Deborah Bradley & Jeremy Irwin - Dr. Phil Interview - 3 February 2012 #2

[matou]

From the interview transcript:

Dr.Phil: So, Jeremy, you came home at 4 o'clock, is that right?

JI: Right. I got home about 3:45.

Dr.Phil: 3:45? Alright. And you didn't have any trouble waking Deborah up at the time, did you?

JI: Not really. She woke up, and we talked a little bit. She was a little sleepy until I told her to, you know, we need to go ahead and get uh, our youngest boy in his own bed. And uh, then when I said, you know, what's going on with the lights being on and stuff, and the windows open, that's when she kind of snapped too and we realized something was wrong.

Why did JI wake her up then? Did he even wake her up at all? They were up talking and then he asks her what's going on with the lights and windows? I thought he woke her up to ask about the window and the lights on.

 

[Donjeta]

So the idea is she is purposely lying about the lights because an intruder wouldn't leave any lights on when leaving with Lisa. Is this the point of all this lights on/off business?

I don't know which version is right but I am always bothered by it when the story changes.

You could be right and maybe she thought that Dr. Phil sounded a little sceptical about the intruder turning lights on and wanted to minimize the impact of the lights.

It could be that she realized that the neighbor was more intoxicated than she was and not a reliable witness and her drunken memory has clarified again.

All I know is that I am very confused about the lights right now.

 

[norest4thewicked]

Thanks for the transcripts askfornina!!!!

 

[madge]

This has been bugging on me.

Deb says her drinking "absolutely had nothing to do with her daughter disappearing" and that she only fessed up to even having anything to drink AFTER LE confronted her with it. Here is here Dr. Phil:

DB: No, because it has absolutely nothing to do with her being missing. It's, it's totally irrelevant information as far as I'm concerned. As soon as I was asked about it, I told the truth. I didn't have to-I could have avoided it. I told the truth because I have nothing to hide.

.



Seems Deb felt it was irrelevant BUT if it were irrelevant why HIDE it until LE confronts you with video about ti.

What ELSE does Deb feel is irrelevant????????????????

Honest to gosh, if my kid was missing I'd dissect EVERYTHING I was doing in the days and months leading up to it. I'd be questioning where anything or everything I was ddoing might have given some kidnapper opportunity to take my baby.

Seems she never felt that being "blacked out" or "drunk" maybe left her child vulnerable. OR she knows she wasn't that drunk at all and it never dawned on her till she was confronted with the info that she could say "oh, I don't remember, I was blacked out"

Just so odd that you would not mention to LE, oh, I was passed out.

And she wonders why LE has doubts on her story and has questions

 

[Jacie Estes]

Guilty people want the heat off. Debbie doesn't want anyone talking about the case, why else would she SHUN local & national media that could help get the word out to find her missing baby? She went into hiding for THREE CRITICAL MONTHS to dodge questions and still won't cooperate with police to find Lisa. Debbie is guilty of killing Lisa or she'd be talking not hiding. All JMO.

Deborah wasn't in hiding, she was on Lister St, IDM saw her. Any LE or media had/has the opportunity to speak with her; in fact, they spoke with LE and FBI. Dr. Phil contacted her, the show was taped within that 3 month time period. A local reporter, in the nighttime, went up and knocked on their bedroom window, kinda rude; LE came to move the reporter so someone in the home spoke with LE.

Deborah did not kill Lisa and she is not hiding. IMHO

 

[RANCH]

I don't know which version is right but I am always bothered by it when the story changes.

You could be right and maybe she thought that Dr. Phil sounded a little sceptical about the intruder turning lights on and wanted to minimize the impact of the lights.

It could be that she realized that the neighbor was more intoxicated than she was and not a reliable witness and her drunken memory has clarified again.

All I know is that I am very confused about the lights right now.

Thanks. So for you it's more about the changing story rather than helping to prove any particular theory?

 

[Donjeta]

From the interview transcript:

Dr.Phil: So, Jeremy, you came home at 4 o'clock, is that right?

JI: Right. I got home about 3:45.

Dr.Phil: 3:45? Alright. And you didn't have any trouble waking Deborah up at the time, did you?

JI: Not really. She woke up, and we talked a little bit. She was a little sleepy until I told her to, you know, we need to go ahead and get uh, our youngest boy in his own bed. And uh, then when I said, you know, what's going on with the lights being on and stuff, and the windows open, that's when she kind of snapped too and we realized something was wrong.

Why did JI wake her up then? Did he even wake her up at all? They were up talking and then he asks her what's going on with the lights and windows? I thought he woke her up to ask about the window and the lights on.

Is he saying that he needed Deb's help to carry the child to his own bed? He looks like he could accomplish it on his own.


They said in an earlier interview that they had talked about some unspecified things for a while before getting on to the lights and Lisa business so it sounded like it wasn't an instant panic.

JI: “I had, I had come home and, uh, Deborah had woke, woken up when I got there, and, uh, we talked for a couple minutes, and then, uh, I asked her, you know, what’s going on. She said what do you mean, and that’s when I told her, you know, the door, the lights, the window. And, uh, she kinda jumped up out of bed like something was wrong, and that was when I, I kind of realized that something might be wrong.”

Dan Abrams on GMA 10/17

 

[cityslick]

My bolding

Then it goes back to would an intruder come in and turn on those lights. Even DR Phil posed the question that way.

There seems to be a need to backtrack and downplay the number of lights that were on when JI came home. It was JI's own words, he wasn't drunk when he came home from work, he would have known what lights were on and whether or not it was more than he would have expected. It was said that the amount of lights that were on was one of the things that led him to become alarmed.

Now the number of lights needs to be downplayed. Did DB, during all of her internet searches to see what people are saying about her, realize that it doesn't sound plausible that an intruder would turn on so many lights so now she needs to say that JI just exaggerated and it was really only a few small lights on, ones that were normally left on?

No, I just think you are focusing on the words 'all' or 'most' and taking that literally. For example, if I come home at 3 am and see 2 rooms with lights on, I'll be pissed off that lights were on because I'm paying the damn bill and will say, 'why did you leave all the lights on'.

 

[madge]

This has been bugging on me.

Deb says her drinking "absolutely had nothing to do with her daughter disappearing" and that she only fessed up to even having anything to drink AFTER LE confronted her with it. Here is here Dr. Phil:

DB: No, because it has absolutely nothing to do with her being missing. It's, it's totally irrelevant information as far as I'm concerned. As soon as I was asked about it, I told the truth. I didn't have to-I could have avoided it. I told the truth because I have nothing to hide.

.



Seems Deb felt it was irrelevant BUT if it were irrelevant why HIDE it until LE confronts you with video about ti.

What ELSE does Deb feel is irrelevant????????????????

Honest to gosh, if my kid was missing I'd dissect EVERYTHING I was doing in the days and months leading up to it. I'd be questioning where anything or everything I was ddoing might have given some kidnapper opportunity to take my baby.

Seems she never felt that being "blacked out" or "drunk" maybe left her child vulnerable. OR she knows she wasn't that drunk at all and it never dawned on her till she was confronted with the info that she could say "oh, I don't remember, I was blacked out"

Just so odd that you would not mention to LE, oh, I was passed out.

And she wonders why LE has doubts on her story and has questions

 

[RANCH]

Because it wasn't a real interview <modsnip>, lol. jmo. She was convinced by her media lawyer, who managed to get his own face on tv for an hour, and McGraw, to do a contrived appearance <modsnip>. Tacopina knows the Anthonys got $500K, <modsnip> and of course he gets a cut of that. McGraw & Tacopino got what they wanted but seems Debbie was left hanging in the wind with more questions than ever. I think she only made public opinion worse because it was clear she still won't answer critical questions. Wonder how she feels about doing her disastrous cameo now, lol. All JMO.

Well whether you feel it was a real interview or not the fact is it did bring attention to DB/JI. People are talking about them and what they said on the show.

 

[cityslick]

This has been bugging on me.

Deb says her drinking "absolutely had nothing to do with her daughter disappearing" and that she only fessed up to even having anything to drink AFTER LE confronted her with it. Here is here Dr. Phil:

DB: No, because it has absolutely nothing to do with her being missing. It's, it's totally irrelevant information as far as I'm concerned. As soon as I was asked about it, I told the truth. I didn't have to-I could have avoided it. I told the truth because I have nothing to hide.

.



Seems Deb felt it was irrelevant BUT if it were irrelevant why HIDE it until LE confronts you with video about ti.

What ELSE does Deb feel is irrelevant????????????????

Honest to gosh, if my kid was missing I'd dissect EVERYTHING I was doing in the days and months leading up to it. I'd be questioning where anything or everything I was ddoing might have given some kidnapper opportunity to take my baby.

Seems she never felt that being "blacked out" or "drunk" maybe left her child vulnerable. OR she knows she wasn't that drunk at all and it never dawned on her till she was confronted with the info that she could say "oh, I don't remember, I was blacked out"

Just so odd that you would not mention to LE, oh, I was passed out.

And she wonders why LE has doubts on her story and has questions

This is the only part that really bothers me if true. If, during initial conversations with LE, when recounting events the previous night, didn't mention that she had been drinking, that's a big deal. Because it does play a part in the events that night. Her recollection is hazy due to the alcohol, so you would think she would tell them that upfront.

Do we have confirmation that she never told LE this early on?

 

[annalia]

No, I just think you are focusing on the words 'all' or 'most' and taking that literally. For example, if I come home at 3 am and see 2 rooms with lights on, I'll be pissed off that lights were on because I'm paying the damn bill and will say, 'why did you leave all the lights on'.

No I'm not focused on the literal meaning of those two words at all, I'm focused on the words that came out of their own mouths. JI said exactly what lights were left on and that they were more than he expected. Shouldn't he know what lights to expect? It caused him to be alarmed. Why would he be alarmed at normal lights being on?

What happened to the two kitchen lights that he said were on? They wouldn't be the stove light because he also included accent lights in addition to the other lights.

 

[Donjeta]

Thanks. So for you it's more about the changing story rather than helping to prove any particular theory?

I guess. Whenever there are multiple versions floating around that can't easily be true at the same time it has the unfortunate side effect that it tends to decrease the teller's credibility.

 

[Donjeta]

JMO but I think focusing on t the difference between all or most or some lights being on totally misses the point.

The point is (IMO): Was there an unusual, alarming number of lights on that night and did an intruder leave them on?

Or, did Debbie leave her normal, customary number of lights on because Jeremy wasn't there to walk behind her and turn them off, and an intruder had nothing to do with the lights being on?

 

[cityslick]

JMO but I think focusing on t the difference between all or most or some lights being on totally misses the point.

The point is (IMO): Was there an unusual, alarming number of lights on that night and did an intruder leave them on?

Or, did Debbie leave her normal, customary number of lights on because Jeremy wasn't there to walk behind her and turn them off, and an intruder had nothing to do with the lights being on?

Well, that is the key question. If she did actually make a statement earlier that it was unusual for that many lights to be on, then it is a direct contradictory statement.

 

[RANCH]

JMO but I think focusing on t the difference between all or most or some lights being on totally misses the point.

The point is (IMO): Was there an unusual, alarming number of lights on that night and did an intruder leave them on?

Or, did Debbie leave her normal, customary number of lights on because Jeremy wasn't there to walk behind her and turn them off, and an intruder had nothing to do with the lights being on?

For myself this business with the lights doesn't help me come to any conclusion either. It may mean something or it may mean nothing at all.

 

[erinleigh]

THINGS I NOTICED
1. Lisa closes her eyes everytime she says she doesnt know what happened
2. Lisa said he and her husband didnt discuss the event until days later because "when you child is missing, you dont talk about it" WTH?
3. Lisa and husband tried to clear up inconsistancies about the lights being all on vs some on. SHe said the lights she left on were normal, yet to Jeremy the electrian it was seen as "a lot of lights" - well the question I have is then, why did Jeremy say Lisa was sleepy but when he said all the lights were on Lisa snapped awake.

 

[cityslick]

THINGS I NOTICED
1. Lisa closes her eyes everytime she says she doesnt know what happened
2. Lisa said he and her husband didnt discuss the event until days later because "when you child is missing, you dont talk about it" WTH?
3. Lisa and husband tried to clear up inconsistancies about the lights being all on vs some on. SHe said the lights she left on were normal, yet to Jeremy the electrian it was seen as "a lot of lights" - well the question I have is then, why did Jeremy say Lisa was sleepy but when he said all the lights were on Lisa snapped awake.

I think you meant Deborah, not Lisa (Lisa is the baby)

On point two, I think she was referring specifically about the lights (not talking about it), not about the event in general. On point three, that could be taken as when he said 'why are all the lights on', she thought that meant that every single light was on. He, being an electrician, has a different meaning to the words 'all the lights on'.

 

[octobermoon]

THINGS I NOTICED
1. Lisa closes her eyes everytime she says she doesnt know what happened
2. Lisa said he and her husband didnt discuss the event until days later because "when you child is missing, you dont talk about it" WTH?
3. Lisa and husband tried to clear up inconsistancies about the lights being all on vs some on. SHe said the lights she left on were normal, yet to Jeremy the electrian it was seen as "a lot of lights" - well the question I have is then, why did Jeremy say Lisa was sleepy but when he said all the lights were on Lisa snapped awake.

I think you mean Deb.

Not meant to be snarky, but you only get so much time to edit a post.

 

[octobermoon]

I think you meant Deborah, not Lisa (Lisa is the baby)

On point two, I think she was referring specifically about the lights (not talking about it), not about the event in general. On point three, that could be taken as when he said 'why are all the lights on', she thought that meant that every single light was on. He, being an electrician, has a different meaning to the words 'all the lights on'.

Could be. I wish he would talk more.