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: 52
41
<< 49  50  51    53  54  55 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 04:01 PM
link   
The Mother is a human being with flaws...Just like the rest of us.

By the way, saying "What you would do" in this situation.... Impossible.

It's easy to throw this woman under the bus.

It's hard not to get emotional with this precious child involved.

I am waiting for the FBI. I am still hoping for her safe return.

I am still praying for Baby Lisa...




posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thurisaz
reply to post by Michelle129th
 


My Daughter recently had a sample taken. It was quick using a swab, there were no court order in place, it was part of the police investigation.

Why would the police need a court order to take DNA samples? The Parents don't appear to be cooperating unless of course court orders are routine in the USA?

over here, if for eg, my Daughter refused to allow the swab, then the police would approach the courts for an order to proceed.





I don't know if you were asking me, or just talking out loud...but I never said they needed a court order to take samples? I was questioning why it was taking the police so long to collect DNA from the family whereas on only day 4 they were out collecting from people outside the home. I was already wondering why they had collected from the neighbour a few pages back. Was it to compare to the samples they would later take from home or another reason?

Michelle



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 
I'm curious as well as to what her lawyer is advising her to do or say,If they are not involved in Lisa disappearance why is she not advising them to do interviews?why all the silence?Lets see,no interviews from the police or media,their not actively out looking,what exactly are they doing to find their child?Nothing,nada,zip,zero and that's what I don't get.As a mom I would be moving heaven and earth to find my child,I would have to be physically sedated....so to behave the way they are I don't understand,could it be perfectly normal for some?I guess,...but not in my world.

you guys have kept me well informed on the latest info on this case..good work



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Kansas City is especially keen on Community Policing. We are encouraged to speculate, to call the police if we see anything suspicious.


That still just gets my goat. It's unbelievable to me someone - especially a couple - in their own homes - who'd witness a man carrying a baby down the road in the wee hours of the morning, the baby is inappropriately dressed - and they don't call the police.

That still just sticks in my craw.

peace



huh? So people are supposed to call the cops over everything? Prior to the amber alert, how would the people even know something was amiss?

Yes, everytime we see a man carrying a baby, and the baby isn't dressed as we would dress the baby, we should call the cops...



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 07:13 PM
link   
Does anyone have any information on that Mike Thompson who saw some one walking with a child at 4:00?
It did say he picked out some one from the pictures that he was shown, and that the person was interviewed a few times. Any Ideas, about this.



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   
For the benefit of everyone in the thread, I found this article while stumbling on Police Interrogation. It looks interesting and may or may not answer some of the questions people asked about questioning.

I can not vouch for its content, but it is on a reputable site:

How Police Interrogation Works



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thurisaz
reply to post by Michelle129th
 


My Daughter recently had a sample taken. It was quick using a swab, there were no court order in place, it was part of the police investigation.

Why would the police need a court order to take DNA samples? The Parents don't appear to be cooperating unless of course court orders are routine in the USA?

over here, if for eg, my Daughter refused to allow the swab, then the police would approach the courts for an order to proceed.




The police took DNA samples on day one, on day one they knew that they would want DNA samples. Go back to the week of the fourth and look at what the police was looking at, in the sewer, cistern, the police by their behavior are convinced this child is dead.

I know that I read that the police got DNA samples on day one, when the police volunteer that the family was cooperating. Now at week four they want more samples? Is this because they lost the originals? DNA doesn't change week to week. Is it because the police over looked the need for DNA samples from the family until almost a month into the invisgation? Would this be a sign of police competence, or incompetence? Or is it a sign of covering your ass, and having available the ability to plant evidence in the future? The police are suppose to be the experts, and if they act as if your daughter is dead from day one. If they accuse you of your daughters death from day one. If they tell you your daughter is dead for almost a month, should we really be surprised if from time to time you also refer to her as being dead?

Once again just last week after being given the opportunity multiple times to search their home. And before you claim these were very limited searches, remember the police found the broken cellphone in the computer desk draw, and they search the basement. Did the police believe at that time that the baby was chopped up and in the draw? The police went over this house with a fine tooth comb, yet they keep finding things that they forgot to search for the first time, the second time, the third time, the fourth time. Anyone else curious why the police and the FBI almost a month into this invisgation keep finding new things to search this home once again for? Why after labeling the family non-cooperative on week one, and feeling the need to get a court order to search for DNA last week, one would assume that the family would be cooperative with giving DNA this week. The police set themselves up as an adversary, attempted to publicly shame this family to corce them, and now seem shocked that the family no longer wants to bend over backwards to meet their wants and desires? The police need to grow up and get real! The police have painted them as bad, it would be folly to believe or expect them to behave as 'good' people now.



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dav1d


The police took DNA samples on day one, on day one they knew that they would want DNA samples. Go back to the week of the fourth and look at what the police was looking at, in the sewer, cistern, the police by their behavior are convinced this child is dead.


Perhaps they did...but could it be that they were thinking along the lines of the baby getting out by herself and gone wandering? Fallen in a ditch, down a sewer whatever.


I know that I read that the police got DNA samples on day one, when the police volunteer that the family was cooperating. Now at week four they want more samples? Is this because they lost the originals? DNA doesn't change week to week. Is it because the police over looked the need for DNA samples from the family until almost a month into the invisgation? Would this be a sign of police competence, or incompetence? Or is it a sign of covering your ass, and having available the ability to plant evidence in the future? The police are suppose to be the experts, and if they act as if your daughter is dead from day one. If they accuse you of your daughters death from day one. If they tell you your daughter is dead for almost a month, should we really be surprised if from time to time you also refer to her as being dead?


I'm not sure that I heard anything about DNA being collected other than from the teenage neighbour we've heard no more about.

I too would wonder IF they didn't collect DNA from the family in the beginning...why not? We all know that a natural progression into a very young child's disappearance is at some point the parents being suspects..I would think they would immediately get those samples from mom dad and kids even if they didn't end up needing them later.

Michelle



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   
Sadly this is a he said, she said case, only with the he being the police. With the police using coercion, and publicly attempting to vilify them to cover their incompetence. CSI is suppose to be specially train in investigations! They, CIS was there on day one. The police started out saying the family had cooperated, it was only later after being interrogated for forty hours, and told that Debrah had kill her daughter that they became less cooperative. Think about what it would mean on multiple days to be subject to over forty hours of psychological manipulation! Historically it's taken far less time than this to get false confession, out of people. Add to this the natural stress that she would be under from the loss of her child.

We acknowledge nowadays that psychological abuse by a spouse is wrong, went will we acknowledge that psychological abuse by the police is every bit as wrong?

---------------

The police got Debrah to concent to a Lie Detector test something not even admissible in court, but now we are to believe that before the police decided to turn the relationship into an adversarial one they never bothered to collect screening DNA?!? That has to speak to the police level of compentance in this case, and how serious they choose to take it...
edit on 26-10-2011 by Dav1d because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 11:19 PM
link   

"...false confessions usually involve coercive interrogations in which police claim to have evidence of a suspect's guilt and then promise leniency for cooperation or severe punishment for non-cooperation.


Does that sound familiar? Interrogated on October the 4, 6, 8, 9, and the 13, told that she failed the Lie Detector Test, turning up the pressure as if she isn't under enough pressure already by saying they have refused to cooperate. Shown a picture of her daughter and told that she is dead, then told to do right by her!

Emotional abuse or psychological abuse is coercion, humiliation, and intimidation, Where one person uses emotional or psychological coercion to compel another to do something they do not want, or is not in their best interests; or when one person manipulates another's emotional or psychological state for their own ends, or commits psychological aggression using ostensibly non-violent methods to inflict mental or emotional violence or pain on another.

Who here believes that if their child was missing, and to have a public authority like the police to accuse you of not doing all you could to assist in the recovery of your child, would not be painful to experience, would not be humiliating, would not be intimidating?!? This also explains why the police would choose to publicly announcement that Lisa parents were doing all they could to help the police... The first she is cooperating, then she isn't, then she is, then she isn't it is a desire to keep her unbalanced.


edit on 27-10-2011 by Dav1d because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 01:21 AM
link   
reply to post by TWILITE22
 


I'm curious as well as to what her lawyer is advising her to do or say,If they are not involved in Lisa disappearance why is she not advising them to do interviews?


One thing you have to factor in is Tacopina himself. He's 'THE MAN'. He's got an international reputation to uphold and he knows the world is looking at him - and he loves it I might add. He was quoted as saying he 'takes cases non one else can win...and wins them.' That, in my mind, plays a huge part in what we're seeing, or not seeing coming out of these parents at the moment.

My opinion? Tacopina? He could give a *bleep* about the child. If you look at his record it's obvious he's never cared a whit for the innocent so it doesn't surprise me we're not seeing very 'parent like' behavior coming from Lisa's mom and dad.


why all the silence?Lets see,no interviews from the police or media,their not actively out looking,what exactly are they doing to find their child?Nothing,nada,zip,zero and that's what I don't get.As a mom I would be moving heaven and earth to find my child,I would have to be physically sedated....so to behave the way they are I don't understand,could it be perfectly normal for some?I guess,...but not in my world.


Silence? Tacopina drew a line with the cops. No interviews unless 'terms' are met. I don't see Tacopina giving in this soon. And I believe you - you'd be moving heaven and earth to find your child lawyer be damned. So would I. But we have to remember too - the police hold no bones for coming right out and saying the parents are suspects. And with Tacopina in their corner? I'm sure they're looking to him like he's a god. Can you imagine Jeremy saying 'boo' to Tacopina? I can't.

peace



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 01:23 AM
link   
reply to post by suzan
 

He picked out 'Jersey' someone who's already been ruled out. (Jersey is the homeless guy who was picked up on another violation, incarcerated and interviewed, etc. He's been cleanly ruled out by the police)

Interesting point there also. Jersey does NOT match the description of the 'tall thin bald guy' seem by the other witnesses - so no we've got conflicting sightings also. 2 men now? Gawd... Smoke and mirrors.

peace



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Jessicamsa
 


Yes, everytime we see a man carrying a baby, and the baby isn't dressed as we would dress the baby, we should call the cops...


Oh the drama of it all, lol. We're not talking a Sunday afternoon in the park or by the seaside for cripes sake!

If it's 0230 in the morning and the baby is dressed in a diaper? Yes. Pretty simple that.

If it's 0430 in the morning and the baby isn't dressed in a coat? Yes. Pretty obvious that.

Use your head. There could have been a car accident and the 'man ' is in shock. Or a house fire, shock again. Someone without a car who's scared because his baby is sick with a high temperature and needs help. Or I don't know, let's see, could it be SOMEONE'S STEELING A BABY?

Nothing at all wrong with being a good Samaritan, especially when a INFANT is involved.

peace

edit on 27-10-2011 by silo13 because: bbc bold



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 01:40 AM
link   
I can't vet this video in my country.

Would one of you be so kind as to tell me what's on it? Anything valuable?



Edit to add: I think this video is the same one on CNN? link (I can only hear the audio I can't 'see' anything though).

Interesting he mentions the dog was 'really loud'.

Huge are - but the audio didn't speak of the pentagram so maybe it isn't the same video? Ugh!

edit on 27-10-2011 by silo13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 02:16 AM
link   
Mother of one of Lisa Irwin’s half brothers speaks out


Rasleen Raim is the mother of the 8-year-old that was living in the North Lister home. Raim and Jeremy Irwin, Lisa’s father, once lived together in the same Northland home. But in 2008, the couple’s custody battle played out in court and Jeremy Irwin received full custody of their child.

Raim said she has not been able to see her son for years.


What's the reason? Not that it makes a big difference if she misses him and is worried that's all fine and good. But I still would like to know why the father was given full custody and why no visitation?


Ryan asked, “What did you think when you heard about the baby?”

“I thought about my boy, I thought it was mine,” Raim said.

“How much do you miss him?”

“I can't even say…I miss him a lot.”

We spoke to Raim on the phone Wednesday night and she said she was worried about her son.


Her lawyer (Raim's) would not allow her to be videoed and will release a statement at a later date.

peace
edit on 27-10-2011 by silo13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 02:23 AM
link   
Back to Jeremy.

I’ve read there’s a couple hours of time Jeremy is unaccounted for.

He took a ‘short break’ from work to go home and eat with the family. Deborah had made dinner for the neighbors.

Also it’s recorded Jeremy was not the one who watched over Lisa when Deborah went to the store - but - the neighbor Deborah was drinking with (later) watched Lisa and her brothers.

Here’s a link to at least half that info. It’s all video.

video link

peace



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 02:59 AM
link   


(See video around 6:24)

So Samantha was babysitting Lisa. Samantha is the same woman who Lisa’s mother was drinking with the night Lisa went missing.

Jeremy was quoted to be there at the same time as Samantha but don’t know how long he was there.

peace



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 03:50 AM
link   
Incompetence! I've said it before, that I believe the police were incompetent in their handling of this case. The rush to cancel the Amber Alert after just 12 hours seemed odd to me. So I went to The National Center For Missing and Exploited Children and looked up the info on Lisa Irwin.


Circumstances: Both photos shown are of Lisa. She was last seen at home on October 4, 2011 at approximately 4:00 a.m. Lisa has a birthmark on her right thigh. She was last known to be wearing purple pants and a purple shirt with kittens on it.


Let's see the police miss stated the time Lisa was last seen! This would have the effect of narrowing the area where she could be!! The alert was issued at 7:00 am and based on the alert info she was last seen at 4:00 am based on that info at that time she would be within a 3:00 hour window of KC... Rather than the 8+ hour window she could actually be in. This would have significantly lessen the search arrea!!! There are no active alerts at the moment, but we are into the 4 week of this case, and the info there is still wrong! We may never know what effect this had on baby Lisa, in the first critical 48 hours of her case.... We may never know the full effects of the choice to cancel the alart by 7:00 pm that night. But if police are concentrating their effort in a smaller area than where she could be, should we really be surprised that there has been no sign of her?



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 04:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Dav1d
 


Let's see the police miss stated the time Lisa was last seen! This would have the effect of narrowing the area where she could be!! The alert was issued at 7:00 am and based on the alert info she was last seen at 4:00 am based on that info at that time she would be within a 3:00 hour window of KC... Rather than the 8+ hour window she could actually be in. This would have significantly lessen the search arrea!!!


First of all they were not even informed of Lisa's disappearance until after 0400 hours, some say 0430. So there's no way the police can beheld to blame for that one.

Also - from the first call Lisa was missing - Lisa's mother changed HER story 3 times. When was the last time she saw her own daughter?


When did you last see Lisa?

■Gave Lisa a bath, put sleeping clothes on her, put her to sleep at 10:30 p.m. as Deborah was going to bed herself. Was programming new numbers in a new phone to replace a third broken one.

■Put Lisa to bed at 7 to 7:30 pm, checked on Lisa at 10:30 pm as she was going to bed.

■Version 4.0.1: Put Lisa to bed at 6:40 pm, checked on her once shortly after, either was well on her way to getting drunk or started getting drunk (she calls it “her adult time” ) has no clue if she ever checked on Lisa again,


So, how can the police be blamed for that?

By your thinking it would seem Deborah is trying to vilify herself.


and the info there is still wrong!


The 'facts' per Deborah and Jeremy? They've changed more than 5 times now.

What the media has reported? Sporadically wrong since day 1.

What the police know as fact and what they are reporting? We don't know.


We may never know what effect this had on baby Lisa, in the first critical 48 hours of her case....


No we wont. Too bad the parents didn't bother to tell the truth from the get go.


We may never know the full effects of the choice to cancel the alart by 7:00 pm that night.


Unless the police know something they're not telling us. But that's besides the point. If Deborah would have reported her child missing earlier - by checking on the baby - and if she hadn't changed her story multiple times it would have definitely changed how the police proceeded. That's not the fault of the police.

peace

edit on 27-10-2011 by silo13 because: finish quote



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 04:23 AM
link   
Just whom do you think issued the alert? Hint it wasn't Deborah, or Jeremy, it was the police. And the police supplied the details for the alert!

Link here



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 49  50  51    53  54  55 >>

log in

join