"Jersey" and MW

[nursebeeme]

This thread is back open for discussion. Here are the rules...

1) MW is the acceptable name for MW.. no name variations please and thank you.

2) You may discuss MW's facebook and myspace respectfully and within our TOS at websleuths... **no discussion of comments made on those pages!**

3) There is no sleuthing of DB's brother

4) You may discuss Juggalette culture respectfully and within our TOS at websleuths.

please thank this post before posting again in this thread

bumping up the rules... this thread was previously closed for cleanup.. and these rules were posted when it was reopened for discussion

 

[Meri]

I was watching - I think it was JVM - last night and it was mentioned that Jersey could not be involved because he was in jail at the time of Baby Lisa going missing. But, that's not true, is it? Wasn't the day he was taking care of the lawn for those neighbors, and the other neighbor saw him, the day OF Lisa going missing? Thanks...

 

[Karmaa]

You know what, I do think Ashley Irwin guided some of the decisions that were made early on while she was the family spokesperson. And I think she was just trying to help, but she quickly found herself in over her head.

She may be the true-crime junkie in the family. (Doesn't EVERY family have one?) Which would explain WHY she has the McCann book, and why she might be the one to try to take the reins in the case. Maybe she's one of the ones who believes that only guilty people get lawyers, and if you just tell the truth everything will be OK. I guess she would have learned quick, huh?

 

[StrayKat]

Please, someone tell me if a map has been made of the path thru the yards to dumpster. Also, if the two different pictures of Jersey. Is the skinny pic the most current?

Thank you.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Ok...serious question. Do you honestly honestly beleive if LE thought a dead body had been on the floor next to the bed they wouldn't have taken the carpet??? Really???

Instead they would just leave it for reporters and talking heads to trample all over....:floorlaugh:

The search warrant said "area of floor" next to the bed. I think they did take the item on the area of floor that the dog hit on.

JMO

 

[cowtowner]

I have to say, I am baffled by the resistance to the idea that Jersey, a convicted felon, could have been responsible for any criminal activity that went on, while the parents, the brother, and the neighbor--none of whom have any sort of criminal record to my knowledge--are clearly capable of everything from the killing of a baby to criminal conspiracy and who knows what else.

Notice that I am not excluding MW from suspicion--I just don't think we know much about her than what SHE says LE has said to her.

As for the idea of the conspiracy to frame Jersey, all I can offer is Occam's Razor. Is it more likely that a group of people conspired to cover up a crime, lie to LE and create evidence to implicate someone and none of them has yet 'broken' under the pressure, or is it more likely that a known criminal committed a crime? JMO.

THANK YOU. Let objectivity and logic prevail.

Let me suggest we go about this a different way. Let's take Lisa out of the equation for a second and ask one question:

WHO PROBABLY STOLE THE CELL PHONES?


We also have objective, forensic evidence that shows a connection between the stolen property and MW as close as the night of the crime, in the form of a phone call from one of the stolen phones to MW's phone on that night.

I don't recollect what time this call was placed. If the call from the stolen phone to MW was placed after the timeline established DB passed out (which has been corroborated by the neighbor here: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/01/3243027/a-look-back-at-a-critical-night.html) then it's very damning evidence of MW's connection to the stolen cell phones.

If your cell phone was stolen, and you found a call was placed after the theft from your phone to my phone, who would you LOGICALLY assume had some involvement????

ME!

I've said since October 5th that the cell phones are the key to the case because they provide objective, forensic data without the emotional clouds of kidnapping, Casey Anthony, alcohol use, prejudice etc.. Anything we learn about the who stole the phones points us towards the someone or something involved with Lisa's disappearance.

Presented with the cast of characters, facts of the situation, objective, provable data: the key question to finding Lisa is; who's most likely involved in stealing those cell phones? Or who most likely knows who stole those cell phones?

From today's published timeline (HERE at the KC STARwe have: MW, Blondo, Jersey and to some degree DB.

MW - got a call from one of the phones, connected to the stolen items after their theft.
Blondo - was, per the timeline, left alone at the Irwin home when DB went to bed (opportunity)
Jersey - history of breaking into windows and robbery in the neighborhood, past criminal history (motive)
DB - left alone at the home while Blondo went to get her own liquor.

Now, we have criminal data and evidence that points to Jersey and MW's probable involvement, including:

• FBI abduction statistics for babies meeting Lisa's description are overwhelmingly a woman in her 20s, overweight/obese. (anyone look at MW?)
  
• Criminal statistics overwhelmingly illustrate that the best indicator of future criminal behavior is past criminal involvement. Ex cons are simply just more likely to be recidivist.
  
• Criminal statistics overwhelmingly suggest that "low level crime" (drug use, drug dealing, theft, etc.) tends to lead to instances of high-level crime: battery, robbery, kidnapping, murder, etc..

We also have objective, forensic evidence that shows a connection between the stolen property and MW as close as the night Lisa was taken, in the form of a phone call from one of the stolen phones to MW's phone on the night Lisa was taken.

I don't recollect what time this call was placed. If the call from the stolen phone to MW was placed after the timeline established DB passed out (which has been corroborated by the neighbor here: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/01/3243027/a-look-back-at-a-critical-night.html) then it's very damning evidence of MW's connection.

Let's take the missing baby out of the equation for one second and ask our selves one simple question: If your cell phone was stolen, and you found a call was placed after the theft from your phone to my phone, who would you LOGICALLY assume had some involvement????

I've said since October 5th that the cell phones are the key to the case because they provide objective, forensic data. Anything we learn about the phones points us towards someone or something.

Occams Razor indeed; follow the breadcrumbs.

 

[frankie069]

THANK YOU. Let objectivity and logic prevail.

This is what I was arguing way up in this thread here: "Jersey" and MW - Page 23 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

We have criminal data and evidence that points to Jersey and MW's probable involvement, including:

• FBI abduction statistics for babies meeting Lisa's description are overwhelmingly a woman in her 20s, overweight/obese. (anyone look at MW?)
  
• Criminal statistics overwhelmingly illustrate that the best indicator of future criminal behavior is past criminal involvement. Ex cons are simply just more likely to be recidivist.
  
• Criminal statistics overwhelmingly suggest that "low level crime" (drug use, drug dealing, theft, etc.) tends to lead to instances of high-level crime: battery, robbery, kidnapping, murder, etc..

We also have objective, forensic evidence that shows a connection between the stolen property and MW as close as the night Lisa was taken, in the form of a phone call from one of the stolen phones to MW's phone on the night Lisa was taken.

I don't recollect what time this call was placed. If the call from the stolen phone to MW was placed after the timeline established DB passed out (which has been corroborated by the neighbor here: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/01/3243027/a-look-back-at-a-critical-night.html) then it's very damning evidence of MW's connection.

Let's take the missing baby out of the equation for one second and ask our selves one simple question: If your cell phone was stolen, and you found a call was placed after the theft from your phone to my phone, who would you LOGICALLY assume had some involvement????

I've said since October 5th that the cell phones are the key to the case because they provide objective, forensic data. Anything we learn about the phones points us towards someone or something.

Occams Razor indeed; follow the breadcrumbs.

Yes, but in this case, JT is not the simplest explanation, DB is..

 

[Darcyline]

This case is definitely very close to closing if it was JT. His DNA would have to be all over the house after breaking into it and searching through it twice in one night. Also, seems like the type that would break or take a deal fairly easily. Definitely best case scenario especially if Lisa was sold!

 

[wvjules]

IMO that's not logical because of what the intruder would have had to do... get the phones, then the baby, or vice versa... and we have to assume that DB did lie about all three phones being out of order, which weakens her claims about the phones being stolen, IMO.

How would an intruder know that the phones were "restricted" or "out of order"? They wouldn't. It weakens nothing, IMO.

 

[wvjules]

This case is definitely very close to closing if it was JT. His DNA would have to be all over the house after breaking into it and searching through it twice in one night. Also, seems like the type that would break or take a deal fairly easily. Definitely best case scenario especially if Lisa was sold!

Twice? :waitasec:

 

[EarlyT79]

No idea. But I do know that DB, when shown cell phone pings, stated that wasn't possible because the phones were restricted. Now, if one of the phones wasn't restricted, why would she say the pings weren't possible? :waitasec:

I have no answer to that question.

With DB telling different storys about much that happened that night, I won't put much faith in her phone story.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

There are some rules to Occam's Razor. One of them being that you can not just conveniently leave out known facts.

Just sayin'.

 

[natsound]

How would an intruder know that the phones were "restricted" or "out of order"? They wouldn't. It weakens nothing, IMO.

What I'm saying is, the intruder would have had to go into one room to grab Lisa, then another room to grab the phones. And, we know that DB lied about all three phones being out of order, because we can be pretty sure that a call was placed from one of them at 8:30. Because DB lied about the phones, it weakens her credibility, IMO.

 

[cityslick]

There are some rules to Occam's Razor. One of them being that you can not just conveniently leave out known facts.

Just sayin'.

I'm not trying to be a pain, but what exactly are known 'facts' in this case other than a baby is missing?

A dog 'hit' on an area in the room.
JI was working that night.

Is that it?

 

[Darcyline]

Twice? :waitasec:

The going scenario I have seen is he came in at 830, fingered around the place for stuff to sell, made a phone call while everyone was on the porch, then left, then came back later and snatched Lisa. Are people saying now that Lisa was snatched at 830 as well as the phones?

 

[cityslick]

What I'm saying is, the intruder would have had to go into one room to grab Lisa, then another room to grab the phones. And, we know that DB lied about all three phones being out of order, because we can be pretty sure that a call was placed from one of them at 8:30. Because DB lied about the phones, it weakens her credibility, IMO.

Again, why must it be a lie and not an assumption?

 

[EarlyT79]

:bananalama: A bit of drama?

There is a baby missing and now MW and jersey are in the cast of characters. Can't change that. Hope for the best for Lisa and her family.

Lisa's family, firstly her mom and uncle, are two who need to tell the truth. They are in the cast of characters.

A baby is missing and the waters around her are muddyed with bs.

 

[EarlyT79]

Maybe someone used it without asking for permission? A thief probably would not know if the bill has been paid or not. We do not actually know what time the phone was used, we have conflicting reports as such, so which are we to believe?

Why would a kidnapper that took a baby use a stolen phone? A stolen phone, to place a call?
That makes no sense.

 

[katydid23]

DB claimed in one of her interviews with Judge JP that she knows the phones were restricted because "she even tried them". Its linked here at WS somewhere.

I wonder if she tried both of the phones on their cell plan? Because when a cell plan is 'restricted' for late payment, ONLY ONE of the phones is actually restricted. The others works the same as always. So she may have picked up the 'primary' phone, the one whose number has the billing attached to it, and found that one going straight to the payment center when she tried to dial out.

 

[powayparent]

THANK YOU. Let objectivity and logic prevail.

Let me suggest we go about this a different way. Let's take Lisa out of the equation for a second and ask one question:

WHO PROBABLY STOLE THE CELL PHONES?


We also have objective, forensic evidence that shows a connection between the stolen property and MW as close as the night of the crime, in the form of a phone call from one of the stolen phones to MW's phone on that night.

I don't recollect what time this call was placed. If the call from the stolen phone to MW was placed after the timeline established DB passed out (which has been corroborated by the neighbor here: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/01/3243027/a-look-back-at-a-critical-night.html) then it's very damning evidence of MW's connection to the stolen cell phones.

If your cell phone was stolen, and you found a call was placed after the theft from your phone to my phone, who would you LOGICALLY assume had some involvement????

ME!

I've said since October 5th that the cell phones are the key to the case because they provide objective, forensic data without the emotional clouds of kidnapping, Casey Anthony, etc.. Anything we learn about the phones points us towards the someone or something involved with Lisa's disappearance.

Now, we have criminal data and evidence that points to Jersey and MW's probable involvement, including:

• FBI abduction statistics for babies meeting Lisa's description are overwhelmingly a woman in her 20s, overweight/obese. (anyone look at MW?)
  
• Criminal statistics overwhelmingly illustrate that the best indicator of future criminal behavior is past criminal involvement. Ex cons are simply just more likely to be recidivist.
  
• Criminal statistics overwhelmingly suggest that "low level crime" (drug use, drug dealing, theft, etc.) tends to lead to instances of high-level crime: battery, robbery, kidnapping, murder, etc..

We also have objective, forensic evidence that shows a connection between the stolen property and MW as close as the night Lisa was taken, in the form of a phone call from one of the stolen phones to MW's phone on the night Lisa was taken.

I don't recollect what time this call was placed. If the call from the stolen phone to MW was placed after the timeline established DB passed out (which has been corroborated by the neighbor here: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/01/3243027/a-look-back-at-a-critical-night.html) then it's very damning evidence of MW's connection.

Let's take the missing baby out of the equation for one second and ask our selves one simple question: If your cell phone was stolen, and you found a call was placed after the theft from your phone to my phone, who would you LOGICALLY assume had some involvement????

I've said since October 5th that the cell phones are the key to the case because they provide objective, forensic data. Anything we learn about the phones points us towards someone or something.

Occams Razor indeed; follow the breadcrumbs.

Does it changed your opinion if the call was made at 8:30 pm, before DB passed out? I believe there was involvement between someone in the DB/JI household and the MW household but don't believe MW has anything to do with Lisa's disappearance. Also based on the activities of LE it appears to me that the phones continued to ping from that location so IMO were not stolen and LE knows it.