"Jersey" and MW #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
21merc7 said:
Agreed, I think "moving on" is just a polite way of saying stop asking, we are not answering.
Click to expand...

Kind of like referring to someone as a POI. It doesn't mean one is or is not a suspect. ;)

However maddening to us, it is actually a rather clever way of getting around the issue. Props to them. lol
 
StrayKat said:
He probably thought they weren't home and was going to rob them by climbing in the window. I hate to imagine what he may have done in those 2 hours... between the sighting at 12:15 and the video of someone walking (if that is him).

He is NOT CLEARED in this report from kidnapping baby Lisa.

Snipped:
Capt. Steve Young with the Kansas City Police Dept says Tanko cooperated with police and they have moved on with the investigation.

http://fox4kc.com/2011/11/01/womans-cell-phone-confiscated-for-baby-lisa-investigation/
Click to expand...

I'm glad someone cooperates at any rate.

But yeah, moved on could mean, "he's been cleared, we'll have to move on to other suspects", or "he sure had a lot of interesting and potentially incriminating things to say and we're going to get a lot farther in the case following those leads".
 
Quizzical said:
One thought I've had. If you were a person in the neighborhood who wanted to kidnap a baby....but you didn't want to do the dirty work yourself, who would you get to help you? Possibly someone who has broken into houses before and is familiar with the neighborhood?

And to me the quote from SY about moving on in the investigation does not necessarily mean Jersey is cleared of all involvement. Maybe they are moving on to the next piece of the puzzle as far as we know.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly, and I think LE is going to say whatever they think
will be helpful to them. If jersey is being uncooperative, they might think
that if he feels less defensive, he might be more likely to talk about it to
his girlfriend or other associates. If I was LE , I'd make sure he has a
cellmate in jail that would be willing to make himself a deal for any info
he can get from Jersey.
 
Mountain_Kat said:
Bizarro world, right? The "prime suspect" cooperates with LE, and the "innocent parents" don't.

Go figure.
Click to expand...

I don't know what his warrants were for but the police have a lot on him he might be persuaded to cooperate if they strike a deal with him.

It would probably only work if he's just a bystander who knows something or was only peripherally involved; he wouldn't want to get off burglary charges just to get hit with kidnapping or homicide charges.
 
MaryAnn said:
How do we know he's cooperating? he's in jail and has no choice
Click to expand...

I was referring to what SY was quoted as saying.

But, everyone has a choice as to whether or not they will cooperate with LE...whether they are in jail or not.
 
wvjules said:
If DB killed that baby in a drunken stupor, or otherwise, wouldn't there also be some evidence left behind? How can she be accused of being drunk and also be sober enough to be able to hide her baby's body so well that even after a month there is no sign of her?
Click to expand...

Maybe she had help from someone who was not as drunk as she.
 
Mountain_Kat said:
Honestly, if SY came right out and said, "We know Jersey didn't do it because he was in the hospital all night!", I think some people here would still argue that SY couldn't possbily know that because he wasn't stationed at the hospital room door all night, or that what SY says doesn't really matter because he's not FBI, or that it's possible that Jersey hired someone to impersonate him in the hospital (or or or).

Kinda frustrating, imo.
Click to expand...

I hear ya, Kat... I really do!

But personally, my poor head is going back and forth on this one. Taking SY's statement at face value, I'll accept that Jersey didn't have involvement in baby Lisa's disappearance.

But then I look at that path he could have walked, the places and times he was spotted, etc. and think he had to be involved in something: with all these dumpster fires, burglaries, and the like. And then I think about LE showing DB burned clothes from said dumpster fire... and LE continually searching places where Jersey was thought to frequent during that timeframe... and I think, 'ugh! this has GOT to all be connected.'

And then I drive myself crazy again.

Do I think Jersey is single-handedly complicit: Sneaking in, stealing 3 Phones and a Baby, and splitting? No. But, could he be involved in disposal of evidence, cover up etc (even, perhaps, unknowlingly?). I'm not doubting that yet.

And why would LE be so quick to say he's been cleared, if that were the case? Because maybe they're hoping that others involved - others closer to baby Lisa - might view that as a sign that they're taking the heat off. That might cause someone guilty of something to let down their guard a bit, maybe inadvertantly reveal the key piece of evidence they're looking for?

Just my confused opinion. JMCO? I kinda like that! =)
 
april_showers said:
I hear ya, Kat... I really do!

But personally, my poor head is going back and forth on this one. Taking SY's statement at face value, I'll accept that Jersey didn't have involvement in baby Lisa's disappearance.

But then I look at that path he could have walked, the places and times he was spotted, etc. and think he had to be involved in something: with all these dumpster fires, burglaries, and the like. And then I think about LE showing DB burned clothes from said dumpster fire... and LE continually searching places where Jersey was thought to frequent during that timeframe... and I think, 'ugh! this has GOT to all be connected.'

And then I drive myself crazy again.

Do I think Jersey is single-handedly complicit: Sneaking in, stealing 3 Phones and a Baby, and splitting? No. But, could he be involved in disposal of evidence, cover up etc (even, perhaps, unknowlingly?). I'm not doubting that yet.

And why would LE be so quick to say he's been cleared, if that were the case? Because maybe they're hoping that others involved - others closer to baby Lisa - might view that as a sign that they're taking the heat off. That might cause someone guilty of something to let down their guard a bit, maybe inadvertantly reveal the key piece of evidence they're looking for?

Just my confused opinion. JMCO? I kinda like that! =)
Click to expand...

Well, ya know...there are a few things of concern to me too where Jersey is concerned. I understand why people have suspicions. What frustrates me is when people can't accept anything as fact simply because it doesn't fit their theory. I mean, we're all just trying to figure out what happened here, aren't we? Or are some of us just routing for or against someone at this point? I personally think Jeremy Irwin helped cover up whatever happened to Lisa, but if I see a video of him at Starbucks at 3 am, I'm not going to insist that he must have had an accomplice doctor that tape for him, KWIM? I'm just going to accept that I was wrong.
 
april_showers said:
I hear ya, Kat... I really do!

But personally, my poor head is going back and forth on this one. Taking SY's statement at face value, I'll accept that Jersey didn't have involvement in baby Lisa's disappearance.

But then I look at that path he could have walked, the places and times he was spotted, etc. and think he had to be involved in something: with all these dumpster fires, burglaries, and the like. And then I think about LE showing DB burned clothes from said dumpster fire... and LE continually searching places where Jersey was thought to frequent during that timeframe... and I think, 'ugh! this has GOT to all be connected.'

And then I drive myself crazy again.

Do I think Jersey is single-handedly complicit: Sneaking in, stealing 3 Phones and a Baby, and splitting? No. But, could he be involved in disposal of evidence, cover up etc (even, perhaps, unknowlingly?). I'm not doubting that yet.

And why would LE be so quick to say he's been cleared, if that were the case? Because maybe they're hoping that others involved - others closer to baby Lisa - might view that as a sign that they're taking the heat off. That might cause someone guilty of something to let down their guard a bit, maybe inadvertantly reveal the key piece of evidence they're looking for?

Just my confused opinion. JMCO? I kinda like that! =)
Click to expand...



I agree that LE might be trying to take the heat off and let any accomplices relax by saying that jersey is clear....BUT...I think if the others involved were the babys family, jersey would be singing like a canary!!...Doing a deal whatever. He has no reason to protect them.

Jersey would only keep quiet if the accomplices were serious bad guys imo.
 
Mountain_Kat said:
Well, ya know...there are a few things of concern to me too where Jersey is concerned. I understand why people have suspicions. What frustrates me is when people can't accept anything as fact simply because it doesn't fit their theory. I mean, we're all just trying to figure out what happened here, aren't we? Or are some of us just routing for or against someone at this point? I personally think Jeremy Irwin helped cover up whatever happened to Lisa, but if I see a video of him at Starbucks at 3 am, I'm not going to insist that he must have had an accomplice doctor that tape for him, KWIM? I'm just going to accept that I was wrong.
Click to expand...

Honestly..no offence Kat I hear ya..but its funny you should think that..i have been thinking the exact same thing but about the mom did it camp..:crazy:

It seems that some are DETERMINED mom did it and will NEVER change or bend or think or accept ANYTHING that does not fit that theory. It drives me crazy:banghead:,,,But i have learned to accept it and move on LOL!

I don't consider myself in any camp...Iam open to all and any evidence. With what is available I strongly suspect Jersey and even MW. I do not at this point suspect the parents at all...but Iam notsaying it was defo Jersey and thats that. Iam just trying to figure it all out.

Anyone here who says someone is defo guilty and they are NEVER going to change there mind no matter what ..needs to step away from the pc have a long hard think..no matter what "camp" they are in...because at this point anything could happen..its not a forgone conclusion at all!
 
katshep said:
From her interview, "
“My mom took me and my brothers and ran away to Mexico, and my mom just left us there from what I remember. I was really young."

Read more: http://www.kmbc.com/news/29660981/detail.html#ixzz1ceOzKSZE
Click to expand...
As I said, if untreated, it can morph into antisocial personality disorder. Jails are filled with people who were abused or abandoned as children and became anti-social. Gangs are likewise filled with such young adults. Juggalos is classified as a gang in many states and by the FBI.

Parental kidnapping involves abandonment and the reactive relationship disorder stems from kidnapping, abandonment and abuse--physical, sexual and emotional.

If being excessively thin can be indicative of an eating disorder, so can being overweight.

She lied about the obvious, because numerous people on Lister knew her to be frequently in the neighborhood not just passing through.

She has an interest in pyromania. She describes her ex as a pyro. Burning blunts is smoking a certain kind of joint and is very hip among Juggalos.

Self-cuddling is a type of reassuring behavior. It is commonly seen in psychological interviews with abused children. The children comfort themselves as they have not been comforted by a parent.

You are free to have your own opinon based on your own personal thoughts and experiences. I am free to form my opinion based on scientific research and extensive trial work with abused, abandoned and kidnapped children.
Click to expand...

What is your point?
 
Mountain_Kat said:
Well, ya know...there are a few things of concern to me too where Jersey is concerned. I understand why people have suspicions. What frustrates me is when people can't accept anything as fact simply because it doesn't fit their theory. I mean, we're all just trying to figure out what happened here, aren't we? Or are some of us just routing for or against someone at this point? I personally think Jeremy Irwin helped cover up whatever happened to Lisa, but if I see a video of him at Starbucks at 3 am, I'm not going to insist that he must have had an accomplice doctor that tape for him, KWIM? I'm just going to accept that I was wrong.
Click to expand...
psssst Kat.....
http://www.kctv5.com/story/15940122/baby-lisas-parents-say-5-12-hour-window-for-abduction
Quote:
Police have been able to verify that Irwin was at the Starbucks until about 3:30 a.m. and nothing unusual occurred.
Click to expand...
 
tink92 said:
Maybe because we have empathy for DB...The poor woman has LOST HER CHILD...I think we all forget that sometimes. Then she gets dragged through the mud and called everything from cold blooded murderer to alcoholic. The woman has my sympathies..
Click to expand...

The poor woman who 'lost her child' did not seem to have much compassion for said child. That baby was seen in her crib at 4:30, was not at the family diner at5:30, and was put in her room for the night by 6;40. And she was SICK. This poor mom never put much effort into caring for that sick child because she just piut her in her crib and then mom began power drinking. She sat outside on the stoop smoking cigs and drinking and totally IGNORED her sick infant. She even left the window open and the front door unlocked. So IF she lost her child, I am thinking it was due to her own drunken negligence. imoo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 202 more.
Total: 2,011 (members: 203, guests: 1,808)

Online statistics

Members online
203
Guests online
1,808
Total visitors
2,011
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,236
Messages
18,092,612
Members
230,826
Latest member
Shirlgirln67
Back
Top