A New Year; where is Lisa Irwin?

[KsStormy]

But here is also a very alert, very awake baby. A sleeping baby would be much more 'tucked' in, as in cradled maybe or even shielding from prying eyes. No shielding, cradling or tucking in this pic. Placement would also depend on the height of the person that is carrying the baby.

True, but I still cannot see her staying asleep, being brought outside into the cold night air.

 

[In da Middle]

True, but I still cannot see her staying asleep, being brought outside into the cold night air.

Again, it was not cold out. At midnight it was over 60 degrees. Some children sleep through anything.

 

[KsStormy]

Again, it was not cold out. At midnight it was over 60 degrees. Some children sleep through anything.

Or, she wasn't alive. I don't put much (if any) faith into these "witness" accounts anyway, the stories have changed too many times, IMO.

 

[In da Middle]

Or, she wasn't alive. I don't put much (if any) faith into these "witness" accounts anyway, the stories have changed too many times, IMO.

We dont know how the stories have changed or not. It could be media editing. On the very first interview with the first witness, she was trying to be evasive to the media and wasn't sure how to answer some of the questions while trying to stay somewhat private. She was probably not sure how much info she should give them after talking to LE. As long as her story didn't change to LE, I am fine with it. How do we know that there are not more people right there that may have seen something, but just have not talked to the media? I respect witnesses that do not talk to the media highly.

 

[KsStormy]

We dont know how the stories have changed or not. It could be media editing. On the very first interview with the first witness, she was trying to be evasive to the media and wasn't sure how to answer some of the questions while trying to stay somewhat private. She was probably not sure how much info she should give them after talking to LE. As long as her story didn't change to LE, I am fine with it. How do we know that there are not more people right there that may have seen something, but just have not talked to the media? I respect witnesses that do not talk to the media highly.

First account I heard was that a woman reported her husband saw it. A while later, they both did. Also, with the motorcycle man, in his first few interviews he didn't mention calling out to the man, in his latest he says he did, and that the baby was sitting up & alert. Too many people in this case,all the way around, can't keep their stories straight.

 

[In da Middle]

First account I heard was that a woman reported her husband saw it. A while later, they both did. Also, with the motorcycle man, in his first few interviews he didn't mention calling out to the man, in his latest he says he did, and that the baby was sitting up & alert. Too many people in this case,all the way around, can't keep their stories straight.

First witness, she was trying to keep under the radar to the media. She did not say she didn't see him in the first interview did she? She said she husband saw him and he did. She may have been more comfortable later on. We also again, do not know how editing went. LE wants all raw video for a reason and some media is not cooperating with this ORDER. Why? I can see no valid reason for this other than some stories have been so edited that changes the entire story. If it was just to see who or what was in the background, I can see no logical reason to fight this.
Same with the second witness.
I am in no way saying that it was Lisa that they saw, but I have no reason to doubt they saw a man carrying a baby that night and reported it to LE. I can see no fault in that at all.

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

We dont know how the stories have changed or not. It could be media editing. On the very first interview with the first witness, she was trying to be evasive to the media and wasn't sure how to answer some of the questions while trying to stay somewhat private. She was probably not sure how much info she should give them after talking to LE. As long as her story didn't change to LE, I am fine with it. How do we know that there are not more people right there that may have seen something, but just have not talked to the media? I respect witnesses that do not talk to the media highly.

ITA: Talk to anyone who did a media interview and they will tell you more ended up on the editting floor than what got aired. :banghead:

 

[In da Middle]

ITA: Talk to anyone who did a media interview and they will tell you more ended up on the editting floor than what got aired. :banghead:

And I know 2 of my neighbors on this very case who will totally agree with this. They said they hardly recognized their own words when the interview hit the news. they described it as it being their words, but that is not WHAT they said. And this was very non-important stuff here they were interviewed for so it made no sense to edit it like they did.

 

[KsStormy]

ITA: Talk to anyone who did a media interview and they will tell you more ended up on the editting floor than what got aired. :banghead:

Which is what will happen on Dr. Phil,as well. I am concerned with what I heard the witnesses & parents SAY, not what was written or reported. I live south of KC, and remember watching a lot more footage & news on the local channels than is online now, seems lots is missing. What the other witness said changed many times, from the ones where he describes it, and now the newest from a PI .

 

[krimekat]

Lisa is with God no matter where she is . . . I truly believe her parents have no idea what happened to her -- regardless WHY (drunk, partying, at work, etc.) -- praying for all involved.

 

[tlcya]

(This is one of those "this post falls at random, no finger-pointing at any particular individual" things.)

Where is she? In the river, I would think, with the answers lying very close to home.

Or at least, statistically speaking, they would seem to lie there, inside those four walls. But who can say, who has been blessed with such second sight, to be able to discern what did take place that night, what actually did happen to Lisa Irwin?

Well, on these threads, many seem to feel they're gifted in such a manner, have the great godlike ability to recognize guilt. On a supposedly victim-friendly forum the edges soon grew tattered and quickly burst apart, the margins blown by those thinking themselves omniscient. The penalty of death by a thousand cuts has already been administered.

That's why I quit posting on the Irwin threads. The vindictiveness of some, the rush to judgement, overran the group conversation. It's certainly fine to believe - as I still may - that those accountable are those closest to the baby. But the continual grasping at straws to condemn based on the slightest provocations - provocations evidently clear to some observers in their need to affix blame - over and over again the picking apart of human lives - sorry. That in itself is a wrong.

:greatpost:

Thank you.