10/28/11 Private Investigator Returns, Baby Lisas Family Leaves

[jjenny]

Do you have multiple kids? Reflecting on it as someone who has other kids at home (and nobody I trust to care for them, literally) I find myself much more conflicted while contemplating this.

Ultimately, I do think I agree- I would risk it all for my child, because she could be hurting and that hurts me. But there is a voice in my head that says "all of your children will lose you and your love if you go to jail" kwim?

What I don't understand as to why would you be so concerned about being falsely accused, if your child was kidnapped and you had nothing to do with it? If the child was kidnapped then she could still be alive. Therefore, no body. It is extremely unusual for someone to be charged without a body. So, where would this overwhelming concern about being falsely convicted come from?

 

[Amster]

Marc Klaas was most certainly a suspect.(no, LE didn't officially name him) Parents always are. There is nothing special about DB or JI that gives them a pass. Maybe, if they had got their "story" straight the 1st time, there would be no need to talk to them again.

 

[MissJames]

Then, the parents are NOT cooperating with LE, period. If they are not answering the question put before them by LE, not being interviewed again, and separate, they are not cooperating with the investigation. I'm SURE tons of things have come out since their little 11 hour interview, witnesses, calls, info, questions, that need to be followed up on to FIND LISA. The parent's and their attorney's are having none of it. WHY? There is no logical conclusion other than poor advice or guilty as sin. In addition, DB and her "camp" state LE was mean to them, accused them etc, doesn't mean it's so.

There is a missing baby. I don't understand why everyone is cutting them so much slack, when every detail they have given to the media has changed. There are just not THAT many excuses, I mean, coincidence's. :innocent: Yet, LE, who is trying to find a missing child, isn't given one benefit of the doubt in this investigation. It truly puzzles me.

My post is not directed at you. JMO.

BBM
That's the bottom line . There's a missing baby ,yet no urgency by anyone to find her,save her from a predator or from harm.If she's still alive,every minute could be torture for her,or be taking her farther away from home,even out of the country.There's not a moment to spare to save her.

When a family attorney says he plans to schedule interviews for the siblings next week, that speaks volumes to me. If the family believed baby Lisa was with someone else they would be scheduling interviews for NOW,not "maybe next week".JMO

 

[Deleted member 39678]

But if they are innocent right? If they are innocent why not just suck it up and push back and answer all the questions?

Their baby daughter is missing. How is this helping Baby Lisa? Putting up stubborn fronts. Sure their feelings are hurt and they probably don't get it totally.

But the best chance at saving the life of their daughter is them. Lisa's Parents. Only they can reach down and tell about their lives so that LE can go out and find people they might not now know about. xoxoxoxo

Are you saying if they are innocent they should fall on the sword? And if they don't that means they are guilty?

 

[jjenny]

Are you saying if they are innocent they should fall on the sword? And if they don't that means they are guilty?

Why does cooperation with LE means falling on the sword?

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Why does cooperation with LE means falling on the sword?

Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't.

 

[Karmaa]

But if they are innocent right? If they are innocent why not just suck it up and push back and answer all the questions?

Their baby daughter is missing. How is this helping Baby Lisa? Putting up stubborn fronts. Sure their feelings are hurt and they probably don't get it totally.

But the best chance at saving the life of their daughter is them. Lisa's Parents. Only they can reach down and tell about their lives so that LE can go out and find people they might not now know about. xoxoxoxo

I think they are answering all the questions. That's what they have been saying all along, and LE (pretty much) confirms it. I think LE is torqued because the parents said "enough" of the accusations, and they want another chance at them.

I would not let them interview me in the same situation, even if I was 100% innocent. I would be frantic about my baby, and I would be willing to answer any questions, but I would not agree to an interview without my lawyer. That is a constitutional right for a reason.

 

[AngelWings444]

I respect Marc Klaas, but he was never a suspect in Polly's murder. He never sat in the hot seat while trying to grieve.

Debbie and Jeremy said that they understood completely why LE needed to question them. They even said after LE tried to trick a confession out of them, that they understood why they did it.

But at some point, when you realize that LE is not going to stop haranguing you, and that they are no longer asking questions to help find Lisa, but are only asking questions to try and implicate you, you have to stop. It would be foolish to continue.

DB and JI have not been named suspects in this case. DB is making claims as to what happened in the interview.

Mark Klaas was the first person LE looked at when Polly went missing. He immediately told them every single detail, never lied, and took a polygraph that he passed! He cleared his name from the get go, to allow LE to seek the truth regarding his missing child.

Mark Klaas is a prime example of what all parents should do if, God forbid, their child goes missing. DB and JI, not so much. :maddening:

 

[Abby Normal]

Then, the parents are NOT cooperating with LE, period. If they are not answering the question put before them by LE, not being interviewed again, and separate, they are not cooperating with the investigation. I'm SURE tons of things have come out since their little 11 hour interview, witnesses, calls, info, questions, that need to be followed up on to FIND LISA. The parent's and their attorney's are having none of it. WHY? There is no logical conclusion other than poor advice or guilty as sin. In addition, DB and her "camp" state LE was mean to them, accused them etc, doesn't mean it's so.

There is a missing baby. I don't understand why everyone is cutting them so much slack, when every detail they have given to the media has changed. There are just not THAT many excuses, I mean, coincidence's. :innocent: Yet, LE, who is trying to find a missing child, isn't given one benefit of the doubt in this investigation. It truly puzzles me.

My post is not directed at you. JMO.

Mine is not directed at your either, I just see this idea a lot. Bold mine.

"Young claims the parents have cooperated and answered other questions, but they have not sufficiently satisfied police demands."
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/237...er-disappearance-yougn-tacopina-short-dia.htm

According or O'Brien, a professor of law (not some street hack) who sat with them on their October 8th interview, satisfying police demands is essentially signing a confession. O'Brien, so far as we know, is not a constant on her team with a reason to spin for her- he just worked with them that once. If he is accurate, it pretty much means that guilty or innocent, everyone avoids signing a confession so nobody could be compliant to their ideal.

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

To be fair though, referencing first link again, Young claims they do have a few specific questions that haven't been answered "sufficiently".

The truth seemingly lies somewhere in the middle IMO. I think it's unfair to say "not cooperating" when Young admits it's just certain things that haven't been answered "sufficiently". By sufficiently, it is (IMO) implied that they were answered, but that they don't believe it was answered honestly.

I 100% agree that the parents need to suck it up and get down there and be compliant as they need to be. Maybe I'm old school, but when your kid is missing you just do what you have to do. Have your lawyer there, be protected, but be uncomfortable. Help them clear you.

So I agree with you, and I also find it mind boggling. I just want to keep it real about what they are and aren't doing.

JMO

 

[Abby Normal]

What I don't understand as to why would you be so concerned about being falsely accused, if your child was kidnapped and you had nothing to do with it? If the child was kidnapped then she could still be alive. Therefore, no body. It is extremely unusual for someone to be charged without a body. So, where would this overwhelming concern about being falsely convicted come from?

I don't know. I am positive I would be scared if I were being accused of murder though! Body or not, I'd be terrified.

It's not an excuse though, imo.

 

[grandmaj]

Do you have multiple kids? Reflecting on it as someone who has other kids at home (and nobody I trust to care for them, literally) I find myself much more conflicted while contemplating this.

Ultimately, I do think I agree- I would risk it all for my child, because she could be hurting and that hurts me. But there is a voice in my head that says "all of your children will lose you and your love if you go to jail" kwim?

I have one child but multiple grandchildren. I understand what you are saying about the other kids too.

 

[vlpate]

10 Parents Wrongfully Convicted of Killing Their Children
http://brainz.org/10-parents-wrongfully-convicted-killing-their-children/

(snip)
Julie Rea Harper woke one night in 1997 to the sound of her son screaming, ran to his room, struggled with a masked intruder and then found that her ten-year-old son had been stabbed to death. As there was no sign of forced entry to her home,
in the small town of Lawrenceville, IL, she was tried in 2000 and sentenced to 65 years in prison for the murder of her own child. Four years later she was released on technical grounds, only to be arrested and tried for the murder again. This time, however, her defense was armed with the confession of serial killer Tommy Lynn Sells, whom Harper had been rude to in a grocery store on the same day her son was slain. In 2006, she was finally acquitted of her son's murder.

Two were in the US - and both are still questionable, in my mind. We have a great justice system, but it is not perfect. Two out of 100 years of trials ain't bad. I feel like the system errs the opposite way - I think too many parents have gotten away with murder. Way too many.

7. Julie Rea Harper - overturned due to a confession by Tommy Lynn Sells - he's made many false confessions. He recanted his confession in this case and then confessed again. His initial confession came after the author of his life story, and friend, wrote him about a 20/20 program on the Julie Rea Harper case - she thought he would find parts entertaining. Julie had been in a custody battle in the months that preceded the murder. I hope she is innocent, but I'm still not buying it.

I love number 9, Lynn Dulac. Her conviction was overturned because the baby did not die from strangulation, but from a cocaine overdose. Well, that's different.

#10 - This guy takes his wife downstairs to a guy he doesn't know, a guy that turns out to be a serial killer, to give his wife an illegal abortion? He should have been hung, IMO.

Having said all that bull caca, I will say I am still amazed by the baby Azaria case. The simple fact that other campers heard the baby cry should have been enough...and yet it went on and on.

 

[Karmaa]

Marc Klaas was most certainly a suspect.(no, LE didn't officially name him) Parents always are. There is nothing special about DB or JI that gives them a pass. Maybe, if they had got their "story" straight the 1st time, there would be no need to talk to them again.

Marc Klaas was NEVER a suspect. There were 2 witnesses (Polly's little friends on a sleepover) and they clearly saw Richard Davis, the kidnapper. Within minutes LE knew that it was Marc Klaas was not the man.

Of course they looked at him, then they checked his story, verified his info and cleared him, but he was never a suspect.

 

[jjenny]

Marc Klaas was NEVER a suspect. There were 2 witnesses (Polly's little friends on a sleepover) and they clearly saw Richard Davis, the kidnapper. Within minutes LE knew that it was Marc Klaas was not the man.

Of course they looked at him, then they checked his story, verified his info and cleared him, but he was never a suspect.

Well police certainly hasn't called either DB or JI "suspects." Supposedly JI wasn't even asked to take a polygraph test. So what are they afraid of?

 

[Abby Normal]

DB and JI have not been named suspects in this case. DB is making claims as to what happened in the interview.

Mark Klaas was the first person LE looked at when Polly went missing. He immediately told them every single detail, never lied, and took a polygraph that he passed! He cleared his name from the get go, to allow LE to seek the truth regarding his missing child.

Mark Klaas is a prime example of what all parents should do if, God forbid, their child goes missing. DB and JI, not so much. :maddening:

I'm curious, was Mark an educated man? I'm not saying this as way to make an excuse- just didn't follow his case. If he was an educated/worldly man would it explain how he was able to do things "correctly"?

And then there is Tim Miller. I didn't read his account either, but wasn't he proven innocent but admits to reacting entirely wrong?

It makes me wonder what "goes in" to the makings of a model parent vs those with lousy reactions.

ETA- ohh, saw that he most likely wasn't interrogated to the degree that the DB/JI couple have been. Well, that does make it easier to behave as expected. I'm sure there are good and bad examples though, and it does make me wonder what circumstances enable/disable "proper" reactions.

 

[AngelWings444]

Marc Klaas was NEVER a suspect. There were 2 witnesses (Polly's little friends on a sleepover) and they clearly saw Richard Davis, the kidnapper. Within minutes LE knew that it was Marc Klaas was not the man.

Of course they looked at him, then they checked his story, verified his info and cleared him, but he was never a suspect.

The parents are not suspects either.

Mark Klaas told the truth and passed a polygraph, that is why he wasn't a suspect. By Mark Klaas cooperating, LE was able to do their jobs and catch the person who murdered Polly!

All person's related to Lisa should do the same!

 

[vlpate]

I respect Marc Klaas, but he was never a suspect in Polly's murder. He never sat in the hot seat while trying to grieve.

Debbie and Jeremy said that they understood completely why LE needed to question them. They even said after LE tried to trick a confession out of them, that they understood why they did it.

But at some point, when you realize that LE is not going to stop haranguing you, and that they are no longer asking questions to help find Lisa, but are only asking questions to try and implicate you, you have to stop. It would be foolish to continue.

BEM: Trying to grieve? I thought they were trying to find their kidnapped daughter?

 

[AngelWings444]

I'm curious, was Mark an educated man? I'm not saying this as way to make an excuse- just didn't follow his case. If he was an educated/worldly man would it explain how he was able to do things "correctly"?

And then there is Tim Miller. I didn't read his account either, but wasn't he proven innocent but admits to reacting entirely wrong?

It makes me wonder what "goes in" to the makings of a model parent vs those with lousy reactions.

IMO, being an educated person has nothing to do with doing the right thing for your child, and their well-being.

The truth is the truth, it doesn't change based on how many years of school you have attended.

 

[MissJames]

Do you have multiple kids? Reflecting on it as someone who has other kids at home (and nobody I trust to care for them, literally) I find myself much more conflicted while contemplating this.

Ultimately, I do think I agree- I would risk it all for my child, because she could be hurting and that hurts me. But there is a voice in my head that says "all of your children will lose you and your love if you go to jail" kwim?

I have seven kids and when my son died ,he was my focus. Even after death I worried about him,wanted to make sure he was okay,needed some "sign" that he was okay.I went through the motions with my other kids,but honestly, it took time to bring them back into focus. I would have left the others if it meant I could help my son.

It's not a rational process. The hyper focus would have been the same if it was one of my other kids who died.I would be focusing on that child.
The same thing happens when one of your kids gets sick or has an accident that requires hospitalization,maybe cancer or liver disease.The more life threatening the issue,the more likely it is that you will spend most of your time and energy on that child.
You don't love that child more,but the needs of the other children might be set aside for a time.
JMO

ETA: Before his death,no one could have convinced me I would be able to "set aside" concern for my other children ,while focusing on him.Freaked me out . I love being a mom and my world revolves around my children.

 

[jjenny]

Tim Miller? I don't think so. He was the one insisting police did something to find his daughter. If he blamed himself for doing something wrong, it was for not searching enough for her body.