Lisa Irwin - Missing - One Year Later

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by IwasOnceHappy

 

I have cancelled a couple of phones and switched to a different service provider for work, they were Verizon. When you try to make a call after that, it will take you to a voice mail from Verizon that states something to the effect of having to call them or use prepaid calling card or such.

What he said made no sense. You can use the phone to call, but, it will not go through? Or maybe that's what you're saying? You call, dial the number and then when you go to talk you get a voice notice from the provider?

I don't do the cell phone thing. They scare me, lol.

Thanks for the info!

Once the news person said it back to him, then it made sense to me. Think of it like using your own phone. You dial my number that is no longer valid. You get a "This phone Number is no longer in service" message from the phone company.

Verizon has made it so if you are using a cell phone on their network, if the cellphone is restricted (not paid, no longer in use except to place 911 calls) it will allow you to dial the number and hit the "Send" key. Instead of routing to the actual number you dialed, it routes you to a voice message telling you that you need to use a calling card or dial them.

*Edit -- sorry about that, did not see the end, you are quite welcome.

IWOH

reply to post by wildtimes

Hear, hear!! However, some people may actually feel too intimidated to go there "alone." Again, it goes to the strength -- the very fiber -- of the person of interest. I went alone. No problem. Yeah, sure, I'll come talk to you, detective.

Yes..we should all assume that someones child who has been stolen ..not to mention the harassing techniques used by police in interrogating ...should show their strength and fiber at such a time..

No..they are not allowed to feel like their world is crumbling..and that the police are out to frame them.. they should be so strong.. and walk right into a situation where the very fiber of what is left of that family is attacked..

Shame on them for feeling this way..shame on them for not showing total character and strength at a time like this.. shame on them for not barging right in there alone and crying out their innocence.. time and time again..

reply to post by wildtimes


Totally true. That's why I asked who all believed that phone call was made. if the call was made to MW's phone, then someone is lying about th service.
No one would steal a phone and then re activate it.

Attorneys trade barbs over baby Lisa’s brother

Okay, I don't think this article has been posted yet. But it might shed some new light on things...

A lawyer working on a custody issue smoldering at the margins of the missing baby Lisa Irwin case fired back Wednesday at comments made by another attorney the day before.

The back and forth started Tuesday, when a lawyer representing Lisa’s parents, Deborah Bradley and Jeremy Irwin, complained about a custody petition filed by attorney Dorothy L. Savory.

Savory represents Rasleen Raim, the mother of Jeremy Irwin’s 8-year-old son, who is a half-brother to Lisa, the baby reported missing from her Northland home six weeks ago. Raim is seeking temporary custody of her son to care for his “safety, comfort and peace of mind.”

Attorney Joseph Tacopina, who represents Lisa’s parents, on Tuesday described the petition against Jeremy Irwin as “unbelieveable” and accused Raim of “trying to glom on to her 15 minutes” of fame in the high-profile case.

Read more: www.kansascity.com...

Now, I think this is weird, too...that the mother of Lisa's elder half brother has sought custody for valid reasons, but the NYC attorney is saying "she's trying to glom on" to the 15-minute fame thing in a high-profile case.

WHAT??!!!

This further discredits the defense attorneys in my opinion.

The phone wasn't reactivated. It WAS on restricted service. There was no payment made to it. How it works is the phone still actually has a dial tone and can dial out, but rather than connecting to the person you're trying to phone, it automatically connects you to an automatic voice message from Verizon...I assume telling you it's restricted or telling you to pay your bill or whatever. So DB's story of the phone's having no service is definitely true (or could be true).

Michelle

reply to post by gabby2011

and that the police are out to frame them..

Uh, AGAIN....I never said I think the police are out to frame them.

YOU are the one who has suggested that.

wait, let's look at your entire sarcastic sentence.

No..they are not allowed to feel like their world is crumbling..and that the police are out to frame them.. they should be so strong.. and walk right into a situation where the very fiber of what is left of that family is attacked..

They are "allowed" to FEEL however they FEEL, gabby!!
And certainly they would be expected to feel their world is "crumbling!!"

No one ever said they should feel happy out this!!!

As for strong?? YES. A parent's job is to be STRONG for their child.

NO
MATTER
WHAT.
It is immaterial whether they "feel" anything about "walking into a situation where the very fiber of what is left of that family is attacked."!!!
Eyerolls right back atcha.

Originally posted by wildtimes

Attorneys trade barbs over baby Lisa’s brother

Okay, I don't think this article has been posted yet. But it might shed some new light on things...

A lawyer working on a custody issue smoldering at the margins of the missing baby Lisa Irwin case fired back Wednesday at comments made by another attorney the day before.

The back and forth started Tuesday, when a lawyer representing Lisa’s parents, Deborah Bradley and Jeremy Irwin, complained about a custody petition filed by attorney Dorothy L. Savory.

Savory represents Rasleen Raim, the mother of Jeremy Irwin’s 8-year-old son, who is a half-brother to Lisa, the baby reported missing from her Northland home six weeks ago. Raim is seeking temporary custody of her son to care for his “safety, comfort and peace of mind.”

Attorney Joseph Tacopina, who represents Lisa’s parents, on Tuesday described the petition against Jeremy Irwin as “unbelieveable” and accused Raim of “trying to glom on to her 15 minutes” of fame in the high-profile case.

Read more: www.kansascity.com...

Now, I think this is weird, too...that the mother of Lisa's elder half brother has sought custody for valid reasons, but the NYC attorney is saying "she's trying to glom on" to the 15-minute fame thing in a high-profile case.

WHAT??!!!

This further discredits the defense attorneys in my opinion.

edit on 18-11-2011 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

The reason it would seem that way to someone is because (apparently and according to defense) that mother hasn't bothered visting her son or paying child support for 6 years (he's 8 now)....so if she were so concerned about his welfare, where has she been for the past 6 years. We don't know where she's been or what's she's been doing so I don't know why she wasn't in his life


I can tell you if it is true that she hasn't been bothered for 6 years, it would seem to me that she is only fame hunting.

Michelle

Do we know anything about Jersey's personality? I mean is he the sort who, after sitting for weeks in jail and getting bored and restless, might make up a story like this to get OUT or to trade fora lessor sentence or to just make up something to pass the time?
Does anyone know anything about him ?

My point is we know he's a criminal and homeless and a wanderer and in general probably a ne'er do well type of guy. So why wouldn't he lie???????????? No reason at all not to and probably lots of reasons TO lie !

reply to post by wildtimes


If she wants 15 minute of fame, then why haven't we seen her face ? ehhhhhhhh??

reply to post by Michelle129th


Michelle, I wondered this 80 pages ago or so. The 'press' ugh, was reporting it was a NASTY custody battle. Yet the court records showed it fairly cut and dried,, not loads of extra hearings like you'd see in a nasty long drawn out custody battle. So I wondered where the term NASTY came from. I wondered if Jeremy didn't strongarm her into giving custody to him, so when she retells it , it's a NASTY battle although legally it just sailed through. She's been in a group h ome and I've yet to hear what that is about. Drugs? If she had a drug problem at the time he could very easily have said I'm taking the kid and you have no financial means to fight me and that appeared NASTY to her . Dopeheads have a way of thinking everything is against them and nothing is their fault. So if she were on drugs at the time , she would feel victimized by him even though ti was probably what's best for the child.
I'd like to know what her current living status is and why she lsot custody in the first place and why she hasnt seen him in all this time. Perhaps the new family told her she wasnt' welcome in the picture? Or perhaps she's been somewehre strung out on drugs and didnt' even know she had a child most days !

I guess we'll know soon enough. Her petition will be flat out denied if shes' still in a group home and / or still using drugs.

reply to post by schmae


Whoa,!! whoa, guys.

I totally agree that having been absent for 6 years in NO WAY makes her look good. Ditto for the other kid's dad. Gone for years? Um, not too respectable in terms of being a parent.

My point was that the attorneys are apparently bickering about it.

Do I think she should have custody of the kid?? uh, if the courts decided she should not, and should have only supervised visitation, I believe them. They would not have made that judgment without careful deliberation and information about the nature of her parenting...

Michelle, I think it is entirely possible she IS just looking for attention....
sorry if I sounded like I was defending her. No no..

It was the attorney Taco's words that she was "trying to glom on" to the spotlight that made me think.

Originally posted by schmae
reply to post by wildtimes

 

If she wants 15 minute of fame, then why haven't we seen her face ? ehhhhhhhh??

Yeah! Exactly!!
That's what irritates me about TacoJoe saying this...we have NOT seen her face (well, there was one little article where they showed a pic of her)...
so, I DON'T think that is her motive.

PLEASE UNDERSTAND:
edit here...
When I said valid reasons for wanting to get custody, I meant in this situation, where she is reportedly concerned for the kid's well-being. Make sense?

reply to post by wildtimes

As for strong?? YES. A parent's job is to be STRONG for their child. NO MATTER WHAT.

OMG.. now we are attacking the parents for not being strong at a time like this.. ? They are human beings.. who"s child is missing..

They have been under investigation..and their life turned upside down..all while the media and the public spew garbage about them.. and call them everything from "unsavory" characters, to lying child killers.

Yes..how dare them show their human side.. and not be STRONG ..no matter what..

Really getting fed up with the "perfect parents" who would do everything right in this situation....and because they are so perfect and strong.. they have the right to judge what it isn't..

eye roll back atcha..

reply to post by gabby2011


Oh, for crying out loud, gabby.
Really, you have a true gift for misconstruing things.

I have said here, and will say again, that NO PARENT is perfect.
I have also said, and will say again,that I know what I WOULD DO.

Consider this: If they agreed to go in for separate interviews, it would RELIEVE some of the public's negative impression. If they feel scared, and weak, fine. I even said "not everyone" has that strength. If they were to go in there today, and clear up the questions and uncertainties, would that NOT reflect WELL on them??

The point is that, weak or strong, if someone's child has vanished, and they are not doing EVERYTHING in their power to enable the police to close the case, they are not viewed as completely dedicated to the cause....which is "FINDING THEIR BABY"

reply to post by wildtimes

Oh, for crying out loud, gabby. Really, you have a true gift for misconstruing things.

I agree I can misconstrue things.. but I think I'm not the only one who has read loud and clear that some on here are implying that they would do such a better job of dealing with it than the Irwin's.. without fully understanding or knowing what they have already done..and what they have been put through.

You seem to have a true gift for twisting around what you have already implied..and doing some serious back peddling..(did I get the spelling right for you ?..wouldn't want you to discredit anything I type due to spelling errors)

I could show many many inconsistencies for what you have said on this thread...as well as misconstruing..but that would be going seriously off topic..

I only hope we can agree that we both want the total truth behind everything to come out about this case....from every angle..

www.kctv5.com...

"They are doing remarkably well," Picerno said.

He added that he spoke with Irwin Friday morning and that Irwin said "everyday has gotten better." He said Irwin plans to return to his job as an electrician next week and they are working to get "back 100 percent to their normal life."


What does this mean? They are better every day while their child is missing if I'm reading this correctly. Why wouldn't you be WORSE the longer your child is missing? And I'm all for a return to normalcy for the other children, but 100% back to THEIR normal life? No one can do that with a missing family member whose fate is unknown. Is this an incident where this PICERNO is misrespresenting what they said? If he's quoting the family here, he's said a mouthful . That mouthful is that the family wants to put this behind them and move on with life and that they ahve given up any idea of finding Lisa and returning her to her life with them.

reply to post by schmae

. That mouthful is that the family wants to put this behind them and move on with life and that they ahve given up any idea of finding Lisa and returning her to her life with them.

I didn't get that from the article at all..

What I read was a father saying that they are feeling better..( which could be true considering how terrible they have felt over the past while)..

There is no mention of giving up looking for lisa.. and putting this all behind them..?

This family is struggling to keep it together, and trying to get back some sense of normalcy in their lives... despite their daughter missing..and I'm sure they know it will never be the same.

reply to post by gabby2011


What does going back to 100% normal mean to a family who's lost a baby ? I just find it odd wording and again I don't necessarily think it's from the irwins mouths. Just remember the crack cyndy short was talking? I just wonder if a LOT of the family's image problem is from the IDIOTS around them opening their mouth. Like the lawyer's using past tense of Lisa, etc.

reply to post by wildtimes

I don't know. It's one of the mysterious things that baffle me here.
I would think the people investigating have records from the provider showing when it was turned off, and when it was turned back on (if that was the case). And we simply don't know what was revealed by the provider.

In the last video the man said something about 'You know how hard it is to deal with cell phone companies' - and later indicated that because this is only an investigation opposed to a what? A trial? He indicated the records are 'slow coming through' or slow getting to and some are blocked. I'm going to have to go back and listen again cause that just sounds like a crock to me, but, ya never know! I'll let you know what I find.

peace

reply to post by wildtimes

Consider this: If they agreed to go in for separate interviews, it would RELIEVE some of the public's negative impression. If they feel scared, and weak, fine. I even said "not everyone" has that strength. If they were to go in there today, and clear up the questions and uncertainties, would that NOT reflect WELL on them??

Yes, it would. Unless they've got something to hide. If they didn't don't you think Tacopina would have them in there for separate interviews in a heart beat? Of course he would. You and I both know that and so does most of America.

As for strong?? YES. A parent's job is to be STRONG for their child.

Yes it is a parent's job. At least any true parent.

So Yes! SHAME ON THEM for not going and speaking to the detectives SEPARATELY (in the last *40-41 days) to HELP FIND THEIR MISSING INFANT.

SHAME ON THEM for COMPLAINING the police are focusing in the wrong direction BUT DOING NOTHING TO HELP the police focus in any other direction.

Little Lisa alive? I can't even imagine how she's going to feel later on in life looking back at her so called 'parents'. Hopefully when the time comes she'll be able to tell them 'SHAME ON YOU' also.

Hopefully she'll be able to ask someday: 'Mommy, Daddy, WHY DIDN'T YOU DO EVERYTHING YOU COULD TO FIND ME?'

Hopefully by now - in part thanks to 'Mommy and Daddy' - it isn't too late.

peace