Inconsistencies in DB's Story

[hambirg]

I certainly don't! That would be ridiculous. I think everything was done before JI got home...or even perhaps before he went to work. But, definitely not when he got home.

Yes I agree with this.

We know that LE did not give JI a LDT. That leads me to assume that they found him credible in those initial interviews. I do believe that when he came home from work he found the door unlocked, the lights on and the window open. In one of the initial interviews he says he checked on the boys. . .and then DB says that he told her, "She's not in her crib." JI's story about what happened when he came home is now a bit fuzzy. But I'm inclined to believe that was originally said is most likely the truth. I think he came in, went around turning off the lights, checked on the boys (not sure if he found any of them in their room, maybe the oldest), checked on Lisa, and then went into their bedroom to see if the boys (or just the youngest depending on where we think the boys actually were sleeping) and Lisa were in there. When he accounted for the boys but not Lisa he woke DB up and told her, "she's not in her crib." Now why he stormed off to SB's idk. I have even speculated that DB was not in their bedroom. He may have stormed off to SB's thoroughly expecting BL AND DB to be there. But we just don't know.

MOO

 

[nursebeeme]

never said there was anything wrong with that...

the same goes for the flip side though... so i don't see why ppl who think DB is guilty of something are constantly getting criticized (and sometimes outright bashed) for having that opinion... (and i hope it's okay that i make this observation) but it seems TO's are issued more to one side than another in this forum fwiw.

I am responding to this on the thread so that everyone understands that TO's are issued for TOS violations not based on what your beliefs are.

The attacking of one another instead of the issues is the problem and it continues to be a problem.

If anyone has any questions please PM one of the mods that are listed on the main page of Lisa's forum.

Thanks everyone for all your contributions. I do realize that this case is very close to everyone participating in the discussion.

 

[redheadedgal]

I am responding to this on the thread so that everyone understands that TO's are issued for TOS violations not based on what your beliefs are.

The attacking of one another instead of the issues is the problem and it continues to be a problem.

i never intended to imply TO's were given based on "beliefs"... sorry if anyone didn't understand my post.

 

[cityslick]

Yes I agree with this.

We know that LE did not give JI a LDT. That leads me to assume that they found him credible in those initial interviews. I do believe that when he came home from work he found the door unlocked, the lights on and the window open. In one of the initial interviews he says he checked on the boys. . .and then DB says that he told her, "She's not in her crib." JI's story about what happened when he came home is now a bit fuzzy. But I'm inclined to believe that was originally said is most likely the truth. I think he came in, went around turning off the lights, checked on the boys (not sure if he found any of them in their room, maybe the oldest), checked on Lisa, and then went into their bedroom to see if the boys (or just the youngest depending on where we think the boys actually were sleeping) and Lisa were in there. When he accounted for the boys but not Lisa he woke DB up and told her, "she's not in her crib." Now why he stormed off to SB's idk. I have even speculated that DB was not in their bedroom. He may have stormed off to SB's thoroughly expecting BL AND DB to be there. But we just don't know.

MOO

The only explanation for this that I can come up with is DB must have told him something after JI told her BL wasn't in her crib, something perhaps relevant to conversations earlier in the evening between SB and DB.

 

[vlpate]

I guess it depends on what you call cheap. I didn't find my lawyer bill for an uncontested divorce "cheap" in the least. I'm not sure what the non-divorce has to do with Lisa being missing. And lawyer fees is only a small fraction of what the total cost of a divorce is, there is also assets that have to be divided up, as well as personal costs.

I totally forgot about "assets" being divided up - my bad.

 

[hambirg]

The only explanation for this that I can come up with is DB must have told him something after JI told her BL wasn't in her crib, something perhaps relevant to conversations earlier in the evening between SB and DB.

But what could of she have said that would make him do that? And that's not really the story we are being told. We are told that DB instantly knew something was wrong and that they were running around the house looking for BL.

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

I totally forgot about "assets" being divided up - my bad.

NP, my point was just that what I had to pay out of pocket + what I turned over to the ex etc to me amounted to a good size investment while to someone else, that amount may seem piddly. In the end, I got what I wanted so to speak, my sanity, or what was left of it. :woohoo:

 

[dog.gone.cute]

BBM: There is nothing to suggest there was a murder, either - IMO.

First, let me clarify that I did not use the word "murder" in my original post ...

The HRD dog did HIT in Deb's bedroom ... and this is contained in the Search Warrant ...

JMO ... but I believe the dog ... he has NO agenda in any of this ...

MOO ...

 

[Sparklin]

But this is YOUR moral compass. A couple of times I walked out of the grocery store with something small in the bottom of my cart (earrings, etc) that I forgot to pay for. I went back in and paid for it, because I consider that stealing. Some people I told about it thought I was stupid, they would have just kept the item. I thnk that's wrong. Thats a moral decision. I know some religious people who think that any type of drinking is "sinful". If you drink, youre a "bad" person. That is THEIR moral decision. I could go on and on with 5000 other examples of what is moral and what is not. I personally don't give a hoot if she was still legally married. So what? If she was living with her husband and had an affair and passed the baby off to him as his own, well yeah, I consider that immoral.

MORALITY is your own perception, your own choices. You may see something as BAD but others may not. And if a person does one bad thing, or 2 bad things, does that mean they will do anything? If DB has no morals, do you think she would outright kill someone? Would you say, well no, she wouldnt go that far? Well why not? If she can dispose of her own child and not tell anyone, then who is to say she is not capable of stone cold murder?

It is all in perceptions.

I <3 you

 

[Whisperer]

I forgot at what point JI noticed the window opened and screen bent. Was it before he woke up DB or after? Did he check the entire house before he woke her up?

 

[hambirg]

I forgot at what point JI noticed the window opened and screen bent. Was it before he woke up DB or after? Did he check the entire house before he woke her up?

I think it was before. I'm not sure, but somewhere didn't we hear that he tried to close the window, but couldn't because of the bent screen? I don't imagine he would be fiddling with the window after he discovered BL gone. :waitasec:

 

[Whisperer]

So Jeremy was quite the house inspector!

Ya know what's strange if he did check on the window? He didn't check on Lisa. He checked on the boys though. Funny, DB doesn't remember checking on her either that night. What a coincidence!

Checks the house, lights, windows and doors and the "boys"....but needs DB to go with him to check on Lisa. Sorry, not buying it. They needed each other to find her missing...just as they need each other to discuss her going missing. Neither one is willing to stand alone on the subject of Lisa. Hinky!

 

[vlpate]

But this is YOUR moral compass. A couple of times I walked out of the grocery store with something small in the bottom of my cart (earrings, etc) that I forgot to pay for. I went back in and paid for it, because I consider that stealing. Some people I told about it thought I was stupid, they would have just kept the item. I thnk that's wrong. Thats a moral decision. I know some religious people who think that any type of drinking is "sinful". If you drink, youre a "bad" person. That is THEIR moral decision. I could go on and on with 5000 other examples of what is moral and what is not. I personally don't give a hoot if she was still legally married. So what? If she was living with her husband and had an affair and passed the baby off to him as his own, well yeah, I consider that immoral.

MORALITY is your own perception, your own choices. You may see something as BAD but others may not. And if a person does one bad thing, or 2 bad things, does that mean they will do anything? If DB has no morals, do you think she would outright kill someone? Would you say, well no, she wouldnt go that far? Well why not? If she can dispose of her own child and not tell anyone, then who is to say she is not capable of stone cold murder?

It is all in perceptions.

The definition of morals isn't fuzzy or selective, it's the difference between right and wrong. A conscious choice one makes on how to live their life. I'm not making judgments, but it is what it is. It's wrong to be married while living with and having babies with another man. It's wrong to get so drunk you don't remember checking on your baby and other little children in your care. It's wrong to obstruct an investigation by lying when your baby is missing and timelines are of utmost importance.

Would someone who has no regard for right and wrong, who only cares how the choices she makes benefits her, do something wrong like overdose her baby? Yeah, of course she would.

 

[melissasmom]

The definition of morals isn't fuzzy or selective, it's the difference between right and wrong. A conscious choice one makes on how to live their life. I'm not making judgments, but it is what it is. It's wrong to be married while living with and having babies with another man. It's wrong to get so drunk you don't remember checking on your baby and other little children in your care. It's wrong to obstruct an investigation by lying when your baby is missing and timelines are of utmost importance.

Would someone who has no regard for right and wrong, who only cares how the choices she makes benefits her, do something wrong like overdose her baby? Yeah, of course she would.

Sorry, I have to disagree. What is right and wrong to you may not be right and wrong to someone else. There are obviously some things that IN GENERAL, people feel are immoral, like murder. Some people think homosexuality is immoral. I don't. I think spanking or other forms of corporal punishment is wrong. Some think it is perfectly ok. etc., etc, etc.

Yes, the definition of morals refers to the distinction beween right and wrong. But people differ on what they feel is right and wrong.

 

[vlpate]

Sorry, I have to disagree. What is right and wrong to you may not be right and wrong to someone else. There are obviously some things that IN GENERAL, people feel are immoral, like murder. Some people think homosexuality is immoral. I don't. I think spanking or other forms of corporal punishment is wrong. Some think it is perfectly ok. etc., etc, etc.

Yes, the definition of morals refers to the distinction beween right and wrong. But people differ on what they feel is right and wrong.

Of the things I mentioned, which do you think most people, and our justice system, would find right?

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

So Jeremy was quite the house inspector.

Ya know what's strange if he did check on the window? He didn't check on Lisa. He checked on the boys though. Funny, DB doesn't remember checking on her either that night. What a coincidence!

Checks the house, lights, windows and doors and the "boys"....but needs DB to go with him to check on Lisa. Sorry, not buying it. They needed each other to find her missing...just as they need each other to discuss her going missing. Neither one is willing to stand alone on the subject of Lisa. Hinky!

That is strange, isn't it? Especially since Baby Lisa was the sick one, you would think she would be checked on first. Unless, maybe the house is laid out such that Jeremy would have passed the boys' room first? I dunno, but it does seem out of order.

Front door unlocked. Check - he'd have to notice that immediately.

Lights? Who knows now? Too many on, normal or was he just disgusted with the waste and the electric bill?

Window open. Check - he'd probably notice that when he turned the lights off in the computer room. They were on, weren't they?

Then the boys' room. Check - one missing, so on to see if he's with his mother. Yup, there he is. Now perhaps a little chatting with Deborah. Or not. Perhaps a little irritation with the state of the house and the strange kitten. Deborah wasn't too difficult to awaken but a little groggy.

What was said? What made her jump up in alarm to check on Baby Lisa? Why didn't Jeremy check on her before the boys? What on earth was he told or did he think that made him run to the next door neighbor to see where Baby Lisa was? What was running through his mind that made him take that action as his first response?

 

[Whisperer]

Sorry, I have to disagree. What is right and wrong to you may not be right and wrong to someone else. There are obviously some things that IN GENERAL, people feel are immoral, like murder. Some people think homosexuality is immoral. I don't. I think spanking or other forms of corporal punishment is wrong. Some think it is perfectly ok. etc., etc, etc.

Yes, the definition of morals refers to the distinction beween right and wrong. But people differ on what they feel is right and wrong.

.....and there lies the difference. People who think. People who feel and people who don't know the difference. Really! Some people do not know whether they are having a thought or a feeling. One more thing, it is almost impossible to have any kind of debate with people who "feel" a particular way.

I could go on a rant about this sort of thing but in order to not take a forced vacation...I will leave it at that.

There is a big difference between the two types...and it crosses political lines too.

 

[melissasmom]

Of the things I mentioned, which do you think most people, and our justice system, would find right?

As far as the justice system, they don't care about your marital status and your procreation I would assume, unless you are a bigamist. The drinking is probably "illegal" in some circumstances, maybe some type of neglect charge. If there was a crack down on parents drinking in the home then a ton of people would get arrested. As for the lying, where is any proof of lying? Do you have a link somehere to LE making a statement that DB or JI flat out lied, and what they lied about? And obvuosly in reagrds to that and justice, yes I do realize lying to police is quite illegal.

As for what other people think, I am pretty sure most people frown on the being drunk with the kids around. If you are impaired to the point of not being able to take care of them. The her still being married thing, I really have no clue. Most of the people I know wouldn't care. Society in general, they would probably be bothered by it.

But I think you are missing the point that I am trying to make with this whole discussion of morals, etc. I just don't see how people can make the leap from drinking, living with JI, etc. to equating that to her being the type of person who could dispose of a dead baby, and keep it a secret all this time. I would have to see a psychological profile of her to see what it says. The couple of things we know about her are not enough to make me say, "Oh yes, she has a pattern of horrible behaviors, so I can see her doing that."

But if you feel comfortable with that leap, that is yours to make.

 

[Whisperer]

What sort of psychological profile of DB would make you think she harmed her daughter?

 

[melissasmom]

.....and there lies the difference. People who think. People who feel and people who don't know the difference. Really! Some people do not know whether they are having a thought or a feeling. One more thing, it is almost impossible to have any kind of debate with people who "feel" a particular way.
I could go on a rant about this sort of thing but in order to not take a forced vacation...I will leave it at that.

There is a big difference between the two types...and it crosses political lines too.

I guess I should have said THINK is wrong. Excuse the error. You either think something is wrong or you don't.
I myself do know the difference between a thought and a feeling. I am not the most eloquent person when it comes to expressing myself.

BBM
Respectfully, many many posters here have expressed that they think DB is guilty of something based on "gut feelings" or "hinkiness". If your opinon is not based on feelings, then I am interested to know what FACTS it is based on.