LE Serves Warrant on Family Home #6

[matou]

Is it possible that LE used the tape dispenser and rolls of tape to pull off samples of the carpet in the bedroom where the dog hit?

 

[Cazzie]

Is it possible that LE used the tape dispenser and rolls of tape to pull off samples of the carpet in the bedroom where the dog hit?

I doubt it. Sounds (from the warrant report) that they were taken as evidence.

I'm sure they have their own supplies and techniques for collecting samples from carpeting/etc.. They probably use vacuums with extremely fine filters, and document (via a grid) from where each sample was taken. JMO.

 

[panthera]

Is it possible that LE used the tape dispenser and rolls of tape to pull off samples of the carpet in the bedroom where the dog hit?

CSI would have their own tape for that purpose, if indeed they did remove any samples from the bedroom carpet in this manner.

I believe the tape and dispenser from the Irwin house could have been for future evidentiary use (for comparison purposes, such as the duct tape in the Anthony home vs. the tape found with Caylee's remains).

MOO

 

[Abby Normal]

There are ALOT of factor that effect intoxication levels. Alcohol percentage in the beverage, duration of time beverage was consumed, body weight, food intake, etc. etc.

But generally speaking, the rule of thumb is that it takes the body 1 hour to metabolize 1 drink.

yes, as well as biological and chemical factors. I can handle my liquor better than my spouse who is a whole foot taller, and much more muscular than me.

 

[Abby Normal]

Ah, thank you. I never saw the "denied" at the bottom.

I missed it too! I think there is still a chance that portions were sealed, but who knows. It did seem like a tiny list of evidence for 17 hours.

 

[katshep]

Maybe the guy who came throught the bushes into the gas station will come forward and tell them who he is and where he came from. Hoping! I'm not sure there is a way they can clear that video up and identify him from what we have seen.

Agreed. It troubles me that no one has come forward to say that s/he walked across from the BP that night or that he was the person that carried a half-clad baby in the middle of the night through a neighborhood.

 

[Karmaa]

Did the drinking partner confirm as well that the box was empty? Box wasn't taken by LE correct? Nothing to stop a person from emptying it in the sink to help with the "I drank a bunch" alibi.

There is also nothing to say that LE didn't empty the box to see how much was missing. That would seem like a logical thing for them to do, to verify if Debbie (and the neighbor) really drank what she said she did.

And, if that happened, it would seem to indicate that her story was confirmed. They would not have taken the box as evidence if it proved her story was true. They would only take it if it indicated that she was lying.

 

[Karmaa]

yes, as well as biological and chemical factors. I can handle my liquor better than my spouse who is a whole foot taller, and much more muscular than me.

Heh - I hear you! When I was much younger, I could drink my hubby under the table, and I drank bourbon to his beer. But wine always made me loopy. Now I don't drink much at all, and a single drink makes me giggly.

Anyway, we have no idea how Debbie reacts to alcohol. It could be anything from falling down drunk, to pretty buzzed, and anything in between. How I react has nothing to do with how she reacts.

 

[Donjeta]

There is also nothing to say that LE didn't empty the box to see how much was missing. That would seem like a logical thing for them to do, to verify if Debbie (and the neighbor) really drank what she said she did.

And, if that happened, it would seem to indicate that her story was confirmed. They would not have taken the box as evidence if it proved her story was true. They would only take it if it indicated that she was lying.

Would they need the actual wine box in the evidence room? If it was emptied by LE it would not indicate either of those things. The measurements and the photos would have to tell the story, the box would be empty either way.

 

[Tuffy]

Would they need the actual wine box in the evidence room? If it was emptied by LE it would not indicate either of those things. The measurements and the photos would have to tell the story, the box would be empty either way.

I don't know that they would need the box at all. It wouldn't seem like something they would need evidence-wise.

 

[Flossie JMO]

Heh - I hear you! When I was much younger, I could drink my hubby under the table, and I drank bourbon to his beer. But wine always made me loopy. Now I don't drink much at all, and a single drink makes me giggly.

Anyway, we have no idea how Debbie reacts to alcohol. It could be anything from falling down drunk, to pretty buzzed, and anything in between. How I react has nothing to do with how she reacts.

Good post ITA. I am pretty small and can do fine, but no wine or liquor, and my friend is tiny at 4 foot 11 and can drink 2 bottles of wine to herself over an evening and you would never guess she had been into the wine. And she could go out to a club/bar after if she wanted. JME

 

[sorrell skye]

There is also nothing to say that LE didn't empty the box to see how much was missing. That would seem like a logical thing for them to do, to verify if Debbie (and the neighbor) really drank what she said she did.

And, if that happened, it would seem to indicate that her story was confirmed. They would not have taken the box as evidence if it proved her story was true. They would only take it if it indicated that she was lying.

If the box-o-wine was considered potential evidence, I believe LE would have seized it & taken it to the lab, where it would have been emptied/measured & documented. I don't believe LE would have emptied/measured it @ the house. Processing of potential evidence typically occurs @ the lab.

IMO, unless DB was given a BrAC test or a blood test to determine BAC shortly after LE arrived on the scene, the contents (or lack thereof) of the wine box bladder are irrelevant, in terms of validating or refuting DB's claim that she was "drunk" & possibly blacked-out when her baby went missing.

A test to determine BAC would be scientific evidence. A wine box bladder (whether empty, full, or half-full) is simply a wine box bladder.

I don't believe LE was interested in the contents of the wine box bladder.

ETA: I think DB & her spin team are highlighting the wine box because they hope it supports the drunk-possibly-blacked-out-while-the-baby-was-kidnapped scenario.

 

[Cher352]

IDK... but I think if I was on the jury I would want to see that box of wine if drinking was brought up in the trial by either side.

 

[sorrell skye]

IDK... but I think if I was on the jury I would want to see that box of wine if drinking was brought up in the trial by either side.

I agree - in a hypothetical situation wherein DB might be the defendant on trial, the defense team would more than likely attempt to enter into evidence the wine box & the empty wine box bladder in an attempt to create reasonable doubt.

Nevertheless, without BAC tests to substantiate the drunk scenario, the wine box & wine box bladder would be nothing more than flimsy stage props.

 

[panthera]

If the box-o-wine was considered potential evidence, I believe LE would have seized it & taken it to the lab, where it would have been emptied/measured & documented. I don't believe LE would have emptied/measured it @ the house. Processing of potential evidence typically occurs @ the lab.

IMO, unless DB was given a BrAC test or a blood test to determine BAC shortly after LE arrived on the scene, the contents (or lack thereof) of the wine box bladder are irrelevant, in terms of validating or refuting DB's claim that she was "drunk" & possibly blacked-out when her baby went missing.

A test to determine BAC would be scientific evidence. A wine box bladder (whether empty, full, or half-full) is simply a wine box bladder.

I don't believe LE was interested in the contents of the wine box bladder.

ETA: I think DB & her spin team are highlighting the wine box because they hope it supports the drunk-possibly-blacked-out-while-the-baby-was-kidnapped scenario.

BBM

I am at a loss for what good this could possibly do to help her. If nothing else, it indicates negligence and child endangerment if she can't remember whether or not the front door was locked, if the front window was left open, etc. and what time she last saw her baby in the crib, alive.

MOO

 

[sorrell skye]

BBM

I am at a loss for what good this could possibly do to help her. If nothing else, it indicates negligence and child endangerment if she can't remember whether or not the front door was locked, if the front window was left open, etc. and what time she last saw her baby in the crib, alive.

MOO

At the very least, it attempts to paint a scenario wherein DB was passed out cold, therefore she couldn't have harmed/killed her baby, nor could she have covered up the crime afterward.

Do I believe this scenario? No.

However, I think DB & her attorney(s) want LE & the public to believe it.

 

[Dee10]

What would the motive be for DB to say she made sure Lisa had her glow worm when she put her to bed. In another interview she said it was missing. When in fact LE took & logged the glow worm in the search records. This woman is all over the map.

ETA Sorry, not to interrupt the convo. just didn't know where to put this.

 

[mysteriew]

If the box-o-wine was considered potential evidence, I believe LE would have seized it & taken it to the lab, where it would have been emptied/measured & documented. I don't believe LE would have emptied/measured it @ the house. Processing of potential evidence typically occurs @ the lab.

IMO, unless DB was given a BrAC test or a blood test to determine BAC shortly after LE arrived on the scene, the contents (or lack thereof) of the wine box bladder are irrelevant, in terms of validating or refuting DB's claim that she was "drunk" & possibly blacked-out when her baby went missing.

A test to determine BAC would be scientific evidence. A wine box bladder (whether empty, full, or half-full) is simply a wine box bladder.

I don't believe LE was interested in the contents of the wine box bladder.

ETA: I think DB & her spin team are highlighting the wine box because they hope it supports the drunk-possibly-blacked-out-while-the-baby-was-kidnapped scenario.

I agree. The box doesn't prove anything. Most likely both the neighbor and DB were drinking from it that night. There would be no way to prove whether DB drank one glass or the whole box just by looking at the box.

 

[curiousc]

What would the motive be for DB to say she made sure Lisa had her glow worm when she put her to bed. In another interview she said it was missing. When in fact LE took & logged the glow worm in the search records. This woman is all over the map.

ETA Sorry, not to interrupt the convo. just didn't know where to put this.

Hmm, I don't recall her saying that Lisa had her glow worm when she put her to bed nor that it was missing? If she had, well, well, well.

 

[GutInstinct]

uggghhh. All so frustrating. Where is baby Lisa? Do we know if LE is still searching?