‘Mother hen’ to media villain: The life of Debbie Bradley - Kansas City Star 11/5/11

[Abby Normal]

BEM: I have never once said I thought either of them murdered Lisa....because I don't think either of them did.

The baby is "automatically" SB's baby - whether he agrees amicably or not. Legally, she's his.

From what I've been reading he is the presumed father, and would be given preference over JI only *IF* he were taking part in the child's life and demonstrated a willingness to accept the child as his own. Which he hasn't done. In court, if they pursued it, paternity would be disestablished and granted to JI since he is playing the active role in her life. The court favors best interest of the child, and that is most often in favor of the father they know as their own.

It's under paternity disestablishment laws if you plan to google/confirm.

 

[jjenny]

From what I've been reading he is the presumed father, and would be given preference over JI only *IF* he were taking part in the child's life and demonstrated a willingness to accept the child as his own. Which he hasn't done. In court, if they pursued it, paternity would be disestablished and granted to JI since he is playing the active role in her life. The court favors best interest of the child, and that is most often in favor of the father they know as their own.

It's under paternity disestablishment laws if you plan to google/confirm.

If DB's legal husband hasn't seen his own son in years, it's highly unlikely he would have wanted custody of baby Lisa anyway.

 

[AngelWings444]

Police spokesman Young responded that the last time the couple consented to an “unrestricted” interview was Oct. 8.

“What we need from them, and what we are not getting, is for them to sit down with our detectives and get answers to the questions we need answered,” Young said.

AND THEN:

The couple also receives five or six calls a day from investigators, said Short, who estimated that Bradley and Irwin each have spent about 40 hours answering police questions since Lisa disappeared.

Young acknowledged that the parents have been helpful.

“They’ve done other things, but when I say we’re not getting full cooperation, I’m saying we’re not getting what we need,” Young said.

Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/20/3220223/baby-lisas-lawyers-say-police.html#ixzz1czvXBKfB

Sounds to me like LE want them back for individual interviews without legal counsel and since they won't agree to that (and I don't blame them) they are not co-operating.


eta: bbm

LE has not asked them to do interviews without legal counsel. I've read all the statements released by LE. I've read all the statements released by DB, JI and their counsel. Again, LE is asking them to answer follow up questions WITH counsel, but individual interviews. Nothing wrong with asking them to do this, but why won't DB and JI cooperate? At least attempt to go, even if they plead the 5th? Why won't they allow their children to be interviewed again? They agreed, then pulled the plug.

:deadhorse:

 

[Donjeta]

Police spokesman Young responded that the last time the couple consented to an “unrestricted” interview was Oct. 8.

“What we need from them, and what we are not getting, is for them to sit down with our detectives and get answers to the questions we need answered,” Young said.

AND THEN:

The couple also receives five or six calls a day from investigators, said Short, who estimated that Bradley and Irwin each have spent about 40 hours answering police questions since Lisa disappeared.

Young acknowledged that the parents have been helpful.

“They’ve done other things, but when I say we’re not getting full cooperation, I’m saying we’re not getting what we need,” Young said.

Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/20/3220223/baby-lisas-lawyers-say-police.html#ixzz1czvXBKfB

Sounds to me like LE want them back for individual interviews without legal counsel and since they won't agree to that (and I don't blame them) they are not co-operating.


eta: bbm

They already had legal counsel in the October 8th interview which LE are calling the last unrestricted so IMO having legal counsel is not the issue here.

 

[Whisperer]

ITA with you. The article may have been intended to shed a more positive light on DB, but I think it provided an excellent timeline for a very clear pattern of destructive behavior.

Obviously the loss of her mother was extremely traumatic at that young and impressionable age. From there, it seems something switched in her mind, and from that point on, it's a downward spiral. I mean before moving in with JI, she began sneaking out to party - no concern about her small child she was leaving behind without telling anyone AND taking someone else's vehicle without permission to do it.

I do not think its a stretch to think that this type of behavior has continued to progress since then. If you look at it like that, this new situation seems like a logical step in the equation. It makes sense to me - and this is only MHO.

Idk if she's a sociopath, but it would not surprise me if she were. Or maybe the trauma of losing her mother when she was younger created some other type of mental illness - which was only exacerbated by her increasing alcohol consumption, stress of daily life, money issues, etc. I feel that with the pattern of running away or avoiding every situation that was pointed out in the article, it's possible she reached a breaking point in her new life with JI. Perhaps she felt she had nowhere else to run to get away from the stress, but she HAD to create a change in the situation to make it more acceptable for her. Maybe she just couldn't deal with it all.

I am inclined think this is more than being an irresponsible parent who got drunk and rolled over/overdosed by accident/whatever theory for BL's disappearance. I can see that there are possibly some much deeper and complicated issues involved. Issues that could easily explain an intent IF and only if DB is in fact responsible for BL's disappearance.

This is all my own opinion, of course. Sorry to be rambling on like this! I haven't posted on this case until now, but I've followed it from the beginning and kept up with the threads. It all came out at once for me! Thanks for reading!

:clap:

 

[Whisperer]

I'm wary about this article-taking it a face value if you will-but i can see why le may have referred to DB as w trash, Sitting on the stoop, drinking wine while having a ciggy and talking with neighbors isn't a good picture to paint. Heck it's against the law here to drink in your front yard.

Where I'm at it's against the rules to even park in your own driveway! :thud:

 

[lauriej]

--i wouldn't be shocked at all if LE had asked the very questions/said the things that deborah's dad said they did in the article.

--LE IS allowed to lie and mislead suspects when interrogating them, to get them to break/gauge their reactions/get a confession....

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrogation"]Interrogation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
Interrogation techniques

Deception
Deception can form an important part of effective interrogation. In the United States, there is no law or regulation that forbids the interrogator from lying about the strength of their case, from making misleading statements or from implying that the interviewee has already been implicated in the crime by someone else.

Good Cop/Bad Cop
The 'bad cop' takes an aggressive, negative stance towards the subject, making blatant accusations, derogatory comments, threats, and in general creating antipathy between the subject and himself. This sets the stage for the 'good cop' to act sympathetically: appearing supportive, understanding, in general showing sympathy for the subject.

The good cop will also defend the subject from the bad cop. The subject may feel he can cooperate with the good cop out of trust or fear of the bad cop. He may then seek protection by and trust the good cop and provide the information the interrogators are seeking.

..in the interview with matt lauer, deborah said that "they understand and don't have hard feelings."

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/44813949/ ... o8ssd6Im0t
--Today Show--Oct.7th--

LAUER: Well talk to -- the -- let's back up an hour -- let's back up an hour or so. What was the -- how would you describe the demeanor of the police prior to you saying you reached your breaking point or your boiling point? Was it an aggressive questioning? Was it -- was there cooperation prior to that point? How were they treating you? How were you responding to them?

Mr. IRWIN: Yesterday, the gentleman that was interviewing me was very nice and once I expressed to him several times that I wanted to leave he went ahead and let me go. The other day was a little bit different story. But we just -- we just want to make sure that we tell everybody that we're, you know, we're still cooperating, we're still talking to the police. We're doing everything we can to try to find Lisa and bring her back home.

LAUER: Debbie ...

Ms. BRADLEY: Our number one focus is her...

LAUER: And, Debbie , what was -- what was the...

Ms. BRADLEY: ...above all else. No matter what, it's her.

LAUER: And I understand that. What was your experience with the police? What kind of questions were they asking you and what was the level of aggressiveness of those questions?

Ms. BRADLEY: They -- the same thing with Jeremy . They were -- they were really nice yesterday and -- but it wasn't like that the first time, and we understand that, we don't have any hard feelings. We're not -- we're not mad. We know that this is what they -- this is what they have to do, so we totally understand.

LAUER: But you say this is what they have to do. Do you feel that in some ways by making this statement publicly, calling you out in some ways publicly, they are trying to pit one of you against the other?

Ms. BRADLEY: Possibly.

Mr. IRWIN: But it doesn't matter to us.

Ms. BRADLEY: It doesn't -- it doesn't -- We don't -- we don't care -- we don't care what anybody says or thinks or, we don't care what they think. I mean, we -- our concern is to find -- is to find Lisa , to find our Lisa and bring her home because that's what we want and I don't care what we have to go through to get it.

LAUER: Let me ask you a couple of other direct questions. Have both of you taken lie detector tests, polygraphs, as part of this investigation?

Ms. BRADLEY: I have. I volunteered.

Mr. IRWIN: I have not.

LAUER: What were the results of that?

Ms. BRADLEY: They said that I failed. And I continue to say that's not possible because I have -- I don't know where she's at. This -- I did not do this and if...

LAUER: Did they say specifically what question you...

Ms. BRADLEY: Some of the stuff they said was...

LAUER: Did they say specifically what question you may have failed on?

Ms. BRADLEY: I don't remember which one it was, but they just kept saying I failed, I failed and I said that's not possible, and, I mean, what do -- what do you say when someone tells you -- when someone tells you that and you know that you didn't do anything.

 

[flipflop]

--i wouldn't be shocked at all if LE had asked the very questions/said the things that deborah's dad said they did in the article.

--LE IS allowed to lie and mislead suspects when interrogating them, to get them to break/gauge their reactions/get a confession....

Interrogation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Interrogation techniques

Deception
Deception can form an important part of effective interrogation. In the United States, there is no law or regulation that forbids the interrogator from lying about the strength of their case, from making misleading statements or from implying that the interviewee has already been implicated in the crime by someone else.

Good Cop/Bad Cop
The 'bad cop' takes an aggressive, negative stance towards the subject, making blatant accusations, derogatory comments, threats, and in general creating antipathy between the subject and himself. This sets the stage for the 'good cop' to act sympathetically: appearing supportive, understanding, in general showing sympathy for the subject.

The good cop will also defend the subject from the bad cop. The subject may feel he can cooperate with the good cop out of trust or fear of the bad cop. He may then seek protection by and trust the good cop and provide the information the interrogators are seeking.

..in the interview with matt lauer, deborah said that "they understand and don't have hard feelings."

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/44813949/ ... o8ssd6Im0t
--Today Show--Oct.7th--

LAUER: Well talk to -- the -- let's back up an hour -- let's back up an hour or so. What was the -- how would you describe the demeanor of the police prior to you saying you reached your breaking point or your boiling point? Was it an aggressive questioning? Was it -- was there cooperation prior to that point? How were they treating you? How were you responding to them?

Mr. IRWIN: Yesterday, the gentleman that was interviewing me was very nice and once I expressed to him several times that I wanted to leave he went ahead and let me go. The other day was a little bit different story. But we just -- we just want to make sure that we tell everybody that we're, you know, we're still cooperating, we're still talking to the police. We're doing everything we can to try to find Lisa and bring her back home.

LAUER: Debbie ...

Ms. BRADLEY: Our number one focus is her...

LAUER: And, Debbie , what was -- what was the...

Ms. BRADLEY: ...above all else. No matter what, it's her.

LAUER: And I understand that. What was your experience with the police? What kind of questions were they asking you and what was the level of aggressiveness of those questions?

Ms. BRADLEY: They -- the same thing with Jeremy . They were -- they were really nice yesterday and -- but it wasn't like that the first time, and we understand that, we don't have any hard feelings. We're not -- we're not mad. We know that this is what they -- this is what they have to do, so we totally understand.

LAUER: But you say this is what they have to do. Do you feel that in some ways by making this statement publicly, calling you out in some ways publicly, they are trying to pit one of you against the other?

Ms. BRADLEY: Possibly.

Mr. IRWIN: But it doesn't matter to us.

Ms. BRADLEY: It doesn't -- it doesn't -- We don't -- we don't care -- we don't care what anybody says or thinks or, we don't care what they think. I mean, we -- our concern is to find -- is to find Lisa , to find our Lisa and bring her home because that's what we want and I don't care what we have to go through to get it.

LAUER: Let me ask you a couple of other direct questions. Have both of you taken lie detector tests, polygraphs, as part of this investigation?

Ms. BRADLEY: I have. I volunteered.

Mr. IRWIN: I have not.

LAUER: What were the results of that?

Ms. BRADLEY: They said that I failed. And I continue to say that's not possible because I have -- I don't know where she's at. This -- I did not do this and if...

LAUER: Did they say specifically what question you...

Ms. BRADLEY: Some of the stuff they said was...

LAUER: Did they say specifically what question you may have failed on?

Ms. BRADLEY: I don't remember which one it was, but they just kept saying I failed, I failed and I said that's not possible, and, I mean, what do -- what do you say when someone tells you -- when someone tells you that and you know that you didn't do anything.

UGH...so why have DB and JI put up the the wall between LE and themselvesI, they both stated themselves that they understand why LE is accusing them and saying certain things...so why not cooperate, get through this first part of the investigation to clear their names. DB stated a few times that she understands that it is LE's job to do this, and said that "she doesnt care what she has to do through", so the only reason I can see as to why she is not cooperating is GUILT! JMO

I keep re-reading this transcript...DB is looking even more guilty. WIth her understanding of LE tactics, I am baffled why she is not cooperating.

And she doesn't remember which question she failed on the poly....come on....how could you NOT remember somthing like that,
"I don't remember" her answer to all.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

:twocents: Here's my :twocents:

If it weren't for the Uncle's "negative comments," IMO, I would say that Bill Stanton was behind this "fluff piece" because it definitely tries to portray DB as a "caring mother" ...


snipped from : http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/0...lain.html#.TrYDcX3KlkE.facebook#ixzz1d1GISGME

The coverage has been anything but favorable to his daughter Debbie. The family’s attorneys will no longer allow interviews with her or Irwin.


Helloooooo ... DB "herself" -- and from her own mouth --

- Has changed her story and timeline so many times I can't count...
- Admits to "drinking" to the point of "blacking out" -- because she wanted "GROWN UP TIME"...
- Is NOT cooperating with LE to find Baby Lisa...
- Has retained "criminal defense attorneys" ...

and the list goes on and on ...



snipped from link above:

Debbie talked of getting her G.E.D. and insisted that her youngest brother, Phillip, graduate. But she didn’t go back to school. Instead, she started leaving the house at night, taking Hazel’s truck without asking when the family slept.

“I never knew for sure where she went or what she did,” Hazel said. They had words. Debbie was again asked to leave.

BBM: So DB does drive ... HB does not know where DB went, but IMO, that only leaves a few options since it was at night ... :waitasec:



snipped from link above:

Her uncle, Johnny Chivalette III, called her twice from Delaware, the second time to ask her to confess.

“She hung up on me. But you have to understand. Our family is so dysfunctional,” he said. He also wrote her a letter calling for her to give up. He sent a copy to The Star.


BBM: Interesting comments from the uncle ... and I wish the Star would print the letter ...



:waitasec: I am still wondering if BS or DB was behind this article ... WHY give DB and JI "coverage" in the "local media' when DB and JI have "shunned" the local media ?

:waitasec:

MOO ...

 

[NancyA]

Originally Posted by Mountain_Kat View Post
Well, the wording was more like "now I'm back on the fence" or "now I'm off the fence again".

But if you ask me to go find those posts to prove it to you, I'm gonna throw this tomato right at your head, Nancy.

Throw away I deserve it - I had the perfect opportunity to demand "link" right there and missed it....drat and double drat. :doh:

It's not all bad though because I was one of the ones who said the article was helping keep me ON the fence and you missed it. Oh the iorny. :wink:

 

[NancyA]

:twocents: Here's my :twocents:

If it weren't for the Uncle's "negative comments," IMO, I would say that Bill Stanton was behind this "fluff piece" because it definitely tries to portray DB as a "caring mother" ...


snipped from : http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/0...lain.html#.TrYDcX3KlkE.facebook#ixzz1d1GISGME

The coverage has been anything but favorable to his daughter Debbie. The family’s attorneys will no longer allow interviews with her or Irwin.


Helloooooo ... DB "herself" -- and from her own mouth --

- Has changed her story and timeline so many times I can't count...
- Admits to "drinking" to the point of "blacking out" -- because she wanted "GROWN UP TIME"...
- Is NOT cooperating with LE to find Baby Lisa...
- Has retained "criminal defense attorneys" ...

and the list goes on and on ...



snipped from link above:

Debbie talked of getting her G.E.D. and insisted that her youngest brother, Phillip, graduate. But she didn’t go back to school. Instead, she started leaving the house at night, taking Hazel’s truck without asking when the family slept.

“I never knew for sure where she went or what she did,” Hazel said. They had words. Debbie was again asked to leave.

BBM: So DB does drive ... HB does not know where DB went, but IMO, that only leaves a few options since it was at night ... :waitasec:



snipped from link above:

Her uncle, Johnny Chivalette III, called her twice from Delaware, the second time to ask her to confess.

“She hung up on me. But you have to understand. Our family is so dysfunctional,” he said. He also wrote her a letter calling for her to give up. He sent a copy to The Star.


BBM: Interesting comments from the uncle ... and I wish the Star would print the letter ...



:waitasec: I am still wondering if BS or DB was behind this article ... WHY give DB and JI "coverage" in the "local media' when DB and JI have "shunned" the local media ?

:waitasec:

MOO ...

Well, my inner cynic says basic economics - as in circulation and ratings - would dictate that local media would be foolish to not cover anything related to what must be one of the biggest local new stories they have right now...and maybe they think emphasising the positive aspects in the article might encourage the parents to trust them and let them 'in' a little more. JMO.

 

[Suthrnqt]

“I miss Debbie. She was a good mother … There’s just no way she could have done this, and she’s just not smart enough — not that she’s dumb — but she couldn’t cover up something like this so well.”

This has been my opinion all along-- DB isn't smart enough to cover up something like this for such a long period of time.

BBM

I so agree!! She just doesn't stike me as 'smart enough' to do this. Maybe I am reading DB all wrong, but I don't think she did anything to Baby Lisa. I think this was a crime of opportunity. The kidnapper watched DB get drunk and then waited for her to pass out. I haven't decided if it was a nutjob, who needed a baby to make their life complete or someone who thought they were giving Baby Lisa a better life. As always, this is just speculation on my part.

JMHO, MOO, etc.

 

[In da Middle]

UGH...so why have DB and JI put up the the wall between LE and themselvesI, they both stated themselves that they understand why LE is accusing them and saying certain things...so why not cooperate, get through this first part of the investigation to clear their names. DB stated a few times that she understands that it is LE's job to do this, and said that "she doesnt care what she has to do through", so the only reason I can see as to why she is not cooperating is GUILT! JMO

I keep re-reading this transcript...DB is looking even more guilty. WIth her understanding of LE tactics, I am baffled why she is not cooperating.

And she doesn't remember which question she failed on the poly....come on....how could you NOT remember somthing like that,
"I don't remember" her answer to all.

Their lack of cooperation seems to directly coincide with their "help" coming to town.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Maybe it's just me, but I don't have a good feeling about the grandparents searching. Experts advise families to not search. Obviously, to spare them the heartbreak of finding something disturbing, but also, to preserve the integrity of potential important evidence.

Plus, it's just too convenient (to me), that BS wanted this area searched...and lo and behold, something is found. He called attention on camera, didn't just do this behind the scenes. Smells very fishy to me. JMO.

BBM: I agree ... and remember when BS was "adamant" about that area being searched ...

And ... "what IF something is found" ? If I were LE I would absolutely consider that that "something" could have been PLANTED by a family member !

MOO MOO and MOO !

 

[Tuffy]

It's my interpretation from statements released by LE, the parents aren't answering the questions LE would like them to answer. Furthermore, they haven't been "cooperating" for some time (JMO). I believe since JT rolled into town (JMO)? That's just my interpretation, you and others may have yours, and then someday, we may know the truth. :waitasec:

I actually took uncooperative to mean both. The parents won't be interviewed separately, and they aren't answering the questions that LE would like answered.

 

[OneLostGrl]

This caught my eye. According to this, Hazel must be a stepmother to Sean? Oh the tangled webs we weave.

Why is being a step mother a tangled web?

 

[OneLostGrl]

:sick: the imo constant over-usage, as always with the term "Sociopath".

 

[4Jacy]

A crowd of volunteers, which included Lisa’s grandparents, searched the woods near 53rd Street and Randolph Road on Saturday

http://global.christianpost.com/new...lunteers-search-nearby-woods-for-clues-60703/

Good to hear that some family members are working this case.

Better late then never...:waitasec:

 

[natsound]

I can't imagine that the sheriff's office could get brought into this case. And I'm not sure how the FBI could be lead investigative agency. I think the only recourse would be to ask for the Missouri Attorney General's Office to step in and become lead investigative agency. I do recall that Joe Tacopina told GMA (and perhaps People?) that he wanted a new set of fair detectives but I took that to mean within KCPD. This is being handled by the crimes against children detectives. In theory, this could be turned over to the KCPD Murder Squad. There are also regional task forces but those are typically for smaller police agencies that don't have the resources that KCPD has. I am not saying this could or should happen. Just outlining the possibilities. I don't think sheriff's office would be one in this case.

I don't live in MO so I don't know how it works there, but why couldn't the SO do it? Our SO can go right into the city and investigate matters... partly to expose how the city PD lets certain things fall to the wayside. I'm not suggesting the KCPD is letting things fall to the wayside... but if the parents need another law enforcment agency, there are several other options that I'm sure would lend them an ear and at the very least.

 

[natsound]

ITA with you. The article may have been intended to shed a more positive light on DB, but I think it provided an excellent timeline for a very clear pattern of destructive behavior.

respectfully snipped

My guess is that the journalist who wrote the article is not intending to shed a more positive or more negative light on DB. IMO, the journalist is giving readers what they want... which is background on DB. The interview subjects, of course, had their own motives.