Mystery Man Surveillance

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

~n/t~ said:
If the swabs are useless why did they ask for them? I posted the Press Release. IMO, they have done whatever any parent would do but that still wasn't enough for LE.
Click to expand...

mysteriew said:
As I stated, the only forensic value they have is for DNA testing if the remains of Lisa are found.

The parents say their last interview was on Oct. 13. If they haven't considered going back for more interviews for instance, it would be difficult for LE to be able to show them the video of man in the white tshirt and ask them if they recognized the person wouldn't it?

They have taken phone calls since Oct. 13. How much of what they found in the searches since then would LE have asked them about, if they went in for an interview? Sometimes only a face to face has any value. For instance DB stated LE showed her burnt clothing and asked if she recognized it while she was in for an interview. LE couldn't have done that over the phone could they?

Refusing to go in for interviews to me says that they don't want LE to see their reactions and responses to any evidence found. If it is done over the phone, it is much easier to hide.
Click to expand...
BBM. Wouldn't a DNA sample of Lisa's be easier to use for identification of her remains than her parents?
 
How do we know LE has not already found the person(s) supposedly walking around with babies on that night? They wouldn't tell us if they had; they have not shared anything much at all. I am keeping my faith in LE until/unless it is no longer warranted. And I don't believe that they are doing anything less than trying to find the truth, along with this little girl. I find it ludicrious to assume that they are only trying to "pin" it on the parents, when we know nothing of what LE may know or have as evidence, or not. I only see them working almost around the clock these past weeks trying to find this child.
 
indepmo said:
This latest video of the "man walking out of the woods" means absolutely nothing to me, and let me tell you why.

I want to see video 5 minutes prior to this man walking out from behind this tree. All GMA has showed us (or I should refer to them as the Irwin/Bradley/JT/PI go to network station for these exclusives) is a man walking out from behind a tree. I'd like to see if this guy was walking east on Parvin road prior to walking out from behind this tree.

Furthermore, this gentleman was not seen in the clip they showed "walking out of woods". See these screen captures I put together from google earth. This is a very very unusually wide intersection. This guy is at best, just on the other side of the cross walk lines and nothing more, not an unusual place to cross the street.
I see people walking down Parvin road at all hours of the night coming from and going to the large apartment complex well east of this intersection on the south side of the road.

Something else that I think that is important here... The red block locations on the map are incorrect. This latest video sighting indicated on GMA's map is WRONG.
The gas station is at the intersection of Parvin & Brighton, not south where it's indicated on the map.

Also take note of the hillside on the south-west corner of the intersection. Right over that hill (look on google earth or maps) there are also a couple of houses there. IF someone walked out of there, it's a possibility that someone cut through that area leaving one of those homes headed back towards the apartments I mentioned...

I really think LE would have put this video all over TV stating they want to talk to this "white blob" in the video walking that night, and if you have any information blah blah blah call the TIPS hotline. Not ONCE did we see LE do this, probably because they looked at this video a long time ago is my guess, and you most likely see this guy walking down parvin before going behind the tree, or LE cleared this by questioning neighbors in and near the houses behind the hill I mentioned.

See screen captures.

http://www.indepmo.com/irwin/street0.jpg

http://www.indepmo.com/irwin/street1.jpg

http://www.indepmo.com/irwin/street2.jpg

http://www.indepmo.com/irwin/street3.jpg

http://www.indepmo.com/irwin/street4.jpg

http://www.indepmo.com/irwin/street5.jpg
Click to expand...
i would also like to know if they (GMA) actually viewed the entire sequence. Their 'wooded' area is not a wooded area. But just correcting google view to current times, the houses shown are no longer there. The houses were raised this summer for widening of N Brighton so nobody to question here. But, yes, it is not unusual to see somebody walking at this intersection at any given time. I would also like to see the timestamps of the video.
 
RANCH said:
BBM. Wouldn't a DNA sample of Lisa's be easier to use for identification of her remains than her parents?
Click to expand...

It would but Lisa is not here to give a sample.
Does she have one saved somewhere? Blood at the hospital maybe? A parent's DNA swab kit?

I suppose they could find DNA from items belonging to her but they would probably have to compare it to the parents and siblings anyway to be sure it's Lisa's.
 
RANCH said:
BBM. Wouldn't a DNA sample of Lisa's be easier to use for identification of her remains than her parents?
Click to expand...

But would they be able to get a DNA sample of Lisa's? If she had a toothbrush, they could try. If they had hairbrush, only used by Lisa they could try. But those would still be iffy. They could try a diaper, but even that could be contaminated by handling by the person who changed the diaper.
It is pretty much standard in a missing person case to take DNA from parents to help in DNA id, as it is the best way to get uncontaminated DNA id.
 
MyBelle said:
BBM. LE can't lie to a Judge. I've never seen a case where LE faked anything in order to obtain a search warrant so how about you supply a link? Thanks.
Click to expand...

Sure.
http://www.infowars.com/cops-routinely-lie-to-obtain-search-warrants/
http://thehive.modbee.com/node/23551

Here's some info about officers perjuring themselves on the stand, although I tend to think that id much less common. The basic rule of thumb is that it's OK to lie during the investigation. It is not OK to lie after that, but clearly, some officers carry it too far. In fact it happens so often it has a name: testilying.
http://policecrimes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6221

While we are at it, lets talk about prosecutorial misconduct, which often goes hand in hand with police officers lying. USA Today did this nice compendium of 201 cases of prosecutors who lie, cheat, etc to get convictions. Start here: http://projects.usatoday.com/news/2010/justice/

Just so it's clear though, A) I am not accusing LE in this case of any wrongdoing. B) I tend to side with the police at first, but I keep an open mind. And C) I have no opinion on this case. We don't have enough information for me to form an opinion. My opinions are formed by FACTS, not speculation, gut feelings, gossip or media sensationalism.
 
Donjeta said:
It would but Lisa is not here to give a sample.
Does she have one saved somewhere? Blood at the hospital maybe? A parent's DNA swab kit?

I suppose they could find DNA from items belonging to her but they would probably have to compare it to the parents and siblings anyway to be sure it's Lisa's.
Click to expand...

Sure, why not do it that way. I would hope that LE would take the time and effort to get a DNA profile of baby Lisa.
 
In da Middle said:
I could be overlooking it, but I am not seeing that they had representation on the 8th in this article. It does state that the last unrestricted interview was done on the 8th.
Click to expand...

O’Brien, a law professor who briefly represented the couple during the Oct. 8 interview, said Bradley and Irwin’s strained relationship with police stems, in part, from investigators’ pursuit of them as suspects. Police also have not kept the family informed about the search for Lisa, which has been a strain on the family, he said.

Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/20/3220223/baby-lisas-lawyers-say-police.html#ixzz1betJ3aJU
 
mysteriew said:
The press release doesn't say when those samples were taken. We have no way of knowing if they were done during the time the family was cooperating with LE or if they were done after the defense team came in.

For that matter we have no way of determining if those statements were even true. After all LE isn't talking.
Click to expand...

No way would a defense team allow them to take samples. This was all done before they had attornies, imo. A defense attorney would say, arrest them or you get nothing. These parents aren't even persons of interest or suspects.
 
mysteriew said:
But would they be able to get a DNA sample of Lisa's? If she had a toothbrush, they could try. If they had hairbrush, only used by Lisa they could try. But those would still be iffy. They could try a diaper, but even that could be contaminated by handling by the person who changed the diaper.
It is pretty much standard in a missing person case to take DNA from parents to help in DNA id, as it is the best way to get uncontaminated DNA id.
Click to expand...

It seems you know a bit about DNA testing! :)

And the reason to take a DNA sample from a non-family member in a case such as this would be...?

TIA!
 
indepmo said:
This latest video of the "man walking out of the woods" means absolutely nothing to me, and let me tell you why.

I want to see video 5 minutes prior to this man walking out from behind this tree. All GMA has showed us (or I should refer to them as the Irwin/Bradley/JT/PI go to network station for these exclusives) is a man walking out from behind a tree. I'd like to see if this guy was walking east on Parvin road prior to walking out from behind this tree.

Furthermore, this gentleman was not seen in the clip they showed "walking out of woods". See these screen captures I put together from google earth. This is a very very unusually wide intersection. This guy is at best, just on the other side of the cross walk lines and nothing more, not an unusual place to cross the street.
I see people walking down Parvin road at all hours of the night coming from and going to the large apartment complex well east of this intersection on the south side of the road.

Something else that I think that is important here... The red block locations on the map are incorrect. This latest video sighting indicated on GMA's map is WRONG.
The gas station is at the intersection of Parvin & Brighton, not south where it's indicated on the map.

Also take note of the hillside on the south-west corner of the intersection. Right over that hill (look on google earth or maps) there are also a couple of houses there. IF someone walked out of there, it's a possibility that someone cut through that area leaving one of those homes headed back towards the apartments I mentioned...

I really think LE would have put this video all over TV stating they want to talk to this "white blob" in the video walking that night, and if you have any information blah blah blah call the TIPS hotline. Not ONCE did we see LE do this, probably because they looked at this video a long time ago is my guess, and you most likely see this guy walking down parvin before going behind the tree, or LE cleared this by questioning neighbors in and near the houses behind the hill I mentioned.

See screen captures.

First image (top part GMA's map, bottom half mine that is correct)
http://www.indepmo.com/irwin/street0.jpg

This is the hillside I was referring to
http://www.indepmo.com/irwin/street1.jpg

http://www.indepmo.com/irwin/street2.jpg

http://www.indepmo.com/irwin/street3.jpg

The roadway on Parvin traveling West when approaching this intersection is about 4 lanes wide, not that it's striped out that way, but speaking in comparison this is about a 6 lane wide intersection with a median strip in the middle just to the east of the intersection, and a shoulder...
http://www.indepmo.com/irwin/street4.jpg

http://www.indepmo.com/irwin/street5.jpg
Click to expand...

great post! I truly believe that could have been any joe smoe from Idaho, I mean just because someone is walking around at 4am (that far away from the home) means nothing really. I dont know the area but that intersection looks mighty big and if you were guilty of snatching a baby not to far away why would you put yourself in the spotlight like that? MOO
 
~n/t~ said:
My reaction was more to do with Young's response. I don't even know this family. I don't know baby Lisa. I'm miles away in another country and was offended by it. Imagine what the family must feel knowing LE thinks this is rogue amateur? It's like they're saying, don't waste our time.

I don't like that arrogant attitude at all.

IF the parents are involved, I want proof. If not, I will assume this child was kidnapped.
Click to expand...

From what I see on the video, it's a man walking, he/she is no where near the "woods." He is not carrying a baby. Heck, if he did come out from a tree, maybe the gas station restroom was closed. Maybe he was out at a bar and did the responsible thing, walking home. WHO KNOWS? But, to have the media link this to a possible kidnapping without any facts or confirmation from LE, to go out on their own and do this report, IMO, is rogue, irresponsible and amateur!

I feel sorry for this poor guy in the video when he is found. It's beyond ridiculous if he's just a guy walking late at night. I certainly don't understand how ABC even tried to connect this to the potential kidnapping of baby Lisa? No kidnapper is going to walk around town for 4 hours.

I believe the media is going nuts because nothing is being released by LE and this story is national news, they don't have to make things up..JMO!

Law Enforcements statement, IMO, was to try to stop ridiculous reporting such as this alleged "mysterious man."
 
RANCH said:
Sure, why not do it that way. I would hope that LE would take the time and effort to get a DNA profile of baby Lisa.
Click to expand...

Do we know that they haven't?
 
mysteriew said:
But would they be able to get a DNA sample of Lisa's? If she had a toothbrush, they could try. If they had hairbrush, only used by Lisa they could try. But those would still be iffy. They could try a diaper, but even that could be contaminated by handling by the person who changed the diaper.
It is pretty much standard in a missing person case to take DNA from parents to help in DNA id, as it is the best way to get uncontaminated DNA id.
Click to expand...
Contaminated samples won't change a persons DNA into someone else s. I'm sure that developing a DNA profile for baby Lisa could be done fairly easily. JMO.
 
One problem is that it may be difficult for the police to determine with absolute certainty who a toothbrush or a hairbrush belongs to. People have occasionally given LE falsely identified items or been suspected of doing that.
 
RANCH said:
Sure, why not do it that way. I would hope that LE would take the time and effort to get a DNA profile of baby Lisa.
Click to expand...

I remember a recent case when the grandmother gave a toothbrush not belonging to the child, but the dog to LE for a DNA match.

I'm quite certain, LE is better off comparing the parents DNA. In fact, I am sure they might have baby Lisa's DNA profile, and might know if Jeremy is in fact the father to baby Lisa.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 153 more.
Total: 384 (members: 154, guests: 230)

Online statistics

Members online
154
Guests online
230
Total visitors
384
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,707
Messages
18,244,325
Members
234,431
Latest member
Watcher121692
Back
Top