FOLLOW US

ORLANDO, Fla. — Nolan Wells’ family attorneys say cellphone data raises new questions about his final day. They also contend that findings in the state autopsy undermine the grand jury’s assessment of his death.

At a Sept. 24 news conference, digital forensic examiner Andrew Garrett presented recovered communications and a reconstruction of the phone’s movements. Meanwhile, attorney Liza Park challenged the jury’s drowning-related finding. She cited the documented injuries and the absence of fluid or debris in the airways.

The presentation followed the grand jury’s decision not to indict anyone in Wells’ death. The 18-year-old disappeared during a July 4 outing to Mississippi’s Horn Island. His body was found two days later.

Reporting note: This article presents documented findings and attributed statements, not the author’s personal views. Reporting a claim does not constitute endorsement or establish that the claim is true.

Attorney Ben Crump discusses recovered Snapchat records and location data from Nolan Wells’ cellphone. Video: Attorney Ben Crump/YouTube.

Nolan Wells phone findings include Snapchat records

During the news conference on Ben Crump’s YouTube channel, Garrett described hundreds of messages. These included group chats that continued syncing to Wells’ phone after his death.

Garrett said software compatibility problems required his team to process Snapchat data manually. As a result, recovering those communications took additional time.

Crump referred to 282 pages of material. That figure describes pages of reports rather than an established count of recovered messages.

The grand jury identified a 21-page final phone report and a 261-page Snapchat report. Together, those documents total 282 pages. Jurors also received a separate 14-page preliminary report.

Digital forensic examiner Andrew Garrett explains why his team manually processed Snapchat data and how it examined Wells’ phone activity. Video: Attorney Ben Crump/YouTube.

GPS presentation traces the phone into the evening

Garrett placed Wells’ last phone use around 2:18 p.m. July 4. Based on the location information, he said Wells was on a boat when he used it.

Later, Garrett’s presentation traced the device across the water and placed it at a boat ramp around 7:24 p.m. It then showed the phone traveling on land to a residence.

However, tracking the device does not establish that Wells accompanied it throughout that journey. Similarly, the last recorded phone use does not establish his time of death.

The grand jury had already addressed the phone’s return to the mainland without Wells. Its report said his was not the only phone that returned without its owner.

Garrett presents a GPS reconstruction that he says places Wells’ phone at a boat ramp around 7:24 p.m. The presentation tracks the device, not necessarily Wells’ whereabouts. Video: Attorney Ben Crump/YouTube.

Examiner reports deletions but does not establish intent

Garrett said Snapchat material had been deleted between Wells’ last use of the phone and its return to his parents. However, he said he could not determine intent.

That account differs from District Attorney Angel Myers McIlrath’s earlier description of the preliminary findings. In a Sept. 21 video, she said the preliminary report indicated no deletions since Wells’ last use, WLOX reported.

Those competing descriptions require further clarification. A reported deletion alone does not establish who caused it, why it occurred or whether it relates to Wells’ death.

Garrett says Snapchat material was deleted between Wells’ last phone use and its return to his parents. He says he cannot determine intent. Video: Attorney Ben Crump/YouTube.

State autopsy documents injuries and an undetermined death

The state autopsy released by the family’s attorneys records an examination on July 7. State Medical Examiner Dr. Staci Turner signed the report Aug. 17.

Turner documented two bruises beneath the scalp at the back of Wells’ head, each measuring approximately 2 inches. However, she found no skull fractures or hemorrhages over the brain. The report also lists no other external or internal injuries.

Under its lung findings, the report states: “No fluid or debris is within the airways.” It separately describes the stomach as empty.

Park cited those findings while challenging the grand jury’s assessment. Nevertheless, the autopsy itself leaves both the cause and manner of death undetermined. It does not classify the death as homicide.

In its summary, the report attributes that uncertainty to the unknown circumstances surrounding Wells’ death. The attorneys’ interpretation of individual findings does not change the report’s recorded conclusion.

Attorney Liza Park cites the state autopsy’s finding of no fluid or debris in the airways while challenging the grand jury’s drowning-related assessment. The medical examiner classified the cause and manner of death as undetermined. Video: Attorney Ben Crump/YouTube.

What the grand jury said about drowning

The grand jury report acknowledged that both Turner and independent pathologist Dr. Roger Mitchell left the cause and manner undetermined. It also said neither expert ruled out accidental drowning.

Jurors described the body’s location, condition, position and discovery timing as consistent with drowning. They did not report that either pathologist had definitively classified the death that way.

The report also acknowledged the head bruising, which it described as nonfatal. A witness reported seeing Wells slip awkwardly off a boat around 3:30 p.m. However, the witness could not say whether Wells struck his head.

According to that testimony, Wells continued socializing afterward without appearing injured. Still, jurors said the exact cause of the bruising remained uncertain.

Consequently, the dispute concerns how the available evidence should be interpreted. The medical classification remains undetermined, while the family’s attorneys challenge the explanation presented by the jury.

Correspondence documents the delivery of phone reports

Letters and emails previously reviewed by USA Herald document the dispute over examining the phone and sharing the results. In an Aug. 19 letter, McIlrath requested the complete raw extraction, reports and technical details.

The family’s attorney, Ahmad Smith, sent a preliminary report Aug. 28. Then, on Sept. 16, his email listed a final phone report and a Snapchat communications report as attachments.

That email documents the submission of reports. However, it does not establish whether the complete raw extraction accompanied them.

McIlrath later said she had not received the full extraction data, as USA Herald previously reported. On Thursday, Garrett said authorities had received a forensic image of the phone. The submission email alone cannot resolve those differing accounts.

Meanwhile, the grand jury’s report confirms that jurors considered the phone reports. Their public presentation therefore should not be described as proof that the jury never received the material.

Family continues seeking further investigation

In its announcement of the news conference, Crump’s firm called for continued investigation and an independent federal review. At the event, Crump also said the team was not accusing anyone of nefarious conduct.

The grand jury unanimously declined to issue an indictment. However, its report calls for further consideration if credible evidence suggesting a nonaccidental death emerges.

For now, the presentation gives the public the forensic team’s account of the phone data. It does not resolve how Wells died.

Crump says the legal team does not know what happened to Wells and is not accusing anyone of nefarious conduct. Video: Attorney Ben Crump/YouTube.