Irwin Attorney: ‘Jersey’ Bragged About Kidnapping Lisa Irwin

[Donjeta]

No matter what anyone says on a message board, it does not change the scientific conclusions. The substances used for training by HRD dogs are cadaverine and putrescine, which are secreted by decaying corpses. Those chemicals are ALSO present in vomit, urine, and several other body substances/fluids. It is IMPOSSIBLE for a dog to be able to distinguish which body substance caused those specific chemicals to be emitted.

My information comes from scholarly research sources which are not linkable (my University library), but google it.

Why are they being used then? I would think that a dog that can't tell if there was someone who died here or if someone once bled or vomited in this room or maybe changed a diaper there would be next to useless.

 

[Karmaa]

I don't think everyone comes close to agreeing to that. No where close.......

By "everyone" I did not mean posters, I mean the people who actually are involved in the case. It has been linked many many times on these boards that LE has (grudgingly) admitted that the family has answered the questions. They just haven't agreed to do it the way LE wants it done.

 

[voxrock2000]

Ok, this still makes no sense. The 'defense' comes out now with all this specific information about a specific scenario and actors, but for what?? Just to prove 'see, we told you we didn't do it'. No effort to find the baby, just a shift of blame. Why arent they spending the $100,000 reward on tracking down Jersey and finding the baby. They just allude to some black market baby ring and say now we want to get back to our normal lives??

 

[MissFine]

BBM

Yep. If they weren't hiding anything, they would have provided their defense attorneys with copies of their phone records. Tacopina and Picerno have had to depend on the FBI to look at them.

That's how I see it too. moo

 

[LadyL]

This reminds me of those old gypsy kidnapping myths.

These juggalos live a gypsy-like lifestyle. I wonder if LE has been checking the various known hobo camps in the area.

[bbm]

that's another myth though

 

[natsound]

No matter what anyone says on a message board, it does not change the scientific conclusions. The substances used for training by HRD dogs are cadaverine and putrescine, which are secreted by decaying corpses. Those chemicals are ALSO present in vomit, urine, and several other body substances/fluids. It is IMPOSSIBLE for a dog to be able to distinguish which body substance caused those specific chemicals to be emitted.

My information comes from scholarly research sources which are not linkable (my University library), but google it.

Not true, according to Sarx, who posts, on page 6 of the Cadaver dog thread:

So by that thought process then, would feces, urine, saliva, hair, nails, sweat, vomit and shedding sking all be "human remains"?

In other words, the whole purpose of a cadaver dog/HRD dog is to be able to distinguish between vomit, urine, etc, and bona fide human remains. The dogs would have no use if they came into my house and hit around my commode!

 

[Karmaa]

How can you make excuses for a mother getting admittedly drunk while solely caring for three children? I wouldn't want someone like that anywhere near my children! And I don't think responsible mothers do that. And I forgot to mention her failed polygraph. I know that alone doesn't mean she lied, but it certainly doesn't help her credibility. She initially said she put Lisa to bed at 10:3, then changed it to 6:40. And the story from her former "friend" about DB trying to have sex with her husband doesn't say much for her character. She is still married to her husband, yet has no problem taking her child into a relationship with another man and having another child. Also, she avoided calling Lisa by name when talking about her, which is often what parents who are responsible for the death of a child do to distance themselves from the child. She and JI have not made any overt attempts to locate BL, nor have they had any recent pleas to the public.

Cadaver dogs have a pretty high success rate. I just can't ignore all the evidence (not proof) that point towards DB. And I find it very curious that the cell activity stopped just prior to JI returning home. In the end, I just hope the case is solved and BL is found alive, but I fear that won't be the outcome.

DB may be totally innocent in all this, but my opinion is that she knows exactly what happened to her baby daughter.

First bold: I completely agree with you that I would not want someone like that around my child! Totally! And I certainly didn't make any excuses for it. I just said that it does not indicate guilt in a murder (or whatever this is.) Obviously lots of people do get drunk, and they are not all bad parents. I wouldn't and you wouldn't - but lots of otherwise good parents do.

Second bold: I completely respect that. I like the fact that you are willing to at least consider that she MIGHT be innocent. I agree that she MIGHT be guilty, and if REAL evidence comes along that points in that direction, I will be off the fence and chanting for justice so fast your eyes will spin, lol.

 

[annalia]

1. There is no proof that DB's stories changed to LE. We know that additional information was added to the media in subsequent interviews, but there was nothing in the actual interviews where DB said anything directly, that she later changed. (Caveat: whether DB checked on Lisa or not at 10:30 is open - she has said that she "normally" checks on her, but doesn't specifically remember doing it that night.) There are lots of things that DB did not tell the media (possibly asked not to by LE.) If we find out about them later, it is not necessarily a "change" in the story.

2. Being drunk does not make one a murderer. It does not even necessarily make one a bad parent. It is not illegal, and it's not unusual.

3. Cell calls/messages were made by someone. If the phones were stolen and DB did not have then, then the calls don't point towards DB's guilt.

4.DB and JI were interviewed separately. They stopped agreeing to these separate interviews when it became clear that LE was aggressively suspicious of them. Local LE then became publicly antagonistic to the family. However, everyone agrees that the parents have been generally cooperative, and answered all questions.

5. Cadaver dog hit is not evidence. It was "probable cause" for a search warrant. Without knowing what evidence was found, it is impossible to form a conclusive opinion from that.

I am not trying to change anyone's mind. It makes no difference to me (or to the reality of the situation) if everyone believes that DB is a murderer or had "something" to do with "it" (whatever "it" is), or even if they are willing to bet $1000 that she is innocent (although I doubt ANYONE on WS would be willing to do that, lol). But until real evidence is produced, we have to be able to look at both possible sides of the situation. There is no doubt that IF the things mentioned are, in fact true, it would look really bad for DB. But the fact remains that each of those things can be explained (reasonably), and thus can't be considered proof of anything.

So, as much as it's not a stretch to believe that DB is (or may be) involved, it is not a stretch to say she may not be involved, either.

JMO (ie: no links)

1) Not true, LE did comment after one of DB's story changes, that they were just learining this and now had to work with a new timeline. ( paraphrasing, don't have a link) LE also said they needed to know more about the comings and goings from the house that night.

2) I agree that being drunk doesn't automatically make someone a murderer, but I disagree that drinking 5-10 glasses of wine out on your front porch, while you have three young children, at least two known to still be awake, one who was sick, is not unusual. Doesn't even have to be an intentional murder. Serious accidents can happen when people are heavily under the influence, then panic can set in, people may cover their tracks for fear of being in trouble for being so drunk while causing the accident.

4) I don't agree that they've been generally cooperative and answered all questions. I haven't seen LE being antagonistic towards the parents, they said they weren't cooperating and they needed vital questioned answered. I don't take as gospel anything that potential suspects or their defense attorneys say about LE being mean to them. Maybe DB herself gave LE reason to aggressively suspect her thru her answers in the beginning. It wouldn't be the first time that we've seen people who have turned out to be guilty crying in the media about how unfairly they were treated.

Pretty much anything can be explained away depending on ones own theories.
DB may not be involved but it's her own actions that cause the suspicion

I can't jump on the thrash LE over everything bandwagon, and I don't really understand it. It sure seems that they are the only ones who are really try ing to find Lisa. They don't owe the parents anything, their focus is on finding Lisa, not coddling DB/JI. It still comes down to whether DB/JI really want their baby found, which would mean parking themselves at the police staion, or they want to continue to whine about LE being mean to them.

JMHO

 

[MissFine]

BBM.

Actually, no. LE has said (link somewhere, already posted several times) that they need questions answered about who came and went from the home.

Also, JMO, but there are probably a lot of other questions that they want to ask the parents.

Cazzie,
What an easy question to answer-who was outside and inside the house with you the night BL disappeared?

It appears DB is afraid to answer the question. moo

 

[huckleberryhound]

It seems to me that if this was a paid, pre-planned kidnapping, JI is the only one that
could have set it up. Everyone else expected he would home by 10:30 that night, did he
set up a rock-solid alibi for himself by staying at work much later than expected, give
his wife some money for a box of wine ,knowing she'd be out of it by midnight?
It's hard to see any sort of motive in this scenario though-

 

[yllek]

Refreshing my memory on what Mary Hurt had to say about Jersey. She is the last known person to see him in the neighborhood (that we know about).

She says she last saw Jersey between 12 noon and 1 pm on Oct. 3rd. The neighbor's sprinklers were still on at 9:30 pm and off by 11:00 pm, but Ms. Hurt did not see Jersey that night at all, so she can only assume he turned off the sprinklers. She said that Jersey had told people about a week prior that he was wanted for an outstanding warrant which surprised them (imo he was already trying to evade LE).

Imo, this information neither implicates nor absolves Jersey in relation to Lisa's abduction, but it's interesting and may be useful if/when we learn more about the events of October 3rd.

Nancy Grace transcript 10/31/11 - snipped:

VELEZ-MITCHELL (filling in for Nancy): Now, what do you know about Jersey? What are your thoughts about him? I understand that he is behind bars on a burglary charge of some sort. But again, he`s not considered a suspect in this case. But do you have any thoughts about him, his character, his personality?

HURT: Well, he definitely was suspicious and kind of shady, I would say. He kind of comes out of nowhere. He never is specific on where he`s been or where he`s going. You kind of see him around the neighborhood and just pop in and talk. He was always friendly, but he definitely let us know in the last probably week before all of this happened that he was wanted for an outstanding warrant that he had for his arrest, which was kind of a shock to us. So definitely...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Did you see him? When was the last time you saw him?

HURT: About -- between 12:00 or 1:00 that afternoon, before I left to go run some errands.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. So hours before -- at least five hours before the mom -- about five hours before the mom goes and gets wine from the store and comes back with a box of wine.

HURT: Right. Right.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1110/31/ng.01.html

 

[LadyL]

He added that he spoke with Irwin Friday morning and that Irwin said "everyday has gotten better." He said Irwin plans to return to his job as an electrician next week and they are working to get "back 100 percent to their normal life."

http://www.kctv5.com/story/16077691/picerno-witness-claims-handyman-paid-300-for-kidnapping

I can't imagine how "everyday has gotten better" when my baby girl is missing. I can only imagine every day being a continuing living hell until she is found safe & returned to me.

omg - it's not like she's been missing & presumed deceased for years - I'm usually pretty lenient on parent's behaviour & what comes out of their mouths but those comments really raise my hackles

 

[Karmaa]

Why are they being used then? I would think that a dog that can't tell if there was someone who died here or if someone once bled or vomited in this room or maybe changed a diaper there would be next to useless.

They are supposed to be used to FIND dead people. If a dead person is found, the dog's job is done, and it makes no difference if cadaverine came from vomit or simply death. Right?

What is happening here is different. Some people are trying to say that a HRD hit MUST mean that a dead body was present. It doesn't work that way.

YES- all dead bodies give off cadaverine and putrescine, but NO - not all cadaverine and putrescine hiots mean there was a dead body there.

Of course LE should use dogs as a tool, the same as any of their other tools. And if the dog leads to a dead body, great! But a hit is not the same as a body.

 

[natsound]

omg - it's not like she's been missing & presumed deceased for years - I'm usually pretty lenient on parent's behaviour & what comes out of their mouths but those comments really raise my hackles

Right. How could it be that every day is not getting worse for the parents of a missing baby?

 

[Karmaa]

Not true, according to Sarx, who posts, on page 6 of the Cadaver dog thread:

So by that thought process then, would feces, urine, saliva, hair, nails, sweat, vomit and shedding sking all be "human remains"?

In other words, the whole purpose of a cadaver dog/HRD dog is to be able to distinguish between vomit, urine, etc, and bona fide human remains. The dogs would have no use if they came into my house and hit around my commode!

<modsnip> I know not everyone can get their hands on peer-reviewed journals, but even wikipedia will usually cite their sources.

 

[natsound]

<modsnip> I know not everyone can get their hands on peer-reviewed journals, but even wikipedia will usually cite their sources.

Respectfully, here's another quote from sarx, regarding bodily fluids and this was in response to one of your posts Karmaa:

Break it down, if they can't distinguish between any of this do you realize that they would be hitting on everything everywhere? It would be crazy and worthless.

<modsnip>

 

[LadyL]

There is so much hate on this thread....its really sad.

I think what's even sadder is that there are missing, abused, & murdered children for us to be angry over.

If parents took care of their children properly, then on the very rare occasions that a child is actually kidnapped by a random criminal, many of us might be more sympathetic.

As it stands, this happens so frequently that we are understandably frustrated and angry.

Not to mention the many who get away with criminal actions against their child make us blind with fury at times. I wouldn't expect anything less. JMO.

 

[Sherbie]

Also linked many times, from many different interviews, in many different words:
"I'm not saying they're not cooperating," he (Steve Young] said. "They have met some of our needs..."
http://www.news-leader.com/article/...lice-Hunt-Kansas-City-baby-Lisa-not-out-steam

If LE has questions, they can ask the parents in their home, with the attorneys present. LE had their chance to have separate unrestricted interviews, and if they didn't get the info they wanted, then they are now at the mercy of the parents. The parents have every legal right to refuse to sit down and be interrogated. Maybe if LE had not been so heavy-handed and antagonistic, the parents would have been more cooperative, but the fact remains, of LE wants a question answered, they can ask it of the parents, in the parent's preferred environment. And there is no evidence that the parents have refused to answer any questions, period. Only that they don't want to sit in LE's interrogation room.

My understanding of what Picerno said in his interview yesterday is not that LE can come to the house and question the parents. I understood him to say that any questions LE have can be presented to the attorneys; that the attorneys will pass the questions to the parents; the parents will give answers to the attorneys; and attorneys will pass answers back to LE.

While I understand the point you're making (and, of course, everyone understands the parents are exercising their constitutional protections), I think maybe we can all agree that it's much less productive to interview someone by asking all your questions of a third party and waiting for answers than to sit down face-to-face where follow-up questions or discussions can happen spontaneously.

You said the parents might've been more cooperative if LE hadn't been so heavy-handed and antagonistic. Maybe that's true. And if it is, it breaks my heart that little Lisa's parents would put their disdain/fear of LE tactics ahead of fully cooperating for her sake. LE is their best chance for finding Lisa, regardless what they think of KCPD.

I just think it would be in Lisa's best interests for her parents to cooperate fully with LE in order to (hopefully) find the baby, then let loose on LE til kingdom come if they want. Plenty of time to voice grievances, sue - whatever - once Lisa is home.

 

[Boodles]

...but the fact remains, of LE wants a question answered, they can ask it of the parents, in the parent's preferred environment. And there is no evidence that the parents have refused to answer any questions, period. Only that they don't want to sit in LE's interrogation room.

And if the parents believe their baby is alive out there somewhere, they would not only be answering any and all questions, but offering and pleading for any and all information about the case and its circumstances.

But if they know otherwise, their resistance and agreement to cooperate on their terms only makes complete sense.

I thought previously that the parent(s)* might come clean and admit to whatever it is they are hiding. I no longer believe that. I think DB is able to go on with this hanging over her head. It will be inconvenient at times, but not a showstopper in keeping her from proceeding with her life. And, I believe she gets some perverse pleasure from the attention.


* I don't know whether to believe that Jeremy is complicit or not.

 

[Donjeta]

They are supposed to be used to FIND dead people. If a dead person is found, the dog's job is done, and it makes no difference if cadaverine came from vomit or simply death. Right?

What is happening here is different. Some people are trying to say that a HRD hit MUST mean that a dead body was present. It doesn't work that way.

YES- all dead bodies give off cadaverine and putrescine, but NO - not all cadaverine and putrescine hiots mean there was a dead body there.

Of course LE should use dogs as a tool, the same as any of their other tools. And if the dog leads to a dead body, great! But a hit is not the same as a body.

I just don't understand why we haven't got millions of holes everywhere that LE dug up trying to find dead bodies since cadaver dogs must hit on pretty much everything. If they hit on traces of vomit, blood, skin cells, urine, etc. I can guarantee you several hits in each room of my house. I have three children, one of whom is potty training right now, and who have vomited more than I would have liked, and of course everybody sheds skin cells all the time.