The “Sarah” Calls Could Have Been Traced Earlier

2010-02-15 13:08:33

By Donald Richter

On April 14, 2008, eleven days after the raid on the YFZ Ranch, Sgt. Philip Kemp of the Texas Rangers was assigned to investigate the telephone calls that triggered the raid. His testimony at the Suppression Hearing in May 2009 clearly shows how quickly he gathered the pertinent information needed to expose the calls as a hoax and also the fact that he could have gathered this information before the raid had he been asked to do so.

Questions at the hearing by attorney Kent Schaffer established the fact that the information necessary to expose the calls as a hoax was gathered in just two days:

Q. You found out about the false reports of Rozita Swinton, you assisted in the execution of a search warrant, you recovered all the documents from Rozita Swinton’s apartment, you interviewed her and you found out a lot of background about things that Ms. Swinton had been doing in regards to making false reports, correct?

A. Correct.

* * *

Q. Those things that I’ve just talked about, you accomplished all that in a period of less than two days, correct, sir?

A. Approximately two days, yes.[1]

The fact that the same investigation could have been done earlier was elicited during questioning by Stephanie Goodman:

Q. Okay. And it sounds like you did a very good job investigating these phone calls that have turned out to be false reports. So my question to you is: If Ranger Long had delegated some investigative duties to you prior to the issuance of the search warrant, would you have been able to help him?

A. Prior to the issuance of the search warrant at the ranch?

Q. Yes.

A. Yes.

Q. And you would have done some of the things that you did after the issuance of the search warrant and the execution of the search warrant?

A. I would have done anything he asked me to do.[2]

With assistance from the United States Marshal’s Office, Ranger Kemp was able to determine where the cell phone used to make the hoax calls had been purchased and also the location from which the calls were placed. Under questioning by Kent Schaffer, he testified of the technology available for pinpointing the location from which a cell phone call was placed and also the fact that in an emergency situation the phone company can make such information available quite quickly:

Q. Okay. You’ve worked on investigations where that sort of technology, what we call “pinging” has been used, correct, sir?

A. Correct.

Q. And through that technology, you’re aware of the fact that you can actually, through the phone company, determine the…actual physical location or GPS cordinance [sic] where a call is placed to or placed from, correct?

A. Within a certain number of feet, yes.

Q. In fact, you work on cases where if it’s an emergency, the phone company can do it relatively fast, can’t they?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. In fact, that’s something the technology that’s used if there’s a hostage situation or maybe a kidnap situation or something where you need to find somebody quickly, correct?

A. Yes, sir.[3]

In further questioning, Ranger Kemp testified that he had worked on investigations where, with a court order, the telephone company had turned over the source of a blocked phone number.

If the “Sarah” calls actually had been placed from the Ranch, it would have been possible for law enforcement not only to determine that fact but also to pinpoint the actual building from which the calls were coming. That they did not take advantage of this technology but instead went to the trouble of securing the air space over the Ranch and assembling a small army for invasion is further evidence that locating “Sarah” was anything but their top priority. (See Texas Authorities Were Waiting for an Excuse to Enter the YFZ Ranch.)

[1] State of Texas vs. Frederick Merril Jessop, “Motion to Suppress Hearing,” Schleicher County, Texas, 51^st Judicial Court, Vol. 10, 16 May 2009, 70-71.

[2] Ibid., 58.

[3] Ibid., 17-20.

Printer Friendly Version

Comments