NBC Action News new timeline - 11/02/2011

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
I agree with you on alot of what you say here, Jeanna. Not checking on a child for that many hours doesn't in any way indicate to me that she intenionally killed her child. Not at all. But putting a 10 month old into her crib at 4:30, taking her out apparently only to feed and change her, and then putting her back in bed at 6:30 and never once checking on her again until almost 4 am is very troublesome to me. Add to that this certainly seems to have been done so that Mommy could get drunk...that's more than just lazy parenting, imo. It's outright negligent. And I just don't think it's a stretch to think it may just be possible that this mother was so intoxicated, that a horrible accident could have occurred as a direct result of the mother's inebriation.

But, that's just my opinion. I have no way of knowing for certain what occurred in that house that night. But I hope to god someone does figure it out...whatever the "it" turns out to be.


Did she say she never checked on her again or she doesn't remember if she did? I think she may have been in the crib for a short time at 4:30 while mom ran to the store and dad was getting ready for work. Maybe dad was trying to get a short nap before he went to the other job.
 
This is pretty much what I meant, actually. The question could have just as easily been phrased as "Did you ever misjudge how much alcohol you drank/how it was affecting you?" or even "Did you drink too much?", but it is laced with the assumption that DB drank to the point of blacking out intentionally and that RESPONSIBLE mothers would never, ever just let their sick children sleep as much as they needed. I think there are elements of this story that are as hinky as hell, but there are assumptions being made that I think are unfair. And maybe that's my issue, but I think it was a bias worth pointing out.

Respectfully, BBM.

I'll say it...It's irresponsible to continue drinking to excess and not checking on a 10+ month old who has a cold and cough and had been fussy.

Likely, either Baby Lisa was not that under-the-weather that she slept that long nor that early, or if she did have a cold and cough that needed monitoring-Mom behaved irresponsibly.

Seems to me a mother who claims to be protecting her own child and her partner's from potential psychological harm by refusing to allow them to be re-interviewed would be the exact type of Mama who checks on her 10+ month old daughter-whether she had a cold and cough or not.

Not buying it!
 
Not seeing a 10 month old baby once, from 6:40 pm until 3:30 am (9 hours) is NO kind of vigilance, imo. Cold or otherwise.

I'll go further...irresponsible to not check on a 4 year old who's being "babysat" by a "fairytale" video and by a 5 and 8 year old while mommy is also drinking.

IMO, it is all a "fairytale."
 
I'll go further...irresponsible to not check on a 4 year old who's being "babysat" by "fairytale" video and a 5 and 8 year old.

IMO, it is a "fairytale."

IMHO..Even a BIGGER fairytale is the story about SB claiming her four year old told her Baby Lisa had tried to kiss her and got her all wet...JMHO
 
Did she say she never checked on her again or she doesn't remember if she did? I think she may have been in the crib for a short time at 4:30 while mom ran to the store and dad was getting ready for work. Maybe dad was trying to get a short nap before he went to the other job.

BBM

She said she doesn't remember whether she checked on Lisa or not. Which, imo, is a moot point. If you are so drunk you can't remember if you saw your child or not, you might as well not have checked on her at all.
 
IMHO..Even a BIGGER fairytale is the story about SB claiming her four year old told her Baby Lisa had tried to kiss her and got her all wet...JMHO

Wow, I totally missed that story. Where did you see that, Em?

ETA: No need to dig for a link or anything, it's not that important...but just a general account, maybe?
 
Also, I would like to know, was the baby food she purchased with the box of wine, eaten? Where are the empty jars?

I also wonder, and i am just throwing it out there, could the financial situation been so bad that DB gave her child to someone to watch and be a part of a fake kidnapping? All along while JI has no idea? (although i don't know if i am ready to let him off the hook just yet) Kinda goes hand and hand with why i am asking about the baby food.

BBM: Baby food?:waitasec: My son was done with baby food (in the jars) way before he was 10mo old! He was eating whatever we had that evening for supper....
 
BBM: Baby food?:waitasec: My son was done with baby food (in the jars) way before he was 10mo old! He was eating whatever we had that evening for supper....

Baby Lisa was supposedly in the 97th % in weight, at 30 lbs. No way she was eating baby food for dinner anymore, imo.
 
....."Apparently safe"
....."Apparently fine"

Does this wording ring odd to anyone else?

Was 'apparently' part of an actual quote? Or did she tell them 'she was fine' and the media is adding the apparently???? The way the media is twisting things, that's how I took it.
 
Originally Posted by Emeralgem
IMHO..Even a BIGGER fairytale is the story about SB claiming her four year old told her Baby Lisa had tried to kiss her and got her all wet...JMHO

Wow, I totally missed that story. Where did you see that, Em?

ETA: No need to dig for a link or anything, it's not that important...but just a general account, maybe?

That was an example someone used to explain how the time could have been determined. IF the 4 year old ran to her mom and said this when mom got back from the store.
 
DB bought baby food (and wipes) with the box o' wine...

I know. I just think it is weird. They had a family dinner and the baby was reportedly not included. They had macaroni and chicken. The baby was nearly 11 months old so I would think she could eat small bites of the dinner. but maybe she was just eating baby food still. who knows. But it would take a lot of jars to fill up a 30 lb child, imo.
 
Wait a minute.. SB claims to have seen Lisa in her crib at 4:30?? Was this poor baby in the crib all day? I'm really starting to wonder if DB was in no mood to parent a sick baby and drugged her.
 
So...where in this dinner scenario does SB running to the liquor store fit in? :waitasec:
 
That was an example someone used to explain how the time could have been determined. IF the 4 year old ran to her mom and said this when mom got back from the store.

OH Ok...My apologies... And thanks for clearing up my mistake.. I readily admit I am not understanding things too clearly..... Waters are entirely too muddy.....JMHO...
 
Regarding the 4:30 and 6:30 in the crib situation: I am not defending anyone or anything --I am not posting much because I don't have much to say about these people that's within TOS!.... but...

I had personal experience today with an even older baby (almost 2) who napped from 2-5 and then went to sleep for the night on schedule at 7. She had gotten up an hour earlier than normal in the morning and has a slight cold.

I think it's possible Lisa could have legitimately been napping at 4:30 and gone to bed at 6:30.
 
So...where in this dinner scenario does SB running to the liquor store fit in? :waitasec:

I saw one timeline where they have her going to the store at 6. So perhaps DB is feeding the 3 older kids their chicken and macaroni dinner, while SB gets her vodka[ or whatever] and cigs.
 
So...where in this dinner scenario does SB running to the liquor store fit in? :waitasec:

Dinner situation is confusing too.. DB claims she fixed a chicken dinner for the boys, herself and the neighbor.. JI claims he came home and had dinner with the family before he left for the job at Starbucks...JMHO
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
109
Guests online
210
Total visitors
319

Forum statistics

Threads
609,500
Messages
18,254,978
Members
234,665
Latest member
wrongplatform
Back
Top