Maybe I jumped to conclusions. I thought the judge said that he understood that the phone belonged to a third party, and, therefore, he didn't want information released until it was reviewed in chambers as some of it may need to be kept private.
It wasn't clear to me who owns that cell phone. But because the service was cancelled the next day, I concluded it belonged to Crystal.
My opinion of all that third party stuff was grandstanding by the judge to show national tv what a thoughtful jurist he is. By golly, he's considering the privacy rights of some phatom third-party. That was just my take.