MO - Lisa Irwin, 10 months, Kansas City, 4 Oct 2011 - #10

[tlcya]

Thanks. Yeah I think I could squeeze in that window too if I wanted to as well. But I wouldn't bother putting the screen back, that is for sure.

As for why they are doing the re-enactment, my speculation is that the FBI is gearing up for another interview with the parents, and wants to be armed with as much evidence as possible that this was a staged kidnapping.

Getting the confession will be the make/break point of all this, IMO. I do think both parents are covering up an accidental death.

Thanks, I am not sold on the parents' involvement but appreciate your posts. you are giving me a lot to consider from the parents' involved side of the debate.

 

[marycarney]

Respectfully snipped as I am just addressing the above: it's very common for BOTH parents to have insurance on a dependent/child, regardless of where the dependent/child resides or which parent has legal custody. As long as you are paying for the "claimant" coverage, I don't think the health insurer would care where the claimant resides, just that they are paid in full.

So I guess I am not sure what you mean here or why it would apply to little Lisa. Don't both her parents live in the same house? Sorry if I am confused . . .

Praying for her safe return.

The discussion at the time was in regards to WHY mom was still married to the younger son's father, and the speculation was that she needed to remain on his medical insurance.
On my husband's employer-sponsored insurance, you are only eligible for coverage is you a) reside with the employee - as in spouse and child or b) are legally obligated to maintain coverage - as in a custody agreement. Thus my original post.
And I gotta say - maybe it's my age, but I DO find it kind of scandalous that a woman would co-habit and have a child with a man who was not her husband WHEN SHE ALREADY HAS A HUSBAND. JMO of course.

 

[saba]

I understood all that as it was explained last night. But that's just a legal formality. He would still be her bio dad, and I'm sure the other guy wouldn't want to be financially responsible for another man's child and would be only be too happy to bow out.

My point was that he can prove he's the bio dad legally, if indeed he is, and he seems to have no doubt about that. He has taken the legal route once before to get his child. He has a home, a job, a son he went to some trouble to get custody of, so he must love that child and want to be a father to him as well.
Why would he stage a kidnapping to get baby Lisa and lose his entire life when it is not necessary? He could just take the legal steps needed to be in Lisa's life also.

I never suggested that Jeremy staged a kidnapping. I think several of us were posting about this but I can't back and forth with you because I never said that. I do think it might affect the couple "dynamics" and who is really the parent driving the train. Jeremy is the one called a halt to meeting with LE. Maybe it's Debbie whose opinion rules. It seems to me, though, that the reason the couple has withdrawn from public view is because one of them has decreed it. jmo

 

[krimekat]

According to the MO lawyers, the fact that he is the biodad and gets a dna test is nice but not the end of the story (i know- it is weird) Sean Bradley is the presumed father because he and Debbie were married when Lisa was born.
If Debbie and Sean get a divorce, there is a way for Jeremy to be a third party to the action and get it all legally established. I hope the lawyers start chiming in and explain this again.

Thanks, saba -- this is how I understand the MO law to apply (have a friend that went through it).

So, biologically J can be the father but because D was married to S when Lisa was born, the law states S is the "father". It's a MO thing . . .

 

[Moonviolet]

Where I grew up in RI a 'raised ranch' is a split level home

http://www.pbsnc.com/Portals/0/images/raised-rnch.jpg

Thank you for mentioning that. i live in RI and thought the same thing. We must have different terms for houses! (just like almost everything else..ha ha)

 

[gliving]

Yes, this is being done for an onlookers benefit I bet. Probably getting ready to haul them in for questioning.

Are you referring to the neighbors we saw questioned outside yesterday? tia

 

[mrye4709]

Why would one of the first things Jeremy would do is try to close the window? If I came home and all lights were on and I saw a window open I think I would think someone might still be in house and I would reach for my phone as I check on my spouse and kids. I would not touch the window and ruin evidence for LE. Unless I needed a reason for my fresh prints to be there.

Nights are alot cooler, he may have done this before he noticed Lisa was gone.

 

[jjenny]

Thanks, saba -- this is how I understand the MO law to apply (have a friend that went through it).

So, biologically J can be the father but because D was married to S when Lisa was born, the law states S is the "father". It's a MO thing . . .

The legal father has rights and could potentially get custody despite not being the biological father. I already posted a link where a sex offender got custody of a child who was not even his biological daughter simply because he and the child's mother were still legally married.
So clearly it's not just a "formality" to be married to someone but have a child with someone else, and could have severe consequences.

 

[krimekat]

I was wondering what that was earlier. But, I don't recall seeing anything under that window in the photos earlier this week? The lines (IMHO) look too irregular to be a meter.

or a garden hose holder . . . those half circle things attached to the house

 

[Marah]

A possibility.
Coming home and seeing all the lights on I am sure sort of got him a bit upset at the wife for being so careless as to leave lights on and run up the electricity when not necessary. Then sees she must have been in computer room ....and left window open...so now not too happy and goes to shut window and then notices the screen stuck.
Would he divulge to media that he was upset when he came home and saw such "carelessness" and that is what he initially felt? Doubtful. Just a thought.

I think he was shutting the windows and turning off lights so he could go to bed.

 

[In da Middle]

A ranch-style house has an entire living area (bed, bath, liv rm, kitchen) with the entrance on one level. A 'true-ranch' also has the garage on that same level and a 'raised-ranch' is where the garage is under.

 

[Cher352]

When I looked at the picture of the back of the house it appears to me that the windows are very high and very small. It might be that the front windows were the only ones that anyone could have gone through.

Also I would like to add that I have talked to a person before who broke into people's homes to steal from them. He told me he took great pleasure in being in the house while the owners were there asleep. He said he would wander around the house or even watch them as they slept. I know pretty creepy. My husband was an attorney and I used to hear all sorts of weird stories from clients. Scary now that I recall them.

Didn't that lowlife currently on trial for the Petit murders say he did the same thing, kind of like a game?

 

[liz b.]

Would't an intruder just cut the screen... MOO

 

[IAM]

It probably never entered his mind in the beginning. Some people just aren't as suspicious as others.

I think seeing a window screen bent in would make me more than suspicious. I would be terrified enough to start dialing 911 as I frantically run to my sleeping spouse and kids maybe grabbing a weapon along the way.

 

[Lavanda Dolce]

It is the "seeing the window popped/bent in", that would be a STRONG clue something was very wrong and he and his family could be in danger. I think calling 911 would have been most people's first thought to do.

Yes, except he didn't "see the screen bent in. He went to shut the window and then when it wouldnt shut that is when he noticed it. Keep in mind...house has children...boys...and about the right age to cause malfunctions in the house...so it is entirely possible that his demeanor was "not on alert" as he said it was....because if he was "on alert that something was not right" ...why would he stop and wake his wife up and ask her "Why is he sleeping in here?" (meaning the six year old son.) I got the impression he was not happy all lights on in house, not happy that window was open and screen bent...and not happy son in their bed. THEN I believe it dawned on him baby door was open and was always shut...THEN went to baby room and saw her gone. NOW all coming together......

Problem is, everytime they interview them on that night's events something new or some slight "change" happens. I turns into WE and WE turns into I and so that is also part of what is making this sooooooooo suspicious and confusing at the same time. We want to believe this is a kidnapping so that baby will be found and well...yet on the other hand...their changing of slight details is making all confused.

 

[Volume]

The teaser was about Debbie Bradley being pregnant at 17 and then becoming pregnant with another man's baby before divorce.

I looked up court cases and there's a couple of judgements for traffic tickets against both. Jeremy was behind on his taxes. There was a child support order for Bradley and Irwin got custody by default.

They have had their fair share of problems.

I do think LE must look at everything, all family members and ex's, or it wouldn't be much of an investigation.

 

[jenniferst]

Thank you for mentioning that. i live in RI and thought the same thing. We must have different terms for houses! (just like almost everything else..ha ha)

I moved from Pittsburgh to RI, amazing the list of things with different names! My first day of school I asked where the water fountain was and the teacher said 'in front of the state house', I was asking for what they called a 'bubbler'

 

[EllaMae]

DEbbie explained (with lots of jumbled words) that when daddy is away the kids like to sleep with her. It was not clear at all in how she answered, but that is what she was trying to say.

I thought it was unusual because the dad when he got to the room, asked Debbie, why are the lights on, front door open, boy in the bed, etc.....so it was odd....

That might be a point of contention between them. Some parents have opposing ideas on the subject. My cousin and her husband fought about that very thing a lot when their kids were young. He did not like the kids to sleep in their bed.

 

[BeanE]

There have been a lot of articles about the statistical improbability of Lisa having been taken by a stranger. Basically, it's only about 278 children abducted by strangers in the past thirty years.

Very rare.

So it's stuck in the back of my mind that we *just* had 3 yr old Kienan Herbert from Canada abducted by a stranger a few weeks ago.

I was just reading a bit on his story again. Taken in the middle of the night. From his home. From his bed. Wearing shorts. Mom left the front door unlocked. The abductor took three blankets. I'm trying to find whether there were lights on in the house.

Anyway, the wonderful thing is that Kienan was, miraculously, returned unharmed to his home 5 days later by his abductor in the middle of the night.

His parents weren't staying in the home. Kienan was found by his dad, sleeping on a chair in the living room.

While the statistical improbability of *two* children having been abducted by strangers in such a short time period and with so many similarities in the circumstances of their abductions is mind boggling, I also am hoping that God will grant us one more miracle, and Lisa maybe, just maybe, may be found any day, safe and unharmed, sleeping on a chair in her home too.

 

[Shelby1]

Could someone get me a pillow?:fence: