"Jersey" and MW

[yllek]

Kansas City Police Department spokesman Steve Young said he could not discuss investigators interviews with Wright. However, Young did say the man known as "Jersey" has been interviewed and cleared of any involvement in the baby's disappearance.
"We spoke to him and are moving on," Young said.

http://www.kctv5.com/story/15919668/womans-cell-phone-connected-to-search-for-missing-baby

It was also stated emphatically at least 5 times on JVM and NG yesterday that LE has cleared Jersey (I won't search out the transcripts). Jim Spellman of CNN has made a point multiple times over the last 3 days of emphasizing that the man picked out of photo line up by Motorcycle Man witness at 4 am is NOT Jersey.

I understand that some feel Jersey must somehow be involved. I have never once seen LE publicly falsely clear a person as some sort of strategy, but doesn't mean it could never happen. LE hardly ever clears anyone publicly - they don't want to look foolish if they end up being wrong and they don't want that statement used against them if they later need to prosecute. They can just say "he's not a suspect" if they they don't have enough evidence to arrest, or to clear. So, it's a strong bold statement that LE is making when they say they have completely ruled the man out and everyone should be looking elsewhere. I believe LE is making this statement in good faith after much due diligence. Others may disagree for reasons of their own. But, it's very clear that LE has publicly announced that Johnny Tanko, aka Jersey, has been thoroughly investigated and cleared of any involvement in Lisa's abduction.

 

[nursebeeme]

I'm confused. Why is there no sleuthing of DB's brother? He has been named in MSM, has he not? He is 20 years old, so he is not a minor. Or IS he? I was thinking under 18 is a minor.

here is a link to the rules (includes current rules relevant to this forum)

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151080"]Etiquette & Information - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

these rules can change as the case evolves

 

[mrye4709]

A list of "just the facts" would be mighty handy to have right about now. New Thread?

I think there is a thread for just facts

 

[cowtowner]

I am not sure there are 2 crimes here, it seems to be one crime with 2 parts IMO.

It's not up to anyone's opinion; the crime of burglary/robbery is different than the crime of kidnapping. So different, in fact, that our criminal justice system has chosen to name them two separate crimes. Pretty compelling stuff, eh?

ETA - It's also important to note that these two separate crimes because they fall under two separate jurisdictions. The crime of burglary is local/county/state. It's under jurisdiction of Clay County to prosecute and KCPD to investigate. But the crime of kidnapping is a federal crime and falls under the FBI jurisdiction. ESPECIALLY if they cross the state line which is about 5 minutes away.

So does that mean we have 2 separate people as well, one who stole Lisa and one who stole the cell phones?? No, they are part of the same crime.

We have no idea if they took place at the same time, separate times, same person, separate people. (Wouldn't it be great if we did?) The only thing we DO know is we have a theft and we have a kidnapping.

We dont know that DB passed out because only she said that.

Actually Deb's not the only one who said it. Read the article I linked, the neighbor Blondo was there and DB told her "she was going to bed."

There is no one to say that DB blacked out drunk.

Not exactly correct. There is actually Blondo to say that DB blacked out drunk. She was there. She can either corroborate the "blacked out" story or refute it. So there is actually someone who can say that "DB blacked out drunk." Her name is Blondo.

I would bet my last dollar thats a defense ploy. I dont believe it for a second. Look at all the things that were in that family's favor that night, work hours changes, blacking out, cell phones missing, on camera buying wine, cant call LE right away because there are no phones, a homeless man walking around the neighborhood, etc... There is a cover up going on here. I big one that I didnt think they would be smart enough to pull off

Given that their daughter is missing and presumed dead, I don't see how we can argue these things were "in their favor."

You're right about one thing, I don't think they are capable of pulling something like that off either. And if I don't think someone is capable of pulling something off, then they probably did not pull it off -- so I look elsewhere.

I look where the data, facts and evidence points.

• Phone missing.
• Missing phone calls one woman. That woman is MW.
• That one woman fits the description and profile the FBI has established as the most likely to be the kidnapper of a baby.
• That woman has a connection to a recidivist criminal. That recidivist criminal is Jersey.

I choose not to focus my attention on those I don't think could pull off a crime. Instead I focus my attention on those connected to the crime who are known, adjudicated, convicted criminals and/or those who fit the profile of the offender.

 

[1&2&3]

Has there been any disclosure on why DB had MW's phone number written on her hand? Just curious. . .

 

[hambirg]

I agree, he is a piece of this puzzle but only as a ploy or being in the wrong place and the wrong time and knowing the wrong person. He has a record, easy mark... I really think thats what it comes down to.

ITA.

It's the stuff defense attorney's dream about, no?

I think when it comes to Occam's Razor you have to keep in mind, who had "access?" What is the simplest answer to who had access to BL that night?

 

[RANCH]

A list of "just the facts" would be mighty handy to have right about now. New Thread?

Here's a link to the "just the facts" thread. It hasn't had any activity for a few days however.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151262"]Just the facts, ma'am. - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

 

[hambirg]

It's not up to anyone's opinion; the crime of burglary/robbery is different than the crime of kidnapping. So different, in fact, that our criminal justice system has chosen to name them two separate crimes. Pretty compelling stuff, eh?



We have no idea if they took place at the same time, separate times, same person, separate people. (Wouldn't it be great if we did?) The only thing we DO know is we have a theft and we have a kidnapping.




Actually Deb's not the only one who said it. Read the article I linked, the neighbor Blondo was there and DB told her "she was going to bed."





Not exactly correct. There is actually Blondo to say that DB blacked out drunk. She was there. She can either corroborate the "blacked out" story or refute it. So there is actually someone who can say that "DB blacked out drunk." Her name is Blondo.




Given that their daughter is missing and presumed dead, I don't see how we can argue these things were "in their favor."

You're right about one thing, I don't think they are capable of pulling something like that off either. And if I don't think someone is capable of pulling something off, then they probably did not pull it off -- so I look elsewhere.

I look where the data, facts and evidence points.

• Phone missing.
• Missing phone calls one woman. That woman is MW.
• That one woman fits the description and profile the FBI has established as the most likely to be the kidnapper of a baby.
• That woman has a connection to a recidivist criminal. That recidivist criminal is Jersey.

I choose not to focus my attention on those I don't think could pull off a crime. Instead I focus my attention on those connected to the crime who are known, adjudicated, convicted criminals and/or those who fit the profile of the offender.

My only problem with that is we don't know if those two crimes occurred. Instead of a theft and a kidnapping, we could very likely (statistically speaking) have a murder and a cover-up.

That's the million dollar question.

 

[katshep]

It's not up to anyone's opinion; the crime of burglary/robbery is different than the crime of kidnapping. So different, in fact, that our criminal justice system has chosen to name them two separate crimes. Pretty compelling stuff, eh?



We have no idea if they took place at the same time, separate times, same person, separate people. (Wouldn't it be great if we did?) The only thing we DO know is we have a theft and we have a kidnapping.




Actually Deb's not the only one who said it. Read the article I linked, the neighbor Blondo was there and DB told her "she was going to bed."





Not exactly correct. There is actually Blondo to say that DB blacked out drunk. She was there. She can either corroborate the "blacked out" story or refute it. So there is actually someone who can say that "DB blacked out drunk." Her name is Blondo.




Given that their daughter is missing and presumed dead, I don't see how we can argue these things were "in their favor."

You're right about one thing, I don't think they are capable of pulling something like that off either. And if I don't think someone is capable of pulling something off, then they probably did not pull it off -- so I look elsewhere.

I look where the data, facts and evidence points.

• Phone missing.
• Missing phone calls one woman. That woman is MW.
• That one woman fits the description and profile the FBI has established as the most likely to be the kidnapper of a baby.
• That woman has a connection to a recidivist criminal. That recidivist criminal is Jersey.

I choose not to focus my attention on those I don't think could pull off a crime. Instead I focus my attention on those connected to the crime who are known, adjudicated, convicted criminals and/or those who fit the profile of the offender.

Cowtowner making sense. You might want to consider that MW was the victim of a parental kidnapping. http://www.kmbc.com/news/29660981/detail.html

 

[cowtowner]

I understand what you're saying, but it was also reported that the call was made at 8:30, but you say you are just disregarding that because there was no LE corroboration on it. As if theories should only come from what LE has corroborated. I was just saying that there was no LE corroboration on either.

The only person I've seen quoted stating as fact that the call was placed at 8:30pm is MW herself. (Trusting the fox to give you the count in the hen house)

ETA: Just an afterthought, as far as LE corroboration goes, they have come out and said that they are moving on away from Jersey, said he is not a suspect, actually the only one that LE has come out and said was not a suspect. Should that be regarded or disregarded?

Correction: KCPD has said they cleared Jersey's involvement with the baby's disappearance. Has the FBI cleared him? Has KCPD said they have cleared him of any involvement in the crime of burglary?

Couple things:

First, Jersey can very well be guilty of burglary and innocent of kidnapping -- especially if he took the phones, called MW, and she came and took the baby.

Second alternate thought: Consider that kidnapping is a federal crime. Have we seen where the FBI has cleared anyone? Given that the crime of kidnapping is a federal crime and we're five minutes from State Line, that makes it the FBI's jurisdiction.

 

[StrayKat]

Wait a minute, have you seen it corroborated as fact by LE or otherwise that the call was placed after DB was already passed out, which is what your basing the OR on? How do you know what to disregard and what not to?

We probably will just need to disregard most of this case since there is a lot that LE hasn't come out and corroborated.

It has been reported on multiple MSM... she said the call was at 2:30 am.

 

[djm41]

I thought the neighbor was Brando. :waitasec:

 

[StrayKat]

Kansas City Police Department spokesman Steve Young said he could not discuss investigators interviews with Wright. However, Young did say the man known as "Jersey" has been interviewed and cleared of any involvement in the baby's disappearance.
"We spoke to him and are moving on," Young said.

http://www.kctv5.com/story/15919668/womans-cell-phone-connected-to-search-for-missing-baby

It was also stated emphatically at least 5 times on JVM and NG yesterday that LE has cleared Jersey (I won't search out the transcripts). Jim Spellman of CNN has made a point multiple times over the last 3 days of emphasizing that the man picked out of photo line up by Motorcycle Man witness at 4 am is NOT Jersey.

I understand that some feel Jersey must somehow be involved. I have never once seen LE publicly falsely clear a person as some sort of strategy, but doesn't mean it could never happen. LE hardly ever clears anyone publicly - they don't want to look foolish if they end up being wrong and they don't want that statement used against them if they later need to prosecute. They can just say "he's not a suspect" if they they don't have enough evidence to arrest, or to clear. So, it's a strong bold statement that LE is making when they say they have completely ruled the man out and everyone should be looking elsewhere. I believe LE is making this statement in good faith after much due diligence. Others may disagree for reasons of their own. But, it's very clear that LE has publicly announced that Johnny Tanko, aka Jersey, has been thoroughly investigated and cleared of any involvement in Lisa's abduction.

"And are moving on"... could mean that they are moving on with their investigation of him. JMO!

 

[katshep]

I thought the neighbor was Brando. :waitasec:

It is. I love some of the names in this case. Brando, Tanko, Netz...It does sound like pulp fiction. Unfortunately, it is not.

 

[cowtowner]

Cowtowner making sense. You might want to consider that MW was the victim of a parental kidnapping. http://www.kmbc.com/news/29660981/detail.html

Nice catch.

Again, as told to me directly from retired LE:

"over 90% of the time when a baby is kidnapped, the person who did it is a woman, in her 20s, overweight or obese who has a history of mental instability."

OVER NINETY PERCENT!

(I also freely admit that DB fits the same description (not sure about history of mental instability) -- so I don't completely rule her out. I just focus more on MW and Jersey because of the recidivist, criminal element tied in.)

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I thought the neighbor was Brando. :waitasec:

Brando, Blondo...what's the diff? :floorlaugh:

 

[In da Middle]

I thought the neighbor was Brando. :waitasec:

psssst You are correct.

 

[powayparent]

Nice catch.

Again, as told to me directly from retired LE:

"over 90% of the time when a baby is kidnapped, the person who did it is a woman, in her 20s, overweight or obese who has a history of mental instability."

OVER NINETY PERCENT!

(I also freely admit that DB fits the same description (not sure about history of mental instability) -- so I don't completely rule her out. I just focus more on MW and Jersey because of the recidivist, criminal element tied in.)

That's because they are using weight to hide the lack of a pregnant belly.

ETA: I don't believe the 90% statistic, especially not for older babies.

 

[krimekat]

A list of "just the facts" would be mighty handy to have right about now. New Thread?

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151262"]Just the facts, ma'am. - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

Here is Just the Facts Thread . . .

 

[natsound]

The only thing we DO know is we have a theft and we have a kidnapping.
[/I]

respectfully snipped

We don't know either of these two things. In fact, I doubt either one of them to be true.