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: 151
41
<< 148  149  150    152  153  154 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 





Thanks Gabby, I'm reading your link now.


That is Davids link schmae.. sorry..but have to correct you..I can't take credit for links he provides..




posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by gabby2011
 


Ah, it was in your post I thought? See how HORRIBLE the memory can be Gabby ?


It is interesting though. There was a time when no body meant no charges even. Not so much anymore with science and all the new tests they can do.

Does anyone still think Lisa is alive? I know we all HOPE she is, but does anyone believe that she i s?



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 


You didn't answer my question schmae.. Don't you think police would have evidence from the families phone conversations.. on their phones?

and yes..I agree everyones memory can get a little faulty.. best to just apologize to David for not remembering , instead of pointing out how memory is faulty in general

I will say some peoples memory is better than others..




edit on 25-11-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by schmae
reply to post by gabby2011
 


Ah, it was in your post I thought? See how HORRIBLE the memory can be Gabby ?


It is interesting though. There was a time when no body meant no charges even. Not so much anymore with science and all the new tests they can do.

Does anyone still think Lisa is alive? I know we all HOPE she is, but does anyone believe that she i s?



with a kidnapping, quite possible in my opinion. conflicting eye witness reports is particularly odd to me. either truly odd or revealing that investigators were not able to hone in on similarities... similarities which still might exist despite conflicting stories. that in itself is something to dig to pieces, rather than feeling it as a failure of perception. furthermore, if specific numbers are requested by investigators, for something like weight... that is not a good thing to ask people who are not professional weight guessers.

many weight reports will come back conflicting if they ask for numbers. if that was the case, then it is very likely the weight issue is not describing different people. there must be some similarities somewhere. if it was a real kidnapping and they took the child by hand... does it not make sense that they might try changing her clothes "on the fly"...?? the mother should know exactly what she put on the baby.... the kidnapper would want to change that first and foremost.

i should read more on the facts of this case. I read the first link... did not get much from that though.... get no feelings from it.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Well well. I just found an interesting bit of dirt on Taco Joe...
talk about corruption, scandal, unethical, illegal activities and the company one keeps!

Now I have NO CLUE yet if this "Gang Land" newsletter is a reputable source, or a bullcrap tabloid. I am not saying this article is proof. I just thought it was interesting and justifies KC's feeling he's just a sleaze. Ew.


Get a load of this:


Biz-Man: I Hired Tacopina For$20G; He Bedded My Wife

Red hot attorney Joseph Tacopina, who has been scoring big wins in court lately, was once accused of scoring with a client’s wife. The episode led to a divorce action in which the client – who had hired the handsome Tacopina to handle a federal grand jury subpoena – accused the barrister of bedding his wife instead of battling the feds,Gang Land has learned.

The lawsuit was filed by the owner of a well-known Queens eatery who paid Tacopina a $20,000 fee to represent him – not as a subject or target of an investigation – but as a witness before the panel. Gang Land is withholding the name of the restaurateur, who has no criminal record, and is clearly a victim here.

According to court papers, the businessman alleged that two months afterhe paid the attorney his hefty retainer fee, his wife of five years began meeting Tacopina in Manhattan hotels and having an affair with the always well-coiffed attorney.

In his lawsuit, the husband alleged that his wife committed adultery with the attorney numerous times, including on August 8, 2002, when they enjoyed a tryst at a Manhattan hotel. Tacopina denied the allegations. But informed sources say that five days after the assignation, on August 13, 2002, the attorney agreed to refund the entire $20,000 fee on condition that the businessman “forego any claim or grievance” against Tacopina.

In the agreement, obtained by Gang Land, Tacopina stated: “I am only agreeing to
in order to avoid any unnecessary and irksome dispute at some later stage.”

The restaurant owner apparently made good on his promise. According to the Appellate Division of State Supreme Court, there are no publicly filed reprimands or censures against Tacopina regarding the above incident, or any other complaint or grievance that may have been filed against him since he was admitted to the bar in 1992.

Gang Land left detailed messages for both Tacopina and his attorney, Michael Ross, regarding the episode, but neither responded to requests for comment.

Tacopina and his attorney also stayed mum last week when Gang Land called regarding assertions that in April, 2007 he began cooperating with the feds against lawyer Ronald Fischetti (left) in a fee-splitting and tax evasion probe. Fischetti branded the allegations as “not true.”No charges resulted from the two-year-long federal grand jury investigation, but word of Tacopina’s cooperation spread on the criminal defense gossip vine. Since then, wiseguys have shunned the flashy Tacopina despite major courtroom wins like the sensational acquittal of a police officer of rape charges last month. Sources say that Tacopina implicated Fischetti in wrongdoing at the same time he agreed to testify against his former client, scandal-plagued ex-NYPD police commissioner Bernard Kerik.


The article is really short. I omitted the bit that cited the restaurateur's statements so as not to be c/p entire articles here..
the link is from a 3rd party site linking to Gang Land newsletter, apparently a true-crime re the Mafia world. The Gang Land site does not have their archives posted back to June of this year, which is the date of the above artilce (6/17/11).

www.scribd.com...

So, this past spring, 4 months prior to Lisa's disappearance, this article was published alleging Tacopina is known to
*have had an affair with the wife of a client who hired him for advice prior to being a subpoenaed grand jury witness
*have his own attorney
*is known to be connected to mafia mobsters
*has cooperated with feds against high-profile racketeers
*bribed the client by 'refunding' his consultation fee in order to shush him
*has assisted a known corrupt NYPD chief
*was shunned by 'wise-guys'
*managed to keep his record clean despite all of his illegal and nefarious activities

Really cool dude, eh?
What an absolute horror of a slime-ball. Ick. Ewwwwww. *shudders to think he ever stepped foot in this city*

Ugh. If this story is true even in part (i.e. not just a tabloid smear like the Enquirer, etc), it certainly does reflect VERY poorly on the choice made by Lisa's parents. And improves Cyndy Short's standing, in my opinion.
Good grief.

Also....it even provides a missing link between mafia mobsters and Lisa's parents.

And I will admit right here and now that in light of this little tidbit, gabby's speculations about horrible underground rings being involved doesn't seem quite as preposterous as it has to date!!
edit on 25-11-2011 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by gabby2011

I will say some peoples memory is better than others..


Like Jaycee Dugard's stepfather. He had amazingly gotten the facts right. All those years he was afraid there was something he missed. Considering the trauma of the moment he was able to recall accurate info. For some I think trauma can bring clarity...I believe it's probably a survival instinct.

Don't know how much it helped as he was always considered somewhat suspicious. In his heart he knew what happened unfortunately the fact it didn't bring Jaycee home haunts him to this day. At least he knows he did get it right.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Here's a little research into the author of that Gang Land newsletter, Jerry Capeci.

Gerald "Jerry" Capeci (born June 30, 1944 in Brooklyn, New York) is an American journalist and author who specializes in coverage of the Five Mafia crime families of New York City. Capeci has been described by news organizations, such as CNN and BBC, as an expert on the American Mafia.[1][2]


en.wikipedia.org...

He is published in a bunch of NY papers, and the Huff Post. He is touted by CNN and BBC (all 3 of the latter of which have been questioned here on ATS as to their rankings as "tabloids" or "credible unbiased journalism.")

Do we know if he should be taken seriously? Or is he a tabloidster? Anyone know anything about his credentials?



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Dav1d
 


LOL - sources from the PDF "Preston was investigated by Geraldo Rivera (early 1980)" and
"(National Enquirer Jan. 6, 2004"
Dude.....do you have any research from RECENT times (and from credible resources)?

OK, I admit the LE academy I graduated from was quite some time ago......but this stuff you are putting out is 20 to 30 years old! (many things have advanced since that time)



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   
I found some interesting info posted by family members.. which might be of interest to some..

www.kansas.com...



Netz shifts easily from streaming tears to fist-clenching anger — against the media, the police and others who disbelieve his daughter in the disappearance of her baby.



"People are judging whether Debbie's crying enough, or if she's crying too much, or if her lip curls up in some body language secret, or if Jeremy doesn't show enough emotion." Another deep sigh. "This whole thing is insanity times 10."



"Nobody knows how they'd react until this happens. I'm sick of hearing, 'If they really cared they'd be doing so and so.' ... And through it all, little Lisa is out there somewhere, that's what gets me." His voice goes silent as he sobs.



That's why Netz discounts the theory that she would try to hide an accidental or negligent death of Lisa. "She would have picked that baby up and run up and down the street screaming for help," he said of his daughter. "No, she didn't do this. She's not hiding anything. She's told the whole world about her drinking ...


from her ex mother inlaw

"I miss Debbie. She was a good mother ... There's just no way she could have done this, and she's just not smart enough — not that she's dumb — but she couldn't cover up something like this so well."



Not all of Debbie's family rallied around her. Her uncle, Johnny Chivalette III, called her twice from Delaware, the second time to ask her to confess.
He'd already called the Kansas City Police Department and had a conference call with four detectives.

Some family members think Chivalette just represents more of the dysfunction. Indeed, he concedes he has served time in prison.



The blogs have been brutal, too. One called for the immediate execution of Bradley and Irwin. Garbage, says Netz. All the family members have been hounded by national media. Netz has stopped watching television in disgust. He has angry words for the police, too.

He says officers called Debbie white trash, told her to cut the innocence act, that it was obvious she'd killed Lisa. They said they'd found the body, showed her burnt clothes, he says.

"Then, they told Jeremy that Debbie had confessed to them that Lisa wasn't his, even though she looks just like him! Eleven hours they talked with both Jeremy and Debbie and when they asked for a break, the police announced they weren't cooperating!"


if the police actually called her white trash.. thats just incredibly wrong.. but I guess if people who work in family therapy and "behavioral sciences" can call her ignorant trash ..who knows how police actually refer to her.
Now the police deny this it says in this article..but..they are allowed to say ANTHING they want in an interview.


Netz feels his daughter would have cracked if guilty. "If they had anything, anything on Debbie they'd arrested her by now." His hand clenches. "But they have nothing." Baby Lisa is out there, somewhere, Netz says.


ok..so here we have family members saying how they feel..and what they were told about what went on with police questioning..

Where are these family members that Debbie called to help hide evidence??..please.. someone.. from what I have read from family members..nobody thinks she could lie about this..

If indeed the police did say these things to debbie.. is it any wonder she doesn't want to be interviewed separately?






edit on 25-11-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by gabby2011
 



but I guess if people who work in family therapy and "behavioral sciences" can call her ignorant trash ..who knows how police actually refer to her

I am retired, gabby.
I am also not in any way involved with this family, the police, or you.

Keep it up. Spend some more time finding people's one-liners from 7 weeks ago when they first got involved in this thread and stated their opinion, and then ignoring everything else they have said. It'll getcha lots of brownie points! Perhaps you are hoping to build a reputation as a criminal defense advocate, and if so, good on ya!

Remember to NEVER acknowledge when those same people -- whom you have abused, misquoted, misconstrued and attacked -- have conceded things to you, have not quoted your vicious profanity in u2us, have tried repeatedly to come to some understanding. Way to go.
Your persuasion skills truly are a marvel. And your debating and compromising skills are even more so. I congratulate you on being one of the most unreasonable and uninteresting persons with whom I have ever engaged in conversation. Gosh.

Now, to change the subject for some ON TOPIC research regarding how guilty people and innocent people react to difficult interrogation. (Heh, actually, come to think of it, in a sick and twisted way it IS the same subject!)
Understanding Denials of the Innocent

The innocent say so.
Those who lie have a need to lie.
These are two principles that must be embraced if there will be understanding of investigations.


The essay talks about several cases in recent history (Anthony, Ramsey, Knox, Dunn, and the mothers of missing Sky and Lisa), as well as a technique called SCAN that is used to judge a person's responses to questioning.

The innocent have an attitude towards the interrogator or interviewer; one of wanting the investigator to succeed, whereas the guilty are in a place of opposition or competition with the investigator, wanting him to fail. This is something that can be subtle, or can take a strong realm. They are on opposite sides and it becomes like a chess match of sorts.

The innocent often 'root for' or 'cheer for' the investigators and will stay with them, seeking to almost 'inspire' them to be 'successful' in the job of investigating.

The interviewer/interrogator can sense this rooting for, or rooting against him.



The innocent often do not wait to be asked, "did you do it?", they come out, without sensitivity indicators, and say so.

They say so early, and they say so often. Even under interrogation, statistically, the innocent align themselves and do not bristle under accusations, but seek to cause the investigator to continue to dig, as the innocence within them is coupled with the desire (especially in missing child cases) to find their loved one, at any personal cost. The innocent will gladly take the blame if it means recovering the child; this is the self--sacrificing attitude towards the innocent. They do not tire, nor do they seek to end the flow of information by ever saying "and that's all I know" as they lose sleep seeking to recall any minute detail that might help.

They 'root' for the interrogator to succeed in his job and do not wait to be asked, "did you do it?" as their innocence and drive for their loved one propels them to say so.

The guilty set themselves up in competition to the investigator and are in opposition.

The innocent do not wait to be asked if they did it.


I'm thinking they probably don't hire high-profile sleazy attorneys who defended mobsters until the time the mobsters stopped using them; or who defend corrupt police; or defend men who make young women disappear; or who are tied to bribes, adultery with a client's wife, and keeping their own records artificially "clean" by calling in favors.

edit on 25-11-2011 by wildtimes because: to add link



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 




I am retired, gabby. I am also not in any way involved with this family, the police, or you.


Whats that have to do with your attitude towards debbie.. and your posts about her .. you don't have to fake it anymore?..and you can call people ignorant trash... and go on to say that baby is not happy ..not one happy picture of her.?

As far as you not being involved this family..the police.. or even me ( secretly looking into my private life) .. hmmm..not so sure on that.. me thinks you protest too much..



Remember to NEVER acknowledge when those same people -- whom you have abused, misquoted, misconstrued and attacked -- have conceded things to you, have not quoted your vicious profanity in u2us, have tried repeatedly to come to some understanding. Way to go.


what vicious profanity??.. tell me??.. because you were rude to me in a u2u ,and I said you could stick your opinions of me you know where? OMG..what vicious profanity..




I'm thinking they probably don't hire high-profile sleazy attorneys who defended mobsters until the time the mobsters stopped using them; or who defend corrupt police; or defend men who make young women disappear; or who are tied to bribes, adultery with a client's wife, and keeping their own records artificially "clean" by calling in favors.


oh I see..its come down to attacking the character of the lawyer now.. and that will help baby Lisa how? seems to me some are trying much too hard to discredit anything about the irwins..right down to their lawyer.

As far as how guilty and innocent people act being questioned.. if the police did indeed fabricate lies to try and coerce a confession out of a person who knows they are innocent...and were so narrowly focused on pinning it on her.. I guess they may have to look at some of their perfectly "legal" tactics of such harsh lies...and trickery to abstract a confession.

Really don't care what you think of my debating skills wildtimes..I'm not here to try and impress anybody with that..like some are.

I'm in this thread to find the truth...and the reason why I have not submitted links is because many many of them have had info that gets refuted anyhow.. so they seem untrustworthy.

I was looking for proof for how the family (who supposedly was called) had to say..instead I find family..right down to Jeremy's sister..totally supporting the Irwins.

What next wildtimes..you going to go dig up some dirt on all of them now?








edit on 25-11-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by gabby2011
 


Here is my answer .................I don't know Gab. The proof the calls happened doesn't tell what she SAID in those calls. Could it be she never told police the phones didn't work? And only told that to the press? I don't know why she would do this, but it's possible I guess. I don't know where a witness statement falls on the evidence ladder. I would think it's good for getting more information and pointing the investigation in the right direction. But as far as standing up in court, maybe not quite solid enough. I didn't read your link yet, but I intend to !



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


'''I'm thinking they probably don't hire high-profile sleazy attorneys who defended mobsters until the time the mobsters stopped using them; or who defend corrupt police; or defend men who make young women disappear; or who are tied to bribes, adultery with a client's wife, and keeping their own records artificially "clean" by calling in favors. ''''

I have the strongest feeling they did not HIRE this guy so to speak. I would think in their wildest dreams they could never afford a guy like this EVEN if they were looking to hire someone. I think he's probably got out 'feelers' looking for sensational cases he can take pro bono to further his own reputation. And I'm sure like most of us, when a very famous lawyer comes asking if you need help you accept and gratefully. The pity is since then it's become the JOE show and I think he's making them look more guilty than if they had stuck witha local attorney,,, Not necessarily Cyndy Short either .



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Isn't it true the only PROOF of police LYING to the family comes from the family's mouth? Deb's told her brother the police called her 'white trash'? Deb's told the press the police told her she failed polygraph? A lot of the info about what went on in the deb/jeremy/police interviews is coming from deb or jeremy's mouth. I'm not ready to believe them on all those points. Could be the police lied? Sure it could. But when the only source is someone that we KNOW has lied, I'd have to take a neutral stance. We cannot call Deb a liar without proof? But we can call police liars without proof?

But while we're at it what's a good well known publicly used term for a mom who hasn't enough money to pay her cell phone bill but can afford a big box of wine to drink? Drinks it to the point of blacking out and admits to doing so a few times a week?



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 





But while we're at it what's a good well known publicly used term for a mom who hasn't enough money to pay her cell phone bill but can afford a big box of wine to drink? Drinks it to the point of blacking out and admits to doing so a few times a week?


yep you're right..certainly makes her look like an alcoholic.. which she may be.. but does that make her guilty of killing her child?..

there are many parents who have addictions.. geez..some smoke cigarettes in their homes while children are in the home?

Does that make them guilty of harming their child?..some would say so I guess..

should we charge all parents with child neglect who choose to smoke in their homes?



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 


Woops Wild, I know you don't think they "HIRED" Joe T. What I meant was I doubt they would ever even look for a guy like him. I think he inserted himself in their lives and they probably thought or may still think it'sa good thing.



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by gabby2011
 


The story of Deborah Bradley is certainly heart breaking. If we remove what we know or think we know of her in the last 7 weeks and just look at the life before, it's really sad. I like to think of people like her as a child. When you see a little child being neglected or abused and losing a parent early and whatever else may have happened, you KNOW they will struggle as an adult. Do they have the skills and presence of mind to say '' maybe i shouldnt' have kids before i get myself sorted out real good with counseling'' ? Of course not. I'm sure no one in her family thought , after her mom's death, that the kids needed some grief counseling at the LEAST. So while I cannot condone anything she's done , I can certainly understand how she came about. Wanting to drink to release herself from the prison of her mind a few times a week is likely the only way she could cope. It's a shame the way things have gone now for her and I am sure in her own mind , in the quiet times, she feels absolute despair. And for that , I am sad for her
Even if she harmed Lisa on accident I am sad for her. Her actions since have made her look guilty of WORSE than an accident but I don't think it's more than an accident.
Guess the holidays have me feeling a little extra sentimental. I do believe she needs justice absolutely for wahteve she's done and I do believe she is hiding KEY facts at this time. But I think the whole story of baby Lisa started with teh tragedy that happened to a baby Deborah many years ago



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by schmae
reply to post by schmae
 


Woops Wild, I know you don't think they "HIRED" Joe T. What I meant was I doubt they would ever even look for a guy like him. I think he inserted himself in their lives and they probably thought or may still think it'sa good thing.

You know, I'm certain THEY did not hire hiim, but I'm not quite clear on whether he's pro bono or he was contacted. I'm almost certain he was contacted "by someone connected to the family, but I don't wanna talk bout that"...Let me check....was the first GMA interview w/o Stanton there, i think. IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY lol

Hey!! Check this out: Former Intelligence Asset and Mercenary Operative Here For Your Questions thread just started 3 days ago!! We could ask him about secret society knowledge. (Dont' know if he'd know anything ... but it's a new resource to be considered)

edit on 25-11-2011 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 08:14 PM
link   
this one is from Oct 17...

“The parents’ level of cooperation hasn’t been what it needs to be in order for us to find this girl,” said Kansas City Police Capt. Steve Young. “Should they change their minds, the door is always open.”

Police last interviewed Lisa’s parents Oct. 6. That same day — two days after Lisa vanished — Bradley refused additional police questioning or contact unless it went through a lawyer, sources close to the investigation told The Kansas City Star. Jeremy Irwin has insisted he be interviewed with Bradley present, the sources said.

In the days since, police have had trouble reaching the parents to discuss tips in the case or talk to them informally. In one instance, the parents said they could not talk to police because they already had scheduled a TV interview with a national outlet, sources said.

Although police have had brief contacts with Lisa’s parents in recent days, detectives have been unable to ask Bradley about inconsistencies in what she has told the national media outlets, including her changing timeline for the night her baby disappeared.

sourced on www.thedailypoint.com... to kansascity.com, but to try to go to the original it says page expired.

the next day, 18 October: Baby Lisa’s Mom Tells Megyn Kelly She ‘Doesn’t Need’ a Lawyer Before Hiring Prominent Attorney Joe Tacopina; Is Wealthy Benefactor Picking Up the Tab?

After telling America Live anchor Megyn Kelly over the weekend that they had no need for an attorney, the parents of Baby Lisa lawyered up early this week, hiring high-profile attorney Joe Tacopina. While Tacopina refuses to reveal who’s paying him for his services, Megyn told her audience Tuesday that she has spoken with a wealthy benefactor who claims she’s picking up at least some of the charges associated with the case – in particular, the reward.

The unidentified woman told Megyn that she’s offering her financial backing simply because she’s a mother herself and wants to assist in finding the missing 11-month-old.

Prior to the couple retaining Tacopina, Megyn asked Lisa’s mother, Deborah Bradley, in a sit-down interview why she didn’t seek out legal help as soon as authorities began pointing the finger in her direction.

“I thought it was part of the investigation,” she answered. “They’re always going to look at the closest family … I see it on TV. I figured, they’re gonna do it and then they’ll be done with it.”



Consistent with the new developments in the case, many questions remain unanswered. It is unclear how a modest American family could afford a high-profile New York lawyer like Joe Tacopina as well as the New York private investigator, Bill Stanton, hired to help find 11-month-old Lisa. An unnamed wealthy benefactor claims to be paying for Stanton's fees and has also offered a $100,000 reward for the return of Lisa or the conviction of those involved in her disappearance. It is unclear who is paying Tacopina's fees.

from m.ibtimes.com... November 1st.

I'll see if it's been updated since....
edit on 25-11-2011 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



edit on 25-11-2011 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Wonder if a family member, perhaps one that she called that NIGHT in question, contacted JOE T? But he would have to get loads of requests like that. He had to WANT to take it on. maybe after seeing Deb talk about the drinking on tv?



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 148  149  150    152  153  154 >>

log in

join