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.

 

Lisa Irwin - Missing - One Year Later

page: 127
41
<< 124  125  126    128  129  130 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 


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.

This more than anything else makes me 'feel' Lisa's not with us anymore. Cyndy Short and her refusal to speak of Lisa in anything but the 'past tense'. Now this 'new' lawyer going on with the smack of 'going back to normal'.
It's like they're all talking about a sick puppy, had it put down, but now it's time to go back to normal. NORMAL?

Why? Maybe because they know Lisa isn't coming back? Not one lawyer for the family has given any other indication. Even Tacopina when he said 'She looked in Lisa's crib to see - as if by magic - Lisa was there.'

We don't see the family lawyers acting/speaking in any manner to indicate they know anything other than Lisa is already dead - and we learned (or I did) from our invaluable consul 'X' (Cathdra)here on the thread the lawyers are under no obligation to tell anyone anything their clients have shared with them. Which means they very well could already know Lisa's fate - and are just sitting back, putting on the spin and waiting for the other shoe to drop...if it ever will.

peace

edit on 19-11-2011 by silo13 because: fix bold




posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 01:39 AM
link   
A few things - To those who are going down the road of the Police wanting to frame someone or using tactics people may find troublesome.

Any technique used that defense has an issue with can and most likely will be raised before anything even goes to trial. When charges are filed the defense will file a motion of discovery. This requires the prosecution to turn over any and all evidence.

The defense will then review all the evidence and any evidence they have issues with will be challenged. Interviews / statements / physical evidence, etc. Defense will look for issues in the collection of the evidence and anything found suspicious is challeneged. Defense will file an evidence supression hearing where they and the prosecution go before a judge and argue why the evidence should be left out, and why it should be included.

The judge makes the decision and it goes forward from there. Just because evidence is supressed / excluded in the begining does not mean it cant be introduced later on in the trial depending on testimony of a defense / prosecution witness accidentally opening a door.

That being said I am going to post this link and allow you guys to do your own research.

MO Casenet - Litigant records search

The link is a public access link and allows you to search judicial records by entering a pesons first name, last name and any additional information to assist in narrowing the list down. Missouri is broken down into judicial circuits, with larger counties being their own entity and smaller counties being grouped together.

There are multiple ways to search (state wide, specific name, specific circuit etc). If you find the person your search for you can click the link for the case. There will be several tabs on the screen that give you the option of seeing offical court dates / attornies / charges / outcomes if there are concluded including prison / jail time fines etc.
* - Disclaimer - The records you access are not meant to be used to to determine guilt / innocence in this case. Criminal / civil records are a matter of public record in the State of Missouri unless otherwise sealed by a court with reason.


As a side note lets try not to devolve into the word game with each other. You will have posters who feel strongly one way, and other posters who feel strongly the other way. 1 person may view the police as antagonistic, while others may view them as frustrated.

In the end it doesnt matter in this conversation when discussing whats actually occuring. Please try to keep that in mind so we dont run this thread off the rails. Any perceived misconduct by law enforcement or non law enforcement will be dealt with in the established process that pertains to the issue being brought up.

Food for thought

Respects



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 01:39 AM
link   
Picerno: Witness claims handyman paid $300 for kidnapping


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."


How can anyone say life will go back to 100% without Lisa.

It’s only getting worse... Picerno just went from having one boot stuffed in his fat mouth to having both of them.

peace



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 

Thank you for the link - and the info. Both will come in handy as this whole 'case' continues.
I wish it were other than that but it seems this will be with us for a while.

Quick question.

I kill someone. I go to a defense lawyer and tell them I pulled the trigger. Knowing this the defense lawyer's under no obligation to 'tell'?

I mean it may be an obvious question but it sure is a loaded on.

Thanks in advance -



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 01:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by silo13
We don't see the family lawyers acting/speaking in any manner to indicate they know anything other than Lisa is already dead - and we learned (or I did) from our invaluable consul 'X' (Cathdra)here on the thread the lawyers are under no obligation to tell anyone anything their clients have shared with them. Which means they very well could already know Lisa's fate - and are just sitting back, putting on the spin and waiting for the other shoe to drop...if it ever will.

peace

edit on 19-11-2011 by silo13 because: fix bold


The purpose and function of a defense attorney is to represent their client with zeal to ensure the best possible outcome for their clients. Communications between a client and a lawyer who is retained / representing them are protected communications. As a hypothetical a client can tell there lawyer they murdered 15 people. The lawyer cannot reveal that information to anyone.

If the attorney does reveal the information its a violation of the privilege, and no information can be used in any way shape or form. The lawyer who violated the privilege can be disciplined, up to and including being disbarred (lose their law license) and unable to practice law again. There are exceptions which are situation specific, and must meet very exacting criteria which usually revolve around a persons life being in danger.

The more family / defense attorneys talk to the public the more of an issue it can create. Speaking to the media and holding press conferences actually can work against the defense by constantly keeping the issue in the news. That means if charges are ever filed against their client they run the risk of having issues finding possible jury members.

To answer an observation from earlier about jurisdiction and counties. Usually if a person is arrested, they are required to be booked into the jail of the county the crime occured in. There are exceptions to this, which do allow for a person to be transfered to a different jail to be held prior to trial (many reasons exist that can justify the move).

If there is a lot of media coverage in the county where the crime occur, a change of venue can be submitted by the defense. This is an argument that states because of media attention the ability for a client to receive a fair trial is called into question. If the motion is granted they will move the case to a different county, different judges etc. The origional PA will still prosecute the case though.



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by silo13
How can anyone say life will go back to 100% without Lisa.


A good question -

How can a mother who had 2 of her children kidnapped (completely different case out of state) and killed find it within herself to forgive the person who did it?

The answer to that question is for the parents and only the parents to decide. We can specualte based on what we would do, but ultimately only the parents know.



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by Xcathdra
 

Thank you for the link - and the info. Both will come in handy as this whole 'case' continues.
I wish it were other than that but it seems this will be with us for a while.

Quick question.

I kill someone. I go to a defense lawyer and tell them I pulled the trigger. Knowing this the defense lawyer's under no obligation to 'tell'?

I mean it may be an obvious question but it sure is a loaded on.

Thanks in advance -


First and foremost - Dont kill - its bad


Secondly, before opening your mouth to any specifics when talking to a lawyer, you must ensure the lawyer is willing to take your case. Most first time consultations are free, some arent. Until they are officaly your lawyer though, I wouldnt not go into to much detail. If you conress and the lawyer decides not to ake your case, it could cause an issue since he is not representing you, an argument could be made there is no privilege.

If the lawyer takes your case and represents you, anything you tell the lawyer is privileged. So yes you can confess to killing a person and the lawyers sole goal is to find the best possible outcome for you, regardless of the moral position of the defense lawyer.

They will see what the prosecution has in way of evidence, provided the police / PA ever get around to figuring out you did it. Assuming they figured out your are involved, your lawyer does the motion for discoverty to see what evidence they have on you.

If its vague / circumstantial they may opt to plead not guilty and try to get the evidence thrown out for whatever reasons. If they A has you dead to rights, the defense might try to get some type of plea deal by offering up evidence they dont have.

In murder cases / kidnapping cases, one of the goals of the faily is to get closure, which doesnt always mean finding the suspect and sending them to jail. The big thing for closure to a fmily is the ability to see the body one last time and burial.

If the police linked you to the crime, but dont have a body, its possible to work out some deal (they take the death penalty off the table or offier 25 to life with possibility of pareol after say 50 years) in exchange for information to locate the body for the family.

All of which is between the defense and prosecution.
edit on 19-11-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 02:40 AM
link   
With any case of abduction, I have a hard time thinking that someone can come into your house and just take a baby.
I don't know how abductors work, so here I have questions on how they do it.
An abductor has got to know a baby is in the house.
They must of cased the area for possible escape routes.
They must get knowledge of who is in the house, what times they are in, what times are safe to go in to abduct and which entry point to use.
A reason for taking the baby.

Can a person just walk on by a house during the night, look at a house, think there might be a baby there. pop in through an entry point, take a baby without it crying, walk through a house, escape and walk away?

You see, these are the things I can't understand.
Surely if an abductor already has intentions to kidnap an known baby to them, someone they have done homework on, knowing the house, family, what type of child they are taking. Wouldn't they have done some preparation work , been around the neighbourhood and surveyed the situation?

Or can just a person just randomly, on the off chance just pick a house a just go for it?

This is where I'm having issues.



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 03:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by sussy
With any case of abduction, I have a hard time thinking that someone can come into your house and just take a baby.
I don't know how abductors work, so here I have questions on how they do it.
An abductor has got to know a baby is in the house.
They must of cased the area for possible escape routes.
They must get knowledge of who is in the house, what times they are in, what times are safe to go in to abduct and which entry point to use.
A reason for taking the baby.


What you described above is one of the reasons most abductions are done by friends or family members, and rarely ever strangers. Taking the above info and trying to plug a stranger into the equation, it opens a new line of investigation into why? That "why" question is a bit harder to answer.



Originally posted by sussy
Can a person just walk on by a house during the night, look at a house, think there might be a baby there. pop in through an entry point, take a baby without it crying, walk through a house, escape and walk away?

You would know by looking at their trash outside (diapers / clothing / baby food / etc). Look at the cars in the driveway - are there any child seats in the car designed for babies? Are any toys present in the front yard, garage, any rooms where a person could look in? Are there any decals on windows that would suggest its a kids / babies room? Are there any signs out front ay any point in the past that announced the birth of a baby?

etc etc etc etc. All without entering the house.


Originally posted by sussy
You see, these are the things I can't understand.
Surely if an abductor already has intentions to kidnap an known baby to them, someone they have done homework on, knowing the house, family, what type of child they are taking. Wouldn't they have done some preparation work , been around the neighbourhood and surveyed the situation?

valid questions. Something else to consider.

What if a friend of that family has some major issues in their own life with say drug dealers / criminal elements etc, where they owe money or something else. Who is to say the friend is not pressured by the unknown to kidnap the child and hand it over to satisfy his debt?

Contrary to popular belief baby for profit scams are alive and well. Stealing a child so a family can adopt the child in another country or even the US still occurs.. When people go to adopt children how many actually ask for information and take their time to investgate the business to ensure they are legitimate?

When looking at a persons possible criminal history, we dont just look at the immediate. We look at their past as well as other criminals they are to have known contact with. Its not out of the realm of possibuility for a low level criminal (does drugs and thats it) to have contacts who are a bit more inviolved in criminal activities, who have friends who are mopre involved in criminal activities, etc etc etc. Somewhere along the line its possible to stumble across some international criminal elements who need a child for something. They put pressure on the person below them, etc etc etc, until you hit the bottome where a low level crimainl / drugs only is forced to act from the pressure above him.



Originally posted by sussy
Or can just a person just randomly, on the off chance just pick a house a just go for it?

This is a possibility of course, but rare.



Originally posted by sussy
This is where I'm having issues.

Understandable - Until some information / evidence comes in that exposes light onto some piece of evidence they had but didnt know how it fits in, we all are going to have questions and not understand aspects to this case.





posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 03:31 AM
link   
Thank you Agent X (Humour)


I suppose this grey area is where I get my suspicions about the parents from. But I will try to not judge from now on.



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



What if a friend of that family has some major issues in their own life with say drug dealers / criminal elements etc, where they owe money or something else. Who is to say the friend is not pressured by the unknown to kidnap the child and hand it over to satisfy his debt?


Is it plausible to think that a family member or former partner might "stage" an abduction, including hiring a team of high-profile specialists, just to 'scare' or 'embarrass' the family??

I keep getting hung up on the 'anonymous' benefactor who has retained these guys and also put up this reward. Perhaps someone thinks Deborah needs a lesson, or a scare? Or they just want revenge for something (real or imagined)?

This is what led me to where I'm still kina sorta leaning -- that someone wanted to 'hurt' Deborah and Jeremy, or 'expose' them or something like that -- took the baby, has her safe and sound in a self-contained estate somewhere, and is waiting to see what the parents do.



Contrary to popular belief baby for profit scams are alive and well. Stealing a child so a family can adopt the child in another country or even the US still occurs..


One of the contributors here has suggested this was a for-profit operation. When you say 'alive and well', do you mean commonplace? Routine? Usually the answer?

I can see for adoption, sure. But when the baby's picture is plastered all over the world, and there's this big reward, how does a family who has 'bought' her keep her out of sight? And for how long?

Also, in your experience, is it plausible (reasonably) to think the police themselves, or an official, was involved, and further that the baby was wanted for purposes of porn, torture, sacrifice, etc??
This suggestion seems TO ME to be the LEAST likely and the most outrageous of possibilities.

And what about the police actually framing the parents? This, again, seems utterly improbable to me.

I'd really like to know what you think about these scenarios....



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 03:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by sussy
Thank you Agent X (Humour)

I suppose this grey area is where I get my suspicions about the parents from. But I will try to not judge from now on.


Lol its all good... Being called Agent X is actually a step up from what ive been called before lol.
It is ok and perfectly understandable to be suspicious. Being suspcious of the parents and the info they provide is also ok. Checking the information out the parents give will either clear some of the suspicion, or will add more the the case.

Being suspicious of someone is not the same as thinking someone is guilty. Being suspicious of someone doesnt mean you are judging them either. It sounds goofy but there is a difference



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 04:17 AM
link   
Very long post - I appologize for that


Originally posted by wildtimes
Is it plausible to think that a family member or former partner might "stage" an abduction, including hiring a team of high-profile specialists, just to 'scare' or 'embarrass' the family??

Anything is possible and from what I have seen it doesnt look like KCPD has really ruled anything / anyone out as of yet. However, family is looked at, including extended family so if there is something there it might be a reason why KCPD seems interested in the family instead of outside leads (that is a guess though).

Also - when the police state the family is not cooperating, you may notice they arent specifically stating the parents (if they did I have missed it). The parents lawyers and media are assuming the comment is in reference to the parents, when in reality it might not be. The police wouldnt clarify since its possible it might jeopradize something currently ongoing.

If you remeber the DC sniper case from years back where the guy and kid were randomly killing people in the DC / Virginia area. If you watched the news footage there were several comments made by the police that made no sense to the media. After it was all over with only then did we learn the police were communicating with the suspects referencing evidence left at the scenes that was never diclosed to the public / media.

Lots of possibilities.


Originally posted by wildtimes
I keep getting hung up on the...snipped for room

When lawyers work pro bono (free) and private funds are established for information there are some protocols in place to ensure its above board. If its not its open a whole new pandoras box on the possible effects on the investigation, the charges as well as number of suspects.

Any action that intentionally interferes / influences / obfuscates / misdirects / etc etc etc the investigation can and usually is dealt with. Instead of the possibility of just the parents looking at charges, its possible to intoduce the term "conspiracy" into the mix.

RSMO - 564.016 - Conspiracy
Conspiracy - General use, not specific terminology

An agreement between two or more persons to engage jointly in an unlawful or criminal act, or an act that is innocent in itself but becomes unlawful when done by the combination of actors.



Conspiracy is a crime separate from the criminal act for which it is developed. For example, one who conspires with another to commit Burglary and in fact commits the burglary can be charged with both conspiracy to commit burglary and burglary.

Conspiracy is an inchoate, or preparatory, crime. It is similar to solicitation in that both crimes are committed by manifesting an intent to engage in a criminal act. It differs from solicitation in that conspiracy requires an agreement between two or more persons, whereas solicitation can be committed by one person alone.


This is a generic example, and there is more info in the link, but it can become confusiong so dont read to much into it to compare the details for this case to that crime. Its just another possiblity exploring the "who paid for the lawyer / reward hypothetical".



Originally posted by wildtimes
This is what led me to ..snipped

Its a possibility for sure based on the info available to the press / people. As far as exposing them though the question then becomes why, and to what end? If they are affiliated with people who do recreatioanl drugs and nothing else, why go this route? The effort taken to "expose" the parents is more criminal and severe than exposing the parents. If the abductors are strangers, then what information do they have and how did they get it reference the parents?

For the parents - At worst, would be a charge of endangering the welfare of a minor, and even in this case provided the charge stands would be a misdemeanor and nothing more, provided it was even proesecuted by the PA.

For the "abductors" - Felony Kidnapping, Felony endangering the welfare, if they child crossed state lines your looking at federal charges, conspiracy if more than one person was involved, fraud if there is some type of monetary link, conspiracy to commit fraud, blackmail, etc the list goes on.

If it were simply the case of sending a warning then techincally all that is needed is an anonymous call to MO Department of Family services, a complaint, and a well being check for the child.



Originally posted by wildtimes
One of the contributors here has suggested this was a for-profit operation. When you say 'alive and well', do you mean commonplace? Routine? Usually the answer?

That stealing babies to sell them is not a crime from last century, but still occurs today contrary to what people may think. Check the United Nations website - you can ind reports on sex trafficking / child abduction rings / child pedofile rings etc. If you were looking for a child to kidnap and sexually exploit in a different country, what do you think the odds are of an international crime ring scenario being looked at in the heartland of the US?


Originally posted by wildtimes
I can see for adoption, sure. But when the baby's picture is plastered all over the world, and there's this big reward, how does a family who has 'bought' her keep her out of sight? And for how long?

Food for thought - next time you come across a baby, look at how s/he is dressed. Now, mentally, change the clothes from say pink to blue, add a small cap, trim some of the hair, etc.

Then compare. Baby identification is extremely difficult, especially from just a passing bystander.



Originally posted by wildtimes
Also, in your experience, is it plausible (reasonably) to think the police themselves, or an official, was involved, and further that the baby was wanted for purposes of porn, torture, sacrifice, etc??
This suggestion seems TO ME to be the LEAST likely and the most outrageous of possibilities.

Absolutely. It would be insance for law enforcement not to look at all possibilities. From my experience when we have had weird calls and one of the officers know the family personally or from past dealings, its always been declared so that officer can be identified in the reports as well as the reason the officer was removed from the ivestigation. It doesnt mean the officer did anything wrong, but a conflict of interest could arise.

There is the possiblity where the officer doesnt give notice fro whatever reasons, as well as the possibil;ity an offcer could be involved in the crime. We deal with criminals on a daily basis, and contrary to popular belief police are humans like everyone else and we are prone to mistakes. When dealing with potential crimianls, there becomes a adversarial system. The police recognize a person as someone to watch since they established a history of criminal behavior.

If it goes far enough and a criminal gains inside information as to an officers personal issues, it not our of the oridinary to reverse the tables, and force the officer to assist criminals in order to keep the information quiet.

Its rare, but not impoissible and has occured in the past.

Actually I commend you for recognizing and asking that question. Its not something citizens recognize / do a lot during an investigation stage, and the manner you addressed it in is impressive - poissibility instead of accusation.


Originally posted by wildtimes
And what about the police actually framing the parents? This, again, seems utterly improbable to me.

Again possible, but in order to explore that the question the question to be asked is to what end? What officers had run ins with these individuals in the past. What transpired for an officer to engage in this behavior? Unless an officer has information about other officer having some type of history and brings that information forward, and sicne the parents arent really speaking to the police for their reasons, its a lot fo officers to look at for a connection.

Again its a possibility though.


Originally posted by wildtimes
I'd really like to know what you think about these scenarios.

All completely plausible, and all that should, if they havent already, be looked at.

The other thing to suggest would maybe be the officer theory you suggested, but expanding it a bit to use an officer from a different jurisdiction. I doubt these people lived in this area there entire lives, and I doubt they have never had an encounter with law enforcement from a neioghboring city / county / state.

As much as the saying irritates me -
The difference between a Police Officer and a Criminal is the thought process put into action. Police will think like criminals in order to investigate crimes. All it takes is the thought to cross over into action on the part of an officer.

Awesome questions..
edit on 19-11-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-11-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 


True and have we heard JOE T or anyone in the family or their legal/ PI team say once "" to whoever has Lisa, we will find you , etc '' ??? No kind of plea has been made for her return. No kind of we are going to hunt and hunt and never give up until we find her and who did this statement has ever been made.
I mean to those here who believe the family is innocent, I feel for you and I hope you are right. I SO HOPE they are innocent and she is alive somewhere. But even Irwin supporters must acknowlege that it does not look good for them. Beyond a reasonable doubt? Of course NOT! But if this were a civil trial, where 51 % of the evidence says they are involved, I think 51% of me thinks they are involved.


Whatever happened to Lisa, I hope and pray she did not suffer like baby Tyler
and I hope those 2 are in heaven together and picking flowers and being cradled by angel wings


I HATE THIS !

The Tyler Dasher killing in the midst of all this might have made me too sappy and emotional to go on discussing this case . I've had a very rough time this week .
edit on 19-11-2011 by schmae because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Thank you ever so much, agent X. It's so refreshing to have someone taking the tme to explain -- in depth and from an inside vantage point.

I have a very good friend who was an undercover narcotcs agent, then a detective, in Europe for years, then after earning a J.D. moved up the ranks in the DA's office (in the Midwest USA) from prosecuting non-violent stuff like habitual DUI, then opened a private defense practice. Knowing so much of the system, that friend has helped me analyze more than one situation of interest. Fascinating stuff, to me.

You remind me of my friend...clear and neutral, straightforward...add in some humor....

Heh...and I have asked that expert's opinion on this case, and received an answer. I don't dare ask you, who is not an attorney, but a law enforcement officer. But dang would I like to!!
anyway, thank you.

It is my nature to dismiss the most hideous possiblities (give the benefit of the doubt) and I have learned, and am STILL learning, how to sharpen my skills and think outside that 'nahhh' attitude.

Again, thanks for taking the time to address these questions!



edit on 19-11-2011 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 07:24 AM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 


True and have we heard JOE T or anyone in the family or their legal/ PI team say once "" to whoever has Lisa, we will find you , etc '' ???

Nope, which actually to me smacks of such blatant arrogance? If it ever goes to trial I hope the prosecutor rubs his smug nose in it!


No kind of plea has been made for her return. No kind of we are going to hunt and hunt and never give up until we find her and who did this statement has ever been made.

Nope, just the absolutely idiotic ‘leave her anywhere, at a fire station, police station, no questions asked!

You’re kidding me RIGHT? Leave Lisa at a police station NO questions asked? My gawd how absurd it that. They really do think we’re that stupid. It’s a face slap! ‘Suckers! You believe that? You believe ‘that!?


I mean to those here who believe the family is innocent, I feel for you and I hope you are right. I SO HOPE they are innocent and she is alive somewhere. But even Irwin supporters must acknowledge that it does not look good for them. Beyond a reasonable doubt? Of course NOT! But if this were a civil trial, where 51 % of the evidence says they are involved, I think 51% of me thinks they are involved.

Do I think they murdered her outright? No. Because I never want to think a mother would do such a thing. Do I believe there’s a LOT MORE to this that they DO KNOW? You bet. And a LOT MORE that would indicate someone made a huge mistake and covered it up - and got WAY LUCKY in the cover-up? YOU BET.


Whatever happened to Lisa, I hope and pray she did not suffer like baby Tyler and I hope those 2 are in heaven together and picking flowers and being cradled by angel wings

I hate this too, because, no matter how I’ve tried to look on the ‘bright side’? I know as well as the rest of you how close that river is to the Irwin house. I also know the cell phone was ‘pinged’ within a third of a mile from the house. Can you say ‘ker-plunk’... I also firmly believe either parent would have done anything - after the fact - not to loose ‘status quo’. So yeah, I hate this too.


The Tyler Dasher killing in the midst of all this might have made me too sappy and emotional to go on discussing this case . I've had a very rough time this week .

You too? Yeah, no matter what, we have to protect ourselves too. We can mourn for them, and hope for them, and pray for them, but at the same time - IT’S NOT OUR FAULT. Something I have to continually remind myself. We know. WE KNOW we wouldn’t have done the same. That should not make us feel ‘holier than thou’ - only give us some peace - as the ‘family’ is trying to get back to ‘100% normal life’ WITHOUT LISA.

hugs



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 





A few things - To those who are going down the road of the Police wanting to frame someone or using tactics people may find troublesome.


Again I used the wrong term when I said the police could be trying to frame them..I meant the police trying to coerce a confession.... in the way of trying to paint them into a corner ,

I don't know if this happened.. but I do think they used some harsh tactics in trying to get info.. to the point that one of their lawyers put a stop to questioning.

If this is true..I don't think it helped their cause much.. especially if they were too focused on the possibility of the parents being involved.

If they really suspect the evidence shows the parents guilty..I would hope they would use some wisdom and good psychological methods of extracting info and a possibly a confession.

For me..what it boils down to is wanting real proof.. and evidence..(something which none of us have at this point)..so that the actual truth comes out about this case.

For the sake of baby Lisa.. its only the truth that matters..and hopefully somehow..at some point the actual truth will be revealed.



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 


I have a very hard time believing Deb killed her outright. I do not believe she did. I believe an accidental death occurred and maybe no one even realized it was a death at the time..........like too much cough syrup or a tumble from the bed, etc. Possibly someone, Deb, maybe, thought OH NO she fell out of bed, but looked at her and she appeared ok but then later on succumbed to swelling or something. I mean, I don't know. There's loads of possible things, but I do not believe an INTENTIONAL murder occurred . I've never believed it and will not unless mom confesses out right. Possibly rolling over on baby, but I don't buy that . It's a big baby to roll over on and she would squeal and struggle to get free. An innocent enough accident that got out of control in the cover up phase possibly because they were drinking and worried about that.



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 





You too? Yeah, no matter what, we have to protect ourselves too. We can mourn for them, and hope for them, and pray for them, but at the same time - IT’S NOT OUR FAULT. Something I have to continually remind myself. We know. WE KNOW we wouldn’t have done the same.



really? you have to remind yourself its not your fault?? It makes me curious as to why you protest so much against the parents, and constantly tell us what you would have done..



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by gabby2011
 


Gabby, do you think Deb could have killed her on purpose? I know you are leaning toward parental innocence in this. But for a minute let's pretend we know 100% mom ' caused her death' but we don't know the method. Would you think accidental ? Or intentional?

I just I know I've been hard on Deb, because I do believe shes more likely involved than not. But at the same time, I see a woman who really is sorry for waht happened, whatever it is. That may be that she looks sorry because she was drunk while someone was stealing her baby under her nose. Deb appears regretful and yet guarded in her interviews. So that makes me think she knows what happened and is horribly sad about what happened, but now is left witht eh task of self preservation for herself and her other child.

I still think Jeremy had nothing to do with it, expect POSSIBLY in cover up only, but not there at the time Lisa became ' lost' . I dont' even really think he had much to do with a cover up.
edit on 19-11-2011 by schmae because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
41
<< 124  125  126    128  129  130 >>

log in

join