Lisa Irwin - Missing - One Year Later

Originally posted by Dav1d
Really? Whom, at this point is a reliable witness, that claims to have seen Lisa? By far the best secrets, are not shared! But in this case Deborah and Jeremy are not seen as trustworthy, would it be Deborah's little brother, Phillip Netz, who was content to apparently go along with the illusion that he wasn't there that night? Or would it be Samantha Brando, who again was willing to play along with the illusion that, she was just drinking with Deborah that night? If you go with the theory that anyone who changes their story is unreliable, who then that hasn't changed their story in some sigificant way saw Lisa that day/night?

Just how long does it take to drive out of the county? How long to cross the state line? Who other than family and friends was the last person to see Lisa, and just when was that really? When was Lisa last seen by her doctor? The Cable guy? The lady in the store? I remember hearing how Deborah would bring Lisa to the store, and how happy she seem.... Yet this night, she wasn't taken to the store... something to think about... When was Lisa last seen on a street cam, and where?

First let me say that I don't go along with the theory that anyone who changes their story is necessarily unreliable. Ask me to give a timeline of what I did yesterday. Then after I've had time to think about it and try to remember exact times, ask me to give a timeline again and I guarantee it will be different.

You bring up some very good points about just how reliable some of the witnesses are and just when exactly we know that Lisa was seen by an unbiased witness.

But as far as reliable witnesses, I remember you posting several pages back that Samantha Brando's 4-year-old daughter had been questioned and had said that she had seen the baby in the evening (around 6? or so). So there's your witness. Could her mom have coached her to say that? Yes, but that would be taking quite the risk that the girl wouldn't recant or even ask mommy in front of police why she asked her to lie (I know my kids pick the darnedest time to ask questions; they have no concept of discretion). Lots of things could go wrong if you coached your 4-year old to say something happened that didn't really happen.

I would be curious to know though, other than the 4-year old's witness, just who was it that last saw Lisa that has no potential interest in lying or covering up and what time that was.

reply to post by gabby2011


Strangely the more bizarre it gets for some reason it makes me think she's still alive somewhere! I don't even understand but this cast of "__________" whatever you would want to call them seem almost like slapstick comedy. Were it not for the missing LISA and this was a missing art sculpture, this would be the funniest thing you ever saw. I don't know if anyone in this mess could cover a crime. I feel there is hope for the first time in days and days . I hope you're alive baby !

Originally posted by Redux

First let me say that I don't go along with the theory that anyone who changes their story is necessarily unreliable. Ask me to give a timeline of what I did yesterday. Then after I've had time to think about it and try to remember exact times, ask me to give a timeline again and I guarantee it will be different.

I believe there is different, and then there is DIFFERENT... Yep I'm not good with time, you want the exact time I did something and you'll be lucky to get the month I'm better with computers, no way that I'm going to mistake using my iPad for my laptop. So yes to a degree I do agree with you. I know I can hear some, who if Deborah time line never changed would be suggesting that it was rehearsed and thus fake...

You bring up some very good points about just how reliable some of the witnesses are and just when exactly we know that Lisa was seen by an unbiased witness.

Thank you.

But as far as reliable witnesses, I remember you posting several pages back that Samantha Brando's 4-year-old daughter had been questioned and had said that she had seen the baby in the evening (around 6? or so). So there's your witness.

And I remember when I posted that, being told that a four year old is NOT reliable. In this scenario I was looking at worse case versions.. To my mind that would be they planed it... To my mind that would mean you can trust no one... So Kansas City has traffic cameras, when is the last time Lisa is seen on one? Where the tapes pulled and saved for the last week, when the KCPD knew this was not a simple lost kid? Did the KCPD get security tapes from all local sources?

Could her mom have coached her to say that? Yes, but that would be taking quite the risk that the girl wouldn't recant or even ask mommy in front of police why she asked her to lie (I know my kids pick the darnedest time to ask questions; they have no concept of discretion). Lots of things could go wrong if you coached your 4-year old to say something happened that didn't really happen.

Agreed, however if this was planned, really planned one needs to consider the possibility that the four year old was missidrected. That she thought she saw something that she really didn't? How many young children after watching a video of superman, and asked if they saw superman will tell you they did?

I would be curious to know though, other than the 4-year old's witness, just who was it that last saw Lisa that has no potential interest in lying or covering up and what time that was.

Agreed, it would be interesting to know, and I wonder if the KCPD knows the answer to this simple question? If they have a feel for how often she was seen in the stores, and whom was she normally with? These are the kinds of questions that the KCPD needs to know the answers to. I believe one can find the answer to these questions, without a direct face to face confrontation with the parents. Now I'm willing to acknowledge that not everyone can do that. I believe that as this case demonstrates baby Lisa needs the cops to know the answers to many questions before they choose to go into confrontation mode...

Interesting the Magan site is now talking how Megan deserves immunity and witness protection....

Originally posted by Dav1d
Interesting the Magan site is now talking how Megan deserves immunity and witness protection....

It has been brought out (and I've witnessed it in my own emails) that the "owner/admin" of JFLI is a complete and utter NUTCASE. There have been a few theories as to the identity of the person...everything from Megan Wright to Johnny Chiavelli(sp?)(DB's uncle). I have NO clue who it is but they are clearly mentally disturbed.

You guys can make your own choices, but watch their actions carefully and be careful yourself. Anyhow MW has made her own page since the JFLI person went all crazy and possessive about the info MW has or doesn't have (funny considering some people think the owner is Megan herself...)....so MW has made her own page Here's the link if you're interested. She seems to be pretty open and answering even the questions that seem to point to her being guilty or involved or lying...so go and ask away if you want

Megan Wright: Q & A, Baby Lisa

Also, on her page is another member of the media...Russ Ptacek. He's written this article on it:

Suspicions in Baby Lisa case prompt mystery phone owner to defend herself on new Facebook page Read more: www.nbcactionnews.com... book-page#ixzz1dFmUqGb8

Michelle

Originally posted by Dav1d
Originally posted by Redux

But as far as reliable witnesses, I remember you posting several pages back that Samantha Brando's 4-year-old daughter had been questioned and had said that she had seen the baby in the evening (around 6? or so). So there's your witness.

Why did Samantha's 4 year old daughter see baby Lisa that night? Was she also there at the house that night? Or was the baby at Samantha's house at some point.

Originally posted by idunno12


Why did Samantha's 4 year old daughter see baby Lisa that night? Was she also there at the house that night? Or was the baby at Samantha's house at some point.

It has been reported that the 4 year old daughter was there playing with the boys inside the home.

reply to post by Dav1d

Thank you for that clarification, David.

I've been trying to read through everything since I posted last, but there is a lot of information and theory and many conflicting stories. I am having a difficult time grasping exactly what is happening...and I think that maybe a part of me doesn't really want to, to be honest.

Does anyone else feel strange about the fact that we now live in a time when an alleged kidnapping/potential child murder case can not only be viewed in every detail as it unfolds, but actually participated in by everyone everywhere...including ongoing direct communication with investigators, reporters, and actual suspects and people involved in the actual incident? The entire Facebook culture continues to astound me.

I am sure that my words are not conveying this feeling that I have about it, but hopefully some of you can understand what I am trying to say.

Originally posted by idunno12
reply to post by Dav1d

 

Thank you for that clarification, David.

I've been trying to read through everything since I posted last, but there is a lot of information and theory and many conflicting stories. I am having a difficult time grasping exactly what is happening...and I think that maybe a part of me doesn't really want to, to be honest.

Does anyone else feel strange about the fact that we now live in a time when an alleged kidnapping/potential child murder case can not only be viewed in every detail as it unfolds, but actually participated in by everyone everywhere...including ongoing direct communication with investigators, reporters, and actual suspects and people involved in the actual incident? The entire Facebook culture continues to astound me.

I am sure that my words are not conveying this feeling that I have about it, but hopefully some of you can understand what I am trying to say.

Boy I sure hope you are wrong! I hope we are getting a highly filtered view, and we DONOT have access to every detail. There are many spinning this story, with there own agenda, their own goals and hopes.

I'm glad I was of some help.

I think from both the Casey Anthony and Haileigh Cumming debacles, the LE are keeping things close to their vests this time. I also think it's part of their strategy too.

I think they want Debbi and Jeremy to feel the heat is off them and is now being refocused in another direction. Where hopefully maybe something damning will come spilling out of their mouths.

There is no doubt in my mind (our minds) that some type of cover-up ensued after this event.

I think there are cheating spouses among this clan and I am getting the feeling drugs migh've been involved too.

Is there anyway someone could bring us up to date on the latest news? Thanks

Originally posted by Redux


I would be curious to know though, other than the 4-year old's witness, just who was it that last saw Lisa that has no potential interest in lying or covering up and what time that was.

Me too. And in addition to that I am very curious if Jeremy volunteered or was asked to work this 'new' night shift (for extra money).

The whole phone caper raises red flags. Why would someone take 3 phones? I know why we were TOLD they might but if there's 3 phones, how would that 'person' know if there wasn't a 4th one? Or a land line? Or a magic-jack on their computer? I mean, it's so lame that were ONLY left with assuming that was staged. Which then brings the focus back to the parental figures.

reply to post by idunno12


I agree I am astonished. I have tried to express this to my family today and they havn't got hold of what is happening yet. Mind BLOWING!

Originally posted by Dav1d
Boy I sure hope you are wrong! I hope we are getting a highly filtered view, and we DONOT have access to every detail. There are many spinning this story, with there own agenda, their own goals and hopes.

I'm glad I was of some help.

I hope that I am wrong, also. I truly hope that the critical details are being protected from unintentional corruption.

It just seems like the general public has so much access to people who are directly involved in this.

Its the same feeling that I get when I see people spilling out their entire minute to minute lives for everyone in the world to see. Every private thought (or should be private), every private (or should be private) conversation...all posted to Facebook for complete strangers to read. Its like some twisted form of reality TV gone crazy.

But I've gone off on a tangent. This page isn't about Facebook. Its about Lisa and this developing case.

Its just that I got caught up in reading the previous pages, following the links, and found myself reading Megan's and Eddie's FB posts. And all of a sudden I thought....wow...this is a person who is potentially involved in a horrific child abduction/murder. And people are just conversing with her about the case as though they were sitting in her living room. Megan and Eddie wildly professing their love for each other like I've seen so many other kids do on their pages. People posting tweets and updates directly from investigators. Names and photos being tossed about. Its just so....

I don't know. But I do think that I need to take a break from this madness for a bit.

Enjoy your evenings, dear fellow ATS posters. Thank you for letting me ramble for a moment. And I wish for little Lisa and the people involved to find some form of peace soon.

Interesting quote from this video.

Jim Spellman and mike brooks (HLN's Law Enforcement Analyst) are walking about Baby Lisa's house pointing out different things. They are at the back fence where it meets the neighbour's fence and backs onto a "public" wooded area (not really wooded, just a few trees).

They are discussing why an intruder might want to go in the front window vs the back. They said the front would've been too public...streetlights, no trees etc. They then go around back and are discussing how much easier it would be to go in the back and Mike Brook says:

And you got the dog next door here...the dog's out...but I think he's gotten to know you (Jim Spellman), so he's not barking.....could that have been a deterrent for somebody to not come back here....that's a possibility too...

Then Jim says:

And the dog could know a lot of people besides just me...

Mike's response:

somebody who's in the neighbourhood a lot? Absolutely

So there you go. I think the dog not barking was an argument earlier on this thread...and yet 2 guys and at least one camera guy are right up at the neighbour's dogs fence...and the dog is not making a peep because he probably knows Jim by now. Jim has only been in KC for at most a month and that dog is already used to him being there....

Lots of good info in the video check it out

Lisa Irwin: 11/9/11

Originally posted by Michelle129th
Interesting quote from this video.


Then Jim says:

And the dog could know a lot of people besides just me...

Mike's response:

somebody who's in the neighbourhood a lot? Absolutely

So there you go. I think the dog not barking was an argument earlier on this thread...and yet 2 guys and at least one camera guy are right up at the neighbour's dogs fence...and the dog is not making a peep because he probably knows Jim by now. Jim has only been in KC for at most a month and that dog is already used to him being there....

Lots of good info in the video check it out

Lisa Irwin: 11/9/11

Great find!
Interesting just this evening I was accused of slander, and not knowing what I was talking about once again, among other criminal acts...

I found it interesting the section of your video on the dumpster fire, and the question as to why it took the police two weeks to remove the dumpster after the fire. What would be even more interesting would be to know the schedule for when that dumpster was dumped! Now if that dumpster was dumped between the 4 and when the police findly got around to collecting it, the police COULD CLAIM they found nothing.... But then the police are not require to tell the truth....

I really hope the police followed all the leads well...and gathered evidence soon after from the dumpster..they must have the burnt items...or the rumor that they threw them in front of Debbie while questioning her, is wrong.

I would also like to know what they did to follow the lead from the young couple in their neighborhood who saw a man walking with a baby at 12:30 am. Maybe their was a line up for them as well to try and identify this man?

I'm assuming the police have much more info than we are getting.. .. there seems to be a lot to sort out here.

We can only hope it is done with the utmost professionalism, and intent to get to the real truth about what really happened the night baby Lisa went missing, and where she is now.

Originally posted by gabby2011


We can only hope it is done with the utmost professionalism, and intent to get to the real truth about what really happened the night baby Lisa went missing, and where she is now.

Why? Just how much do we actually value the children? These people are paid by us, don't we have a duty to hold them accountable for their actions? Are we really being honest with ourselves when we pretend that all we can do is hope? We are not even at forty five days, and the DA tells the public this case might take years to solve! What message does that send to those contemplating abducting a child?

Is little Lisa a victim of having "bad parents" is she worth less because she chose the wrong parents? Does little Lisa deserve nothing more than a few people hoping that her case was done with the utmost professionalism? Doesn't little Lisa have a right to accountability? Shouldn't those who deem that little Lisa is worth less than 45 days of searching be held accountable? Don't we have a right to know what exactly was done in her name to find her, and when? If not Lisa then when?

reply to post by idunno12

Does anyone else feel strange about the fact that we now live in a time when an alleged kidnapping/potential child murder case can not only be viewed in every detail as it unfolds, but actually participated in by everyone everywhere...including ongoing direct communication with investigators, reporters, and actual suspects and people involved in the actual incident? The entire Facebook culture continues to astound me.

Part of me's convinced this is a good thing. When I think of all the crimes past that might have been cleared up had there been more public involvement - needless to say the number of people that would have gone 'unpunished' for something they didn't do.

In Lisa's case? Wouldn't you agree the public's turning up the heat?

Is it a good thing in this case? I've no idea.

peace

Missouri Woman's Phone Tied to Baby Lisa's Disappearance

Another 'phone' video. Exposing lies. Making more assumptions. Just another mouthpiece but worth a listen.

peace