Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sarcasm noted, but no problem.
This is true...most of the time, it is a family member or somebody they know. There is hope though there will be no trial because nine times out of ten, there is no strange DNA at the scene the body is hid well or they got lucky and they walk. No need to worry.
OTOH, most innocent parents make sure they are cleared first. BTW, DB failed the poly...and hired a few attorneys to stop the bad Po Po from being mean to her any more.
I have considered other alternatives. It could be a family member but if it is, the parents are covering for them...so it comes back to them again.
.....as far as a stranger, I have stated very clearly many times how that is very unlikely, as far as I am concerned.
Why would an intruder undress a baby to take her from the house in the cold?
I don't think I would consider a 'sources say' kind of report a fact. ANY body could be a source good or bad. Just sayin....Samantha saw Lisa at 4:30pm
Samantha's daughter (4 yrs old) saw Lisa at 6:30pm.
No sightings after that.
We have these facts and these will be considered when looking at the timeline.
SBM
BBM
FWIW There is a foxnews report that says " 'sources close to the investigation' say that SB says" that she saw the baby in her at 4:30and she appeared fine and her daughter saw her at 6:30.
The 4:30 time for the sighting really bothers me. I cannot understand why SB would not have seen a living breathing baby AFTER that time if she indeed ate dinner there at 5;30 and stayed there with her 4 yr old until 10;30 pm. That really seems odd to me. It is a very small house. Was the baby 'out of the way' from 4:30 on? She heard no crying, no babbling at all that night? There were 3 kids running around playing in that house and that baby sat silently all night?
That is even before Dad left for work? That 4:30 sighting leaves the window open for him to have disposed of the baby. The sighting by a 4 yr old means nothing, imo. Anyone can convince a 4 yr od=ld of anything, so I give that sighting no credibility.
The 4:30 time for the sighting really bothers me. I cannot understand why SB would not have seen a living breathing baby AFTER that time if she indeed ate dinner there at 5;30 and stayed there with her 4 yr old until 10;30 pm. That really seems odd to me. It is a very small house. Was the baby 'out of the way' from 4:30 on? She heard no crying, no babbling at all that night? There were 3 kids running around playing in that house and that baby sat silently all night?
That is even before Dad left for work? That 4:30 sighting leaves the window open for him to have disposed of the baby. The sighting by a 4 yr old means nothing, imo. Anyone can convince a 4 yr od=ld of anything, so I give that sighting no credibility.
For the SODDI theorist, this intruder had to spend a heck of lot of time in the house before leaving. If the LE found Lisa's described clothing, like the ones described in the warrant, this lends credence to a preposterous storyline told by the parents....but I will consider what others have to say about the intruder.
Going with the people who believe that man walking was carrying Lisa...This means that either he removed the clothing or DB did. Since DB has no recollection of the evening, what is the consensus on who removed Lisa's clothes.
With in "Intruder" theory going strong here. We now have him/her turning on all the lights in the house EXCEPT in Lisa's room. He/she undressed lisa, walked into the kitchen, stole the phones and either called from Lisa's house or somewhere close by when left the premises. He/she didn't even think to put a blanket around the child...but he/she thought to make a call from one of the three phones and of course he/she picked the phone that didn't work. The call was made close to the Irwin residence perhaps even..from inside the residence.
Can anyone tell me why neither parent thought to call the one cell phone that was working after they called 911 if not before?
The neighbor said she saw a baby's bare arm and leg. DB said she put BL to bed in a tshirt and shorts. BL could still have been still wearing the tshirt and shorts when the neighbor saw the baby's arm and leg.
The tshirt in the warrant was not the tshirt DB described BL wearing.
Are you sure? Why would LE take it then?
DB described BL in purple shorts and white kittens tshirt. The warrant said purple shorts and tshirt with cartoon or Disney characters. Sorry I can't remember the exact description. Maybe someone has a link to the warrant. I'm assuming LE took them because they were close to what DB described.
DB described BL in purple shorts and white kittens tshirt. The warrant said purple shorts and tshirt with cartoon or Disney characters[/B] .Sorry I can't remember the exact description. Maybe someone has a link to the warrant. I'm assuming LE took them because they were close to what DB described.