People Magazine article about Lisa

[MamaK]

I believe it is one small piece of her personality. And I believe it shows a lack of respect for other people's relationships, and a total disregard for proper boundaries. I have never in my life made a pass at someone else's husband, not as a teen, not as an adult. It has not been that long since she was 17 anyway. And I do believe she has shown a severe case of arrested development. IMO, she has not matured much beyond the age of 17 today.

Maybe SHE didn't make a pass at the ex-husband. Maybe, just maybe, it was the other way around, and that husband was trying to cover his butt. We don't know. We weren't there and neither was Sara. Of course she's going to believe that her husband at the time was innocent but he might not have been. It wouldn't be the first time a husband lied to his wife.

 

[MamaK]

What I think is happening, is that a number of individuals have made up their mind what happened to little Lisa that night. The fact is that we don't know. There has been very little information released by LE. Almost everything at this point is speculation. I think once individuals come to a conclusion about a certain situation or person, they then look for evidence to back up their claim instead of looking at the evidence objectively.

:fence: :seeya:

MOO

 

[Donjeta]

When I heard the change in time by DB, my first thought is that DB realized that if Lisa's body is found, they will be able to determine time of death, so if DB says the last time she saw Lisa was 6:30 p.m. and not 10:30 p.m., it will cover her timeline if it is discovered that Lisa was deceased earlier. JMO Remember DB says she follows these missing children cases.

I do not want Lisa to be deceased, but this is an infant, and it is beginning to look more and more like Lisa is no longer with us. So very sad.

BBM. No, they won't. If Lisa died that night, by the time the story changed Lisa had already been dead for long enough that they wouldn't be able to tell the hour of her death that specifically.

Magazine Quote, pg 50-
~And what about all the odd occurrences - the lights still on and the stray cat, all on Irwin's first night shift?~ ~"There were tons of strange things that happened," she admits. "But I have no idea why, I was sleeping. No crime makes sense until it's solved."

.

SBM. It may be just the reporter editing things odd or DB answering only a half of the compound question she was asked but this quote is weird to me in that it appears that DB includes the stray kitten in the strange things that happened that night and she has no idea why they happened, she was sleeping. Did the intruder bring the kitten while she was passed out? :waitasec:

But you know where one would be likely to habitually find hungry little stray kittens? At apartment complexes or businesses where they have dumpsters. Just sayin'........

If you've just thrown a baby in a dumpster are you likely to be in the mood to rescue a kitten? I wouldn't know. (I hope none of you would either.)

Also, I do not think the neighbor she made dinner for is the same neighbor she drank with. I think the one she made dinner for is the teen. JMO

It could be because it doesn't mention cooking for the four year old of the other neighbor. Wouldn't that child be there eating as well? We haven't heard what time the teen was there that day.

Anyone else thinking someone brought that kitten to Debbie that night?

If the kitten wasn't there when JI left and DB and kids didn't leave the house all evening it had to come to them or be brought.

I wouldn't let a baby or toddler around a stray kitten, ever. Too many pointy little things! And can you imagine worms, fleas, mites and whatnot?

Me either... but if you're the sort of mom who would rather buy wine than pay the phone bill and get plastered rather than be in a shape to take care of a sick baby maybe you don't care about those things too much.

Yep. It seems People Magazine has done what all the others have done so far in this case. Chop, dice, jumble, omit, elude, misconstrue.... have I missed any?

I haven't read any of the People articles, just going by what I've read here... But I'm thinking People Magazine is writing what the parents want them to write. From what I gather they've given People an interview in every issue that has come out since Lisa's disappearance and since they're not strangers to banning media that they feel misrepresent them it leads me to believe they don't think People has distorted their message too much.

This is probably the wrong thread to be asking this in, but here goes.

At what point do the family members of DB and JI start doubting the parents story. I would think that if something like this happened in my family and the evidence starting piling up, I would start looking at the family members closer. Is it blind loyalty or why does everyone in their family so strongly believe that the parents couldn't have done anything wrong. I know blood runs deep, but we are dealing with a likely dead baby here. Just doesn't make sense to me???

Jhessye Shockley's grandma is saying she doesn't believe her daughter would do anything to her children - and the daughter's spent years in prison for severe child abuse. Beats me.

The problem with the "she snapped" scenario is that she has no history. She was out buying items to care for the little girl, who is, by all accounts, well-cared for. There is no record of DFS visits to the house. They do not have a violent history as a couple. She does not have a long litany of boyfriends, ex-friends, ex-bosses and others saying that she had a history of snapping. She cooks for others. She's friends with her neighbors. She's close to her brother. She's a stay-at-home mom to three kids who are, by all acounts, nice kids and also well-cared for. Indeed, she's the kind of naive, relatively uneducated person who takes in a stray kitten (when most of us would put it in quarantine in the laundry room in a box until we could get it to the shelter or a vet - if we did that much).

The kind of bizarre feeding frenzy that media, and LE using the media keeps trying to whip up just isn't supported by any evidence.

I don't think I know for certain many of the things you state here. If there was something of concern I'm not sure the family members would tell. Sometimes there is quite a culture of concealment and denial. But FWIW I don't think there has to be years of history before something happens. She has admitted that she was drunk to the point of blacking out that night and it is not unheard of that otherwise nice people snap when they incapacitate themselves to that degree.

I would be interested in reading some links that show that anyone has just "snapped" without a history of violence and instability, prescription or illicit drug use, etc. Violence is a continuum, and when we do see mothers who kill like this, like Andrea Yates, there is a long history of depression, instability, worries by others over her care of the children. Usually the ex has tried to take the child away because of fears for them, etc. I am not saying it never happens, but I would be interested in reading statistics or studies.

This is what I think is wrong with Pat Brown's assessment. There just isn't any evidence that DB has borderline personality disorder or something similar. She has healthy, functioning relationships with everyone in her life, no criminal or DFS history. She drinks in the way many do - too much. She was embarrassed by that and didn't immediately admit it to LE. She blacked out sufficiently to be hazy on the night's timeline. She lives in a place where people don't lock their doors. She is poor and not mediagenic, like other high-profile parents - so there are not a lot of white, upper-class people organizing searches for her family.

I don't know about drug abuse but we know DB has a history of alcohol abuse. She admitted it herself. (OK maybe she didn't use the word "abuse" but in my book it's abuse if you drink yourself to oblivion when you're the sole adult caretaker of three small children, including a sick baby.) I don't know how extensive but I am worried about it because she had a cocky attitude about it in her interviews and acted like it was no big deal, like everybody does it and it can't have anything to do with her baby going missing, although when asked if she could have hurt her baby she was unable to say she absolutely didn't, she was forced to resort to reasoning that she wouldn't have because she's not that sort of mother, AND, if there was an intruder her unconscious state could have everything to do with giving the creep the opportunity and free entry.

Well, I've got news for her, you're not your usual sort of mother when you're blacked out drunk.

IMO there is nothing wrong with her mediagenicity (is that a word?) except that she lies in her interviews.

I don't know anything about her DFS history or her relationships with others, functional or otherwise, except what the family has come out to say about them which is not very much, and I wouldn't necessarily expect family to say everything. If this happened to some of my family members I would have some choice things to say about them but I don't know that I would give interviews about it. Her relationship with JI seems a bit odd to me, just from the body language. Her drinking gives me cause for concern in respect to her relationship with the children.

Actually, this isn't true. In each of these cases, others had expressed misgivings about their behavior on multiple occasions.

Do we have a predictive test? No.
Do we know what signs of stressors, and dangerous situations are? Yes. Mental health professionals and courts couldn't do their jobs, and save as many kids as they do, and get as many people help as they do, without them.

Drinking in excess is one such dangerous situation. Just saying.

 

[loveandhugs]

I just had a very scary thought.

DB got the cat to hide the smell of Lisa's decomposing body. The baby was already dead (Sun night or Mon morning) (and Jeremy knew it too of course) and there was an odour developing. With the cat in place when the boys commented on the awful smell she could now say that it was cat poo.

I'll take it a step further. Lisa wasn't sick. She said she was so that when the boys asked where she was on that Monday she could say 'she's resting, she's sick, don't disturb her'.

Maybe there was no kitten, but DB decided to tell LE that so if there was an "odor" in the master bedroom, DB could explain it away saying her son/herself found a stray kitten/cat and it slept in the master bedroom with them. Seems strange that the kitten/cat is mentioned by both DB and JI in their stories, how would that matter if a baby was kidnapped? Why bring that up.

If your child had been kidnapped, would you say "my son was sleeping with a stray kitten", I don't think so, and then keep mentioning it in other interviews. Why is that kitten so important to DB and JI that they have to keep reminding people about it?

Wonder if LE saw the kitten/cat when they arrived at the house?

 

[Brooke]

People Magazine 10/31/11 page 47 "I turned the light on in her room, and I found she was gone," says Irwin, 29. "And that's when all hell broke loose, and we started freaking out and running all over the house for her. And she was no where to be found."

Page 51 ~on when they realized their daughter was missing: Jeremy: "Immediately, when I saw she wasn't in the crib or and wasn't in my bed."~

I'm not sure what to think anymore.

BBM

I thought "all" or "almost all" of the lights in the house were on when JI came home from work.

 

[tehcloser]

I haven't read everything...but didn't he say the light WAS ON in her room when he walked past it or something like that?

 

[Brooke]

I haven't read everything...but didn't he say the light WAS ON in her room when he walked past it or something like that?

The impression I got (and it may be wrong!) was that "all" of the lights in that house were blazing when he walked through the front door.

I guess I'm just thinking it odd that the light in Lisa's room would be off, or the only major room light not left on... again, just based on what's been said by them early on.

 

[TxLady2]

I really want to know who their service provider was. Because if it is Sprint, which is the company that I know does 'restricted' service when you are late, then you CAN receive incoming calls. And only one phone is put on restriction. The other phones work fine until they are all disconnected if you do not pay within the 3 day restricted period.

I happen to know this because we have 4 cells on a family plan, all of which have unlimited texting and so our bill is huge. Sometimes I pay it right at the cutoff mark.

We have AT&T and they cut our phones off once a few years ago, none of the phones could be used at all until the bill was paid. I had lost the bill and didn't send the check in time. Hubby had to call them from the land line and make a payment over the phone, and they instantly turned the service back on. There are three of us on our plan. Not all services work the same way, they all have different policies, I think.

 

[Debthree]

Maybe there was no kitten, but DB decided to tell LE that so if there was an "odor" in the master bedroom, DB could explain it away saying her son/herself found a stray kitten/cat and it slept in the master bedroom with them.

That's also a possibility, yes. And it would partly explain why DB refuses to let the boys be interviewed for fear they'll say "cat? What cat?"

Seems strange that the kitten/cat is mentioned by both DB and JI in their stories, how would that matter if a baby was kidnapped? Why bring that up.

If your child had been kidnapped, would you say "my son was sleeping with a stray kitten"...

That whole "kitten in the bed" thing bothered me from the first time I heard about it. It definitely means something.

DB does like to add details. Each time she tells the story a new nuance is revealed.

Both the above posts (or snippets from posts) are so true. She certainly does add detail that seems off or, at best, pointless. Another example is when she explained why the 6 year old was in the bed: at 3.15 in the video below: "my son was sleeping with me, sometimes, you know I like to... my kids have always when they're little... slept in bed with me so I like to do that when I can. He [Jeremy] asked why Michael was there and I said 'you know, he's just sleeping next to me".

I found the above part in bold very odd the minute I heart it, just like the kitten story. Why go on and on with unnecessary detail. It's like she had a pre-fabricated story to tell and must ensure she gets all the details out there. Very odd.

[ame="http://video.foxnews.com/v/1208764392001/exclusive-parents-of-missing-baby-lisa-speak-out/"]Video[/ame]

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I haven't read everything...but didn't he say the light WAS ON in her room when he walked past it or something like that?

I believe he did. Let me see if I can drag up the link. :waitasec:

But when he peeked in on then 10-month-old daughter Lisa, her light was on and the crib was empty.


http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20537999,00.html

(And both of these conflicting statements come from People mag? WTH?)

 

[Mountain_Kat]

That's also a possibility, yes. And it would partly explain why DB refuses to let the boys be interviewed for fear they'll say "cat? What cat?"






Both the above posts (or snippets from posts) are so true. She certainly does add detail that seems off or, at best, pointless. Another example is when she explained why the 6 year old was in the bed: at 3.15 in the video below: "my son was sleeping with me, sometimes, you know I like to... my kids have always when they're little... slept in bed with me so I like to do that when I can. He [Jeremy] asked why Michael was there and I said 'you know, he's just sleeping next to me".

I found the above part in bold very odd the minute I heart it, just like the kitten story. Why go on and on with unnecessary detail. It's like she had a pre-fabricated story to tell and must ensure she gets all the details out there. Very odd.

Video

In one of the interviews, where she's talking about the boys watching videos, she goes on to describe their room...tv in there, bunk beds, etc...then for some reason she smiles. I thought that was odd. Why do we need a description of the boys bedroom? We don't. She's stalling because she wants to get the interviewer off the time line. IMO

DB does that ALOT, I've noticed.

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

- 5:30 PM: DB cooks dinner for her sons and a neighbor -(Source People magazine)


Ok, so why didn't she feed Lisa?

Deleted because someone already said it lol.

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

And a spot on DWTS :great:

Every dance goes like this....pas du chat, pas du chat, pas du chat... :innocent:

 

[curiousc]

I apologize if this theory has already been visited--i've only read the first page of this thread and my eyes are crossing--not sure I'll finish tonight, but..


So, JI can't call to say, "I'm working over/will be late..." His first time working night shift. DB, drunk and jealous..thinking he's out with a woman does one of two things: 1. Wanting to hurt JI, she goes after the one (baby Lisa) who owns his heart and takes her jealous rage out on Lisa. OR 2. Leaves the children unattended (obviously done) and goes in search of JI. Comes home to find something happened to Lisa.

I suspect #1 may be the scenario.

Scenario 1 may be a possibility

I just hear DB say "fussy baby" and the baby was "sick" and all I can think of is that she lost control.

 

[w1df10wr]

Page 50 "Irwin rushed down the hallway to look in on Lisa. Her stuffed Barney was still in the crib, and her bottle was on the floor." - does anyone have a link to a different MSM source mentioning the bottle? I'm just not certain about this part of the article. Thank you in advance!

 

[In da Middle]

I heard one former acquaintance call her a con-artist. I doubt most people would say anything bad about a victim of a crime to the media unless they had a very good reason to do it and it was true.

A FORMER acquaintance from 2003! Nothing being reported as bad since then from anybody. Trust me the media is trying to dig it up and they had to go all the way back to 2003 to get somebody to say such. Just sayin...

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

A FORMER acquaintance from 2003! Nothing being reported as bad since then from anybody. Trust me the media is trying to dig it up and they had to go all the way back to 2003 to get somebody to say such. Just sayin...

Jmo, but no matter what I had to say about an acquaintance, I wouldn't blab to the media. Too easy for me to come out looking like a fool, whether I had good or bad things to say. Speculation: maybe they had to go to 2003 because more recent acquaintances just don't want to get involved.

 

[Seth]

Could it be possible that DB is talking so much about the stray kitten, to make it seem to all of us there's noway she could hurt her baby if she's the type that would take in a stray kitten and even let it sleep with her?

 

[MamaK]

Could it be possible that DB is talking so much about the stray kitten, to make it seem to all of us there's noway she could hurt her baby if she's the type that would take in a stray kitten and even let it sleep with her?

Maybe, maybe not? The kitten gets mentioned so much Invisi-Kitty has it's own thread: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=152403&page=4

 

[In da Middle]

Jmo, but no matter what I had to say about an acquaintance, I wouldn't blab to the media. Too easy for me to come out looking like a fool, whether I had good or bad things to say. Speculation: maybe they had to go to 2003 because more recent acquaintances just don't want to get involved.

Verrrrrry possible!