Baby Lisa's brothers to be questioned and DNA tested

[LietKynes]

"Investigators want to "bring them back to see if they remember anything that might be able to help find their younger sister," Snapp said. The boys were reportedly sleeping with Bradley in her bed when Lisa disappeared and may have heard noises in the house."
"Baby Lisa's Brothers: Interviews and DNA Sampling Scheduled"
http://abcnews.go.com/US/missing-baby-lisa-

This is the first time I've read that both boys were with the mom...before, it was just one of the boys.
This story keeps changing.
And Lisa is still gone....

 

[Just K]

Well, if I were SB, I'd get a Leave of Absence, if he hasn't already, and get my arse back to MO and take care of my child...get him some respite from this whole mess! Oh, and I'd file suit against any media that published my child's name without my permission.

 

[nursebeeme]

Please keep in mind that WS does not allow sleuthing of minors who are not victims or named suspects in crimes.

Where this post lands is random.

my bumping up of this post lands at random

 

[jjenny]

Well, if I were SB, I'd get a Leave of Absence, if he hasn't already, and get my arse back to MO and take care of my child...get him some respite from this whole mess! Oh, and I'd file suit against any media that published my child's name without my permission.

There is absolutely no law that prohibits media from publishing names of minors.

 

[Peepers]

There is absolutely no law that prohibits media from publishing names of minors.

There isnt?

 

[1&2&3]

It is beyond belief that Deborah has not talked with these boys. Living with relatives, I would think an adult in that house would have discussed the situation. You know at their ages, the boys have to have many questions as well as fear.

As adults do sit around and talk, let's hope they remember these little guys are hearing every word that is being said and that is not a situation these boys need! In Deborah being so adamant that "they know nothing", is it because they were asleep OR it occurred while they were at school so they absolutely know nothing??

 

[Just K]

There is absolutely no law that prohibits media from publishing names of minors.

Really? Maybe, there should be! What happened to protecting minors? What about without the parents permission? That is so sad...it is just in poor taste to do that to these children.

Schools have to get permission to publish pics of kids, social workers, the courts and LE are obliged to redact the names of minors...confidentiality laws...why does the media have different rules?

 

[lag28wa]

I don't like the wording in the KC Star where CS says that she is laying down ground rules for questioning "in exchange" for the longer interviews that LE wants to do with the parents. Like this thing is a giant swap meet to barter at instead of an active investigation for a missing child. I know it's probably just poor word choice on the part of the reporter, but the parents and their team could be spending less time discussing questioning and just get it over with.

Also, I have worked as an RN for several years in all areas of maternal/child health- NICU, Labor & Delivery, Postpartum, Nursery, and Antepartum. You would not believe some of the situations I have seen newborns go home with the mother into, despite a CPS consultation. People who were most likely psychotic. As long as they know how to answer the questions correctly, everything's fine. And a lot of these parents have been around the block with the CPS system and know what to expect and what CPS expects.
Conversely I have seen relatively benign scenarios, where CPS/Social Work was triggered as an automatic referral (things like a positive urine drug screen on admission, no prenatal care, what have you) and just from mom or dad being uncooperative, I have seen the baby removed from the home. The absolute worst thing the parents can do is become defensive and uncooperative. Even if they think it's silly, a waste of time, or offensive, if they cooperate with the care plan, everything will be peachy.

That's a bunch of unneeded information probably, but just my past experience to say that I think DB/JI have a long way to go before having their boys removed, or even getting an open case with CPS.

 

[not_my_kids]

There isnt?

Nope, only if they are victims of a crime themselves, personally. And I think even that might just be a courtesy, as opposed to a law.

 

[cluciano63]

I just don't see how there is a moment to spare, personally. If I was the parents I would have allowed this weeks ago, but in any case I would not be saying, "gee, let's wait until Friday" to see if they know anything. More convenient.
This is about an infant here...isn't it?

 

[Just K]

Nope, only if they are victims of a crime themselves, personally. And I think even that might just be a courtesy, as opposed to a law.

IMO, being the brother of a missing baby is being a victim of a crime. it's a shame that some publications don't give a r@ts @$$ about children's privacy.

 

[Debthree]

.... She allowed this already(both boys interviewed immediately after with these highly trained individuals, one for 50mins, and one for 30mins)<- THIS IMO NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED AND UNDERSTOOD!!.. The two boys were interviewed, questioned, spoken with these highly trained individuals about their sister's disappearance.. One son for 50mins and the other son for 30mins.. The parents allowed this at the very beginning!!.. Therefor this latest interview will be the second time the boys have been interviewed.......

Thank you!

Unbelievable!! People were complaining that they weren't letting the boys be interviewed and now that they agreed to, it must be something that was forced upon them.

I guess these parents can't get a break. D@mned if they do. D@mned if they don't.

Mind boggling.

And thank you too!!

At this point, it's clear to me that Deborah Bradley is going to be criticized by the majority of people on this forum no matter what she does.

Is it really sleuthing when it's done with the presumption of guilt towards a particular individual? I don't think so.

Also worth pointing out again is that, as others have said, it's quite possible that Child Protective Services are involved only because they are the ones who interviewed Lisa's brothers (and they will now do so again) because the boys are minors. I really really hope that the letters CPS aren't bandied about now all over these boards as further 'proof' that DB is the devil.

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

I don't know how to bring it over from the MSM thread, but Josie posted a PDF about forensic interviews that I found very helpful and interesting. I would attach the file, but I guess my iPad doesn't want me to. :waitasec:

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

I don't like the wording in the KC Star where CS says that she is laying down ground rules for questioning "in exchange" for the longer interviews that LE wants to do with the parents. Like this thing is a giant swap meet to barter at instead of an active investigation for a missing child. I know it's probably just poor word choice on the part of the reporter, but the parents and their team could be spending less time discussing questioning and just get it over with.

Also, I have worked as an RN for several years in all areas of maternal/child health- NICU, Labor & Delivery, Postpartum, Nursery, and Antepartum. You would not believe some of the situations I have seen newborns go home with the mother into, despite a CPS consultation. People who were most likely psychotic. As long as they know how to answer the questions correctly, everything's fine. And a lot of these parents have been around the block with the CPS system and know what to expect and what CPS expects.
Conversely I have seen relatively benign scenarios, where CPS/Social Work was triggered as an automatic referral (things like a positive urine drug screen on admission, no prenatal care, what have you) and just from mom or dad being uncooperative, I have seen the baby removed from the home. The absolute worst thing the parents can do is become defensive and uncooperative. Even if they think it's silly, a waste of time, or offensive, if they cooperate with the care plan, everything will be peachy.

That's a bunch of unneeded information probably, but just my past experience to say that I think DB/JI have a long way to go before having their boys removed, or even getting an open case with CPS.

Not at all, it is really interesting! Thanks for sharing and explaining. :seeya:

 

[amymarie]

DB is probably saying she hasn't talked to the boys about what happened because she was probably told to NOT talk to them by LE. Children are very impressionable and anything she says to them about what happened or didn't happen could taint what the children remember as happening.

I say this because, sadly, my step-daughter was molested by her maternal great grandfather a couple years ago. She told us and we immediately made a police report. One of the first things the police told us was to discuss it with her as little as possible until she could be interviewed professionally. We could offer her sympathy and support if she brought it up, but we weren't to ask her specific questions about it. The reasoning behind this was because if we did ask her something, and then the forensic interviewer asked her something similar and she said she talked to us about it, anything she said could then be discredited by the defense and they could say we coached her.

That being said, just because DB says that doesn't mean it's true. My step daughter's mother also stated she did not talk about it with her, yet, by the time she was professionally interviewed, my step daughter's story changed drastically from what she told to both us and her play therapist.

My point is, I believe DB is saying she's not talking to the boys about it for LE's sake. But I don't believe for one second that she hasn't been coaching them on what to say this entire time. There's a reason why she has waited this long to let them be re-interviewed.

 

[Just K]

DB and JI's actions and/or lack of actions, "admissions" and changing stories are what is making it hard to have faith in their innocence. The discussion about CPS started this morning when one MSM misrepresented the Social Service workers who conducted the first interviews with the children. Many of us prefaced our comments with "IF CPS" is involved...and went on to discuss how this organization comes to be involved in family issues. No one is bandying about the term to make DB or JI look like anything. None of us has any idea what actually occurred in that home or to Lisa Irwin and that would include the legal representatives for DB & JI as well as the media and the PI.

ETA: Innocent to what degree we don't know either...anyone associated with that home could be involved but to what extent we are not privy.

 

[LostInTheMyst]

As the current intake coordinator for a Childrens Advocacy Center in the midwest I can shed some light on the forensic interview process. CPS (Child Protective Services would not normally have a CPS social worker interview the child. In fact that would not be allowed at our center The children we see are interviewed by individuals with Masters level degrees in social work. The children are seen in a child friendly environment and the children are told in advance that the interview will be filmed (and are given the opportunity to see how that works) they are also told who will be watching the interview via the closed circuit recording device. Our interviewers are given a limited background on the case in order to reduce as much personal prejudice and bias as is humanly possible. The children are NEVER asked leading questions and questions are NEVER asked in such a way as to imply blame. A typical interview starts with, "do you know why we're here today" or "can you tel me about last Tuesday night?" etc.
(our clinic also performs forensic medical exams on children who have been detained and/or are suspected to be victims of neglect and/or physical and/or sexual abuse. I can state for a fact that at least in the state of Wisconsin, an inebriated parent, exposed electrical socket and wine on the stove would NEVER result in a child's removal from their parental home. In fact, it would be unlikely for CPS to even conduct a home visit on those allegations. They have their hands full with HORRIFIC accounts of abuse...)
Hope that information is helpful to you.

ETA: CPS does not have to have an open investigation or be involved in any way. LE can request that a child be interviewed by a forensic social worker for assistance in an open investigation.

 

[Just K]

As the current intake coordinator for a Childrens Advocacy Center in the midwest I can shed some light on the forensic interview process. CPS (Child Protective Services would not normally have a CPS social worker interview the child. In fact that would not be allowed at our center The children we see are interviewed by individuals with Masters level degrees in social work. The children are seen in a child friendly environment and the children are told in advance that the interview will be filmed (and are given the opportunity to see how that works) they are also told who will be watching the interview via the closed circuit recording device. Our interviewers are given a limited background on the case in order to reduce as much personal prejudice and bias as is humanly possible. The children are NEVER asked leading questions and questions are NEVER asked in such a way as to imply blame. A typical interview starts with, "do you know why we're here today" or "can you tel me about last Tuesday night?" etc.
(our clinic also performs forensic medical exams on children who have been detained and/or are suspected to be victims of neglect and/or physical and/or sexual abuse. I can state for a fact that at least in the state of Wisconsin, an inebriated parent, exposed electrical socket and wine on the stove would NEVER result in a child's removal from their parental home. In fact, it would be unlikely for CPS to even conduct a home visit on those allegations. They have their hands full with HORRIFIC accounts of abuse...)
Hope that information is helpful to you.

ETA: CPS does not have to have an open investigation or be involved in any way. LE can request that a child be interviewed by a forensic social worker for assistance in an open investigation.

Again, if you put my comments into context: I said that LE may have evidence of neglect/endangerment that we are not privy to. That the family may have been advised that it would be better to allow a second interview VOLUNTARILY rather than at a later date INVOLUNTARILY.

In addition, it is not just the things that you mention here (Bolded By Me) but the fact that if it is proven that DB or JI's neglect directly resulted in the kidnapping or death of her child then it would be highly likely that CPS would be brought in.

In my state if CPS gets a complaint they must check it out. They don't have to open a case but they do have to investigate the complaint.

 

[frankie069]

There is absolutely no law that prohibits media from publishing names of minors.

You are right, it is not a breach of ethics nor is it illegal to do so. If a paper doesnt print their names its because they are ethical as far as I am concerned. Its a choice each news organization makes.

 

[belleyes]

From KMBC's Peggy Breit: This is a place that conducts forensic interviews of children in a child friendly neutral atmosphere. They conduct interviews for the police department in cases of sexual abuse, violence or even murder. While they won't talk about a specific case, they say they approach each interview in the same way. Make a child feel comfortable in a non-threatening environment. Police are in the next room listening and can prompt the interviewer to ask about certain things.

by Brian Foster - KMBC.com 4:08 PM


Read more: http://livewire.kmbc.com/Event/Live_Blog_Amber_Alert_Issued_For_Missing_10-Month-Old#ixzz1bvCe9ErL

B/U BM
I have had extensive experience with this in the last few years unfortunately(as a foster parent).IME it can take weeks yes WEEKS before LE interview kids. (I still am unsure as to why) I do have a theory some of which has been told to me and some that I have theorized. My experience has been with the above bolded items and I have experience with FBI and LE (FBI rolls heads a lot faster IMO)

1. Defending on the interviewer's expertise it can take a while and an expert may have to be called in from a much larger city hours away (this can delay things but is well worth the wait)--they can ask questions,gain trust, read body language and looking at what is said and NOT said. These can be used in court as "expert testimony" without having to call the kids to the stand, especially if the kids are not credible witnesses due to age, fear, etc.

2. In another situation I am aware of, the children were interviewed weeks later to "tie-up loose ends" and verify (IMO) the theory and tips LE already had. This kept them from having to testify unless absolutely necessary (due to safety issue with testifying in open court)

*FYI- all the cases I am familiar with the children are taped and CPS and LE watch from another room and they can request the "therapist" (they are usually trained therapist who specialize in forensic interviewing) ask certain things as they come up. LE gets a copy of the tape and can analyze it as needed) The whole process is very non-climactic and the kids leave with a treat for being brave *JUST MY EXPERIENCE

ETA: Frankie069 (post #199) this happened in case #2 above---media published names and extra precautions had to be taken to ensure safety