I'm a bit confused. The neighbor passe a LDT, and yet GA doesn't want LE to stop investigating him (even insinuating that he's the guilty party). Isn't this what happened to him when he was falsely accused after his own child went missing? Why does he want that to happen to someone else?
What possible evidence does GA have that would make anyone eye the neighbor? What he's not saying is more troubling that what he is saying.
MOO
Mel
From what I've read, Gil Abeyta considers the police suspicion of him to be par for the course. He knows that parents are always going to be suspects in a missing child case. It's his wife, however, who was really raked over the coals because she failed a lie detector test. I don't think GA would want an innocent person to be accused of something but he does feel that there's something in the neighbor's story that warrants further investigation.
He seems to know something that we don't know about what went on earlier that day on October 3rd:
From the first article above:
Abeyta believes events that occurred the afternoon of Oct. 3, and that appear to have escalated throughout the evening and into the early morning hours of Oct. 4, could have caused the potential suspect to snap and act on impulse.
He feels that time is being wasted and the neighbor is a potential suspect and should not be dismissed easily. He clearly suggests that JB (the neighbor) was the one who was identified by the motorcycle guy as the man carrying the baby in the middle of the night:
"We have a potential suspect, we have an eyewitness who positively identified the suspect in a lineup of photos," Abeyta said.
A positive ID, a motive, some kind of trouble earlier in the day, a separation from his spouse that same day and also the fact that SB was with DB all that evening. Yes, I agree with GA, it's worth looking into in great detail, beyond a LDT.
I'm really glad the parent did little speaking (from the 2nd article). GA clearly violated any trust that could have been by going straight to the media with his findings - going so far as to tell them what DB was doing when he got there (cleaning the kitchen) and further by saying she didn't come out to say hi or shake his hand (sour grapes anyone).
He clearly is not an advocate for baby Lisa by spreading such drival nonsense.
My opinion Only.
Mel
The fact that GA was initially turned away is not news. He did not report it. It was reported by the media who were outside the house weeks ago. If anything all he's doing in the above article is confirming it. And I don't see any violation of trust in him mentioning that DB was cleaning the kitchen! He is on their side. That's clear to me. He believes Lisa is alive and he believes that DB and JI have let others (like her cousin, the PI and the lawyers) have too much power in dictating to them how to behave.
Was Mr. Abeyta definitely cleared in the case of his own child? The article say the child was never found. Was he falsely accused, or did they just never have enough evidence to convict him?
He was never an official suspect. He, like all parents of missing children, was a person of interest but it was his wife mainly who police were suspicious of.
Mr. Abeyta is a nice man, but he's not LE. His "feelings" about this neighbor don't matter any more than yours or mine.
JMO
I disagree. He has spent time with the family. He has 25 years' experience in dealing with these cases. His opinion matters a great deal. In fact, chances are he has a lot more experience in missing child cases than many of the police officers investigating this case.
