Police say parents are not answering vital questions #2

[annalia]

Its not a pick or chose thing. The right to remain silent was put in the constitution so that law enforcement couldn't trick people or use violence to make people confess to a crime they didn't commit. It was also put in place so people would know what crime they were being charged with. Baby Lisa has rights, no one can prove her parents violated her rights or the parents would lose their freedom. I think the parents should do the interviews, but I also think they have the right not to do them. What rights should be taken away from someone before they are found guilty of a crime or even charged with committing a crime? Should they be thrown in jail until the police are satisfied? Should they be forced to do whatever the police want until the general public thinks they are innocent? By defending the rights of one person, you defend the rights of all people. You can't use force to make someone talk, using any form of that would make confessions come from people who aren't guilty of crimes. The founders knew the system would be flawed, but they also believed everyone had rights. I am not sure what rights people want the parents to lose I mean what can you do to them? You can have opinions but with no evidence you can't just start hauling people into jail until they do what you want them to do. The parents have been interviewed, they consented to searches, they have the right to remain silent, they are exercising that right. I don't personally agree with the choice they are making but I think they have that right. by thinking that I do not believe their rights are more important then Lisa's rights that is not a fair judgment. They are two separate issues and if it is found that Lisa's rights were violated by her parents, then they will be punished. People's rights have been abused to much in this country's history for it not to be important everyone has them. Ask someone whos rights have been violated how important they are, research a country that doesn't give their people rights and see how justice is served. I will stand up and fight for the rights of children but I do not think rights should be taken away from anyone until I am shown they did something deserving of losing their rights.

There's nothing that I know of in the constitution that states they have the right to be questioned together as boyfriend/girlfriend.

They're not being forced by LE to do anything that violates their rights, they can have an attorney present. LE hasn't threatened them, hasn't forced them, they've said they still need to speak with them, they refuse. They can keep refusing and go on the rest of their life refusing, LE hasn't ever said otherwise.

So even if it means that LE can't go any further we'll all just give a big cheer for the parents exercising their rights to never answer another question that could possibly lead to finding their child. Yippee

Claims that their rights are being violated is a straw man argument. JMHO

 

[prayers4missing]

Are you saying that the law is that you can't take your dog out for a walk? What kind of dog gets enough exercise if it stays leashed in a tiny back yard? Maybe I misunderstood.

I'm not sure about KC, but I am in MO and I know where I am we are not allowed to have our dogs out without them being on a leash, unless we are at the dog park. We can walk them all we want as long as they are on their leash. I would **advertiser censored**ume it is the same on that side of the state. MOO

 

[prayers4missing]

There's nothing that I know of in the constitution that states they have the right to be questioned together as boyfriend/girlfriend.

They're not being forced by LE to do anything that violates their rights, they can have an attorney present. LE hasn't threatened them, hasn't forced them, they've said they still need to speak with them, they refuse. They can keep refusing and go on the rest of their life refusing, LE hasn't ever said otherwise.

So even if it means that LE can't go any further we'll all just give a big cheer for the parents exercising their rights to never answer a question that could possibly lead to finding their child. Yippee

Claims that their rights are being violated is a straw man argument. JMHO

:clap:

 

[Sabot]

Well I do not know about these particular people nor this locations leash laws. What I do know is that people around here (deep south)...do not think anything about penning their dogs is 4x4 pens outside :furious: and not letting them out at all, except occasionally in winter to hunt. It is criminal. We adopted our neighbors dog this way...he kept digging out of the pen to come to our house. They only fed him once a day or every other day...the dog was left there during lightening storms and hail...whatever! :banghead: They replied to our concern with "It's just a dog". Seems that is the mentality here. :waitasec:

All Hunting Dogs are penned in France because they run off and disappear for days on end. And if a dog is hit by a car and damages the car then the owner of the dog is responsible, so dogs are kept in gardens and often tied up if they are in to escaping. I see nothing wrong with this.

 

[In da Middle]

Well I do not know about these particular people nor this locations leash laws. What I do know is that people around here (deep south)...do not think anything about penning their dogs is 4x4 pens outside :furious: and not letting them out at all, except occasionally in winter to hunt. It is criminal. We adopted our neighbors dog this way...he kept digging out of the pen to come to our house. They only fed him once a day or every other day...the dog was left there during lightening storms and hail...whatever! :banghead: They replied to our concern with "It's just a dog". Seems that is the mentality here. :waitasec:

This particular dogs "run" is more than 100 ft x 30 ft. Not a pen by any means.

 

[In da Middle]

I'm not sure about KC, but I am in MO and I know where I am we are not allowed to have our dogs out without them being on a leash, unless we are at the dog park. We can walk them all we want as long as they are on their leash. I would **advertiser censored**ume it is the same on that side of the state. MOO

Exactly how it is here.

 

[Nixie]

There's nothing that I know of in the constitution that states they have the right to be questioned together as boyfriend/girlfriend.

They're not being forced by LE to do anything that violates their rights, they can have an attorney present. LE hasn't threatened them, hasn't forced them, they've said they still need to speak with them, they refuse. They can keep refusing and go on the rest of their life refusing, LE hasn't ever said otherwise.

So even if it means that LE can't go any further we'll all just give a big cheer for the parents exercising their rights to never answer another question that could possibly lead to finding their child. Yippee

Claims that their rights are being violated is a straw man argument. JMHO

I never said half the stuff in this reply. I didn't say they had the right to be questioned together I said they had the right to remain silent. I said in my opinion they should do the interviews, but they have the right not to. I asked what rights people should lose when they are not even charged with a crime. I never said LE had violated their rights nor did I say that they attempted to. I was responding on the basis that just because I think everyone has certain rights doesn't mean I think their rights are more important then Lisa's. I also want to know what rights should be taken away or how people who aren't 100% sure DB is guilty are putting Dbs rights before Lisa's. I am not sure why you would think anyone would give a big cheer when a baby is missing or how you got that from my post. People have rights for a reason that was my point.

 

[prayers4missing]

At what point does this become obstruction of justice? The last person to see the baby alive and well is refusing to go meet with LE, how is that not obstruction? Seriously asking.

 

[stilettos]

All Hunting Dogs are penned in France because they run off and disappear for days on end. And if a dog is hit by a car and damages the car then the owner of the dog is responsible, so dogs are kept in gardens and often tied up if they are in to escaping. I see nothing wrong with this.

I take issue with it when that animal is never treated with love and affection. Just left there and only let out to use as a hunting tool. Our dogs are family. I just do not understand. I have had hunting animals...we fed them, brushed and washed them, let them out to play with our family and took them out regularly. When an animal is left with out any human companionship and thrown some food every other day, is only let out to hunt two or three times a year...it just seems cruel to me. I know about responsiblity...I am responsible for my dogs, even my hunting dogs.

 

[stilettos]

This particular dogs "run" is more than 100 ft x 30 ft. Not a pen by any means.

OK. It just sounded to me like the animal was never let out of the yard...not a part of the family. I know I think of my dogs differently than some people.

 

[linda505]

At what point does this become obstruction of justice? The last person to see the baby alive and well is refusing to go meet with LE, how is that not obstruction? Seriously asking.

I don't think Missouri has an "Obstruction of justice" law

 

[In da Middle]

OK. It just sounded to me like the animal was never let out of the yard...not a part of the family. I know I think of my dogs differently than some people.

I understand. My dogs dont like to be inside, so I go see them plenty outside. It's good for me, too! It gets me out in the fresh air. I was just stating that just because the media only had a few seconds of the day of these people caught on tape and nobody saw the dog in these very few seconds, didn't mean the dog was in anyway being neglected. Their dogs "pen" is much bigger than my entire back yard where my dogs live.

 

[prayers4missing]

Here is what I found.....

Obstruction of an ethics investigation, defenses, penalty.
575.021. 1. A person commits the crime of obstruction of an ethics investigation if such person, for the purpose of obstructing or preventing an ethics investigation, knowingly commits any of the following acts:

(1) Confers or agrees to confer anything of pecuniary benefit to any person in direct exchange for that person's concealing or withholding any information concerning any violation of sections 105.450 to 105.496 and chapter 130;

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5750000021.htm Chapter 575
Offenses Against the Administration of Justice
Section 575.021

 

[Nixie]

At what point does this become obstruction of justice? The last person to see the baby alive and well is refusing to go meet with LE, how is that not obstruction? Seriously asking.

Your right to remain silent can't be prosecuted has obstruction of justice. DB has told her story to police, they may want to interview her again, but she is under no obligation legally to be interrogated repeatedly. Obstruction is used for when people lie and give an albi or destroy evidence in a case. It can also be used if people refuse to testify in court unless they can prove that they will incriminate themselves then they can plead the 5th.

 

[cindysue]

I'm beginning to wonder if the parents have just resided themselves to the fact she is probably dead and have given up all hope

 

[stephen40]

What about Lisa's rights? Lisa had the right to be loved, protected- to be nurtured and raised in her home. Lisa's been gone 7 weeks~maybe it's time her family thought about their baby more than they think about their 'rights'.
Do their in-actions point to their actions the night Lisa vanished? mo

 

[Minette]

I'm beginning to wonder if the parents have just resided themselves to the fact she is probably dead and have given up all hope

If we accept that the cadaver dog hit was accurate, then I can see why. I do wonder why LE sought to seal the affidavit supporting the search warrant--it could be that they didn't want to tip their hand to the parents, or it could be that they didn't want the parents to be unduly traumatized by reading of it. I know there are some who will believe the former, but I'd like to think LE has enough heart to want to shield the family. Whether or not you believe DB and/or JI had to do with Lisa's disappearance, there were bound to be family members who would be crushed to hear of a positive cadaver dog hit.

 

[stephen40]

I'm beginning to wonder if the parents have just resided themselves to the fact she is probably dead and have given up all hope

What's the possibility these parents know their baby is deceased? Could they be getting back to 'normal knowing Lisa isn't coming home? mo

 

[Cazzie]

You have only seen a very tiny glimpse of their coming and going. In the years I have been here, I know a dog exists, but I have also never witnessed it going in or out with them. It stays out back here and goes in and out through the back I presume. Their front yard is not fenced and we have pretty strong leash laws here. I see no reason to see it go in or out through the front.:waitasec:

My point was about them moving out of their home, and moving back into it, covered by MSM video...no dog nor kitten shown (ever, actually).

My expectation would be that they would take their pets with them (especially for the kids' sake), or perhaps, have someone care for them in their absence. Thought maybe someone knew what they did.

There was much coverage especially in the first week or 2, what with media camped out all over the neighborhood for even longer. Didn't see a dog or kitten ever. This was when DB said she didn't want to ever live in the Omen house again. So if moving out, take pets, rite?

There was an MSM video of BS escorting DB/JI/boys out of PN's house for their "have to get away from media and public intrusions" move-out...no dog or kitten seen. But of course that weekend+ turned into really being the ABC Halloween trick-or-treat exclusive. :angel:

There was an MSM video of them returning to move back in. No dog or kitten shown.

In my prior post, I wasn't questioning not seeing the dog or kitten except at the move-out/move-back-in times.

Maybe I missed some videos, or the several MSM and local news stations failed to air photos or videos of the pets being moved out and back in, or reporters failed to get them filmed.

 

[linda505]

Here is what I found.....



http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5750000021.htm Chapter 575
Offenses Against the Administration of Justice
Section 575.021

I think that this portion of the law deals only with "ethics" violations in reference to business and interfering in investigations into those "ethics" violations.