Those sites won't give you subscriber information anyways. They will only tell you (sometimes) the cell phone company to whom the number is registered (which you apparently already know). You have to contact the cell phone company to get specific subscriber information and they cannot give it out with a subpoena, although they will sometimes give it to law enforcement without a court order. Trust me - been through this process many a time during my investigations. Cell phone information can be a real pain . . . .

 

Have you just tried calling the cell numbers to see who answers?

 

I haven't tried yet. I was going to wait and see what the police officer found out about them. I really want to call, and play stupid to find out a name, but I don't want to interfere with the police. However, if they say they couldn't find anything in regards to the number, then I'm calling.

I haven't tried yet. I was going to wait and see what the police officer found out about them. I really want to call, and play stupid to find out a name, but I don't want to interfere with the police. However, if they say they couldn't find anything in regards to the number, then I'm calling.

 

Doubt it would interfere with their investigation, but your call. Just some advice when/if you do call. Work under the "it's easier to attract flies with honey than vinegar" approach initially. I'd simply explain to the person why you are calling and you are trying to determine who made the call to them using your phone and that you are hoping to take care of this matter without involving the police (doesn't matter if you lie or not). They may feel a bit more at ease talking to you if it's less confrontational and not overly serious. If things don't go well, you can always "ratchet" up the confrontation level by telling them your next call will be to the police and that they (person you are speaking with) are certain to be subpoenaed to provide the exact same information you are "pleasantly" asking them for.

If things don't go well, you can always "ratchet" up the confrontation level by telling them your next call will be to the police and that they (person you are speaking with) are certain to be subpoenaed to provide the exact same information you are "pleasantly" asking them for.

Could he also tell them the places that the person who called them committed a felony? Naming those places and saying they were caught on the store cameras? Of course this is if the "pleasant" approach doesn't work. Hoping they will call the person and maybe they will "give themselves up" in order for a plea? At least it MAY scare the people who took the purse a bit and they will be looking over their shoulders wondering when they will get nabbed.

It seems that there is so much of this going on , that the civilians need to do a lot of the leg work themselves. Good Luck.

They've spent $247 at Toys R Us, $203 at an ATM, and $200 at Krogers. However, the store number given online via our bank doesn't exist according to any Kroger store. I will call corporate in the morning.

 

 

 

Yeah. The officer we're working with seems real cool. I'm just trying to find out everything I can and then letting him know. Toys R Us has to have cameras upfront, the ATM has it, and Krogers has them. Based on the times we have so far, it appears as though they hit up the ATM at Rookwood by PF Changs, then went to Toys R Us in Kenwood, and then hit Krogers. Come to think of it, i think there's a new Krogers up there. That has to be the one they hit as the store # probably isn't on the list yet that the other stores have.

 

Yeah, there is 2 fairly new Krogers locations up there. One is in Blue Ash (off of Plainfield Rd by Ronald Reagan) and the other is the brand new location by the new Crate and Barrel.

Best of luck to you, nees. After reading through this thread, I cringe for all you are going through. :mad:

I haven't tried yet. I was going to wait and see what the police officer found out about them. I really want to call, and play stupid to find out a name, but I don't want to interfere with the police. However, if they say they couldn't find anything in regards to the number, then I'm calling.

 

If the police really want to solve this case they will subpoena the records. Keep checking in with them but whatever you do don't taint the investigation.

This thread has made me go through my wallet and take out all those extra credit cards that I put in there during Christmas. Only have my debit card, one credit card for emergencies and drivers license in there now. I never carry my social security card with me.

When my purse was stolen from my kitchen table, the police were 0 help to me. I NEVER heard from the detective assigned to my case, despite numerous attempts to contact him, and messages left. In addition, my credit card companies supplied me with all sorts of information to give to the police. Even the messages I left explaining that I had information went unreturned and unacknowledged.

I don't see how the precincts where your cards were used refuse to pursue the issue, as that is where the fraud occurred. (I am correct in that understanding, yes?) To me, that is like someone stealing a gun in KY and killing someone in OH and the OH police department saying, "it's not our issue, the gun was stolen in KY."

I know this is going to come across like an excuse but if the "police" took the time to thoroughly investigate all the crimes reported to them my guess is most police departments would need to triple or quadruple their sworn officers.

 

This one case may take an officer/detective two or three days to complete and the department in question probably doesn't have more than about 12 officers. They may end up doing a great job, the point is crime after crime keeps happening and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to crunch the numbers.

 

At the end of the day we get the kind of police service we are willing to pay for. Sometimes that service is excellent and sometimes that service stinks.

I don't see how the precincts where your cards were used refuse to pursue the issue, as that is where the fraud occurred. (I am correct in that understanding, yes?) To me, that is like someone stealing a gun in KY and killing someone in OH and the OH police department saying, "it's not our issue, the gun was stolen in KY."

 

To answer your question the police are exercising a limited amount of resources in a political environment and in your example the police would throw lots of resources into solving the case and as a result the police may not throw lots of resources into the crimes this thread is about because again the resources are limited.

 

Excellent analogy by the way!!!

I agree it's wrong (and flat out lazy) for the police department in the area where the cards were fraudulently used to claim it's not their issue/jurisdiction. That, to me, is a department that has some serious management issues.

 

What I do feel is correct, however, is that police departments must prioritize their work with the limited manpower and resources they have available. Though nees' incident may seem like a very simple, quick investigation, it's not. Not saying it's the O.J. investigation or anything, but this isn't something that can be wrapped up in 4 hours time. There are probably only a few detectives on Norwood's force and they have to apply their time to the most serious crimes first (I'm sure anyone would agree that murder, assaults, rapes, drug offenses, etc.. would "rank" ahead of this offense) and then look towards solving those investigations that can be wrapped up fairly quickly. Of course, you can't know how quickly something might be resolved if you don't at least take an initial look at it. :irked:

To answer your question the police are exercising a limited amount of resources in a political environment and in your example the police would throw lots of resources into solving the case and as a result the police may not throw lots of resources into the crimes this thread is about because again the resources are limited.

 

Excellent analogy by the way!!!

 

Thanks.

 

For the record, I understand that crime must be prioritized. I just am a big fan of the truth. I can accept, "We don't currently have the manpower to handle this fully. I suggest you let your local police handle the robbery issue first and let's go from there," moreso than "It's not our issue."

I never carry my social security card with me.

 

My wife doesn't either. However, she had a paystub that she just received in her purse, and her employee still uses the SSN as identification.