about them asking in a hostel about the trail before, but maybe this refers to Casa Pedro and their interaction with Pedro about the trail. Romain seems to also have doubts about why Kris and Lisanne would have willingly kept walking on and on, and that is makes no sense to assume they believed they were walking back towards Boquete. I think that the recent footage of the Mirador also discredits this theory. We established that Kris and Lisanne took photos even of Boquete there, lying behind them. So at least one of them would have realized that walking straight on, would not lead them back home. And yes: since they had great memories of Bocas del Toro, going by their diaries and photos, they would have certainly taken a photo of those islands in the background, hád they made it this far (which I seriously doubt). 

One of the other noteworthy elements to Romain and Hugo's recent youtube videos of the trail, is the number of people they either passed by on the trail, or who seemed to be lurking in some recess to the side of it. Women are always the most vulnerable in these places. Particularly given the crime reports at the time of robberies there. In the comment section, Romain also wrote that these videos capture the third time that he went up on the Pianista trail. He did it twice more, back in 2019. "The first one being a failure because I ended up going the wrong way, by taking the wrong direction at the split before the first river crossing (you can see it on El Pianista Part 2). During the second one, I went further than the Mirador." So you can easily take a wrong turn on the Pianista trail. Did someone tell Kris and Lisanne perhaps how to walk? And is it possible that they took a wrong turn themselves, say on Monday afternoon. And that they returned on Tuesday April 1st to properly walk the whole trail? With regards to mobile phone receptivity, Romain confirmed that beyond the treeline on the Boquete side of the mountain, there is no mobile phone reception. He wrote: "It only work until you are a bit into the forest area. Then it works again when you arrive at the Mirador." And also notice in these videos that there are no steep ravines along the trail beyond the Mirador, where one can make a deadly fall and do so unseen by searchers. 

More footage of the Pianista trail

Source

      

Very good to have more footage of this trail and the length and distance Hugo went to videotape it. It is lovely that he doesn't babble throughout the videos, or has music in the background, allowing us to hear the birds, the water streaming by and even the rustling of leaves; it all enhances the feeling of being there yourself on that trail. It is also nice how he takes the time at certain points of interest to turn the camera around and allow us a better look around. At some point, he turns the camera around and you can see areas with blue sky and clouds, but also grey skies once he turns the camera a little further. It seems to show once again that over here, blue skies can be a very temporary thing. Of course we cannot forget that he shot this video nearly eight years after the disappearance of Kris and Lisanne and under different meteorological conditions. (On April 1st of 2014 it was more sunny and the area had endured an extensive period of droughts). The girls did not encounter such fog and high humidity, which in Hugo's videos make the trail look even more eerie. His videos also show however that one can start with sunshine, but nevertheless end up with fog and mist on this trail. The continuation of the trail beyond the Mirador especially did not strike me as super inviting. I wouldn't have enjoyed that hike, if I were in their shoes... Strange country, strange town, strange terrain, underdressed, unprotected. But maybe it seemed exciting to Kris and Lisanne, because of the mystery of that winding trail leading further. But to me, its narrowness and claustrophobic nature doesn't make it very inviting looking for young foreigners, who have no idea where the trail will end. And as Hugo hikes on, it seems obvious that this is a small trail that leads further away from civilization, not looping back towards it. 

We also have another time indication now. Hugo had a normal/decent walking tempo. Dave mentioned to me that we now know for instance that as Hugo set off down the other side of the Mirador, it only took him three minutes to reach the location of photo #505. Now we can calculate with more confidence that Kris and Lisanne left the Mirador just after 13:15 indeed. And Victor Hugo's timing shows that it takes at least a good 25 minutes to get from the summit to the first stream. Victor arrived at the location of photos #507 and #508, after a total hiking time of 2:22:42, as I understand it from Power-Pixie, who checked Hugo's video timecode.. Power-Pixie also wrote to me: "By the end Hugo has clocked in at 2 hours and 30 minutes at River 3 [= the same as River 2 of Answers for Kris]. Just took him about 8 to 10 minutes from River 1, since there were a couple of stops/edits and at times he slipped a little on the way to River 3. Kris and Lisanne had drier weather, and so they would have been able to get here in less than 8 minutes". The video also shows, as claimed again and again, that one does not easily get 'lost' on this trail behind the Mirador. It winds on and on, clear to see, easy to follow. One can also find running water in several places. Here we see the first river, where photos #507 and #508 were taken. Hugo shows us here that the boulder behind Kris seems indeed moved to the right of the path over time, something we also already saw in IP’s/Romains photos. At minute 56:29 of video 2, we see the same second river crossing from Hans Kremers' Answers for Kris video. Hugo's video further confirms this is indeed the second proper stream, which one could call a river I suppose. But I still don't get why Imperfect Plan call it 'river 3'. Perhaps because of the trickle that was passed beforehand, but it is a bit of a stretch to call that one a river (In fact, you could hear that water stream more than you could see it). But unless Hugo edited things out of his video, this barely detectable trickly should then count as another "river". Anyway: the details we're receiving through various people over time about the trail and its surroundings are fantastic. And back to the disappearance mystery: even if that 2nd river - as I will continue to call it - with its small waterfall had half as much water in April of 2014, it would probably still be a place where the girls would have wanted to take a photo. As Hans Kremers also believes. Being Dutch myself I can say that for many of us, being used to the flat boring agricultural Netherlands, even the slightest hill gets us excited. The smallest waterfall or rock-littered creek does so too. We don't have many natural waterfalls in the NL and that sort of thing warrants a photo or video for sure, under normal circumstances. So the fact we have no evidence at all that they ever reached this spot, tells me that they likely either never reached that point and turned around after taking photo #508, or that whatever tragedy hit them, hit them soon after taking photo #508. As for the theory that the girls could have waded through the next big river; to me, the next river itself does not look inviting whatsoever to actually wade through as an alternative 'trail'. It would have been a really reckless and baseless assumption to think that wading through that river and following the stream that way, would have brought them back to Boquete with a shortcut. Unless they were trying to flee or hide from someone else, that theory is frankly absurd and probably mostly the sort of notion created in hindsight by certain online sleuths.. 

First stream ('River 1'):

Second stream ('River 3'-although I'd call it River 2):

At the end of Hugo's video, he shoots a photo of some wooden structure, right behind the second river. To me, this video shows once again that there was seemingly no reason for Kris and Lisanne to walk on and on and on. Not after River 1 and certainly not after River 2 (of which we have no evidence whatsoever that they ever reached this point, as there are no photos to support this). Once tired and out of water, what logic is there for pushing on along the path? And while watching Hugo's videos, that feeling creeped up on me again. Why in god's name would they want to continue after, say, the 1st stream? I find it already incredible that they made it to the Mirador. The same terrain, the same winding trail, the knowledge that they were moving further and further away from their starting point. The creepiness and isolation of that area. Knowing they had to hike back through so many similar looking gullies. It should have been completely counterintuitive to push on after the stream of photo 508. The notion that they would have willingly pushed further at that point, almost three hours into the hike, just makes no sense and feels off.. There is no information after all of a specific goal or destination they may have had in mind that day. Just like there is no indication or evidence that Kris and Lisanne ever reached that next river ('river 2' or 'river 3', whatever you want to call it). It was much more photogenic and bigger than the first one, with its waterfall; I agree with Hans Kremers that they would have taken a photo of it if they ever did reach that point. And so I believe they never did. I stick to my long-held belief that the girls turned around after taking photo #508 OR were captured by a 3rd party at or near this point. And the idea that someone was with them to guide them there somehow still lingers in my mind. How else would they get the confidence and carelessness to not only make it that far up to the Mirador, but to then push on even further? There is no hard evidence for this however, other than the peculiar sudden Plinio-style 'thumbs up' photos and him having declared that he was on that Pianista trail himself that afternoon and believed to have passed them.  

Passers by; notice by the way how Hugo also ran into "the professor of the mountain", aka guide F. He captured it on camera. Guide F. was also on this trail and caught on camera when the Lost in the Wild crew shot footage there. And he also features in many TV specials and reports of that trail, also from back in 2014. Close to the summit Hugo also passed another person on the trail, who he crossed again after the Mirador. This further strengthens the claim from Imperfect Plan, that one is rarely all alone on these trails: "Approximately 5-7 locals passed our camp each day, usually around 2:00PM.". Hugo had Feliciano and two of his tourist clients pass by, another local below and after the Mirador, so four people within a few hours time. The notion that Kris and Lisanne could have wandered around there, unheard and unseen for at least eleven days, remains very, very far-fetched in my opinion, going by the supposed monkey bridge they must have been or perished at (those monkey bridges are also widely used by locals) and the inhabited area where there remains were found. Collage made by Power-Pixie. 

And it is also noticed that the trail that goes up towards the Mirador, on the Boquete side of the mountain, has several points where one could get easily confused. Here for instance. Did Kris and Lisanne know to take that exit into the forest? And if so, how? Did the google map which Lisanne viewed that morning indicate this route in such detail? Or did someone else tell them about the direction they should take? If so, who was this? There is a sign, but from the main track it seems very difficult to see. Perhaps this was different in April of 2014. Here is another decision point on the trail. But even near the start of the trail... You would have to know where you were going. I don't believe this new footage shows a clear opportunity to get fatally lost. But it does show that at the start of the trail especially (after the summit the trail seems far more straightforward actually), you could probably do with some reassurance that you are taking the right track. Still, kudos to Kris and Lisanne because if I had been in their shoes, I would have probably chickened out of this hike early on and certainly once you pass the dense tree line. This has got to be one of the most eerie and mysterious trails I have ever seen. And then further up.. gosh this is a wonky, narrow trail. We know they succeeded in passing it and making it to the summit, but this is not the sort of trail you easily hike back when the sun is setting. To be frank: for me, this video makes it much more clear just how much of a challenge this trail can pose for brand new tourists in town. I don't get why they kept pushing forward, without a guide. They must have really felt care-free and confident.

In terms of cell Reception. Here Hugo records a slight connection of his phone with the cellular network (with TIGO-Movistar), which is in the upper half of the trail on the Boquete side. Victor had a strong signal around 8-10 minutes before he reached the Mirador; from minute 14:10 in the second video, Hugo notices that the cell phone signal strength goes from good to strong. And this continues all the way to the Mirador. He had a signal on the Mirador, while the phones of Kris and Lisanne only connected after being 14 minutes up there... Is it possible that the girls' phones didn't register reconnection until the screen was activated at 13.14? And what does that tell us about the reliability of those phone logs, if true? Hans Kremers stated that there are many areas at/near the Mirador which have no cell reception and not everyone who hiked this trail has kept track of the precise cell receptivity along the track. The differences in weather and density of the forest may perhaps also have played a role here. But both Hugo and Kris and Lisanne seeme to have lost signal within around 20 minutes beyond the Mirador. Hans Kremers reported to have lost mobile phone reception after 45 minutes of walking beyond the Mirador. These phone log details are very important for those of us who believe that the girls returned to the summit that afternoon. Power-Pixie wrote me about this: "So I wonder now why Kris' and Lisanne phones, which were not turned off, did not ALSO start to connect within this timeframe or slightly earlier or later, give or take a minute of the hike? Please recall Tharindu’s note on how an elevation can block signals - so on the Boquete side, considering there was even less foliage back in 2014, looking at Hans' video and others who went up there, there should be better signal strength than that of today. Victor descends the Pianista at 23:35. His cell phone coverage is lost by 42:00 in the video. That is approximately 19 minutes and 25 seconds."  -  I also noticed that this 'wall of moss' right behind the Mirador, going down the other side of the mountain, is really long. Longer than I imagined it to be. I still don't understand why Kris and Lisanne only took photo 505 and photo 506 there. So many unusual twists and turns in that entire stretch, but I feel that those two photos don't really do it justice, so to speak? Is this because Lisanne was perhaps tired of taking photos? Or was she not feeling comfortable with standing still and shooting photos? Or was there perhaps someone with them who they were trying to keep up with? Given her eye for photogenic scenery, I would have expected a shot slightly resembling like this one for instance, or like Romain captured it. 

Photos taken right below the Mirador, on the 'wrong' side if the mountain

I also loved seeing the unofficial entrance of the Pianista trail being right next to the Il Pianista restaurant, and how closeby Oliva de Kam lives. This is what Tharindu wrote me about the new videos of Hugo: "Courtesy to the great videos by Victor, now we can digitally hike the Pianista trail up to "river 3" [Scarlet; I'd say River 2]. It is very clear from the video that there is only one clear single path up to this river. He has also maintained a similar hiking pace as K&L maintained up to river 1.

**Now it is almost certain that their phones were already connected to a roaming network by the time they reached the summit (exactly as I predicted earlier). There was a weak cell reception 30 minutes before the summit, and the connection became stronger as he (Hugo) was hiking towards the Mirador. The Iphone connected to a roaming network around 12.33 p.m.

**He then reached the first river within 25-30 minutes, while K&L did it within 35-40 minutes. I was surprised by the observation that his phone was completely disconnected from the roaming network about 7-8 minutes walking distance before this first river. However, the Iphone fully disconnected from the roaming network at 13.38 p.m. (16 minutes before #507). There exists a small time gap, but I can't give an explicit reason for that. Around 13.38 p.m. K&L almost walked 23 minutes beyond the summit. If we add 7-8 minutes, it will be 30 minutes and it fairly matches with Hugo Victor's timeline. It is well supported by the fact that the girls had better hiking conditions on April 1st. Therefore, I assume K&L were at the same location as Victor was when their phones disconnected from the roaming network, around 13.38 p.m. If they turned back around 13.54 p.m., there exists a possibility that they could have  contacting Kris's boyfriend around 2 p.m.

**I asked on YouTube whether the trail was slippery beyond the summit, and Victor responded that he slipped twice before reaching the first river. It might explain why Kris had [seemingly] slipped and fallen on her back. Furthermore, he encountered only a single native person beyond the summit, and he thinks the same person had left those soda cookie wrapper and a sweet wrapper on the rock at river 2.

**For me, the distance to the river 1 is too much for a random exploration for two cautious girls, and there was not much scenery after the gully until river 1. They also didn't photograph anything in between. You would never continue along the trail unless you have a good reason. It appears like K&L had a certain destination in their minds beyond the Mirador. But then again, anyone hiking beyond the summit (in 2014) without a guide has no idea about the long gully, rivers 1/2/3, the paddock, monkey bridges etc. However, it appears [based on the official phone logs provided by case investigation] like they never walked back at least 10 minutes towards the summit after #508, as there was no more roaming connections. What were they searching?

**After seeing the complete trail up to the next big river: if someone would be intercepted there by a 3rd party from behind, the only option left would be to rapidly continue along the trail. Because there are no exit trails except for river 1/2/3. If the interception is from the front, then someone could rapidly hike back to Mirador. Personally, I think the evidence suggests that they were intercepted from behind and it happened soon after #508." - Interesting, thanks as always for sharing your thoughts and suspicions, Tharindu

Imperfect Plan and Romain went to Boquete in July of 2021

You can read all about their trip  here. They mapped trails, gathered GPS coordinates, GoPro- and aerial drone footage. They took photos with a Canon Powershot and explored environmental conditions. Fantastic job, men! And thanks for all your hard work and investments. Thanks also for talking me through your results some time ago and I look forward to your upcoming articles. I will stick to highlighting a few things here that interested me in particular. 

*Bridge - The bridge seen in photo #476 takes about ten minutes to reach from the start of the Pianista trail and the Il Pianista restaurant. And right after crossing it, you find yourself among open pastures. 

*It's a straightforward safe enough trail -  While hiking to the Mirador, the team members quickly learned that "it’s difficult to go off of the trail. The trail is straightforward. There’s only one trail split, but that split happens far before reaching the Mirador. Therefore, considering the timeline of Kris and Lisanne’s Mirador photos, it’s clear they did not take the wrong direction at that trail split." They also exclude the possibility of diverging trails: "We learned that there’s just one trail Kris and Lisanne could have taken." "The Pianista Trail is surrounded by heavy vegetation and the trail itself is often carved deeply into the mountainside, limiting any opportunity to go in a different direction." Mostly it would be either impossible or very difficult to go off trail, not to mention illogical. And even with a 25 kilo heavy backpack on his back, Romain managed to avoid sliding off a steep incline. "It was a small scare, but it demonstrated to us that even with all our gear it’s still not difficult to avoid slipping off the edge of the trail, especially due to all the vegetation that’s available to grab onto". 

*It is clear to see on the Mirador which side leads to where - "The Pianista Trail before and after the Mirador have distinct differences. It would not have been possible for Kris and Lisanne to accidentally go in the wrong direction. The positioning of the vegetation, the view of the other mountains, and the manner in which the landscape is positioned at the Mirador are all very clear indicators of which direction a person is facing. Also, the town of Alto Boquete (“High Boquete”) is visible from the Mirador on one side the mountain range, while on the other side of the Mirador there is only green forests visible for as far as the eye can see. Therefore, from these numerous factors, Kris and Lisanne would have been aware that they had passed the Mirador in their subsequent photos, such as in photo #507 and #508. Furthermore, the trail beyond the summit continues in the same direction north for several hours. After hiking north for a while, it’s unlikely that a hiker would assume that the trail would eventually lead back to Boquete." "There’s no doubt that you’re entering a totally different region. Any speculation about Kris and Lisanne having unknowingly chosen the wrong direction at the Mirador can be put to rest. They had intentionally opted to go beyond the Mirador." 

*Beyond the summit - In between the first streams the men encountered after the Mirador, there lies a "small mountain". A natural obstacle in a way, that would have slowed down their pace. 

*This trail is very frequently hiked by others - "We saw numerous locals hiking the trail on a daily basis. We monitored the foot traffic in the area and kept notes of the number of people that past our camp. Approximately 5-7 locals passed our camp each day, usually around 2:00PM." And this was on a random, misty day.  -  [Scarlet: To me this was very important information. It supports what other bloggers, hikers and locals have stated. Some mention a dozen people a day who pass this trail. Well, let it be 5 a day, the lowest mentioned number (and it was a brilliant week, that first week of April, in terms sun and temperatures): even then it is fairly bizarre that nobody saw these tall, eye-catching tourists anywhere behind the Mirador. Not a single witness has come forward in that respect. Nobody saw anything. Over the course of a week we are talking about a minimum of 35 people who could have seen them or who the girls could have seen or heard and asked for help (or smelled their bodies if the girls had died already at this point - nobody reported to have seen vultures circling either, despite there being a hefty reward at that point). Notice also that 2:00 PM is named the peak hour on this Pianista trail and beyond. Which is close to the time of the last photos of Kris and Lisanne... It also further shakes the theory that Kris and Lisanne could have endured an injury of sorts, sat down and waited, while nobody found them. If they truly did so at or right near the trail, they would have encountered that 2 PM walker rush hour every single day. They would have been found]. 

*River - After two small streams, there follow a few 'rivers'. The first 'river', named river #1 in the article, appears (?*) to match the [eroded] location of photos #507 and #508. A third river, seen here, seems (?) to match the one where Hans Kremers believes the girls would have taken a photo of the small waterfall, hád they continued walking after the location of photos #507 and #508. Although it may also be an entirely different river altogether, IP are still investigating this for themselves and will report about this at a later time. They did already write the following about it: "This river was an important find. It was a good source for drinking water, it had swimming holes with crystal-clear water, the temperature of the water was very cool and comfortable, and it had a lot of rocks at waist-level which made it perfect to sit and relax." IP later emphasized again that "the water is crystal clear, drinkable and safe. This river was our primary water source during most of Expedition 1. Although the water temperature was chilly, it was refreshing for swimming." The men believe that this river is an important point in the reconstruction of the movements of Kris and Lisanne. "This river, to us, seemed to be the furthest logical point that a person would have comfortably hiked on this trail before turning around and going back to Boquete. Immediately beyond this river is a steep incline that must be climbed to continue on the trail and a normal hiker would likely not have opted to do so unless they had a good reason to do so." My thoughts are that, like Hans Kremers said earlier, I would have expected the girls to have taken at least one or two photos of this 'river', if they actually made it there in sound body and mind. But we have no such photos. 

UPDATE: Power Pixie made this excellent photo overlap and proved that yes, indeed, what IP call 'River three' is in fact the 2nd river shown in the Answers for Kris video. IP use a different numbering for the streams behind the Mirador, but River three is the second stream with small waterfall which Hans Kremers points out in his video, HERE. Dave Mullen also mentioned correctly: "It is clear from Imperfect Plan's photographs that there has been rain", whereas Kris and Lianne were there at a time, seven years prior, when "the severe drought of 2014 thad reduced these streams to trickles. So what they call rivers here were just streams back then, and it may be that the meagre flow of water from the first stream that day is what made crossing it so easy and tempting for Kris."

*Scenario - IP suggest the following scenario: "This river fits the story well. Two girls go hiking, decide to cool down before hiking back and then something unexpected causes them to flee the area by running down the river and they experience injuries. We hiked up and down this river more than once." 

*Data - At this point, so in the second week of July 2021, the river temperature was 16.5 Celsius and the air temperature was ranged between 16.8 Celsius to 17.5 Celsius, depending on the amount of sunshine.

*Paddock - At the open space commonly called the paddock, the jungle opens up into clear space with significantly less trees and vegetation. It took the men approximatively 30 to 40 minutes to reach the paddock from the last river (possibly the one where Hans Kremers believes the girls would have taken a photo of the small waterfall, hád they passed it). "Although many people imagine the paddock to be open pastures of flat area, it’s actually very mountainous, with steep inclines and declines." "There are no visible houses or cabins near the Paddock, which suggests that Kris and Lisanne wouldn’t have found refuge if they desperately needed to find shelter." The paddock is utilized by local farmers for livestock and fences are present in the area. Additionally, behind the Paddock there is a destroyed cabin which one cannot see easily.

*Monkey Bridge -  the team noted while hiking on the Pianista Trail to the first Monkey Bridge, was that there was only one visible trail that spans the entire distance. "This is the same trail that the locals use and there are no alternative trails that lead to the Monkey Bridge from the Mirador. Occasionally the main trail briefly splits, with smaller trails breaking-off of the main trail for about 5 to 20 meters, but they always merged back onto the main trail." The trail was more tiring at this point, also due to mud. Again, "there aren’t many areas along the trail where you could fall and not be able to climb back. Falling down the slope certainly could result in injury, but in most cases the vegetation is dense enough to slow you down and could potentially help you to climb back up to the trail." The trail continues to Alto Romero. It took 2 days (16 hours) for Romain to reach the Alto Romero community. However, a native to the area can do the walk in only one day.

*Additional info - "During early August of 2021, the first and the second Monkey Bridges were renovated by Plinio and Laureano, whom covered the costs of building the bridges by themselves. These bridges are still made of cables, however the new renovations involved adding wooden planks to stabilize the bridges and make them safer to cross. In 2020, an unfortunate situation happened where a mother and her two children fell while crossing a Monkey Bridge during a storm and died."

*Phone coverage - At the Mirador it’s possible to establish a cellular connection, but phone connectivity isn’t available in the area beyond the Mirador (not even in open fields), and neither in the area surrounding the Monkey Bridges. But in Alto Romero you can make phone calls, with the connection described by IP as "fairly strong". "Alto Romero is much closer to national roads and developed towns, which are located slightly east. At Laureano’s farm it’s sometimes possible to send a text message if the signal strength is strong enough." - Unfortunately IP did not document the phone connectivity as they hiked up the Mirador on the Boquete side of the mountain.

*Rain - Heavy rain is said to mainly occur in/after September. Not in July but neither in April, May and June. Scarlet: It begs the question therefore how flash floodings could have theoretically washed away the bodies of the girls during these months and deposited Lisanne's shoe and foot behind, "almost under" a tree trunk, located a fair distance away from the river. I think that the general flash flood suggestion is still a theory; I have never seen any hard evidence for it. Not even news items about unusual, extreme floodings in the months after the girls went missing. Power Pixie dug further into this topic and confirmed that no floods or heavy rains were reported in the Alto Romero/Bocas Del Toro Province region, between April 1, 2014 and June 19, 2014.

*Orbs - IP also show a preview of night photos they tried to recreate, including orbs, which they will dive deeper into in an upcoming article. But the orbs - similar looking to the one in the night photos found on the memory card of the girls - appear to be water drops, for instance from the river, according to Matt. "It's spray from the river. not dust."

*Many Spiders and a Red Ant nests - IP describe the presence of a "nest of red ants". Dave Mullen highlighted this to me in writing: "This is interesting in light of Nina's comments on Ants, and what they can do to people and their remains. If Kris and Lisanne reached this far, and became aware of the insects described here, then like anyone else they would have been very keen on getting out!" [Nina von Rönne wrote in her book that in the tropical forest within one hour, an entire snake was eaten away by a colony of typical tropical ants.She therefore has some question marks about the body parts of Kris and Lisanne surviving for that long in a tropical forest]. So this may be a potentially important detail, in light of Nina's information about the decomposition processes in the jungle when there are tropical ants present. 

The men also confirmed the location of the swimming photo. I added their information below my own info about this photo and its location HERE. Great amount of new data points. I also liked how IP pretty much take the authoritative highway in terms of more or less shutting down the debate about whether or not Kris and Lisanne could have gotten lost at or near this trail (no), whether or not they could have endured a (near)deadly accident on this trail (highly unlikely) and whether or not they may have thought they walked back to Boquete when they continued on the path on the Mirador (most certainly not). - Tharindu linked me to a great map HERE. Some photo stills from it show key locations along the Pianista trail and beyond and I think the hill beyond the summit can also be seen in that detailed map:

Power-Pixie found a great new video from a Boquete local, who hiked the Pianista route, in memory of Kris and Lisanne

November 4, 2021

It is a great and very detailed video. After viewing it, I am mostly surprised about just how long that 'wall of moss' is! That gulley. Long and eerie. It goes on and on! And this is just on the way up to the Mirador. Edit: Lemo mentioned in the youtube comments: "I started from Boquete, and crossed the mountain range towards Bocas del Toro. Greetings" (Comencé desde Boquete, y crucé la cordillera hacia Bocas del Toro. Saludos). So I assume this implies that he also shot footage after he crossed the mountain range, on the 'wrong' side of the mountain, beyond the Mirador. And that he mixed that footage with videos taken on the Boquete side of the Pianista trail. But it isn't super clear from the video. Anyway, I don't want to sound melodramatic, but I would be feeling the creeps if I had walked there with a female friend. Beautiful as the route is, this must be among the more claustrophobic hiking experiences. And as Dave Mullen wrote: "At 10.04 as the Mirador summit comes into view I can tell where the April 1st Summit shots were taken - look carefully and you can still recognise the same bushes in his video, the mountains would be there in the background. It is such a tight area, and you can see what a nonsense it is to suggest the two might have gone down the wrong path."

I do not speak Spanish, but I managed to extract the audio from the video and transfer it into text and this is what Lemo says, phonetically at least (the translation is not good, but we can pick up some things hopefully of what he says about Kris and Lisanne related stuff) - and for everyone reading this who does speak Spanish and who gets an itch from my poor translation, please feel free to message me with the right one :) 

Lemo: "Vamos a meternos. Subir por aquí. Dicen que por aquí hay un alto. Oh, guau! Aquí hay un. Un árbol, una escalera, Aunque usted no lo crea. El camino viene hacia allá y por ahí se pierde. Ya no se ve absolutamente nada. Y como está el día nublado, ya ustedes se imaginarán. Si te pierdes, que va a suceder. Me regreso. No se que decirles, pues quería hacer esta caminata. En memoria de ellas, algo pequeño, pero para mí muy significativo mostrarle más o menos como era el lugar. Según cuentan, ahorita vamos a ver el monumento que hicieron en su honor. Ellas pasaron por aquí. Con dirección hacia la provincia de Bocas del Toro. Ya de aquí es montaña adentro, señores, montaña, montaña, lo que sigue hacia allá, y para personas que no están acostumbrados a este tipo de caminos, no conocen. Debió ser muy difícil. Esas tardes agobiantes, esas noches agonizantes, estar en un lugar rodeado de toda clase de cosas, de un bosque que. La verdad es que. El bosque tiene muchas historia y para dos chicas que no saben dónde están. Debió ser algo muy. Lamentable es la palabra que puede decir muy triste y pues pasa su alma es lo único que digo si la justicia llega tarde o temprano. No sé. No sabemos qué pasó. En realidad no. No podemos especular nada. Pero sí estará más o menos la ruta que caminaron ellas hacia allá en Boquete, que era hacia allá. Vengo de Boquete subiendo el boquete aproximadamente 3 kilómetros y con rumbo hacia allá. No sé si vive gente para allá, no se si viven personas para allá, pero yo me imagino que hay naves que viven para allá porque estas son rutas en EI."

--This over here. We go out into clarity. Let's get in there. Climb up here. They say there is a stop here. Oh wow! Here's a. A tree, a ladder, believe it or not. The road comes there and it gets lost there. You can see absolutely nothing. And as the day is cloudy, you can imagine. If you get lost, it will happen. I go back. I don't know what to tell you, because I wanted to do this hike. In memory of them, something small, but for me it is very meaningful to show you more or less what the place was like. As they say, right now we are going to see the monument that they made in his honor. They passed through here. In the direction of the province of Bocas del Toro. From here it is the mountain inside, gentlemen, mountain, mountain, what continues there, and for people who are not used to this type of road, they do not know. It must have been very difficult. Those exhausting afternoons, those dying nights, being in a place surrounded by all kinds of things, a forest that. The truth is that. The forest has a lot of history and for two girls who don't know where they are. It must have been something very. Regrettable is the word that can be said very sad and as his soul passes it is the only thing I say if justice arrives sooner or later. I do not know. We don't know what happened. Not really. We cannot speculate anything. But it will be more or less the route that they walked towards there in Boquete, which was towards there. I come from Boquete going up the hole approximately 3 kilometres and heading there. I don't know if people live there, I don't know if people live there, but I imagine that there are ships that live there because these are routes in EI.

--Bien, amigos, damas y caballeros, pues este es el famoso lugar de las fotos donde aparecen las chicas que desaparecieron en este sendero, según las evidencias de las fotografías, ellas llegaron hasta este lugar y se tomaron selfies o las fotos en este. En este lugar. Todo está nublado, todo está nublado y. Y este es el alto, el punto donde llegaron ellas. Aquí hay un letrero viejo que ya no se alcanza a leer absolutamente nada no pase, retorne. O sea, hasta aquí. El letrero dice que había que llegar hasta este lugar, pero ya casi no se lee. Está en español. Ya de ahí hacia adelante, el que va hacia allá lo hace bajo su propio riesgo. Aquí está el monumento La Cruz para las chicas que desaparecieron. Hay alguien sembró unas flores. Ahí está Lisandro y Chris Cramer. Así que. Esta es una cruz en honor a ellas que dejaron en este lugar. Igual la verdad es que el ambiente es un poco triste, la verdad, cuando llegas a este punto, no sé. No sé qué decirle. Este es el lugar. Señoras y señores del Sendero del Pianista. Esta es la cima, la cima donde llegan los turistas a ver ya de aquí en adelante. Como lo dice el letrero de allá. De aquí en adelante ya es tierra desconocida.

--Well, friends, ladies and gentlemen, because this is the famous place in the photos where the girls who disappeared on this trail appear, according to the evidence of the photographs, they came to this place and took selfies or photos in this. Here. Everything is cloudy, everything is cloudy and. And this is the stop, the point where they arrived. Here is an old sign that can no longer be read at all, don't pass, come back. I mean, up to here. The sign says that you had to get to this place, but it is hardly readable anymore. This in Spanish. From there onwards, the one who goes there does so at his own risk. Here is the La Cruz monument for the girls who disappeared. There is someone who planted some flowers. There is Lisandro and Chris Cramer. So. This is a cross in honor of them that they left in this place. The truth is that the atmosphere is a bit sad, the truth is, when you get to this point, I don't know. I do not know what to tell you. This is the place. Ladies and gentlemen of the Path of the Pianist. This is the top, the top where tourists come to see from now on. As the sign over there says. From now on it is an unknown land.

--Si no venimos por acá. Aquí están. Aquí hay una foto de Chris Kramer de Chris. 21 años abril 2014 Por el reflejo nos alcanza a ver muy bien. Está la foto de la chica dulcemente chispeante y graciosa, parte continua de nosotros. Esa era la foto que pusieron en memoria de ella. La otra foto de la de la otra chica, pues no aparece. Lo estoy buscando, pero parece que no está y pues es muy conmovedor. Aquí podemos ver un machete o machete y como les digo, sigo buscando lo que es la fotografía, la otra fotografía y no esta. Hermanos y hermanas, estoy en este punto un ambiente. Raro para mí, en lo personal no se los turistas ya casi no vienen turistas a este lugar por obvias razones y pues hoy me vengo a aventurar por ese lugar y estando totalmente nublado no se ve, pero el sendero es muy bonito. Las montañas. Aire fresco, muy bonito, muy bonito. Da para una buena caminata, una buena aventura, un buen senderismo. Pero cuando llega a este punto se encuentra con. con estos recuerdos, estos monumentos, esa cruz. La foto de la chica que está hacia allá de las holandesas, que en paz descanse, pues te pone a pensar muchas cosas, muchas cosas. Pero no vamos a especular nada, no vamos a hablar de eso. Más bien quería mostrarle lo la ruta del senderismo como se llega y eso, pues es bastante difícil llegar para el que no está acostumbrado, pero.

--If we don't come this way. Are here. Here's a Chris Kramer photo of Chris. 21 years April 2014 By reflection we can see very well. There is the photo of the sweetly sparkling and funny girl, a continuous part of us. That was the photo of her that they put in memory of her. The other photo of the other girl, it does not appear. I am looking for it, but it seems that it is not there and it is very moving. Here we can see a machete or machete and as I said, I keep looking for what the photograph is, the other photograph and this is not it. Brothers and sisters, I am at this point an environment. Strange for me, personally, I don't know tourists and tourists hardly come to this place for obvious reasons and because today I come to venture through that place and being totally cloudy you cannot see it, but the path is very beautiful. The mountains. Fresh air, very beautiful, very beautiful. It makes for a good walk, a good adventure, a good hiking. But when he gets to this point he meets. with these memories, these monuments, that cross. The photo of the girl who is over there from the Dutch, may she rest in peace, because she makes you think about many things, many things. But we are not going to speculate anything, we are not going to talk about it. Rather, I wanted to show you how the hiking route is reached and that, because it is quite difficult to get there for those who are not used to it, but.

--Pero si no se si hacia allá, hacia allá se va hacia su salida, hacia la boca del toro y por ahí deben vivir personas jóvenes. Me imagino que viven por ese camino, pareciera un camino transitado porque está así y pues bueno, la verdad es bien difícil sobrellevar solo esto. Estoy solo por aquí amigos, solo por aquí, agravando esto en este momento solo y pues nada, con mucho respeto que se merecen la familia de D. de las chicas que partieron ya que descansan en paz, pues hago esta grabación. Y pues. Nada, que cosas como esta no vuelvan a ocurrir más nunca y sobre todo que que se tenga respeto por la vida a los turistas también. Ustedes cuando van a hacer turismo y van a ser tour, vayan acompañados de personas que tengan experiencia en Tour, que vayan acompañado con personas que que conocen el camino, que conocen el terreno, que conocen a la gente del pueblo para que no pasen desgracias, no pasen cosas. Pues yo ando con un guía. Ellos están más adelante, pero yo ando con ellos. Andamos 4 personas y llegamos hasta hasta este punto hemos llegado. Así que amigos, soy Lemon, os veré volviendo una vez más del descanso, así que vamos a seguir hacia abajo a ver. Gracias por seguir hasta aquí, seguirme hasta este lugar. Así que vamos, continuemos. Bueno, miren este camino, señoras y señores. Este es una parte de lo que me puedo mostrar a ustedes desde enero el pianista. Solitario. Solitario, abandonado por alguien. Y señal de la gente todavía. He caminado bastante. Así es, señores, damas y caballeros, pues de esa manera he terminado lo que es el senderismo, el tour hacia el sendero, hacia el pianista y pues una ruta muy, muy misteriosa, una ruta muy, muy bonita también, pero al final pues es una ruta que da mucho de que hablar. Y bueno, usted decide si puede ir o no puede ir, pero es una experiencia bastante nostálgica por todo lo que ha pasado, por toda la historia, por lo que ha sucedido y pues te envuelve una atmósfera extraña, lo que es el sendero. Así que muchísimas gracias por ver mis videos. Venimos con más en la próxima, así que nos vemos si el Todopoderoso lo permite. La ochavo los quiero mucho."

--But if I don't know if that way, that way it goes towards its exit, towards the mouth of the bull and that is where young people must live. I imagine they live along that road, it seems like a well traveled road because it is like that and well, the truth is, it is very difficult to cope with this alone. I'm alone here friends, alone here, aggravating this at this moment alone and then nothing, with a lot of respect that D.'s family deserves of the girls who left since they rest in peace, because I make this recording. And so. Nothing, that things like this never happen again and above all that tourists have respect for life as well. When you are going to do tourism and you are going to be on a tour, make sure to be accompanied by people who have experience with the tour, be accompanied by people who know the way, who know the terrain, who know the people of the town so that they do not have misfortunes, so that things don't happen. Well, I walk with a guide. They are ahead, but I am with them. We are 4 people and we have reached this point. So folks, I'm Lemon, I'll see you coming back once more from the break, so let's keep going down to see. Thank you for continuing here, following me to this place. So come on, let's continue. Well, look this way, ladies and gentlemen. This is a part of what I can show you since January the pianist. Lonely, abandoned by someone. And still people signal. I have walked quite a bit. That's right, gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, because in that way I have finished what is hiking, the tour towards the path, towards the pianist and well, a very, very mysterious route, a very, very beautiful route too, but In the end, it is a route that gives a lot to talk about. Well, you decide whether or not you can go, but it is quite a nostalgic experience because of everything that has happened, for all of history, for what has happened and then a strange atmosphere surrounds you, which is the path. So thank you so much for watching my videos. We come with more in the next one, so see you if the Almighty allows it. I love you very much."

A German clairvoyant weighs in on the case
Thomas kindly forwarded me email conversations he had with a relatively well known German clairvoyant, named Michael Schneider. This man has helped find several victims in recent missing person/murder cases in Germany, including the body of Carolin Gruber. In the Carolin Gruber case, he was extremely close with his information and predicted police correctly where they could find her body (at 300-400 meters, not buried, not in the water - ponds were inspected by police at the time -  and he knew to tell them that the missing woman died as the result of a crime). Here he talks about missing backpacker Scarlett S., who disappeared without a trace in Germany's Black Forest in September of 2020 and in the video (which can be set to English translated subtitles) the presenter also mentions several other police cases which Mr. Schneider solved, for instance the (clairvoyant) locating of the body of Tanja Meyer in the Bodensee. Here he discusses more cases he helped solve. Thomas asked Mr. Schneider about his feelings with regards to the Kris and Lisanne disappearance. He attaching a picture of Kris Kremers in her red and white striped shirt and a photo of Lisanne Froon to his email for Mr. Schneider, without further information about the picture or the case, as requested by him. Only their disappearance in Panama was supposedly further mentioned. About the Kris and Lisanne case, Michael Schneider was short: 

"both women are unfortunately dead and have fallen victim to a crime"

Michael Schneider regularly correctly predicts the place where victims are/were, and in this case he said that "I just got the place itself based on the headline (I only read superficially so as to not get too much information inadvertently and thus to be influenced incorrectly or to influence myself incorrectly)" and in Panama and the surrounding area he comes "to this very exact GPS coordinate in connection with the details" of both women having fallen victim to a crime (see also marked with a red dot in the map below):

https://www.google.de/maps/place/8%C2%B050'04.4%22N+82%C2%B029'07.4%22W/@8.8076864,-82.4895404,13z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d8.8345556!4d-82.4853889

Michael Schneider is sorry as to not be able to give more positive information regarding their fate. But: "My motto in such cases is Better an end with horror than horror without end. The agonizing uncertainty is often worse than a final sad result. In any case, this has been my clear experience since 2000, since I have been working as a police reporter and since 2006 as a seer". Even after this long time, Mr. Schneider recommends "first a superficial search and then a meticulous search with trained search dogs and / or ground penetrating radar of this area in Panama." [Scarlet: the map is interesting and links to the location where the plastic bag with food wrappers and the pink shoe sole were found, as well as the area where female screams and a loud bang were heard and reported to a ranger, a few days after the girls disappeared, as well as some local guys trying to hide in the bushes. It is also where guide P. made these strange lookalike daytime photos of the V-shaped tree and of the night photos. This is also the area which has the Cave of La Pandura. Also, Ingrid Lommers first told police that the scheduled trip from the girls with tour guide F. was to visit his "ranch in Alto Quiel", which is also in this direct area].

Greetings, God's blessings and good luck!

Michael Schneider

www.einseher.de
 

Sleuth Tharindu has looked into several aspects of this case and wrote me about it. Starting with the Samsung phone’s sudden and unexplained surge in battery use between 13:40 and 16:53 on April 1st of 2014.

June 1st, 2021. I myself am not extremely knowledgeable about mobile phone/GSM technology, so thank you to everyone who has written me about this. Tharindu wrote me: "Generally, mobile phones are constantly broadcasting signals (pinging) and receiving signals from nearby base stations (towers), and they connect to the base station, which has the maximum signal strength. When a mobile phone approaches cell boundary in a cellular network (e.g. GSM network), the signal strength from the connected Base Station (connected tower) depletes. So, the mobile phone increases the transmit power, in order to maintain the required signal level at the base station. (CDMA near far problem) Meanwhile, the phone is listening to the signals from other base stations to initiate handover process. If there are no other base stations available, the mobile phone continues to increase transmit power to the already connected base station until it surpass the cell boundary. Now the phone is in a complete dead zone, and it is working overtime to provide a speedy reconnection. Meanwhile, the phone is rebroadcasting signals with an increased power (in each attempt) until it has a signal reception from a nearby base station. As a result of that, the phone battery drains in a faster rate compared to the standard draining rate in an idle state. Actually in Kris and Lisanne’s case, they were not probably near a cell boundary, and the probable causes for poor signal (fading) reception was due to the scattering phenomenon (occurs due to the leaves in a thick vegetation) of electromagnetic waves and diffraction (due to sharp mountain edges). However, the power controlling mechanism I described above can be applicable to Kris and Lisanne’s scenario, since they were in a dead zone due to external obstacles. From mobile’s point of view, it does not know the reasons for poor signal reception, but it continues to follow the standard procedure of power controlling. Generally, the higher rate of battery draining due to power controlling can be avoided by switching the phone into air plane mode until you surpass the dead zone. The above scenario immediately struck in my mind because there were no obvious use of any apps and no phone logging activity to explain the higher rate of battery draining.

I compared this data with network mode capabilities in Samsung S3 and iphone 4, and came up with a possible explanation. However, I have assumed that batteries of both phones performed better before the 1st of April (without suffering from unusual power draining due to improper use of battery cycles). 

The default setting of the Samsung S3 would be Auto mode(GSM/WCDMA), which lets the phone automatically select the best (normally fastest) data network that it can pick up in the area that you're currently in. But as this mode involves using all the 2G and 3G chips and antennae, this uses more power than forcing the phone to always use GSM only or WCDMA only. The drawback of selecting GSM only is that it will stop your phone connecting to high speed 3G (WCDMA) data networks, but it will save power as the 3G chips and antenna won't be used. The drawback of selecting WCDMA only is that it will stop your phone from using 2G networks at all (So if you're in an area with no 3G support, then your phone will have no data signal) but if you're in an area that you know has good 3G signal, then selecting this will save power. Given the fact that there was no obvious use of any apps and no phone logging activity (except for using Google maps and camera around 13.14-13.15 p.m.), I strongly believe that Lisanne’s Samsung S3 was operated in Auto mode (GSM/WCDMA). Therefore, the Samsung consumes more power in poor reception areas and dead zones as explained earlier. - However, Kris' iphone 4 tells us a different story, because under similar conditions the rate of battery draining is small compared to that of Samsung S3. Most probably, Enable 3G, Mobile Data & Data Roaming might have turned off. Simply it means the iphone 4 had been forced to operate in GSM only mode.

Generally, if we do a basic mathematical calculation regarding the power use in April 1st, we can visualize the theory regarding power control. I have assumed a ratio of power consumption between Auto mode (GSM/WCDMA) and GSM only to be 3:1 (Suppose 3G antenna chip uses twice the power as 2G antenna chip),
-𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐨 𝐦𝐨𝐝𝐞 (𝐆𝐒𝐌 − 𝐖𝐂𝐃𝐌𝐀) ∶ 𝐆𝐒𝐌 = 𝟑 ∶ 𝟏 = 𝟐𝟕:𝟗 -𝑺𝒂𝒎𝒔𝒖𝒏𝒈 𝑺𝟑 𝒑𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓,𝒘𝒉𝒆𝒏 𝒇𝒊𝒓𝒔𝒕 𝟏𝟏𝟐 𝒂𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒆𝒎𝒑𝒕𝒔 = 𝟒𝟗 − 𝟐𝟕 = 𝟐𝟐%
-𝒊𝒑𝒉𝒐𝒏𝒆 𝟒 𝒑𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓,𝒘𝒉𝒆𝒏 𝒇𝒊𝒓𝒔𝒕 𝟏𝟏𝟐 𝒂𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒆𝒎𝒑𝒕𝒔 = 𝟓𝟏 − 𝟗 = 𝟒𝟐%
This calculation is just an illustration (looks like it further confirms that iPhone 4 was operated in GSM only). However, when considering the available GSM information and their phone activities (Google maps, signal reception and camera usage), I would estimate a value around 6%-8% of battery draining in Samsung S3 during the timespan of GSM signal lost (13.40 p.m.) and first 112 attempt due to the use of LED flash light or display (since there is no phone activity and app usage).

During the night of the 2nd of April and during the early morning of April 3rd, I believe the power saving mode had been turned on in the Samsung S3. Otherwise, the battery would drain at a faster rate, like in the evening of April 1st. Generally, when the battery is at 15%, a notification pops up, asking to “Recharge Your Phone” or to sometimes “Enable Power Saving” mode. It is quite straightforward to switch Samsung S3 to power saving mode. You just need to slide down the top menu and select the power saving mode."

Tharindu: the only remaining problem to me is why the ‘iPhone lost contact with the GSM network at 11:49 a.m. and then reconnected with the GSM network at 13:14 p.m.?
Or as you indicated more clearly in your blog: “how come the signal was reinstated at 13:14? And not at 13:00, when they were already standing high on the summit and taking photos?” I don’t think that trailhead from the base to the Pianista summit goes through a complete dead zone. I kind of agree with you regarding the availability of intermittent signal. The only reason I can think of why it didn’t connect to a network (during the ascent), is due to small scale fading and large scale fading. A main consequence of small scale fading is rapid fluctuations in signal strength over a small travel distance or time interval. If there are intermittent signal available with poor signal strength due to large scale fading (path loss and shadowing), there is a possibility that small scale fading could occur due to a higher pace of walking. Now we know that Kris & Lisanne almost took 1 hour and 15 minutes to travel from the base to the summit. #489 shows them at the open trailhead around 11.42 a.m. and #491 shows them inside the forest around 12.03 p.m. So it is logical to assume that they were inside the forest when the iphone lost its reception at 11.49 a.m. Compared to the other hikers, Kris & Lisanne had maintained a healthy pace throughout the period between 11.08-13.00 p.m. However, I don’t have an explicit explanation for why the phones didn’t connect to a GSM network at 13:00 p.m., when they were already standing high on the summit and taking photos. But I can think of a rare possibility for this. Even though the open trailhead and Pianista summit have GSM reception, there is a possibility that the two locations are served by different base stations (towers) of the same service provider. This can happen if the Pianista summit and open trailhead belong to different cells of the same service provider. So, at the summit you are a new user to the corresponding base station and handover is required. Imagine a situation where your mobile is willing to initiate handover but the corresponding base station is congested. In such a scenario a delay maybe possible. Maybe that’s why we see phone activities in both phones around 13.14 p.m. -13.15 p.m. I kind of feel like Lisanne had turned on data roaming when using Google maps, because using Google maps without data connection is odd. I might be wrong. It’s a pity that we don’t have the connection details of Samsung S3. Highly likely scenario is that, reception from the previously connected base station (same explanation for a new base station from the same service provider) was blocked/weak (due to multipath propagation, natural weather phenomenon, bandlimited interference or congestion) at the time, when the girls reached the summit, and available again around 13.14 p.m. Different theories can be speculated, but due to the lack of information, I would stick to this possibility. It is possible that they were not in a complete dead zone like in a jungle, instead a location with signal reception available, but it was blocked by external factors. Faraday cage (Blocks electromagnetic waves) is a good example. Inside an elevator and a box wrapped with aluminium foil are good examples for Faraday cages. Underground tunnels and caves are also good examples for places with poor signal reception.

Update: Tharindu: "Regarding the question "why the iPhone lost contact with the GSM network at 11:49 a.m. and then reconnected with the GSM network at 13:14 p.m.?" - When I was going through the GSM information table last weekend, I immediately noticed what I think may have actually happened. The iPhone lost contact with the GSM network at 11.49 a.m. and then reconnected with the GSM network at 12:33:55 p.m. After that it remained connected with the GSM network. And by the time the girls reached the summit, it was already connected to a GSM network. We simply don't see anything between 11.49 a.m. to 13.14 p.m., because the phone was in idle state. The reason why we see GSM activity around 13.14 p.m., is because they started to actively use their phones at that point, to make selfies. It makes a lot of sense to me now and looks like there is no mystery behind it. That is why I was not able to give you any explicit explanation in the first place."

You [Scarlet] wrote: "I have the impression (?) that there may have only been one GSM tower/base station for this Pianista area though?" - "Not necessarily, there might be signal reception from different service providers (base stations). I will give you a simple explanation. Suppose you, me and Matt are at the Pianista summit. You are using a Dutch SIM card (Vodafone) while Matt and I are using SIM cards from two different Panamanian service providers (Digicel and Claro). If we all have GSM reception at the same time, it means my phone is connected to the base station maintained by Claro service provider, while Matt’s phone is connected to Digicel tower (base station). Here, your phone is connected to a GSM network (Digicel or Claro) because of the Roaming facility. As you mentioned earlier, if Digicel was the only international service provider at that time in Panama, your phone will only connect to the Digicel network under the Roaming facility. Do you see now? If reception from Digicel is not available at the summit, your phone won’t be able to connect to a GSM network (because there is no Roaming agreement with Claro). Matt’s phone also won’t connect to the Digicel network. However, my phone would still connect to the Claro network, if signal reception is available. Although signal reception from Digicel network is not available, both you and Matt can still make emergency calls through Claro network under the Emergency Mode. Here, both phones would not register to the Claro network, so only the emergency calls are possible.

Mainly, GSM network operates in 4 steps:

Step 1: Connects to the network of your SIM card. If not step 2.

Step 2: Connects to the roaming network. If not step 3.

Step 3: Connects to another network, which has the best signal strength. (“Emergency Mode

Only”) If not step 4.

Step 4: “No Service”- place where there is no reception. (Dead Zone)

That late summit connection was probably due to a congested base station (resulting in Cell Breathing) or due to destructive interference due to natural phenomenon. Roeli Kremers also confirmed the mixed signal reception at the Pianista summit in the Answer for Kris video."

Scarlet: With regards of cell coverage, I already posted information some time ago in my blog part 2. "Digicell, which has the widest coverage of all the Panamanian cell phone providers that could be found back in 2014. You can see the important part, which is where the long mountain range in the middle, blocks the phone signal. Near Boquete there's a big mountain range, so the signal will cut off sharply as soon as you cross over the ridge (within 1.5km, according to the map) and beyond that there will be no signal at all. Not just an irregular signal, but no signal. The weak signal region is the purple region on the north side of the ridge. Only within that small region will there be irregular reception. Beyond that, there will be none at all, because the signal isn't fading with distance or blocked by irregular objects, it's being entirely blocked by the mountain."  -  I am not sure if this 1 bar receptivity that was logged for both the phones of Kris and Lisanne after they disappeared, matches with this actual cell reception situation behind the Pianista trail or not. No coverage north of the divide ridge is indicated in these maps. Yet the girls' phones showed one bar signal on April 2nd and 3rd.

 

Tharindu about removing the SIM card
"You can still contact to the emergency services without having a SIM card in your mobile phone (it doesn’t matter whether you are using roaming or not). Simply speaking, you need the SIM card to make calls (to your contacts), to send SMS (to your contacts) and to use mobile data. Taking out the SIM card doesn’t block microwaves transmitting (signal reception) from base stations reaching the mobile’s transceiver (2G or 3G antenna module). But I don’t know whether an operating system log is created when the SIM card is removed. Someone from the software side of things need to confirm this. So, if you are in an area where mobile reception is available, the phone would display “No SIM Card – Emergency Mode Only”. However, this is not the case if the mobile is located in a dead zone. Mobile’s transceiver then doesn’t receive microwaves transmitting from the base station. Then, the phone would display “No SIM Card- No Service” or “No SIM Card”. Visit this page. You will find that "with some networks, a GSM phone without a SIM card may be used to make emergency calls, and most GSM phones accept a larger list of emergency numbers without SIM card, such as 112, 911, 118, 119, 000, 110, 08, and 999. However, some GSM networks will not accept emergency calls from phones without a SIM card, or even require a SIM card that has credit. For example, Latin American networks typically do not allow emergency calls without a SIM, nor British networks due to the prevalence of hoax calls.” So all in all, national authorities decide whether the network accepts emergency calls without the SIM.

Possible reasons for the first 911/112 attempts Tharindu: "According to the official statements, the phones were never reconnected to a base station (cell tower) on the 1st of April. It means they never returned back to Boquete, but instead continued deep into the jungle until the first 112 calls. The point is, when the mobile phone does not have signal reception from any networks, it displays “No Service” around the signal reception bars. Therefore, the first 112 call from Kris (16:39) would go straight to voicemail message or an out of network range message. The same thing happened with the attempt from Lisanne’s Samsung. Considering their last known location (#508), there are some possible reasons for these first 911/112 attempts. They range from getting lost, realising they could not make it back home before sunset, to enduring an accident, to them having been attacked and kidnapped by a third party. I rate that last one the most likely option, because there are too much inexplicable facts when it comes to a lost scenario. For instance, why they would otherwise have switched off their mobile phones so quickly (within 12 minutes) of this 112 call? There was still daylight available at that time, and they could have at least checked for a signal again an hour later, by moving backward along the trail towards the summit or to a higher ground. In such a situation, you would expect to regain signal reception at any moment, because you don’t know about the boundary of the GSM dead zone, and you would normally do this at least for an hour until you give up. And we don’t see desperate actions in these first 112 attempts. If the girls were attacked by a third party and kidnapped, then it is more likely that those later phone activities (probably those after the 1st of April) have been staged by them or by someone else. Then someone might ask the question, how they correctly entered the pin codes during the first 5 days? There are ways to get that. (The world is more cruel than we think) The perpetrators could extract basic information about the victims, because we know that a passport/insurance card was in the backpack. Since there have been a number of missing cases around that area, I believe an organized crime gang/ serial killers/ drug dealers were active in Boquete, who operate in a systematic manner (above the law). Probably they might have links with local people from Boquete as well. Another question is, why didn't they destroy the evidence, the backpack and belongings? Those gangs or drug dealers have a chain of operation, which runs from powerful players to low level players. These girls were actually not local people, and we know that this case received worldwide attention at the time. So, if the powerful players feel like they are vulnerable, they usually cover their traces by eliminating the low level players. (Everyone in that swimming photo plus the cab driver is dead).

Actually, the phone reception data is the only thing that contradicts the idea of the girls returning to Boquete soon after #508.
Tharindu: "Personally, I don’t trust those emergency calls, because as explained earlier, it doesn’t make any sense most of the time if you pick any theory (lost, accident or crime). It does initially appear like they were lost deep in the jungle and waiting for help, but other evidence suggests that something else has happened to them. There is a possibility that they were moved to a secondary location by a 3rd party after the morning of April 3rd. We know that one specific guide searched beyond the Pianista summit on 3rd of April. And since there were too many loose ends in the investigation process, we can’t be 100% certain if the phone reception data was complete and if maybe the eyewitnesses were telling the truth after all. In fact we know that Kris’s boyfriend had contacted her around 14:00 (Panamanian time) according to Roelie. (Which was somehow not listed in the official case reports). I think the last contact time between Kris and her boyfriend is crucial here. Kris’s iPhone had lost reception around 13.38, which is 15 minutes before the last day time photo #508. Let’s assume that they had turned back to Boquete around 14.00 PM at the first stream. Then, they would have signal reception around 2.15 PM and her boyfriend might be telling the truth."

Why were they suddenly attempting to call 911 instead of 112 by the late morning of April 2nd?
Tharindu: "Is it perhaps because the previous 112 attempt from the Samsung S3 had made a connection, and they heard the famous question “911, what is your emergency?” just before disconnecting the call? If this connection was actually made for 1-2 seconds that day, what would be the most likely and logical scenario? Consider the attempt from the Samsung S3 at 10.52 a.m. on April 2nd, the official report says: “At 10:52 the Samsung was powered on again and both 112 and 911 were dialed”. By following the CDRs updating procedure, I have a strong feeling that this 112 attempt has the highest probability for a short connection. I lean towards this idea, because all the 5 attempts up to that point were dialed to 112. Then, the immediate attempt after this last 112 call was to dial 911. So, my question is why they were suddenly attempting 911 instead of 112? If we consider this possible scenario, CDRs updates the Called Number field as 112, and the Connected Number as 911 (9911). We usually see the dialing phone number in our display, while the other party answers the call. So, when the 112 attempt was made, I believe 112 was pending for a short moment in display and suddenly connected to 911. Since the connection was brief (1-2 seconds), I believe the call was held for 1-2 seconds until an operator answers. Check the description related to Call Duration field in CDRs table. (Call Duration = Duration of call or holding time.) Unfortunately, due to poor reception the call was disconnected before an operator answers. I think at that moment, the girls realised that 911 is the emergency number in Panama. It makes a lot of sense, because after that you only see 911 attempts. It might also explains why the Samsung phone was powered ON and left ON during the night of April 2nd. 

I will remind you a good example where CDRs of a SMS were used. Do you remember how the police was able to identify the area where Frauke Liebs was at 12.49 a.m.? Did you notice the phone conversations of Frauke Liebs and Magdalena Żuk have a correlation? An interesting application of HLR and VLR CDRs is if it is possible to locate where a phone was turned OFF. This is often the situation during searches for missing persons. When a phone is turned OFF it deregisters with the HLR before it shuts down to avoid incoming calls to page the mobile in the entire location area. This means that it is impossible to tell which location area or cell a phone was shut down in after the shutdown. However, if the phone loses its power source, it will not deregister in the HLR since it has no power to communicate. As a result, the last location area of the phone will be available in the HLR for a period of time after the phone lost its power. This situation can also be identified by people trying to call the missing person. The reason is that since the mobile is not deregistered in the HLR, the network will try to page (paging is like saying can you hear me? please respond) the mobile in the entire location area. The caller will therefore experience 15-20 seconds of silence before the caller gets the message that the phone cannot be reached. This property can be useful to detect if missing persons have fallen in water or been implicated in violent crashes, since the mobile will lose its power source in such situations.

*****

Regarding the dbm values

It is good that now the data has been corrected to negative dbm values, and the dbm values correspond to the rest of the timestamps that are available. 

*RSSI refers to the power present in a received radio signal. The RSSI is indicated by a negative dBm value. 

*Dead Zones refer to areas where mobile phones cannot transmit to a nearby mobile site, base station, or repeater are known as dead zones. In these areas, the mobile phone is said to be in a state of outage.

*Signal strength below -110 dBm in GSM/WCDMA means that the serving cell power is so weak that the receiver antenna module inside the mobile will only considers it to be a random noise signal. The mobile phone cannot initiate a successful connection request to a base station then, because there are too much drop outs in the transmitting signal. It means the mobile phone has no signal coverage (inside a dead zone), and it will disconnect from the service provider. Simultaneously, the bar levels will disappear, and the phone will display “No Service”. However, the receiver GSM antenna module is not sensitive enough to detect signal strengths below -113 dBm, which means there is no GSM signal. You can see that forensic experts had commented the same thing “A signal strength of -113 dBm per the forensics examiner means that there is essentially no signal”. This can be also confirmed by putting a Samsung phone into flight mode. All the cellular antennas are turned OFF during flight mode, so there is simply no signal. Therefore, signal strength is displayed as -113 dBm 0 ASU. 

But the RSSI value is greatly affected by the interference power. In Kris and Lisanne’s scenario, the main reason for the signal interference during their ascent is multipath propagation (due to shadowing), while the descent along the other side is affected by diffraction and shadowing. So, In order to counteract the effect from interference, GSM standards introduces a minimum required dBm level of -104 dBm for maintaining a healthy communication (although it would still affects by interference). It does not strictly mean that a signal strength level of -107 dBm will not guarantee you any sort of communication. It is just a telecommunication standard adhered by the service providers/mobile companies. [Interference is actually happened due to multipath propagation and Bandlimited channels].  Suppose your phone indicates a -80 dBm value for instance, it looks like a strong signal strength to establish a connection, but on the other hand it is possible that the serving cell power of the service provider is very poor (in such a scenario, you will see less bars even though the RSSI value is -80 dBm). This could be due to something interfering with the reference signal, such as a building or other obstructions (hilly terrain, dense foliage, or physical distance) between the mobile phone and the tower. Going back to the Kris and Lisanne’s situation, this is the exact reason why GSM disconnection occurred at 11.49 a.m. and 13.38 p.m. on April 1st. The dBm values and corresponding bar levels clearly show that (-82 dBm 1 bar and -94 dBm 1 bar). 

-Based on the available dbm values, RSSI value correspond to the strongest signal being -76 dbm. Surprisingly, this was at the Pianista summit around 13:16:03 p.m. (I guess due to the higher altitude and a Line Of Sight path was created between mobile phone and the base station for a short moment). It was 6 dbm greater than the RSSI value (-82 dbm) at the start of the Pianista trailhead around 11:05:25 a.m. In addition, the received signal power (-76 dbm) at the summit was 4 times more powerful than the received signal power (-82 dbm) at the Pianista trailhead. Apart from that, the signal strength at the summit was fairly strong and it was varying between -76 dbm and -91 dbm within 2 minutes. I find this completely natural, and such variations would occur, when you move the phone into different positions. Bar levels look also fairly okay.

**At 11:49:41 a.m., the phone was disconnected from GSM network, probably at the start of the jungle trail (can be clarified from the photo timings). The phone is showing a single bar and it can be tallied with the poor serving cell power. However, if you only consider the RSSI value of -82 dbm, it is more than enough to establish a connection according to dBm value to bar level mapping scales. But actually the serving cell power is very poor and the interference power (caused by shadowing due to dense foliage) has a greater impact on RSSI value. It is highly likely that serving cell power of the iPhone was approaching near -110 dBm and GSM disconnection had occurred. It appears like the GSM information of the iPhone had frozen after GSM disconnection. I’m not sure, but the same pattern of GSM logging can be seen for the rest of the timestamps. [I have done few tests using my Samsung phone. It appears like, if the serving cell power is less than -104 dBm, it would show no bars (in 4 bar scale), but it remained connected with my service provider. It perfectly makes sense according to the GSM standard regarding -104 dBm, which I described earlier. It is my speculation that iPhone would show a single bar (in 5 bar scale) in a serving cell power range between -105 dBm to -110 dBm.]”

**Do you see now at 12:33p.m., the RSSI value is -82 dbm, which is the same value recorded at 11.49 a.m.? The phone connected with the GSM network at 12.33 p.m., and it means the bi-directional communication was initiated (synchronization with the base station). It means the connection request made by the mobile phone was acknowledged by the base station (actually core network), and an operating system log was created. Here, also a single bar level and the same RSSI value (-82 dBm) were shown, which confirms that the GSM information of THE iPhone had frozen after GSM disconnection at 11.49 a.m. I think this connection was made due to the weak serving cell power at the 2nd half of the mountain trail. After that, it remained connected with the GSM network. And by the time the girls reached the summit, it was already connected to a GSM network. Simply, we don't see any kind of GSM activity between 11.49 a.m. to 13.14 p.m., because the phone was in idle state. We need to be clear that log files were only created, when there was a GSM activity (connection/disconnection/location update) or during an application usage. The reason why we see GSM activity around 13.14 p.m., because they were actively using their phones. That doesn’t mean that at 13.00 p.m. (while they were taking happy selfies) the phones were disconnected from the GSM network. Otherwise, if there was a GSM disconnection after 12.33 p.m., it would have indicated THIS in GSM information similar to the disconnection logs created at 11.49 a.m. and 13.38 p.m. Quite the opposite scenario had happened during the descent along the other side, because the iPhone was able to maintain a GSM connection until 13.38 p.m., which is close to the location of #508.After that point the iPhone entered the Dead Zone (disconnected from GSM) and the RSSI value and bar level frozen at -94 dBm and 1 bar. At this specific location of the trail, you can almost guarantee GSM disconnection, because the signal reception is completely blocked by the mountain range (it can be clearly seen in GSM coverage photos). Hans Kremers was also experienced the same thing around this location in “Answer for Kris” documentary video. Generally, there will then be no bars visible on the screen, as well as a “No Service” or  “Emergency Calls Only” notification and a dead zone symbol (circle with a diagonal line through it). Unfortunately we don’t have GSM information from Samsung S3, but there was a power log detail (41%) at 13.40 p.m. It is highly likely that Samsung S3 entered the dead zone around that time (but I don’t fully understand why the Samsung S3 does not have such a power log detail around 11.49 a.m.).

**Again the same observations at 16:39p.m. and 16:40p.m. Based on the available GSM information, the iPhone had disconnected from the GSM network since 13.38 p.m. Here also the same RSSI value of -94 dBm and a single bar was logged at 16.39 p.m., because the RSSI value and bar level were frozen at -94 dBm and 1 bar after the GSM disconnection at 13.38 p.m. In telecommunications perspective, it was the RSSI value corresponding to the last location update at 13.38.31 p.m., and not the actual RSSI value at 16:39:26 p.m. Otherwise it is highly unlikely to have the same RSSI value for several timestamps. For example, see the fluctuation of RSSI value during the 2 minutes at the summit. The iPhone would not display one bar, but instead it would display “No Service” at this point. Same story for the Samsung S3 at 16.51 p.m., but most likely its RSSI value would be -113 dBm 0 ASU (Samsung phones do not freeze its current RSSI value during GSM disconnection, but instead it jumps instantly to the minimum value, which is -113 dBm). We see from GSM information that last dBm value (-94 dBm) was logged at 16:40:07 p.m. on April 1st, which was immediately after the first 112 attempt at 16:39:26 p.m. Similar kind of system logging can be seen in Samsung S3 at 16.53 p.m. (timestamp and battery power of 22% were logged), which was immediately after the 112 attempt at 16.51 p.m. This might be due to 2 reasons. (This is one clue for me that the SIM cards were present in both mobiles)

* Forced registration was initiated by the mobile due to its failed 112 attempt (higher likelihood).

* Both girls tried to turn ON cellular data just after their first 112 attempts (just a speculation).

**First emergency calls: If Kris had seen a single bar on her iPhone around 16.39 p.m., you would have expected her to make multiple 112 attempts. But the most likely notification on her iPhone display would have been “Mobile network not available” or “Not registered on network”. Is this why the girls did not attempt to send a SMS or Whatsapp message during that late first afternoon? I personally think that if a person sees such a notification during an emergency situation, he/she would immediately press OK and go for another attempt. (This is like clicking “I agree” while installing a software. We usually don’t read the agreement.) But instead, both of them were showing a calm response to the situation during the first hours of their emergency, which seems odd. Another odd thing is that I would expect Lisanne’s 112 attempt to follow immediately after Kris’s attempt, but there was a 12 minutes time gap. After those two 112 attempts, it appears that both phones were in idle state (Samsung S3 lost 3% of battery), until both of them were switched OFF between 17.40 - 17.52 p.m. Why didn’t they at least try to make one more attempt from both phones just before switching of their phones? If they were lost or had an accident, they wouldn’t even think about dying inside a jungle or spending a dreadful night inside it. For me these 112 attempts show no signs of desperation and don’t make any sense at all. And what were they doing for the next 13 hours? Could they spend an unplanned night inside a dense jungle in such a calm manner? We have to remember that these were their first few hours of emergency. Why didn’t they at least try another 112 attempt during the night? If they were in close proximity to a cell coverage area, a call attempt around midnight would given them the best chance of having at least weak reception. This is due to the low interference between channels at night. These unanswered questions lean my opinion regarding the cause of their disappearance towards 3rd party involvement rather than getting lost or having an accident. That 12 minute interval between the first 112 attempts is interesting. I personally give more weight to the idea that they were on the move (freely or influenced by a 3rd party) between 16.39 p.m. and 16.51 p.m. rather than them having been stagnant. And I would expect at least 2 emergency calls in quick succession if they encountered a fatal accident). Based on my general theory and the mystery following 13.54 p.m., I think those emergency calls on April 1st might have been made during a desperate escape attempt from a 3rd party. Btw, IF the iPhone had reconnected with the GSM network in between 16.39 - 17.52 p.m. on April 1st, then the expected GSM log would have looked like this:

**signal of -113 dbm - Then comes the most interesting part for me. You wrote: “For the next days, April 2nd and 3rd, there was a signal of -113 dbm. The investigators deemed this the lowest possible value in telecommunications and as such and in effect, that it reflects a situation where there was no GSM signal available. Matt doesn't know why there isn't a -113 dbm signal reported for later days though, so after April 3rd.” I did a simple test with different Samsung phones available in my home. I have used Samsung S20+(android 11), Samsung S7 (android 8.0), Samsung M21 (android 11) and Samsung Galaxy Trend-2013 (android 4.1). I turned ON the Airplane/Flight mode of each phone and checked the RSSI value. Guess what! All the phones instantly showing -113 dbm. It is highly likely that Samsung S3 would show the same RSSI value for Airplane mode. Unfortunately, I don’t have an iPhone at my home to test this theory. But one thing I know is that when you switch ON the airplane mode, both the Wi-Fi and cellular antennas will turn OFF. So no more signal reception. Investigators have also commented on the same thing: “this the lowest possible value in telecommunications and as such and in effect, that it reflects a situation where there was no GSM signal available”.

Power-Pixie read this and commented to me with the following information: "Tharindu was spot on with the measurements of the DBms of the two cell phones. There are tests that you can easily do with your smartphone if you have an Android or iPhone. Try it out. I did, with my iPhone SE 2016. My RSSI reported -94 dbm, but fluctuates between -94dbm to -104dbm at times. I have two consistent bars. Like Tharindu, I turned on Airplane mode and my stats froze at -94dbm, in other words I didn't get any more reads from the Field Test that the article outlines. From this article: If your outside signal ranges from:
-50 to -79 dBm, then it's generally considered great signal (4 to 5 bars).
-80 to -89 dBm, then it's generally considered good signal (3 to 4 bars).
-90 to -99 dBm, then it's generally considered average signal (2 to 3 bars).
-100 to -109 dBm, then it's generally considered poor signal (1 to 2 bars).
-110 to -120 dBm, then it's generally considered very poor signal (0 to 1 bar)
Generally from -95 dBm and above, you're dealing with below average signal. However, at -100 dB, that's when you're experiencing some serious inconsistent service and weak reception. - So what I understood from the article is that the signal bars are subjective, and based on what each phone company determines their signal bar(s) to be." 

Tharindu: "During flight mode, all the cellular antennas will turn off, so there is no signal reception. This is why he didn’t get any reads from Field Testing parameters.Yeah, the signal bar levels are different for different phone companies (this is because each phone company or operating system uses different algorithms). dBm value bar levels can be used to clarify whether the serving cell power is strong or poor. When looking at dBm values and bar levels on internet, we need to be very careful about the network modes (2G/3G/LTE), because Kris and Lisanne had used iPhone 4 and Samsung S3. Both phones supports only 2G and 3G (GSM and WCDMA) network modes only. See this image for the comparison of dBm and bar levels below. Sensitivity of the LTE antenna module is greater than the sensitivity of the GSM antenna module. Those dBm values and bar levels will depend on network modes (2G/3G/LTE). However, in this particular case, it is easier for us to analyze GSM information, because Kris’s iPhone was operating in GSM only mode. 

Tharindu: "The important result from Power-Pixie's test is that the dBm value got frozen at -94 dBm (it could have frozen at -104 dBm if the last recorded dBm value was -104 dBm) during flight mode. When going back to the GSM information from Kris and Lisanne's phones, gathered after 13.38 p.m. on April 1st, then this might be the only possible and logical way to understand why there were the same GSM system logs for the rest of the timestamps. Based on this theory, when the first 112 attempt was made at 16.39 p.m., the RSSI value had frozen (including the bar level) for almost 3 hours, which indicates that the iPhone never regained GSM connectivity after 13.38 p.m. Therefore, -94 dBm was logged as the corresponding RSSI value at 16.39 p.m. However, the Samsung S3 would show its signal strength as -113 dBm 0 ASU, as I explained earlier. RSSI is a fluctuating value, and certainly it wouldn’t have remained at the same value for a long time, if serving cell power is greater than -110 dBm. Therefore, my conclusion is that there would be no bars after 13.38 p.m. on April 1st, but instead both phones would display “No Service” or “dead zone symbol”.

**Another possible way for clarifying bar levels. The only other way of clarifying the doubts regarding the bar levels is screenshots. Did you notice the 4 screenshots that were created by the iPhone after April 1st? In my opinion, they should show the corresponding bar levels at that particular time, and the screenshots might have been available in the phone's gallery, when the Dutch forensic experts started their investigation. But then again, it looks like the investigators listed down the dBm values and bar levels by referring to the operating system logs only. (I don’t see anywhere that, the investigators confirmed the bar levels through screenshots. It appears like it was also not particularly looked for). Did they fail to recover the 4 screenshots? It was not mentioned in the official reports. 

**The following days (2nd and 3rd April), the dBm value and the bar level were frozen at -113 dBm and 1 bar. How did that -94 dBm value from the previous day change into -113 dBm the following day? Perhaps the investigators only referred to GSM information created through operating system logs, and came up with a conclusion that “-113 dBm is a situation, where there is no GSM signal available”. It makes sense, because the official report contains just raw data, which was obtained from the operating system logs. I also agree with the investigators statement though, because -113 dBm means 0 serving cell power in GSM dBm scale. – Again, don’t be confused with minimum usable signal strength and lowest possible signal strength value in telecommunications. Minimum usable signal strength is a general threshold (around -110 dBm) for serving cell power to initiate a successful bi-directional communication between the mobile and the base station. On the other hand, lowest possible signal strength value means the lowest RSSI value in GSM scale, where there is no GSM signal power is available (no serving cell power and interference power). That’s why the Samsung phone is showing -113 dBm in flight mode: because the GSM antenna is turned OFF, so no power is received. It only was the RSSI value corresponding to the last bi-directional communication at 13.38.31 p.m. and not the actual RSSI value at 16:39:26 p.m.”. The iPhone 4 entered the dead zone around 13.38 p.m., and it never connected with GSM network after that point again on April 1st. After reading Power Pixies simple test from his iPhone, I can now give a better explanation. Once the iPhone was very close to enter that dead zone around 13.38 p.m., the -94 dBm value and 1 bar reading was logged in the operating system just before GSM disconnection. Samsung S3 also had a similar kind of system logging around 13.40 p.m. (Generally, a mobile phone is synchronized with the base station, when it has GSM connection. This is crucial for power controlling purpose, as the mobile user moves in a GSM cell area. So, when the serving cell power is deteriorating, the bar levels will decrease and the mobile phone would initiate a location update. This is what exactly looks like happened just a moment before GSM disconnection at 13.38 p.m.). Just a very short moment after that final location update, the serving signal strength might have dropped below the minimum usable level (practically below -110 dBm) in a GSM network. So, the iPhone was disconnected from the GSM network, and it was in a dead zone. Since it never regained GSM connection again, the RSSI value had frozen at -94 dBm (probably the recorded 1 bar value as well), which was the last recorded RSSI value. And based on the argument used for the GSM information analysis on April 1st, we cannot exactly say whether the girls were moving further and further away (continued to walk along the trail) from civilization (Boquete), or were stagnant at some point. Because, once they entered the dead zone, they could be anywhere inside the dead zone behind the summit. The only thing we can be certain of is that they never returned back past that specific location related to GSM disconnection around 13.38 p.m. on April 1st. But if someone turned ON flight mode inside the dead zone on April 1st, we might not even notice it, because the dBm values and bar levels had already frozen at that point. However, in Flight Mode, the cellular antennas are powered OFF, while the operating system is still running. Whereas when a phone is powered OFF, not only its cellular antennas but also its operating system shuts down. So, when the phone is powered ON again, the operating system starts its booting process. I believe the RSSI value (-94 dBm on April 1st) would most probably stored in the volatile memory (RAM). So, once the phone is powered OFF, the volatile memory is cleared. And when the phone is powered ON next time, the memory location related to the RSSI value will be updated by the currently measured signal strength (-113 dBm on April 2nd) from its GSM transceiver. I think this is the most convincing way of explaining that dBm value change. Ultimately we cannot exactly say whether the phones were moving further and further away from civilization, or were stagnant at some point. The only thing we can be certain of is that phones were not inside a cell coverage area.

Next days: There are no call attempts after April 3rd. So, no operating system logs, and no more RSSI values were reported (note that dBm values were not logged, when the phone was turned ON or OFF). However, an additional piece of GSM information (-113 dBm and 1 bar) was logged, when the contact of “Mytiam” was looked up in contacts. I don’t understand the reason for doing this because they never tried to call her or left a draft message (my first impression was that the operating person was just looked up that contact based on country code. Just an idea). In order to create an operating system log related to GSM information, there should be some sort of GSM activity - if you observe the GSM information logs, you will see that there were key events like GSM connection/disconnection, 112/911 calls and normal location updates had taken place. Since this activity is related to Whatsapp/Contacts, it is possible that Kris or whomever was operating the iPhone, might have turned on cellular data. Then you have GSM activity. After April 3rd, iPhone had only turned ON and OFF and I don’t see any more GSM related activities. So, also no more information logs. And in effect also no more call attempts."

You [Scarlet] wrote: "I have read some people questioning whether or not it is suspicious that the phone logs reported 1 bar reception signal on the phones. In an area that has reportedly zero reception". - 
Tharindu: "Yes, this is a really suspicious part for me, and there are a lot of unanswered questions. As the investigators say, -113 dBm (standard value in telecommunications) means no signal. Although the lowest antenna sensitivity might be below -113 dBm (probably -120 dBm), signal reception bars would indicate levels according to a predefined algorithm. So theoretically, I believe there should be no bars, if there is no signal reception. In addition to that, -113 dBm corresponds to RSSI value in airplane mode (antenna module turned off, so no signal) in Samsung phones. So, it is difficult to differentiate whether the phone is inside a natural dead zone or switched to airplane mode. In the meantime “Kris changed some settings on her phone, allowing its control panel to be used without the need to first enter PIN codes". The motive of this might be to access the control panel (conveniently) regularly for some reason. Note that each 112/911 attempt was made when the corresponding signal strength was -113 dBm (that 1 bar level is the problem here). 4 screenshots were created by the iphone 4. This might be because the operating person was nervous and he/she was simultaneously pressing the power button and home button. I have a serious doubt whether Kris was freely using the phone at that moment. During the first 112 attempts on April 2nd, a screenshot was created. This is interesting because pressing the home button ends the current call in IOS 7. I believe there is a correlation between the above mentioned activities and I will add a few links below to clarify myself. For me, it seems like somebody who was not familiar with an iPhone 4 was operating it at that moment (I might be wrong but that was my first impression)." Link 1, link 2, link 3, link 4. 

You [Scarlet] wrote: "They did not try to write at least one draft message, as a form of documentation. Dead zone or no dead zone." - Tharindu: "Good point Scarlet, if the available facts regarding the GSM information are authentic, the girls must have seen the 1 bar signal reception level on display. It is very strange that they didn't at least try to send a single text message to anybody. From the girls' point of view, they weren't aware of the boundary of the (GSM) dead zone. I believe 99 out of 100 people would send a text message in such a situation (lost in the jungle), if he/she sees a single reception bar on mobile display. Another thing is that text messages can be sent, even if you have a very weak serving cell power (dBm). Only voice calls need better signal strength to communicate through the channel. I highly doubt that the girls had free control with their mobile phones from April 2nd onwards."

You [Scarlet] wrote: "Pitti and her team looked at these photos before they were all sent to the Dutch NFI and they also rotated and brightened the original photos and saved them. What else did they meddle with potentially?"  
Tharindu: "I suspect that that was not only #505, #506 and #507, but that also some of the nighttime photos were either rotated or flipped after capturing them. It seems the night photos are better fit to an earlier night (especially when you see Kris’s hair, which was clean and dry). Probably during the early morning of April 3rd. Do you see? The girls were using the weather app during the early morning of April 3rd around 02:21 - 02:41 a.m. This time period has a direct correlation with the night photo’s time interval on April 8th. Based on this argument, it is more likely that night photos were from the early morning of April 3rd, and for some reason they were shifted onto a later date. Other possibility is that those night photos were compilation of first two nights and they were shifted to a later date (early morning of April 8). Like you, I want to believe that the girls had returned back to Boquete after #508. I have noted another important fact from Samsung S3, which supports this idea. It is stated that at 13:14 p.m., the Samsung phone closed Google Maps, which had remained activated since 10:16 a.m. We usually tend to close the maps if we are going to return from the same path. However in this case, it could be possible that girls might have been accompanied by a local person at that moment, so they didn't need Google maps anymore. Most probably the girls had encountered something around that meadow area behind the summit. It might be possible that some kind of struggle had occurred around that meadow area (note down that guide F had searched for footprints around that meadow area on April 3rd. Did he cover up possible traces?), and they were captured by a 3rd party and moved to a secondary location. Those emergency calls on April 1st might have been dialed during a desperate escape attempt. It is highly likely that the backpack damage *4 and *5 has occurred due to the barbed wire at the meadow. (Trapping the backpack fabric with a barbed wire fence) while they tried to get away." 

Clues from mobile phone activities starting from the 1st of April

April 1st
*Several apps like Facebook, Whatsapp and news sites have been accessed by the Samsung S3 before public Wi-Fi connection was created at 9.48 a.m. It means Lisanne might have used cellular data, when there was no Wi-Fi.
*I think they might have used Google maps to navigate from Boquete to Pianista trail. Since, there were two timelines for this disappearance case (based on eyewitness and photo details), there is a possibility that the girls might have wanted to hike the Pianista trail during the afternoon of the previous day, but instead they took a wrong turn and ended up on a different trail (I saw a few eyewitnesses statements from people declaring that they were seen on a different trail). So, they needed to make sure that they were on the right trail on April 1st.
*Kris’s iPhone lost connection to the GSM network between 11.49 a.m. -12.33 p.m. (based on GSM information).
*At 13.14 p.m. Lisanne closed Google maps. Usually someone would close the maps, if he/she is going to return from the same path. But I don’t think that the trail was properly mapped on Google maps at the time, because today we still don’t see the complete trail in Google maps.

April 2nd
*At 8.12 - 8.14 a.m. the iPhone was manually switched from 2G-network to 2G+3G-network. It means that Kris’s iPhone was operated in GSM mode only, up to that point. This was a wise move to increase the power of the mobile transceiver, which shows situation awareness. In order to make this change, the phone can't be in Flight mode, and the SIM card should be present inside the phone. For me, this is the only phone activity that shows a survival instinct, because none of the other activity makes any sense at all.
*Kris changed some settings on her phone, allowing its control panel to be used without the need to first enter PIN codes. The motive of this might be to regularly access the control conveniently. This is kind of a suspicious move for me, because if we consider the icons in this image, I can only pick four icons of relevance here, considering their situation. They are Flashlight, Brightness Control, Camera and Air Plane Mode. We can exclude the camera, because there were no photos taken from iPhone after April 1st. Then, out of the remaining 3 options, which icon has the highest probability of being used within a very short time span? (1-2 minutes, because they always powered ON their phones for a very brief time). We can also exclude the Brightness Control as well, because we usually keep it in auto control mode. Flashlight is needed, if someone is walking at night, inside a tunnel or a cave. Flashlight is rarely used outside, if someone is walking in daylight, and we also know that the iPhone was never used at night time. And if their motive was to save battery power, then using the Flashlight would not have been a great idea. I just picked the Flight Mode icon, because of that specific dBm value of -113 dBm recorded during the following days. Clearly something is going on here, but I can't quite put my finger on it based on the available facts.

*According to Romain’s info, there were 4 screenshots taken by the iPhone. Two of them were during the 112/911 attempts and another one shows the contact of “Mytiam”. The remaining one was taken on April 6th and it shows a clock app. This might have occurred because the operating person was nervous and he/she was simultaneously pressing the power button and home button. Is it likely that a regular iPhone user like Kris would do such a thing? If it had happened one time, we can say that it was by accident, but instead it happened 4 times. Certainly it is not a coincidence. I have serious doubts about whether Kris was freely using her phone at that moment. For me, it seems like somebody who was not familiar with an iPhone 4 was operating it. This link shows how to take a screenshot in iPhone 4. And this video shows how to bypass iPhone 5 and iPhone 4S passcode. It was published in February 2013. I was surprised after watching this video, because the procedure explained in this video can also be seen reflected in Kris's phone activities. Highly suspicious! The same pattern can be seen in Kris's each 112/911 attempt. After watching this video, I was able to understand how that screenshot of Mytiam''s contact was made. How can we possibly explain this? There is no way a regular iPhone user would take those kinds of screenshots. It is very clear to me that something is not right here. Not only me, but also anyone who has followed Kris’s phone activities would become suspicious here. At the moment there certainly are lot of unanswered questions. Most importantly: did someone fake those 112/911 attempts after April 1st?

      

Scarlet: Regarding the Mytiam info: It does intrigue me that Miriam's number was saved in Kris' whatsapp list. She must have contacted with Miriam before therefore. I don't think people preventively make WhatsApp contacts unless they actually communicate(d) with them. So if they already communicated before, and Kris (or someone else) ALSO looks up Miriam's number in whatsapp, at 15:59 PM, two days into their disappearance, then it is all the more absurd that for eleven days they only try to contact 112/911, seven times in total. When you go as far as powering on your phone, opening WhatsApp, looking up the actual number of your host mother, while 'lost' for nearly three days, why not click on it to try to make contact with her?

April 3rd and 5th
*AccuWeather-app was used on the Samsung phone during the early morning on April 3rd. I have also used AccuWeather app. Sometime's update notifications are displayed even when you are not connected to Wi-Fi or cellular data. It is possible that the girls might have heard the notification sound, and immediately checked what it was (They could have thought it might be a SMS from somebody).
*At 13:37 p.m. on April 5th the iPhone4 was powered ON and OFF. The SIM pin code was either not entered, or not entered correctly. In order to have that type of sudden memory loss, not remembering your own pincode within a short period of time, the person should experience a severe concussion of sorts, affecting your brain function. Usually concussions are caused by a violent blow to the head or by falling or enduring physical abuse (there are many causes). This was the same day that someone had reported to a nearby Ranger about having heard female screams and a loud bang.

Tharindu's general theory

is based on the following reasons: "The last known location of the girls (at #508) was nearly 35 minutes away from the meadow area and there was an abrupt stop in photographing + the missing photo #509. "The girls were on the main trail around 14.00 p.m (hard to get lost there and there were no other trails & cliffs close to the main trail according to the parents), they were also hours away from the first monkey bridge and the phones didn’t connect to a GSM network after 13:38 p.m and the girls were not prepared for a longer hike (perfect weather conditions). So I believe they encountered some kind of problem in between the time span of 13.54 to 14.40 p.m. The girls were really active and took photographs at regular time intervals, but suddenly everything had frozen in time. I think the problem occurred very close to that meadow area. The backpack had specific damage: a 10 mm tear located near and parallel to a seam and a missing piece of fabric of apprx. 30 by 15 mm, which were determined to have been caused by a 'sharp edge'. Damage mainly around the top right/left corner of a backpack is a rare occurrence if you slip along a steep slope. However, it can happen if the backpack fabric is trapped by a sharp edge while you are walking/running. When considering the above reasons, it is highly likely that damage had occurred due to a Barbed Wire.

Why? Because around that meadow area the trail is narrow and both sides have barbed wire fences. The girls may have encountered something around 14.00-14.40 p.m. close to the meadow area. For some reason, whomever (Kris or Lisanne) carried the backpack had decided to pass through that barbed wire fence in a jiffy, or some kind of struggle had occurred. I think at that moment, the top right corner of the backpack had suddenly trapped with a barbed wire and maybe Kris’s Jean short as well. Due to the dragging force generated, the damage might have occurred instantly. However, the official report doesn’t mention which strap (right or left) has damage 1. In my opinion, it is highly likely to occur in the right strap, because when the top right corner is trapped, the dragging force is fully exerted on the right side, and the seam can be loosened. Other important thing is that the contents inside the backpack would not damage, because the effect of dragging force is focused on the top right corner. I believe this explanation makes a lot of sense based on the evidences available to us. It might be possible that they were already under the influence of someone/something at the time of #508. The guide claimed (Answer for Kris video) that he had not found any traces of them including footprints. I think the guide had accidentally slipped an important point here. Why would he search beyond the Pianista summit, when he already had the chance to return at the summit? At the time, no one exactly knew that the girls had gone beyond the Pianista summit. Specifically searching for footprints around that meadow area seems highly suspicious. We need to keep in mind that no official search operations were ongoing on April 3rd. It might be possible that some kind of struggle had occurred around that meadow area, and this guide had covered possible traces of it. Why was he was searching for footprints? I might be totally wrong about this theory, but I have tried to look at this from a different perspective."

How about the swimming photo and its location?
Tharindu: "If the swimming photo is legitimate, I believe they were kidnapped soon after that or behind the Pianista trail soon after #508. Looks like most of the emergency calls and night time photos were staged later on, to narrate the lost theory. That’s why we have lots of controversies in each theory and are unable to explain what has really happened to them. For instance the introduction of extra and fake information like the story of the dog Blue. Exactly like Dave said, we see ‘two ghosts’ after #508, and ‘something or someone happened to make the photographing stop after #508’. It’s a pity that the investigators were unable to recover a single bit of information regarding the missing #509. At least the date and time. Is it possible that #509 never existed and somebody made a mistake while renumbering the photographs? For example, the night photo showing the back of Kris’s head fits better with the first night on April 1st, because after a week surviving inside a deep jungle, her hair looks very clean. Is it possible that this photo was taken during the night after they went swimming? Lots of doubts and questions remain." 

"So theoretically it is possible to move the girls from Pianista to the Caldera hot springs without their phones connecting to a network. If both SIM cards were taken out from the phones, they would operate under Emergency Mode Only. Based on my understanding, VLR (Visitor Location Register) does not update location records at idle state, when the mobile operates in Emergency Mode. However, it will update location records for a connected 112/911 attempt. This is not practical, because the girls were posing happily in the swimming photo, so we have to exclude the idea of SIM card removal behind the summit. I have clues to believe at least the SIM card of the iPhone was present on April 1st and the morning of April 2nd, but I can’t be certain of the Samsung S3. There is a possibility of removing the SIM card of Samsung S3 during the following days or after the 112 attempt on April 1st, because the official case report says: “One white Samsung cell phone was found with battery but it had no SIM card and no memory card” - No SIM card and no memory? This is a big mistake in an official report". Another farfetched scenario is turning ON the Flight Mode inside the dead zone by Kris. Since the GSM information had frozen after GSM disconnection, Flight Mode would not make any change to the dBm values. Then, the girls have the possibility to move to the Caldera Hot Springs without GSM connection (we can assume this, because we don’t have GSM info from Samsung S3). But then again, the girls have to be kidnapped inside a dead zone around Caldera then - because their 112 attempts didn’t connect - or someone else has to fake those first 112 attempts. If the girls were kidnapped behind the summit, then the swimming photo might have been taken before April 1st. It is also possible that the swimming event caused Lisanne's coughing." [Scarlet: Good point also that indeed, the case report states that Lisanne's phone was found WITHOUT a SIM card or memory card. That has been mostly overlooked I think. But that could match with the SIM card having been removed from the phone at a much earlier stage in fact (also interesting in relation to that swimming photo and placing it within the timeline.]

Faraday bag
"Another more far-fetched reason why the phones would not make connection with a cell tower while being on the go (for instance late in the afternoon of April 1st), could be the use of a Faraday bag, according to Tharindu. "Just imagine, the phones were put inside a Faraday bag soon after #508. Now, even if they returned along the same path, the phones would not connect to a network. Severe battery power draining is also applicable inside a Faraday bag as explained earlier, because inside the bag is a virtual dead zone. The Faraday bags/cages provide a possibility of creating artificial dead zones."

Tharindu: based on the available information related to the phone records, it is impossible to give an explicit answer to the question how the girls made it to the swimming location. "According to the phone records, it appears the girls were lost deep in the jungle and waiting for help. But then again, there are lot of unanswered questions with the lost theory. I think what we are missing here is the phone detail records from the service providers perspective. But generally service providers are reluctant to provide Call Detail Records (CDRs) unless a warrant is provided. CDRs contain mobile originated/terminated call records, mobile originated/terminated SMS records, HLR location update records and VLR location update records. I think the police/investigators never investigated those records, before or after the backpack was found. I think the investigators/police made a huge mistake in a disappearance case like this one. Those phone records were the key piece of information to construct an accurate timeline during the early investigation. The official report just contains raw data obtained from the operating system logs. It appears like the obtained data was never converted into a meaningful form/information and that comprehensive research was never conducted."

"It’s a pity that we don’t have all the comprehensive and detailed official report for a disappearance case like this one. Another special thing I notice in this disappearance case is whenever you have a new lead, the crucial facts related have simply vanished. According to my understanding, CDRs have to be investigated as soon as possible, (at the beginning of the investigation) because the collected information is varied for different service provider, and the information, even if collected, may not be held in their servers for a longer period unless a special request is made from the police/investigators early on. We know that prosecutor (Pittí) never carried out a proper investigation regarding mobile phone records. I think the police made a big mistake early on by not investigating CDRs. For instance, we know from the first interview that Kris had contacted her boyfriend around 14.00 p.m. Panamanian time on April 1st. If the CDRs were investigated during the initial stage, we could have confirmed this statement made by Kris’s family." [Scarlet: Indeed, there was a huge problem with those Call Detail Records. They were not provided in the case files and Pitti (put on the case already on April 14th of 2014) said at some point that she did ask the provider - I believe Digicel was the (international) phone provider there at the time - but they received no useful information from them. True or not? The end result was still the same: nothing].

Best Regards,

Tharindu."

Thanks Tharindu! This case really needs people like yourself and technical guys like Dave and Power-Pixie to have these case files at your disposition, ideally. We know that this info is out there in the case files, but ideally those should be shared with absolute specialists on the matter, to sift out errors and peculiarities. Alas, this is not yet the case. But I believe that more clues are hiding in these logs. 

As I already posted in my blog part 2: I realize that many people see the phone log info as the Bible; as irrefutable evidence. But I do not necessarily agree with this. Not in this case. The log info may have been incomplete, a cherry-picked highlight of events or worse. We know for a fact that Betzaida Pitti messed with the night photos, before sending the camera to the Dutch NFI,. And she and her team were also the first people to go through the mobile phones of Kris and Lisanne. When it comes to discovering phone log manipulation, it partly depends on who is doing the research and the detecting. Let's hope that the NFI received the original copy of data from the phones. Not the one that Pitti and her team first extracted and looked at, using mobile forensics technology. The nightphoto disaster tells us that we cannot trust her with the originals. But if the NFI people were already looking at a tainted copy of the phone logs (say: with some info left in there, but other log details sifted out and removed), then that is what they have to work with. And let's not forget that the NFI did not flag (or even detect?) the manipuated EXIF data from the night photos either. It was Juan who discovered that Betzaida Pitti has photoshopped the night photos and has overwritten the original photos. This is a very serious forensic error on her part, and I believe she did not do so by accident. When we know this, then it opens the door for suspicions of more widespread manipulation. There is a missing photo or video file #509, after all. And phone logs which are fairly minimal and illogical at times. As if some data has been left out. For instance; there was a massive battery drop of 19% in the afternoon of April 1st, before the girls started calling 112 for help. Nothing in the phone log info explains this loss of battery, as there were seemingly no significant processes or apps running in the background, and the phones were in a zone without mobile reception. Did the original phone logs truly not log more information about what these phones did at that time? I have my doubts. With one illegal manipulation already being proven, the other seems suddenly less far-fetched. But still, you need evidence then. True specialists need to look into these official phone logs. But the authorities shield them for dear life, and do not allow anyone to do a second opinion. 'Nothing to see here, the case is closed', they told Juan and others. And bad intentions are one explanation, but another is unprofessionalism and clumsiness of course. If Pitti for example decided to turn on Lisanne's phone without taking the precautions outlined in the mobile forensics manual, then the first thing that would happen was the clearance of the cache of any application data that was set to clear cache on a power on/off cycle. Oops. I can see Pitti - not being versed on this type of forensics - making this blunder if she was left to her own devices and did not straight away sent the phones to the local computer forensics department. 

Here's a simple video on how they extract data. It is probably the easiest video to watch and learn how it's done when someone steals a phone or obtains a phone and has the tools to extract the data. Caveat: The video is 10 years old and has annoying background music that sounds like an 80s arcade video game 😀

Dr. Todd Grande's take on this case

Naomi S. wrote a comment on youtube about a new video from dr Todd Grande about the Kris and Lisanne case. Thank you. I checked the video out and I love his videos in general and often listen to his balanced, professional and interesting takes on personality disorders such as narcissism for instance. Thanks for the tip and thanks to Dr. Grande for his methodical analysis of some key elements of this disappearance case and for mentioning my blog, among other sites, as a source below his video. Here it is:

Update on the GSM connectivity

Matt shared this GSM info for the iPhone of Kris, for April 1st. (Thanks as always for sharing Matt!) These were the only signals: there was no signal reception after April 1st. For now it raises more questions than answers to me. How is it possible for instance that before the summit, 1 bar equaled connectivity to the GSM network, but a few hours later the same 1 bar meant no connectivity? - Matt replied to me that those bars by themselves do not mean so much, as they are determined somehow arbitrarily. "The dbm value is more important but also not available". Again something important that wasn't available in the official police files.. The connectivity means here if the phone was connected to the network, yes or no. Even if the phone picks up a signal, Matt explained to me, that does not automatically mean that it can also connect to the network. When one bar is showing, it can mean that the phone picked up some signal, but that it could not connect to the network because the signal was too weak (in the case of Kris and Lisanne we know from the official police files that their calls did not go through). It is also possible that the phone picked up a signal from a cell tower but could not transmit back, and therefore could not establish a network connection. The one thing this info does seem to show, is that the iPhone moved further away from a cell tower as time went by, because eventually there was no signal at all anymore.  -  I wonder if this info for the iPhone, having no connection in the 2nd part of the climb, also matches with connectivity data from the Samsung phone from Lisanne? Unfortunately for now, we do not know much about the official phone log info from the Samsung. I wonder if it also had no reception right on the summit initially. Not until 13:14 PM (despite being up there at 13:00 already). I guess this same pattern as this info from the iPhone may be reflected, to some degree, in Lisanne's phone log info. Matt does believe that the connection pattern of the Samsung phone would have been similar, with maybe only some small differences in cell reception based on different antennas and transceiver modules. Wished we had the Samsung phone connectivity info available for the public though.. 

Signal strength as recorded by the iPhone4

The table below shows the signal strength as recorded by the iPhone4 and the bars on the signal display indicator of the iPhone4. The indicator ranges from 1 – 5 bars and those are not just proportional to the signal strength but also are affected by other attributes like connection type (e.g. 2G/3G) etc. If the phone shows 1 bar, as it still did on and after 13:38 on April 1st, it does not mean that the phone had a network connection. The signal strength in dBm is the cell signal strength received by the phone’s transceiver. In order to have a network connection and being able to make phone calls or send text messages, the phone has to establish a two way connection to a cell tower. Since cell towers have large elevated antennas and great signal strength, it is often possible to pick up the cell tower signal but the phone with its tiny antenna and limited transmitter power can not send a signal back. This results in situations where there is a bar indicated on the phone but the phone can not connect to the network and can not make calls. Signal strength data is shown in the forensics report up until the data point at 15:59 on April 4th. After that, no more signal readings are shown and it is the assumption by Matt that from then on, the phone did not receive any signal anymore and did not log signal strength data and it was not listed by the forensics examiner that no signal was detected. A signal strength of -113 dBm per the forensics examiner means that there is essentially no signal. However it is the interpretation of Matt that the phone transceiver did pick up an extremely low signal. No signal data is available for the Samsung Galaxy phone of Lisanne, unfortunately.

So... for the iPhone4 there was only 1 bar between roughly 11:49 AM and 13:14 PM. I guess mobile phone reception higher up on the Pianista trail (on the Boquete side of the mountain) is not as good as was previously reported by people. But surely right on the summit, they would have had GSM reception right away? Instead of only after 14 minutes up there? How could this potentially be explained? Matt added that the graph shows all signal bars for the iPhone4 that are 1 bar.  All readings with more than 1 bar on April 1st are omitted to declutter the graph, he says. When there is no indication of signal strength and it is not stated in the forensics report, then most likely there was no signal at all, or 0 bars.  

     Dutch time / Local Time  Network Signal  Bars
18:05:25 / 11:05:25       GSM        -82  5

18:20:19 / 11:20:19 GSM -85  4

18:49:41 / 11:49:41 None -82  1

19:33:55 / 12:33:55 GSM -82  1

20:14:29  / 13:14:29 GSM -91  3

20:14:53  / 13:14:53 GSM -82  4

20:15:08 / 13:15:08 GSM -87  3

20:16:03  / 13:16:03 GSM -76  5

20:16:20 / 13:16:20 GSM -89  4

20:38:31  / 13:38:31 None -94  1

23:39:26  / 16:39:26 None -94  1

23:40:07  / 16:40:07 None -94  1

For the next days, April 2nd and 3rd, there was a signal of -113 dbm. The investigators deemed this the lowest possible value in telecommunications and as such and in effect, that it reflects a situation where there was no GSM signal available. Matt doesn't know why there isn't a -113 dbm signal reported for later days though, so after April 3rd. Perhaps investigators simply stopped reporting about those next days, or maybe there was even less signal in the days after April 3rd? Either way, this absence of further data has not been explained in the official police files. All in all it is fair to conclude, Matt thinks, that according to this official data there was no effective GSM signal for the mobile phones to use after April 1st. 

I also still find it peculiar that:
A. the parents of Kris were adamant so early on that there was phone contact at 2 PM local time between Kris and her boyfriend, but this is nowhere reflected in the official phone log info and B. that this local newspaper was the first to publish the detailed phone logs (early on) and this reporting can now be verified and proves to be as good as entirely correct. With exception of that one main detail: the supposed short connection the Samsung phone made with 112 on the morning of day 2. I understand that this event is not mentioned in the official police files. But it begs the question how a prominent newspaper had as good as everything leaked to them correctly, except for this one detail? Why would a source give 99% correct info to a newspaper with one glaring lie buried among it? And just the same: why would officials leave one peculiar detail out of the report on purpose? We already know errors were made in these official files, but this would be an error of another magnitude. So one or the other, in the case of this supposed contact with 112 for 1 or 2 seconds. Maybe the journalist just didn't understand the raw data correctly, or something..  -  What we also know now, is that Matt says the official police files show that the only place that has good GSM reception seems to be the trailhead (where Kris and Lisanne were at 11:05 AM - 5 bars) and one specific section of the Mirador (where they were at 13:14 PM - 3 to 5 bars). But both the area before and after the summit has the same low 1 bar reception, which was not enough for a 112 call to get through later that afternoon. So whether or not they kept walking after photo 508 was taken OR moved around and returned to the summit - perhaps lingering a bit on the same area of the summit where they stood between 13:00-13:14 and where they had no good reception, going by this official information - the phone log would have looked exactly the same then. The same as what we see in this phone log image. Because the top half of the ascend of the Pianista trail on the Boquete side had no reliable GSM reception either, we are now being shown with this connectivity image. 

Of course, one can then say that hád these girls in fact returned, then their phones would ultimately have shown 5 bars again at the start of the trail. But perhaps that moment of return was clocked after 16:40, which is when the phone log info stops. Or perhaps the phones had their sim cards removed at that point, under pressure of a 3rd party. Or perhaps.. well, it is all guessing work. But still not entirely possible to rule out, as an alternative explanation, I think. And something important we still have no reliable information about: how is it possible that both the phones were powered on between 13:38-16:40 PM, and that they were using above average battery life (draining the battery of the Samsung phone of Lisanne, in fact), but the official police files do NOT provide any extra information to explain the phone use during those 2,5 vital hours. Something must have drained those batteries during those hours, but going by the official report, there was literally nothing done with those phones then; no app use was logged, no attempts to look stuff up in the phones, nothing to explain this draining of the battery. Strange. As someone wrote to me: "I do now find myself asking the question as to IF they did find anomalies while reviewing the Phone logs, or had suspicions on their accuracy and lack of clarity, would they voice those concerns?"  -  Agreed. I have doubts about this as well at this point. Book from Frédéric Pirez (translated in English) about this case can be found here and here. And my review of his book can be read here. 

New findings about the missing image 509 from Matt on ImperfectPlan

April 7, 2021 - Matt had come to interesting conclusions about the possible fate of missing camera file 509. We assume that it was a photo and not a video file. He based himself on experiments he did with the Canon SX270 HS digital camera. I have been given the opportunity again to read his findings and come up with my own summarized post about it. I am far from technical myself when it comes to the nitty-gritty of digital cameras and their use of memory card storage, so I have mostly allowed myself to be surprised by what Matt has written. 

470 images
Matt found out from the official police files that 133 photos were taken on / after April 1^st of 2014, of which 33 (images 476-508) on April 1^st itself. Hundred images (510-609) were claimed to have been taken on April 8^th of 2014. In total investigators found 470 images on the Canon camera's memory card, as well as 7 videos, none of which taken on or after 1 April 2014.

One image is missing: image 509. The following is known about this file:
*It was taken after image 508 and could therefore at the earliest have been taken at 13:55 that day.
*It was taken before image 510 and could therefore at the latest have been taken at 1:29:32 on April 8^th.

When was image 509 most likely taken within those seven days?
Matt and IP identified patterns in the way Kris and Lisanne took photos. They often took multiple photos (at least two) in quick succession. Photo 509 may therefore have been a photo similar to photos 507 and 508. But not necessarily so, as we do not know the exact time when it was taken. The taking of photo 509 may also have coincided with another known event; the first attempts to call 112 emergency services at 16:39 PM on April 1st. But Matt notices that when you are focused on calling for help, taking a photo with your digital camera at the same time may not seem like a priority. And as for image 509 being just another dark night photo like photo 510; this seems also less likely to Matt, simply because it begs the question why the photo (and only that photo) would then have had to be removed. There are about a hundred night photos which mostly show the same dark surroundings, but only one of them had to go? Unlikely. And with regards to the rest of that week-long period of April 1^st - 8^th Matt reckons it is also a stretch to imagine that Kris and Lisanne would take one single photo with their camera then, while they had their mobile phones powered on at least shortly on most of those days and could have more easily taken a photo with their mobiles right there and then if they felt the need to document something. Besides, their habit of taking clusters of photos would also contradict with taking this one lonely photo 509 then. And considering the stressful situation they were probably in, it also begs the question why that sole photo was then deleted again. Matt deems it most likely, all in all, that photo 509 was taken in the afternoon of April 1^st, after 13:55 but before 16:39 PM.

Image numbering
All 133 images are sequentially numbered, just like the Canon SX270 HS digital camera would do by default. Out of the sequence of images there is only one file missing: image 509. It was not available to the forensic analyst who examined the SD card of the camera. Looking at the SD card on a Windows computer, it would look as shown in Picture 1 below:

Picture 1: Simulated sequence of images. Note that those are not the real
images nor times and it serves only to visualize the file names.

The Canon SX270 HS camera has two methods of numbering images, according to Matt. “Auto Reset” and “Continuous”. “Auto Reset” will give the next image a number sequential to the last image taken, regardless if the number was already used before. If image 509 was deleted befóre 510 was taken, the camera would use image number 509 again for the next photo. “Continuous” will use an image number only once and if an image was deleted, the next image will automatically be given a new number. So with this setting, once image 509 was deleted, the next image would automatically be 510. In case of the specific Canon camera from Kris and Lisanne, Matt was unable to be certain which of the two numbering methods was selected, as this info was not saved in the EXIF information. But since this camera's default setting is “Continuous”, this was used for all tests performed in Matt's article. All testing for his article was done with Firmware 1.02 (the firmware that was installed on Lisanne’s camera).

Retrieving other photos
Out of the total of 470 images found on the Canon's memory card, investigators actually retrieved 64 images and 4 videos with image recovery software that were deleted and partially overwritten. But no trace of image 509 was found or recovered. All recovered images were thumbnails and other formats of the images #476-609. Matt writes that the case file forensics commented that those thumbnails were likely created by the camera to preview images when they were replayed in the camera. However, this is not correct according to Matt, as the camera does not create or store thumbnails and the review images are created from small versions of the image that are embedded in the EXIF information, which can be seen in Picture 2 below.  

Why was photo 509 most likely missing?
Matt identifies two options:
1. There never was a photo 509 to begin with and there was a camera malfunction, or glitch of sorts and this number was skipped. Matt deems the chance of this very small. Computer programs very rarely just skip a number by mistake, and this specific camera never did before, as far as could be seen in the photo history. Matt conducted his own experiments to see if the Canon SX270 HS could be triggered/challenged to skip image numbers. You can read the specifics of these extensive experiments in his article, but the conclusion is that no image numbers were ever skipped and that Matt estimates the chance of this having happened with Lisanne's Canon camera to be in the range of < 0,2%.

2. Photo 509 was deleted. Either by Lisanne herself, or by someone else. As mentioned: out of the total of 470 images found on the Canon's memory card, investigators actually retrieved 64 images and 4 videos with image recovery software that were deleted and partially overwritten. But no trace of image 509 was found or recovered. All recovered images were thumbnails and other formats of the images #476-609.

Experimenting with the deleting of photo 509
Forensics also reviewed the sectors on the SD card (on an image of the SD card) to locate image 509. Picture 4 shows what was found.  

Matt explains in his post in detail how images are stored on a (Sandisk) memory card and how one photo takes up a certain amount of byte sectors, depending on the size of the image. When any photo is subsequently deleted, this image leaves an empty space in the byte sectors it once occupied. This space remains, as the photos coming before and after it will continue to occupy their own respective sectors. The camera will eventually fill this gap on the SD card with other data/images, but it will not move already used sectors to fill the gap (and this camera will not do it by itself on the SD card either, if I understand that part correctly). Matt did detailed testing of this mechanism with his own Canon SX270 HS camera and came to the conclusion that when (simulated) image 509 was deleted on the camera, this did not actually delete the image itself, but only the directory entry to the file. But the file was still on the SD card and recognizable. As a result, the deleted image could easily be recovered. (Which is also what image recovery software does: it looks for such image remains and restores an entry for the directory so that it is shown by the operating system).

The results
Matt also found with his camera experiments that when he deleted image 509 directly from the camera right after it was taken and before photos 510 and 511 were taken (test 1), the camera subsequently skipped number 509 for the next photo and there therefore was no photo 509 left on the SD card, but there were also no byte sectors missing: there was no byte gap between the mages 508 and 510. [Just like was the case with our own missing file 509]. The below 1st (purposely simplified) illustration shows how things were found on the original SD card:

But when photo 509 was deleted from the camera áfter photo 510 and 511 were already taken (test 2), there was again no image 509 but there wás a byte gap created between images 508 and 510.

Matt did more tests and found that if he removed photo 509 with a Windows 10 PC áfter photo 510 and 511 were already taken (test 3), there was no image 509 but there wás a byte gap created between images 508 and 510.

Matt then tested what happened if he deleted photo 509 with the camera's delete button after photos 510 and 511 were already taken (test 4) and when he then copied the remaining images onto a Windows 10 PC. Then he deleted all the images from the SD card with the help of the computer, and then copied them back onto the SD card. Result: there was no image 509 but there wére random byte gaps created between random images.

Matt also tested what happened if he deleted photo 509 with a computer after photos 510 and 511 were already taken (test 5) and if he then copied the remaining images (image folder “DCIM”) onto a Windows 10 PC. Then he deleted all the images from the SD card with the help of the computer, and then copied this entire image folder back from the computer onto the SD card. Result: there was no image 509 and there was no byte gap created between images 508 and 510.

In test 6 Matt deleted image 509 with a computer after photos 510 and 511 were already taken and he then copied the remaining images onto a Windows 10 PC. Then he formatted the SD card with the computer. And then copied the images and their folder back from the PC onto the SD card. Result: there was no image 509 and there was no byte gap created between images 508 and 510.

In test 7 he took images 505-508, then took a video (MVI 509), followed by four images (510-513). Result: there was no image 509 but there wás a video 590. And there was no byte gap created between images or videos. The video 509 was however not stored in the sequence it was taken. Matt commented on this: “The video was most likely not written right away as the camera does some processing to it and if images are taken before the camera is finished with the video, it is saved at that time and not necessarily in order.”

In test 8 Matt took again a video MVI 509 followed by three images. Again a video file 509 was found on the SD card (but not stored in the same place, image 509 would be stored) and there were no gaps between images or videos. – In test 9 Matt repeated the process of test 8, but turned the camera off and then on again after shooting video 509. This gave the same results as for test 8.

For test 10 Matt took eight pictures (504-511). Then he Secure Erased image 509 with a Windows 10 PC and Eraser 6. This overwrites the image file with random data which makes the image unrecoverable. Result: there was no image 509 to be found on the SD card and there wás a gap between images 508 and 510.

For test 11 Matt took six images and one video (509). He then turned his camera off while waiting until buffering was complete and shot two more images (510 and 511). Then he deleted video 509 in the camera or with the Windows PC. Result: there was no video 509 to be found on the SD card and there wás a gap between images 508 and 510. 

Summary
Out of all test runs there were three that matched the configuration that was found on the original SD card of Lisanne's camera: Tests 1, 5 and 6. All other tests resulted in different configurations. This means that the possible scenarios have been condensed to the following three ones for our missing file 509 (which could still have been either a photo or a video, theoretically): Either #509 was deleted in the camera before image 510 was taken; Or the entire image folder of the SD card was copied and cut from the card and pasted onto a computer and then #509 was deleted before the remaining image folder was copied back onto the SD card again (sans 509). Or the entire image folder of the SD card was copied and cut from the card and pasted onto a computer and then the SD card was formatted, #509 was deleted before the remaining image folder was copied back onto the SD card again (sans 509). Matt concludes: “It would likely be possible to determine which event took place by examining the SD card or the SD card image that the forensics had available. Unfortunately, the forensics report does not go into more detail than is shown in this article and therefore Event (test) 1 or 2 or 3 cannot be distinguished based on evidence.”

Scarlet: Good to know this. Three most likely scenarios, of which the first will appeal to Lost believers and the other two to Crime followers. For your information: Dutch forensic specialists of the NFI already determined early on in the investigation that photo 510 matched photo 508 seamlessly. There was no gap between the two photos, such as you would normally see if #509 had been manually removed from the camera/card. Seamlessly means zero (micro)space. So, a difference of zero between the successive OCLs. They concluded that this can only be achieved with the use of a computer.  -  People have written me many times over the years about the card formatting option, but it all seemed too complex to me at the time. But now Matt singles it out as one of the 3 possible options as well. I guess that with different fingerprints found on the camera and with there being theoretically a whole week when this #509 deleting could have taken place, there is also still place for a fourth theory, one in which it could also have been someone other than Lisanne who deleted image 509 on the camera. I find the 1st test option surprising to be honest, as it was always claimed that if photo 509 was deleted in the camera before photo 510 was taken, that image 510 would automatically take on the number 509. And so file 509 had to have been deleted áfter photo 510 and probably also after the other night photos were taken. This was also claimed in The Travel Channels episode on this disappearance case. It seems Matt proved this theory wrong. Matt explained in this respect: “It would do that if you set the camera to auto reset numbering. But it's not the default so it wasn't done I am sure and there would have been no trace of 509 then.” Now Matt appears to prove however that it was either manually deleted from the camera in between April 1st-8th, or afterward with the help of a computer. I am also surprised that manually deleting 509 cán in fact lead to this situation where there is nothing left of file 509 to retrieve with special software. That goes against almost everything that has always been claimed so far, also by specialists who Jeremy Kryt interviewed about this. And we at least know for a fact now that Lisanne and Kris were fully aware of the video recording capacities of their Canon digital camera. And the fact there was no goodbye video is not down to them not realizing the camera had that recording option. 

Concrete theories that are now left

*If Lisanne [or someone else] manually deleted the photo, she would have had to press a total of 4 small buttons in the correct order for this to successfully happen. It would have been done on purpose therefore and not by accident (highly unlikely, all in all). If Lisanne deleted image 509 on purpose, then the question still remains why she would delete it at that (stressful) moment in time, and why only that one photo. Matt notes that of all the images that should have been deleted, image 495 (a not published photo of Kris on the Mirador) is the likely candidate because it shows her with her eyes mostly closed. As for deleting #509 to make space on the SD card: this is very illogical because A. one photo makes no real difference and B. the 16GB SD card can hold upwards of 7000 images at the highest resolution and they were nowhere near there with their 470 images in total on the card.

*And as for a 3^rd party deleting #509: this could also have happened accidental or intentional. And if a 3^rd Party intentionally deleted image 509 in such a manner that it cannot be recovered anymore, we also have to wonder about their possible motive. Maybe there was something on image 509 that was not desirable for others or the police to become publicly known, such as an indication of a suspect, someone pictured who did not want to face police scrutiny or evidence of a crime. Or perhaps it was a photo showing an area away from the Pianista trail and its hinterland. As explained, it would be fairly easy to remove photo 509 permanently. Matt thinks that the methods described above to successfully remove the entire file 509, means that it would have had to be either someone (un)lucky or a knowledgeable person to perform this action. And if any 3^rd party wás involved in the disappearance of image 509, it also opens the theoretical possibility that other images or videos could have been deleted, coming after the last known photo #609. Matt said about this that if we accept the phone logs as created by Kris and Lisanne, then they lived for several more days after the night photos were taken. This opens the possibility that goodbye videos could have been recorded near the end, so after the night pics and these could have been deleted (theoretically)." We now also know that 7 videos were found/retrieved on the SD card of the camera, so we know now with some certainty that Kris and Lisanne were used to shooting videos on this camera as well. Perhaps they díd shoot a video after April 1st, but whomever worked on this memory card before the Dutch investigators received it, got rid of it somehow? 

*Matt as good as rules out the likelihood of photo 509 being removed as a result of a camera malfunction or through unintentional deleting by Lisanne. He deems it not that likely either that a 3^rd party unintentionally deleted photo 509 with the help of a computer. He concludes that we'd perhaps be able to get more answers if the SD card itself was investigated more extensively.

Lastly: Matt also came with more clues that the Panamanian investigators worked on these photos, before the memory card and camera were sent to the Dutch investigators

Matt revealed that it is confirmed now that there was access to the SD card and that was done in a careless way. Because software was used on the SD card by someone (may have been anyone involved in finding the backpack and camera or it could have been anybody within the police forces who had access to the SD card) that created thumbnail images. Thumbnail images were also deleted from the memory card as a result and images were rotated and saved back again onto the memory card. Matt: 

“This is an incredible amount of manipulation on the SD card that destroyed evidence. Whoever performed those manipulations on the SD card was extremely careless.. 

and it is not impossible that when the thumbnail images were deleted, also inadvertently image 509 was deleted. However, simply deleting image 509 was not done and the person doing it would also have to copy the entire image folder to a computer, accidentally deleted image 509, and then moved the folder back to the SD card. It seems unlikely that a person who carelessly works on the SD card would have gone through the trouble of also copying the images to a computer and then back onto the memory card.”

Matt made another noteworthy observation: the image names of images 505, 506 and 507 do not have the expected image name of “IMG_0xxx.JPG” but contain an appended string “~RF1xxxxx.TMP”, e.g. “IMG_0505.JPG~RF17df08.TMP”. The comment in the forensics report is that this is the version before rotation of the image. All three images are taken in portrait orientation and it is likely that they were rotated with image editing software and then saved. Matt does not know which software would do this and change the file name like that, but he suspects it was Apple software. It should be noted that those file names appeared first in Panama but it is unknown when and by who they were created. Matt concludes: “It is apparent that someone reviewed and edited those images on a computer. At a minimum those edits consisted of rotating images and deleting thumbnails that were most likely auto generated by the image viewer used. Unfortunately it was not determined when the edits and deletions were made and if it was done before or after the camera was given to the police. With the very limited information in the forensics report it is not possible to determine when all those changes were made. For this access to the disk image of the SD card would be required.” But here we have it confirmed once more that someone did mess with that SD card, probably before it was sent to the Dutch as Juan had earlier already discovered. - Feel free to share your thoughts and opinions in the comment section. 

New police report info about the backpack

March 24, 2021

Matt has revealed more case file information. Where it was found; in which state it was; what it contained inside. And a forensic analysis of the backpack, with some surprising new finds. Below I will give you my own summary: in the police files, the following information was disclosed about the backpack, which was a Burton brand backpack with light blue straps, black accents and a blue and purple pattern. According to police the backpack of Lisanne was found by a local woman [Irma Mirando and her husband Luis Atencio] on June 11th 2014 by the Culebra river in the district of Valle Risco, community of Alto Romero, roughly 10-15 km north of the Mirador. Irma noticed the backpack when she went to the river to take a bath, according to the police files. Irma noticed it among some driftwood at the shore of the river near huge boulders. She opened the bag and saw its content. Upon notifying her husband about her discovery, they are described to have called the authorities who came to inspect the findings the next day. The backpack contained the following items: 

*One black and dark gray Samsung camera with battery (This is a police mistake: it was a Canon SX270HS camera and this was confirmed in the files by pictures of the camera). 

*One 16 GB memory card

*One black camera case

*One white Samsung cell phone with battery and a light blue/green cover, some money was kept under the case, IMEI# (withheld).

*One black iPhone with red cover, IMEI# (withheld)

*One black bra

*One flower pattern bra

*One pair of pink rectangular sunglasses, not worn or damaged

*One pair of black round sunglasses, not worn or damaged

*One key with a blue key chain and a small lock

*One small personal item (withheld)

*An insurance card stating name L. Froon

*A total of $88.30 USD

*One snail

*One small (sea) shell

Where did the water bottle go?
Some things that strike me right away: where is the water bottle in the report? The photo that was taken by someone of the bag and its content after it was found (and which was leaked to the Panamanian press early on) clearly shows an empty water bottle. It looks like the same one which can be seen in some of the photos the girls took. In fact, photo 491 shows Kris holding two white capped water bottles in front of her. Why was it pictured but not described in the files? The photo also shows what looks like a wrapped up sweet, above the black bra in the photo. Maybe it is a cough sweet or lozenge. It looks to be the same item that was visible in a close-up form one of the night photos; here you can see it right from the branch with red plastic. But this was also not mentioned in the police files. And about the sunglasses the police wrote that they were undamaged and not worn. Very good to see it confirmed in black and white that these fragile sunglasses were undamaged. But they were clearly worn by the girls. The top one with the 'coloured' glasses matches the one Lisanne wears on this photo of them that day. Kris seems to also wear the same sunglasses in that photo. But in their own photos her sunnies look brown, not purple'ish like the sunglasses pictured with the bags content. But they were described in the police report as 'black', so clearly the photo is not showing the colours 100% correctly. Then: a key on a chain is described (but not pictured in the photo I believe): was this key also the key of their room? Surely they brought it with them. I wonder if this is confirmed or not in the rest of those police files. In the photo, the backpack looks clean and dry. The report says that there was a bit of damage to the bag however.

Damage to the bag

According to the police files, the following damage was observed of the bag: 

*Some dirt

*The attachment of one of the straps was partly loose (this seems to have been due to a loose seam)

*The plastic closures contained deep scratches (possibly the result of abrasion)

*The fabric showed signs of discoloration in various places.

*A rectangular piece of the fabric (approx. 30×15 mm) at the top right corner was missing. The edges of this damage were straight and contained frayed fabric ends.

*A straight tear of approximately 10 mm in length, immediately adjacent to the aforementioned missing piece of fabric. The tear contained straight fabric ends on one side and frayed ends on the other side. It was concluded that it was caused by a 'sharp edge'. The fabric was discolored near this damage. 

A dirty bag?

So,  there was actually some dirt reported to have been on the bag, as well as some yellowish brown clay at ends of the straps of the bag and some plant and leaf fragments and loose sand inside the bag. I still believe that the bag looks clean and dry in the photo that was taken of it. No discoloured circles in the fabric, indicative of water stain damage. No stains which you would expect from a bag that had been soaking up for months in the jungle or a river. And no detection of mold was described in the police files (where you would expect to see mold if a bag like this one had been in a humid rainy jungle or river for any amount of time).

There were also some translucent plastic fragments found in the bag. Police assumed the bag had drifted by the river to this spot. It had been raining heavily in the prior few weeks. I will stick to my opinion that this bag does not look like it had been drifting in a wild river full of river rocks. The content of the bag looks also dry, clean and intact. The police files reported minor dirt on the bag. The bag looks normal in the photo and was not described as 'wet' ( or 'dry') in the police files either. It is assumed or claimed at times that the backpack was wet by the time investigators got it in their possession, which was at least 48 hours after it was found on June 11th. The bag was picked up by case officials on June 13th. The assumption that investigators could have received a bag that was still 'wet on the inside and the outside', two days later, seems strange. Because on the photo of the bag, taken inside the hut where it was kept until police picked it up, not even the turquoise flap of fabric of the bag looks wet or to have sustained water damage. The police file also mentioned no recorded no damage to the sunglasses. Although the mobile phones and camera suffered water damage, there was no physical damage to the screens of the mobile phones or the digital camera, such as cracks or dents. So this bag may not have bounced off the many river rocks after all. Matt also concluded: "Although the damage of the backpack (scratches and abrasion) is consistent with travelling in a river and rocks, the damage is very light and probably not consistent with a travel of many kilometres in a wild river." Update Scarlet: the Samsung phone could be accessed without problems, the iPhone suffered water damage and only its memory card could be accessed in a separate device. 

The tearing
The 10 mm tear in the bag (located near and parallel to a seam) and the missing piece of fabric of apprx. 30 by 15 mm were determined to have been caused by a 'sharp edge'. The investigator did not specify if this could have been a natural object (think of a sharp rock edge) or a man-made object, such as a knife. After reading this, I remembered something which Juan told me in the past. Juan was told some time ago already - before Matt published this new case info - by locals that the backpack had been left hanging on a nail in the wall of the house of Angel Palacios, before police came and picked it up. Could this information be correct? Perhaps the tear in the bag was not sustained before it was found, but afterwards. Just a theory. It may have been one of those river rocks as well of course... Or a knife.. Unfortunately the forensic specialist did not make it clear in the police files if this 'sharp edge' was more likely a rock or natural element, or a man-made object. 

Update: I received an excellent comment from Taz who wrote: "Can I just point out that the bag/rucksack is hanging up (on nail)? For some reason everyone shows this photo upside down." Thank for pointing this out Taz. Incredible that I never realized this and never heard it being mentioned by anyone in the past two years either.. And TVN-2 showed the photo up the wrong way as well then. Dutch media did the same. In this wrong version, the belongings seemed to have been spread out on river rocks. But now... the photo actually shows this bag hanging on the wall, with the personal belongings are laying on a small bench below it. Looking at the photo now, it could even confirm the story Juan was told. These belongings suddenly do seem to be kept inside a shed. In Alto Romero, as Juan already reported on before, with the bag indeed hanging from a nail in the wall. The only issue now is that the water bottle 'seems' to float a bit. Perhaps the 10 mm tear in the bag, made by a 'sharp object', may simply be the result of hanging that bag, that piece of evidence, on a nail in the wall? Or perhaps this has nothing to do with the damage of the bag. [Update: Sleuth Tharindu thinks the backpack could have gotten damaged in a manner consistent with Kris and Lisanne possibly fleeing or maybe trying to get past the barbed wire we see in areas where the Kremers hiked to.]

DNA analysis of the backpack
Matt revealed that a total of 13 DNA samples were taken of the straps, zippers, and edges of the backpack. Out of the 13 samples, DNA was only found in three of the samples. They turned out to belong to multiple people, including at least two different women and one man. But they were never identified. The DNA samples did not match the DNA of Kris and Lisanne. Their DNA may have been washed off in the water (and if that was the case, then the DNA of any other potential person handling the backpack before it ended in the water, could have disappeared as well). Because local police did not collect the DNA from people involved in the searches and the finding of this backpack and of other belongings, police did not verify if the DNA was from the couple who found the backpack, or anyone else for that matter. The police report also states: "No DNA match for the samples could be obtained from criminal DNA databases". Local newspapers had already reported that Pitti, leading the investigation,  never further investigated these leads. The same media had also already reported by the way that as many as 34 different fingerprints were found; 13 on the backpack, 12 on the phones and the camera, as well as 6 different ones on the bras. But they were not suitable for identification.

For what it is worth, I don't believe that any of this information factually proves either that the bag arrived there naturally by the river OR that someone had planted it there. As you all know by now, I do not personally believe that it arrived there by its own accord; the good and undamaged state of the sunglasses, phones and camera to me confirm that this bag did not bounce off river rocks for several kilometres. That bag did not float for 10 kilometres or even 2 kilometres. And the state of the bag, as described ánd pictured, also does not prove to me that it was out there in the muddy rainy jungle or the dirty water for any long amount of time. As I have said and written from the start: I [still] do not believe that this river would on the one hand be strong enough to shatter bodies and crumble two entire skeletons, but that on the other hand it had no damaging effect on the simple bag and it's delicate content. I believe the backpack was planted there by someone and found by the couple who knew where to look for it. I don't think it was a coincidence that the bag was found near the guide's place there and by people he knew. Irma said on camera to the Travel Channel in this interview that she and her husband first called a local cattle rancher [the tour guide] about the finding and that he called the police for them and handed the bag to the police a day later. But this detail has also not been reported in the official police files. [Circled in the photos the plastic water bottle with the white bottle cap, held by Kris on the day they disappeared; in fact, she carries two of them in the bottom photo. Where did that second one end up? Was it ever found in the searches?]. 

More formation from Imperfect Plan: the data found on the mobile phones

March 10, 2021

IP have revealed more case file information from an anonymous source, this time about the data found on the mobile phones of Kris and Lisanne. The article is based on the forensic analysis from the Dutch police and other official reports. Matt: "It confirms existing information, corrects wrong existing information, and adds new information." Check Matt's original article here, as I only give a summary of his main findings in this post.

Kris carried an iPhone4 with her and Lisanne Froon a Samsung Galaxy S3. The phones were packed in their backpack, which was found on June 11th on the bank of a river. Matt reviewed the use of these phones between April 1st and April 11th of 2014. He used the Dutch police report and other official reports for this, which have so far in and by themselves not been shared with the public. It has been proven without doubt that these were in fact the phones of Kris and Lisanne. It was verified through the phone's IMEI numbers and their content. The Findings: 

-Neither of the phones had GPS data available for the period after April 1st.

-None of the 911 calls connected to the cell network in Panama. For a call to connect it must ring at least once, but none of the calls did for a lack of cell network connection.  
-As for the 112 calls that were made, the author has no records from the Dutch phone system to show that there was or wasn't a connection made.
-The info about the 70-something attempts to enter the SIM pin in Kris' iPhone4 was measured over a much longer time period: from March to April. Therefore it is not relevant for the situation after April 1st, Matt says.
-No notes or messages were left in the phones.

-Several pictures were taken with the mobile phones between 13:14 and 13:15 on April 1st. Those pictures were most likely taken on the Mirador. Photos and videos can be easily deleted by anybody with access to the phone. Anybody who had the PIN codes of the iPhone would have been in theory able to delete user generated data from the phone. Note that there is no operating system log for when the known pictures were taken, so it is not impossible that other pictures were taken and deleted.
-Fingerprints and DNA samples were taken from the phones. There was no DNA profile recovered and the recovered fingerprints were not suitable for identification.      

Below is a graph made by Matt. Events are only plotted by day on the x axis but not 

by (local Panamanian) time, so all activities of each day are on the same vertical axis. 

Single dot - indicates a phone being booted up or shut down for 1-3 min. only.  

A line - indicates a phone being turned on longer.

For April 1st only the times when the phones were turned off is displayed. The were on otherwise, that day.  

April 1st: the Samsung phone last made a connection with Wi-Fi at 10:10 AM. By 10:40, when the girls had already started the Pianista hike, both phones had only half charged phones. The iPhone4 had 51% battery capacity and the Samsung 49%. Several pictures were taken with the phones between 13:14 and 13:15. Those pictures were most likely taken on the Mirador. Then at 13:14, so by the time the girls would have left the Mirador to continue their hike, the Galaxy S3 accessed Google Maps. Very interesting info. At 13:38 PM the iPhone4 lost GSM network contact and would never regain it again. It is likely the Galaxy S3 lost GSM network contact at the same or similar time and it would also never regain network contact. At this time the signal strength was -94 dBm and the phone showed 1 bar.  This indicates that the phone picked up a cell tower signal but could not transmit back to establish a two way connection with the cell tower. At 13:54 PM the last known picture (photo 508) was taken with the Canon camera. At 16:39 the first emergency call took place. The iPhone 4 tried to call 112, the Dutch emergency number, and again at 16:51. Both phones had no GSM connection. At or just after 17:52 both the iPhone4 and the Samsung phone were powered off. 

Scarlet: some other phone activity details for April 1st: 

-Kris left her iPhone powered on overnight between March 31st-April 1st. Investigators believe that the iPhone was not charged that night. It had 70% battery on March 31st at 17:00 and 61% battery at 11:04 on April 1st. 

-Lisanne's Samsung phone received multiple app messages overnight, before 7:52 AM. 

-At 8:10 AM the clock app was viewed on the Samsung phone [possible the time when they woke up].

-At 09:09 AM Whatsapp was viewed on the Samsung phone and at 9:32 the facebook app.

-At 9:39 AM the NOS app was checked on the Samsung phone; a Dutch news site. [Were the girls sitting down somewhere, possibly having breakfast and checking their messages and the news as a morning ritual?]

-At 9:48 AM the Samsung phone connected to public Wi-Fi and the internet was surfed [no mention of where this happened but it was probably at local restaurant Nelvis where the women had breakfast that morning].

-Wi-Fi was used until 10:16 AM when Google Maps was downloaded and Wi-Fi disconnected.

-When the Samsung phone's battery level was analyzed for the time of 10:40, it had 49% battery left.

-Kris' iPhone had nearly 51% battery left at 11:05. The iPhone was connected to the 2G-network.

-Kris' iPhone lost connection to the GSM network between 11:49-13:14.

-Between 13:14-13:15 PM when the iPhone made connection again with the GSM network, four photos were taken with the phone on the Mirador [selfies/landscape shots]

-Between 13:14-13:15 PM the Samsung phone took five photos on the Mirador [selfies/landscape shots]

-At 13:14 PM the Samsung phone closed Google Maps [had remained activated since 10:16]

-At 13:38 PM the iPhone lost connection with the GSM network.  

April 2nd: the Samsung Galaxy S3 was powered on at 06:58 AM, approximately half an hour after sunrise. The phone was used to try to call 112 again and then the phone was powered off again. The Samsung phone had no cell network connection and the call did not go through. [It had 19% battery remaining at this point, just like when it was powered off shortly before 18:00 PM the day before; so overnight the Samsung phone lost no battery life, according to the official data]. At 08:12 AM the iPhone4 was powered on [pin codes were entered correctly] and at 08:14 AM the iPhone was used to dial 112. It had 43% battery left. Apple's operating system created a screenshot. Then the phone was powered off again at 08:14. The phone had no cell network connection and the call did not go through. Log data show that the iPhone was manually switched from 2G-network to 2G+3G-network, possibly to increase the possibility to get a network connection. Dutch officials also determined that Kris changed some settings on her phone, allowing its control panel to be used without the need to first enter PIN codes. At this time the signal strength was -113 dBm and the phone showed 1 bar. This indicates that the phone picked up a cell tower signal but could not transmit back to establish a two way connection with the cell tower. At 10:53 the Samsung was powered on and both 112 and 911 were dialed, before the phone was powered off again. There was no network and the phone was powered off again [It had 18% battery now]. At 13:50 the Samsung phone was only powered on and powered off again. At 16:19 the Samsung phone was powered on and left on. The phone was powered during the night.  

April 3rd: the Samsung phone from Lisanne has been left powered on throughout the past evening and the night. It was powered on at 16:19 PM on April 2nd and it was still on at 07:36 AM on April 3rd. Matt says about this: "It appears as if the phone was not actively used and only left on. It is not clear if this was an oversight that depleted the battery or if it was done on purpose." That night, between 02:21 and 02:41, a weather application (AccuWeather-app which is an American weather forecasting service) was used on the Samsung phone. The phone has 6% battery left by now. Then at 02:41 AM applications of the Android OS were used, but it is not known which ones. The official NFI files mention that the Samsung phone was opened at 02:47, by which they may mean 'accessed'. By 07:36 the battery of the Samsung phone had been as good as depleted and only 1% of battery was left. The phone was powered off at this time. At 09:32 the iPhone4 was powered on and 911 was called twice at 09:33. Then the iPhone was powered off. The phone had no cell network connection and the call did not go through. At this time the signal strength was -113 dBm and the phone showed 1 bar. This indicates that the phone picked up a cell tower signal but could not transmit back to establish a two way connection with the cell tower. A signal strength of -113 dBm per the forensics report means that there is essentially no signal. However it is the interpretation of Matt that the phone transceiver did pick up an extremely low signal*. The iPhone had around 42% battery at this point. At 11:46 the iPhone was powered on and then powered off again. For this data point is very little raw data in the forensics report and no signal strength is stated. It is possible that at this time there was also 1 bar but it is not reported in the forensics report. At 15:59 the iPhone4 was powered on and the contact “Mytiam, 00 507 679xxxxx” looked up on WhatsApp (this is not a typo from Matt). Apple's operating system created another screenshot. Then the iPhone was powered off at 16:02 with 39% battery left. Miriam's number is never called by either of the girls' phones.* This is the last data point for which signal strength data is reported in the forensics report. It is speculation by Matt that from this time on, the phone did not pick up any signal anymore and the readings would have been -120 dBm and 0 bars. No further attempts to call 112 or 911 were made again either, which is likely attributed to the fact that the phone had no longer 1 bar and no hope of connecting to a cell tower.  

April 4th: the Samsung phone was powered on and turned off at 04:50 AM. At 05:00 AM the Samsung phone was again powered on and it shut down again right away. The battery was at 0%. This was the last time the Galaxy S3 booted up. At 10:16 AM the iPhone4 was powered on and off. At 13:42 the iPhone4 was again powered on and off [pin codes are entered correctly both times].

April 5th: at 10:50 AM the iPhone4 was powered on and off.  This was the last time the SIM pin was entered correctly. Until then the phone had successfully received both a SIM pin (0556) and a login PIN to unlock the screen. [Scarlet: apparently this first SIM pin needs to be entered in order to be able to see information such as the phone's signal strength. Only the time can still be checked without the correct pin codes. If entered incorrectly, the phone will be blocked ultimately]. At 13:14 a log file was created on the Samsung Galaxy phone, which is only possible if the phone had power. However, it did not power up and the conclusion by Matt is that the battery had just enough power to start the phone’s boot process, but it shut down from a lack of power before having booted up. At 13:37 the iPhone4 was powered on and off. The SIM pin code was either not entered, or not entered correctly (this cannot be determined). Whoever entered the SIM pin not/incorrectly must have known the login pin to unlock the phone.  

April 6th: at 10:26 AM the iPhone4 was powered on and off.  The SIM pin was not entered or not entered correctly. At 10:27 AM the iPhone automatically created a screenshot when the clock app was opened and then closed and the phone was powered off. At 14:35 PM the iPhone4 was again powered on and off without a correct SIM pin code.

April 7th: no Activity of either phone could be found

April 8th: no Activity of either phone could be found. Note that this is the night when the night photos were taken with the digital Canon camera. 

April 9th: no Activity of either phone could be found

April 10th: at 05:15 AM a log file was created on the Samsung Galaxy phone, which is only possible if the phone had power. However, the phone did not boot up completely and the conclusion by the author is that the battery had just enough power to start the phone’s boot process but it shut down from a lack of power before having fully booted up. 

April 11th: at 10:51 AM the iPhone4 was powered on and left on for 65 minutes. The phone was then powered off. The SIM pin was not entered or not entered correctly. There were no log files created during those 65 minutes and it is not known what the phone was used for during this time. The fact that it was turned off indicates that the user had intentions to conserve battery and to use it again. However, it was never turned on again after. It is not known how much capacity was left in the battery, but before having been turned on the capacity would have been in the range of 22% and it is likely that some capacity remained when it was turned off. The author believes that there would have been sufficient battery capacity to boot up the iPhone4 again. 

Below is a graph made by Matt abut the battery capacity. It 

shows the remaining battery capacity from 01 – 11 April.

Matt: "Note that battery data is not available for all days, especially not for the iPhone4 and for those days the battery capacity is estimated.  This is possible since the iPhone4 has seen very consistent usage and the battery consumption per day would be very consistent. All data points that were estimated are marked in red. On this graph, data points are plotted at the actual time on the x axis when they occurred. Between 02 and 03 April the battery capacity of the iPhone4 increases from 42% to 43%. This likely caused by the battery recovering slightly. The battery was not charged, and it is not something of concern."  

Matt noticed that:

-From day 2 onward, emergency calls were only made in the morning and only for the first two days.
-Despite having less battery life, the Samsung phone was activated more often that the iPhone.

-The iPhone was never used before 08:14 and on most days not before 10:00 AM. 

-The phones were most used in time blocks: between 10:00-11:00 AM and between 13:00-14:00 PM.

-Why was no phone used between 06 April and 10 April?

-Why was the iPhone4 turned on for 64 min on 11 April and then never used again?

-Matt estimates the chance quite small that log files within the phones were manipulated afterwards. The operating system of the phones (iOS and Android) creates log files for most activities, such as booting the phone. "Although it is possible to manipulate those entries, it is difficult and requires root access to the phone. This is above the abilities of the average person and requires someone with advanced skills and tools. There is no mention in the forensic report that data may have been deleted or modified, however it was also not particularly looked for." "It is of course possible to delete user data when someone knows the login PIN to the phones, but it is very difficult to manipulate OS system information."  The Dutch NFI declared that they believe that Kris activated her iPhone device every time from the inactive state by using the little power button on top of the phone.

Image 4 shows at which time of day the phones were most used. The data is accumulated from both phones between April 2nd to April 11th.  It shows that 45% of all the times the phones were turned on, it was done between 10:00 – 11:00 AM and 13:00 – 14:00 PM. There must have been cue or indication for this. Matt wonders if it was the sun that came over a mountain at that time? Was this the time to rest from trying to walk to safety? Or was this the time they woke up when they slept during the day since it was not possible to sleep at night?  It should be noted that the Canon camera can be used as a clock as it displays the time in the setup menu, so if certain times were targeted deliberately it could be done by using the clock in the Canon camera. 

[Update] Matt also shared the following case information with me about the login of the iPhone:

This info about the 74 logins of the iPhone is slightly changing the story. What the rapport says is that they looked at the use of the iPhone since July 31st 2013. And between then and the moment the phone was analyzed, the iPhone had only been powered on 74 times. (Odd, did she mainly leave her phone powered on during those eight months?). And of those 74 power on events, the phone was powered on correctly 70 times. The only 4 times when the PIN code was not/not correctly entered, took place after April 5th 2014, 13:37 PM.

Matt concludes: "It is unknown though who was in control of those phones between 01 April 2014 and 11 April 2014. Most likely it was Kris and Lisanne, but it cannot be ruled out with that there were 3rd parties involved to some degree. It is also not known where the phones were between 02 April and 11 June, when the phones were found and who may have been in control of them. Between 12 June and 23 June, the phones were in the custody of the Panamanian police and from 23 June on they were in the custody of the Dutch police. There was ample opportunity to access the phones and make modifications to the data within. It is unknown if this happened. There is no indication in the forensic analysis that there are signs of manipulation, however it was not specifically looked for."

*********

What interests me, Scarlet, in particular about the Google Map app use, has been marked in dark red in this post. The fact that Google Maps was looked up while Kris and Lisanne were still standing on the Mirador (the summit), tells me that they probably knew that they were heading in unknown territory if they kept walking. In fact, the NFI phone report says that Lisanne opened the Google Maps app at 10:16 that Tuesday April 1st, after first downloading it by using public Wi-Fi (this was at restaurant Nelvis, according to the police files, where they had breakfast). And then she left the app activated and on in the background as they climbed the Pianista trail. The Google Maps app was closed at 13:14 PM. So right before they left the Mirador. By then the girls may have felt there was enough time for some more exploring and to see what more was ahead. This Mapp app detail also most likely excludes the possibility that someone else forced them to walk on at this point. Unless of course they wanted to plot an escape, looking for a good place to do so. But I don't think that is a likely scenario though, at that point in time. I also think that this new detail about them looking at Google maps, disproves the whole notion that they *may* have believed that the road ahead would loop back to Boquete. Not only did they see Boquete behind them, but Google Maps would surely tell them the same thing. 

I was surprised that the telephone number of what most likely was Miriam Guerra, their host family, was looked up on April 3rd. No attempts to call her though.. Which is even more strange in my eyes. I was also very surprised to read that the Samsung phone from Lisanne was kept powered on overnight on April 2-3. And that a weather app was checked in the middle of that night. But why keep that phone powered on for such a long time, while doing no important things with it in the meantime? On the one hand it makes sense to want to look for a signal all the time in that second frantic night out there. But on the other hand, the Samsung phone had so little battery at that stage already (starting the trip with only 49%), that I (still) do not understand that no nightly attempts to actually call or send a text message were made, given that the phone was switched on anyway. It somehow feels like a waste of battery energy, if you will not use the phone to try to make contact? Aside from panic, fear and frantic behaviour when caught in such a terrifying situation: why during the second night and not the first? Perhaps this was the night when there was some rainfall and they looked for information about how long the rain was going to last? The phone from Lisanne burning almost all its remaining in one night, and not the first night out but the second... it is strange. Maybe they forgot it was on, but whoever looked for the weather app in the middle of the night must have been aware the phone was on and using battery, and nevertheless did not power off the phone around 3 AM either... Not until after 7 in the morning. And when the Samsung phone was powered on at 16:19 PM on April 2nd, it had 18% battery life. But somehow it managed to stay powered on for fifteen hours continuously, until 07:20 on the morning of April 3rd, when it had 1% battery left. That sounds like a lot of hours of phone activity, using only 17% of phone battery? While the battery was already walking on its last legs, so to speak.

It is also good to have it without a doubt confirmed now that no draft messages, notes or anything of the likes were left behind in the phones. That makes no sense. They used text message, we know that from interviews with the parents. But the girls just stopped using SMS services after disappearing? Kris' iPhone lasted a very very long time, starting off with only 51% battery on day one. Her phone only lost 29% over the span of ten days. Despite being powered on and off many times, and staying on for 64 minutes on day eleven. And afterwards it was stíll not empty. Also striking to me is the little sentence from Matt that whoever entered the SIM pin not/incorrectly, must have known the Login pin to first unlock the phone.. How can we explain this? Knowing one code but not the other? Is this an indication perhaps that the person who handled that phone simply could not remember two sets of PIN codes, only one? And why didn't Kris take out that entire login requirement early on? And then the strange last powering on of the iPhone. I always assumed that phone was ultimately powered off on April 11th because it ran out of battery. But now it appears that the phone was switched off on purpose, with battery left... Unfortunately this data still doesn't tell us with certainty what happened to them, why they did not return to the Mirador and took the same trail back to Boquete. Although the use of the phones can very well be matched with the behaviour of two young people who are lost, in my eyes they still do not exclude the possibility that they were trapped somewhere or were kidnapped, or something else along those lines. 

And the big elephant in the room probably: where is that 1 to 2 second connection, supposedly made on day two at 13:56 with Lisanne's Samsung? This map with the phone data, published in a Panamanian publication, says that the phone shortly connected to the GSM then. Either that information has been false all along (although the rest of their detailed information seems to be 99% correct, including the info about a screen capture, which Matt confirmed to me to be true), and an error slipped in somehow. Or perhaps the connection was in fact made, but was too short to register in the phone's operating system? The best explanation I can think of now, is that Matt has stressed that he only knows for sure that nothing connected to 911. Dialing 112 in Panama would very likely have connected them to the 911 dispatchers in Panama, and not to the Netherlands. Matt wrote that for the 112 calls that were made, he has no records from the Dutch phone system however to show that there was or wasn't a connection made. He does not have this data for the 112 calls, and the short connection was said to be made to 112... There was no GSM connection seemingly, but you can never rule out that on one particular freak stretch, there wás a short connection possible after all. Overall, we just have to do with the information available, and luckily the details are being filled in or adjusted as time goes by, although it's all still going too slowly for me :) 

But we have to also keep in mind that you can manually change the phone's time and date settings very easily. If you then start making mock calls or look up google maps, it will be logged on whatever time you want it to. Creating your own narrative. For people who believe that Kris and Lisanne got lost, this new info will no doubt reinforce them in their convictions. But playing the devil's advocate: what would a criminal want to convey? That they looked at google maps! The girls would certainly do that if they were lost. And look up Miriam, the host mother. (But not actually call her..). Betzaida Pitti was the first to have her team look into these phones and document and analyze the data. A Panamanian newspaper reported on this at the time. Who tells us with certainty that they did so correctly? What if they manipulated some of the data? Photo 509 went missing also, after all, and the Panamanian officials were also the first to look at those Canon photos, before sending the device to the Netherlands. In Panama many people go missing every year and many such cases are investigated. Nobody expected at the time that at some point, people from all over the world would be obsessed with these case details. I would not be surprised if it is proven one day that some vital issues have been brushed under the carpet from higher up.     

I think the overall narrative stays the same, some people will think this shows they were lost, others like me will still believe they were snatched and held by someone and that part of this phone use was done by someone other than them. To me, those phone logs stíll do not reflect the sort of panicked behaviour I would have expected to see in their situation, especially initially. It all looks incredibly controlled and organized. Cool, calm and collected. They were up during the night of the 2nd and the 8th of April, and probably also couldn't sleep during some other nights, but nobody tried to check for reception or tried to call relatives then. Odd. I mean, being a girl myself and being like both of them very attached to my parents, I would display a completely different call pattern if I were in their shoes. I know that this is all subjective, but even when I have a burst tire and stand stranded at the side of the road, I am calling my family like a madman and not once or twice. I'd be freaked out and obsessive if I were in Kris and Lisanne's shoes overnight and would have called literally as often as possible. Especially when there was no prepaid call limit to keep in mind (and only a battery issue). Calling only twice before 5 PM and then not even once through the evening or the night... that does not seem right to me for young women in their position. Same for the 2nd night. Knowing that Samsung phone was powered on all evening and night, it is incomprehensible really to me that she would not have at least tried to call her parents once or twice. I just cannot believe that. 

Regarding Matt's new info about a last 10:10 AM Wi-Fi connection: this was most likely at the Spanish by the River. If that was the case, Eileen did not tell the truth to the Canadians, when she said she had last seen Kris and Lisanne there on Monday afternoon, and not on Tuesday morning... ('Kris and Lisanne did not leave the school at the first of April, but the day before.' Read more about this in part 2).

Now there are some new things to ponder over and I bet people will. New food for thought. Below an updated schedule Jeremy and I made, reflecting the time blocks in which the phones were used to call, or when they were simply powered on. As we say: mostly during office hours.  

Romain posted some new details
March 14th 2021 
Romain added some extra case file details:

-On April 1st, the iPhone 4 from Kris had 51% battery at 11:10 AM. The iPhone lost contact with the GSM network at 11:49 and then reconnected with the GSM network at 13:14. Four photos were taken then with the iPhone (Photos IMG_2125.JPG to IMG_2128.JPG). The phone lost contact for the last time with the GSM network at 13:38 PM. By the time 112 was called with the iPhone at 16:39, the phone's battery was down to 42%. It is powered off at 17:52 PM.

-On April 1st, the Samsung Galaxy S3 from Lisanne had last contact with Wi-Fi at 10:10 AM. At 10:16 Romain says she looked at a Maps application. The Samsung phone had 49% battery at 10:40 AM. At 13:14 PM the phone used a Maps application and at 13:15 the phone took five photos. By 13:40, the Samsung phone was down to 41% battery. At 16:51 it was used to call 112 and by 16:53 it had 22% battery left. By 17:40 this had gone down to 19%. At 17:52 the Samsung phone was also powered off/deactivated, at the same time as Kris' phone. 

*********

Scarlet: So the maps were first consulted by Lisanne on her phone at 10:16 according to Romain. This was done while she was connected to Wi-Fi. Then on the Mirador at 13:14 Maps were consulted again, now without Wi-Fi connection, before the app was closed off. This does not necessarily mean however that she could not see the maps. I have been told that a Samsung Galaxy S3 mini, once connected to Wi-Fi and accessing google maps, will then also display a roughly 100x100 km map tile without data or Wi-Fi connection. As well as showing a compass. And that if the phone made a connection to GSM services, that info would have been logged. They also had a short GSM connection around 13:14, so the mapp consultation may coincide also with that short burst of connection. Just as any call made would have been logged. But for a 911 or 112 call to register, it would have had to ring at least once. One does wonder what exactly could have been consulted on that map. Because as everyone can check for themselves, when you look up the area behind the Mirador you basically only see blank greenness. You will find no further information or details whatsoever, other than green areas and the odd river further up north. There is basically nothing to be seen that could have encouraged them to walk further up that trail (let alone the notion that the trail ahead would bring them back to Boquete). 

Also, Romain seems to confirm that the GSM connection on the Boquete side of the Pianista trail is not flawless. People often said that up until the summit you had reception and I always questioned this. As I know from nature hikes I made myself that connection can come and go, especially when you are away from towns and villages. This new info seems to confirm this. According to the new data, the iPhone lost GSM network contact between 11:49 AM and 13:14 PM. The same may have happened to Lisanne's Samsung phone, but her device did not create similarly detailed phone logs, apparently. Kris' phone was not powered off during this loss of connectivity. So what is this about? There may have been intermittent signal available and unavailable at the 2nd part of the Pianista trail, going up the mountain. But how come the signal was reinstated at 13:14? And not at 13:00, when they were already standing high on the summit and taking photos? Why was the iPhone reconnecting to the network so late?  -  Another question here could be: do hikers more often report to lose signal on the walk up there? I have not come across this info before. The Kremers family did not report this issue either when they retraced Kris' steps. Hans Kremers specifically announced the moment when his phone lost connection, and it was about 45 minutes past the summit. I have not come across information about this loss of signal on the Boquete side of the mountain by other bloggers. Maybe they all had this issue though but just did not bother to blog about it? Questions... More new questions. 

Let's also think about the possible further implications of this, if this data is true. If there is indeed no (reliable) GSM phone signal on the second half of the Pianista trail, basically from the point where you leave the meadow halfway and enter the zone with trees, then this is important to emphasize. I still keep the option open that the girls returned to the summit after photo 508 was taken and that something happened to them after the returned to the Mirador and then walked back down again. The overriding argument against this has always been: 'but wouldn't their phones have connected to the network again then?' And official says the phones never did, after roughly 13:38 PM. Now it would be possible, theoretically, that these girls did try to walk back to the trailhead, but something happened to them in the tree zone below the summit. Knowing now that there is a 'dead zone', phone network wise, below the summit on the Boquete side of the mountain, does significantly widen the window in terms of where they could have been after photo 508 was taken. The first photo of the trailhead was taken around 11 AM. It seems almost undeniable now that thát is when they started their hike. Unless the entire time/date info of the photos and the phones were messed with. But the fact there were photos taken on the Mirador with their phones, around the same time when they took photos up there with the Canon camera, gives a time reference confirmation I assume. It seems now that the New Timeline is correct and they started their hike indeed at 11 AM.

Another interesting detail which Romain shared: Lisanne's Samsung phone had a sudden and unexplained surge in battery use between 13:40 and 16:53. The Samsung phone was down from 41% to 22% battery within that time frame. We know that the Google Mapp app she had running in the background between 10:16 and 13:14 was not responsible for this, as it had been powered off at 13:14. I discussed it with Dave Mullen, who believes that this is such a large consumption of power that afternoon, with no obvious use of any apps etc. Ending with only one call attempt at the end of the afternoon. He is also at a loss how to explain this huge battery use (19%) within those few hours, but with absolutely no phone log activity to account for it. So no data to explain it with, despite this strongly suggesting some sustained and intense phone use.. According to the Samsung phone logs the phone had no GSM connection then and if she had been looking up stored apps for instance, the phone log should have documented did. Like it did for the early hours of April 3rd when at least one weather app was checked. We both do not understand why that extreme two and a half hours power drain was left unaccounted for in the logs? It may just be down to  sketchiness or limitations of the Samsung's logging capability. But it is an interesting question: what could Lisanne have done that afternoon to use so much battery? And did she even have to actively do something for that to happen, or could background activity of that phone somehow be responsible? Could she have flipped through her photos? Viewed movies? And wouldn't that have ended up as data in those internal log reports? And more importantly: why would she do that? At a time when she either was lost, distressed or busy getting back to the summit? 

Oh and what I did miss here: I have not read anything in the phone logs about the supposed 2 PM phone contact which Kris had with her boyfriend? The family said this about it:

So according to her parents, Kris still had phone contact with her boyfriend at or around 14:00 PM. contrasting with what the camera times and the official phone log data are now telling us. [Matt and Romain say that the police files state that the phone lost contact for the last time with the GSM network at 13:38]. And the authorities did not report any calls/text messages or whatsapp interactions with Chris' boyfriend on April 1st in the official phone logs. Matt confirmed to me that it is highly unlikely that this communication actually took place, if we go by these official phone logs. So what's going on here? Were these girls not behind the Pianista after all at that stage? But in a zone with GSM coverage? Or is it possible that the parents are off by a whole day? Because the police file only included phone data from April 1st onward. But.. the families were prepared for this very important first TV interview, aired on prime time national TV. Roelie seemed to know exactly what she was talking about when she corrected Hans on the time. They seemed to have looked it up before the interview, to be sure what they told the Dutch people. They had done their homework in advance and seemed certain about when that last time of communication was, on the day the girls went missing.. It seems unlikely to me that they would be mistaken by such a detail, considering Kris' boyfriend had that call/contact log info on his phone as well and was consulted by the parents about this. Even if they were a few hours off, every call or text or message made or received on April 1st should have been registered. And it was not in the police files. And I can hardly believe they would have the entire day wrong... But either they were wrong or the call log info is not complete.. How reliable is this police file? How complete is it?

And I was also disappointed that the police file started logging the phones from April 1st onward. Why is there no information about for instance the pattern in which Kris and Lisanne used their phones until then? How often did they normally call or message their parents, during those weeks in Panama? How often did they charge their phones normally and at what time of day? Because it seems odd that by 11:00, both their phones had about 50% battery life only. Was that a common thing for them in the weeks prior, or not? And did they normally have contact with their parents by using public Wi-Fi connection, or did they pay for their international calls and messages normally? I'm sure some of you can think of other valuable data that could have been documented in that 2000+ page long police file. But no, the info starts on April 1st. But kudos to Matt and Romain for posting all this new information. There seems to be so much misinformation spread out, mixed in with true facts and it does make people's heads spin and makes some of us very fatalistic and grumpy in the end. Not knowing what is fact and what is fiction and getting your head in a mess, trying to reason what could be true and what not. That in itself is already priceless, to now know more about the Official's Truth, so to speak. Their official police files on this case. Now we are getting to know a bit more about what info is and isn't correct. The importance of that cannot be underestimated. 

Juan comes with new inside information 

Juan posted a video this week, after he received information from someone from the Boquete area. This person, dubbed JJ, claims to have been part of a small, international group of elite military people from countries including Mexico and the United States, who were all military special forces of one kind or another, trained in dealing with abductions and who offered their services to the families of Kris and Lisanne during the first week of their disappearance already. 'A very generous offer'. They said they wanted to work for free, but only requested a plane ticket. However, this offer was rejected according to JJ. The relatives appeared suspicious of the offer and were focused on the financial cost, making the team members feel bad and like conmen, according to JJ. They are said to have been asked by the government to assist the relatives, as they themselves have no abduction/counter terrorism experience. So the offer was declined and the plug was pulled. 

If true, that is an unfortunate thing, in hindsight. Especially since this small team of professionals were convinced that by April 5th, the girls were still alive.. JJ also confirmed that the last verified sightings of the girls was on Piedra de Lino trail, starting next to the hostel of Pedro (who also claimed to have seen the girls in front of his house that day), as well as that Lisanne had a swollen/aching knee that day and took pain medication for it. 

According to JJ, local police were in over their heads and mishandled the case. JJ believes the girls were taken by certain local people, abducted and hidden somewhere downhill to the lowlands, in an area of the province where no search teams were present. Putting distance between them and the police searches. JJ stressed that you are never truly alone for long in the jungle above Boquete. 'Even when you think you're the only ones.. along comes some Indian family out of the bush. Someone would have seen those girls, had they been kept in highlands'. JJ and a friend helped search through the area, it is claimed, but found no signs of Kris and Lisanne. JJ believes it is more likely that they were offered a lift on the day they went missing. An easy way to abduct trusting people. Especially if Lisanne had some pain from her injury, it was easy to offer them a ride and the human tendency is often to be trusting of other humans offering their help. It can be that easy. 

JJ also mentioned a local drug that is available and is used sometimes to restraint people, for instance those who are kidnapped or abused. It's called Scopolamine (Devil's Breath). Power-Pixie sent me the following information about Devil's Breath: "I watched this video about the Colombian narcotic. Scary stuff. Who knows, Kris and Lisanne may have even tried to get away despite the effects. Kidnapping has been on my mind since the incidents in Costa Rica and border crossing as noted in their diaries." Hauntingly, JJ recalled other known abduction cases, where victims could be kept/staying alive for weeks or months, although cases like that don't last very long, typically.

It must have been a very hectic, chaotic and confusing time for everyone involved; a difficult headspace to make such large decisions. I feel that all the parents held on for a long time to the hope that Kris and Lisanne just took a wrong turn, and that Sinaproc would find them again. They also weren't in Panama right away themselves, which is probably the only place where you can ultimately with any certainty push officials and help troops in the right direction. JJ warns that if your child goes missing abroad, to never discount the possibility of abduction too soon. It takes a lot of manpower and cooperation from the authorities, but it is not unheard of that in (high-profile) disappearance cases, all national entry and exit roads are screened from the start by beach, border and mountain patrols. There are exit routes by boat in Bocas, by mountain or jungle in the west.. Time is of the essence though. On top of border patrols, you need top detectives to investigate leads on the ground and sniff out the trail of the perpetrators. Investigate, interrogate, follow up leads and intel aggressively. JJ states that the government was actually cooperative and taking the case seriously instantly, and the initial prosecutor on the case believed it was an abduction as well. We know this to be true as the case was classified as an abduction/crime ("deprivation of liberty") up until June of 2014 in the Panamanian police file, according to Dick Steffens. JJ also mentions two local primary suspects that were selected by the Panamanian DIJ (their version of the FBI, in a way). I won't mention these people here. But they are influential local drug dealers, linked to previous abductions of young women.   -   Anyway, just another (interesting) testimony and unfortunately this case is riddled with so many details of which we ultimately do not know if they are correct or not. So many false version of events were also spread, possibly to try to muddle the entire investigation, and make everyone doubt all of the case details. Dick Steffens, a former Dutch cop and involved in the release of the abducted Freddy Heineken in the Netherlands, has stood by the families' side, and he himself has spoken about how you deal with some international authorities in his experience, especially the more corrupt ones. You pay them money under the table and you go after the information you want the unofficial manner. You brine people if necessary. You always have to aim high, put all your money on a full scale investigation of the highest order (not think they will just walk out of that jungle by their own initiative) and then you can always scale things down.. Maybe following Betzaida Pitti and her for ever taking searches for the lost girls were the wrong bet in all this? If there even was an alternative in reality. But by October of 2014, the Kremers family had still not received an official DNA match result from Pitti and the authorities kept the parents from openly talking about case details, only to cast Hans Kremers aside as a troublemaker in the end.... Horrible, horrible.

Matt and Romain posted more new information: photos of the damaged jeans shorts from Kris...

Feb 28, 2021

Matt, Romain and Chris have received more case photos from an anonymous source. They had access to police file photos which show the shorts from Kris, pictured after they were found. Unlike what we had heard before in the press, the jeans were in fact not found 'neatly folded', nor floating in the water, but instead they were found soaked and stuck on a dead tree branch that was partially submerged in a waterfall on the Serpent (Culebra) river, more than 5 kilometres (3.1 miles) from where they were last thought to be.

Matt writes: "When her shorts were discovered by investigators, her shorts had numerous holes, some of which were new holes that didn’t exist prior to their disappearance (as shown in numerous photos). It’s uncertain if the new holes were caused naturally from the river conditions, or caused by something else altogether." There were some dirt traces on the shorts, and they also show a large tear at the back, as well as a few small holes, "possibly from a fall that Kris experienced while she was missing."  -  In the photos you can see some damage on the back of the shorts, mainly left and right from the main vertical seam. The brand of the shorts is H&M's 'Divided', which is a fashionable but cheap clothing brand. I know that brand well and actually have a similar jeans shorts as this one. Also bought at that time. The fabric is thin, it looks and feels nothing like the real jeans fabric from Levi's, to name one brand. It very easily gets damaged. The tearing is located seemingly at around the same spot where Kris had already some mud visible in photos 507 and 508. I am not sure that this relatively small damage area could be consistent with a slide down a ravine, for instance. Although this tear does look probably most like slitting or sliding damage. Just not down a 40 metre ravine, in my estimation. I'm inclined to think the fabric damage should be more extensive in such a situation, and also shown further down on the point where the bum sticks out most, so to speak, and would have suffered the most friction in case of sliding down rocks. I can't really make out an animal attack on the fabric either. Claw marks tend to be long and sharp in shape and would probably have left some blood marks as well. Maybe, just maybe, it is also possible that the force of the water at the spot where the jeans was found, stuck on a branch near a waterfall of sorts, could also have caused this fabric damage. Although it doesn't really look like that. The jeans were also found unbuttoned and mostly unzipped.  

"The official reports stated that the jean shorts had no trace of bodily fluid, nor skin cells of any type. Furthermore, the shorts did have some dirt on them."

The jeans are shown to have European size 38. Matt writes that the leather tag shown on the back of the shorts "is illegible due to being soaked with water, which darkens denim fabric and waterlogs leather materials". No trace of bodily fluid was found on this garment. When people die wearing their clothes, the decomposition process usually allows for body fat to penetrate the clothing fabric in a way which cannot be simply washed off. This was not the case here, so it seems most likely that Kris did not wear these jeans (for long) after her death... Matt also says that it is difficult to damage jeans like that and there was no blood on those shorts. He proposes the theory that "For one reason or another, the shorts ended up in the river and thus were carried by the current. Subsequently, when arriving at the waterfall, the shorts got stuck on the tree which covered the passage."

The location of the Kris shorts:

Latitude: 8.877639

Longitude: -82.408389

08 ° 52 ′ 39.5 ″ N 82 ° 24 ′ 30.2 ″ W

Great to have access to new facts now, regarding these jeans shorts! Unfortunately a lot of the hard case facts have been kept out of the public domain, and half truths, whole truths but also completely false details did seep through to the public through media publications. I always try to provide you the story as it is currently publicly known, based on publicly available information and source links. But the more info comes out, the more this story needs to be adjusted. I earlier wrote about these jeans shorts: "The Ngobe who recovered the shorts claimed to have found them zipped and folded and placed on a rock, high above the water line. At least, that is one account. Another account reported them having actually been discovered floating in the river.. A local guide called Laureano told The Daily Beast: “Her clothing wasn’t found on any trail! We found those shorts down there in the river”. (We = at the least him and local guide 'Angel', aka: Angel Palacios, here you can see him talk about his find). He was pointing to the bank of the Culebre river some 50 or 60 feet away, downstream. This place is only reachable by passing a three cabled monkey bridge (I read it was found in the vicinity of the 2nd cable bridge). “Her shorts weren’t used as any kind of trail marker,” Laureano insisted. “And they weren’t put there on purpose.”  In this difficult terrain Dutch police estimated the distance between the jeans short and the backpack to be no less than 14 hours of walking distance."

So now the question is of course why people like Angel Palacios and Laureano would tell Jeremy Kryt, at the location where they said to have found the jeans, that it had been "down there in the river". Perhaps this can still be true technically, but I do wonder why such a distinct detail as the jeans being found soaked and stuck on a dead tree branch was not included in their testimony... Perhaps such details were only meant for selective ears. As Matt put it himself: "These photos of Kris’s denim shorts not only potentially provide further clues about their disappearance but they also demonstrate that there’s much more information about the case that wasn’t previously known to the public." 

Below the photos, left as they were published, right how I adjusted the brightness and contrast a bit for a better view of the details:

Matt from ImperfectPlan published a new article

February 25th, 2021 He was able to view all the daytime photos, taken by Kris and Lisanne on April 1st. Matt could unfortunately not publish the remaining ten or so photos which we have not been able to view in the public domain yet, but he was able to describe them and reveal that these photos do not show Blue the dog, nor another person. I will summarize some of Matt's interesting findings now. 

About the time it took for the girls to reach the summit, Matt wrote: "It took Kris and Lisanne 1:52h [to reach the Mirador], since they would have started at 11:08 and took the first photo on the Mirador at exactly 13:00. This also assumes they reached the Mirador and took photos right away, while in reality they may have spent a few minutes first enjoying the view. The time they took is very short and required that no wrong turn on the trial is taken. Although it is possible to have happened, there is some doubt and it can be wondered if they had someone with them that knew the trail and also paced them."

About the 'new' daytime photos he saw he wrote: "All 33 images were taken in 8 groups of 2 – 10 images each and show the same subjects or scenery from slightly different angles within those groups. Therefore, if there is one image from a group available, it is very easy to visualize what the missing ones show. Since I cannot publish those images, I am giving a description of what they show. Matt concluded: "None of the previously unpublished images shows anything that is particularly noteworthy or not visible in a subsequent image."
-Photo 478: This image shows scenery very similar to #481. It shows the same landscape.

-Photo 480: This image shows scenery very similar to #481. It shows the same landscape.

-Photo 487: This image shows a small creek.

-Photo 488: This image shows a small creek.

-Photo 490: This image shows the same location as #491.

-Photo 492: This image shows the trail and the same stream as #491.

-Photo 495: This is the first image taken at the Mirador. This image is a selfie like #498. Kris touches her hair/neck and has her eyes closed.

-Photo 496: This image is a selfie like #498.

-Photo 503: This image shows the same scenery as #504.

Cropped photos

Matt also wrote some paragraphs about whether or not he believes the photos were photoshopped or cropped or manipulated. He believes they were not. But he does highlight a few of the original photos were cropped, probably because they had to be published in the media at the time I reckon [Scarlet]. Matt wrote: "The Canon SX270HS that was used to take all 33 images produces images of 4000 x 3000 pixel at highest quality and an aspect ratio of 1.33. Thus, any image with an aspect ratio other than 1.33 was obviously cropped. Of the 22 previously available images the following images have an aspect ratio other than 1.33. Images #476, #481, #485, #489 are screenshots of a TV screen and obviously cropped and no further investigation is necessary. The original that I have reviewed do not show signs of being cropped. Image #497 and #498: Those images were very slightly cropped. In comparison to the originals, nothing of interest was cropped and is likely that they were cropped for “artistic” purposes or to fit an image template better. The originals do not show signs of being cropped." So: "no relevant image portions were cropped off the known images. However as mentioned above, I can only compare to the originals available to me and assume those were not slightly cropped."

Deleted photos

Matt writes the following about this: "[for] deleting images within a series of images, one would have to renumber all images subsequent to the deleted image(s). It is possible that this was done with image 509 which is missing and was not even recoverable from the memory card. It is unknown if this image was deleted by Kris or Lisanne after image 510 was taken or if it was secure deleted to make restoration impossible. It does not appear as if Kris or Lisanne deleted images since no other image numbers are missing. In [unpublished] image #495 Kris has her eyes closed and appears to be moving her hair with her right hand. This image would be one she would have wanted to delete, especially since there are several like images taken right after that look acceptable. It is therefore unlikely that image 509 was deleted by Kris and Lisanne because they didn’t like it, simply because they did not seem to have deleted other images that seem unlikable. Image 509 might have taken at a time where there was a problem and under those circumstances there would not be motivation to delete images.  -   The other option is that the image [#509] was deleted by a 3rd party. We then must assume that the motive was to prevent anybody from seeing what was shown in this image. This on its own is not evidence of 3rd party involvement since someone may simply not have wanted to be the target of an investigation, however it makes some 3rd party involvement a possibility. Lastly, the image could be missing due to accidental deletion or technical defect, but those are both rather unlikely. Digital cameras are essentially computers and it is not likely they just miss count of images. Accidental deletion also seems unlikely since for that the Canon SX270HS requires 4 small and rather hard to locate buttons to press, including one to acknowledge a delete warning. For this to happen unintentionally is nearly impossible. A further problematic detail is that this image was taken between the last day photo, image 508, the first 112 call and before the distressing Night photos. It is therefore entirely possible that image 509 showed something that someone did not want to be seen. In summary, it is possible that at least one image was deleted and possibly more."  -  Matt deems pixel manipulation of these photos unlikely, as it is difficult and prone to errors. "Especially since one image was deleted, one could have deleted another one without raising any more suspicion. It is much easier to simply delete images with unwanted content rather than performing difficult to do and relatively easy to detect pixel manipulation." 

As for meta data (which the camera writes into the images) manipulation, he concludes that this data can be easily manipulated, and then it would not be detectable by anybody. "In this case the most interesting would be the date and time the image was taken based on the camera’s clock as well as “last edited” data (to me only the time the image was taken was available)." But, "if the original meta data was manipulated, it might not be possible for us to detect it." Matt gives the example of images #500 and #501, where the time difference is difficult to align. There were only 12 seconds between both photos, "which is not much time since Kris and Lisanne had to switch spots, trade the camera, focus and take another image. Which is pretty not much time to do all those steps." When experimenting with it, Matt concluded that it is physically possible to recreate the scene within this time frame (14 seconds for him). Nevertheless he concluded that "the time of 12s that Kris and Lisanne took is possible, but very fast and one wonders if there really was such reason for the haste to save seconds. Another explanation could be that those images were taken by a 3rd party, which on its own is not evidence for 3rd party involvement as it could have simply been another hiker." He also notices the "thumbs up" sign in photos 498, 500 and 501, and calls them "untypical and probably for young people their age rather untypical hand signals". They are not visible in ano of their other pictures taken. Matt: "Could this be a connection with a 3rd party who took those pictures? It can not be said."

Photo #509
"Image 509 seems to have simply been deleted. If someone deleted one image without correcting the meta data of the remaining images why would they have put more effort into deleting other images? It is also possible to manipulate image data and time data to make it appear as if they were taken at a certain date / time while in reality they were taken at a different date / time. For this to be done realistically with only a few images, it would be required to match the locations, lighting conditions and looks of persons shown and it would be easier to manipulate an entire series of images to make it appear as if they were taken on a different date or time. While the former appears unlikely, the latter is not impossible but not likely."  -  Matt adds: "I would also encourage the reader to review Juan’s analysis on some of the bushes where it appears as they are in different stages of rolling their branches. This is difficult to explain and I recommend reviewing Juan’s excellent analysis on this subject."

Before or after the summit?
Romain walked the Pianista trail twice and believes that: "When I first saw photos 493 and 494, they reminded me of the path beyond the Mirador. I didn't doubt it for a second… Today, with the official schedule, it's very difficult for me to say. However, I cannot place them other than beyond the Mirador…" He also wrote: "The place shown is a typical passage of the path located after the Mirador, which one is not supposed to find before this one. I could be wrong, however. [But] photo 493 reminds me of a place which is located four minutes after the Mirador."  -  If he is correct, then we are looking at photos which were shuffled to some degree and must have been renumbered, as in the current chronology they are placed before the Mirador photos, not after. And time wise it is not possible that they were taken on the way down again either.

Romain also highlighted a photo from his own hike up the Pianista trail, and a very interesting photo is shown, showing the same bottleneck as local guides already pointed at in this video I translated. There is a fork in the road at some point, where the hiker has to go to the right (as I understand, the trail to the left (west) leads to a place called Cerro Horqueta). But this is not clearly indicated, and as Matt/Romain describe, the clear path to the left may seem the more logical one to take. So the fact that Kris and Lisanne summited in a quick time, within two hours, may indicate that someone had told them what path to take. Either directly, being there with them, or beforehand. 

Update: photos taken with the mobile phones on the summit 

On the summit of the Pianista trail, the Mirador, there were also nine known photos created with the iPhone from Kris and the Samsung Galaxy phone from Lisanne. Matt does not show them in his article, but he does describe them in little detail.

-IMG_2125; taken with the iPhone4 on the Mirador at 13:14. This was around 6 minutes áfter the last digital photo was taken on the summit, photo 504, which showed the views down towards Boquete. So there were six minutes where we have no idea what happened, but then these eight images are taken in quick succession with the mobile phones. And going by the numbers of these images, there may even be more that we don't know about?   

-IMG_2126; taken with the iPhone4 on the Mirador.  

-IMG_2127; taken with the iPhone4 on the Mirador at 13:14:00. 

-20140401_131420; taken with the Samsung S3 on the Mirador at 13:14:20.

-20140401_131424; taken with the Samsung S3 on the Mirador at 13:14:24. 

-20140401_131430; taken with the Samsung S3 on the Mirador at 13:14:30. This image shows similar clouds and scenery as Image 502

-20140401_131456; taken with the Samsung S3 on the Mirador at 13:14:56.

-IMG_2128; taken with the iPhone4 on the Mirador at 13:15:00.

-20140401_131513; taken with the Samsung S3 on the Mirador at 13:15:13.

*******

Interesting 2014 research into the GPS function of the girls' mobile phones, and the potential of google maps coordinates 

July 2nd, 2014

Een Vandaag
Please note that the phones and digital photo details that are shown during this program, as well as their GPS info (set to Scandinavia) are not the phones of Kris or Lisanne. They were only shown for illustration purposes.

Presenter: "What happened with Lisanne Froon and Kris Kremers? DNA results has confirmed that the items that were recently found in the Panamanian jungle, belonged to the two friends from Amersfoort. And they hope that these can bring more certainty about how their last hike could end so fatally."

Nikki van Passel (spokesperson of the families): "I think that the most important question is: what happened with Kris and Lisanne? And in order to be able to answer this, we need more information." 

Presenter: "Kris and Lisanne left in March to go to the other side of the world, to do volunteer work in Panama. On April 1st they are last seen on the Pianista Trail in Boquete. Over 1,5 month later and at a distance of 20 kilometres, a backpack and later also DNA traces are found, deep in the jungle. 

Nikki van Passel: "From what we understand, the backpack has been found pretty far away from the location where they were last seen. And this distance is actually too big to assume that they have walked it themselves. And we have a lot of questions about this. Especially regarding [the distance between] where they were last seen, and where the items were found."

"Jaap Jan Visser is specialised in retrieving data from damaged smartphones. He says we have to hope that the GPS service was activated"

Presenter: "The Dutch Forensic Institute is currently investigating the mobile phones Kris and Lisanne. The parents hope to get more information about where the friends were at which time."

Researcher Jaap Jan Visser: "It depends on what the girls did with their phones. But the best case scenario would be if they if we can find for instance pictures taken as close as possible before the moment of their disappearance."

Presenter: "Jaap Jan Visser is specialised in retrieving data from damaged smartphones. He says we have to hope that the GPS service was switched on." 

Researcher Jaap Jan Visser: "When I look here for instance, you see that within the photo two coordinates are registered. These are GPS coordinates, and they determine a certain point on Earth. And they are registered with the photo, if that services is activated."

Presenter: "Google maps then accurately displays where the photos were taken. The families of Lisanne and Kris also hope that the last phone calls and text messages that were made with the mobile phones can be retrieved and that they will receive more information."

Nikki van Passel: "We have many witness statements. And from witness statements they have also said that they are contradicting one another, or mentioning different times. And we hope that based on this new data from the phones, we will soon know which information is correct."

"You can have an entire body that is in mint condition, and then you suddenly find a cranial vault that has a fracture and a hole. Then you suddenly have a clear picture of the circumstances. So with only a few bone remains you can do nothing. Are you not allowed to come to any conclusions and neither should you want to." 

Local news reporter: "The remains have been found close to Boca del Toro, at a 21 kilometre distance from Boquete, where many trails come together and where the terrain is dangerous."

Presenter: "The only evidence we have so far, is the DNA match. According to pathologist Frank van de Goot, it is difficult to say much about what happened, based on the bone remnants that were found."

Frank van de Goot: "Yes, there is unfortunately not enough material found. The clothing residues and the few bones alone are of course completely insufficient to be able to say anything about what happened. It will be difficult to find out how long that bone has exactly been lying there. In the Dutch or even the European situation, you'll be able to determine from damage of the surface of the bone if it has been lying out there for a while already, or for a few days. But this is of course a completely different climate. With completely different vegetation and flora and fauna."

Presenter: "The forensic investigation into the phones is also not simple. The backpack was found alongside a river, and perhaps the phones have become wet." 

Researcher Jaap Jan Visser: "In the worst case scenario, so in the worst case when the phones turn out to be very damaged, then we have to solder the chips out of the phones. And then they have to be baked first, to get rid of all the moisture. That is a very meticulous process. If it gets warm too quickly the chips will start to blister and then the data on it is destroyed. But that is identical in both processes. And then we can use our special NFI techniques to get info from individual chips."

Presenter: "The parents of Kris and Lisanne first want to wait and see the results of this investigation. For them this is not yet a closed case."

Nikki van Passel: "We noticed that the Dutch quickly turned in a certain direction after the DNA results. And for the families this is more difficult. And this is because there is very little found of Kris and Lisanne. Very little to say goodbye to, factually. And we will really try to change this."

Presenter: "The search operations will continue. Once the river levels have gone down the search teams can go back into the search area. The families hope to find more traces there."

Frank van de Goot: "The more you find, the more complete the image becomes. You can have an entire body that is in mint condition, and then you suddenly find a cranial vault that has a fracture and a hole. Then you suddenly have a clear picture of the circumstances. So with only a few bone remains you can do nothing. Are you not allowed to come to any conclusions and neither should you want to." 

Presenter: "By now dozens of theories are circulating about what may have happened to the two friends."

Local reporter: The two girls had no guide and did unfortunately get lost. 

Frank van de Goot: "That happens with every case that touches the population. You see that in no time the wildest speculations arise. That is perhaps also how it's supposed to be. That is part of the collective bereavement process."

Presenter: "The parents of Kris and Lisanne continue with their search for answers. They hope to see quick results from the NFI investigation. All the possible scenarios remain open for them."

Nikki van Passel: "At the moment there are as many theories as there are people. And it is very difficult to determine right now who of them are right. So right now we are just waiting and looking for the facts. And based on those facts, the people who are specialized in this can hopefully explain to us what exactly happened."

N.B. I read there at some point that some people believe that the cracked screen shown in this video is the Samsung phone from Lisanne. It is not. The phones shown in the program are not the phones of the girls. They are just for illustration purposes (and the screens of the real phones of Kris and Lisanne look undamaged according to Matt, who saw the official files and photos). Same for the photos with exif data shown in that video, they are from someone else and taken years earlier, with a GPS location in Scandinavia. Again, purely illustrative. There is not even info that the phones were actually damaged or wet. The investigator who was interviewed, was awaiting the phones and was thinking out loud that they 'could be' or may be wet. And then he tells the interviewer what should thén be done with such (theoretically) damaged phones. But they don't know yet at that point in what state the phones will be coming in. And all I ever heard and read since, is the Samsung phone from Lisanne and the iPhone from Kris were not damaged. We may not have been given all the information available in this case yet, but for now we have no such information. What we do have is the photo of the video of the backpack, taken right after it was found. Not even the sunglasses look damaged in any way. Everything looks fine and dry. That's all we can go on.

Discovered by Juan and mentioned in his excellent google album on this case; in some photos on the Pianista, Kris wears a black earring in her left ear (right for us viewers) and a grey one in her right, and in another photo on the same trail.... the earrings are suddenly reversed 

Did she take them out to put them in opposing ears? That seems odd. Or has someone been mirroring that photo of hers in photoshop? In both photos the background looks right; you cannot reverse that viewpoint on the Mirador, because this is exactly what it looks like, seen as here in the background. The same applies to the grassland part and the wooden fence in the background of the other photo. You cannot flip that background horizontally, because that is not what it looks like in reality. Was only Kris' cut out photo mirrored by someone using photoshop? Or were these two photos taken at different days perhaps? One day she put the differently coloured earrings in differently than the other day? But then the question becomes; would Kris really wear the same exact set of clothes on two consecutive days? Or even two days in close proximity? With all the different clothes they took along? Perhaps the angle of the photo obscures part of Kris' earlobe and we just don't see properly that a black and a silver earring were perhaps worn in her left ear (right for us)? - Solution here may be that due to the lesser photo quality, we do not see right away that Kris is wearing both a black and a silver earing in each ear. On the left photo, her jaw may perhaps block view of the underlying black earring. In the photo on the left I don't even see a hint of a black earring in the right ear* (= Kris' left ear). And likewise, I don't see a hint of a silver earring in her right ear* in the second photo either. Maybe other people do, or have another good explanation for this earring matter. 

Notice also how stretched some of the photos of Lisanne look on the summit. In this closeup you can also see how the little mole under her left arm suddenly looks a lot further away from her armpit. Photo credit to Juan.

And notice the amount of dirt on her legs and jeans shorts suddenly (it was all clean still on the summit photos). Smudges on her calves, her inner thigh and the back pocket of her jeans. How come? It was dry sunny weather, there was no heavy mud on the trail that day, after a long stretch of drought. Did she slip somewhere?  

About a much talked about photos

Toni B shared a photo with Juan, claiming that the night photo of Kris' hair is in fact a photoshopped mesh-up from a daytime photo taken of her in Boquete. Here is the image which is supposed to prove this:

So what it's supposed to prove, is that when you closely look at the night photo, you can see that Kris' hair falls in exactly the same manner as in this specific daytime photo. In other words: the night shot may be a photoshop. I get messages from people pointing me to this photo, saying it is new evidence. I have responded to those messages, saying that I believe that what Toni may have done, is placing two different photos over one another, in layers, and merging the two. But that in reality, the two photos do not look alike. The only thing the comparison shows us (imo) is the similarity in colour and hair structure, making is fairly certain that the night photo is indeed showing us Kris' hair. Here are the two photos which were merged:

Here are the close ups: 

Kris in underground sex circuit?

Juan came with interesting but unverifiable information in the past. He heard online about a Brazilian truck driver who claimed he had Kris in his truck shortly, in Brazil. And who gave his contact data. Juan then contacted him and spoke with this Leondro Ferreira on whatsapp. He told Juan that he is a truck driver and lives in Goiás, Brazil. He had written online that he was Leondro and worked as a trucker. In February of 2016, Leondro said he had Kris standing by his truck. But that he only realised this afterwards. She was about 25 years old and had a different accent, according to him. He asked where she wanted to go and where she came from and she told him that she was Dutch. That she came from the north of Brazil and had to find the Dutch consulate. He said she looked confused, but that she knew where she wanted to go. Then she told him that a friend of her, Lisanne, had died in Boquete, Panama. She also told him her name: Kris Kremers. And she apparently showed him a copy of her passport. He asked her how she ended up in Brazil, but she didn't reply. He then had to do something or think about it for a minute, but a minute later she was gone. A colleague told him that she had gotten a lift from someone else, who had driven in the direction of Golania Golas in Brazil. 

That is when he allegedly decided to google and came to know about the disappearance case. He believes Kris and Lisanne were abducted in Panama. Juan showed him the photo of Kris' passport and Leandro confirmed to Juan that it was the same girl, only when he saw her Kris had short hair. He told Juan also that if Juan contacted Brazilian authorities over this, he (Leandro) would give his full cooperation. The fact that he claimed that Kris had a copy of her ID card with her, is supposedly correct and something he 'couldn't have known otherwise'. - The photo of Kris' passport that is shown up here was taken on the same afternoon of April 8th by the way, when local Boquete man Mark Heyer also made photos of the girls' diaries in their bedroom. For documentation value. Only this passport photo bore the name of a local Panamanian journalist in its exif data, Mr. Rosario. He was in their room that day together with Heyer, taking photos of the scene. One can wonder why a journalist and a local photographer were allowed to roam through this bedroom by April 8th, taking photos of a possible (?) crime scene, on the same day when the forensic investigators inspected this room.  -   Anyway, very vague info this. But I wanted to share it anyway. But without solid facts, it can go straight to the realm of make belief probably. Leandro made no photo as evidence. He didn't call police right away (he didn't know about the disappearance case at that moment though). It is also unclear how Kris could have been alive in 2016, when half her pelvic bone and a rib were found and identified as hers back in June of 2014. Although not everybody trusts the DNA testing and results. Either it's all nonsense and she is dead, or the bones were falsely attributed to her by pathologists/Panamanian prosecutors. (Or she walked around with a pelvic replacement... no noooo this is way too absurd and illogical!). To be honest; without evidence such as a photo of this supposed 'Kris with short hair', there is not much to go on, and I understand that such a story reeks of sensationalism in the eyes of most people. This man may have known of the case already and just brought this out for attention or to troll or whatever. Or maybe he is really convinced it was her? Anyway, no proof means it is just another unfounded theory to add to the pile of unproven theories surrounding this disappearance. Just to be clear once more: I share on this blog all sorts of information about this case, including other people's theories. Just because I share them with you does not mean that I myself believe in each and every one. But this is a cold case currently and not even the cause of death of Kris and Lisanne is known. Let alone what exactly happened. 

Now a source close to Kris Kremers, who earlier shared information about having indications that the girls were abducted after a swimming event (see part 2), has come forward again and told Juan that at the time, a photo has been circulating from Kris in the underground sex circuit. He says that a man from Boquete, Lee Zeltzer, saw the photo at the time and mentioned it on his blog. Now, Lee died in 2015 but was a passionate amateur investigator from the moment Kris and Lisanne disappeared. He interviewed people living at the start of the Pianista trail; he kept up to date with the whole case and he had a blog with extensive comment section. His blog has since been removed. But Juan now found a way to still be able to read it, through the nets cache functioning. Here I am writing out everything of (semi) interest for you from this now-deleted blog. Including screenshots. Now this source messaged Juan again and said that he was following that forum of Lee back then, in April 2014 and onward. And that someone had posted a photo online in April of Kris, with a torn lip and her face beaten up. This photo was said to have been made in a sex club in Panama City, later in the first week of April. It was a club he said where photos were being taken for an erotic calendar. In fact, a woman from Panama City had posted the photo on April 13th of 2014. He and others were "99% certain" it was Kris. There was also an accompanying text with the photo, asking in Spanish if this could be one of the missing Dutch girl perhaps? This Dutch source then directly messaged Lee himself, to notify him of this, and Lee said he would go after it. But as soon as the man who posted the photo was confronted (a Panamanian man with a small beard), he took the picture offline again, As I understand it, the photo was posted on a forum. And this forum was soon after also deleted. Now this Dutch source regrets that he didn't save the photo right away. But "the man" (Lee? Or the person who uploaded the photo?) told him that he had sent it to Hans Kremers. Who said that it wasn't his daughter. Now, the source says, that is not surprising because she was badly beaten. But several people who knew Kris personally believed it could be her. The source asked Juan if he could find this Lee perhaps and ask him about the photo. Unfortunately... Lee passed away himself in 2015. And I am scrolling through his cached (hidden) forum posts, that is to say; the ones that are still accessible, and cannot find anything yet about this photo either. I also find it peculiar to be honest that nobody on that forum screen saved or saved the photo in question at the time. That should be a first impulse normally with these fellow amateur sleuths. And Lee was by all appearances a dedicated sincere searcher, not someone to sneakily erase evidence like that. The fact that this supposed photo has never resurfaced, to me makes it another possible fable. So... more smoke and mirrors probably. Without hard facts or photo evidence, this one can also go to the realm of unfounded theories probably. But I wanted to share it here anyway. I'm sure it will interest some people. 

By the way, I don't have to tell you at this point that there are many strange details in this case. As Juan reminded me of the other day; how strange is it that the parents and authorities viewed the swimming photos (see part 2; Kris and Lisanne swimming with 2 local young men who died soon after) and that they and investigators determined that this photo is authentic. But.... that the two girls in the photo, the redhead and the brunette looking exactly like Kris and Lisanne... are not them but two other tourists. Not one, but two lookalikes. Never did officials provide more details, for instance which nationality these two supposed other tourists had. Juan and I expected them to say that the entire photo was fake. But no, it is real apparently and the young men who we identified in it are real too. And dead... But we have to believe that early April of 2014, in Boquete, there were two complete lookalikes of Kris and Lisanne. Lookalikes who we never heard of or read about otherwise, by no local, no media outlet, despite the whole region looking for similar looking Dutch girls. I suppose what they say could be true.. But to me personally it seems that we would have seen them show up here and there in the media during the investigation, from people mistaking them for the two lost girls. But nothing... 

Photos from the search operation from April 15th 2014

And now...? What more can 

be expected in this case?

People asked me what more can be expected in this case. Since it has been closed by authorities, for now. Back in 2018 when I started writing that blog, there was barely any attention for this case anywhere anymore. Only Jeremy kryt had written a couple of articles about it in the Daily Beast back in 2016. Other than that, the Panamese and Dutch prosecutors had closed the case as an (unproven) accident. Juan started making his massive google album with evidence, a few people on a Dutch forum kept posting about the case, I wrote my blog and started translating the Dutch information that was out there and the many videos. And from there people internationally started picking up on this mystery case again. But it has lead to nothing new, in terms of investigation. Only to many youtube videos, articles, journalists diving back onto this case again. But the authorities do not see a reason to reopen the case at the moment. So other than putting international pressure now on them, by keeping this case in the public eye, and other than increasing the (theoretical) chance that people who do know more in Boquete will speak out, there is really nothing to look forward in terms of new investigations. The original investigation was RUINED by Betzaida Pitti and Co. And forensic evidence is gone for ever now. I don't know what more there is to report on at this point. We have been very lucky that different people internationally have recently started investing in this case as well. And there have been two Canadians who got their hands on new evidence (photos of the diary entries which Kris and Lisanne wrote in Panama; almost all the night photos; the swimming photo which in my view is a game changer really). They didn't exactly intent to make that evidence public, but gave it to Juan, who has a 100% transparency protocol in place, so that is why we now all know about this new material. And perhaps there will be more information coming out in the future. One can only hope. 

In my blog part 5, you can read what other people think about the disappearance of Kris and Lisanne. In part 6 you can read the most important interviews with the families of Kris and Lisanne. And for first hand information gathered by Lee Zeltzer and provided on a local Boquete forum at the time when these girls had gone missing, keep reading here