Cheewawa007
Registered Changiholic
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
- Messages
- 1,395
- Reaction score
- 6
Man seen carrying diaper clad baby
- Thread starter momtective
- Start date
New Posts
-
MA MA - Judith S. Bleiler, 18, Brockton, 16 September 1977
- Latest: victoriarobinson642
Mrs. Holmes
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2011
- Messages
- 683
- Reaction score
- 2
DB changing her story about the timeline and when she last saw the baby is interesting... when you realize JI fits the description.... is she trying to change things up so that LE will have a much larger window to consider and it will point less strongly at LI being the man wandering the neighbourhood with the baby after midnight?
It really, really bothers me that the physical description of the man carrying a diaper clad baby in the neighborhood almost fits JI.
Let's go back to the surveillance tapes. Yes, perhaps he is on them but I can't believe he's on the tapes for the whole 9-10 hours he said he was working. Surely, he must have had a break...perhaps went outside for a smoke, etc. Perhaps he left for a 1/2 hour....takes 5-10 minutes to get home.
Kamille
Shine bright like a diamond
- Joined
- May 5, 2009
- Messages
- 16,781
- Reaction score
- 6,301
I really think that if it was JI, that couple would have been able to identify him. He walked right past them. And JI's been all over the news since the next day. I'm sure at least the husband would be able to state whether it was him or not.
MOO
He didn't walk right by the lady. I don't believe she got a good look at the face at all. It was dark and the lady was looking through the blinds on her window. And we don't know what the husband saw since he hasn't talked to the press, but again, they don't appear to even know what race the guy was.
Cazzie
This is love
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2010
- Messages
- 4,455
- Reaction score
- 43
Well, finally (we knew that!) an MSM acknowledgment (Dan Abrams, legal analyst) of inconsistencies between the accounts of the eyewitnesses that saw a man with a baby...near the end of this video from today:
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/baby...-talk-14815791
No specifics, but they mentioned "man seen carrying a baby" and showed images of the motorcycle guy and the blob.
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/baby...-talk-14815791
No specifics, but they mentioned "man seen carrying a baby" and showed images of the motorcycle guy and the blob.
Sisterhood
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2008
- Messages
- 119
- Reaction score
- 0
Assuming the sitings of this "male carrying a baby" are credible,isn't it also logical to look at the sightings from the angle of "ok..if the person who was sighted isn't an abductor....then surely by now whomever was carrying a baby out in those areas that evening would have called LE and told them they were out & about with their own child for a completely innocent reason"..surely the community has all heard this claim-and if noone has come forward to dispell this "theory" of this man sighted...I still believe it is possible.
I mentioned in another thread that the first sighting was around 12 :30 by a neighbor near Lisa's home..but if you listen to the inital interview the woman says " it looked like the man tried to pretend to walk up to a house when he saw them lookin at him"....so it's very possible that this man phones whoever was going to be the "pick up car" & told them he had to lay low for a few in a nearby wooded area.,..and after a while he then continued walking with the child to the last area where there was a sighting (near an INTERSTATE) at 4 am..possible he was picked up & they went on to "whereever" with baby Lisa...far fetched -maybe? but who knows???????
I mentioned in another thread that the first sighting was around 12 :30 by a neighbor near Lisa's home..but if you listen to the inital interview the woman says " it looked like the man tried to pretend to walk up to a house when he saw them lookin at him"....so it's very possible that this man phones whoever was going to be the "pick up car" & told them he had to lay low for a few in a nearby wooded area.,..and after a while he then continued walking with the child to the last area where there was a sighting (near an INTERSTATE) at 4 am..possible he was picked up & they went on to "whereever" with baby Lisa...far fetched -maybe? but who knows???????
momtective
Lifetime WS Non-Mod
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2008
- Messages
- 11,995
- Reaction score
- 30
This was brought up on another thread and I thought I'd bring it here to see what others may think.
IMO It does appear to be the same cadence...but with the surveillance video it's so hard to really tell...but both do appear to have the same rhythm as they walk. :waitasec:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/baby-lisa-irwin-surveillance-footage-mystery-man/story?id=14795844
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/baby-lisa-parents-talk-14815791
The man with the baby is described by neighbors as bald or balding, tall and slender. JI is balding, tall and slender. :waitasec:
I wish we could see the video of him working at the Starbucks, I'd just love to know what he was wearing that night... white T, white coveralls???
I know in the live feed the morning Lisa was reported as missing, he was wearing that Black hoodie...wonder if he had a T on under it.
IMO It does appear to be the same cadence...but with the surveillance video it's so hard to really tell...but both do appear to have the same rhythm as they walk. :waitasec:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/baby-lisa-irwin-surveillance-footage-mystery-man/story?id=14795844
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/baby-lisa-parents-talk-14815791
The man with the baby is described by neighbors as bald or balding, tall and slender. JI is balding, tall and slender. :waitasec:
I wish we could see the video of him working at the Starbucks, I'd just love to know what he was wearing that night... white T, white coveralls???
I know in the live feed the morning Lisa was reported as missing, he was wearing that Black hoodie...wonder if he had a T on under it.
I posted yesterday afternoon on the abc thread, (when the story broke out about the witness descriptions being different from each other, couple and bike man,) that this description raised flags for me, but that thread was all about the separate interviews being needed, which was the primary focus of that abc news story, so my post was lost on that thead, but happy to find you all talking about it.
JI was working a very late night shift, or was he? I am not sure we know if his alibi checked out as far as all the hours accounted for between 5:30 and 4:00am. Maybe just that he arrived when he was supposed to and left at the time it would take to get home by 4:00am. Somewhere in between he could have left and come back. Was he working alone? Were there others on the late shift. I imagine LEW has looked into this.
At least maybe now the press will stop intimating that the man carrying the baby spotted by two witnesses (couple and bike man) and the white blob are the same individual which points to abduction. I don't see that this would happen, three people are involved in a random baby abduction?
Either they are all unrelated, or there is someone involved who is tied to Lisa and there is a specific purpose in this.
JMO Feel free to disagree.
JI was working a very late night shift, or was he? I am not sure we know if his alibi checked out as far as all the hours accounted for between 5:30 and 4:00am. Maybe just that he arrived when he was supposed to and left at the time it would take to get home by 4:00am. Somewhere in between he could have left and come back. Was he working alone? Were there others on the late shift. I imagine LEW has looked into this.
At least maybe now the press will stop intimating that the man carrying the baby spotted by two witnesses (couple and bike man) and the white blob are the same individual which points to abduction. I don't see that this would happen, three people are involved in a random baby abduction?
Either they are all unrelated, or there is someone involved who is tied to Lisa and there is a specific purpose in this.
JMO Feel free to disagree.
mistermissy
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2009
- Messages
- 104
- Reaction score
- 2
Rooster, ITA with you. I have been asking around on here what others think of JI having left at 5:20pm, supposed to be off at 10:00pm, ends up working "late", arrives home at 4:00am. It really bothers me that we are to believe that JI and DB had no contact after he left for work and before he arrived home. It would seem normal for anyone to contact their spouse to say they would be home six hours later from work than expected. IMO.
3. Enough descriptive information exists about the victim and the abductor for law enforcement to issue an AMBER Alert.
http://www.mshp.dps.mo.gov/MSHPWeb/PatrolDivisions/DDCC/AmberAlert/aboutTheAmberPlan.html
First time poster, hope I'm doing this correctly. 
Stating the obvious, IF the sighting and the incident are related, the man with the baby is either an abductor or an accomplice. (otherwise it's an innocent neighbor with his own child).
IF an abductor, does it make sense they are on foot? IF it was to get Lisa, there would be a getaway car involved, IMO. IF it was a crime of opportunity, "lets grab the baby while we're here stealing phones" then it's at least more plausible that they had to walk back somewhere. But that opens a whole new can of speculation.
IF an accomplice, makes no sense that he would be walking around the neighborhood with a dead baby. And if he's covering for an accident by DB, can you imagine getting the call or the discussion for that? Here honey, I messed up, go drop this in the river for me. shivers. sigh. :-/ JMO
Stating the obvious, IF the sighting and the incident are related, the man with the baby is either an abductor or an accomplice. (otherwise it's an innocent neighbor with his own child).
IF an abductor, does it make sense they are on foot? IF it was to get Lisa, there would be a getaway car involved, IMO. IF it was a crime of opportunity, "lets grab the baby while we're here stealing phones" then it's at least more plausible that they had to walk back somewhere. But that opens a whole new can of speculation.
IF an accomplice, makes no sense that he would be walking around the neighborhood with a dead baby. And if he's covering for an accident by DB, can you imagine getting the call or the discussion for that? Here honey, I messed up, go drop this in the river for me. shivers. sigh. :-/ JMO
What is the point of a Public Information Officer if he can't release any information???
momtective
Lifetime WS Non-Mod
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2008
- Messages
- 11,995
- Reaction score
- 30
First time poster, hope I'm doing this correctly.
Stating the obvious, IF the sighting and the incident are related, the man with the baby is either an abductor or an accomplice. (otherwise it's an innocent neighbor with his own child).
IF an abductor, does it make sense they are on foot? IF it was to get Lisa, there would be a getaway car involved, IMO. IF it was a crime of opportunity, "lets grab the baby while we're here stealing phones" then it's at least more plausible that they had to walk back somewhere. But that opens a whole new can of speculation.
IF an accomplice, makes no sense that he would be walking around the neighborhood with a dead baby. And if he's covering for an accident by DB, can you imagine getting the call or the discussion for that? Here honey, I messed up, go drop this in the river for me. shivers. sigh. :-/ JMO
:welcome: to WS GoodGurl!
Another member, not sure who it was...made the suggestion that perhaps JI returned home from work, found that DB had passed out on or rolled over on Baby Lisa and suffocated her...he might have just taken the baby's body and disposed of her thinking DB could handle an abduction far better than knowing she suffocated her baby girl. If DB was out cold she wouldn't have even know he was there.
First time poster, hope I'm doing this correctly.
Stating the obvious, IF the sighting and the incident are related, the man with the baby is either an abductor or an accomplice. (otherwise it's an innocent neighbor with his own child).
IF an abductor, does it make sense they are on foot? IF it was to get Lisa, there would be a getaway car involved, IMO. IF it was a crime of opportunity, "lets grab the baby while we're here stealing phones" then it's at least more plausible that they had to walk back somewhere. But that opens a whole new can of speculation.
IF an accomplice, makes no sense that he would be walking around the neighborhood with a dead baby. And if he's covering for an accident by DB, can you imagine getting the call or the discussion for that? Here honey, I messed up, go drop this in the river for me. shivers. sigh. :-/ JMO
Like other nice people gave to me, when i first posted.....
:welcome:
grandmaj
Former Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2009
- Messages
- 43,414
- Reaction score
- 16
Welcome to WS.
A Public Information Officer will give information out from time to time if it will not harm the investigation. They will not give information out which needs to remain secret for purposes of not harming the investigation, showing the perp/perps what they have for information or information which could harm a potential trial.
LE is not going to show their hand except in areas where they want information released. In the early days while conducting ground searches and trying to get the information out about a possible abduction yes. But not as the investigation keeps moving forward. The information always dries up.