Pat Brown compares Lisa case to other cases.

[Donjeta]

What does it matter? Even if she was the Queen of Profilers her random blog comments would still be just random blog comments.

However impressive someone's credentials might be, I'd still not be inclined to take their word about MSBP if they present no actual evidence to support their opinion.

 

[MissJames]

But what happens if those rights collide.here if people prejudiced a trial it woudl have the trial thrown out so we do not allow people to mess up trials like that. If someone wanted to state their opinion they would have to wait until after a trial. Also here it would actually have to be an opinion, you cannot falsly accuse someone of murder and tag on a "in my opinion" and expect to not get into trouble for it, that would be comical. I suppose when one has so many rights, like the right to privacy, not to be harressed ( spreading lies about someone would be a form of harrssemnt), the right to be free from discrimination, it is difficult - someone cannot exercise their right to be free from discrimination at the same time as someone else exercising their supposed right to call them every racist or sexist name under the sun.

Anyway this is very off topic. back to Pat brown as this thread is about her, has she actually worked on any cases with LE. Someone claimed she had worked on the mccann case, but as far as I am aware she has not once been employed on the case. What cases has she actually worked on with LE?

Rendering an opinion isn't telling a lie about someone. That would be slander and there are remedies in court for that. By questioning potential jurors about what they've heard and what they believe ,the defendant maintains a fair trial. Sometimes trials are moved to another jurisdiction. The US goes to great lengths to maintain everyone's rights .
Pat Brown is on tv because people want to hear what she has to say. It's up to each individual to believe her or not. We aren't lemmings ,we have the right to speak and to listen ,and make up our own minds.Even on Websleuths you will read many different opinions about facts,and what they mean.
Obviously you don't believe Pat Brown or take her seriously so that just proves the point. It's her opinion and everyone can take it or leave it. Just because something is said on tv ,it doesn't mean everyone takes it as absolute truth. And this is all JMO :cheers:

 

[norest4thewicked]

can discussions of all things UK, freedom of speech and the like be done in other more appropriate forums, please? this one is for lisa irwin. thnx.

Thank you!:banghead:

 

[Cappuccino]

Well, the thread is about Pat Brown's comparison to other cases. If her opinion is not valued any more or less than anyone else's, why does she have a thread about her opinions? Presumably because whoever started this thread thinks she is an expert.

So is it wrong that we would like to examine her credentials, and her professional experience? I think its fair play to examine them. Moo.

 

[redheadedgal]

this thread is clearly for those who believe pat brown has the necessary credentials to investigate and comment on this case... i think if ppl want to discuss her not being credible, another thread ought to be started in a more appropriate forum. again, this is the lisa irwin forum. thx.

 

[MissJames]

this thread is clearly for those who believe pat brown has the necessary credentials to investigate and comment on this case... i think if ppl want to discuss her not being credible, another thread ought to be started in a more appropriate forum. again, this is the lisa irwin forum. thx.

I guess we have a difference of opinion about what is appropriate conversation for a thread . No worries,though . I'll wait until there is something new to discuss about Lisa's case. :waiting:

 

[brit1981]

I do not think this thread is clearly for people who consider Brown an expert. It is about Brown comparing this case to others. Therefore her credibiltiy etc are a part of that discussion, otherwise what is the point of the thread as we cannot discuss it if we cannot question her credibility? If we had a thread entitled joe bloggs compares this case to tohers then I am sure peopel woudl want to question who Bloggs was, doe she actually know what he is talking about, or is he just a loudmouth.

 

[Donjeta]

JMO, I think Joe Bloggs's personal history is less important than the weight of his arguments. If he presents a rational theory that is in line with the available evidence it may be worth considering regardless of who he is. If he just throws out random acronyms that don't have anything to do with the known facts it doesn't become a rational argument just because we find out that he is a university professor.

But I know a couple of nutty PhDs so my view may be biased.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

I don't care about Pat Brown's opinion, and I haven't read the first post of this thread since it was started. I just used this thread to post any thoughts that come into my head regarding other cases, and how they compare to this one.

 

[brit1981]

JMO, I think Joe Bloggs's personal history is less important than the weight of his arguments. If he presents a rational theory that is in line with the available evidence it may be worth considering regardless of who he is. If he just throws out random acronyms that don't have anything to do with the known facts it doesn't become a rational argument just because we find out that he is a university professor.

But I know a couple of nutty PhDs so my view may be biased.

But if his arguements mainly consist of "in my experience" "in my view as a profiler/expert/criminlogist" "comparing this to other cases I have worked on" etc then it is important to actually look to see if this person actually has any worthwhile experience or credentials that warrant giving them more weight than the opinions of any other random person. If someoen said they were a hairdresser but had these opinions, we woudl not find people quoting them to give weight to thier arguements, but when peopel claim to be a profiler with experience people do use their arguements to give weight to their own claims.

From what I have read from pat Brown, it dos not look as if she does give theories in line with evidence. For example ABB is charged with terrorism in norway, Pat Brown states he is not a terrorist, she had made various claims about the mccann case which were not true (and I mean she has stated things as fact when they were not i.e about calpol as a sedative etc), she also states rape requires the use of force- now I do not really know about US law, but in the UK it does not involve force it involves non-consensual sex, physical force is just an aggrevating factor. I would be shocked if in the US non-consensual sex is legal so long as physical force is not used (how the hell can someone who is sleeping, or otherwise unconcious defend themselves).

 

[Donjeta]

Just saying that if someone's theory obviously doesn't line up with evidence we don't need to know if he's a famous scientist, we can dismiss the theory because it doesn't line up with evidence.

 

[redheadedgal]

Cadaver dogs, however, are admissable in some cases but they better have other overwhelming evidence to support the dog testimony.

Detroit — A canine expert whose dog allegedly detected a cadaver scent in the home of a missing toddler will be allowed to testify at the murder trial of the girl's father, a judge ruled Friday.

...

Also Friday, Rex A. Stockham, a special agent for the FBI who oversees its forensic canine program, said the agency has been studying the science for about a decade.

The FBI began testing contract and volunteer teams for the human scent detection program in 2008, Stockham said. The agency has three full-time dogs working in the country.

The dogs are tested annually to ensure they meet best practices standards.

...

Grime testified in court Friday that Morse has never had a false positive response*, and that testing done just prior and after the dog worked in the Jones case was successful.



http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120824/METRO01/208240420#ixzz24a3uvyi9


*demonstrates the reliability and accuracy of FBI trained dogs

 

[KsStormy]

Detroit — A canine expert whose dog allegedly detected a cadaver scent in the home of a missing toddler will be allowed to testify at the murder trial of the girl's father, a judge ruled Friday.

...

Also Friday, Rex A. Stockham, a special agent for the FBI who oversees its forensic canine program, said the agency has been studying the science for about a decade.

The FBI began testing contract and volunteer teams for the human scent detection program in 2008, Stockham said. The agency has three full-time dogs working in the country.

The dogs are tested annually to ensure they meet best practices standards.

...

Grime testified in court Friday that Morse has never had a false positive response*, and that testing done just prior and after the dog worked in the Jones case was successful.



http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120824/METRO01/208240420#ixzz24a3uvyi9


*demonstrates the reliability and accuracy of FBI trained dogs

Thanks Redheaded gal! Going to repost this in the dog thread!

 

[redheadedgal]

another comparison:

local case from 1990... father killed baby in drunken rage... threw baby into detroit river... said baby was kidnapped*... the baby was found by a fisherman a few days later... the father was arrested and eventually confessed...

http://blogs.windsorstar.com/2012/09/18/raymond-laroche-convicted-in-1990-of-killing-his-baby-dies/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2001/02/16/laroche_hearing010216.html


*the story of the baby being "kidnapped" seems to be a very common theme in cases where a parent ultimately is the one responsible for the disappearance of the baby...


i wonder what evidence police had that tied ray to the murder before he confessed... ?

 

[RANCH]

another comparison:

local case from 1990... father killed baby in drunken rage... threw baby into detroit river... said baby was kidnapped*... the baby was found by a fisherman a few days later... the father was arrested and eventually confessed...

http://blogs.windsorstar.com/2012/09/18/raymond-laroche-convicted-in-1990-of-killing-his-baby-dies/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2001/02/16/laroche_hearing010216.html


*the story of the baby being "kidnapped" seems to be a very common theme in cases where a parent ultimately is the one responsible for the disappearance of the baby...


i wonder what evidence police had that tied ray to the murder before he confessed... ?

BBM
I would imagine that police had some pretty convincing evidence to get an arrest and confession in such a short period of time.

Two days later, the baby was found floating in the Detroit River. An autopsy showed he had been brutally beaten before drowning.

Ten days later, Laroche was arrested and confessed to killing the baby.

Quite unlike this case I would say, which has no body, no arrest, and no confession.
JMO.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2001/02/16/laroche_hearing010216.html

 

[brit1981]

another comparison:

local case from 1990... father killed baby in drunken rage... threw baby into detroit river... said baby was kidnapped*... the baby was found by a fisherman a few days later... the father was arrested and eventually confessed...

http://blogs.windsorstar.com/2012/09/18/raymond-laroche-convicted-in-1990-of-killing-his-baby-dies/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2001/02/16/laroche_hearing010216.html


*the story of the baby being "kidnapped" seems to be a very common theme in cases where a parent ultimately is the one responsible for the disappearance of the baby...


i wonder what evidence police had that tied ray to the murder before he confessed... ?

But the baby was found, Lisa has not been found. If we are going to arrest people for claiming their child has been abducted, then Jaycee lee Dugaards step father would have been in prison for nearly two decades for telling the truth - how many people believed he was lying? people do kidnap children that is a hideous fact.

 

[redheadedgal]

But the baby was found, Lisa has not been found. If we are going to arrest people for claiming their child has been abducted, then Jaycee lee Dugaards step father would have been in prison for nearly two decades for telling the truth - how many people believed he was lying? people do kidnap children that is a hideous fact.

1) the fact lisa has not been found does not nullify my comparison...

2) acquaint yourself with the stats re: who kidnaps a baby, whether or not kidnapped babies are usually located quickly and returned home, and *who is most likely responsible when a child goes "missing". they're all over this forum.


as for carl probyn:

1) he submitted to all interviews and questioning asked of him by LE... have DB and JI?
2) he passed not one but TWO lie-detector tests... did DB?
3) he and the rest of the family were 99.9% cleared by LE... were DB and JI?

Knowing that the vast majority of kidnappings involve family members*—only four of California's 240 reported kidnappings last year are confirmed stranger abductions—local authorities, together with the FBI, questioned all relatives. But it was Carl who was subjected to the closest scrutiny. "Did you ever wish Jaycee wasn't here?" police asked him during two lie-detector tests—which he passed—and while he was under hypnosis. "It made me nervous," he says. "I had to say, 'Sure, there were times I'd wished Jaycee wasn't in our life.' I think every parent has wished that." Ultimately the police decided that Carl's occasional ambivalence about his stepdaughter was as innocent as he said it was. "We're 99.9 percent sure this is not a family abduction," says Eldorado County Sgt. Jim Watson.

http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20111362,00.html

 

[brit1981]

But the police have also not said Lisa's parents are guilty. It is people on the internet and TV not privy to all the details who are implying left right and centre if not outright accusing the parents, just as those same people accused jaycee's stepfather even though the police did not.

 

[iamnotagolem]

But the police have also not said Lisa's parents are guilty. It is people on the internet and TV not privy to all the details who are implying left right and centre if not outright accusing the parents, just as those same people accused jaycee's stepfather even though the police did not.

In looking at statistics of most likely, stranger abductions are not the most likely. But you also have to consider the age of the victim, it's very unlikely that Lisa was kidnapped for sexual purposes.

 

[Sabot]

In looking at statistics of most likely, stranger abductions are not the most likely. But you also have to consider the age of the victim, it's very unlikely that Lisa was kidnapped for sexual purposes.

All the more reason to think that Lisa was stolen for adoption. This does happen, no matter how many people want to believe otherwise.