ME ME - Ayla Reynolds, 20 mnths, Waterville, 17 December 2011 - # 7

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I just fear they wont lock "daddy" up in time and he will commit suicide ala Melinda Duckett and we will never know. Maybe if all else fails they can net a sting like they did to Ron Cummings and at LEAST get him locked up.
 
LE doesn't want to announce they believe Ayla is dead; LE never wants to do that, when the victim has not been found. But the evidence is clearly pointing them in that direction and it hardly matters whether they say so officially or not.

But at some point, they may have to say so, especially if they intend to eventually proceed with a case, even if Ayla is not found. Perhaps they need more results back from the lab, i.e. the estimated volume of blood found at the scene, i.e. They will have problems going after anyone for murder if they don't at some point state that she is most certainly deceased, IMO.
 
huckleberryhound said:
I would sure like to know when was the last time Ayla was seen by anyone outside the DiPietro family.

The answer to that might go a long way in explaining why nobody is talking.
Click to expand...


RBBM: And that is the $64,000 Question ... :waitasec: wasn't that an old game show ?

I wonder if LE received any "tips" from someone who is CREDIBLE ? I am sure they checked her medical records ...

:waitasec:
 
maedlamsmom said:
Regarding the Boston herald article, it sounds to me that WCVB, and perhaps the reporter, McPhee, has a source in the police department. They were the first to publish accounts of the blood, which was later confirmed. I think that it is telling that McCausland is trying to get in contact with her. If she were just a nobody reporter, telling unattibuted, inaccurate stories, I would think he would let the press release and the paper deal with her. However, the fact that he wants to speak to her leads me to believe that the facts she is reporting are true and he wants to know where she is getting them. WCVB has not printed a retraction as far as I know. We know there was a leak about the blood originally on Saturday before the vigil, why is it so hard to believe that these other statements are part of the same leak? I see no reason to doubt their veracity, just because the police spokesperson is KINDA denying them. When asked if police believe Ayla is alive, he still only stated that finding her is their top priority. To me, this response only reinforces the WCVB article. Also, you should know that particular news agency and specifically McPhee is known for their professionalism and is award-winning.

Here's some background on the reporter. See for yourself is she would risk her career on lies/sensationalism

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/r/28756716/detail.html
Click to expand...

The only thing is that the article has been changed. Not fully retracted, but the part that was "unattributed" no longer appears in the article. Also, the title of the article has been changed. If her sources were solid and credible, I think she would have stood by the story and declined to make the aforementioned changes.

It could have just been a misunderstanding, though. I'm not accusing her of maliciously reporting that the police believe Ayla is dead. Perhaps she gathered from their tone and other things they said that that is the sentiment.

I wouldn't put too much stock on her risking her career---journalists take risks all the time. Everyone wants to break the story first and provide the most details. All networks or stations want exclusive details and interviews. There's a lot of ethics (or lack thereof) involved, and I think she did the right thing by changing the story.
 
Lavanda Dolce said:
She didn't blurt that out. He did not know.
Click to expand...


Since you have worked with Trista....I realize you would know if she blurted it out or not.

The statement He Did Not Know....I have to question that though, could it not have been leaked to Justin in some manner that perhaps no one but the leaker and Justin are aware of.
 
HiHater said:
The only thing is that the article has been changed. Not fully retracted, but the part that was "unattributed" no longer appears in the article. Also, the title of the article has been changed. If her sources were solid and credible, I think she would have stood by the story and declined to make the aforementioned changes.

It could have just been a misunderstanding, though. I'm not accusing her of maliciously reporting that the police believe Ayla is dead. Perhaps she gathered from their tone and other things they said that that is the sentiment.

I wouldn't put too much stock on her risking her career---journalists take risks all the time. Everyone wants to break the story first and provide the most details. All networks or stations want exclusive details and interviews. There's a lot of ethics (or lack thereof) involved, and I think she did the right thing by changing the story.
Click to expand...

If her source is someone inside LE or the investigation, that person could lose their job. They got their healdline, their bombshell story, they have not been harmed by the modifications they did to either the headline or that one line stating police do not think Ayla is alive. No harm done to them. but to reveal her source in attempt to validate that headline could cost someones job.

ETA someone who has been feeding her pretty good info IMO. lose that someone, lose future headlines.
 
cluciano63 said:
LE doesn't want to announce they believe Ayla is dead; LE never wants to do that, when the victim has not been found. But the evidence is clearly pointing them in that direction and it hardly matters whether they say so officially or not.

But at some point, they may have to say so, especially if they intend to eventually proceed with a case, even if Ayla is not found. Perhaps they need more results back from the lab, i.e. the estimated volume of blood found at the scene, i.e. They will have problems going after anyone for murder if they don't at some point state that she is most certainly deceased, IMO.
Click to expand...

I have been thinking is this really fair to Trista to give her false hope? Mercy! The agony of believing, trying to believe. I know it is a very painful thing for her to learn regardless of when she is told. Even the agony of a missing child is enough, but to prolong the inevitable seems unfair to me.

I know when it was discovered my husband had cancer, I was very thankful the Dr.s were very honest with us from the start, telling us their educated opinions. When he died, I was thankful the Dr.s had been honest with him and myself. I would have been very unhappy and mistrusting if they had lied or deceived us. JMO
 
Lavanda Dolce said:
Initially JVM reported grandmother. I think that was prior to the phone calls and lawyering up.
Click to expand...

I have to wonder about these reports of who is going to be on tonight.

Certainly Phoebe would have gained more listeners than the Godmother.

I have to doubt that Phoebe was really going to be on, wouldn't JVM have been very happy to say ......and guess what Phoebe cancelled out on us after the phone calls etc.

Her listeners should have been informed why they tuned in to find another guest. JMO
 
naturallyme said:
I have been thinking is this really fair to Trista to give her false hope? Mercy! The agony of believing, trying to believe. I know it is a very painful thing for her to learn regardless of when she is told. Even the agony of a missing child is enough, but to prolong the inevitable seems unfair to me.

I know when it was discovered my husband had cancer, I was very thankful the Dr.s were very honest with us from the start, telling us their educated opinions. When he died, I was thankful the Dr.s had been honest with him and myself. I would have been very unhappy and mistrusting if they had lied or deceived us. JMO
Click to expand...

I guess without a body there is always hope. The only 2 scenarios I can come up with that involve the blood and give me hope are that Ayla was injured and needed to be hidden while she heals because they were afraid she would be taken by DHS or she was being injured and someone took her to keep it from further happening. Either way the family/gf set it up or is aware of the person that knows what they know.

That's all I've got with what they've given us.
 
interesting stuff going on in the parking lot at the moment
 
HiHater said:
The only thing is that the article has been changed. Not fully retracted, but the part that was "unattributed" no longer appears in the article. Also, the title of the article has been changed. If her sources were solid and credible, I think she would have stood by the story and declined to make the aforementioned changes.

It could have just been a misunderstanding, though. I'm not accusing her of maliciously reporting that the police believe Ayla is dead. Perhaps she gathered from their tone and other things they said that that is the sentiment.

I wouldn't put too much stock on her risking her career---journalists take risks all the time. Everyone wants to break the story first and provide the most details. All networks or stations want exclusive details and interviews. There's a lot of ethics (or lack thereof) involved, and I think she did the right thing by changing the story.
Click to expand...

I think we will have to agree to disagree. :innocent: The only thing changed in the story is the part stating that the police think that Ayla is no longer alive. Key words being POLICE and THINK. This was not a statement saying that she is absolutely, beyond a shadow of a doubt, deceased. But, only what detectives are thinking and saying, perhaps due to the unattributed nature of the information, behind closed doors. And, really, with all of the info that the police HAVE released, I think it is very safe to say that these seasoned, logical, realistic officers of the law believe Ayla is gone. There is blood. Some of it is Ayla's. They do not believe the people in the home are being upfront. They took LDTs and they know the results. Don't you think it is likely that one of the questions asked was, "to the best of your knowledge, is Ayla alive?" at some point during each test? And, they are not searching houses for a live Ayla, but instead waterways and dumpsters.

Does that mean that they are OPERATING or acting under that assumption? No. And that was the clarification that McCausland made. I think that McPhee has a source and like TlCox said, she preferred to remove the statement rather than reveal or endanger stopping the leak. But, I fully believe that she was told everything she printed, but it was most likely in a hush, hush, this is what we are saying around the water cooler kind of way.

Trust me, I want to hold out hope just as much as anyone else. I would be more than happy to eat a thousand crows in one sitting, if it meant Ayla could come home safe and sound. I give my baby girl an extra hug for Ayla every night. But, I can't deny the obvious, and doing so won't make it true. All moo, of course...
 
Just wanted to express a few thoughts and get others opinions about these particular details(and I welcome the opinions that disagree just as much, if not more than opinions in agreement:))..

In looking at LE's latest info/details that they've brought forth in these last few days about making IMO it very clear where they stand with those 3 adults that were present in the home the night of Friday, December 16(and am assuming present as well for that following morning of the 17th when Ayla was actually reported as "missing" to Authorities).. What stands out the most to me is that in their repeated, firm statements about these 3 adults NOT being honest, nor forthcoming with LE about what happened to Ayla.. For me strangely, yet obviously absent from LE's directly pointed accusations is Phoebe.. And yes, before anyone needs to point out the obvious I fully realize that Phoebe was NOT in the home that Friday night.. Obviously IMO LE has something concrete that is verifying this as fact that Phoebe was NOT home.. I feel comfortable with that partially due to the fact that LE's statements DO NOT INCLUDE PHOEBE in the group of adults that they are highly concerned with and believe them to have been dishonest thus far about the events of that night..

Which leads me to believe that LE MUST SURELY HAVE SOME EVIDENCE THAT AYLA WAS ALIVE ATLEAST UP TO THE NIGHT OF FRIDAY, DEC. 16.. The way I see it is that with LE being so adamant about those 3 particular adults being the one's that have lied, with held, and hindered.. Combined with the fact that for some reason LE does NOT include Phoebe in the group that are lying and hindering.. That tells me that it's due to strong evidence indicative that Phoebe was NOT in the home the night of the 16th.. Therefor LE excludes her leaving the 3 adults, JD, ED, and CR who hold the information of what happened to Ayla.. IMO would that be a pretty clear representation that LE believes that the crimes against Ayla did in fact occur at some point during the evening/night of Friday, Dec 16th into the morning of Sat the 17th when she was officially reported as "missing"(ie. correlating with the period of time LE have evidence that Phoebe was not in the home)??

Hope that makes ATLEAST some sense..:crazy: .. From LE's latest release of info/details this is something that IMO seems to be indicated in LE's statements.. Especially the fact those statements IMO seem to absolutely EXCLUDE Phoebe..

Do others read it that way as well??
Or do you read it completely different or perhaps that there is no inference at all regarding LE's statements??

For me, as I said the glaringly obvious absence of Phoebe all together made me feel that LE have evidence and information that has allowed them to narrow it down tremendously as to the actual period of time.. Or maybe even have zeroed in on an actual exact, key time as to when it was that Ayla was harmed(or abducted or whatever you believe occurred)..

All jmo, tho and wanted to hear where others stood about this particular detail..

TIA:)


Still posting via mobile so plz forgive the large number of errors in my posts;)
 
SmoothOperator said:
Just wanted to express a few thoughts and get others opinions about these particular details(and I welcome the opinions that disagree just as much, if not more than opinions in agreement:))..

In looking at LE's latest info/details that they've brought forth in these last few days about making IMO it very clear where they stand with those 3 adults that were present in the home the night of Friday, December 16(and am assuming present as well for that following morning of the 17th when Ayla was actually reported as "missing" to Authorities).. What stands out the most to me is that in their repeated, firm statements about these 3 adults NOT being honest, nor forthcoming with LE about what happened to Ayla.. For me strangely, yet obviously absent from LE's directly pointed accusations is Phoebe.. And yes, before anyone needs to point out the obvious I fully realize that Phoebe was NOT in the home that Friday night.. Obviously IMO LE has something concrete that is verifying this as fact that Phoebe was NOT home.. I feel comfortable with that partially due to the fact that LE's statements DO NOT INCLUDE PHOEBE in the group of adults that they are highly concerned with and believe them to have been dishonest thus far about the events of that night..

Which leads me to believe that LE MUST SURELY HAVE SOME EVIDENCE THAT AYLA WAS ALIVE ATLEAST UP TO THE NIGHT OF FRIDAY, DEC. 16.. The way I see it is that with LE being so adamant about those 3 particular adults being the one's that have lied, with held, and hindered.. Combined with the fact that for some reason LE does NOT include Phoebe in the group that are lying and hindering.. That tells me that it's due to strong evidence indicative that Phoebe was NOT in the home the night of the 16th.. Therefor LE excludes her leaving the 3 adults, JD, ED, and CR who hold the information of what happened to Ayla.. IMO would that be a pretty clear representation that LE believes that the crimes against Ayla did in fact occur at some point during the evening/night of Friday, Dec 16th into the morning of Sat the 17th when she was officially reported as "missing"(ie. correlating with the period of time LE have evidence that Phoebe was not in the home)??

Hope that makes ATLEAST some sense..:crazy: .. From LE's latest release of info/details this is something that IMO seems to be indicated in LE's statements.. Especially the fact those statements IMO seem to absolutely EXCLUDE Phoebe..

Do others read it that way as well??
Or do you read it completely different or perhaps that there is no inference at all regarding LE's statements??
For me, as I said the glaringly obvious absence of Phoebe all together made me feel that LE have evidence and information that has allowed them to narrow it down tremendously as to the actual period of time.. Or maybe even have zeroed in on an actual exact, key time as to when it was that Ayla was harmed(or abducted or whatever you believe occurred)..
All jmo, tho and wanted to hear where others stood about this particular detail..
TIA:)
Still posting via mobile so plz forgive the large number of errors in my posts;)
Click to expand...

I agree with your assessment. LE seems to have it narrowed down to that time and place and cast of characters, PLUS a few more people possibly.
 
SmoothOperator said:
Just wanted to express a few thoughts and get others opinions about these particular details(and I welcome the opinions that disagree just as much, if not more than opinions in agreement:))..

In looking at LE's latest info/details that they've brought forth in these last few days about making IMO it very clear where they stand with those 3 adults that were present in the home the night of Friday, December 16(and am assuming present as well for that following morning of the 17th when Ayla was actually reported as "missing" to Authorities).. What stands out the most to me is that in their repeated, firm statements about these 3 adults NOT being honest, nor forthcoming with LE about what happened to Ayla.. For me strangely, yet obviously absent from LE's directly pointed accusations is Phoebe.. And yes, before anyone needs to point out the obvious I fully realize that Phoebe was NOT in the home that Friday night.. Obviously IMO LE has something concrete that is verifying this as fact that Phoebe was NOT home.. I feel comfortable with that partially due to the fact that LE's statements DO NOT INCLUDE PHOEBE in the group of adults that they are highly concerned with and believe them to have been dishonest thus far about the events of that night..

Which leads me to believe that LE MUST SURELY HAVE SOME EVIDENCE THAT AYLA WAS ALIVE ATLEAST UP TO THE NIGHT OF FRIDAY, DEC. 16.. The way I see it is that with LE being so adamant about those 3 particular adults being the one's that have lied, with held, and hindered.. Combined with the fact that for some reason LE does NOT include Phoebe in the group that are lying and hindering.. That tells me that it's due to strong evidence indicative that Phoebe was NOT in the home the night of the 16th.. Therefor LE excludes her leaving the 3 adults, JD, ED, and CR who hold the information of what happened to Ayla.. IMO would that be a pretty clear representation that LE believes that the crimes against Ayla did in fact occur at some point during the evening/night of Friday, Dec 16th into the morning of Sat the 17th when she was officially reported as "missing"(ie. correlating with the period of time LE have evidence that Phoebe was not in the home)??

Hope that makes ATLEAST some sense..:crazy: .. From LE's latest release of info/details this is something that IMO seems to be indicated in LE's statements.. Especially the fact those statements IMO seem to absolutely EXCLUDE Phoebe..

Do others read it that way as well??
Or do you read it completely different or perhaps that there is no inference at all regarding LE's statements??

For me, as I said the glaringly obvious absence of Phoebe all together made me feel that LE have evidence and information that has allowed them to narrow it down tremendously as to the actual period of time.. Or maybe even have zeroed in on an actual exact, key time as to when it was that Ayla was harmed(or abducted or whatever you believe occurred)..

All jmo, tho and wanted to hear where others stood about this particular detail..

TIA:)


Still posting via mobile so plz forgive the large number of errors in my posts;)
Click to expand...

On NG, Susan Candiotti (who did the PD interviews on CNN) did say that PD told her where she was that night off the record, and Susan went on to say that her police sources confirmed that PD told them where she was at the onset, and that it had been confirmed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 74 more.
Total: 3,543 (members: 75, guests: 3,468)

Online statistics

Members online
75
Guests online
3,468
Total visitors
3,543
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,340
Messages
18,170,841
Members
232,419
Latest member
Txwoman
Back
Top