Police say parents are not answering vital questions #3

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Do you really think DB would tell LE the clothing BL was last wearing when she went missing, and then have those clothing still in the house?
 
I think we know what we are talking about as far as some of the evidence goes. Some want to make excuses and say LE took similar clothing. .. and then spin BUT it wasn't the ones Lisa was wearing...all the time telling us she had two outfits exactly alike.

I get it. Excuses being made to try and reason why DB is not responsible. LE took the clothing that was described to them but I am being told it was not the correct clothing. It will be tested. When DB provides proof that it wasn't the outfit she put on her, then I will consider it. So far DB has not come in to tell them it was the wrong clothing, has she? She is not talking to LE.
 
Detective Klimpt said:
Do you really think DB would tell LE the clothing BL was last wearing when she went missing, and then have those clothing still in the house?
Click to expand...

Sure do. Been to this rodeo before, Det. K.. Perps get drunk and/or high and make mistakes. Happens more than you think.

It appears the perp took nothing that belonged to Lisa when leaving the house...not even her baby blanket..pretty strange in itself. My guess is she was in a blanket but not hers. DB is an anxiety driven person who doesn't always reason well..She's going to make mistakes..IMO
 
Whisperer said:
I do not have to comply with hunting down links at every whim. I was pretty clear in my post but abbreviated. If one chooses to knitpick, so be it. Cadaver dog hits in house. Parents do not have to move away from home when it's a crime scene. They were not forced out of their home. They chose to go. Seventeen hours yes, they had to go...but as far as two months, no.

LE took clothing from home for evidence. It was the same as DB described. I am not going to believe they simply chose any clothes that were SIMILAR as evidence. LE took what was described to them. Making more excuses for mother is not something I choose to do. The clothing is evidence, AFAIAC.
Click to expand...

If you state something as a fact, then a link is needed. If it is your opinion based on information you've read here or elsewhere, please state it is your opinion.

:tyou:
 
If the parents gave conflicting information and it is stated on a sworn affidavit, I have to conlude/my opinion that they were lying/misleading and giving different versions of what occurred that evening. This is a huge red flag and doesn't fair well for the innocence of one/and or both parents. In fact, it tells me that one or both are liars. When your baby vanishes and there are two different versions of the story, it is logical to conclude that there is a perp in the midst.
 
Whisperer said:
I do not have to comply with hunting down links at every whim. I was pretty clear in my post but abbreviated. If one chooses to knitpick, so be it. Cadaver dog hits in house. Parents do not have to move away from home when it's a crime scene. They were not forced out of their home. They chose to go. Seventeen hours yes, they had to go...but as far as two months, no.

LE took clothing from home for evidence. It was the same as DB described. I am not going to believe they simply chose any clothes that were SIMILAR as evidence. LE took what was described to them. Making more excuses for mother is not something I choose to do. The clothing is evidence, AFAIAC.
Click to expand...


Hi Whisperer - it is common courtsey to supply a link when you state something as fact and it is within the rules for any poster to ask for a link. This case has it's own media thread, so finding a link should not be that difficult. And it is not nit-picking when a poster asks for backup to a statement of fact.

If you do not wish to supply a link, then please state info as your opinion, theory, speculation only.

I don't mean you specifically, Whisperer, but the other thing that should be done in this case, if it has not been done already, is a FACT only (no discussion thread) should be created. There is so much confusion in this case.

We could have a thread where statements are posted with the link that backs them up and rumors are posted with the link that disproves them.

I remember LE taking some of Lisa's clothes, what I don't remember is that the clothes were the one's described by DB - although I do remember some discussion about that.

So..... I can start the thread, and all posters are welcome to contribute to it, keeping in mind that it is a FACT thread and NOT a discussion thread.

Thanks,

Salem
 
Okay - there is the Fact versus Rumor thread: [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=157803"]FACT vs. RUMOR (List Only) NO DISCUSSION - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

I made it a sticky so it could be found easily.

Salem
 
Whisperer said:
I do not have to comply with hunting down links at every whim. I was pretty clear in my post but abbreviated. If one chooses to knitpick, so be it. Cadaver dog hits in house. Parents do not have to move away from home when it's a crime scene. They were not forced out of their home. They chose to go. Seventeen hours yes, they had to go...but as far as two months, no.
Click to expand...

<modsnip>.....not sure where you get 17 hours or two months from.

The home was a crime scene from 4 a.m. Tuesday Oct. 4 until 7-8 p.m. Oct. 6. That's more than 17 hours. The cops WOULD NOT ALLOW THEM TO LIVE IN THEIR HOME. THEY HAD TO SLEEP SOMEWHERE until the night of Oct. 6, which would of course be the boys' bedtime.

Cops took down the crime tape the night of Oct. 6. Some have argued prematurely.

The police then made the home a crime scene again on Oct. 9/Oct. 10. It remained a crime scene pretty much until after the final search in mid-October. The only 17 hours I know of was the 17 hour search which ended Oct. 20.

So from Oct. 4-Oct. 21 there were only a couple of days (night of Oct. 6-Oct. 9) when it wasn't a crime scene. They could have moved back after Oct. 21.

The family returned to the home on Lister on Nov. 15, which is definitely NOT two months later. You've said the two months later before and it's not correct. Six weeks is correct.

http://www.kctv5.com/story/16043329/baby-lisas-parents-expected-to-move-back-into-home

<modsnip>. I am stating facts and I think stating facts accurately is important <modsnip>.
 
FACTs:
Mother states she failed poly.
Mother states she expects to be arrested
Cadaver dog hits in bedroom
parents gave conflicting information to LE stated on a sworn affidavit
Mother states she was drunk and don't recall checking on child x10 hours but does
...recall talking with boys and sleeping with them.
Mother states she never heard lisa on monitor
Mother states she never heard dogs bark
LE found clothing described by mother to what Lisa was wearing when last seen
Both parents make use of four different criminal defense lawyers in short time.
Parents refuse to be interviewed separately.

.....Yeah, this all adds up to innocence....:waitasec:
 
If JI gave a hoot about his daughter, he would be at the police station begging for a poly and begging LE to help him find his daughter.

JI is too busy attending to DB to do anything. I consider him a sad excuse for a father. I expect nothing less of DB but the fact that this father who some think had nothing to do with this does absolutely nothing to locate Lisa speaks volumes to his character.
 
So in a local article it says clearly that JOE T. says there will be no interview of the parents unless he knows what the questions are and if he can set the ground rules.

:waitasec: ...well..then...em.. I guess he has his reasons, none of which are any good...oh, my opinion.
 
Re-reading the article.... cameras were inside the homes on Nov. 15. Wonder why that video hasn't been shown?

Did Tacopina or ABC do the filming?
 
Whisperer said:
FACTs:
Mother states she failed poly. as told to her by LE, could or could not be the truth
Mother states she expects to be arrested Perhaps due to neglect, not murder
Cadaver dog hits in bedroom yup
parents gave conflicting information to LE stated on a sworn affidavit yup
Mother states she was drunk and don't recall checking on child x10 hours but does not really sure where 10 hours comes from, last check is at 6:30pm. According to her story she went to bed after 10:30pm, that's 5 hrs unless you are counting the time she is asleep
...recall talking with boys and sleeping with them.
Mother states she never heard lisa on monitor not unusual if the baby was sleeping through the night
Mother states she never heard dogs bark not unusual
LE found clothing described by mother to what Lisa was wearing when last seen link?
Both parents make use of four different criminal defense lawyers in short time. yup
Parents refuse to be interviewed separately. yup

.....Yeah, this all adds up to innocence....:waitasec:
Click to expand...

Responses in bold. Doesn't add up to guilt either. It adds up to we don't know what happened.
 
DeAnn said:
Yes it happens all the time. But to accept that JI was involved and she was dead before he went to work means you have to accept that from 6 pm or so until 3 a.m. or so that he did nothing on surveillance camera to indicate that his daughter has been accidentally or purposefully killed ....to show not a sign of distress...to act so normal that your actions aren't called into question by the FBI or KCPD...no matter how shell shocked you are....to do so.....if that's not cold hearted then what is? If you can hide any sign of distress over your daughter being dead? That's the point I'm making. To say JI was involved or knew before 3:30-3:45 a.m. means you have to be able to explain his behavior. KCPD and the FBI were satisfied hence why he didn't take a poly the first few days. And you have to be able to explain why the KCPD and FBI were wrong in their assessment of the video. And when I say "you" I don't mean any single particular person....I just mean those advocating JI being involved before 3:45 a.m. Oct. 4. I mean you generally.
Click to expand...

JI appears to be a particularly emotionless person in all respects. He might be one of the most stone faced people I have ever seen in a case like this. So, I don't think that anything can be said about him acting in any particular way the night that Lisa went missing. And, unfortunately, you hear of people doing it every day...acting as if nothing has happened when, in fact, something horrific has happened. Look at Scott Peterson, Casey Anthony (I know she was found not guilty but I believe she is guilty. Then there are the mothers like Diane Downs, Susan Smith, etc. I see what you are saying, but I just think that JI is one of the last people who you could judge what they are thinking by their emotion.
 
I can't see the neighbor lying and saying she seen Lisa if she didn't or still being DB's friend after all of this if she thought DB had killed Lisa. The neighbor has a daughter of her own and LE has said nothing to suggest she hasn't cooperated. They have come out and said the parents aren't answering questions ect, if the neighbor was doing the same I think LE would have said something. I don't see why anyone would lie in this case unless they had something to do with the crime so why would the neighbor lie? I don't think anyone would lie to protect their friend if they murdered their baby.
 
Nixie said:
iirc Their old lawyer (I can't remember her name) did a walk though after the search with cameras

http://www.nbcactionnews.com/dpp/ne...st-look-inside-lisa-irwins-home#ixzz1bzA4UAN5
Click to expand...

I think that DeAnn is refering to Debbies brothers house.

A television camera went into Netz's home about 11:30 a.m. Tuesday. Tacopina has been conducting exclusive interviews with Good Morning America and a GMA reporter was at the home Tuesday. The ABC program was allowed to film Lisa's half brothers trick-or-treating on Halloween.
Click to expand...

http://www.kctv5.com/story/16043329/baby-lisas-parents-expected-to-move-back-into-home
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 151 more.
Total: 1,740 (members: 152, guests: 1,588)

Online statistics

Members online
152
Guests online
1,588
Total visitors
1,740
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,587
Messages
18,206,353
Members
233,895
Latest member
lizz28
Back
Top