Debbie Bradley and Jeremy Irwin on Dr. Phil 3 February 2012

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
That's one opinion; there are others.

This is absolutely sickening! My outcries that the parents should be talking more do NOT include ratings shows for them to make money off of this. How is this going to bring anything new to the case? If JT is going to be answering questions for the parents, wouldn't it make sense that everything about this "interview" is staged?

One thing has come to light out of this for me. It is becoming sickeningly clear to me that with each new case of child murder, something new is learned to help the murderers have a better chance of getting away with it. The latest thing that we have learned is that if you murder your child, and you get through the initial questioning without breaking, that you can just sit back and bide your time. You can keep out of the limelight and play it low. You don't have to talk to LE. You don't have to talk to anyone who isn't paying you. You can take the paying gigs and collect your money. You can sit back and use that money for paying your high priced attorney (who, after all, seems to be keeping you out of the spotlight of being a child murderer.) You can save whatever money is left over and let it multiply for later when you can start your "new" life and when people have "forgotten."

Of course JT is telling them to not go out and buy anything new right now or spend money on anything that is significant. After all, there is lots of time for that later.

Makes me physically ill.
 
http://twitter.com/jimspellmancnn
--jim spellman CNN

jimspellmancnnjim spellman
I'll be talking Baby Lisa with @VinniePolitan on @HLNTV around 5:30 eastern.
16 minutes ago

jimspellmancnnjim spellman
Just spoke w/KCPD. Short version is nothing is new. Still want to talk to DB/JI, All crime lab type work is done. Case remains open
1 hour ago
 
And if the "new evidence" from JT is so earth shattering, why isn't he sharing it NOW?
In fact, didn't he tease the public with new evidence about a month ago? :waitasec:


RBBM: JMO but there probably is no "new evidence" ... JT is probably still trying to "concoct" something up ... that's what defense attorneys do ...

MOO ...
 
I guess I lied when I said I wasn't going to comment on the MF interview. I think I can keep it within TOS. :innocent: I don't recall any attorney ever saying that there is new "evidence", only new leads. So I don't know where MF saw the use of the word "evidence" as he says.

Since I'm already commenting, I can't let this one go. From the video:

MK: A searcher claims she has been getting anonymous threats to stop the searching, Mark. Relevant? Do you believe it? Does it fit into the puzzle at all?

Mark: Well, uh, it does fit into the puzzle considering some of the people that surround uh, you know, Deborah Bradley, and some of her associates, I see them engaged in this kind of conduct.

...I really want to know who MF is referring to, when and how he has seen people around DB engage in "this kind of conduct." I want to know when the last time MF talked to DB or her "associates" and when he witnessed this behavior. How did he come to this conclusion about the character of DB and "associates"? Not buying it, sorry.
 
Thanks, Amster..

I will stand behind Mark Fuhrman any day of the week. That is one very good detective. He knows how to profile too. Mf may have info the rest of us don't. I'm sure the evidence they took has no stranger DNA. I wonder if the cadaver dog hit on some of the evidence they took from the house?

The stars didn't line up one day for a stranger to walk in and steal a baby and three cell phones from an alcoholic-induced semi-lifeless mother and an absent father who worked a night shift for the first time.

He believes the dog hitting on decomp in the bedroom is the key....especially if her little body is ever found. I'm jaded, though. I remember a hit for decomp in a certain car trunk and a tiny body being found in the woods.....smacking myself! Different case, different state, different "mom"....
 
RBBM: JMO but there probably is no "new evidence" ... JT is probably still trying to "concoct" something up ... that's what defense attorneys do ...

MOO ...

Dog.on.cute, this is not in response to your post...just a "jump in" to state that I had made a mistake.

I just did some research, and I stand corrected...JT stated early in January that there are new "leads", not new evidence, surrounding the case of Baby Lisa. I am sorry that I used incorrect terminology.
 
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/01/2...opina-claims-there’s-new-evidence/#more-82516

Here is a link to that. He does mention Dr. Phil. Also, I'm not sure where MK is getting her information that there is a new volunteer search planned, because per the Search group facebook, they will not be doing any more searches.

and, that's all I'm going to say about that interview with Mark Fuhrman, to avoid a time out. :silenced:

Thanks...I missed completely where they talked about Dr. Phil. Honestly, I don't think MK has a clue about anything. The Nancy Grace of Fox News....:innocent:
 
http://twitter.com/jimspellmancnn
--jim spellman CNN

jimspellmancnnjim spellman
I'll be talking Baby Lisa with @VinniePolitan on @HLNTV around 5:30 eastern.
16 minutes ago

jimspellmancnnjim spellman
Just spoke w/KCPD. Short version is nothing is new. Still want to talk to DB/JI, All crime lab type work is done. Case remains open
1 hour ago
10 minutes.
 
They want to get counseling from Dr Phil? Really???
 
Dog.on.cute, this is not in response to your post...just a "jump in" to state that I had made a mistake.

I just did some research, and I stand corrected...JT stated early in January that there are new "leads", not new evidence, surrounding the case of Baby Lisa. I am sorry that I used incorrect terminology.


:seeya: No problem ... I remember that about the new "leads", and I thought it was the other attorney J Picerno -- who said there were new "leads ? :waitasec:

:seeya:
 
Mike Brooks: Dr. Phil is not gonna help you find your baby
 
Vinnie on HLN

Covering DB and JI going on Phil McG Show

Mike Brooks saying DB and JI should be TALKING TO LE !

I agree, Mike ... totally agree ...

MOO ...
 
Fantastic news from Jim Spellman, there is a crack developing in the family. Best thing that could happen in the case.
 
(OOPS, not over yet)

Does anyone else think that the local lawyer may be on his way out the same way as CS, disagreeing with Joe T.'s tactics?
 
Wow! Was Mike Brooks wound up or what!?! :eek:

One of my questions has been finally been addressed: Not all the family members of DB and JI are onboard with the legal team or their strategy in handling the case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
78
Guests online
172
Total visitors
250

Forum statistics

Threads
609,330
Messages
18,252,742
Members
234,626
Latest member
XtraGuacPlz
Back
Top