LIVE MSM COVERAGE on BABY LISA - 24 OCTOBER 2011

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Same here. I've crept from 'blindsided with fear' to 'he suspects something' to 'well, maybe he's not saying anything that might compromise the recovery of his daughter, and then he'll turn on DB' to "????" Flooded is a good word for my mind lately.:crazy:

This case has a lot of things going on.. I hope LE has a few tricks up their sleeve and they seem very quiet since that last major search.. Something's coming I think :0)
 
I think you can put 2 and 2 together in this case. LE said that there were no holes in the story. One of the very first things they are going to check is the alibi. The Starbucks tape shows Jeremy working. I don't think it's a big leap of faith to say that his alibi is good, at least for the time he claimed to be at work. Because if he couldn't account for his time, LE would not have said that there were no holes. Right?

I'm not making any "leaps of faith", great or otherwise. If others find doing so a reasonable thing to do, I'm fine with that. Just doesn't work for me personally.
 
On Vinnie Politan show 10/17 Peter Alexander(reporter that was in KC investigating the case.. He(quite the cutie he is:heart:).. Some may remember him from in depth parents interview that he did).. He confirmed to Vinnie that Jeremy's alibi pans out. There is video surveillance of him working at Starbucks that night... Not sure if someone could locate this transcript of this particular show on 10/17
 
I'm beginning to think LE is looking at JI more than we think they are.........:twocents:

Something about him just does not sit well with me.....

I agree.

I've done a 180 degree turn. I was convinced it was DB and Jeremy was standing by her, either in disbelief that she could kill their child or he played a minor role himself out of love for her. I'm really not so sure anymore. I don't think I trust him at all. The more I watch those old videos from 3 weeks ago the more suspicious he looks. I'll tell ya this, if DB is responsible, she's a damn fine actress in those interviews. Him? Not so much.
 
For those who followed the HaLeigh Cumming's case, the use of "werk" instead of the correctly-spelled "work" was used after the word was misspelled on a document of some sort. Please don't ask me to locate said document, but maybe a good soul who was more involved in tracking that case will cite the source.

When I use the euphemism "werk", please understand that I am being facetious ;)

No link necessary! And I certainly knew you were being facetious. Like I said, just curiosity after seeing it a few times. Thank you!
 
Maybe? He was the one who found her missing... Never know, I'm getting a little flooded with all the different possibilities now..

It's definitely mind boggling and what always bothers me about these kinds of cases is that "someone" knows exactly what happened to that child. Be it an accident, killing,kidnapping.....:banghead:

And they are sitting around watching LE and others frantically trying to find the child......:furious:
 
When Jeremy Irwin and Deborah Bradley arrived back to the house on North Walrond, KCTV5's Bonyen Lee asked the parents of baby Lisa Irwin on Monday if it was true that they were getting paid to avoid local reporters.

"No, not at all," said Deborah Bradley, the mother of the missing baby.

When asked why they would not talk to local reporters, Deborah replied, "Because we are grieving."

Police said they do not want to comment on Short's accusations, saying right now they are keeping the focus on baby Lisa and following up on tips and leads.

Police do say they have not had full cooperation of the parents since Oct. 6, nearly three weeks ago.
http://www.kctv5.com/story/15863026/lisas-mother-we-are-grieving
 
I agree.

I've done a 180 degree turn. I was convinced it was DB and Jeremy was standing by her, either in disbelief that she could kill their child or he played a minor role himself out of love for her. I'm really not so sure anymore. I don't think I trust him at all. The more I watch those old videos from 3 weeks ago the more suspicious he looks. I'll tell ya this, if DB is responsible, she's a damn fine actress in those interviews. Him? Not so much.

Exactly, she could be the one protecting him.....
 
I have thought since the beginning that perhaps JI is not Lisa's biological father. I was just thinking that Lisa has blue eyes and it looks like neither her DB or JI have blue eyes. Now its possible that Lisa could still have blue eyes but look at what i found while searching:
"The laws of genetics state that eye color is inherited as follows:
1.If both parents have blue eyes, the children will have blue eyes.
2.The brown eye form of the eye color gene (or allele) is dominant, whereas the blue eye allele is recessive.
3.If both parents have brown eyes yet carry the allele for blue eyes, a quarter of the children will have blue eyes, and three quarters will have brown eyes.
" So either Lisa got lucky and is in the 1/4 or ????
 
Attorney Cyndy Short told KMBC's Peggy Breit that she took the case after speaking with Lisa's family and believing they were innocent.
Short also explained that Lisa's parents, Deborah Bradley and Jeremy Irwin, declined to speak with reporters on Monday because they're afraid of the attention the missing baby case has brought to their family.

Read more: http://www.kmbc.com/news/29574361/detail.html#ixzz1bk4ImqjV

----------------
 
I have thought since the beginning that perhaps JI is not Lisa's biological father. I was just thinking that Lisa has blue eyes and it looks like neither her DB or JI have blue eyes. Now its possible that Lisa could still have blue eyes but look at what i found while searching:
"The laws of genetics state that eye color is inherited as follows:
1.If both parents have blue eyes, the children will have blue eyes.
2.The brown eye form of the eye color gene (or allele) is dominant, whereas the blue eye allele is recessive.
3.If both parents have brown eyes yet carry the allele for blue eyes, a quarter of the children will have blue eyes, and three quarters will have brown eyes.
" So either Lisa got lucky and is in the 1/4 or ????

That comment that JI made in that one interview about woman who cheat, eats at me...
 
I have thought since the beginning that perhaps JI is not Lisa's biological father. I was just thinking that Lisa has blue eyes and it looks like neither her DB or JI have blue eyes. Now its possible that Lisa could still have blue eyes but look at what i found while searching:
"The laws of genetics state that eye color is inherited as follows:
1.If both parents have blue eyes, the children will have blue eyes.
2.The brown eye form of the eye color gene (or allele) is dominant, whereas the blue eye allele is recessive.
3.If both parents have brown eyes yet carry the allele for blue eyes, a quarter of the children will have blue eyes, and three quarters will have brown eyes.
" So either Lisa got lucky and is in the 1/4 or ????


very possiblr its happen in my family many times :0) and some babies eyes can be blue up till 3 yrs old
 
I have thought since the beginning that perhaps JI is not Lisa's biological father. I was just thinking that Lisa has blue eyes and it looks like neither her DB or JI have blue eyes. Now its possible that Lisa could still have blue eyes but look at what i found while searching:
"The laws of genetics state that eye color is inherited as follows:
1.If both parents have blue eyes, the children will have blue eyes.
2.The brown eye form of the eye color gene (or allele) is dominant, whereas the blue eye allele is recessive.
3.If both parents have brown eyes yet carry the allele for blue eyes, a quarter of the children will have blue eyes, and three quarters will have brown eyes.
" So either Lisa got lucky and is in the 1/4 or ????

Nah! I think its his. I have four kids. Me and my husband have brown eyes and all of my kids do too except for the youngest. He has blue- green. :innocent: I thought debbie has blue? moo
 
It's definitely mind boggling and what always bothers me about these kinds of cases is that "someone" knows exactly what happened to that child. Be it an accident, killing,kidnapping.....:banghead:

And they are sitting around watching LE and others frantically trying to find the child......:furious:

I totally agree!
 
Hey LE, talk about consistency?!?! Why don't you make up your mind about when it was that these parents QUIT COOPERATING with you!!!! You can't keep it straight and have given multiple different dates!?! How about a little consistency?? When was it? Which date is correct?? If any??

Funny how they say they won't make a comment on Cyndy Short's statements about questioning there even being a dog "alert" in the home?!? They say they only want to focus on baby Lisa or keep the focus on.. But funny it is they can continue to make derogatory comments about these parents repeatedly!?!! But certainly can't keep the date straight for when it was they "supposedly" quit cooperating..
 
I have noticed and even remarked that DB's hair is always groomed to perfection. During the initial videos taken that next morning, she appears in pj pants, but her hair is perfect. In every interview, her hair is groomed to perfection. I find this strange since the store video has her hair simply pulled back without much effort, not as perfect as each time I have seen her after Lisa's disappearance.
I don't usually remark on anyone's appearance, but the predigious care and focus DB seems to have on her hair is remarkable in the face of what her lawyers are trying to say she is going through. A heap of trembling and sobbing...and a comb...

Just playing devil's advocate here...sometimes when you see everything about a person except for one thing go to pieces, it's a sign that the person is holding onto that one thing for comfort as something that he or she can control and have pride about.
 
Then LE must know that the neighbor, the boys, and the neighbor's daughter never saw Lisa that night, right? Otherwise, why would they even think it was possible that Jeremy killed Lisa before going to work?
Don't know if it means that necessarily, it could mean that they are only asking him about the only time frame he could answer about. They could only ask him about the 2 hours he was home. He wouldnt wouldn't be able to answer what happened if he wasn't physically there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
123
Guests online
1,497
Total visitors
1,620

Forum statistics

Threads
601,756
Messages
18,129,328
Members
231,138
Latest member
mjF7nx
Back
Top