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

[ExpectingUnicorns]

I don't know if it's true or not, but lets just throw a wild hypothetical out there. What if what DB/JI/Family are saying about how they were initially interrogated was true. All the bad stuff that is alleged being said by LE, etc.

Would you want to go through that again? It's a hypothetical, just curious about what you would do if all of that really was true?

cityslick, this is not a hypothetical for me. Several years ago my family and I experienced some of those techniques from LE. False accusations, twisting of facts and intimidation in more than a couple of sessions. But, since we were all being truthful, those methods only helped to reinforce our desire for the truth to be known and prove our honesty and move the case along to a successful conclusion. It was painful and difficult but not as difficult as the original crime itself. I am thankful it is behind us now but I would certainly go through it all over again to expose the crime and criminal.

Because of our experience, I have to say I stand with Marc Klaas when he says, "Defense attorneys argue that the police cannot be trusted. However, the majority of law enforcement officers are dedicated preserving the peace, protecting the innocent, and finding the truth. The best way to assist them in finding the truth is to cooperate, clear yourself, and allow them to explore other avenues of investigation." And he further states, "When Polly disappeared, I did not understand my rights. I thought I had to talk to the police. I now know better, but it would not have made any difference. I reacted as do most innocent victim family members. I walked into the police station ready to turn in family members if necessary to bring Polly home." (http://www.klaaskids.org/1997/Summer 1997.pdf)

I wish Baby Lisa's parents were honest and innocent enough that they had nothing to fear from LE's questions but it doesn't appear, to me, that even they feel they are.

 

[natsound]

cityslick, this is not a hypothetical for me. Several years ago my family and I experienced some of those techniques from LE. False accusations, twisting of facts and intimidation in more than a couple of sessions. But, since we were all being truthful, those methods only helped to reinforce our desire for the truth to be known and prove our honesty and move the case along to a successful conclusion. It was painful and difficult but not as difficult as the original crime itself. I am thankful it is behind us now but I would certainly go through it all over again to expose the crime and criminal.

Because of our experience, I have to say I stand with Marc Klaas when he says, "Defense attorneys argue that the police cannot be trusted. However, the majority of law enforcement officers are dedicated preserving the peace, protecting the innocent, and finding the truth. The best way to assist them in finding the truth is to cooperate, clear yourself, and allow them to explore other avenues of investigation." And he further states, "When Polly disappeared, I did not understand my rights. I thought I had to talk to the police. I now know better, but it would not have made any difference. I reacted as do most innocent victim family members. I walked into the police station ready to turn in family members if necessary to bring Polly home." (http://www.klaaskids.org/1997/Summer 1997.pdf)

I wish Baby Lisa's parents were honest and innocent enough that they had nothing to fear from LE's questions but it doesn't appear, to me, that even they feel they are.

:skip: :skip: :skip:
Thank you, EU! This testimony was sorely needed. I've never been through it, but this is what I believe in my heart. Were PD cool after a while... did they finally realize that everyone was innocent, and did they explain that this is what they have to do to figure out if they need to look close to home or not?

 

[curvecuti]

That's exactly right. To be honest, LE had their chance to get a confession from them (a chance that they would never have had, had it been me!), so if they didn't get it then, they blew it. That brings up the question WHY didn't they get it then? How could these people not have cracked in 11 hours of what they claim was pretty intense techniques, designed to get them to confess?

The only logical answer is: they aren't guilty.

I spent this afternoon looking through some CJ textbooks about interrogation/interview techniques. If DB and JI are lying about what happened in their interviews, they are pretty good, because those are exactly the types of things that are in the book. (Can't link, of course, but I'm sure there are websites which talk about it.)

I don't blame LE. (Neither do DB and JI, according to them). LE has a job to do, and it's not always pretty. But these people do not have to subject themselves to it. It's their constitutional right, and no indication of guilt or innocence, IMO.

I don't know what university you got this textbook from, but at the one I work at, nothing like that is used. BLET students are taught interrogation by in service detectives. I have NEVER seen any of them tell the students to call anyone "white trash" or anything derogatory. Yes, they antagonize suspects and many times this does lead to confessions or to lawyers. Anyone that has ever followed a missing child case knows that the parents will come under suspicion if a suspect is not found rather quickly. Even DB admitted she knew that.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

:skip: :skip: :skip:
Thank you, EU! This testimony was sorely needed. I've never been through it, but this is what I believe in my heart. Were PD cool after a while... did they finally realize that everyone was innocent, and did they explain that this is what they have to do to figure out if they need to look close to home or not?

No; they never explained nor apologized. I think we all just knew that was a part of how they had to go about their business. We never did really warm up to any of them, though, even afterwards. The entire case was extremely complicated and lengthy. We ended up having to give telephonic testimony for a congressional committee about the entire investigation.

(I hope I haven't misled anyone ~ this was not about a child abduction but a different type of crime. But the LE questioning was the commonality to the original post.)

 

[uvamerica]

The police would have a much easier time investigating missing children if it was as easy as checking if there is a documented history of being soulless and if not, they can't be lying about what happened.

I think a psychopath or a sociopath is the closest thing in scientific thinking to a soulless, heartless demon, and everyone who killed their children and lied about it cannot be diagnosed as either. Several violent criminals have had relatives and friends come out and say good things about them. No way he could have done such a thing, she's not like that, he's a good dad, she did a kindness to someone back in the year of the cub so it shows she's innocent, he was a good kid and didn't get in trouble too muc, she seemed so normal and I didn't see any warning signs.... Some of it might be due to denial and other defense mechanisms or desperate attempts to save the perp from being convicted or the perp might have faked a facade of goodness but I think some of it is probably true and there has been some good in the history of people who also did very bad things. Some modern religions are adamant that people have the capacity to do both.

That's why a human interest article showing that someone has a good side or a bad side is not imo proof of guilt or innocence, just that they have a good or a bad side. It's often a matter of who you get to talk to you. You could find people in my past who have negative things to say about me and if you talked to my dad he would probably say he likes me.

Alcohol and drug abuse are IMO one thing that can change parents who appear so normal. Someone I know was always nice and social, had a great sense of humor and a smile on his face and everybody liked him but he was a very mean and threatening drunk within the four walls of his home and there was some DV. If Lisa's parents are involved IMO alcohol could be a factor. I see it as a potential warning sign that DB said she wants her adult time two or three times per week and apparently thought nothing of getting plastered in front of children with no sober adult available. It is IMO an irresponsible action that is in stark contrast with the mother hen image, and if it's a regular thing I would worry a lot, particularly with a history of addiction problems in the family.

I don't think lying about one's wrongdoings is necessarily a sign of having no soul. Maybe just a cowardice. People documentedly go to absurd lengths to avoid having to face the responsibility and the consequences of doing minor things that are not a crime whatsoever. There is a thread in the Bizarre forum about a guy who called LE to report a burglary in progress when his girlfriend was about to see another female in his home. He was not about to be imprisoned for having a bit on the side but would he stand up straight and face the music? No, too scared of the old lady I guess, better lie to LE because the consequences are not nearly as scary. :waitasec:

Concealing a honest accident is not something that parents would be likely to do IMO (because why would they?) but some might prefer to try to conceal severe (drug related?) negligence, child abuse or other criminal activity, fearing the loss of their freedom, relationships and good standing in the community, the custody of remaining children etc. over doing the right thing.

I think living a lie and concealing your crime absolutely may lead to losing your soul eventually. If someone started out with a smidgen of conscience but chooses to live a lie and never take responsibility for what they did to their child, and pretend every day to not know the things they know, they might have to kill off that part of their soul that keeps telling them it's the wrong thing to do, to cope with the dissonance between the moral values and their actions.

Great Post !! TY !! :rocker:

 

[Jacie Estes]

Big whoop. I can break a lawn chair, fall into a pond, and puke scottish eggs after 4 long island ice teas. (theoretically) :innocent:

BBM

2 summers ago my husband and I were at a outdoor summer wedding; I had had a few glasses of champagne. :innocent: It was getting dusk out and the yard was not well lit. I saw my husband standing about 20 feet away and walked in a straight line to him, right through a gold fish pond! Fortunately it wasn't that deep but my shoes got stuck in the muddy bottom. He came wading in, picked me up and carried me out. My shoes are still in the bottom of that pond. :floorlaugh:

 

[natsound]

No; they never explained nor apologized. I think we all just knew that was a part of how they had to go about their business. We never did really warm up to any of them, though, even afterwards. The entire case was extremely complicated and lengthy. We ended up having to give telephonic testimony for a congressional committee about the entire investigation.

(I hope I haven't misled anyone ~ this was not about a child abduction but a different type of crime. But the LE questioning was the commonality to the original post.)

Oh shoot... so police didn't come back with any compassion afterward. I guess that's not unusual. I wish our city PD had a few liaisons who would offer the "compassion" component that the officers so often don't. Anyway, I'm sorry for your experience, EU, but thanks again for your insight.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

BBM

2 summers ago my husband and I were at a outdoor summer wedding; I had had a few glasses of champagn. :innocent: It was getting dusk out and the yard was not well lit. I saw my husband standing about 20 feet away and walked in a straight line to him, right through a gold fish pond! Fortunately it wasn't that deep but my shoes got stuck in hte muddy bottom. He came wading in, picked me up and carried me out. My shoes are still in the bottom of that pond. :floorlaugh:

:lol:

 

[1&2&3]

according to the missing flyer, she is

That is Lisa is 30 lbs. Thanks Krimekat, had to go out, trying to catch up and glad you answered. I'm wrong, 26-30 lbs.

We need to step back a minute and recall when the lawyer that is a professor sat in with DB & JI remarked that with him there LE got "heavy handed" and he could only imagine what it would have been had he not been there (paraphased not exactly). That statement coming from a lawyer, leads me to believe that DB was put thru he77 when she was on her own!

Therefore, we are at the stand off we see today. Guilty or innocent, there is no way I would submit myself to that kind of treatment again! I understand the request for speaking with different investigators, don't you? Personalities have developed, negatively unfortunately; let's do what needs to be done to move on.

And, as a lawyer on this board has commented, LE knows better than to ask to meet with DB & JI after they have legal representation! That is not quoted word for word.

 

[1&2&3]

In response to those questioning about a family car, I found this picture posted by nursebeeme in another forum.

http://images.scribblelive.com/2011/...fc459f_400.jpg

 

[Whisperer]

<modsnip>

It's understandable that some may be affected by my (I assume I am one of them) posts about my thoughts on this case.

I am well aware there are different ways people grieve. However, one thing remains constant in a missing child case and that is the parents are relentless in their pursuit to find their child. When parents lawyer up and stop talking to LE, I draw the line at their innocence. It may be wrong of me to do so, but that is the way I see it. Sure there may be somebody, somewhere that may be innocent, but in the majority of cases, that is not the outcome.

It doesn't matter how bad LE is treating the parents. IMO, they need to man up and demand LE eliminate them as suspects. If they are innocent, they will want to pass LDT's and tell the LE they can tell the media they passed. This would move the case forward.

In this case, I see the opposite occurring. The parents are being told NOT to talk to LE or media. What would make any parent who is sincere let a lawyer stop them from cooperating with LE? It would be assumed if they do that, then they are more concerned about their feelings and what is being said then finding their child.

Attorneys come into a case to protect the possible suspects in a missing child. At no time does their interest lie in finding the child....quite the opposite.

 

[norest4thewicked]

True. Anyone heard of Theodore 'Ted' Bundy? A serial rapist-killer? He wouldn't confess and went as far as representing himself at one of his trials.

Adolf Hitler killed millions directly and indirectly-----------he never confessed. Took his misdeeds and psycho self to the grave.

Diane Downs never confessed.

 

[norest4thewicked]

<modsnip>

It's understandable that some may be affected by my (I assume I am one of them) posts about my thoughts on this case.

I am well aware there are different ways people grieve. However, one thing remains constant in a missing child case and that is the parents are relentless in their pursuit to find their child. When parents lawyer up and stop talking to LE, I draw the line at their innocence. It may be wrong of me to do so, but that is the way I see it. Sure there may be somebody, somewhere that may be innocent, but in the majority of cases, that is not the outcome.

It doesn't matter how bad LE is treating the parents. IMO, they need to man up and demand LE eliminate them as suspects. If they are innocent, they will want to pass LDT's and tell the LE they can tell the media they passed. This would move the case forward.

In this case, I see the opposite occurring. The parents are being told NOT to talk to LE or media. What would make any parent who is sincere let a lawyer stop them from cooperating with LE? It would be assumed if they do that, then they are more concerned about their feelings and what is being said then finding their child.

Attorneys come into a case to protect the possible suspects in a missing child. At no time does their interest lie in finding the child....quite the opposite.

Great post! And exactly how I feel.

 

[ynotdivein]

I am disappointed at the amount of clean-up this thread just required.

Snark not at your fellow posters.

Stay on topic.

Follow TOS and Rules of Etiquette. [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=160"]Forum Information & Esoterica are here.[/ame]


Use your alert button and the Ignore feature if it comes to that.

It's that simple.

This case is frustrating, but no more so than hundreds if not thousands of others that we discuss at WS. I know that our members can hold and debate differing viewpoints respectfully, because I see it done here EVERY. SINGLE. DAY.

 

[gluestk]

<modsnip>

It's understandable that some may be affected by my (I assume I am one of them) posts about my thoughts on this case.

I am well aware there are different ways people grieve. However, one thing remains constant in a missing child case and that is the parents are relentless in their pursuit to find their child. When parents lawyer up and stop talking to LE, I draw the line at their innocence. It may be wrong of me to do so, but that is the way I see it. Sure there may be somebody, somewhere that may be innocent, but in the majority of cases, that is not the outcome.

It doesn't matter how bad LE is treating the parents. IMO, they need to man up and demand LE eliminate them as suspects. If they are innocent, they will want to pass LDT's and tell the LE they can tell the media they passed. This would move the case forward.

In this case, I see the opposite occurring. The parents are being told NOT to talk to LE or media. What would make any parent who is sincere let a lawyer stop them from cooperating with LE? It would be assumed if they do that, then they are more concerned about their feelings and what is being said then finding their child.

Attorneys come into a case to protect the possible suspects in a missing child. At no time does their interest lie in finding the child....quite the opposite.

I for one greatly appreciate your post and your point of view.
bbm---
IMOO Non-guilty parents would talk to le and the media. Nothing would stop non-guilty parents from communication that kept their child's picture and situation (being missing) in the light.

 

[Whisperer]

That is Lisa is 30 lbs. Thanks Krimekat, had to go out, trying to catch up and glad you answered. I'm wrong, 26-30 lbs.

We need to step back a minute and recall when the lawyer that is a professor sat in with DB & JI remarked that with him there LE got "heavy handed" and he could only imagine what it would have been had he not been there (paraphased not exactly). That statement coming from a lawyer, leads me to believe that DB was put thru he77 when she was on her own!

Therefore, we are at the stand off we see today. Guilty or innocent, there is no way I would submit myself to that kind of treatment again! I understand the request for speaking with different investigators, don't you? Personalities have developed, negatively unfortunately; let's do what needs to be done to move on.

And, as a lawyer on this board has commented, LE knows better than to ask to meet with DB & JI after they have legal representation! That is not quoted word for word.

The link that was given about the Law Professor had Oct 8 as the day in question. That coincides with the date LE gave as the parents refusing any further interviews.

 

[gluestk]

Diane Downs never confessed.

Correct. ty

 

[yllek]

Nite all.

May tomorrow be the day that sweet Lisa is found...

 

[Whisperer]

In response to those questioning about a family car, I found this picture posted by nursebeeme in another forum.

http://images.scribblelive.com/2011/...fc459f_400.jpg

:seeya: I can't see the link 1&2&3. Can somebody describe the car...Thanks.

 

[gluestk]

I tried to find a video or link to the last time DB talked to the media. I must not be searching correctly.