Deceased/Not Found ME - Ayla Reynolds, 20 months, Waterville, 17 December 2011 - #10

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

What did everyone miss? Where is Ayla?

  • Total voters
    6
  • Poll closed .

New Posts

Bump for Ayla... :bump:

Was there supposed to be some type of Presser for Ayla's case today?

TIA
 
IHAVENOCLUE said:
Bump for Ayla... :bump:

Was there supposed to be some type of Presser for Ayla's case today?

TIA
Click to expand...

There was but I never found it. Wondering if the breaking news of the CT school shooting made them delay it?
 
:seeya: I can't believe that one year has passed now since little Ayla has been "missing" ...

:furious: And nothing ... no developments ... no "new" news ... and most imoprtantly, NO Ayla !

:moo: It's high time that LE "round up" ALL the DiPietro's and make them talk ... they KNOW where she is !

:please: that Ayla will be found soon and there will be a development ...

:please::please::please:
 
My heart is heavy - I cannot imagine how Trista gets through each day - perhaps she draws some of her strength from us ...
 
My heart is so heavy when I think of Ayla, such a precious baby girl. And it is so depressing to think that this case is stalled out. It is so obviously an 'inside job.' There was so much lying and deflection and misinformation from the start, and still they are all free and clear?

I wish CPS had taken custody of the sister and girlfriends kids until they came through with the TRUTH about what happened that night. :furious:
 
One year today. And still, she is missing while the people involved go on with their miserable lives.
 
Missing toddler's dad and his family talk to police

Bourget said that when police met with his clients, they presented the family with the physical evidence they had, including the revelation that DNA evidence that police found in the basement of the toddler's home might not be blood.
Click to expand...

"Might not be blood?" That sure is a strange thing to say. Either it's blood or it's not. Are they saying that the sample was so small that LE can't tell if it's blood? If that's the case then why did LE initially say that it was blood?

http://www.pressherald.com/news/Communication-improving-between-Aylas-father-and-police.html
 
cluciano63 said:
This is JD's lawyer speaking...maybe LE said that before they tested it.
Click to expand...
I haven't followed this case but the article says this.
In January, police announced that they had found an undisclosed amount of blood in the basement of the home.
Click to expand...
And the LE spokesman didn't dispute what the family lawyer said.
When reached by phone Friday afternoon, McCausland said he had "no reaction" to Bourget's statement.
Click to expand...

I would hope that LE knew if it was blood or not before they made the announcement in January but I'm starting to wonder. Is it possible that they claimed blood was found to put pressure on Ayla's family?

http://www.pressherald.com/news/Communication-improving-between-Aylas-father-and-police.html
 
Having "no reaction" from Le just means, to me, they are not going to get into it with JD's lawyer. I don't think the blood was invented. JMO
 
cluciano63 said:
Having "no reaction" from Le just means, to me, they are not going to get into it with JD's lawyer. I don't think the blood was invented. JMO
Click to expand...

You could be right. If that lawyer is lying it sure would nice for LE to let the public know the truth. All he had to say was that the lawyers statement about the blood was not correct and restate that the January announcement was accurate. MOO.
 
IIRC LE said in the beginning that some of the sample's were Ayla's blood and we discussed what it meant ad nauseam, did it mean that some of the sample's were someone else's or not blood or that they hadn't been tested yet. I wonder if the lawyer could be referencing some of those other samples.

On the same day police announced their belief that a kidnapping was implausible, they also announced that blood had been discovered during the investigation of 29 Violette Ave. Later, McCausland said some of the samples were Ayla’s blood, and the lab is analyzing other samples. He added the amount of blood attributed to Ayla was more than a small cut would produce.
Click to expand...
http://www.onlinesentinel.com/news/Father-friends-say-its-possible-cops-say-no-way.html


I just want to know, if it wasn't blood, what does the lawyer think it was?
I mean, decomposition fluids wouldn't look much better, would they?

If it was supposedly a large enough amount to make them suspect that Ayla wasn't alive any more, what other kinds of Ayla's DNA could be there in such quantity? Toenail cuttings wouldn't work, I think, as they wouldn't make a drop or spatter pattern. Toddlers drool but such a lot? I think the DiPietros would remember if they ever had to clean large amounts of her vomit or feces from the basement.
 
Donjeta said:
IIRC LE said in the beginning that some of the sample's were Ayla's blood and we discussed what it meant ad nauseam, did it mean that some of the sample's were someone else's or not blood or that they hadn't been tested yet. I wonder if the lawyer could be referencing some of those other samples.


http://www.onlinesentinel.com/news/Father-friends-say-its-possible-cops-say-no-way.html


I just want to know, if it wasn't blood, what does the lawyer think it was?
I mean, decomposition fluids wouldn't look much better, would they?

If it was supposedly a large enough amount to make them suspect that Ayla wasn't alive any more, what other kinds of Ayla's DNA could be there in such quantity? Toenail cuttings wouldn't work, I think, as they wouldn't make a drop or spatter pattern. Toddlers drool but such a lot? I think the DiPietros would remember if they ever had to clean large amounts of her vomit or feces from the basement.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link Donjeta. I found this in the article.
“We felt it was important that the public understand some specifics of the investigation. We felt it was important that the public understand the magnitude of this investigation and that some of the blood was Ayla’s,” he said.
Click to expand...

If McCausland felt that it was important for the public to understand some specifics of the investigative to explain why the statement about Ayla's blood being found was released, then why didn't he reply to Bourget's comment that "it might not be blood"? And why did he say that he had "no reaction" instead of simply "no comment"? No reaction is an odd thing to say in my opinion. Was he trying to stay calm and not "react" to news that he felt uncomfortable in hearing?

It would be nice to know the truth in this matter. Was it Ayla's blood and how much of it was found?
 
RANCH said:
Missing toddler's dad and his family talk to police



"Might not be blood?" That sure is a strange thing to say. Either it's blood or it's not. Are they saying that the sample was so small that LE can't tell if it's blood? If that's the case then why did LE initially say that it was blood?

http://www.pressherald.com/news/Communication-improving-between-Aylas-father-and-police.html
Click to expand...

Note that this statement was made by the family's attorney... And when the reporter asked McCausland about it.. mcCausland declined to comment...

I imagine the lawyer was saying something like...Well... Ayla's DNA was in the house... And she lived in the house.. Can't DNA come from things other than blood.. And the LE would have to say.. Yes... Drool.. Urine.. Etc.... And then the lawyer spins this to say that the samples of DNA might not be blood..

JMO
 
IHAVENOCLUE said:
Note that this statement was made by the family's attorney... And when the reporter asked McCausland about it.. mcCausland declined to comment...

I imagine the lawyer was saying something like...Well... Ayla's DNA was in the house... And she lived in the house.. Can't DNA come from things other than blood.. And the LE would have to say.. Yes... Drool.. Urine.. Etc.... And then the lawyer spins this to say that the samples of DNA might not be blood..

JMO
Click to expand...

I think that your missing the point of my entire post.

I want to know why LE did not set the record straight when the family lawyer said "it might not be blood". It's about evidence that LE deemed was important for the public to know about in the first place. That means that it's important for LE to let the public know what they said was true by standing behind their prior statements.

A "no comment" or a "no reaction" doesn't cut it for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 139 more.
Total: 2,340 (members: 140, guests: 2,200)

Online statistics

Members online
140
Guests online
2,200
Total visitors
2,340
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,640
Messages
18,127,676
Members
231,113
Latest member
SWilkie1985
Back
Top