have your thoughts changed? **new poll**

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

Who do you think is responsible for Baby Lisa being missing

  • mom

    Votes: 223 49.4%
  • dad

    Votes: 2 0.4%
  • mom and dad

    Votes: 76 16.9%
  • SODDI

    Votes: 31 6.9%
  • I have no idea

    Votes: 119 26.4%

  • Total voters
    451
Status
Not open for further replies.
As time has passed, I've become more dug in: Mom alone is responsible. Initially, I thought this Mom either sold her gorgeous sweet baby, or lost her temper causing her baby's death.

Then, I began thinking there was a possible accident which was covered by Mom because of her being drunk and/or negligent.

I see Mom's not gonna budge an inch. I'm back to either Mom sold her daughter, or lost her temper and she will never admit it.

IMHO - I don't think mommy was drunk at all. It was a convenient excuse to present to the MSM as to her gaps in the timeline. For all I know she poured that box o' wine out in the back yard and proceeded with selling/disposing of baby Lisa. I haven't heard from the neighbor as to how much mommy consumed, so I'm gonna have to go with my gut.

JMHO -- thanks.

Mel
 
Jmho and based on "Mother's intuition", gut instinct, DB's reactions to questions when interviewed and the facts of the case...I jumped off the fence and onto the side of Mom is responsible with Dad helping in the cover up of something. Occam's razor is always brought to mind in cases such as these. Cases that involve such elaborate stories, like cell phones missing, Dad's first overnite shift, all the lights on in the house, open window, no dogs barking, drunk Mom, sick baby, runs to the store for booze, baby to bed at 10:30 no 6:40, other children in the house not allowed to answer questions and a dumpster fire a few blocks away.
Too much to overcome for SODDI. JMO.
 
I was supportive of DB for about the first week. I finally fell off the fence last Monday when we saw all of the interviews that DB and JI did. It was their own words and their behavior that knocked me off. It has nothing to do with rumors or media. Their changing stories and changing times are indicative of deception. And, DB's behavior now is completely different than she was the first day. There is no way in my mind or heart that I can believe that this woman who was crying the way she was the first day could have recovered so quickly. And, her manipulative and defensive ways when she is doing the interviews is more of an indication to me.

Also, I don't know how Lisa died, but I believe she is gone and this happened at the hands of DB, whether it be by accident or other. I believe that this either happened during the day or during the hours that she was having her "grown up time." I also believe that she had help in disposing of that precious child. I don't know if the child will ever be found because if the person who helped DB took that angel in a vehicle away from the area, she could be anywhere. And, a small body is so hard to find. Whoever did this did a great job at hiding the cell phones, I'm sure they would do an even better job hiding precious little Lisa.
 
anyone out there that the remembers the show 'Lost in Space'????? Thats where I am?????
 
I went with I have no idea. I want to believe it was soddi, at least then theres a chance that Lisa is alive somewhere. But everytime I see that clip of Deborah defending her "adult time", my gut says theres something wrong there. I understand that everyone acts different in stressful circumstances, but I would feel alot better about her if she was saying something along the lines of how she felt guilty about it now and she wished she could go back and change things so maybe her daughter was with her now.
 
My opinion hasn't changed...I voted Mom again.

I like the way this poll is worded ie: responsible for, rather than guilty.

I feel much more comfortable with that because I don't know the why/when/ how/, but I do feel DB is responsible in some way.

JMO
 
You forgot to add the devil worshippers, hippy wiccans/witches, and aliens to the poll. :floorlaugh::great: Sorry, I couldn't resist! :floorlaugh:
 
I'm hanging out on this fence waiting to hear more from LE. :fence::seeya:

I just really don't think enough information or evidence has been released from LE to truly formulate a theory without a large amount of speculation. MOO
 
I think Deborah is primarily responsible but not the only party to this crime.

I think while Mom was drinking out front, the baby got out of the crib, or the boys got her out because she was fussing and Mom was preoccupied with her grown up time. From there I think the baby got in trouble and was harmed. I think Jeremy or someone helped to attempt to stage an abduction so that neither of them would be charged with negligence, thus possibly putting them in jeopardy to lose "the boys."

Or I think they somehow sold the baby.

I believe they know her status (deceased or alive).

That doesn't make sense to me for the simple fact that an accidental death caused by a 6 or 8 year old would have given DB and JI a lot of sympathy, not having to worry about their child getting in trouble and certainly not anything like they are experiencing now.
 
That doesn't make sense to me for the simple fact that an accidental death caused by a 6 or 8 year old would have given DB and JI a lot of sympathy, not having to worry about their child getting in trouble and certainly not anything like they are experiencing now.

Exactly. Who in their right mind is going to cover up an accident involving a 6 or 8 years old? Children that young can not be legally punished.
 
Since the question was one of responsibility and DB was the responsible party left to care for the children- I'm going with her having involvement in it. Whether it be that she was too drunk and passed out to hear an intruder. Not locking the doors. Having some kind of accidental mishap as a result of drinking or what have you. I think the responsibility still lies with her.
 
There's a saying in Texas: If you don't like the weather, wait a minute and it'll change. This is how I feel about my "opinion" about who dunnit!

Still holding out the glimmer of hope that Lisa will be found alive and I am so, so wrong.
 
I pegged the faker mom as the guilty party the first time I saw her boohoohoo for the cameras and then shut off the waterworks at will.
 
I voted SODDI. Still giving the parents the benefit of the doubt.

Not condoning DB actions that night but Ive seen nothing to show she killed Lisa harmed her or sold her.
 
In the initial poll I was on the fence and had no idea who could have been responsible for baby Lisa's disappearance. But with the news this past week I've changed my mind.

I now feel that DB was responsible. Clearly both parents have changed their stories, and nothing makes any sense. But the fact that DB stated she was drunk that night and doesn't remember if and when she last checked on baby Lisa shows a clear lack of responsibility on her part. JI was evidently at work when whatever happened took place, so that leaves the responsibility on DB's shoulders.

DB and JI not allowing LE to interview the two boys is very concerning. It's as if they fear that one or both of the boys would slip and say something they don't want known. It disturbs me that neither parent has made any sort of plea for the safe return of their baby.
 
I voted SODDI. Still giving the parents the benefit of the doubt.

Not condoning DB actions that night but Ive seen nothing to show she killed Lisa harmed her or sold her.

I am with you on this, gonna take a lot to make me believe either mom or dad was involved. I am just not feeling it.
 
I was sure of mom the first time but unsure of the dad, now vote is Dad and Mom.
 
MOO ...

My thoughts have NOT changed ... from the first interview of DB I saw, I have always believed that "mom" was responsible for Baby Lisa's "demise" ...

And DB's latest "media appearances" from earlier this week, has "sealed" it even more for me.

I have tried as best I can to look at this from an "unbiased viewpoint" -- that maybe SODDI ... BUT the "intruder did it" makes absolutely NO sense to me ... it just does NOT work.

When you have the "last known person" to have seen Baby Lisa continuously changing her "timeline" and "stories", that is a "clear indication" to me that DB is "definitely hiding something" ... and DB not cooperating with LE speaks "volumes" !

I am still :fence: with respect to JI : did DB "convince" him that an "intruder" took Baby Lisa, or did he help with a "cover-up", or did he know when it happened ?

Prayers that Baby Lisa is found soon !

MOO ...
 
I feel it was mom. JI seems like a puppet on strings led by DB, plus JI had an alibi and was at work when this occured.

Too many red flags for me.

1: You should reply on law enforcement to assist you regardless of your opinion of them and regardless of what questions they ask you. This family has not "fully" cooperated with law enforcement since 10/8

2: The whole community AND the rest of the world is watching and judging. It's unfortunate that parents murder their children, and with the recent "Anthony" situation, many are going to not just "wonder", but they are going to put their guard up. With that being said, you can't be judgemental to law enforcement and media, or the publics instincts are going to lean more towards someone in the home harming this child vs a real abduction.

3: The media is your friend. You also can't be negative to the media. They are the one's who are going to continuously broadcast pictures of your missing child, and broadcast your plea's for the safe return of your child. I touched on this once, and I will touch on it again. I was very involved with the Sam and Lindsey Porter situation. I assisted writing and sending out press releases, trying to get media attention when it started to fade, handed out fliers, maintained the website, handled phone calls etc. I spoke with Sam and Lindsey's mother a few nights ago and again today. She was in disbelief that the family was avoiding the media, and that she would be on her front porch holding a picture of this baby and talking to anyone and everyone that could help. When you avoid the media, and you "make a deal" with national media (was this for money?) then this is a negative impression you are giving the community and those across the world following this.

4: When you give two seperate times of what time you put your child to bed, it gives a negative impression and turns one's judgement.

5: When you are caring for three children ages ranging from 10 months old to 8 years old and you "got drunk" and may have "blacked out", it gives a negative impression. Legally, I think you can refer to that as "Inadequate supervision". Per Missouri child neglect legal terminology, inadequate supervision would also serve as a ground for assuming jurisdiction over a child for neglect. Jane Doe v. Department of Social Services, 71 S.W.3d 648 (Mo.App.E.D. 2002). ( mo.gov )
It should be assumed by the public that sense she "can't remember" certain details of that night, that she also put the other two children still in her supervision in danger. How can she say "she couldn't have done anything" when she could have "blacked out"? This is why I feel Inadequate supervision/Child neglect should never be ruled out here until we know more. It's probably safe to assume that DB was incapacitated due to the consumtion of alcohol and possibly medication(s), which resulted in the Inadequate supervision of the three children, and possibly just maybe the dissapearance of one. How can law enforcement or the public have total faith in anything she has stated when she has indicated she was "drunk" that night? Was she wearing something purple when she went to bed? Was she put to bed at 7:20, 9:30, left in her crib screaming while DB was on the front porch drinking with neighbors? We don't know. Right now we are posting theories and making comments based on what DB has stated to the public, and with the behavior or avoidance in seclusion in this situation, it's really really strange.

6: Why would you retain an attorney when you have not been charged with committing a crime? I can see hiring an attorney to set up a non profit organization so you can legally accept donations to build a reward fund and distribute collection containers or receive donations from the general public, but to hire an attorney because the police are asking you hard questions based on the lack of evidence and probably credibility gives the public a very negative impression.

---

I really hate to judge someone or prosecute them, but after being so close to a case for 2 ¹/² years, it's seems pretty clear to me that a mother who has no idea what has happened to their child would refuse to talk to all of the media, be sitting on her front lawn, attending vigils or balloon releases for her child, and much more.

If my opinion is wrong about this in the end, then I will pray for my forgiveness. I however won't discount the neglect issue as I feel she should be held accountable for.
Nice post except for if a person is changing their story wouldn't common sense tell you she is lying. If indeed we come to the conclusion she has lied why would we believe she was drunk? To me her statement of being drunk screams of "I cannot answer questions because I'll get caught in another lie and get arrested"

Sorry again nice post and I agree except I cannot believe anything DB states.
 
I fell off the fence on the “Mom did it” side.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
109
Guests online
1,237
Total visitors
1,346

Forum statistics

Threads
600,802
Messages
18,113,909
Members
230,990
Latest member
DeeKay
Back
Top