Cadaver dog hit on scent in DBs bedroom

[Donjeta]

Your misusing the word "alibi". An alibi is a defense where someone proves that there elsewhere when a crime is committed. That's not what I'm trying to say. All that I am trying to say is that DB being drunk that night is a factor in her ability to get away with a crime some people believe that she committed. Everyone is free to minimize what effect alcohol may have played in this case. But I don't think that it should be ignored.

I don't think I'm minimizing the effect alcohol may have played in this case. :waitasec: It's quite possible it was a factor in whatever happened to Lisa.

Of course her being drunk, if she was, is a factor in getting away with it if she committed a crime but what I'm trying to say is that we have not received any confirmed information that says she was so drunk that she obviously must have been unable to get away it, if something happened that she was responsible for. We have all sorts in this world. There are A) drunk people who are so impaired they make a mess of everything they touch, there are B) drunk people who are impaired so much that they mess up something some of the time, and there are C) people who get drunk but manage to get away with it without anybody noticing their messes.

As for the problem that I have with conspiracy's in this case, I have a hard time in understanding what "stakes" a friend or family member would have to make them feel it necessary to help cover up Lisa's death and depose of her body. MOO

It's always hard to understand why anybody would cover up a child's death, let alone the child's parent. It should be hard to understand. But it happens.

I don't know if you followed the Bianca Jones case. It's a no body case but her father was recently found guilty of murder. According to the prosecutor she was beaten to death at night in his apartment, and there was also previous child abuse of other children of his. Then he faked a carjacking story to cover it up. Yet there are family members who apparently cover for him. One child was made to take back her initial story about the abuse she had experienced. Others never heard anything when the baby was beaten to death or testified that they saw the dead toddler alive and well in the morning. Jerice Shockley has family members saying that they saw Jhessye after she had been dead for a while (she has not gone to trial yet so she is technically innocent until proven guilty.)

Sometimes it might be a person who is partly responsible or fears that they might be thought so. Or a family member who wants to avoid seeing a loved one in prison more than they want to see justice done.

Or DB could have acted alone. I'm by no means committed to a theory that there was anybody helping her, if she did anything, I just threw that thought out as another alternative how a drunk person might manage to get away with it.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I don't think I'm minimizing the effect alcohol may have played in this case. :waitasec: It's quite possible it was a factor in whatever happened to Lisa.

Of course her being drunk, if she was, is a factor in getting away with it if she committed a crime but what I'm trying to say is that we have not received any confirmed information that says she was so drunk that she obviously must have been unable to get away it, if something happened that she was responsible for. We have all sorts in this world. There are A) drunk people who are so impaired they make a mess of everything they touch, there are B) drunk people who are impaired so much that they mess up something some of the time, and there are C) people who get drunk but manage to get away with it without anybody noticing their messes.





It's always hard to understand why anybody would cover up a child's death, let alone the child's parent. It should be hard to understand. But it happens.

I don't know if you followed the Bianca Jones case. It's a no body case but her father was recently found guilty of murder. According to the prosecutor she was beaten to death at night in his apartment, and there was also previous child abuse of other children of his. Then he faked a carjacking story to cover it up. Yet there are family members who apparently cover for him. One child was made to take back her initial story about the abuse she had experienced. Others never heard anything when the baby was beaten to death or testified that they saw the dead toddler alive and well in the morning. Jerice Shockley has family members saying that they saw Jhessye after she had been dead for a while (she has not gone to trial yet so she is technically innocent until proven guilty.)

Sometimes it might be a person who is partly responsible or fears that they might be thought so. Or a family member who wants to avoid seeing a loved one in prison more than they want to see justice done.

Or DB could have acted alone. I'm by no means committed to a theory that there was anybody helping her, if she did anything, I just threw that thought out as another alternative how a drunk person might manage to get away with it.

Looks like we're getting to the point were we agree on some things. All I want to add is if we knew about some previous abuse that friends or family were willing to cover up, then I would entertain a conspiracy. Or maybe some evidence of a lack of character or criminal behavior or something that would explain why they would help in a coverup. I haven't seen anything like that in this case. Just saying that its possible is not enough for me. MOO.

 

[Donjeta]

Looks like we're getting to the point were we agree on some things. All I want to add is if we knew about some previous abuse that friends or family were willing to cover up, then I would entertain a conspiracy. Or maybe some evidence of a lack of character or criminal behavior or something that would explain why they would help in a coverup. I haven't seen anything like that in this case. Just saying that its possible is not enough for me. MOO.

The cases I mentioned are different in that there seems to be a well established pattern of making excuses and covering up. Jerice is a great mother according to some although she has a previous conviction for violently abusing a child. Nothing like that here. But I suppose if previous abuse or criminal behavior was successfully covered up we wouldn't necessarily know about it.

Anyway, the timeline may be a little tight for getting anyone to help. But if there was some evidence about a person who helped in the phones it might explain why the phones were ditched. I don't know if LE are able to get emails sent from phones from the phone records or instant messages.

I recently read in another missing persons thread that there is an instant picture service in which people can send photos to another phone and it is kept for a very short time only and LE were not able to get the content of the message. The missing person had sent such a photo shortly before disappearing but it was not retained in the receiver's phone and the receiver said he or she didn't see it so they had no clue what the photo was or if it was a clue to the disappearance. I'm a little fuzzy on the details. I forget which case that was and what the service was called. Maybe totally irrelevant if there was no service in the Bradley Irwin phones that would allow that or if everybody was too drunk to use it anyway.

Anyway, I guess my point is just that saying that it's possible that DB may have been too drunk to cover Lisa's death up is not enough for me to be sure that she was, and didn't. It took a lot of posts to get to that but there it is in a nutshell.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

The cases I mentioned are different in that there seems to be a well established pattern of making excuses and covering up. Jerice is a great mother according to some although she has a previous conviction for violently abusing a child. Nothing like that here. But I suppose if previous abuse or criminal behavior was successfully covered up we wouldn't necessarily know about it.

Anyway, the timeline may be a little tight for getting anyone to help. But if there was some evidence about a person who helped in the phones it might explain why the phones were ditched. I don't know if LE are able to get emails sent from phones from the phone records or instant messages.

I recently read in another missing persons thread that there is an instant picture service in which people can send photos to another phone and it is kept for a very short time only and LE were not able to get the content of the message. The missing person had sent such a photo shortly before disappearing but it was not retained in the receiver's phone and the receiver said he or she didn't see it so they had no clue what the photo was or if it was a clue to the disappearance. I'm a little fuzzy on the details. I forget which case that was and what the service was called. Maybe totally irrelevant if there was no service in the Bradley Irwin phones that would allow that or if everybody was too drunk to use it anyway.

Anyway, I guess my point is just that saying that it's possible that DB may have been too drunk to cover Lisa's death up is not enough for me to be sure that she was, and didn't. It took a lot of posts to get to that but there it is in a nutshell.

BBM
I agree. I think that there is evidence that DB was drinking that night but your right in saying that we have no way of knowing how impaired she was. If you were under impression that I thought that the mere fact that I believe she was drinking is proof of her innocence then I apologize for giving you that impression.

 

[Donjeta]

I wonder if the first responders made any observations about the state of impairment or lack thereof. Did we ever see the first responders' initial report? I don't recall.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I wonder if the first responders made any observations about the state of impairment or lack thereof. Did we ever see the first responders' initial report? I don't recall.

I don't think we have. SB should be able to give us an idea on how much DB drank that night but we haven't heard from her either.

 

[norest4thewicked]

I think that the degree of impairment depends a lot on the levels of alcohol that the person is used to regularly drinking. We have heard in the earlier threads from DB's own words that she drinks a lot of nights. There was even some discussion that she was an alcoholic. I have a very close family member who is an alcoholic. This person is able to perform in a way that no one would ever suspect. This person could accomplish pretty much anything that they do in a regular day, all while having a LOT of alcohol in them.

Of course, we don't know how much DB had to drink. But, I'd guess that she could easily accomplish the disposal of Lisa's body with little to no trouble, unless she actually DID black out. I personally don't believe she blacked out. I think that she used that as an excuse as to why she didn't hear Lisa being "kidnapped".

And, regarding the idea that those of us calling DB a "bad mother" are trying to have it both ways, not so. I believe DB is a bad mother because she didn't check on her child for many hours, especially when the child was sick. I believe she is a bad mother because she kept her car seat in a front facing position and believe she is a bad mother because she admitted to drinking a lot of nights. Whether she blacked out or not is just another point that would make her be even a worse mother, if she was proved to have done so. But, she's already a bad mother, in my mind, so blacking out wouldn't make it any better, for sure.

 

[Whisperer]

BBM
The clothes that LE found and removed from the home were described as "purple shorts and a multi-color Disney character shirt". The clothes that are said to be the ones that Lisa was last seen in are described as "purple pants and a purple shirt with kittens on it.

http://media2.nbcactionnews.com/NWT/pdf/20111021_irwinwarrant.pdf

http://www.missingkids.com/missingk...NCMC&seqNum=1&caseLang=en_US&searchLang=en_US

IMO, they are one and the same....and LE thinks the same way.

 

[Whisperer]

...LE took the clothes for evidence. LE is not the problem here. They found the clothes that ms db described Lisa as wearing.

They took lisa's glow worm and her two blankets. They took the tape also. They have a very good idea of what happened in that house that night. My guess is they have decomp dna on the items taken.

 

[Whisperer]

I wonder if the first responders made any observations about the state of impairment or lack thereof. Did we ever see the first responders' initial report? I don't recall.

First responders often ignore drugs and alcohol around house when there is a missing child. I haven't heard of any giving a drug and alcohol test upon arrival. I can hear defense attorneys' sirens ringing in the background on that one.

Things like that are handled by the investigators which first responders are not.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

...LE took the clothes for evidence. LE is not the problem here. They found the clothes that ms db described Lisa as wearing.

They took lisa's glow worm and her two blankets. They took the tape also. They have a very good idea of what happened in that house that night. My guess is they have decomp dna on the items taken.

The links that I provided say that the clothes that LE took do not match what Lisa was described as wearing when she was last seen. If you have a link showing otherwise I'm willing to look at it.

 

[tlcya]

...LE took the clothes for evidence. LE is not the problem here. They found the clothes that ms db described Lisa as wearing.

They took lisa's glow worm and her two blankets. They took the tape also. They have a very good idea of what happened in that house that night. My guess is they have decomp dna on the items taken.

I think if they had the BBM, the woman would already have been charged. MOO

 

[tlcya]

In Addition:

I have never seen or read or heard from anywhere that clothing said to be worn by Lisa when she disappeared had been found and were in LE possession?

It is entirely possible I missed some big presser or something. Can someone throw up a link? TIA

 

[Donjeta]

I don't really understand the ado about whether the clothing was the same Lisa was said to have been wearing or not because it proves nothing in my mind. Any small girl can have more than one outfit that fits the descriptions "purple shorts" and "a multi-color Disney character shirt" or "purple pants" and "a purple shirt with kittens on it". Some outfits can fit both descriptions if it's colorful but predominantly purple and the Disney characters happen to be kittens and shorts vs pants may be in the eye of the beholder. My kids had some pants that ended up more like shorts when they got taller (the kids, that is). In the absence of surveillance photos from the home DB could have given any clothing description and who's to prove her wrong. Someone else might have remembered Lisa's clothing differently from earlier in the evening but hey, if DB doesn't remember if she saw Lisa at 10 pm she probably doesn't remember if she changed her clothing then.

 

[tlcya]

the to-do about the clothing is that a poster is suggesting it is FACT that Lisa's mother lied about what she was wearing and further is suggesting that it is FACT that LE has that very same clothing described by Lisa's mother in their possession.

I have backed away from Lisa's forum for quite some time and it is entirely possible I have missed some new developments, but when someone states something as fact that I have never heard of, I request a link.

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

I don't really understand the ado about whether the clothing was the same Lisa was said to have been wearing or not because it proves nothing in my mind. Any small girl can have more than one outfit that fits the descriptions "purple shorts" and "a multi-color Disney character shirt" or "purple pants" and "a purple shirt with kittens on it". Some outfits can fit both descriptions if it's colorful but predominantly purple and the Disney characters happen to be kittens and shorts vs pants may be in the eye of the beholder. My kids had some pants that ended up more like shorts when they got taller (the kids, that is). In the absence of surveillance photos from the home DB could have given any clothing description and who's to prove her wrong. Someone else might have remembered Lisa's clothing differently from earlier in the evening but hey, if DB doesn't remember if she saw Lisa at 10 pm she probably doesn't remember if she changed her clothing then.

I think the problem arises when one states as fact that LE took clothes of the same exact description, but can't back it up with a link, enven after being asked repeatedly to supply such a link to that "fact". MOO

 

[Whisperer]

http://www.kmbc.com/Lisa-Irwin-Sear...it/-/11664900/12264286/-/108618q/-/index.html

IMO, they took the clothes described by debra as to what she was seen wearing last. I know some don't choose to believe Lisa was wearing these and choose to believe the bad PoPo are just picking on the mother. LE took what they saw as evidence. For some reason those clothes were significant for evidence and LE has them.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

the to-do about the clothing is that a poster is suggesting it is FACT that Lisa's mother lied about what she was wearing and further is suggesting that it is FACT that LE has that very same clothing described by Lisa's mother in their possession.

I have backed away from Lisa's forum for quite some time and it is entirely possible I have missed some new developments, but when someone states something as fact that I have never heard of, I request a link.

I think that its important to keep the information that we have factual. I'm willing to admit that the quotes I provided are wrong if someone can provide links showing that they are. Taking a description of clothes that are similar but different and saying that they are in fact the same clothes is not in the best interest of finding the truth. IMO.

 

[Donjeta]

To me it's just not that significant if it's the same or not. If DB is a liar she could have lied about the clothing description too. If she told the truth it proves nothing as either an abductor or DB could have undressed Lisa and left the clothing there, or maybe even one of the kids. Some babies can probably get out of shorts or pants all by themselves if they are loose fitting. I sometimes found my babies wearing less clothing in the morning than they started out with. I just want to know if the cadaver dogs hit at that clothing and what if anything was found at the crime lab.

If the clothing description that was published in the Amber Alert was all that DB told LE they would imo have no way of knowing if anything they found at that house was the same clothing or not, it was so vague. At least tell us what the material was and which Disney characters.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

http://www.kmbc.com/Lisa-Irwin-Sear...it/-/11664900/12264286/-/108618q/-/index.html

IMO, they took the clothes described by debra as to what she was seen wearing last. I know some don't choose to believe Lisa was wearing these and choose to believe the bad PoPo are just picking on the mother. LE took what they saw as evidence. For some reason those clothes were significant for evidence and LE has them.

I'm not disputing the fact that LE removed some clothes from the Irwin home. In fact I provided a link showing the receipt that they made with some clothes listed. What I haven't seen is anything saying that those clothes are the ones that Lisa was last seen in. The description sure doesn't match.