Man seen carrying diaper clad baby

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
No rumors and no FB that includes rumors please. TIA
 
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

They had an Amber Alert issued right away, then cancelled it after 10 hours. They have a description of a bald man, late 30s, white shirt, dark pants, slender, approx 6' tall - what more do they need?

My point is that LE knows there has been no abduction. MOO.
 
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


I agree that this couple would have immediately recognized JI.

And JI wears GLASSES ...

NONE of the witnesses have stated that the "man carrying the baby" was wearing GLASSES ...

So IMO, it could not have been JI ...

MOO ...
 
They had an Amber Alert issued right away, then cancelled it after 10 hours. They have a description of a bald man, late 30s, white shirt, dark pants, slender, approx 6' tall - what more do they need?

My point is that LE knows there has been no abduction. MOO.
It was stated when the AA was issued that it would only be ran for 12 hours. That is exactly what happened. The description could not be linked to an abductor without a doubt. At that time that could have been simply a dad walking a baby. Nobody could say that the baby was baby Lisa.
 
I agree that this couple would have immediately recognized JI.

And JI wears GLASSES ...

NONE of the witnesses have stated that the "man carrying the baby" was wearing GLASSES ...

So IMO, it could not have been JI ...

MOO ...

The neighbor lady and her husband don't even know what race the man was, so clearly they didn't get a good look at his face at all.
 
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.

Motorcycle guy didn't even come forward for "about a week." I am pretty sure by that time the neighbor lady was already on TV.
 
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.

It sure would be normal, but supposedly they didn't pay their phone bill so their cell phones didn't work.
 
Motorcycle guy didn't even come forward for "about a week." I am pretty sure by that time the neighbor lady was already on TV.


did you see his interview? He's seems very credible to me. Why are we assuming that EVERYONE is lieing? I'm hoping and praying this is a valid tip because then maybe Lisa will be brought home. Why can't everyone be opened minded give this family a break and not accuse them until we have definite evidence. DB is no FCA!!!
 
did you see his interview? He's seems very credible to me. Why are we assuming that EVERYONE is lieing? I'm hoping and praying this is a valid tip because then maybe Lisa will be brought home. Why can't everyone be opened minded give this family a break and not accuse them until we have definite evidence. DB is no FCA!!!

Yes I saw the interview. What exactly makes him seem very credible? By his own admission, he didn't come forward for about a week because he didn't make a connection. That seems strange to me. What made him to finally make a connection about a week later? He doesn't say. How does he even know what day it was he supposedly saw something? I personally don't remember what day it was that I saw someone on the street about a week after the fact.
 
Yes I saw the interview. What exactly makes him seem very credible? By his own admission, he didn't come forward for about a week because he didn't make a connection. That seems strange to me. What made him to finally make a connection about a week later? He doesn't say. How does he even know what day it was he supposedly saw something? I personally don't remember what day it was that I saw someone on the street about a week after the fact.

It is possible that he didn't know that a baby was missing until a week later. Some people don't watch news or read the paper. As for remembering when he saw this, there are endless reasons why that could be so. He was riding a motorcycle. Maybe that's the last time he rode it and so remembers. I guess he was on his way home from work and maybe that was the night he had worked overtime.
 
The neighbor lady and her husband don't even know what race the man was, so clearly they didn't get a good look at his face at all.

Did we determine that conclusively? I thought it was only one article that even mentioned race, and it was assumed that it was faulty reporting since the whole article had errors. Do we now know that they actually don't know what race the person was?
 
The neighbor lady and her husband don't even know what race the man was, so clearly they didn't get a good look at his face at all.
We have those orange lights. Them not 'assuming' race actually makes it more credible IMO. It is very bright, but orange.
 
It sure would be normal, but supposedly they didn't pay their phone bill so their cell phones didn't work.

you can read up on this on the cell phone thread. It's discussed in pages and pages but i know, it's hard to keep up with all these threads. JI had his "work" cell phone on him, that is what he called 911 on supposedly. I am pretty sure about this. And it was also reported that they do have a land line. But this was also discussed weeks ago and i could be wrong. Has this been substantiated?

If these are both true, that is why it is odd that no phone calls would have gone back and forth on that night when he was supposed to come home earlier than he did.

Missing cell phones are a big red flag for me in this whole thing.
JMO
 
Yes I saw the interview. What exactly makes him seem very credible? By his own admission, he didn't come forward for about a week because he didn't make a connection. That seems strange to me. What made him to finally make a connection about a week later? He doesn't say. How does he even know what day it was he supposedly saw something? I personally don't remember what day it was that I saw someone on the street about a week after the fact.
The same kind of reflection that made Elizabeth Smart's sister realize who abducted her sister several months later, maybe?
 
The same kind of reflection that made Elizabeth Smart's sister realize who abducted her sister several months later, maybe?

The sister didn't wait about a week before saying she witnessed a kidnapping.
 
My theory on why the first report goes from "my husband" to "we". Is that woman said in one of the interviews that she has 4 kids. I'm starting to wonder if they did both see the man with the baby, but had left their kids at home alone and were worried that they'd get caught by admitting to both seeing "man with baby".
 
That woman claims she saw the man through the window while remaining in her home.
 
That woman claims she saw the man through the window while remaining in her home.
Which means she was only 30 feet or so away. There is only a 30 ft setback on the houses here. Only the width of the street more if he was on the other side so less than 50 ft. Under brightly lit conditions that are orange.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
117
Guests online
2,470
Total visitors
2,587

Forum statistics

Threads
601,847
Messages
18,130,620
Members
231,163
Latest member
Kaffro
Back
Top