Post your theory-****NO DISCUSSION****

[cityslick]

Jersey and MW had only been broken up for three weeks or so, right? It's possible that Jersey, who at one time lived (or flopped) right across the street, gave DB that number. Who knows why... perhaps if she ever needed any "odd jobs" done.

On the night of October 3rd, when she had an "odd" job (more like macabre and criminal), she dialed the number.

This was suggested to me recently: perhaps someone did answer, and DB asked for Jersey and of course he wasn't reachable. Or, no one answered because the call didn't connect. Then, DB took care of that job by herself. I'm still hung up on that though... because that means she would have left the house for some time, and that's huge risk with two sleeping children.

What about Dane in all this though? If someone 'answered', wouldn't that had to have been Dane? And then if that's true, then isn't Dane lying (not forthcoming) to the events that night? For what reason?

 

[natsound]

What about Dane in all this though? If someone 'answered', wouldn't that had to have been Dane? And then if that's true, then isn't Dane lying (not forthcoming) to the events that night? For what reason?

IDK if Dane hasn't been forthcoming. He never really went into detail with Russ Ptacek about the 11:57 call. IIRC, Dane admitted he had the phone, but he was vague about what time he had the phone.

Either way, it doesn't make him guilty, IMO. If he answered, and Debbie said "I need to speak to Jersey", or if she simply hung up because an unfamiliar voice answered, it doesn't make Dane a party to anything.

Dane has talked to the FBI and he may have told them all of this. He only answered Ptacek through text, and didn't elaborate on anything.

 

[Karmaa]

IDK if Dane hasn't been forthcoming. He never really went into detail with Russ Ptacek about the 11:57 call. IIRC, Dane admitted he had the phone, but he was vague about what time he had the phone.

Either way, it doesn't make him guilty, IMO. If he answered, and Debbie said "I need to speak to Jersey", or if she simply hung up because an unfamiliar voice answered, it doesn't make Dane a party to anything.

Dane has talked to the FBI and he may have told them all of this. He only answered Ptacek through text, and didn't elaborate on anything.

But, hasn't it been confirmed (at least by the lawyers, who claim the info came from the FBI) that the call didn't go through, and that the cellphones were, in fact, restricted?

So, why would DB try to call anyone on those phones, knowing that they were not usable? Doesn't it seem more likely that someone who didn't know the phones were down tried to make the calls?

 

[natsound]

But, hasn't it been confirmed (at least by the lawyers, who claim the info came from the FBI) that the call didn't go through, and that the cellphones were, in fact, restricted?

So, why would DB try to call anyone on those phones, knowing that they were not usable? Doesn't it seem more likely that someone who didn't know the phones were down tried to make the calls?

No. I'm still unsure of the extent the phones were "restricted", because Picerno said in the same breath during an interview a few weeks ago that the phones could take incoming calls, but Jeremy tried to call DB earlier in the evening to say he would be late, and he reached the call center. Either DB's phone could take incoming calls, or it couldn't.

And I did also say, in my above post, that it's possible DB tried to call Jersey for help that night, and the call didn't go through. Why would
DB try to call out on a phone that she knows is restricted? Because she's desparate!

 

[cityslick]

No. I'm still unsure of the extent the phones were "restricted", because Picerno said in the same breath during an interview a few weeks ago that the phones could take incoming calls, but Jeremy tried to call DB earlier in the evening to say he would be late, and he reached the call center. Either DB's phone could take incoming calls, or it couldn't.

And I did also say, in my above post, that it's possible DB tried to call Jersey for help that night, and the call didn't go through. Why would
DB try to call out on a phone that she knows is restricted? Because she's desparate!

Just to clear up (I know, it's been discussed ad nauseum), didn't DB have a phone that worked, the phone that was 'lent' to her from her father (in law?)? If that is the case and she knew that, why would she make a call on a phone that was 'restricted'?

 

[natsound]

Just to clear up (I know, it's been discussed ad nauseum), didn't DB have a phone that worked, the phone that was 'lent' to her from her father (in law?)? If that is the case and she knew that, why would she make a call on a phone that was 'restricted'?

There's a paradox here. If DB had a working phone, why would JI dial the phone that was restricted? (His call, according to the attorneys, went to the call center).

 

[Karmaa]

Just to clear up (I know, it's been discussed ad nauseum), didn't DB have a phone that worked, the phone that was 'lent' to her from her father (in law?)? If that is the case and she knew that, why would she make a call on a phone that was 'restricted'?

I think it is unknown if the borrowed phone worked or not. I thought it was likely that it did - that the father may have lent it so they had emergency coverage, but that is just a guess. I believe it was a pre-paid, so it could have had some leftover minutes, and I also think that the father had a new phone.

I couldn't begin to link (or even FIND) all of this info, but I am pretty sure that it all came from MSM sources or interviews. So, JMO ;

 

[In da Middle]

There's a paradox here. If DB had a working phone, why would JI dial the phone that was restricted? (His call, according to the attorneys, went to the call center).

Maybe he didn't know the number?

 

[natsound]

Maybe he didn't know the number?

Hmmm, that's possible, but I'd hope he would have taken the number down and put it in his work phone. It makes more sense, IMO.

Something is just not right with the phone calls and the restricted status of the phones. It's too confusing to be real, IMO.

 

[Karmaa]

No. I'm still unsure of the extent the phones were "restricted", because Picerno said in the same breath during an interview a few weeks ago that the phones could take incoming calls, but Jeremy tried to call DB earlier in the evening to say he would be late, and he reached the call center. Either DB's phone could take incoming calls, or it couldn't.

And I did also say, in my above post, that it's possible DB tried to call Jersey for help that night, and the call didn't go through. Why would
DB try to call out on a phone that she knows is restricted? Because she's desparate!

Or it could have taken incoming calls earlier in the day, but not later in the day? Or the lawyer may have been confused.

Either way, it doesn't make sense that JI's call TO DB would have gone to the call center, since he was calling presumably from his work number. Since the work phone is not related to the home phone, it would not route there if the service was down. Instead, JI would have gotten an "out of service" message. The only time they would route a call would be an OUTGOING call from one of the phones on the account, because the person calling IN to the phone is not likely to be an account holder.

It is entirely possible that JI tried to use his phone (not his work phone) earlier in the day and it went to the call center, and the lawyer confused the two, or something. Because what he SAID makes absolutely no sense at all.

Either way, we are all just guessing and trying to piece it all together, but I am pretty confident that LE has all of the records, knows all of the phones, all of the times each phone was attempted or used, and the completion status. I wish they were talking.

 

[Karmaa]

Hmmm, that's possible, but I'd hope he would have taken the number down and put it in his work phone. It makes more sense, IMO.

Something is just not right with the phone calls and the restricted status of the phones. It's too confusing to be real, IMO.

I think we are trying to do a jigsaw puzzle with only about 1/10 of the pieces. It is so hard to keep it all straight, and everyone interviewed offers different information, different times, different phone statuses....

I wish SOMEONE would talk and just say what the truth is. Even if it comes from the family, it would be nice to know about those phones, and not just the "lawyer dance" we have gotten so far.

 

[cityslick]

Hmmm, that's possible, but I'd hope he would have taken the number down and put it in his work phone. It makes more sense, IMO.

Something is just not right with the phone calls and the restricted status of the phones. It's too confusing to be real, IMO.

I'm still going off the working theory that JI did not know the phones were restricted when he made that call. I think it may be possible the 'restriction' happened at some point that day, but obviously DB became aware of this fact at some point since she told LE that they didn't work.

 

[natsound]

I'm still going off the working theory that JI did not know the phones were restricted when he made that call. I think it may be possible the 'restriction' happened at some point that day, but obviously DB became aware of this fact at some point since she told LE that they didn't work.

So JI didn't know the phones were restricted, and he also didn't know that DB had borrowed a phone from her dad? The man of the house wouldn't know how to reach his wife and children the first night he's working overnights? DB purposely didn't tell him? Why?

Or perhaps this was another innocent oversight? DB not telling JI how to reach her, and JI oblivious that there's an alternate phone number to call?

This phone confusion is just a little too convenient to occur on a night when the baby goes missing. Ya gotta call a spade a spade.

 

[Karmaa]

So JI didn't know the phones were restricted, and he also didn't know that DB had borrowed a phone from her dad? The man of the house wouldn't know how to reach his wife and children the first night he's working overnights? DB purposely didn't tell him? Why?

Or perhaps this was another innocent oversight? DB not telling JI how to reach her, and JI oblivious that there's an alternate phone number to call?

This phone confusion is just a little too convenient to occur on a night when the baby goes missing. Ya gotta call a spade a spade.

This phone confusion (not counting the specific calls) would mean absolutely nothing if Baby Lisa had not gone missing. Nothing about this sounds particular sinister. I would guess that on any given night, in KC, there are hundreds (maybe even thousands) of people who have had their phones turned off. Some may be oversights, and some may be that the subscriber just doesn't have the money. Some people may be aware their phone is restricted and other have no clue.

This is only significant because it happened on the same day that the baby was reported kidnapped, AND because the phones also went missing. It may or may not be a coincidence, but to believe that it's NOT a coincidence, it would be necessary to believe that DB or JI set out deliberately to kill or sell their baby, and timed it to the phone service.

Otherwise, it IS a coincidence, whether it helped or hurt the perpetrator.

 

[cityslick]

So JI didn't know the phones were restricted, and he also didn't know that DB had borrowed a phone from her dad? The man of the house wouldn't know how to reach his wife and children the first night he's working overnights? DB purposely didn't tell him? Why?

Or perhaps this was another innocent oversight? DB not telling JI how to reach her, and JI oblivious that there's an alternate phone number to call?

This phone confusion is just a little too convenient to occur on a night when the baby goes missing. Ya gotta call a spade a spade.

I agree somewhat with what Karmaa is saying, it's only convenient because of the rest of the events that happened that night. How many times would this situation happen on a normal occurence to anyone?

Perhaps he knew about DB borrowing the phone but he didn't know the number? Like I said, perhaps he was under assumption the phone worked, why would he need to know the number of the 'lended' phone?

The better question is if DB knew the phones were restricted (if they were) and when did she find out about that? Before or after JI left for work? If it was before, then I agree it makes no sense she wouldn't tell JI this fact.

 

[cindysue]

This phone confusion (not counting the specific calls) would mean absolutely nothing if Baby Lisa had not gone missing. Nothing about this sounds particular sinister. I would guess that on any given night, in KC, there are hundreds (maybe even thousands) of people who have had their phones turned off. Some may be oversights, and some may be that the subscriber just doesn't have the money. Some people may be aware their phone is restricted and other have no clue.

This is only significant because it happened on the same day that the baby was reported kidnapped, AND because the phones also went missing. It may or may not be a coincidence, but to believe that it's NOT a coincidence, it would be necessary to believe that DB or JI set out deliberately to kill or sell their baby, and timed it to the phone service.

Otherwise, it IS a coincidence, whether it helped or hurt the perpetrator.

IMO neither of them prob knew that the phones were turned off...to think that its hinky it happened on the night of the dissappearence would make it seem like the phone company was in on it, and thats not possible .

 

[natsound]

This phone confusion (not counting the specific calls) would mean absolutely nothing if Baby Lisa had not gone missing.

respectfully snipped

That is my point. I am not the only poster who believes that there are no coincidences in crimes such as this. LE feels the same way.

Guilty people have a reason to make excuses about everything under the sun.

 

[natsound]

How many times would this situation happen on a normal occurence to anyone?

respectfully snipped

It wouldn't!

OK, let's say for a minute that all of this phone confusion did happen on a night where someone sneaks in and steals the baby.

What would the parents do? What would they be doing now, several weeks out?

Obviously, someone really pulled the wool over their eyes, right?

They would have gone through the motions long ago, and while police may not have "ruled them out" as suspects, they would be on a different track if the parents were meeting with them every day and working as a team with them.

Now, take the phone confusion, on top of the fact that the parents and police aren't working as a team at this point.

Do we really want to keep making excuses for these parents?

(I keep lumping JI in with DB, but I'm really on the fence about him, leaning toward innocent).

 

[Donjeta]

I tend to think that the phones being restricted was a coincidence because I do not understand how it's an advantage to anybody that could be connected. What was convenient about it?

 

[natsound]

I tend to think that the phones being restricted was a coincidence because I do not understand how it's an advantage to anybody that could be connected. What was convenient about it?

But then on top of that, JI didn't know that:

a: the phones were restricted, or

b: that DB had her dad's phone in case of emergencies? Gosh, that would be hilarious if it wasn't tragic.