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: 172
41
<< 169  170  171    173  174  175 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by luciddream
 


Can anyone sum up the story please, i believe i haven't been keeping up since a "man" was caught on camera.

There's a missing baby, Lisa, two months later.
We really don't know any more now than we did when she went missing.
There's TONS of distractions, and 'strange characters' and whatever, but, it all boils down to Lisa is gone on the night her father went on his first night job, the same night the mother got (supposedly) snockered and though the house showed signs of a break in - the police discounted an intruder and all witnesses later that claimed to have seen a 'man walking around with a baby'. The last person who supposedly saw Lisa was a four year old. The parents still refuse to sit down and talk to the police separately, but, they don't mind taking money from a new 'donate fund' directed at helping them find Lisa.

peace

edit on 5-12-2011 by silo13 because: spelling




posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 


Well NO kidnapper would take a baby into another room , remove her clothes or change her clothes right at the FOOT of the bed where her mother was sleeping and then leave with her.

What may be is that in a panic Deb noticed she's not breathing and removed her clothes trying to administer cpr or something? I'm just thinking out loud of why the clothes would still be there? So her clothes last worn did NOT leave the house with her. So anyone walking around with her outside WOULD have a baby with only a 'diaper ' on. Note there was not a DIAPER listed in the items the dog 'hit' on.

I mean, in a way, this somewhat validates the eyewitness sighting of baby in only a diaper.
edit on 5-12-2011 by schmae because: spelling



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 

Well NO kidnapper would take a baby into another room , remove her clothes or change her clothes right at the FOOT of the bed where her mother was sleeping and then leave with her.

What may be is that in a panic Deb noticed she's not breathing and removed her clothes trying to administer cpr or something? I'm just thinking out loud of why the clothes would still be there? So her clothes last worn did NOT leave the house with her. So anyone walking around with her outside WOULD have a baby with only a 'diaper ' on. Note there was not a DIAPER listed in the items the dog 'hit' on.

At the risk of posting a one-liner?
Exactly.
This is curdling my blood. Seriously. Mom panics - for whatever reason - and 'strips' her baby before 'getting rid of her'.
Hey, that's presuming - I know - But what the hell, it's not like Deborah will tell us any different!!!

peace



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 



Well NO kidnapper would take a baby into another room ,

And no kidnapper is going to break into a house with the LIGHTS ON, or, break into a house and TURN THE LIGHTS ON, or break into a house and break a screen to make it look like that's how he/she broke in.
I mean we could go on with these 'a kidnapper wouldn't to it' all day - and be bloody right.
It's time someone SPOKE UP - and we know who that SOMEONE IS!
peace



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by silo13
And for OIO, it sounds to me like someone changed her out of what she was last wearing into...something else...or nothing...



edit on 5-12-2011 by silo13 because: (no reason given)


And that's what has me confused!!! One of the major things listed in Amber alerts is what the child was wearing when he/she goes missing.

So they tell the police she was wearing purple shirt/shorts. Yet the purple shorts are still at the house. Seems to me that would be noted and asked about. My mind is racing trying to come up with a good explanation for this.

Also, didn't Deborah claim the police showed her burned clothes??

What the heck???

OiO



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by luciddream
 


I'll try to make it brief... but that will be difficult

Baby Lisa Irwin missing from her crib in the middle of the night 2 months ago now.
Dad was at work until 4 a.m . , comes home , sees baby missing, wakes up mom and they look around
and call 911 and say someone stole her.
Mom admits on tv some days later that she was drunk and could have blacked out.
Confusion as to last time baby Lisa was checked on in her bed. sometime between 6:30 and 10:30 is the last
KNOWN sighting of a live Lisa.
Lisa was sick that night and fussy so mom put her to bed early.
Neighbor and mom and possibly 2 or 3 others sat outside drinking until 10:30 when mom passed out.
The sightings of a man walking with baby have all been discounted by police.
The family says their cell phones were all turned off due to non payment.
Police looking through phone records see a phone call was made by one of their phones about midnight.
THe recipient of this alleged phone call claims NO KNOWLEDG of anything to do with it.
But this recipient is suspected of being into drugs and possibly a dealer.
Mom's uncle now claims on FB that mom called family members that night and say Lisa had had an accident and wanted 'help' from her family, presumably to dispose or hide the baby's body.
Family lawyered up several weeks ago and are no longer talking to police.
Two older boys in the house, one mom's and one dad's talked with police twice.
Mom said she faile a polygraph question of what happened to baby lisa.
One of the older boy's biological mom is now filing a suit for custody of the boy.

I think that's the main parts.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by OneisOne
 



Also, didn't Deborah claim the police showed her burned clothes??

Yes, and at this point that makes no sense unless - UNLESS what Deborah 'reported' Lisa wearing was actually the last thing she really was wearing - alive. (See the difference?)
From there 'someone' changed Lisa into 'something else'.
The 'something else' is what was found 'burned'...
Oh this is just disgusting isn't it.



On another note it does clear up all the talk about the dog hitting on the 'rug'!
We went over and over this in the thread. My conclusion was - a seasoned police officer would not have reported the dog hit 'near the bed' if the dog hit 'on the rug'. 'Near the bed' confirms the 'glow worm toy' the 'Car's theme blanket' etc. Exactly why no 'piece of carpet' was taken for analysis. They didn't need to. They had what the dog 'hit on' in the items 'by the bed' listed in the report.




posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 


Where did they find the burned clothes?

The 911 dispatch audio I posted had fire responding to a dumpster fire not to far from the home.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by luciddream
Can anyone sum up the story please, i believe i haven't been keeping up since a "man" was caught on camera.

Thanks in advance!


I doubt you will find unbiased facts among many on this thread..If you want the closest most unbiased facts..check Michelles links..




Baby Lisa Irwin missing from her crib in the middle of the night 2 months ago now. Dad was at work until 4 a.m . , comes home , sees baby missing, wakes up mom and they look around and call 911 and say someone stole her.
Mom admits on tv some days later that she was drunk and could have blacked out. Confusion as to last time baby Lisa was checked on in her bed. sometime between 6:30 and 10:30 is the last KNOWN sighting of a live Lisa. Lisa was sick that night and fussy so mom put her to bed early. Neighbor and mom and possibly 2 or 3 others sat outside drinking until 10:30 when mom passed out. The sightings of a man walking with baby have all been discounted by police. The family says their cell phones were all turned off due to non payment
. Police looking through phone records see a phone call was made by one of their phones about midnight. THe recipient of this alleged phone call claims NO KNOWLEDG of anything to do with it. But this recipient is suspected of being into drugs and possibly a dealer. Mom's uncle now claims on FB that mom called family members that night and say Lisa had had an accident and wanted 'help' from her family, presumably to dispose or hide the baby's body. Family lawyered up several weeks ago and are no longer talking to police. Two older boys in the house, one mom's and one dad's talked with police twice. Mom said she faile a polygraph question of what happened to baby lisa. One of the older boy's biological mom is now filing a suit for custody of the boy. I think that's the main parts.


The above is a prime example of some very important info left out..

One of the phones that was missing made a call to a meagan wright, who is allegedly reported to have been going out with a handy man that knew the irwins..and had been in their house before for repairs..and was known to wonder around that neighborhood.

Someone conveniently forgot some very important info in the reply above.

As well.. there are assumptions that Debbie phones someone in her family to ask for help.. and was told to call police.. but this is by a disgruntled family member who has not spoken to Lisa for years.

I find it extremely difficult that .. someone who has been referred to as "passing out" in the above analogy could possibly cover all the tracks so efficiently...and if police have that kind of evidence from cadaver dogs..why have they not pressed charges? I also find it extremely difficult to think that family members would cover for her..if they indeed did tell her to call police.

There have been a couple witnessing a man carrying a baby at approximately 12 am that morning not to far from the Irwin house.. where there was also a fire in a dumpster... shortly after .

Like I said before..please don't rely on what some members here have assumed as reality.. check out the links for yourself..and as far as I see it Michelle has been the only one giving links from all sides.. and not doing it to point an accusing finger..

I'm not sure where she has gone..because I really miss her unbiased input..

There is way more to this story than in the reply you received.

I find it odd when some suggest that because police have said that none of the baby carrying witnesses have any validity.. that this is the truth.. yet when police have said that they do not suspect the Irwins in this case... that is somehow a lie.. to try and force the hand of justice on the Irwins..

Have fun trying to get to the truth ..I wish you luck..

I hope the truth comes out in this case.. eventually... time will tell...but please don't count on it being made available here..you'll have to check out some links for yourself.. here is a link with many good stories.

www.nbcactionnews.com...

There are many videos on this page.. and I find it interesting that even the former lawyer who left the case.. is very convinced the Irwins are innocent.

She apparently left the case because she did not think the boys should be interviewed , and disagreed with the new lawyer.


Tons of info on that page.. so please check it out.. and don't make the mistake of taking the "facts" on this case from biased people..

here is one that might be of interest..

www.nbcactionnews.com...

There is no proof that this is true.. but it does tie into the story.

I find it odd that a homeless handy man who has been involved in crime and breakins.. has definite association with meagan wright .. who received a call from one of the iriwns phone...has been totally cleared on this case.










edit on 5-12-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by OneisOne
 



Also, didn't Deborah claim the police showed her burned clothes??

Yes, and at this point that makes no sense unless - UNLESS what Deborah 'reported' Lisa wearing was actually the last thing she really was wearing - alive. (See the difference?)
From there 'someone' changed Lisa into 'something else'.
The 'something else' is what was found 'burned'...
Oh this is just disgusting isn't it.



All this just makes me twitchy!!! It seems to me that a discrepancy in what Lisa was wearing when she went missing would be very important and a big deal.

And just a hypothetical, if the shorts had been found somewhere else (the Sam's Town area, near the river, etc.) & had a cadaver dog hit, how would that be viewed? Would it be so easily dismissed as a "bad" hit from the dog?

Just thinking/posting out loud.

OiO



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
BIAS b: an inclination of temperament or outlook; especially: a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment : prejudice

www.merriam-webster.com...

An UNREASONED judgment. There are plenty of reasons to think Deb is guilty . In fact it's unreasonable to assume she is NOT.

I have spent many posts accusing others like:

Jeremy Irwin
James Brando
Dane Greathouse
Phillip Netz ( if this is the uncle who stayed there )
Megan Wright

So to say my post is biased is a lie or at least faulty thinking.
I left out Jersey from the post because police have MOVED ON from him as having anything to do with it.

Megan Wrigth says she had nothing to do with it but I have still suspected her. So I don't take someones' word that they are innocent as the gospel.

But I did miss you Gab



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by OneisOne
 


Nice thinking O. I bet if a hit had come from a dog at sams town and the clothes found there , which would indicate an abductor , would be viewed on really excitedly.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 





So to say my post is biased is a lie or at least faulty thinking. I left out Jersey from the post because police have MOVED ON from him as having anything to do with it.


Are you so sure.. they have also said they have do not have the irwins as suspects in this case..more than once on television..

Just curious as to why you did not include that?

Of course there is a possibility that Debbie is guilty..just seems like way too much stuff to cover up efficiently..and considering the police are professionals at getting to the truth..it makes me wonder why there has been no arrest?

I think you miss the rush of arguing with someone schmae.. the only reason I came back was because I didn't want to see someone who was looking for FACTS.. be told a very one sided stream of events that does NOT have all elements of this case in it.

I am not here to argue..though I have ..because of the outright assumptions and judgements made by some.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by gabby2011
 


Just acknowledge that I have pointy my witchy finger at SEVERAL people and still do to this day ! Since accuracy is so important to you .
And yes I left out loads and loads of the story. I was trying to give a cliff notes version of a NOVEL that has now consumed almost 200 pages just on this o ne site. I had to leave out things and lots of them. I hit on what I thought was the most important. There is loads LOADS more.
I left out the cadaver dog hit. I left out the searching of the neighbor's house and asking media to NOT FILM what they removed from that house. That's pretty weird .
A cadaver dog hit on the smell of DEATH inside DEB's bedroom. I left out that highly incriminating part !
The phone thing is a fiasco that makes no sense. How many p hones worked ? for how long ? and who had possession of those phones? That's very important info. That Deb phone tried to get online at 3 am . Left that part off too.
It has yet to be seen waht is the most important part of this case. I think the phones are very important. But we , the public, don't have enough information to begin to draw a conclusion on the story with those phones.


To clarify, I cannot understand all the versions of the phones and their calls, times of calls, txts, attempt to get online, bills paid, not paid, who had what. I cannot so I do not.

edit on 5-12-2011 by schmae because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 





The phone thing is a fiasco that makes no sense. How many p hones worked ? for how long ? and who had possession of those phones? That's very important info. That Deb phone tried to get online at 3 am . Left that part off too.


can you please show me where deb tried to get online from their home computer? ..because if she didn't have the phone.. ??..and I read that it was from the phone that the attempt was made.

Please show us the link where it is specifically debbie who tried to access the net?..




I left out the cadaver dog hit.


Do cadaver dogs hit on old menstrual blood ..that wasn't entirely cleaned up at a very deep level on the rug?


A cadaver dog searching for evidence of missing 11-month-old Lisa Irwin "indicated a positive 'hit' for the scent of a ... Cadaver-sniffing dogs can give false positives, "hitting" on menstrual blood (among other things). ...


message.snopes.com...




edit on 5-12-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-12-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by silo13
 


Where did they find the burned clothes?

The 911 dispatch audio I posted had fire responding to a dumpster fire not to far from the home.


We only have "reports" the police found burnt clothing, nothing from an actual police source. One major report of the burnt clothing is from Deborah. She stated in an interview that police showed her burnt clothing.

From an ABC news article about the fire:

Dumpster Fire Investigation

GMA has also learned that police are investigating a fire that took place at a Dumpster at that same time, in that same area.

That dumpster fire could explain not only why burnt clothes were shown to Lisa's parents during their interrogation, but also why authorities searched an area landfill as part of the investigation.

The Dumpster where the fire occurred is emptied at the landfill.

The man who reported the fire told GMA that flames were shooting several feet into the air, and he believes some kind of accelerant was used. ABC News


As for the location, the PI Ron Rugen did a video tour of the area.

He passes Lisa's home at about 1:07 in the video.
He passes the location of the dumpster fire at about 1:55 in the video.

Hope that helps!
OiO

Edit at 11:58am (EST) to add.....
Location of dumpster fire per KWCH:

Police said someone reported a dumpster fire at an apartment complex at 4897 NE 37th Street at 2:27 a.m. on Tuesday, October 4. The dumpster is less than a half a mile away from the Irwin home.
www.kwch.com
edit on 5-12-2011 by OneisOne because: add more info



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by gabby2011
 


That Deb phone tried to get online at 3 am . Left that part off too.

THE DEB PHONE.....or the irwins phone. You, again, misread. I never said from the home computer.
Ok let's do phones..

PHONES

Deb said in her interview with megan kelly of fox news that their phones were on restricted service due to non payment of the bills.
Deb said in a later interview that she was moving phone numbers from one phone, (old) toa newer phone. Unclear if this is the same night or at an earlier time.
Jeremy attempted to call home to tell Deb he was working late.Not sure why he did this since the phones were off due to non payment.
A call came from an IRWIN phone to Megan Wright's phone at about midnight on that night. Megan says Dane answered it. Dane says he did not. ( wrong n umber)
One attempt was made to access voicemail and another to access the INTERNET at around 3 am or so.
When Jeremy got home at 4 am , he went to neighbor's house and when Lisa was not there, he called 911.
Deb and Jeremy ADAMENTLY said the phones were stolen 'to prevent us from calling 911'. So they know why they were taken , even though they still had a way to call 911.
Oh apparently looking at this link, it attempted to get online 5 times that evening.
Pings from the phone have all of this activity within 1/5 to 1/3 of a mile from the house.
So anyone seeing a man with a baby 2 or 3 miles away is NOT seeing the person who stole the phones. They maybe seeing a person who stole the baby, but not the phones.


foxnewsinsider.com... radley%e2%80%99s-phone-the-night-lisa-disappeared/

You see it is a convulated mess and it's very full of holes, so I don't like to go into it.
But what I know is if a call went to megan wright phone then the phones were NOT turned off.
Unless you wnt to believe a kidnapper stole the baby and within 10 minutes pulled out their debit card, while walking around the neighborhood with the baby and called the phone carrier and had it turned back on from their own account. But if any of us have paid our bills you know its pretty hard to do that when its not your own phone service. You can't so much as ask if your phone is on if you're not the 'account holder'.
edit on 5-12-2011 by schmae because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 





Oh apparently looking at this link, it attempted to get online 5 times that evening. Pings from the phone have all of this activity within 1/5 to 1/3 of a mile from the house. So anyone seeing a man with a baby 2 or 3 miles away is NOT seeing the person who stole the phones. They maybe seeing a person who stole the baby, but not the phones.


So this is your explanation for blatantly stating that debbie tried to access the net at 3 am? She was wondering around the neighborhood drunk?..trying to access the net..?


yep..just more assumptions.. and anyone wanting the facts from someone who can state "debbie tried to access the net at 3am".. without any proof behind that statement.. is someone who will only find biased theories..and little fact.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by gabby2011
 


I said if you were reading and know the english language DEBS PHONE , not DEB.
But I'm glad you got a good laugh out of your failure to follow a sentence to the end.
It is funny !

If there is more phone facts, feel free to add them. THere are literally too many to keep up with.
I asked dozens of pages ago who believed a call went to megan phone that night , and Gabby you agreed you thought it did. So how do you jive that with their phones being shut off for non payment? Which is true?
edit on 5-12-2011 by schmae because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by schmae
reply to post by gabby2011
 


I said if you were reading and know the english language DEBS PHONE , not DEB.
But I'm glad you got a good laugh out of your failure to follow a sentence to the end.
It is funny !

If there is more phone facts, feel free to add them. THere are literally too many to keep up with.
I asked dozens of pages ago who believed a call went to megan phone that night , and Gabby you agreed you thought it did. So how do you jive that with their phones being shut off for non payment? Which is true?
edit on 5-12-2011 by schmae because: (no reason given)


ha ..nice switch on the wording in that post.. it clearly said deb tried to access the phone..and now you change it.. and pretend you didn't.. guess I have to copy and paste your stuff more carefully.

I think you could use calling cards?.. i don't know..not a phone expert..




top topics



 
41
<< 169  170  171    173  174  175 >>

log in

join