The surveillance video-**identified** man and the box of wine

[Pensfan]

If this guy wasn't underage, would there be any reason why he would need Deborah to buy his box of wine while he was standing beside her?

 

[mrye4709]

I pray this is true, but could be just for show/alibi also. Like my baby is still alive........see I bought her favorite stuff,

Not sure someone would be smart enough to think of that and then push the screen IN and claim all the lights were on. :waitasec:

 

[uvamerica]

Why did the police release this video?

Why did the police not release the name of the person?

Don't know why it was released , but I'm hoping if they released this video, maybe they'll release the 911 call, don't know why they are holding back releasing it, I for 1 would like to hear it. :leaf2:

BTW, none of this, this weekend :slapfight: :floorlaugh:

 

[marge_rita]

Why feed the baby if you're going to do something to the baby? It makes no sense that she would buy babyfood if she planned something.

Unless, she planned a hoax.

But after a week, I'd think the hoax would be up.

I'm not completely backtracking on my feelings about DB, but the baby food/wipes purchase is causing me to reconsider.

I wish we knew more! I think we're all spoiled by how much discovery we were able to see in the Anthony case.

I'm doing this again :fence:. finding out today that D bought baby food and wipes along with the wine made me rethink things. I don't know if a mom getting ready to harm or give her child away would buy wipes and food.

imo
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/12/justice/missouri-missing-girl/index.htm

Deborah Bradley appeared calm and joyful just hours before her baby daughter was reported missing, according to a supermarket clerk who sold her baby wipes, baby food and boxed wine.

 

[angeleleven]

JVM of Issues is discussing Baby Lisa's case now.

 

[marge_rita]

This is wine in a box for pete's sake...you think these people care about the subleties of temperature's effect on the taste of wine? :floorlaugh:

:great: good one!

 

[mrye4709]

Why in the world would a store do that? Only thing I can think of is LE gave their ok to it. Stores do not want to be on the wrong side of LE.

IMO, LE let it be released to put more pressure on mom.

 

[shorty42404]

Who is the woman in the video? When DB & man are in line, she seems like she is with them too because she's standing close to DB.

N/M, sorry, it's someone who works there.

 

[matou]

Why in the world would a store do that? Only thing I can think of is LE gave their ok to it. Stores do not want to be on the wrong side of LE.

Could it be to see how the husband reacts to seeing the video?

 

[cj1132]

Ok.. I can now see going frame for frame that in the cam view as their leaving the register and mom Is actually out of the frame it appears as tho male actually does grab handles of a light plastic grocery bag.. That upon their exiting the store that bag Is out of the frame of the cam..

I MUST ADD THAT WHATEVER IS THE CONTENTS OF THAT LIGHT, PLASTIC GROCERY BAG THE MALE SEEMS TO GRAB THE HANDLES OF IS OF EXTREME LIGHT WEIGHT IMO!! EXTREMELY SMALL AND LIGHT WEIGHT!! IMOO there Is no way that the lightweight plastic bag the male appears to grab, has diapers, wipes, and baby food all inside of it!! No way in he!!.. Jmo, tho!

I wouldn't imagine a small box of baby wipes would be that heavy. It doesn't say how much baby food. Does all baby food come in jars? I haven't bought it for more years than I care to admit. All of the grocery stores in my area, scan the products and the items bought are listed on the receipt. Is this done at that grocery store?

 

[Mountain_Kat]

If this guy wasn't underage, would there be any reason why he would need Deborah to buy his box of wine while he was standing beside her?

Only thing I can think of is if he was obviously impaired and thought the clerk might refuse the sale. But that's obviously not the case, as he's clearly not intoxicated to the point where a clerk would refuse the sale.

And truly, I wouldn't even assume DB was buying the wine for him, if it didn't look to me like she handed him the change. But then, maybe she was giving him the change to help towards gas or something. My gut feeling is that the wine was for her, not him, and whatever he bought was what was in the lighter bag which he picked up.

JMO

 

[SmoothOperator]

Quote:
Originally Posted by natsound
We're hearing that PD did not release the video.. the store did. Strange to me that police did not "take" it from the store for evidence. I guess they just made a copy of it.

If you take what LE's statement was about said video.. IMO it makes perfect sense.. LE stated there Is nothing of any evidentiary value contained in this video (not direct quote but same sentiment meaning the video doesn't play a role in the disappearance of Lisa).. IMO meaning that, as I stated yesterday that I did NOT find LE's having visited the store and reviewed their surveillance video was indicative of LE believing it to be a "lead" or evidence in the case, NOR WAS IT INDICATIVE THAT DEB HAD LIED OR HIDDEN THESE GROCERY STORE VISIT TO LE IN HER TIMELINE OF THAT DAY/NIGHT's events..

Much different IMO Is that it is SOP for LE to go to any length necessary to confirm/deny a witness/SUSPECT's alibi or timeline in question.. That of course LE would go to the store to either confirm/deny Deb's claim of being at the grocery store at such and such time.. I would be highly questioning the integrity of any case that LE did NOT verify a main player in the case's timeline/alibi.. And instead were just taking a witness/SUSPECT's "word" for it as to what their alibi/timeline of hours in question were.. LE taking one's "word" for it would NOT BE SOP IMO.. but their going to the store, speaking with employees(especially one's working during time in question), and most importantly of course one of the best pieces of evidence there is, to view the actual video of that specific time, if still available from the specific store..<-- this being SOP IMOO!

So, given what LE has stated about the video of Deb and male at grocery being NOTJING of evidentiary value in the disappearance of Lisa.. And IMO their viewing it being NITHING MORE THAN SOP OF confirm/deny the mom's timeline.. With that being openly stated by LE it makes perfect sense of why the store released the video.. IT IS NOT EVIDENCE, it is not a piece of court subpoenaed evidence to be used in a court proceeding, IT HAS ALREADY SERVED IT'S PURPOSE TO LE TO CONFIRM/DENY A PERSON's timeline.. and is nothing more than the store's property to do with it as they so feel fitting.:

IMO they(the owners of the vid, the store) likely released it due to media/public interest..jmo, tho!!

 

[tlcya]

I'm trying to catch up myself. Why did they ask the clerk about the baby? The baby wasn't with her?

What relevance does this trip have to do with others she had in the past with the children? They're asking a store clerk about her demeanour from previous store visits?:waitasec:

Probably to try and gauge how she interacted with the kids on previous visits. It seems as if this was her regular choice of store and the impression given by the article is that the clerk was familiar with her and the children from those previous visits. All I can figure is they were trying to ascertain if she was one of those screaming, child whoopin mothers we've all encountered at one time or another or if she seemed overwhelmed by the children. Would go towards the impression of what sort of mother she was in their eyes I imagine.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

If you take what LE's statement was about said video.. IMO it makes perfect sense.. LE stated there Is nothing of any evidentiary value contained in this video (not direct quote but same sentiment meaning the video doesn't play a role in the disappearance of Lisa).. IMO meaning that, as I stated yesterday that I did NOT find LE's having visited the store and reviewed their surveillance video was indicative of LE believing it to be a "lead" or evidence in the case, NOR WAS IT INDICATIVE THAT DEB HAD LIED OR HIDDEN THESE GROCERY STORE VISIT TO LE IN HER TIMELINE OF THAT DAY/NIGHT's events..

Much different IMO Is that it is SOP for LE to go to any length necessary to confirm/deny a witness/SUSPECT's alibi or timeline in question.. That of course LE would go to the store to either confirm/deny Deb's claim of being at the grocery store at such and such time.. I would be highly questioning the integrity of any case that LE did NOT verify a main player in the case's timeline/alibi.. And instead were just taking a witness/SUSPECT's "word" for it as to what their alibi/timeline of hours in question were.. LE taking one's "word" for it would NOT BE SOP IMO.. but their going to the store, speaking with employees(especially one's working during time in question), and most importantly of course one of the best pieces of evidence there is, to view the actual video of that specific time, if still available from the specific store..<-- this being SOP IMOO!

So, given what LE has stated about the video of Deb and male at grocery being NOTJING of evidentiary value in the disappearance of Lisa.. And IMO their viewing it being NITHING MORE THAN SOP OF confirm/deny the mom's timeline.. With that being openly stated by LE it makes perfect sense of why the store released the video.. IT IS NOT EVIDENCE, it is not a piece of court subpoenaed evidence to be used in a court proceeding, IT HAS ALREADY SERVED IT'S PURPOSE TO LE TO CONFIRM/DENY A PERSON's timeline.. and is nothing more than the store's property to do with it as they so feel fitting.:

IMO they(the owners of the vid, the store) likely released it due to media/public interest..jmo, tho!!

The ONLY way I wouldn't consider that video of evidentiary value is if I saw the box of wine in the mother's home and it was obvious she hadn't guzzled the entire box while home with a sick baby. But maybe that's exactly what LE did find...who can say for sure?

 

[Dr.Fessel]

Don't know why it was released , but I'm hoping if they released this video, maybe they'll release the 911 call, don't know why they are holding back releasing it, I for 1 would like to hear it. :leaf2:

BTW, none of this, this weekend :slapfight: :floorlaugh:

Oh don't worry about that! I have resigned to the fact she is mom's favorite and the Princess of the family.:great:

 

[Wise Old Owl]

JVM on HLN just had a reporter on that interviewed the store clerk. She didn't say much - just that she had seen mom and the "wine guy" and dad together before and that they must all know each other. She also said she always asks mom how the kids are and that whenever they were in the store everything seemed like a "normal" family.

 

[grandmaj]

How do we know the store released the vid and not LE? Can someone help me with a link. I have been out of pocket for several hours.

 

[Lera213]

How do we know the store released the vid and not LE? Can someone help me with a link. I have been out of pocket for several hours.

Grandmaj,

I don't think anyone knows but I would venture to guess the bar owner made some money off of the deal.

OT: I cannot read your post without hearing your voice. So cute

 

[QueenD]

On Inside Edition (sorry I can't watch no more of the Jackson trial on JVM)

They had a little bit on this. Showed the video and ask who is the guy with baby Mom then showed another clip of who they think the guy may be. It was at a vigil? maybe. He was standing next to another girl who also looked young.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

This is the closest I could get:

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...56C8EE8638486D1FE2C156C8E&first=0&FORM=LKVR20

Now I have seen it all. LOL LOL LOL:great: