Dan Abrams ABC to Interview Lisa's parents 10/17/2011 & Today Show

[jjenny]

So now they talked for a few minutes too? This is very different then the other stories he had put out in the media.

He also doesn't tell Dan Abrams that he checked on the boys first.

 

[cachmo]

ur not kidding! she admitted to watching all of the missing children stuff and always thought the mother was responsible. WTH? moo

Ok so if she followed other missing kids she should know about TES and Mark K ? How close did she follow other missing kids stories? I DO NOT TRUST THIS LADY ANYMORE. MOO

 

[essies]

Did the neighbor ever actually SEE little Lisa alive that night? Hear her crying?

That's the interview I'd really like to see-would answer alot of questions I have!! But-that's not gonna happen I'm sure!!:maddening:
snipped-
The community continues to hold prayer vigils for the safe return of baby Lisa who has been missing for 13 days
http://www.kctv5.com/story/15709753/baby-lisas-mom-admits-she-was-drunk-when-her-baby-vanished
Are the parents or even the family showing up to any of these vigils or thanking their community for these vigils?:waitasec:

 

[laniefi]

Where was this "revelation" a week ago???

Now, a day before a GJ convenes, she admits this. I am so sick on sitting on this fence my butt is numb. I am trying so hard not to be swayed by the media coverage, gossip, and rumours, but OMG - THIS???

I would have admitted this to LE at 4:15 am the morning they realized she was gone from her crib. Wouldn't LE be able to smell alchohol on her breath still at 4:00am? I have met drinkers who exude alcohol from their pores the next morning!

IF, and that is a really big if, her parents are telling the truth then this should be a case study in what NOT to do if your baby is abducted.

At the very least she should be held accountable for neglect or endangering a minor. What if baby Lisa's cold/couch got worse and she needed to go to the ER - mom was "drunk"! Not to mention IF true - your baby was abducted from under your nose cause you were sleeping off your drinks! WTF?

I can see needing some "me time" or "adult time" but the reality of raising children propoerly is that YOU MAY NOT GET YOUR ADULT TIME - not today or maybe even for a few days - DEAL WITH IT! Hire a babysitter, take them to Grandparents house - don't get plastered while your sick infant and young brothers under your care.

Like I said - why NOW? I am sliding off the fence...

 

[not_my_kids]

I fully agree with you. If the child knows anything, they can get that info in one interview. Re-interviewing child witnesses again and again is not good practice, either from a forensic perspective, or a child psychology perspective.

Legally, interviewing kids is tricky, because if they meet with them more than a couple times, they are risking a lawyer saying in court that the kids testimony was coerced. The standard rule, I THINK, don't quote me, as I'm not an expert, is five minutes per year for the age of the child, so the boys being 6 and 8, the maximum recommended interviews would be 30 minutes and 40 minutes, respectively. Often that is not long enough to coax a child to tell them what they really saw, heard, or feel. JMO.

P.S. I think I quoted the wrong post, but it's still related, so I'll leave it.

 

[angeleleven]

In the clip of the Today interview, Peter A asked her how much wine she had drank and she said "enough to be drunk."
Wow. Getting drunk with a baby and two other kids in your care. Not good.
OT, but I got drunk on wine many years ago, but I could not have hurt a flea, I could barely walk under my own power. It did not erase my memory, I could still remember everything that happened. Just saying.

It seems that the parents of the other two boys (the real mom and the real dad) would have big concerns about their kids staying with JI and DB. Maybe they already have.....I'm just saying there should be some big concerns. IMO

 

[In da Middle]

Wow, drinking on the porch, if someone was watching that would be a nice heads-up. IF there is a kidnapper. If not, anything could have happened, and there may not be an accomplice. I hate to say this, but my first thought was LE needs to check the street sewers.

They did 2nd or 3rd day.

 

[Turnadot]

I dont think children are interrogated. They usually have a trained professional come in and work with them. moo

I don't really care. Like I posted earlier, LE would get one interview with my 5 year old. One. That's it. What LE claims to do and what actually happens are two separate things. I'm with BeanE, to be honest. I'd have a child counselor talk privately with my child, then the counselor could relay that information to LE.

That won't win me any friends or influence people, but my goal is to protect my remaining child from further trauma. LE would get a chance to know what my son knows, but they would not ever have complete access to him. Never.

 

[Quiche]

Just now watching the interview. DB is full of horsepit, imo. She won't allow LE to re-interview her boys because she refuses to put them through any more upset?! Hey lady! You're baby is missing? Remember HER?!

I think it's a HUGE mistake not letting the older children tell about their night-- what if they held a key and weren't allowed to help? As if Lisa missing isn't enough to mess them up for life. Let them talk before the memories slip so deep they can't be retrieved! :banghead:

mo

 

[vasportsmom]

10/17/2011 Dan Abrams GMA Interview
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/missing-baby-lisas-parents-microscope-14752251
Abrams: …”I started by asking Deborah how she learned she’d apparently failed a lie detector test.”
Deborah: “He said, you failed. And I said, failed what? What question did I fail? And he said, you failed the one where you know where your daughter’s at. And I said, that’s not possible. I don’t know where she’s at. And I just proceeded to come unglued. That’s not possible, freakin out, tellin them no, and he looked in my face and he said, I met bad mothers like you. And proceeded to say, probably, something along the lines of, I need to tell the truth or…It’s hard to hear that, but, if it means I have to go through all this to get her back, I don’t care.
Abrams: “Would you take another lie detector test?”
Deborah: “Yeah. Why not?”

Snipped & BBM. WOW, could she be any more flippant and nonchalant?

 

[frankie069]

I'm sure I'm in the minority, but there's no way in hell LE would interview my 5 year old more than once, even if my other child was missing. I won't have my 5 year old traumatized, dealing with this the rest of his life. I still have to protect him, too.

Especially seeing how LE f'd up the Fox boy.

IMO, these children should be taken to the police station and they will get a guardian to protect them as well, but they should be taken and questioned. None of us like to see our children hurt or upset, but think about this for one minute please, if your child saw something lets just say at a neighbors house, and the police wanted to question them, would you hold them back from that? If they were a potential witness would you stop them from catching lets say a kidnapper or a baby killer? If you look at it from that point of view, you would let your kids be questioned I believe, I know I would (IE, they had a description of a vehicle or a person that pulled another child off the street etc.). BUT if we were guilty of something, then thats a different story, you dont want those kids questioned. They might have the smallest clue that opens a HUGE door. I dont think they are going to be able to stop LE from questioning them at this point. Those kids will be court ordered to answer questions. As they should. (please note, I have nothing against those kids, they are innocent and my heart breaks for them but the law is the law and they can be questioned and its the only way we, well the police are going to get some answers). Sometimes to do the right thing, we have to do something that places another in an unfortunate circumstance. This is a necessary evil in my book.

 

[natsound]

When the interviewer asks her is she was drunk, she arrogantly nods and says, "Yeah." Am I the only one who found her response defiant and arrogant? I could flat out hear the "so what" in her voice.

Also, she plays JI like a fiddle, imo.

I agree. She's trying to trivialize it in an attempt to save her own hide.

 

[LaLaw2000]

Let's hope that the Grand Jury determines that there is enough evidence for the arrest of one or both parents.

BBM:

At first I thought that the Grand Jury was only about wanting the media videos at this time. Now I think it is a Grand Jury with witnesses to determine if charges will be brought against both parents.

What I would love to see is Deborah go before the Grand Jury first jump out of the chute and tell one of the many variations of her story. Then Have JI tell his version. THEN have the Grand Jury see ALL of the media footage as well as these 'exclusive' interviews. At the end of the Grand Jury fact finding I believe Deborah will be indited. JI just might be indited as well.

These two could not keep their stories straight at gunpoint. There are probably even more versions we haven't heard yet!

I just cannot begin to express how disgusted I am. Neither parent even said 'Baby Lisa' today that I heard. It is all about themselves, isn't it?

MOO's

:furious:

 

[Donjeta]

It makes no sense to me that she says she didn't ask her boys about the noises they allegedly heard. She says she doesn't know if it was before or after they went to bed.

I can't see how you could keep from asking them. Maybe they can help to identify the abductor and find Lisa, or get justice for their sister. Surely that would be worth putting them through a few friendly questions, with a therapist present if necessary.

 

[21merc7]

A few things I've been considering with the latest revelations -

1. How pissed off was the dad to come home and find? - door unlocked, window open, lights on, mum passed out drunk, signs of drinking while he's working. Pissed off enough to teach mum a lesson?

2. Mum suffered from black out, female friend didn't, female friend sees lights turned off after she goes home at 1030pm. female friend could be considered as last person to see Lisa (and remember it) was female neighbour pissed off and took Lisa?

3. The women spend the night drinking on the front porch for anyone to see thus allowing someone to be able to sneak into the back of the house.

4. To believe a stranger abduction it can only go one of two ways - a stranger sees the family so targets and stalks them as they want to abduct the baby and are waiting for just the right moment when dad is at work and mother is distracted.

OR

A total stranger just happens to be on that street and randomly picks out that house to enter it for the sole purpose of randomly taking a baby as opposed to either the mother or her two other children.

Add - Kidnapper walks by, hears baby crying, looks in window sees no one with baby, grabs baby, walks down the street soothing baby.

 

[Sigh Sister]

When the interviewer asks her is she was drunk, she arrogantly nods and says, "Yeah." Am I the only one who found her response defiant and arrogant? I could flat out hear the "so what" in her voice.

Also, she plays JI like a fiddle, imo.

I took it that way too. She sounded defensive for sure.

 

[jjenny]

It seems that the parents of the other two boys (the real mom and the real dad) would have big concerns about their kids staying with JI and DB. Maybe they already have.....I'm just saying there should be some big concerns. IMO

Yes there should be concerns. The woman admits to being drunk the night she was a sole caretaker of 3 little kids. If that doesn't lead to concerns I don't know what would.

 

[vlpate]

I totally agree tht 6:40 is way too early for a 10 month old. My 7 month old sometimes wants to go down around 8pm and I think that's early!

This is looking worse and worse for DB. There's no telling what could have happened in the hours after she had enough to drink to get drunk. That explains why she didn't hear anything if there was an intruder.

Don't forget Lisa was not the only child in the house....she was responsible for THREE children. Not ok. In any way.

 

[Turnadot]

IMO, these children should be taken to the police station and they will get a guardian to protect them as well, but they should be taken and questioned. None of us like to see our children hurt or upset, but think about this for one minute please, if your child saw something lets just say at a neighbors house, and the police wanted to question them, would you hold them back from that? If they were a potential witness would you stop them from catching lets say a kidnapper or a baby killer? If you look at it from that point of view, you would let your kids be questioned I believe, I know I would (IE, they had a description of a vehicle or a person that pulled another child off the street etc.). BUT if we were guilty of something, then thats a different story, you dont want those kids questioned. They might have the smallest clue that opens a HUGE door. I dont think they are going to be able to stop LE from questioning them at this point. Those kids will be court ordered to answer questions. As they should. (please note, I have nothing against those kids, they are innocent and my heart breaks for them but the law is the law and they can be questioned and its the only way we, well the police are going to get some answers). Sometimes to do the right thing, we have to do something that places another in an unfortunate circumstance. This is a necessary evil in my book.

No.

LE could question him. Once. With a child advocate present.

Again, my opinion is the same. If LE wanted to question my 5 year old more than once, they'd be SOL.

 

[21merc7]

Do we know where the father was the entire time? I thought I saw on t.v. that he was doing some repair work at a Starbucks. Was he there the entire time? Did he leave for parts? Did he leave for lunch break or any breaks?