Lisa Irwin - Missing - One Year Later

reply to post by gabby2011


Also if she isn't involved in anything more than neglect, well I will formally post a retraction, feel better now?
I may be a little PTSD over the whole Anthony case I feel that it was a great injustice and it took place in my State so it is a possibility, but my instincts are usually correct.
I am just saying.

reply to post by silo13


I wonder if this man who was seen carrying the baby was the same in the grocery store video? I know he was excused but just going nuts over this because someone does know the truth and with all the derailing we have seen in this case it is confusing.

Breaking it down silo, what do we 'know' about all the parties involved?

Taking a look at each of their profiles, there must be something to point in the direction of the abductor or abductors.

*Also for all of you going nuts over this thread and the Babies situation whether alive or dead, just reread this thread and you will understand that no one is anxious to falsely accuse anyone, it is just that there were and are so many lies it is hard to not think that the parents and family, neighbors and friends know something that would be a key in unlocking this kidnapping.

reply to post by ldyserenity


Understood, it did bring that up for everyone on some level. I guess part of my closing on previous post was to lend a little support to you and your position on this.

Originally posted by antar
reply to post by ldyserenity

 

Understood, it did bring that up for everyone on some level. I guess part of my closing on previous post was to lend a little support to you and your position on this.

Thank you, Antar.
I just hope that these policemen are more vigilant.
Justice for whomever is the culprit.

reply to post by ldyserenity

Also if she isn't involved in anything more than neglect, well I will formally post a retraction, feel better now?
I may be a little PTSD over the whole Anthony case I feel that it was a great injustice and it took place in my State so it is a possibility, but my instincts are usually correct.
I am just saying.

Follow your instincts and never ever apologize for ridding yourself of frustration among friends. If others cannot understand - too bad for them - leave them to their opinions and believe me we understand and respect yours.

One problem I think we're seeing with this whole Baby Lisa case is the mounting frustration on everyone's part. The police must be just be at their wits end. Especially when Bradley and Irwin have a PI and lawyer who's intentionally misleading the public by making claims like 'No, she didn't confuse or lie about the time line' (when she did repeatedly on video) and the latest?

The latest spin? The stray kitten is what the cadaver dogs are 'hitting on'. The kitten wallowed in 'road kill' and that's what the dogs are scenting. Needless to say unless the kitten wallowed in a dead body the dogs wouldn't be 'hitting' on the smell. Cadaver dogs do not 'hit' on the scent of death unless it's human.

So yeah, this has been going on a while and we're all just wanting an end to it for that poor little baby.

Hang in there!

peace

Originally posted by schmae
Gabby, can I ask.... if Deborah come on tv today and said ok i got drunk and fell/ dropped / overmedicated etc the baby. If she confessed to an accidental situation and they got panicky and did all this to try to cover it up. What would you feel should happen to / with her at that point?



Why don't you focus your attention on trying to stop them? Because you don't care about the ones that get sacrificed? (yes there are many who do).. You don't care about those that get put into human trafficking?
^^^^^^^^^^^^ if this is so concerning to you , why don't you focus your attention on this?

edit on 22-10-2011 by schmae because: (no reason given)

I do focus my attention on human trafficking..and have posted , and started threads on it.
If I could join a police force to help..I would in a heartbeat,and I'd do it for free...but I don't think they would have any use for someone my age with no background training.

If Debbie broke down.. and confessed it was an accident, I think they need to take into account that she let the police force spend a lot of money and time trying to uncover the truth...and that the tax payers shouldn't be responsible for footing the bills to uncover her lies. That can be said for all criminals who lie, and cost the taxpayers money to uncover the truth.... even the elite.

I don't think she should be charged with murder , if it was an accident.

Heres a question for you.. If a parent or grandparent accidentally drives over a toddler..who was riding on a bike , unnoticed, while they back out of a driveway...what do you think they should be charged with?

Originally posted by gabby2011

Originally posted by schmae
Gabby, can I ask.... if Deborah come on tv today and said ok i got drunk and fell/ dropped / overmedicated etc the baby. If she confessed to an accidental situation and they got panicky and did all this to try to cover it up. What would you feel should happen to / with her at that point?



Why don't you focus your attention on trying to stop them? Because you don't care about the ones that get sacrificed? (yes there are many who do).. You don't care about those that get put into human trafficking?
^^^^^^^^^^^^ if this is so concerning to you , why don't you focus your attention on this?

edit on 22-10-2011 by schmae because: (no reason given)

I do focus my attention on human trafficking..and have posted , and started threads on it.
If I could join a police force to help..I would in a heartbeat,and I'd do it for free...but I don't think they would have any use for someone my age with no background training.

If Debbie broke down.. and confessed it was an accident, I think they need to take into account that she let the police force spend a lot of money and time trying to uncover the truth...and that the tax payers shouldn't be responsible for footing the bills to uncover her lies. That can be said for all criminals who lie, and cost the taxpayers money to uncover the truth.... even the elite.

I don't think she should be charged with murder , if it was an accident.

Heres a question for you.. If a parent or grandparent accidentally drives over a toddler..who was riding on a bike , unnoticed, while they back out of a driveway...what do you think they should be charged with?

Gross negligence.
I think I am right hold on going to check.

Gross negligence is a conscious and voluntary disregard of the need to use reasonable care, which is likely to cause foreseeable grave injury or harm to persons, property, or both

Source

IT would be so, because the person apparently did not check the mirrors and/or notice the child was in back of the car before getting behind the wheel...but even more so if she was a drunk mother who dropped or overmedicated the baby...definitely gross negligence.

reply to post by gabby2011

But do you think she should be charged? with something?
involuntary manslaughter, intoxicatin manslaughter, etc e?

A parent backing over a child in driveway is an accident. If they call 911 and report it immediately in an
effort to try to save the child, then it's an accident. If something like that happened here and it was an
accident, she went WAY OUT OF HER way to make it look much more heinous than an accident, don't
you agree? I think her drunkenness is the issue here. If she had been sober and an accident occurred
she would likely have done soemthing immediately to help and all this would not be going on.
But because she was drunk, she might have thought it'll look bad so I better make up a story or
something else. I don't necessarly think she murdered the baby with malice. But she does seem
arrogant ? ( i cant think of the word i want to use here) in her mannerisms for it being a true
kidnapping. She may have a drinking issue and is defensive about the whole thing because of that
thinking at the end of the day her alcoholism might come into question and nothing I DID DRUNK
caused any of this .See? The father of the baby has a DUI from a few years back and otehr than
that it is their only scrape with the law. Well lots of folks who geta DUI stop drinking because it
scares them and they want to improve their life. For the ones who continue to do so........ it "
MIGHT" indicate a problem with alcoholism. So I think mom and dad are both big time drinkers.
An accident happened. They covered it up to keep their drinking problem out of the spotlight
and to avoid any intox. manslaughter issues...e tc. and now we have this big mess !

reply to post by antar

*Also for all of you going nuts over this thread and the Babies situation whether alive or dead, just reread this thread and you will understand that no one is anxious to falsely accuse anyone,

You must be reading a different thread than I have been.

Heres just one example below of what I have read on this thread...There are many more..but I won't make this post too long.

If you want to say this this thread has no one that is anxious to falsely accuse someone ..then you are sadly mistaken.

I just don't think the satanic ritual thing sounds plausible...it was a # up, a lowlife scumbag who couldn't handle responsibility of having a kid, a loser and a POS.I hope they hook the fat lump to the electric chair and fry her A$$! Worthless scumbag.

To antar... The above... ^^ is the position you are supporting??

Quote by Antar

Understood, it did bring that up for everyone on some level. I guess part of my closing on previous post was to lend a little support to you and your position on this.

reply to post by schmae

But do you think she should be charged? with something? involuntary manslaughter, intoxicatin manslaughter, etc e?

I don't know or understand enough about laws , to give you a reasonable answer for this..

I do know that I wouldn't be yelling .." haul her fat ass off to the electric chair so we can watch her fry"

just saying...

reply to post by ldyserenity


Actually gross negligence is different than negligence. But a tiny child cannot be seen behind a car even checking mirrors etc.
Gross negligence is when the actor has more of a responsibility of care than you or I.
Say you and I see a child with a broken leg in the park and we wrap it up the best we
can but still his leg's doesnt' heal right because we used our purse straps and scarves
to wrap it up. But what do we know? We are laymen, so to speak , and did the best
we could.
Now say a dr in an ER sees same child with broken leg and uses a purse strap and
scarf to wrap it up . He knows the proper way and has the proper tools and could
easily offer the child's leg a MUCH greater chance than you or I.
That dr's actions are GROSS negligence.
He is to a higher standard than a non dr when it comes to a health issue.

reply to post by gabby2011


Someone else yelled haul her off to the electric cghair. i've said nothing about even PRISON , certainly not execution. I still hope she didnt ' do anything because that means there's a chance the baby will be found. But
my logical side tells me she does and the baby will never be found alive.

reply to post by schmae


I think it has been applied to parents/ caregivers in the past as well though?
Maybe not?
I don't know.
But I thought there was precedent for it?

Take for instance, your not seeing a child in the rearview, if you tried to cover up the accident didn't call 911 and "hid" the child then it would be gross negligence...Am I wrong?

reply to post by ldyserenity


Yes probably a parent would have a more knowledge of the care of an infant than say that parent's 6 or 8 year old child. So yes you are probably right when it comes to something like falling asleep drunk in your own house, etc. But just being a parent doesn't mean you can set a broken leg or know if a new toy you got for chrsitmas will explode and injure your child more than the toy's manufacturer. But parents are given a burden of reasonable care toward their children. I think at the very least we can all agree deborah did not give reasonable care
toward her children at least during some part of this evening .

reply to post by gabby2011


What I have seen is that everyone at some point or other in this long mega thread has lost their cool at some point or other and said things based on anger, fear, resentment and frustration, but through discussion usually come around and even have some level headed additions after the emotional reactions turn to responding inclusions.

reply to post by antar


Agreed and over all it's a great thread. It keeps new ideas coming . I said earlier but it might bear repeating that this is a horrible situation where NEITHER option is acceptable. That mom did something on purpose or accident
is unacceptable. That a stranger came inside their house and took her without leaving a trace is unacceptable. But one of these scenarios DID IN FACT happen, so there's no reason to discount HALF of the only TWO theories that will result in finding baby Lisa

Originally posted by schmae
reply to post by ldyserenity

 

Yes probably a parent would have a more knowledge of the care of an infant than say that parent's 6 or 8 year old child. So yes you are probably right when it comes to something like falling asleep drunk in your own house, etc. But just being a parent doesn't mean you can set a broken leg or know if a new toy you got for chrsitmas will explode and injure your child more than the toy's manufacturer. But parents are given a burden of reasonable care toward their children. I think at the very least we can all agree deborah did not give reasonable care
toward her children at least during some part of this evening .

Thinking of a case that another parent was charged with gross negligence when not seeking care for their child that was injured and resulted in the death. I am pretty sure this has been used against them before, it is more criminal negligence then simple negligence, like they knew that the child needed medical care and didn't seek that care. If I am not mistaken there has been a case like that before.

It was a long time ago but I think I recall a case of it being used.

Originally posted by schmae
reply to post by gabby2011

 

Someone else yelled haul her off to the electric cghair. i've said nothing about even PRISON , certainly not execution. I still hope she didnt ' do anything because that means there's a chance the baby will be found. But
my logical side tells me she does and the baby will never be found alive.

I know you didn't say those things..was just an example of what I would not be saying..

I'm not sure what has happened to that baby..and it could very well be a neighbor that was over drinking with her, that took that child out of the house, and who knows what has happened to it.

Like you..I hope the truth eventually comes out.. ALL of it.. and justice is served...but until all the facts are made known, I will not jump to conclusions about where the child is now... or what happened to her.

One thing I want to ask you all. Something that's really like a bur under my saddle...

Remember those three people (four if you count the spouse) that witnessed a man walking down the street carrying a baby.

Besides the obvious - What else do you find rather more than odd about that scenario? About a man walking down the street at all hours carrying a half clad or diaper clad infant?

Put on your thinking caps...

I'm going to wait and post later when I hear what you all have to say. And yeah, it is a bit of 'game play' but I think we all need it.

Gabby? What do you think? Read the 'bold' above and let us know your opinion!

The rest of you - you're smart and insightful (you too Gabby) - what is WRONG with that picture???

peace

I guess it can fall under other terms too, but gross falls under the blanket term of criminal negligence, but it is definately one of these things:

Criminal negligence is negligence which requires a greater degree of culpability than the civil standard of negligence. The civil standard of negligence is defined according to a failure to follow the standard of conduct of a reasonable person in the same situation as the defendant. To show criminal negligence, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the mental state involved in criminal negligence. Proof of that mental state requires that the failure to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a result will occur must be a gross deviation from the standard of a reasonable person. Criminal negligence is conduct which is such a departure from what would be that of an ordinary prudent or careful person in the same circumstance as to be incompatible with a proper regard for human life or an indifference to consequences. Criminal negligence is negligence that is aggravated, culpable or gross.

US LEGAL.Com

So she could be held on gross, aggravated or culpable negligence IMO...if she didn't outright kill the child which I think is a possibility. And maybe a man did help her cover it up. But that is JMO.