It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Morningglory
reply to post by Human_Alien
I propose something to the effect where: if a parent refuses to answer any and all questions then some sort of repercussion should be in place. I liken it to refusing to take a breathalyzer test after swerving all over the road and being stopped.
I'm having a problem with the "refuses to answer any and all questions." We live in a world where forced confessions do happen. If a confession is desired by LE and you don't deliver could that be considered a refusal? You're walking a fine line here.
If you refuse a test then you're found and fined, guilty. There would be no reason to not want to show your innocence especially after 'looking' guilty, right?
My kids always come to mind when people say if you're innocent prove it. Just think about that for a minute it might be harder than you think. For example someone takes the last cookie from the cookie jar. Everyone knows you're a cookie monster. The family assumes you're guilty because of your past but you know you're innocent. How could you possibly prove you didn't take it? You couldn't that's why it's the state's "burden" to prove guilt not yours to prove innocence.
Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by Morningglory
For example someone takes the last cookie from the cookie jar. Everyone knows you're a cookie monster. The family assumes you're guilty because of your past but you know you're innocent.
Granted, but, saying nothing surely isn't going to help.
Have Lisa's parents sat down with the police for separate interviews?
No.
That's not helping either.
Not taking a swipe at you - just sayin'.
peace
Fri, Nov. 11, 2011 08:11 PM - An attorney for the parents of missing baby Lisa Irwin said Friday that his clients will not sit down for separate interviews, as Kansas City police are requesting.
Originally posted by wigit
reply to post by Morningglory
I agree. Has anyone here seen the "confessions" in movie - In The Name of The Father?
If there are new important questions I'm sure they can be relayed to the couple and the answers coming back. But if you've gone over the same stuff for 30 hours then it's just too much to do it all over again and it just seems like it would be a game to the police.
Originally posted by silo13
Fri, Nov. 11, 2011 08:11 PM - An attorney for the parents of missing baby Lisa Irwin said Friday that his clients will not sit down for separate interviews, as Kansas City police are requesting.
read more
Fri, Nov. 11, 2011 08:11 PM - An attorney for the parents of missing baby Lisa Irwin said Friday that his clients will not sit down for separate interviews, as Kansas City police are requesting.
peaceedit on 17-11-2011 by silo13 because: mImm - red and spacing
Bradley and Irwin have been interviewed separately twice without attorneys, he said. Read more: www.kansascity.com...
link
‘I’m not saying they're not cooperating," Kansas City Police Capt. Steve Young told Fox News. "They have met some of our needs. What I've been talking about SPECIFICALLY is sitting down, SEPERATE from each other, to be interviewed by detectives. In regard to that, no, that hasn't happened since the 8th of October."
Originally posted by silo13
November 15, 2011 4:33 PM EST
link
‘I’m not saying they're not cooperating," Kansas City Police Capt. Steve Young told Fox News. "They have met some of our needs. What I've been talking about specifically is sitting down, separate from each other, to be interviewed by detectives. In regard to that, no, that hasn't happened since the 8th of October. "
I will not not pick over THEN and NOW.
peace
edit on 17-11-2011 by silo13 because:
Originally posted by silo13
I was just wondering... What the heck have the 'Brad-Wins' been up to in the last, ohhh about 39 days? I mean we know what they've NOT been up to - talking to police, that's for sure.
Wow - 39 days ago is a LIFETIME when LISA is STILL MISSING...
Long time for parents not to talk to police to find their baby who's only 11 months old.
39 - thirty-nine days - thirttyyyyyynineeeee days Lisa's 'parents' have not sat down to separate interviews with the police - as the police have requested - the same police who're trying to find their DAUGHTER.
Ya know... *Scratching my head*... It's almost like... Well... It's almost like - yeah - It's almost like the parents are hoping little Lisa will not be found. Maybe the 'Brad-Wins' know something we don't???
39 days is a LIFE TIME... Lisa's...
peace
edit on 17-11-2011 by silo13 because: bold
Here none of us are directly affected but we're all basically ready to stand and say we KNOW one side is right and the other is wrong.
No? Then talking to them and relaying the same information is not going to accomplish anything.
Originally posted by silo13
I was just wondering... What the heck have the 'Brad-Wins' been up to in the last, ohhh about 39 days? I mean we know what they've NOT been up to - talking to police, that's for sure.
Wow - 39 days ago is a LIFETIME when LISA is STILL MISSING...
Long time for parents not to talk to police to find their baby who's only 11 months old.
39 - thirty-nine days - thirttyyyyyynineeeee days Lisa's 'parents' have not sat down to separate interviews with the police - as the police have requested - the same police who're trying to find their DAUGHTER.
Ya know... *Scratching my head*... It's almost like... Well... It's almost like - yeah - It's almost like the parents are hoping little Lisa will not be found.
39 days is a LIFE TIME! LISA'S
Or maybe the 'Brad-Wins' know something we don't???
peace
edit on 17-11-2011 by silo13 because: bold fix
Originally posted by schmae
It seems we are dividing into two camps.
TEAM BRADWIN vs. TEAM KCPD
I'm sorry that's just the way I see it. We believe one side or the other and refuse to hear facts, logic or opinion that the other side might be right. It's funny, isn't it? Is this a form of mass hysteria? Here none of us are directly affected but we're all basically ready to stand and say we KNOW one side is right and the other is wrong. We have no idea who's lying and who's not. We all need to take a step back, read clearly what is posted by others and maybe, ( myself BIG TIME included here) take a deep breath and think for a few minutes before replying.
Originally posted by schmae
reply to post by Dav1d
I guess it depends on what each of our OWN definition of cooperation is. KCPD say they are not cooperating and many of us believe them. Family lawyers say family is cooperating and many believe that. Could they both be correct? Or both be wrong?
When I tell my kid to clean a room, they do. They cooperate. When I check that room after they've left for their friends' house, I can see clearly that my idea of the clean room and their idea are two different things. You see what I mean? Police say they aer not FULLY cooperating and they may be telling the truth and at the same time family may be telling the truth that they've done all the can to cooperate.
Food for thought.
Originally posted by Morningglory
reply to post by Human_Alien
I propose something to the effect where: if a parent refuses to answer any and all questions then some sort of repercussion should be in place. I liken it to refusing to take a breathalyzer test after swerving all over the road and being stopped.
I'm having a problem with the "refuses to answer any and all questions." We live in a world where forced confessions do happen. If a confession is desired by LE and you don't deliver could that be considered a refusal? You're walking a fine line here.
If you refuse a test then you're found and fined, guilty. There would be no reason to not want to show your innocence especially after 'looking' guilty, right?
My kids always come to mind when people say if you're innocent prove it. Just think about that for a minute it might be harder than you think. For example someone takes the last cookie from the cookie jar. Everyone knows you're a cookie monster. The family assumes you're guilty because of your past but you know you're innocent. How could you possibly prove you didn't take it? You couldn't that's why it's the state's "burden" to prove guilt not yours to prove innocence.