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: 141
41
<< 138  139  140    142  143  144 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by schmae
Ok PHONES,,, the phone thing has really got me bothered. Were the phones on or off? I can't tell from what people to say to what they say next. If the phones were off, no call could have been made to megan wright's phone. So if that call was made to megan's phone, then the phones were on. Right? Now is Megan the only person who has said a call came in to her phone? She says the cops have had her phone since, but I don't recall the actual KCPD saying they took her phone and that the calls were made. Could Megan be making up every bit of it? I'm also thinking it's been insinuated many places that Jeremy was a bit of a stickler on the finances, a bit of a hardnose on keeping the bills under control, lights out etc. So could Deb, like a lot of girls , gotten real chatty with the phone, continued running up the bill and Jeremy getting upset about it just told her the phone is off . " i coudlnt pay the bill so there is no phone service''---- a little white lie, just to keep her from running up more phone charges?? So Deb THOUGHT the phones were off but it wasn't the case? Anyone who knew them closely would know their phones were off and so why would they steal them when they left with the baby see? I just cannot see clear to this phone situation. Were they on restricted calling or not and who KNEW if they were on or off?


She said the FBI took her phone, after questioning...




posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by schmae
reply to post by gabby2011
 


If ten years go by and never a trace of baby Lisa and in that time it's shown that her parents probably had nothing to do with it, I would be much more inclined to think along the lines of illum. baby stealing story. I do not discount it totally. I just think of all the possibiliites, it's low on the list right now. But I won't discount it totally. I cannot until she's found discount anything that's possible. But you know as well as I if that is what happened, she has in essence vanished for good.


I agree that all other possibilities need to be investigated thoroughly , and even if she is not found in 10 years it doesn't necessarily mean that illuminati was involved.

I really hope for Lisa's sake that this is not a possibility..and I would much prefer to think that the police are doing all they can to find her.

But preferring the truth to be a certain way..doesn't always make it so..thats all I'm saying.



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by gabby2011
 


She says........ I just wonder if any fbi or kcpd has verified what MEGAN says happened. See? To my knowledge fbi and kcpd have made no kind of statement in ages, since way before Megan started showing up everywhere. Could she by making it all up ? Yes phone records would show what happened, but we've not seen phone records or even heard about phone records from LE. Just pondering if this is more spin by media.

If it's true then the phones were NOT restricted, so what does that mean? Here's the thing on Megan, when her portion of events first came out , she was all over fb talking up a storm answering any and everything,,,,,,,,truthfully ? who knows? But she was talking away. The more details come out... dane took the call , dane was freaking out , etc etc....( speculation) the more quiet Megan has become. Since the other day when Dane actually SPOKE and said I had nothing to do with anything like what's been said ,,,,,,,, virtual silence from Megan. So, it begs the question is Megan 's account anywhere near what happened? It is odd to say yes she dated jersey and yes she lived with dane a bit, but the 2 don't know each other at all.......
edit on 21-11-2011 by schmae because: (no reason given)


Dane , who it took her a week or 2 to recall, remember? She just automatically one day says OH yea I remember it was DANE who used my phone that night. Odd no?
edit on 21-11-2011 by schmae because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 08:49 AM
link   
I wanted someone with a bit more knowledge to have a look back at the warrant that was requested back on I believe oct 19th. It was requested after a cadaver made a positive hit in the Irwin's bedroom...

I was just looking back on it noticed something I was curious about. On the first page at the bottom in someone's handwriting is "Denied" and a signature or initials.

That first page where the "Denied" writing is, is the "motion to seal court records" Why would they deny such a thing? It states in the request that releasing of the records could hamper the investigation. I think that is reasonable...or is it? I have no idea anymore...with all the witnesses or possible witnesses I guess blabbing to media, and people showing lineups and crazy BS I think the investigation is already mucked up but could be wrong...

Is there a particular reason a judge would deny sealing court records?

Search warrant

Michelle

edit on 21-11-2011 by Michelle129th because: to add link



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Michelle129th
 


Also mentioned a while back, if you look on page 7 of this you can see the X in the box of 'deceased human fetus or part thereof'.......... at the time of the search, they "ASSUME" the child has died within the home.
As for the denial of sealing records...... I don't know why that would be. It would seem almost they would want it SEALED,,, maybe it's just SOP until a reason comes up to seal?
Also, of note this part of the warrant *( tks for posting this, I havent ever read it in full embarassingly enough) ""the extent of the search had been limited in nature with consent....................... ''''--- does this mean the consent given by parents was limited? AND '''however the type of search needed at this time would not be conducive to being revoked at any time by the owner/ and or their attorney'' -----------what does this mean? the word " NOT " in here throws me off. The owners/ attys would revoke at any time that access to search? But the word NOT means that they would NOT ,. I must admit I am having a bit of trouble with the english language on this. ' not conducive to being revoked'



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 


Michelle, I don't think they assumed it..but they had to look. What's really odd to me is that this happened TWO WEEKS after she vanished. It says the are looking for "human fetus or corpse or part thereof", which is, as I understand it, to record the reason they wanted to search, and that IF they found that^^ it would be on the record as what they were looking for.

Isn't there some search-warrant thing about you have to have a reason, and if you find other stuff that wasn't part of the reason, then it can be thrown out??
Hopefully agent X can help out with that.

Also, the Denial to seal records....it said at the bottom that the info wasn't public and the PA/State was worried that if it WENT public, it might jeoparidize the investigation. So.....
does that mean, since it was Denied, that it's the judge who approved -- one could even say "caused" -- the media frenzy??
I wonder what the reasoning was. To avoid any potential accusations to investigators? Or was it just not a case with the right paramaters to seal it??



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Maybe they are trying to be sure they LE are not accused of covering anything up so want all info public. Already sensing a high profile case brewing , they decided to SEAL anything would look at though they were covering up ?



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 09:24 AM
link   
And honestly this goes back to point of cadaver dog "HIT" inside the house. That is very , VERY important. 90% plus accuracy rating these dogs have means it's only a 10% chance or less there was NOT a death in the house. I'm glad this got brought up today because of all the back and forth and phone calls and neighbors under scrutiny, the hard facts are a cadaver dog's NOSE told a story that cannot be ignored. It still doesn't point to motive or intent or even perpetrator, but it does point to a death in the home.



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Thank you Wildtimes for pointing that out. The thing I liked about the page is that some of the things in the timeline is sourced to a media outlet, i.e Kansas City Star, KCTV 5, CNN, etc. I just thought it could help figured out who's spinning what.

I'm still trying to track down where CNN's Jim Spellman reported about Secret Service involvement.

OiO



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 09:34 AM
link   
''''Forte stressed that in the case of Lisa Irwin, the police have good reasons to not suspect the child's parents. With many unanswered questions in the matter, however, a lot of mystery surrounds the case. And, even as the investigations continue and new details emerge, the most important of those questions have yet to be answered.'''''

Chief of Police,, the new one Forte has good reason to NOT suspect the parents.
www.ibtimes.com...



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


The Erwin house from what I see is in Kansas City on the North side and not in the city of North Kansas city so NKC officers wouldnt have primary jurisdiction in the erwin neighborhood - it would be on KCPD. All of the info released from what im seeing is solely from the FBI or the KCPD and not from NKC. So unless I missed something NKC shouldnt even be involved in all of this.

Law Enforcement have mutual aid agreements with surrounding agencies, and there are state wide mutual aid compacts as well (Joplin tornado had over 1500 local, state, surrounding state, Federal and military guard units). If something occurs and the main agency doesnt have resources to do the job, they can ask other angenices who do have the resources to assist. Those people assisting essentially take on the same authority as the agency requesting the help.

The manner in which a crime scene is processed as well as the collection of evidence is pretty much the same statewide. Missouri has centralized crime lab infrastructure (handles evidence processing for any agency in the state lacking the resources). KC, St. Louis and Springfield, in addition to using state crime labs, also have their own just because of their case load. The facility for Springfield is a joint crime lab - State and SPD's.

Since 9/11 the way law enforcement is handled in missouri has changed. Missouri currently has 2 levels (in general) of classification for law enforcement - A class B certification and class A certification. The difference between the 2 is training (CL-B is about 500 hours minimum and CL-A is about 750 minimum classroom training and does not account for field training)..

Municipal Officers actually have a bit more authority than County Sheriffs or Highway Patrol simply because in addition to being able to enforce state laws, we also enforce local city ordinances / laws. HP and county cant enforce municipal ordinances on their own.

Law Enforcement in Missouri is also able to act regradless of jurisdictional boundaries (although we take great caution in that ability since its not nice to stir up a crap storm in someone else sandbox and then just bolt.
.If something occurs all we do is request local police response and go from there. As with all cases the PA of the county decides if charges go or if they dont.

On the fluke the Erwins are inside North Kansas City city limits it doesnt really change anything. If NKCPC doesnt have the resources, KCPD does.

Hopefully the wall of text explanation here will help others understand the ins and outs. If anyone has other questions by all means feel free to ask. If other officers are in the thread by all means speak up.



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by OneisOne
 



I'm still trying to track down where CNN's Jim Spellman reported about Secret Service involvement.

Yes, that is what prompted me to explain a bit about the 'Examiner's that write there. I haven't seen, and can't IMAGINE why the Secret Servce would be involved.

I see agent X is here (yay!)...I hope he gets to all these Qs before he goes!!



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by OneisOne
 


If I had to guess about the Secret Service I would say they are part of a task force. The role of the US secret service, which is most well known for its special agenst and Presidential protection, also have jurisdiction over counterfit US currency as well as credit card fraud. They have concurrent jurisdiction with other federal agencies like the FBI.

Since 9/11 the role of joint task forces has risen. A joint task force, in general terms, is a combination of local state and federal law enforcement personnel. Depending on the reason for the task force (terrorism, drug interdiction, counterfeiting, fugitive recovery) its possible to have federal agencts investigating what should be a local crime.

Depending on resources available, they may simply be on loan as well to augment manpower.



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by gabby2011
True enough, and my sincerest apologies for suggesting something without any proof... I certainly do not have a good knowledge of how LE works, and I do hope they have done their best to gather valuable evidence , and are pursuing this case with a focus on finding baby Lisa and looking at all possible clues.

To date I havent see them not doing what you just described.


Originally posted by gabby2011
There has been a lot of heresay on this thread... and many have discussed theories and speculations without much proof of why.

Theories and speculation are fine - its the same method law enforcement uses when doing an investigation. The difference I see though is people seem to move from that to accusing law enforcement when somthing comes up in the case that they dont understand.



Originally posted by gabby2011
I will say this though, I do believe that there does exist an "illuminati" type organizations in this world , and I do believe that they have key figures and representatives within politics, law, military, banking, etc.

There has been shadow organizations throughout history, dating all the way back to when Adam and Eve were kept out of the loop on the apple. Being kept out of the loop doesnt mean sinister intentions or wrong doing though.



Originally posted by gabby2011
There have been big coverups as well by people in postilions of power concerning sexual abuse of children....and it isn't unfathomable to think that this case has some people behind the scenes in the know of what happened and are stopping the truth from being revealed.

Again I understand, however I fail to see the relevance in brining up some of these examples. What I am reading, and please correct me if im wrong, but it seems that you are suggesting the police are untrustworthy simpy because of other scandals / coverups / conspiracies.

I can prevent you with a list of conspiraies and coverups that the Erwins would fit to a T.



Originally posted by gabby2011
Once again my apologies for looking at the police for either screwing up a bit, or having a few on the force that have reason to not seek the real truth...though I still think it could be a possibility.

Every organization will have people that should not be there. I agree there is always the possibility, however possibility should not be construed as fact or actually occuring. Its an ongoing investigation, which means its none of the medias or publics business until such time the case is resolved. This means you dont get to see all of the facts / info collected.



Originally posted by gabby2011
If the police did make some serious errors on how they handled this case.. would they ever really fess up and say so to the public?? nope.

You really need to learn the difference between speculation and accusation because once again, not only have you stereotyped here, you are once again accusing. Not only are you accusing, you are doing so in a blanket manner, which is nothing ignorance.

On the off chance you ever decide to take your blinders off, please do research. You will find many many times where the police have acknowledged problems during investigations. Even in those circumstances that do go unreported, the court process exposes those issues, resulting in people being held accountible.



Originally posted by gabby2011
If there was someone within that force that was covering something up and working to protect a ring of criminals...would we ever really have proof..unless another officer wrote about it..? NOPE ...

Again, you would be wrong, but again by all means keep those blinders on.



Originally posted by gabby2011
So finding proof to substantiate theories or speculations..is sometimes very difficult... especially involving cover ups.

Especially when the person who is accusing people of coverup has absolutely no idea how these types of investigations work. Being my background is in law enforcement and public law, I am not going to walk into a trauma room and lecture a doctor on how to do his job. I am not going to accuse the doctor of a coverup on the off chance he loses a patient during emergency surgery.

Is it possible he is at fault? Absolutely, however to determine that an investigation must occur. I have not seen the results of your investigation into law enforcement actions to support your accusations.


Since you insist on blaming the police let me ask this -
What if the erwins are at fault? Have you ever really considered that as a possibility? If so, it must have gotten lost in the blame game on law enforcement.

"If you eliminate the impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth"
- Sherlock Holmes (Sir Arthur conan Doyle).

Stop doing the 100 meter rush to judgment and extend the same to LEO's that you extend to the Erwins.



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by OneisOne
 


So now I'm wondering what kind of fraud is suspected to have happened to warrant the Secret Service to be in on the investigation.

FAB find. I've got to do some more research now but you've provided links and a great place to start.

I wonder if there's any way we can find out if Lisa was a participant in the 'Gerber Baby' life insurance plan?

Just thinking out loud.

Thanks for the link!



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Michelle129th
 


A request to seal court records is done to protect information that the police arent keen on having the public see for the sole purpose of jeopradizing possible evidence / suspects.

While court records are a matter of public record, that usually comes after the case is resolved.

A probable cause statement that is submitted for an arrest warrant or a search warrant is a matter of public record and can be obtained by media through a freedom of information request / sunshine law compliance.

Since an arrest warrant / search warrant are required by law to be as specific as possible, it will contain information that is usually integral to the investigation. A request to seal those documents is normal based on certain circumstances.

The court must weigh the right of the state to conduct their investigation, the rights of the people who might be named in the warrant and the right of the public to know.


edit on 21-11-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 


If ten years go by and never a trace of baby Lisa and in that time it's shown that her parents probably had nothing to do with it, I would be much more inclined to think along the lines of illum. baby stealing story. I do not discount it totally. I just think of all the possibilities, it's low on the list right now. But I won't discount it totally. I cannot until she's found discount anything that's possible. But you know as well as I if that is what happened, she has in essence vanished for good.

(Unless otherwise stated most of the below is conjecture and theory from learned facts but not ‘facts’ pertaining to Deborah Bradley as much as supposition).

The only question I’d ask there is about ‘recall’ and trauma induced ‘amnesia’ - that isn’t really amnesia more than deep repression.

Why do I ask?

Deborah already went through hell as a child.

Children learn very early how to ‘get away’ from pain, abuse, trauma, heartache.

This condition isn’t ‘lost’ when children who’ve been traumatized as youngsters reach adulthood.

If something traumatic happened in the ‘Brad-Win’ house - something Deborah might have fallen victim to herself - (yes I did say that) - meaning, sure, she was drunk, but, during that time when she was ‘out of her whit's’ (as they say) she (might have) found her baby deceased due to nothing more than an accident?

I can see her easily returning to the ‘fugue state’ as she quite possibly did as a child. As she possibly if not probably did when she lost her mother.

From there? Memories can be suppressed for YEARS.

In a nutshell.

- Horrific emotional trauma suffered in adult life by an adult armed with very little or no copping skills.
- Same adult reverts to poor coping skills learned as a child - copping skills induced by trauma = It didn’t happen.

Bury it all. Every bit.

There’s cases of such incidents and not so infrequent as you might think - especially involving Adult Survivors of Childhood Sexual Assault.

Am I saying Deborah was molested/raped as a child. No, because that would be speculation. But we do know she lost her mother at an early age, and, under ‘suspicious’ circumstances. (Links to this information already posted in the thread).

So - Could Deborah have woken from a stupor to find her child dead? Could have happened.
Could she then have done whatever was needed to ‘get rid of the pain’? Could have happened.
Then, falling back on ‘tools’ she learned as a child, could she have buried this incident bone deep? Could be.

Something to think about.

So I think that’s what happened?

No, but it’s on the board now as we’re all throwing theories into the theory bin.

peace



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 


There are a few different ways law enforcement can conduct a search of a person, car or house.

First and foremost is requesting consent. If the Police ask the Erwins to search the house, and the Erwins agree, no warrant is needed (same for car or themselves). Because the search is voluntary the consenting party can at anytime stop the search.


Hypothetical -
If the cops were in the bedroom and notice something that the homeowners may not want the police to see, they can end the search and the police must comply.

The exceptions to that rule is when law enforcement can articulate that by leaving the premisis critical evidence may be lost / destroyed. In that instance law enforcement can technically seize the house and any evidence they have already discovered. They cannot continue their search and must wait for a search warrant to be authorized in order to continue the search.

Also, search warrants are time restricted. If a search warrant is issued, it must be absolutely specific, down to the address, a description of the house, what corner its located on etc etc etc. Search warrants are restricted by time simply because of the burden it places on the people who own the residence. Any items seized during a search warrant are cateloged and once completed a copy of that list is left, in addition to the search warrant, are let in the house / with the homeowner.

If an initial search turns up evidence, that later on leads to another piece of evidence in the house, the police must submit a new probable cause statement requesting a new search warrant.

Law Enforcement can only search areas that can contain the item they are looking for. If the police are looking for say a refridgerator, they cannot look in any area that could not hold the refridgerator.

Interrogations are along the same lines as well with Miranda.



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 10:56 AM
link   
At first I thought they were misquoting something said in sarcasm...such as "i've been interviewed by everyone from the pope to the president himself" type of thing. But when I researched it myself I found this webpage

U.S. SECRET SERVICE PARTNERSHIP WITH THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING AND EXPLOITED CHILDREN

As part of the 1994 Crime Bill, Congress mandated the U.S. Secret Service to provide forensic/technical assistance in matters involving missing and exploited children. The Secret Service offers this assistance to federal, state and local law enforcement agencies and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. On April 30, 2003, President George W. Bush signed the PROTECT Act of 2003, known as the "Amber Alert Bill", which gave full authorization to the U.S. Secret Service in this area.


So it doesn't seem it's a weird or shady thing that the SS is involved.

To schmae, the whole piece of the search warrant that talks about fetus/deceased etc I *believe* is because the cadaver dog made the positive hit. I would think to LE that meant Lisa could possibly have been killed in the home and may still be in the home or on/near the property. Remember the search warrant was requested AFTER the cadaver dog hit...it wasn't part of the search warrant search.

My feelings on the "not conducive" statement is that LE wanted to make sure the parents/attorneys didn't stop them after say the 12th hour...or limit them to where they could search inside or out. This was a very extensive 17 hr search...if the parents had walked in halfway through and told LE to beat it, it could've left a lot of stones unturned. I think it was just a precaution on LE's part to make sure they could do, and finish, a very thorough search

Michelle



posted on Nov, 21 2011 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 




Theories and speculation are fine - its the same method law enforcement uses when doing an investigation. The difference I see though is people seem to move from that to accusing law enforcement when somthing comes up in the case that they dont understand.


Is it Ok to question law enforcement? As much as I want to believe they are doing everything possible.. it does appear at times they have dismissed clues.

I have also said that we don't know everything police have on this case.. and I would assume that if they had enough evidence on the irwin's they would have pressed some kind of charges by now...but then again they could be waiting for more evidence.




There has been shadow organizations throughout history, dating all the way back to when Adam and Eve were kept out of the loop on the apple. Being kept out of the loop doesnt mean sinister intentions or wrong doing though.


This is your explanation for the sinister events caused by people in shadow organizations??? ok...




Again I understand, however I fail to see the relevance in bringing up some of these examples. What I am reading, and please correct me if im wrong, but it seems that you are suggesting the police are untrustworthy simpy because of other scandals / coverups / conspiracies. I can prevent you with a list of conspiraies and coverups that the Erwins would fit to a T.


Yes..I am suggesting that SOME police can be very corrupt and untrustworthy....and we have proof of that..

and yes you can present all types of conspiracies and coverups that fit the Irwin's to a T.

So..that being said.. there is evidence of both.. BUT.. if it were to be true that someone within the system is actually corrupt, and works with other high level "secret society" insiders.. it would be much more likely that that truth would never be seen by the public.. while if the conspiracy were to be on the part of the parents.. there would be a better chance of it being revealed to the public.




Every organization will have people that should not be there. I agree there is always the possibility, however possibility should not be construed as fact or actually occuring. Its an ongoing investigation, which means its none of the medias or publics business until such time the case is resolved. This means you dont get to see all of the facts / info collected.


I have said previously we don't have all the facts or info.. and I have NEVER said that the possibility of illuminati , or any secret society being involved was in fact occuring.. did I?



You really need to learn the difference between speculation and accusation because once again, not only have you stereotyped here, you are once again accusing. Not only are you accusing, you are doing so in a blanket manner, which is nothing ignorance.


Excuse me.. but I think you are accusing me of accusing ..when in fact I am speculating....so please stop with your blanket type accusations.. because they are nothing more than ignorance in my eyes as well...




Since you insist on blaming the police let me ask this - What if the erwins are at fault? Have you ever really considered that as a possibility? If so, it must have gotten lost in the blame game on law enforcement.


Talk about blinders on.. you're accusing me of a blame game..when all I suggested was that there was a possibility of cover up..and why..and who could be involved .

and yes.. if you bothered to take the time to read I have acknowledged that the Irwin's could be guilty..as well as other possibilities.. I just wasn't ready to lynch mob them for it..and if you bother to look at my ALL of my posts you would see that I'm not blaming the police either.. but I do have questions.. and hopefully they will be answered some day.

So take off your blinders and let me have my speculations and theories.. and quit accusing me of a blame game.. because you are doing exactly what you say you don't care for..and the proof is in my posts.. if you care to search.


edit on 21-11-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-11-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
41
<< 138  139  140    142  143  144 >>

log in

join