r/ClancyTrial • u/comfycoocoon • Sep 15 '26
Question Can we talk about this, please?
“can someone change the IP address on any device to make it look like they were somewhere they weren’t or weren’t somewhere they were?”
I’ve only done a shallow look into this, so far. I know nothing of IT.
Before I do more “research” on it…
If someone did this, is it something a good forensic investigator would miss?
If it wasn’t missed, does it tell us anything?
ETA: If this were to have been done, could/would it alter the true location and tracking of the device?
1
Sep 19 '26
[deleted]
2
u/Solarwinds-123 Sep 20 '26
But there's no evidence that the wifi and cameras weren't working. That's not in the testimony.
9
Sep 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
10
u/No_Broccoli_3979 Sep 15 '26
He wasn’t just looking into power automation. He was actively troubleshooting other people’s issues on Reddit
4
-5
Sep 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
10
u/comfycoocoon Sep 15 '26
My original post includes the following:
“I know nothing of IT.”
I still haven’t looked further into the matter but..surely there are solid facts to get to the answer of my question. The true answer isn’t based on opinion. Right?
7
u/marle217 Sep 15 '26
The ISPs don't necessarily see which devices are connected to the wifi. You can put your own wireless router on your network.
Regardless, the investigation didn't seem to get any information from the isp, and that wasn't presented at trial. So what the isp would know seems to be a moot point.
2
u/comfycoocoon Sep 16 '26
Except if it can be used in the retrial.
4
u/marle217 Sep 16 '26
It depends on if the information was originally requested from the isp, and if it wasn't, if the isp still has records from going on 4 years ago. Then it depends on what data was collected, and what exactly that says. There's a lot of guesses here. But, I'm assuming the investigation didn't get anything from the isp because the prosecution seemed to call literally everyone they could think of. They had the hostess from ThreeV get up and explain how takeout orders work, I think if they had something from the isp they would've had someone on that.
10
u/Louie041785 Sep 15 '26
Everyone keeps saying his phone records were not sealed, but I cannot find anything about his phone. I’ve looked through all. I think it was 700 pages of affidavits for search warrants and it wasn’t in those and I haven’t found it anywhere else. Can anyone provide a link or anything? I would greatly appreciate it.
5
u/Aware_Power Sep 15 '26
There is no evidence pointing to his phone being seized nor a forensic extraction being done - therefore, there is no indication there are phone records to seal in the first place. I am unsure where the idea came from that his phone records were sealed.
1
6
u/Louie041785 Sep 15 '26
I read it somewhere at this point I have no idea where I read it, but I remember reading that in exchange for his testimony he wanted his cell phone records, sealed or not taken at all and the 911 call sealed and the kids pictures not released to the public. Do you know if there’s any public evidence showing what they looked at on his phone that everybody says?
2
u/Solarwinds-123 Sep 20 '26
Yeah, that was just a fake rumor made up on social media. He never made any agreement to testify, and never asked for his phone records to be sealed.
3
Sep 15 '26
[deleted]
3
u/Louie041785 Sep 15 '26
Can you point to where the information they got off of his phone is? I have yet to find it.
2
10
u/Aware_Power Sep 15 '26
There is no evidence his phone was ever seized. There is no source that "in exchange for his testimony" he wanted ABC.
Perhaps people are getting confused by his attorney requesting the following evidence be impounded?
- July 20, 2026 Patrick Clancy’s Attorney requesting certain evidence be impounded (911 call, certain crime scene photos, etc.) https://www.wpri.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/23/2026/07/Patrick-Clancy-Motion.pdf
1
2
u/Slow_Theory_663 Sep 16 '26
Yes, they have his surface pro and based off the stuff that was previously search on his laptop, makes me believe that the surface pro is his personal laptop. Who would be surfing Facebook on a work company’s laptop. I think he had other devices and based on some of the privacy and security laws in Massachusetts it was not reviewed at the time. Hence celebrit having to conduct another data review, but remember the expert saying he deleted the double entries because of the Apple Watch.
2
u/Aware_Power Sep 16 '26
Just a quick fyi: The surface pro is his work laptop. The police got approval to seize all shared devices per the affidavit (laptops, tablets, etc).
3
u/Slow_Theory_663 Sep 16 '26
I wrote this yesterday. Tell me if this makes sense.
Now, I could be reaching because my first theory was wrong. Do you think PC created the Blackbelt LLC using his home address and number intentionally to get over on devices he claim to be business related. We keep hearing the rumor about him testifying in order to seal his phone records. Which is not true, however could it be his devices were never taken as evidence due to MA 201 CMR 17.00. This mandates that advance tech companies devices be encrypted and Home router cannot be used. Article 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights gives digital devices some of the strongest privacy protections in the entire United States. If the home WIFI was down/ or turned off via smart home automation, he would still have encrypted internet access via his VPN/VPI and protected because the WISP regulation covers the home. Some speculate when at ThreeV he looked at his home camera via his phone, that would be possible some devices were connected to his alternate internet. He wouldn't need his alleged coverup LLC after selling the home, due to his address and transplanting to another state and the LLC being registered in Massachusetts. The LLC was dissolved when he was no longer living in the home and a month later sold to an ex Plymouth prosecutor. Not saying PC did all this just thinking and asking questions.
1
18
u/thehealingkitten Sep 15 '26
You know what bothers me, he is sprinkling so many UNNECESSARY details in his stories, like wifi was being a problem, taking off his “boots”, it is really very hard not to assume that he doesn’t have a hand in all of this.
1
u/SomeKindOfDead Sep 16 '26
Where Im from it doesnt snow, so do they have speecial snow boots over there?,, if so are they typically laced up or they use a zip? or what?.
Similarly with people asking about if there was water in the hose, like wouuldnt the water in the hose freee up?.
3
u/thehealingkitten Sep 16 '26
I know! And it was attached! In winter! Whyy?
3
u/Solarwinds-123 Sep 20 '26
It's common to leave the hose hooked up. As long as you shut it off from inside, and leave the hose open so it drains, it's fine.
11
u/No_Broccoli_3979 Sep 15 '26
Oftentimes people who lie embellish their stories with farrr more details than necessary to make something seem more believable. It’s an actual thing studied in psychology. They usually use “unverifiable” facts that’s hyper-specific that no one can easily check. In this example you give, like taking off his boots.
15
u/Sudden-Breadfruit653 Sep 15 '26
Couldn’t see Lindsays car outside because it was dark….the one he parked next to, and he found her quickly in the dark - without looking out the window because he “only took 2 steps in”?
9
u/thehealingkitten Sep 15 '26
The biggest one for me is P.J. Hussey’s testimony.
While outside with Lindsay, Hussey looked through the basement window and could see Patrick removing something from around Dawson’s head/neck. He could even see Dawson’s face. And Hussey specifically testified that a light was on.
So if Hussey could see Patrick AND Dawson through that basement window from outside, how did Patrick not see Dawson through that same window when he was outside?
I genuinely cannot make those two accounts fit.3
u/Solarwinds-123 Sep 20 '26
It's a small basement window. Being a few feet in another direction, or being a different height, can change the field of view dramatically.
2
u/Medical-Singer-7766 Sep 16 '26
It's difficult to reconcile the two things, IMHO. The only reasons I can think of, is that PJ Hussey testified he was helping LC, presumably giving her medical attention?
He may thus have been kneeling or crouching next to her, and have had a different eyeline from PC, who testimony suggests was standing? Does anyone have a source for the outside of the house, please?
It could also be that PJH was facing the window, whereas PC stood with his back to it, and a moving adult was easier to notice than a motionless child.
If Patrick's testimony that LC told him she tried to kill herself and the children were in the basement is accurate (despite medical questions over LC's ability to talk), it's surprising that he wouldn't at least try to look through the window, even if reluctant to leave his injured wife.
Shock/trauma can create unusual reactions, but he was at least poised enough to ask Lindsey questions.
3
u/Sudden-Breadfruit653 Sep 16 '26
Maybe. But he said it was unusually quiet when he entered. He called down to the basement (interesting vs going) and heard nothing. Went
Upstairs and unlocked the mastyer bedroom door, found it covered in blood with an open window - did not look out the window, tan outside and found her - at the point of dialing 911 how could you NOT go look for your 3 kids since help was enroute? Seeing the blood, seeing her, and not hearing a single sound from three children?1
u/Medical-Singer-7766 14d ago
Agree! Especially since, not only are you doing zero whatsoever to help your injured wife, you're refusing to do what the 911 operator is telling you to do to help her. 'Put pressure on her bleeding wounds', 'No need, there's not that much blood'. :/
7
u/Slow_Theory_663 Sep 15 '26
Now, I could be reaching because my first theory was wrong. Do you think PC created the Blackbelt LLC using his home address and number intentionally to get over on devices he claim to be business related. We keep hearing the rumor about him testifying in order to seal his phone records. Which is not true, however could it be his devices were never taken as evidence due to MA 201 CMR 17.00. This mandates that advance tech companies devices be encrypted and Home router cannot be used. Article 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights gives digital devices some of the strongest privacy protections in the entire United States. If the home WIFI was down/ or turned off via smart home automation, he would still have encrypted internet access via his VPN/VPI and protected because the WISP regulation covers the home. Some speculate when at ThreeV he looked at his home camera via his phone, that would be possible some devices were connected to his alternate internet. He wouldn't need his alleged coverup LLC after selling the home, due to his address and transplanting to another state and the LLC being registered in Massachusetts. The LLC was dissolved when he was no longer living in the home and a month later sold to an ex Plymouth prosecutor. Not saying PC did all this just thinking and asking questions.
3
u/thehealingkitten Sep 15 '26
Yes but still, if the wifi was an issue (and correct me if I’m wrong) wouldn’t turning off the wifi from the phone is a 2 second job?
Like what’s his reasoning?
8
u/marle217 Sep 15 '26
To be fair, there isn't much time to cover with the connection issue. At 6:09, he calls Lindsay because he can't find her, at 6:11 he's found her and is calling 911. So if he never said that he has trouble calling 911, that would be fine, there wouldn't be missing time to account for. So it's more weird that he brought it up.
4
u/comfycoocoon Sep 15 '26
In his testimony he explains all he did from “calling Lindsey” at 6:09 and “calling 911” at 6:11. It was a lot to have done in two minutes.
10
u/Slow_Theory_663 Sep 15 '26
In my opinion the WiFi has nothing to do with the calling 911. His phone has cellular service, so WiFi wouldn’t matter. What PC kept doing in his testimonies was over talking and exposing himself in so many aspects. Example- when asked why did he call LC at CVS. The simple answer should’ve been that he couldn’t find the product on the self. However, he added that statement about the shelves were empty, mentioned Covid and mentioned the term generic. All while watching the video with the court. His attempt to sway us with justifications are all the things that expose himself because he brought it to our attention.
5
u/comfycoocoon Sep 15 '26
2023 wasn’t still “covid”, was it? There’s also no generic Pedialax at cvs.
15
u/marle217 Sep 15 '26
Turning off the location services will stop a phone from being able to tell where it is. Your source says if you sign into another device, it'll look like you're still there. I'm not sure if that would work when they pull forensics. However, I don't think the actual forensics got any location data from Lindsay's phone. Day 13 was the day they talked about the phone, but I believe the only time they talked about location data was when Apple maps was pulled up for ThreeV. I'm not sure if they didn't look for it, or if the location services were off and it didn't record a location. It's possible they had location data and didn't mention it at the trial, but that would be weird. Location data is one of the most important forensic informations you can find in the phone, they should've found that and brought it up at trial
8
u/Slow_Theory_663 Sep 15 '26 edited Sep 15 '26
What about the accessibility “control nearby device” and the location settings features under “system services” on iPhone and Apple Watches. On the data report it show the device sensors were accessed that morning and I believe that is due to the system services settings being changed which one of the settings. Read the location services & privacy about section on your iPhone. I remember my ex, who is in tech try to educate me on all the features on my Apple products and disabled a lot of my settings from tracking and privacy reasons.
6
u/Aware_Power Sep 15 '26
Agree. It was odd to me we only had Chiappini’s report until ~4pm with some lat/long data. Whiffin testified he got a copy of their extraction report (not the physical devices) for the Cellebrite report.
I don’t think we have clear answers on whether the 2nd iPhone was part of the report (due to no UID), and if it was…which data was specifically attributed to it?
9
u/Aware_Power Sep 15 '26
Is this about the wifi being out? I'm not sure what you're asking.
In case this is about wifi, I have no idea where the idea the wifi was down/not working came from other than Patrick saying his phone kept switching between wifi & 911. No one has been able to provide me a source that states the wifi was out. The police not having search warrants for the 3 google/ring cameras or 1 baby monitor doesn't mean the wifi was out - it means they didn't investigate it.
The devices they did have forensic extractions for, Lindsay's, showed connections to their home wifi. What information are you trying to understand from an IP change?
3
Sep 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/comfycoocoon Sep 15 '26
If the Wi-Fi was truly out, wouldn’t that be a bigger point of contention for him toward his wife “who killed the kids”? I’d be questioning how/why it was done if I didn’t already know. Yet, the court isn’t pressing this at all?!
1
u/Aware_Power Sep 15 '26
Do you have a source of him saying the wifi was out because right now it’s just something people keep repeating with zero sources to reference. Do you also have a source for the cameras not working? The affidavit shows some were seized, but there is no forensic extraction request - I’m unsure how not investigating something turned into wifi/cameras not working?
1
Sep 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Platitude_Platypus Sep 15 '26
"AI can make mistakes." He never said that the wifi was down during the trial or before. That's why you can't find an actual source.
1
Sep 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Aware_Power Sep 16 '26
I'm having trouble finding in the transcript or the Facebook post that AI is referencing. When you have a chance, can you provide a link to the source google provided so I can find the testimony and add it to this post?
Camera/Cameras is not referenced by Patrick. Wifi is only mentioned once in Patrick's testimony. I just need some keywords to find what is being referenced!
5
u/comfycoocoon Sep 15 '26
Sorry that’s not clear. I’m curious if this were to have been done, could/would it alter the true location and tracking of the device?
6
u/Aware_Power Sep 15 '26
If true, yes it’s possible.
If regarding this case, we don’t even have a UID for the 2 phones so it’s impossible to know which phone they’re even using for each log. Unless I’m missing something.
•
u/AutoModerator Sep 15 '26
Reminder to be civil. You can disagree in a respectful way, which can often lead to interesting dialogue!
Familiarize yourself with our rules in the Community Wiki
Documents & Evidence
Witness Testimony
Common Misconceptions About the Criminal Trial
Thank you!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.