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: 42
41
<< 39  40  41    43  44  45 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 


Or they figure it would bring a little more empathy to her as people tend to judge harshly those who are rather frumpy looking. No telling what her relatives and even the mother herself is reading online and elsewhere about her. She may not be able to change much but her appearance.




posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Ok this may be interesting,,, on the megan kelly fox show that is on right now alleges the brother of deborah, the one I think who took her to buy wine? is seen at a 'deli' at 5 am on the morning in question. Do lots ofpeople stay up all night and/or get up that early to go to breakfast? I have no clue. We rise very early in my house , but not so early s to be out and dressed and at a deli or store at 5 am. This should be interesting. !!!!



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Let's hope for this...

Somebody thought she was a bad mother and took the baby.

Now that person is too afraid to come forward.

Because, I really don't like the way things are looking for this baby.

I have prayed for her safe return.

We really need a miracle right now...



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   
A question or just a thought. Whatever happened to the teenage neighbour they questioned that had the security code for the garage? I always thought it was odd that they took a DNA sample? At first I thought maybe they had found something near an entry point...blood, skin etc the possible abductor might have left....but that hasn't come out yet, so I doubt it.

Would they take DNA "just in case" they later needed it to compare or would they have to actually have a valid reason and suspect in order to get a DNA sample?

Michelle



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Wow, Parent's attorney just told MK on foxnews that he would ABSOLUTELY allow the 2 older boys to be interviewed again. He wants them with child psyche experts who know how to talk to them without upsetting them further, but said SURE they can talk again. Now let's see if they are able to.
By all accounts these 2 boys are the only ones other than Mom who were in the house during the time in question. Poor little guys
I hope they don't konw anything.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Michelle129th
 


I have only heard of the teenage boy a few times and always with almost no details at all. I would think as far as DNA that it's super common now to give it in any case , if you will agree to it. I don't think it's so much for this case as they want to get as much 'on file' as possible to put in a date base for broader crime searches. So if you agree to it, why not take it, then they've got it for life !



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   
If you have ever watched Fox News you know Megyn and Joe Tacopina are friends.

Megyn Kelly is also a lawyer. Obviously not practising.

She interviews the Mother...Joe immeadiately becomes her lawyer.

Then Joe starts granting exclusive interviews to Megyn and Fox News.

Funny how that works....Just Saying.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 


I guess that does make sense...although I haven't heard of them DNA testing anyone else in relation to the case...parents, neighbours, uncle(mom's brother) that all were also at the home that day. I wish the police had released more in regards to that line of searching.

Michelle



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 01:33 PM
link   
This is a total rumor and I cannot find where it began,,,, but a possible text from Deborah's brother at or around 2: am ( i did hear much earlier that there was a call or text at 2 or 230 am on the so called restricted phones) that said " i am ready when you are" .
Seems innocent enough if he had sent it hours earlier, like are you ready to go to the store, etc.
I hope this is rumor and not true



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 

The 'text' rumor and the 'teenager'... I've hunted for a long time and found noting to back up either, but you're right, it's out there and I've no idea where it started... Still trying to pin it down though. Good luck to you if you're searching too.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by schmae
Here is my working theory on what happened that day. I've been reading a lot as we all have and I don't know what my theory may have been before but here is what I think is close to what happened.

Dad goes to work that night....

Another option is that Deb has already removed and done something with Lisa and he wants to believe her so badly becaus the alternative is jsut too horrible to think of and again the KEEPING HIS SON thought must be very close to his heart at all times. He wants to believe her an believe it was an accident but the police wi9ll never believe it so why even go there ?
Thoughts?


The flaw in this reasoning as I see it, would be they are both aware that Lisa is dead. It would be insane to call attention to the missing child. The more attention they focus at the beginning of the invisagation the more likely they are to get caught. It would be far wiser to report her missing, and let the police do their thing. In a month, if one wants attention call attention to the cops and complain that they never tried. Survalance tapes get recycled and lost, people forget, etc.

To my mind they have focused attention on Lisa. They are doing it while things are fresh. And if it was my child, and I knew I had nothing to do with her disappearance I would also be upset with the police wasting time attempting to prove I had hurt my child rather than being out searching for her. Survalance tapes are nothing new or uncommon nowadays. Why does a reporter have to discover these tapes from a gas station so near to her home? If the police search was as thorough as they wish us to believe why didn’t they discover them? Just how many business are there within say three miles of this location that might have cameras looking out to the street? Are there traffic cameras in this area?

As to the search, the police were permitted to search, that's how they got the cadaver dog in that the search warrant was based on. Too much of this has a feel of the parents being tried in the media. The media is supposedly kept at a distance, yet we have all seen the great big roll of carpet.... 17 hours and the spot where the dog hit is not removed for testing? Why? Not the carpet, nor the floor.... Before that we have a cop getting stuck in a window?!? And pictures of that, too. We have a forensics team in "white bunny suites" yet their hair is blowing in the wind....



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by schmae
 


Teenager with garage code


Over the weekend police investigated two new leads that came forward from the case. A teenage neighbor who was at the Irwin's home the day Lisa vanished and who also knew the code to the garage door was questioned. Nothing concrete has emerged and Police are looking for new tips.


Well, that's one.

Off for more...



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   
I checked back through the PDF warrant information for any mention of the basement and it is there. The basement was searched and revealed nothing - so that’s cleared up once and for all. End of that discussion.

Now on to a new one though that’s got me stumped.

While going through the info in search of the above I found this and it was red flags waving off the page.


Crime scene personnel recovered items from the home, but due to the initial information provided by the family, the only areas extensively processed for DNA and fingerprints during the consent were the baby’s bedroom and possible points of entry.
(my bold)

During the ‘consent’??? So, in other words during the first search the parents gave ‘consent’ to where the police could search and that did NOT include Deborah’s bedroom where the cadaver dogs ‘hit’ on an area around her bed near the floor?

Wow.
edit on 24-10-2011 by silo13 because: my bold



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by silo13
I checked back through the PDF warrant information for any mention of the basement and it is there. The basement was searched and revealed nothing - so that’s cleared up once and for all. End of that discussion.

Now on to a new one though that’s got me stumped.

While going through the info in search of the above I found this and it was red flags waving off the page.


Crime scene personnel recovered items from the home, but due to the initial information provided by the family, the only areas extensively processed for DNA and fingerprints during the consent were the baby’s bedroom and possible points of entry.
(my bold)

During the ‘consent’??? So, in other words during the first search the parents gave ‘consent’ to where the police could search and that did NOT include Deborah’s bedroom where the cadaver dogs ‘hit’ on an area around her bed near the floor?

Wow.
edit on 24-10-2011 by silo13 because: my bold


I believe the important word here as I see it is EXTENSIVELY processed, indicating to me that other areas were processed, note there is no statement that the police were denied access to any area in the application for the warrant. I see this as far more likely to indicate the police felt these were the only areas worth their time.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   
I agree here with David. Read the paragraph in its entirety and it takes on a whole new meaning.

"detectives obtained consent to search for the house....personnel searched the home for any evidence....personnel recovered items but due to initial information provided by family..the only areas extensively processed ...during the consent"

Meaning they got consent to search the house in general, but during the consent they only processed certain areas because of the "story" the parents gave them. ie: (and i'm guessing here) the computer room window, front door, light switches etc

Michelle



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   
The sad fact here is this home has been search multiple times, with the consent of the parents! It was initially search on 10/4/2011 when Lisa was reported missing. There was no hint that the parents refuse the police the right to search any area at that time. The police should have at that time looked for a child hiding and/or a body, they found nothing in their search of the home! It is reported that later that day the police began hunting with tracking dogs.... Note that these dogs would have the same kind of noses that the cadaver dogs have. Apparently these dogs less than 24 hours after baby Lisa went missing hit on nothing. It is claimed that tracking dogs can track a child being carried by another person. That tracking dogs can track a child in a vechicle through a major city. These dogs gave no "hit" that Lisa was in the home, in the yard, in the out buildings, in the garden, I believe that is important to remember!

Is anyone here willing to suggest that if just one of these dogs gave a hit, the police would have accepted the parents refusal to let the police search? Two of the by-products of decomposition, putrescine and cadaverine, have been bottled and are commercially available as cadaver dog training aids. But putrescine and cadaverine, are also present in all decaying organic material, and in human saliva. So if one of the boys went out into the woods and stepped on some fall leaves, they could have brought them, along with putrescine or cadaverine into the home. Or Lisa is eleven months old, can you imagine her crawling around on the floor, and drooling, slobbering on the carpet? Once again we could have putrescine and/or cadaverine, in the carpet. There are lots of ways one could account for a hit here. In my opinion what we can say for sure is the police fumbled here.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 04:01 PM
link   
Watch THIS Video...

Tacopina tears evidence apart

He makes a great point...

There would be no decomposition in hours.

Baby Lisa is out there...She might be alive.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by whyamIhere
Watch THIS Video...

Tacopina tears evidence apart

He makes a great point...

There would be no decomposition in hours.

Baby Lisa is out there...She might be alive.



Actually that is incorrect! I am surprised that he is not better informed than this, decomposition starts at death, and at least one study shows that cadaver dogs can detect decomposition on carpet after 2 minutes exposure to a body 2 hours old!
edit on 24-10-2011 by Dav1d because: Additional info



Attorney Joe Tacopina, a top criminal attorney hired by the parents of missing Kansas City baby Lisa Irwin on Monday, told the Today Show Tuesday there’s “absolutely not” a chance the baby’s mother Deborah will be arrested in connection with the 10-month-old’s October 4 disappearance.

edit on 24-10-2011 by Dav1d because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
i guess I don't get the full 3 hours of the megan kelly show because she said coming up in the next hour MORE on the baby Lisa investigation , in which I thought they would cover a sighting of the brother at a deli at 5 am. But after the commercial it went to the next show and hers was over. I only get 2 hours of that show. Did anyone see anything about tha t/?



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dav1d


Actually that is incorrect! I am surprised that he is not better informed than this, decomposition starts at death, and at least one study shows that cadaver dogs can detect decomposition on carpet after 2 minutes exposure to a body 2 hours old!
edit on 24-10-2011 by Dav1d because: Additional info



Attorney Joe Tacopina, a top criminal attorney hired by the parents of missing Kansas City baby Lisa Irwin on Monday, told the Today Show Tuesday there’s “absolutely not” a chance the baby’s mother Deborah will be arrested in connection with the 10-month-old’s October 4 disappearance.

edit on 24-10-2011 by Dav1d because: (no reason given)


He said the dogs hit on decomposed fecal tissue.

If that is true....Even in a 10 hour window there would be no breakdown.

In a baby's room a hit by dogs might be expected.

I'm no expert...But the family said they removed no carpet.

If they had a hit on the carpet...They would have preserved it.
edit on 24-10-2011 by whyamIhere because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 39  40  41    43  44  45 >>

log in

join