Live MSM coverage on baby Lisa 21 October 2011- including Nancy Grace

[Mountain_Kat]

Does anyone know whether LE has said anything about the fire in that dumpster and has it been confirmed that LE showed DB clothing of Lisa that was burned? Or is all this just spin? Anyone know if LE has run tests on the dumpster contents etc... Sorry - so hard to keep up w/ all the versions of facts in this case.

All we know is that, according to DB, police showed her burnt clothing. It was never stated that it was child's clothing. Just clothing.

 

[Insomnia Momma]

Does anyone know whether LE has said anything about the fire in that dumpster and has it been confirmed that LE showed DB clothing of Lisa that was burned? Or is all this just spin? Anyone know if LE has run tests on the dumpster contents etc... Sorry - so hard to keep up w/ all the versions of facts in this case.

The only thing I have personally heard came straight from DB's mouth. Seeing as how I don't trust much of anything she says.... I have my doubts.

LE hasn't said a word about anything.

 

[AnaTeresa]

Thus far, according to Short, the couple has allowed police to:

Take their computer; call an Amber Alert, knowing that it would bring federal investigators into the case; take their other two children for forensic interviews; have the complete run of their home, their vehicles, a shed and a pop-up camper; take DNA and other biological evidence; obtain Lisa’s medical records, including those for well-baby visits; and conduct a polygraph examination on Bradley.

The couple also receives five or six calls a day from investigators, said Short, who estimated that Bradley and Irwin each have spent about 40 hours answering police questions since Lisa disappeared.

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/20...#ixzz1bQ9kNFV5


And this is why I'm fence-sitting. What more does LE want? How do they define not cooperating? What more can the parents really do, if they ARE innocent?

In no way am I trying to bash LE, as it seems like they are doing a good job investigating. But this squabbling in the media about cooperating vs. not cooperating has gone on far too long, and is making everyone involved in the case look bad.

 

[Peepers]

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/20/3220223/baby-lisas-lawyers-say-police.html#ixzz1bQ9kNFV5


This is a very good article, thanks Nurse!
It seems there is a standoff here now between the family and LE. I can see both sides, the family feels like they have told all they know and that LE is trying to get some sort of confession. LE is putting the heat on publicly making the family look uncooperative.
What I dont understand is...they have lawyers..why not talk with your lawyer present? I dont get it. What good is your high falootin lawyers if you dont use them?
Reminiscent of the Ramseys

 

[goldringstx]

http://g.co/maps/ncvtu

interactive case map (I have drawn a line between sightings)

eta: sorry my line didn't quite make it down to the perpendicular road where the 1215 sighting was.. but you can get the 'just" of it from the line

Is it plausible that this man could be responsible for the dumpster fire, since it's right near the line and at 2:30am?

 

[Donjeta]

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/20...#ixzz1bQ9kNFV5


And this is why I'm fence-sitting. What more does LE want? How do they define not cooperating? What more can the parents really do, if they ARE innocent?

In no way am I trying to bash LE, as it seems like they are doing a good job investigating. But this squabbling in the media about cooperating vs. not cooperating has gone on far too long, and is making everyone involved in the case look bad.

BBM. Not lying about the timeline would have been a good start IMO.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

http://g.co/maps/ncvtu

interactive case map (I have drawn a line between sightings)

eta: sorry my line didn't quite make it down to the perpendicular road where the 1215 sighting was.. but you can get the 'just" of it from the line

Thanks, Nursie.

Now, the man on the motorcycle says he turned off 48th onto Randolph, and it was on Randolph that he saw the man and the baby, right? So we don't know where on Randolph he saw this. But if it's the same man, and he's walking, it almost seems to me that he'd have had to have gone up NE Parvin to get from point a to point b.

:waitasec:

ETA: That's a helluva long walk with a baby dressed only in a diaper. Just sayin'.

 

[andalso]

For anyone who missed this, I personally think this is HUGE!

Today Show's Peter Alexander this morning states : "....Police are discounting reports that a neighbor saw a man with a baby near the home early that morning...."

 

[Mountain_Kat]

For anyone who missed this, I personally think this is HUGE!

Today Show's Peter Alexander this morning states : "....Police are discounting reports that a neighbor saw a man with a baby near the home early that morning...."

You think the 2 separate sighting is huge, or you think LE discounting the sightings is huge?

 

[nursebeeme]

Thanks, Nursie.

Now, the man on the motorcycle says he turned off 48th onto Randolph, and it was on Randolph that he saw the man and the baby, right? So we don't know where on Randolph he saw this. But if it's the same man, and he's walking, it almost seems to me that he'd have had to have gone up NE Parvin to get from point a to point b.

:waitasec:

ETA: That's a helluva long walk with a baby dressed only in a diaper. Just sayin'.

not to mention... there are a lot of homes and traffic in between... I would think there would be more than just a few sightings:twocents:

 

[andalso]

You think the 2 separate sighting is huge, or you think LE discounting the sightings is huge?

I think the police discounting it is huge!

 

[Sandfordfan]

I just posted a review of the piece on Fox and Friends, Plain Jane Doe.
Baden thinks DB rolled on her and smothered her in her bed.

 

[uvamerica]

OK now I'm confused ! I remember the woman who went on camera saying her husband saw the man with the baby at a/r midnight. She never said she saw the baby herself, but that her DH mentioned it to her an she thought a/b calling LE, now this same woman is claiming to have seen the man and the baby herself ? :waitasec:

I figured once lawyers were brought into the picture that there would be more "sightings" and tips would come in. Anything to throw the investigation off. I don't believe these sightings are Lisa. The man on the motorcycle at 4am and sees a baby in a diaper being carried by a man walking down the road, 45degrees out and says nothing until now ?:banghead:

 

[Donjeta]

If the abductor walked for hours with diaper-clad Lisa from the Irwin home via point A and B he was either on drugs or trying to get caught IMO.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I think the police discounting it is huge!

Gotcha. But they've interviewed the man and woman who apparently witnessed the first sighting 4 times, so I wouldn't say LE "discounted" the information.

People sometimes see things, later read things, and then evaluate what they originally saw in the context of what they've read, kwim? Here's an example: I might be in a parking lot and notice a woman with a red stain on her shirt. I later read that someone threw koolaid at a grocery store clerk after robbing the clerk. AHA! I was in a parkinglot of a grocery store and saw a woman with koolaid all over her shirt. Bet it was her!! Suddenly, in my mind, the red stain is now a koolaid stain...see where I'm going with this?

 

[josie1986]

I think the police discounting it is huge!

maybe they have something that points in another direction or they've already checked it out.

does anyone know when this guy reported this to LE or even if he did?

 

[Mountain_Kat]

maybe they have something that points in another direction or they've already checked it out.

does anyone know when this guy reported this to LE or even if he did?

The guy on the motorcycle reported his sighting a week after Lisa went missing. I find that kind of....odd. It's not like this case hasn't been plastered all over the place, especially locally.

 

[josie1986]

The guy on the motorcycle reported his sighting a week after Lisa went missing. I find that kind of....odd. It's not like this case hasn't been plastered all over the place, especially locally.

i thought that when it was posted.....even if there isn't a missing baby in the area,you'd surely phone LE? i would.

it not the norm to be out at 4am with a baby in just a diaper.

 

[andalso]

Gotcha. But they've interviewed the man and woman who apparently witnessed the first sighting 4 times, so I wouldn't say LE "discounted" the information.

People sometimes see things, later read things, and then evaluate what they originally saw in the context of what they've read, kwim? Here's an example: I might be in a parking lot and notice a woman with a red stain on her shirt. I later read that someone threw koolaid at a grocery store clerk after robbing the clerk. AHA! I was in a parkinglot of a grocery store and saw a woman with koolaid all over her shirt. Bet it was her!! Suddenly, in my mind, the red stain is now a koolaid stain...see where I'm going with this?

I was not discounting it at all, until I heard this (verbatim) on the Today Show "....Police are discounting reports that a neighbor saw a man with a baby near the home early that morning...."

I realize, unfortunately, that we can't take everything MSM states as fact but if the police are willing to discount it (for whatever reasons they have) then so am I. Maybe that is naive of me (and I reserve the right to change my mind, about a zillion times).

I can't figure out how these sightings could be discounted. I wonder if discounted means denial...i.e...it did not happen, or if it means they have ruled out the possibility that it could be baby Lisa.

I am more confused then ever.....

 

[josie1986]

I was not discounting it at all, until I heard this (verbatim) on the Today Show "....Police are discounting reports that a neighbor saw a man with a baby near the home early that morning...."

I realize, unfortunately, that we can't take everything MSM states as fact but if the police are willing to discount it (for whatever reasons they have) then so am I. Maybe that is naive of me (and I reserve the right to change my mind, about a zillion times).

I can't figure out how these sightings could be discounted. I wonder if discounted means denial...i.e...it did not happen, or if it means they have ruled out the possibility that it could be baby Lisa.

I am more confused then ever.....

i trust that if LE are willing to discount these sightings they have done a thorough job checking them out,so im willing to believe thats the case.

this whole case is a mystery to me,a baby just doesnt disappear without a trace :banghead: