natsound
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2008
- Messages
- 5,129
- Reaction score
- 1,932
Doesn't her own Facebook profile say she likes playing with fire?
Either her FB or her Myspace, but yes.
Doesn't her own Facebook profile say she likes playing with fire?
The phone thing was hinky from the beginning. I don't understand why someone (or two someones) would tell such a blatant lie that can so easily be disproven with one phone call from LE to the phone carrier. They both can't be seriously stupid enough to believe that if the phones go "poof" that would be the end of the story? If they had two brain cells between them they had to have known the restricted phone lie would be discovered in a nanosecond.
I don't know. Maybe they really thought LE would show up and then immediately beat feet looking for kidnapper and would never question them/their story at all, much less check it out. I suppose that's possible (not that LE would do it, but that DB&JI would think it.)
Okay, let's assume for a moment that DB did think the phones were restricted and didn't make that 8:30 pm call to MW's phone.
There were 2 adults (possibly 3, if you count the brother) in the home at 8:30pm (per DB). I doubt the neighbor would call from DB's cell phone, but if she did, how did SHE know the phones weren't restricted, but DB not know that? Let's say the brother was there that night (and I'm not convinced that he was), how does HE know that he can make a call to MW's phone, but DB doesn't know that?
Just doesn't make sense, imo. These were DB's phones. The logical person to use one of these phones would be the person who had possession of the phones. In this case, that would be DB (since JI wasn't home at 8:30 pm). Why is it so mind boggling to so many people that DB made this call herself, and then lied about the phones being restricted. It's not like we don't have evidence of her lying already?
I don't get it. I really don't. The obvious, simple answer is usually the correct answer. IMO
OR......maybe it is as simple as someone DID take the phones AND the baby.....
I watched the entire show. HLN Vinnie did not state that it was NOT PN. The reporter only stated that MT (older man who rode a motorcycle home from work) stated that he didn't identify Jersey as the man with the half-naked baby at 4:00 am.
OR......maybe it is as simple as someone DID take the phones AND the baby.....
But the brother is about 5'8" and slender which is what MT said in his description. In the booze store, the brother does not appear to be tall man. He is not much taller than Deb. He isn't in his 30s, but he does have a short haircut like a mature man.Oh NG, Jim Spellman, reporting from KC stated this below:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1111/01/ng.01.html
"SHERYL, CALLED FROM OHIO: Hi, Jane. Excuse me. My question would be, the -- the gentleman that Mr. Thompson saw carrying the baby, does his description fit either the uncle or Jersey?
VELEZ-MITCHELL: We don`t know, but I`ll throw it out to Jim Spellman.
SPELLMAN: He does not resemble the brother at all. The brother is much younger, different build, doesn`t match at all. There is some similarity between the other descriptions of sightings of people.
I just want to say, Jane, to be very clear that the man that Mike Thompson identified is not Jersey, is not Mike Tanko. And I showed Mike Thompson a photograph of John Tanko, the man known as Jersey and he said no that`s the guy -- not the guy. I`ve never seen him before. I want to sure that nobody takes that implication away that it`s John Tanko that has been identified. "
Oh NG, Jim Spellman, reporting from KC stated this below:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1111/01/ng.01.html
"SHERYL, CALLED FROM OHIO: Hi, Jane. Excuse me. My question would be, the -- the gentleman that Mr. Thompson saw carrying the baby, does his description fit either the uncle or Jersey?
VELEZ-MITCHELL: We don`t know, but I`ll throw it out to Jim Spellman.
SPELLMAN: He does not resemble the brother at all. The brother is much younger, different build, doesn`t match at all. There is some similarity between the other descriptions of sightings of people.
I just want to say, Jane, to be very clear that the man that Mike Thompson identified is not Jersey, is not Mike Tanko. And I showed Mike Thompson a photograph of John Tanko, the man known as Jersey and he said no that`s the guy -- not the guy. I`ve never seen him before. I want to sure that nobody takes that implication away that it`s John Tanko that has been identified. "
In the first few press conferences LE and family had stated that they had given LE a list of people to check out. I do not recall ever reading that parents were not disclosing information as to who was at the house on that day/evening.
Where the heck was he sleeping? I never even heard he was at the house until yesterday. Had anyone else?
I think you are right. Anyone who spent time in a federal penitentiary would likely be wise enough to NOT walk around town holding an partially clothed deceased or unconscious (not crying) baby at 4 am.
So he identified not GSBrother, not Jersey, but"a man they had been showing pictures of". If it was JI, don't you think they'd be arrested by now? So if not JI, who else have they been showing lots of pictures of?
What do you think the "click click" noise was that the boys heard during mommy's "adult time"? I can also believe that someone who was mentally ill or mentally distraught/"shell shocked" would be wacky enough to carry a dead baby unhidden through the streets.The ONLY reason I can think that someone would walk around town at night holding a partially clothes baby is if they were high.
I'm not saying anything about Jersey or even accusing someone of being high. Just saying that it doesn't make sense for anybody.
The ONLY reason I can think that someone would walk around town at night holding a partially clothes baby is if they were high.
I'm not saying anything about Jersey or even accusing someone of being high. Just saying that it doesn't make sense for anybody.
Either her FB or her Myspace, but yes.
The ONLY reason I can think that someone would walk around town at night holding a partially clothes baby is if they were high.
I'm not saying anything about Jersey or even accusing someone of being high. Just saying that it doesn't make sense for anybody.
why so many changes in the timeline from DB and JI if SODDI
thats what i don't understand,the truth doesn't change. what are we up to now the 4th or 5th change of events?:banghead:
not buying that SODDI, sorry.
JMO MOO
I thought it was said the neighbors had a german shepherd. Anyone remember? We saw it in the videos with the reporters. It was barking it's head off.