MO - Lisa Irwin, 10 months, Kansas City, 4 Oct 2011 - #13

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
curiositycat said:
There is another theory that I have kicked around a bit. What if it was the dad, and it happened before he went to work? Would DB cover for him? I think as hard as it is to think about, she might. She constantly looks at him out of the corner of her eyes, I find that strange. She has a good home with him, and she seems to be a person who takes a lot of guilt on herself. Could she have possibly thought, "If, I had done this or that, or been here or there, this would not have happened, and so I am going to support him, and go along with the story?"

In some ways she is so open and honest, that I believe that she might not be lying. But if she did flunk the LD test, it could have been because she knows what happened, and is covering.

A motive for either of them lying for the other could be the custody issue of the other two boys. In his case especially, if the mother lost custody and people speak of him as "ruthless" in getting custody of his son, perhaps DB would feel badly for him for that reason, as she too has custody of her son from a prior relationship.

I frankly don't know what to think anymore...a bunch of theories and nothing to really prove any of them, one way or the other.
Click to expand...

I could see that happening
 
tlcox said:
Welcome to Websleuths frankie069, thanks for joining the conversation. We are a bit confused as to why they are waiting til Oct 18. Typically, a GJ is convened at certain times, such as every three months, every six weeks, etc. Now occasionally a Special Grand Jury might be convened earlier that the normal scheduled ones.

It is possible that the Oct 18th date is simply because that was when the next already scheduled GJ was to meet.

Quite a few of us are wondering why whatever they are subpoenaing does not seem important enough to need til the 18th but is important enough to subpoena. It does seem a bit odd to me.
Click to expand...


Generally, a subpoena is required to give the receiving party "sufficient notice", meaning a reasonable amount of time to respond. I don't know the procedural rules there, and grand jury subpoenas are a special animal, but it could simply be that they have to give some time for the subpoenaed party to come forward (or object).
 
Grand Jury generally meets once per month or they can convene under an emergency. It is possible since today is the 10th that they were due to meet anyway. Or LE is still waiting on some evidence that they will need for Grand Jury.

But it is not unusual to have Grand Jury scheduled to meet once a month but not meet if there is no need.
 
Just-a-Guy said:
Generally, a subpoena is required to give the receiving party "sufficient notice", meaning a reasonable amount of time to respond. I don't know the procedural rules there, and grand jury subpoenas are special animal, but it could simply be that they have to give some time for the subpoenaed party to come forward (or object).
Click to expand...

Yep, they would need to give the news channel time to comply with the subpoena.
 
housemouse said:
We are doing fairly well. DH has been at Mayo clinic for several days of arcane tests, and he will be admitted there soon for a week to 10 days to see if they can get him stabilized.

It breaks my heart to think that the parents have lost baby Lisa. I find the mother believable, and the father seems very stoic, but he is probably doing his best to keep himself together for Deborah and the boys.
Click to expand...

Housemouse, wonderful to see you here. I have just been reading, but had to come out when I saw you here!
This is a heartbreaking case and I have missed our astrologers.:crazy:k
 
marycarney said:
OK - the guy in the jean shorts and black tank top is the one whose back stays to the camera? If anybody thinks he's the perp, I have got one thing to say:

NO WAY could that gut fit through that window. Just sayin'................
Click to expand...

I had the same thought... :innocent:

Seriously, his demeanor reminds me of Clint Dunn when Hailey first went missing. I think different people react to cameras differently, especially a TV news camera. Perhaps they are shy, want to remain private, have arrest/criminal activities in their present/past, don't want to be seen by thousands of folks, etc. Put me behind a computer, and I'll type all day. But I hope to God I'm never on the news... I'd run from a video camera... It's just who I am and I totally respect others who are like that...
 
Regarding the grand jury....this is just what my dad told me (he was 25+ on Chicago PD, and 15+ years attorney).....

Evidence is presented to a grand jury, and they make a recommendation to either file charges, or give the opinion that there is NOT enough to make an arrest (at the present time).....WHOMEVER they are discussing is NOT allowed to defend themselves, or present any evidence that might clear them....

There is a saying, 'they'd indict a ham sandwich' because many times, evidence is presented in a slanted way, and unwarranted indictments are the results (as well as the fact that the accused cannot defend themselves)
 
marycarney said:
BUT if you offer it in an attempt to clear yourself.......
Click to expand...

On the DNA testing, I wonder if they tested the neighbor and boys who were visiting at the house earlier in the evening.

Florida's sunshine laws were much more helpful in tying down the facts. Missouri doesn't seem to have any "sunshine laws", which makes sleuthing a lot harder!
 
justbeachy said:
I've often thought that if, God Forbid, I was ever in this situation, I would tell LE that they could have a team of investigators follow me around night and day, asking me the same questions repeatedly, hook me up to a polygraph...heck, sleep in my house and eat my food....I wouldn't care AS LONG as they also had a huge team dedicated to investigating other leads. Investigate me all you want to, but for God's sake, don't stop looking somewhere else too.
Click to expand...

Amen to that, they would probably throw me out of the police station because I would be on everyone's butt so bad about being out there and looking for my baby.
 
Is the subpoena for one particular news station and only that station?
 
curiositycat said:
I looked for any "raw video" that I could find. This is the first one taken by channel 5 and they refer to it as "raw video" it's a little over 3 minutes long. I put it full screen, nothing stood out as "odd" to me, but maybe someone with better eyes then mine will see something;
http://www.kctv5.com/category/222182/search-for-lisa
Click to expand...

I found this one that's titled "raw" but it's of the presser.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qd5lBOVJLns&feature=related"]10/04/2011 | KIDNAPPED INFANT LISA IRWIN | RAW POLICE PRESSER - YouTube[/ame]
 
Does anyone have quotes that the LE have stated regarding "no leads" - I remember there was a weird statemtnt also....

Is it possible someone KNOWS what happened to the baby - told LE the truth from the start - and the LE is just searching for the evidence to support the claim???

I can't get over the husbands body language with the wife... he looks like he does't even want to be anywhere near her.. IMO...
 
kmartin96 said:
Regarding the grand jury....this is just what my dad told me (he was 25+ on Chicago PD, and 15+ years attorney).....

Evidence is presented to a grand jury, and they make a recommendation to either file charges, or give the opinion that there is NOT enough to make an arrest (at the present time).....WHOMEVER they are discussing is NOT allowed to defend themselves, or present any evidence that might clear them....

There is a saying, 'they'd indict a ham sandwich' because many times, evidence is presented in a slanted way, and unwarranted indictments are the results (as well as the fact that the accused cannot defend themselves)
Click to expand...

Yes, but IIRC, a grand jury did not indict in the Jon Benet case, so sometimes they do not indict a ham sandwich.
 
cakegirl0905 said:
Gosh guys, I don't know. What is the crime? A baby is missing, but we don't know for sure who took her, or what happened to her, or what the motive was...is that enough for a grand jury?

Also, I tend to get pretty good reads on people. Like TH for example, I saw her and KNEW she did it. But this lady? She seems appropriately devastated. I just don't know...I'm baffled. I need to know more before I can decide if she is responsible or not.
Click to expand...



BBM


I am the same way.....and I also knew TH was guilty in Kyron's disappearance. She made my skin crawl the minute I saw her.

These parents definitely have me confused too. I think a lot of us here don't know what to think.
 
Does anyone else think that maybe LE has evidence we just don't know they have? What if they found the phones? Or were able to get text message info from the service providers?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 60 more.
Total: 2,862 (members: 61, guests: 2,801)

Online statistics

Members online
61
Guests online
2,801
Total visitors
2,862
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,084
Messages
18,151,623
Members
231,641
Latest member
HelloKitty1298
Back
Top