Nolan Wells' Phone Sat Untouched for How Long?

**SPEAKER_1** (0:01)
This is Hidden Killers Live with Tony Brueski and Robin Dre.

**Tony Brueski** (0:08)
Let's go over to another case that is still making headlines because, well, it's still out there in the ether. And one of the key reasons it's still out there in the ether is because a certain cell phone still hasn't been looked at. Nolan Wells, the phone, the key piece of evidence that could settle the loudest claim in this case, that somebody wiped it, that something went on. And now we're, what, eight weeks, seven weeks after he died. No agency has examined it. The family says it's ready. The DA says she can't discuss it. And the phone has been sitting. As of this morning, as of this recording, I don't know if it's gone anywhere yet, but hopefully it goes somewhere soon. Jen Coffindaffer, retired FBI Special Agent, with myself and Robin Drake, retired FBI Special Agent, Chief of the Counterintelligence Behavioral Analysis Program.
What the hell?
I mean, what the hell? I was kind of shocked. I was just trying to do an update on this case the other day, like, oh, what's new? I haven't heard anything. And like, oh, the phone hasn't gone anywhere yet. Jen, I mean, from an investigative criminal standpoint, how the hell is that even a possibility this many weeks into this, unless it's not being looked at as a criminal investigation?

**Jennifer Coffindaffer** (1:22)
Well, they've got to look at the phone. They've got nothing going on. This is kind of a no-brainer. It needs to be analyzed to make sure nothing has been erased. It needs to be looked at to see what communications took place. It also needs to be looked at to see the last time it was held or touched. Like, when did he check in?

**Tony Brueski** (1:42)
Yeah, everything.

**Jennifer Coffindaffer** (1:44)
Everything needs to be looked at. And it's a no-brainer. It's going to have to be reviewed.

**Robin Drake** (1:50)
So Jen, and we talked about this with Eric Faddis the other day. And now, this is an area I would listen to a lot because you had a lot of reps in this area when it comes to data collection and investigative techniques like this.
What do you think happens, so even at this point, so they get the phone and but the family's had it for so long, is how can they use that or not use it? I mean, do you think it will stand up under under scrutiny by the defense or the prosecution? I mean, it just seems like a really tainted-

**SPEAKER_1** (2:17)
How do they still have it?

**Robin Drake** (2:19)
Well, first of all, it's a really tainted piece of evidence to me. To me, when you have a phone like that in the hands of the family for so long, it's as if you have the crime scene and you left the tape down, you let everyone traipse through it all the time because everyone has access to it.

**Jennifer Coffindaffer** (2:35)
I tell you though, the beauty of digital evidence is, if anything was done after the fact, it's going to have those timestamps as true. So from that standpoint, that's why your crime scene is protected. It's sort of like if you have a crime scene like you just discussed and everybody's trampling through it, but I've got video tape all over the place showing who's trampling.

**Robin Drake** (2:57)
Good analogy, yeah.

**Jennifer Coffindaffer** (2:58)
I really like the fact that it was always my favorite piece of evidence, always the one that at least I would ask the prosecutor, hey, listen, for our cool charts we're going to put up and everything, let's do it last because the juries eat it up.
Then in talking to juries afterwards, they will tell you digital evidence has no ambition, it has no, it's just. It's there.

**SPEAKER_1** (3:26)
It just is.

**Jennifer Coffindaffer** (3:28)
It just is.

**Tony Brueski** (3:29)
It's ones and zeros, it'll answer questions, no matter what you want it to be. Okay, so I'm trying to wrap my mind around any other investigation where a critical piece of evidence just sits in the hands of the people who originally had it for all of this time. That's the part I'm having a hard time because like, well, where's the incentive here to not have this thing examined? And I mean, it really could benefit both sides depending on what's on it. Is this both sides not wanting to open Pandora's box? Because on one side, you got the claims that Snapchat was deleted and this and that. And well, open up the phone. Let's find out. Let's get the info from Snapchat. Let's find out what that says. Was anything actually deleted? If it's no, well, then that whole people went in and passed with the phone theory is all bullshit. And then all the vitriol on top of that doesn't make any sense because it's based on nothing. Or we open the phone and it shows a lot of deleted shit and it shows information that doesn't look so lovely.