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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't know that people would necessarily want to be involved in a criminal investigation unless police come a knocking, they might not volunteer.

WebSleuths is making me feel trashy tonight, but I agree. If the couple of people were someone she was having an affair with and then someone with a criminal record and underage drinkers I can see why they wouldn't be pounding down the police doors to talk. Though, it does seem like it would have come out by now. Maybe it has-I do feel like LE is holding some cards we don't know about.
 
It sounds like they were preparing for a party. Nobody buys paper plates and napkins to have an illicit, one on one, get together with another man.

Unless it's a romantic little Pic Nic?!?
 
I don't know that people would necessarily want to be involved in a criminal investigation unless police come a knocking, they might not volunteer.

Then again, if they thought it through, to fail to come forward implies a sense of guilt on their part. Just look at what withholding the "itty bitty" wine-purchasing trip "gap" in DB's story has done to HER credibility. Besides, knowing human peoples and their habits, I've found that it's mighty hard for folks to have some knowledge of situations like this one and not tell someone...who tells someone else...who tells LE.
 
Question-Is it confirmed that LE has interviewed the children? I have read that it is VERY problematic to do so and sometimes even when the kids might know stuff they are not allowed to do it. Have they in this case?
 
Why didn't LE clear this up when asked about the mystery guy and wine buying story?

Why do they want this cloud hanging over the parents head?
 
Couldn't the paper plates and napkins been for the kids watching the video ie potato chips etc and the wine have been for the adult/s?
 
If there'd been a get-together attended by 3-4(+) people, I imagine someone in attendance would have come forward by now.

I wonder if somebody did?

But, I think it's more likely Debbi left the house and got in shortly before Jeremy arrived home. JMO.

If the 2:30 a.m. call/text really exists, it could explain a few things.

So many possible scenarios at this point. Some of them perfectly innocent. It just doesn't feel like she told LE about it and that's what makes me suspicious that she was hiding some activity. MOO...
 
WebSleuths is making me feel trashy tonight, but I agree. If the couple of people were someone she was having an affair with and then someone with a criminal record and underage drinkers I can see why they wouldn't be pounding down the police doors to talk. Though, it does seem like it would have come out by now. Maybe it has-I do feel like LE is holding some cards we don't know about.

RBBM

WebSleuths should NEVER make you, or anyone who reads or posts here, feel trashy.

If you see posts that are violating TOS, alert on them.

If you see a post that you would not want a young family member of a victim to come upon ten years from now, alert on it.

And again and as always, :tyou: for the amazing sleuthing that you do.
 
I am not sure the homeless man and the unidentified man are one in the same. I also wonder if the some of the neighbors had already told LE that there were several people over there.

In the link above, of Dr. Jeanine's interview. She made it sound like she went to check the baby at 10:30 and then went to sleep. I don't believe that anymore.

Maybe the kids were not being watched and going in and out of the windows. There was a table there that someone pointed out earlier, maybe that's how the screen got left open and bent in.

Passing things--including Lisa--through the window in the computer room while boys were at the other end of the house watching a movie with friends would be easy. I bet the kitten also was a distraction to keep the kids occupied.

JMO
 
LE not clearing this up really makes me think that someone is a suspect. The mother or the wine guy or the dad.

This is as good as naming a suspect. There is no reason for them not have cleared it up if it was innocent. You want to clear things up like this so the public does not get the wrong idea.
 
If there'd been a get-together attended by 3-4(+) people, I imagine someone in attendance would have come forward by now.

Listen to Debbie's own words here ... [ame]http://video.foxnews.com/v/1208764392001/exclusive-parents-of-missing-baby-lisa-speak-out[/ame]

DB says she and her neighbor were out front talking. Kids were in the bedroom watching a movie. Doesn't sound like a neighborhood get together.
 
Dad said "cheating husbands" right?

Say mom had an affair w/a married man whose wife is unable to have kids. Maybe mom & lover do their thing then mom heads home intoxicated. Lover shows up or drops mom off, either way and grabs Lisa. Uhhh......my brain doesn't get me any further than this.
 
It sounds like they were preparing for a party. Nobody buys paper plates and napkins to have an illicit, one on one, get together with another man.

Well, she had a neighbor friend over, along with kids to watch a kid-vid, right?

So, who bought the pizza to go on the paper plates? Do we have a receipt for that, or was it delivered?

These are the details we really want to know, along with the testimony of anyone who was there that night. LE isn't being very helpful to us, unfortunately.

(a bit of sarcasm, which might be caused by frustration)
 
Dad said "cheating husbands" right?

Say mom had an affair w/a married man whose wife is unable to have kids. Maybe mom & lover do their thing then mom heads home intoxicated. Lover shows up or drops mom off, either way and grabs Lisa. Uhhh......my brain doesn't get me any further than this.

BBM
No dad said "people who are cheating on their husband" implying a female IMO.
 
Is it me or did we just learn on JJP about the neighbor coming over with her child etc.
 
Is it interesting to anybody that the very first time her boyfriend has to work overnight, she decides to party??? Like I said a few nights ago, "When the cats away the mice will play."

:rocker:

BBM: Yes, I remember your post ! After I read your post, my "radar" shot up !

And I do find it "interesting" that the very first time JI has to work overnight, there is a "party" ... and the window is open and the door is unlocked ... and Baby Lisa is MISSING !

IMO ... both Baby Lisa's parents have come across as "deceptive" -- as if they are hiding something.

MOO ...
 
LE not clearing this up really makes me think that someone is a suspect. The mother or the wine guy or the dad.

This is as good as naming a suspect. There is no reason for them not have cleared it up if it was innocent. You want to clear things up like this so the public does not get the wrong idea.

My bet is on mother+wine guy. And if Jeremy was trying to reach her and she wasn't answering, it certainly explains the cell phones "disappearing."
She got Lisa out of there because she wanted to make it more difficult for Jeremy to get custody.

JMO
 
I really don't think a woman with three kids who doesn't work is going to go around buying boxes of wine for homeless men.

Maybe he did some work for her? I've bought hamburgers for homeless people...they say they are hungry, I'll feed them. I'd buy them a box of wine for an odd job, if that's what they wanted.

But that doesn't explain why DB didn't mention this guy, and, come on, she obviously didn't or LE would have been looking for him. They said the teenager had been at the house that day - but teenagers aren't into wine, at least none of the ones I've ever known.

I keep a box of black box around for my every day glass....good stuff for steak dinner. Just sayin'
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
71
Guests online
177
Total visitors
248

Forum statistics

Threads
608,901
Messages
18,247,459
Members
234,495
Latest member
Indy786
Back
Top