Have been reading....too much maybe.
There is no such thing as too much reading!
What I found interesting, and I couldn't find a lot of info n it is...the detective in charge was told originally that it was a custodial dispute.
You are referring to this quote...
Sgt. Sondra Zink, who was the lead investigator on the Baby Lisa case for nearly six months, remembers the wakeup call about 4:30 a.m. last Oct. 4 that started it all.
The first she heard was that a baby was missing in a possible custody dispute involving grandparents. The baby wasnt believed to be in danger.
Keep me updated, she told the officer on the phone before she hopped in the shower to head into work early.
Before she could even dry off, she learned the grandparents didnt have the baby.
http://www.kansascity.com/news/loca...-answers-in-Baby-Lisa-case.html#storylink=cpy
I would imagine that morning Deborah and Jeremy were thinking of every possible place Lisa could be and the grandparent's house was likely one of the first places they mentioned to police. I don't know the personal details of this situation and I'm not going to speculate, but- court records show that Jeremy's parents filed a motion in court for grandparent's visitation prior to Lisa going missing. Visitation- not custody-- an important distinction. More info on that can be found on this page of the thread about the custody case:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...s-filed-by-mother-of-JI-s-son-11-14-11/page39
That motion for visitation was dropped by the grandparents after Lisa's disappearance. The grandparents did not speak badly of the parents after the disappearance and CNN's Jim Spellman reported that every member of the Lisa's family he has talked to believe Deb and Jeremy are innocent.*** Lisa's grandparents have spoken with the media on several occasions and have been nothing but supportive of the parents. I don't know what the visitation issue was about, but there is apparently no bad blood there.
***Here is a source for that info:
@jimspellmancnn tweets:
A couple people have asked me for more details on the divide in the family. Basically there is one camp that supports Tacopina/Stanton and
their strategy of only doing these occasional hi profile media appearances and another camp that thinks they should be doing
all the media they can. To be totally clear BOTH camps...everyone in the family I am in touch with thinks Deb and Jeremy are innocent
Unfortunately, I don't have the original links for the these tweets. Jim changed his twitter username and they are no longer available.
Here is a link to a websleuths post w/ the tweets:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...Dr-Phil-3-February-2012&p=7541617#post7541617
Jim Spellman also discusses the divide within the family regarding Stanton/Tacopina at 0:55 in this video:
http://youtu.be/CZL4OfeZ2zs?t=55s
More on the subject of Stanton/Tacopina later in this post...
The biological mother to boy aged 8 (Rasleem Raim) has a lot to be angry about. And using Mr.
Abetya's theory......it would be someone close to them but angry. She used to live in that house! It appeared she lawyered up right away and only granted several small interviews in Marshall, MO.
Did he hand the baby off to someone? Yes, I think so. But who? Was it one of the 8 who lived at pink hair's apartment? I'm sure they were all interviewed. Did any of them have a connection to Marshall, Mo?
Rasleen's lawyer, Dorothy Savory, was her lawyer in the custody dispute with Jeremy going as far back as 2005.
I'm sure Rasleen and Deborah's ex were thoroughly investigated by LE. I don't suspect either of them, because the phone call is key IMO and I don't know for sure, but I highly doubt either of them have connections to Megan Wright and/or Jersey. There has never been any indication of that. If Jersey didn't take Lisa, I think the person who did this has to be an acquaintance of his and/or Megan Wright.
And just who is the benefactor in this whole mess? It seems that person has a ton of control..... and money. But why?
Deborah's cousin knows the benefactor, which is how she became involved. She is a philanthropic woman who seems to be very pro-law enforcement IMO. She is the founder of K9s4Cops, an organization that donates k9s to law enforcement agencies. She is good friends with Bill Stanton and Tacopina.
http://k9s4cops.org/why-we-exist/
http://k9s4cops.org/about/board-members/
These videos are a must-watch in order to understand how Bill Stanton became involved with the case:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BipD-shAwZs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIb5Tb0kVM4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31TIP2yWtfk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BEakYHhSC8
BS says the benefactor sent him to Kansas City to represent Lisa's interests, not to represent the parents. Bill Stanton came into town believing the parents were probably guilty, and left convinced they were likely innocent. He brought in his team of experts. We still don't know everything this team did to assist. We recently found out Phil Houston is one of the experts BS brought in. Phil Houston is former law enforcement and is apparently very qualified in his field. He interviewed the parents for approx. 8 hours and is aware of more info than the public. (Not privy to police info, of course.) He thinks the parents are likely innocent. Obviously, that isn't enough to convince me of their innocence, but it means something. Some weight should be given to his opinion, IMO. Why not? I think he is trustworthy and seemingly quite intelligent. He spent time on the ground.
I certainly don't think the benefactor would knowingly provide help to baby killers. I think she cares about baby Lisa and wants this case to be solved. I think her connections have absolutely done a lot of good in this case. For example, I don't believe the case would still be getting national coverage 3 years later without BS/benefactor. But, I definitely can't say I agree with everything Bill Stanton and co have contributed. I don't agree with how some things were handled. Without getting into specifics, I think the parents received some unwise advice along the way. I think hiring Tacopina was a mistake. I'm not a fan of his.
In the tweets and video from Jim Spellman I linked above, he reported that some family members were not happy with Tacopina/Stanton, either. It seems, for better or worse, the parents and other family members let them "run the show" for a while. Take a look at this quote from Deborah after Cyndy Short was fired from the case...
Cyndy Short, a Kansas City area attorney, is no longer representing the parents of missing baby Lisa Irwin.
Sources tell KCTV5 that Short was forced off the case Thursday. Short was reportedly fired at the direction of Joe Tacopina, a New York attorney, who joined the case last week.
He could not be reached for comment Friday.
KCTV5's Jeanene Kiesling asked baby Lisa's parents, Debbie Bradley and Jeremy Irwin, about Short no longer representing them when they returned to a relative's home Thursday night.
"This is the first I've heard of it," Bradley replied. "You know as much as I do."
http://www.kctv5.com/story/15898355/short-forced-off-the-baby-lisa-case
Another interesting quote...
Deborah Bradley's cousin, Michael Larette, has said that he and Lisa's parents chose Tacopina because he came highly recommended by several people, including Stanton, a New York-based private investigator who has been working with Bradley's family.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/10/1...missing-missouri-girl-refuses-to-divulge-fee/
Here is what Gil Abeyta had to say on the subject:
These parents, Gil says, didn't ask for Stanton or Tacopina - he says they inherited them by this "anonymous wealthy benefactor." He also believes someone else is leading the show, someone who in his opinion, is young and completely inexperienced.
~~
Gil tried to explain to Deborah and Jeremy's family that someone is misleading them, that everything they're suggesting the couple do is making them look guilty in the eyes of the public.
His take-away while visiting with the family was that these high-profile men don't care about public opinion because they feel good publicity, bad publicity, it's all publicity.
~~
He says that Baby Lisa's parents don't have the intelligence to deal with this. He doesn't mean any disrespect, he means that young parents aren't given a handbook on how to cope with a missing child. That's why he came in to offer his experience and expertise.
"They're like zombies, they can't function," he said. "They're like wounded people. I saw the pain and suffering. It was very sad. They need help. They're not working, they probably have no money coming in. They need people to show compassion and love. They need people to help them, not judge them."
http://www.examiner.com/missing-per...rking-day-and-night-as-catalyst-for-baby-lisa
If I had a missing loved one, and a wealthy friend of my family member who had lots of qualified former law enforcement connections offered to help me find my missing loved one, I would absolutely accept. Bill Stanton also had worked with national media networks. The family had been inundated with media requests. I would certainly want help from someone who has experience dealing with the media at a time like that. I can see why the help was accepted. I'm just not sure some of the advice they received was wise.
Read more about the benefactor in this thread:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?163128-Benefactor-Discuss-here