It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 185
<< 182  183  184    186  187  188 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 08:17 AM
reply to post by schmae

As far as speaking to people who know the person sure. Ive done that before in a lot of occasions. When talking to people, they have a tendency to leave info out. Friends, family, coworkers etc generally will offer more information about potential problems or issues.

As far as him being a good Father, I agree to a certain degree. However, knowing moms drinking habits does raise the question that if he is that good of a father, why does he leave a child alone with her knowing she gets like that?

Again, im not saying he is a bad father, but it does raise the question.

posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 08:27 AM
reply to post by schmae

I try NOT to imagine it. At least now I can imagine that she is an adult herself. I know she was the one looking after her baby sister, pulling up ALL the slack for her worthless POS mother, totally "parentified". She had a level head, too. One of those kids who sees things aren't right, and tries to do something about it, rather than getting caught in the same pattern.

If I didn't know for certain that X is not in KC, I'd have thought it might have been him who came to the school! Yeah, but anyway, shows to go ya that DFS of Missouri is not screwed together right at all. Or wasn't, at least.

That may have changed, I don't know, but I rather doubt it. Of course, this is not to say there are not some good workers in there. They are overburdened with cases...and spread too thin, there just isn't time enough to do a good job with all of the cases, and when asinine "policies" dictate what is to be done, well, hands are tied.

posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 08:29 AM
reply to post by wildtimes

Sorry I was not intending to make a blanket all DFS are idiots claim.

posted on Dec, 13 2011 @ 08:32 AM

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by wildtimes

Sorry I was not intending to make a blanket all DFS are idiots claim.

Nono, I knew that!! I was just pointing out that their "policies" and at least TWO of their workers, were lame. I got your intentions. I'm really only saying that to vouch for those workers who are stuck in that agency for whatever reason...and have to go by their policies. Clearly we have had similar experiences with's all good, X! (Well, no it's not "all good". But, between you and me, all is well!!

posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 12:03 AM
Grou p believes missing baby Lisa Irwin is alive

There is a group of people in Kansas City who want the public to know they believe baby Lisa Irwin is alive and well.

Baby Lisa has been missing for more than 2 months now.

Her parents say she disappeared from her crib in the middle of the night. Police were called the morning of October 4.

Sunday afternoon, a group showed their support for the missing one year old baby with a march at Penguin Park.

The group says they believe they can find her.

Agree with them or not I wish them the best, for Lisa and for them.

They say they wonder why the family has not conducted their own search for their missing child.

They've been told not to? [/sarcasm]
Anyone tells me 'not to look for my child' better get the hell outta my way is all I can say.

Kansas City, Mo. resident Cindie Williams said, "I am somewhat disappointed because I believe they should be out searching with the strangers. Just wish the baby was found because it disappoints me. The baby's gone and they're not helping to locate her."

I think we're all disappointed.

In late November, a group held a vigil for baby Lisa outside the Irwin family home.

The parents Deborah Bradley and Jeremy Irwin asked the group to leave.

That about says it all.

And just think - with Lisa gone, the kids at school, now Deborah gets all the 'adult time' she wants! Yay! That's a silver lining to the cloud now isn't it! [/sarcasm]


posted on Dec, 14 2011 @ 02:29 PM
Looks like things are drying up as far as any info on this case

We should meet back here when the trial starts ! Or
when an arrest is made.

posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 07:37 AM
reply to post by Xcathdra

Thanks for the wall of information. Especially since you are speaking from a PA position. No I am not with any type of legal authority. Only have been around some issues a couple of times. Apparently the laws are quite different. I feel quie confindent the boys hold the truth. In regards to the Jeffs case as well - thank goodness he made that disgusting recording which was the final nail in his coffin.

Lastly, if Deborah were innocent I believe she would be screaming from the rooftops - not seeking out "her since of normal; which seems to be ok without Lisa." Yes indeed disturbing - the psychology of the entire situation.

posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 07:47 AM
reply to post by schmae

I feel the same way. Silo - your last post before Schmae's speaks volumes. Who turns away people focusing on the return and saftey of their missing baby? Creating a positive group force of energy is deniable why; unless you know her fate already.

posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 01:47 PM
Listen to this video - maybe then you'll understand why we doubt Deborah.

IRONICALLY Wild Bill has more than enough to say in the end of this video.

'They want to spin things in their favor... If they shed a tear and shake their head a couple a times they'll convince Mom and Pop America (who's very forgiving) that they didn't do it...'
(Bill Stanton)

Anyway, the (first part of) Scott Peterson interview made me feel weak. Almost word for word = Deborah.

And what is Deborah doing this evening? I mean truly - does anyone on this thread realize WE have put MORE TIME INTO LISA than her OWN MOTHER at this point???



edit on 15-12-2011 by silo13 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 09:50 PM
reply to post by silo13

Ewww, you are right! We have spent hours and hours looking at vids and reading blogs and listening to psychics and arguing with each other, relentlessly, trying to find one little glimmer of HOPE for this baby we don't even know, never held, never saw for a second. And we never will. And yet we likely did spend more time. I suspect Deb went straight back to a bottle and now 'adult' time is permanent

I wonder what the little boys' Christmas will be like.

posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 01:04 AM
reply to post by schmae

@Silo prior to @schmae.....I have agreed with a lot you have both said so therefore my comments would be mute. From what "we" have seemed to have discovered and discussed; yes I believe we have spent more time attempting to prove or disprove various theories. Again - IF it were me....I would be in everyone's face until all leads were exasperated. The fact of her (their) silence and allowing the FBook pages to exist without input leaves me to state one phrase.....perception is reality.

posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 06:53 AM
Ok little bit of interesting stuff here. I do not know this source to well so will not speak to its reliability, BUT, it was posted by ron rugen and is about him so possibly it's true.

''In his latest blog post, Rugen says that he has received a lot of information regarding the Lisa Irwin case from his sources, and he claims that that 50-second call may not have actually happened. However, Dane Greathouse doesn't seem like the most upstanding of characters. When Rugen tried to touch bases with the guy, he got a pretty unfriendly text:

"I don't have time for games. Unless u have a milli in cash. all ben franks. Top it off with everyday i haue (sic) a full tank. Ha good night."

So Dane who says he's got nothing to say sort of implied he'd talk to ron rugen if he got a million dollars cash? So what would he say THEN if he had no information? Do you see what I mean? I've got nothing to say and know nothing about the baby but I'll tell you waht you want to hear for 1 million? Seems a little odd.

posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 06:55 AM
Also Rugen says in his FB that Megan Wright singed a request for her phone company to release all call logs to Rugen to look over going all the way back to early summer when she got that phone or that service. So after Rugen looks them over I guess he's going to release his findings. That will be interesting.

posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 06:58 AM

Rugen Team Investigations, LLC Missouri Private Investigator

Something in the works in the next week that could answer a lot of questions in one piece of the puzzle in missing Lisa Irwin case. Cross your fingers. It could bring fewer persons in question and some out of the suspect picture.

Like · · Share · December 9 at 7:27am via mobile

Ron Rugens FB and this was 7 days ago. Sorry guys I got distracted and havent' been keeping up with the FB circus regarding Baby Lisa. 7 days ago posted regarding the next week, so maybe it sounds like at least some of the suspicious people might get eliminated or something. Is that what this means?

posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:46 AM
reply to post by schmae

I heard a while back some noise about the cops telling tales about that call. That the call never happened and LE was using the lie to try and get info. I've got the article somewhere - I'll go and start hunting it up. I didn't credit it at the time because Megan said she got the call - now it seems not only is she lying but LE? Gawd, what next.


posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 07:15 AM
reply to post by silo13

But Megan is not lying if LE told her that. She always said she didn't have the phone and didn't know about the call until LE told her, right? So if she's believing them, she's not lying. BUT remember early on Megan said that LE said something like ''deb had megans number written on her hand'' and that turned out to be a lie, correct? Ron Rugen the PI says the call was placed, but perhaps did not go does that mean it was never answered because someone looks and says oh i dont know the number so I will nto answer it or does that mean it never even rang, like a call dropped .

posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 10:02 AM

Attorney in dispute with baby Lisa's Dad in legal hot water
A Kansas City attorney is facing a judge's wrath after she apparently allowed her client's twin brother to impersonate him during a court hearing.

Jackson County prosecutors want criminal defense attorney Dorothy Savory held in contempt of court and removed from the case, according to court documents. She also likely will be reported to the Missouri Bar Association.

Savory is representing Rasleen Raim in a different case. Raim is suing her former boyfriend, Jeremy Irwin, in a custody dispute over their 9-year-old son. This comes after Irwin and current live-in girlfriend, Debbie Bradley, reported on Oct. 4 that their then 10-month-old daughter had been abducted from her home, but Bradley has said she is under police suspicion for being involved in her daughter's disappearance.

So, this is the woman representing Raim (for the time being). Interesting little indication of her integrity. Funny, in a sick way, that the "accused" twin was in the building (doh!) and seen by an officer, while his bro was posing as him, at her request. Um...lost license, anyone?

In other news,
there is another informal "search" going on right now. (No, I'm not there.) And Rugen's blog has referenced one of the "vigil" attendees, who is also an active poster on the BLIU fb page.

Otherwise, nothing about Lisa. One week til that major Christian holiday -- I can only wonder how those two boys are going to remember it.

edit on 17-12-2011 by wildtimes because: clarity

posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 12:13 AM
reply to post by schmae

But Megan is not lying if LE told her that. She always said she didn't have the phone and didn't know about the call until LE told her, right? So if she's believing them, she's not lying. BUT remember early on Megan said that LE said something like ''deb had megans number written on her hand'' and that turned out to be a lie, correct?

You're right. Once again my frustration over all the lies and BS keeps me from seeing the big white elephant in my living room. That's assuming LE lied. But what the hell is that all about anyway? I mean really. What is it that they KNOW - what information does LE KNOW that would be the protagonist to lie to someone about a phone-call and a number written on someone's hand. I mean - I just can't see LE taking wild stabs in the dark?
Come on all you sleuths out there - what is is that LE might know that would lead them to making (of all the lies they could have come up with) THESE lies???

Happy Holiday's All.

posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 12:47 AM
reply to post by wildtimes

I see the lawyer being disbarred for that stunt. Its one thing if the lawyer doesnt realize the twin is standing in. Its something else entirely when they know about it.

posted on Dec, 18 2011 @ 01:00 AM
reply to post by silo13

There is a rule that lawyers have when it comes to asking questions while in court -

"Never ask a question you dont know the answer to".

For law enforcement we dont get that luxurey, so we have to make do with what we have. As I stated before about a hundred pages back, its not illegal for law enforcement to use deception / lie in order to gain information. The manner of the deception / lie and the outcome of it will be closely scrutinized to ensure it does not violate consititutional rights or is gained through the fruit of the posionous tree standard (any information obtained when the initial process was illegal, prohibits any and all evidence gained from the intitial lie / deception from being allowed in court).

In court proceedings, the answers to the questions are generally present, and the intent is to show a jury / judge the perosn charged is the person responsible through presentation and argument of the facts.

In Law Enforcement we usually have some of the answers, but usually those come in the form of not being attached to anyone question about anyone person.

Example - We know baby Lisa is missing, and that based on the parents statements, she was taken illegally from their house sometime in the middle of the night.

Question -
do we know baby Lisa is missing? - Yes we do
do we know when she disappeared? - we have a basic time frame
do we know if she was abducted? - No we dont
do we know if she is still alive? - no we dont.

Those answers above are facts.
The problem is we dont know who to attribute those "facts" to. Hence the reason for deception by suggesting another person gave information they in fact did not, up to flat out lyeing to the person to convey the position the police have the answers and the person being interviewed is caught.

People are more than welcome to have their personal views on law enforcement using deception / lies, but please keep in mind, there is a limit to what we can and cannot do, and you can bet your ass any action taken in that manner will be challeneged by the defense prior to the case making inside of a court room.

Even when the results are allowed in court, defense will still bring that fact to light, suggesting that if police lied during this step, what makes us so sure they didnt lie during the other steps. It strengthens the defenses ability to raise reasonable doubt in the mind of jurors, and since this is criminal, all it takes is one miind to be persuaded by the argument.

- 3 people can keep a secret, if 2 of those people are dead.

new topics

top topics

<< 182  183  184    186  187  188 >>

log in