Deborah Bradley & Jeremy Irwin - Dr. Phil Interview - 3 February 2012 #2

[Dr.Fessel]

Don't you just love how DB like to take us to school on almost every subject?

Explains the JI. Imagine how many times he has been schooled. He learned a long time ago not to say a word.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

But who would have helped her? How would she have gotten ahold of this person to have them assist her? She could not call out on any of the phones. So a friend or family member just happened to stop by, and DB said "Oh hey, glad you came over, I accidentally killed Lisa. Can you please go hide her body for me? Thanks, I'm gonna go to bed now."
Sorry for the sarcasm, but I just don't see how the logistics of this would have even worked. Another theory that I find possible, but not probable.

She had a car and just a short distance to the river.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I would think even a friend or relative of DBs even if they believe her to be innocent may not agree w/everything she does.

Yes I know what you mean. But I would hope that a friend or relative would talk to LE about anything that may help them in this case. To have these kind of things posted on the Internet serves what purpose? To make Debbie look bad to the public? I'm not sure of any other reason. Maybe I'm missing something.

 

[norest4thewicked]

But who would have helped her? How would she have gotten ahold of this person to have them assist her? She could not call out on any of the phones. So a friend or family member just happened to stop by, and DB said "Oh hey, glad you came over, I accidentally killed Lisa. Can you please go hide her body for me? Thanks, I'm gonna go to bed now."
Sorry for the sarcasm, but I just don't see how the logistics of this would have even worked. Another theory that I find possible, but not probable.

I didn't say positively that someone helped her. But that is just as possible as anything in this case. I personally believe that DB did it all by herself. She had 3 1/2 hours to do it and I just believe that she did. However, anything really is possible. Some things are more probable than others, but anything is possible. I always like to go back to the very basics and don't think that every single detail in a case is necessarily a clue. Often times, it is just the simplest of things that turn out to be what happened in a case.

 

[Sparklin]

"Our daughter is missing, the last thing we are going to do is talk about it"

This is the statement of the day, IMO....WOW, I cannot believe she said that.
What does one talk about after they discover their daughter missing, do they just ignore that this happened and move on. I cannot believe that JI did not discuss this with DB or ask questions about what they did at the house that night, what time LI was put to bed, what time the boys went to bed, ask who was over etc etc etc. What father comes home to this and NOT ask questions or discuss it. If you lose your car keys, you re-enact where you were, what you did, you keep going over it until you find them. But your daughter goes missing and you DO NOT TALK ABOUT IT.

This is the oddest and most concerning statement of the show...IMO This statement tells me that DB is guilty and did not want to discuss it, even with the father of LI.

The first time I listened, I thought the same thing..huh?? But then when I listened the second time, I got it. They were discussing the lights - ALL the lights versus the FEW lights. I believe, imo, what she meant was they didn't go over the initial Jeremy comes home and wakes her, but they have been concentrating on the fact that their daughter is gone and where the heck could she be and who has her.

 

[Donjeta]

But who would have helped her? How would she have gotten ahold of this person to have them assist her? She could not call out on any of the phones. So a friend or family member just happened to stop by, and DB said "Oh hey, glad you came over, I accidentally killed Lisa. Can you please go hide her body for me? Thanks, I'm gonna go to bed now."
Sorry for the sarcasm, but I just don't see how the logistics of this would have even worked. Another theory that I find possible, but not probable.

This is getting OT and I'm not convinced there was anybody but they have a computer, she could have emailed someone or called them on Skype, or borrowed the friend's phone, or someone was supposed to come over anyway, or that someone lives near enough to talk to in person.

 

[Coldpizza]

Explains the JI. Imagine how many times he has been schooled. He learned a long time ago not to say a word.

I hear ya, but all along that's been his demeanor. Just to be fair that could just be him.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

Conversely, if people think she's okay they won't be looking for a body.

And now the reward is only good for the safe return of Lisa. No reward for a body.

 

[octobermoon]

:cow:

There is something wrong.
And they know it.

:cow:

 

[norest4thewicked]

This is getting OT and I'm not convinced there was anybody but they have a computer, she could have emailed someone or called them on Skype, or borrowed the friend's phone, or someone was supposed to come over anyway, or that someone lives near enough to talk to in person.

Or, it could have happened earlier and everything DB did that night was staged....we don't really know...

 

[melissasmom]

She had a car and just a short distance to the river.

But I will reiterate, why was there no evidence of a dead body being in the car?

 

[Donjeta]

The first time I listened, I thought the same thing..huh?? But then when I listened the second time, I got it. They were discussing the lights - ALL the lights versus the FEW lights. I believe, imo, what she meant was they didn't go over the initial Jeremy comes home and wakes her, but they have been concentrating on the fact that their daughter is gone and where the heck could she be and who has her.

It's just a bit strange that they'd have to go over the story together when they both were there to begin with.

In effect her excuse is that their stories don't match because they didn't have time to agree which one of them would lie instead of say what s/he remembered.

 

[norest4thewicked]

I hear ya, but all along that's been his demeanor. Just to be fair that could just be him.

I believe JI is zombified because either that is just his personality, or he has an investment in the coverup and DB told him that she would take care of everything...just to follow her lead and let her do the talking. I don't really know which of these cases is true...but I strongly suspect that one of them is...

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I think you're assuming "the family" to be the Bradley Irwin family. I didn't say that. It's clear which family this source is close to.

Thanks. I get your point and I'll leave it at that.

 

[matou]

Those are physical descriptions used in the Amber Alert for somebody to look for if they see a baby that looks like her to distinguish her from other babies that look like her at the time. How would one know what to look for in a baby that cleared an ear infection? Especially if it was a casual encounter.

Ear infections can transfer from one ear to the other fairly easily. She never mentioned to the abductor(s) or to the general public that Lisa had an infection at all. The baby could have gotten worse in the hands of someone else who wouldn't know this and the ear drum could have burst. JMO MOO

 

[Valhall]

Yes I know what you mean. But I would hope that a friend or relative would talk to LE about anything that may help them in this case. To have these kind of things posted on the Internet serves what purpose? To make Debbie look bad to the public? I'm not sure of any other reason. Maybe I'm missing something.

I've thought about this myself. If you were close to a situation and you knew things that bothered you - those things that point to "something's just not right" - and you had a grave concern about the honesty of the people you were close to, and whether they may have done something very bad, BUT you had no proof that could implicate them....

how long would you be able to process this "hinky" information you are faced with - maybe even first-hand! - without you wanting to talk to someone that could get it out. What are the police going to do if you walk in and share the behavior that is concerning you? the behavior you find suspicious? the family comments that reflect doubt on a certain member of the family?

...the answer is the police are going to do nothing. And still, you have this increasing mound of information that eats at you....like you're privy to an unacceptable situation, or a crime covered....or, just flat wrongness.

I'd find someone to talk to. I would find someone who would speak for me.

While I absolutely agree that unnamed "anonymous" sources' information should be taken with a grain of salt, I also believe it's a fool's choice to completely dismiss them. There's some applicable box they most likely need to go in. Maybe "additional information for future reference".

As far as whether Debbie is being painted in good light or bad light, my heart doesn't leave much room for compassion when a person appears to do everything possible to rouse suspicion. Even severe OCD can't explain some of this.

Just my opinion.

 

[In da Middle]

This is a curious complaint.

First here is the entire piece of information relayed in the article from the source



So why did you just intentionally portray what was shared from that source as ONLY containing information about a tattoo? That's clearly not the case, now is it?

Second, let's pretend that the information that was shared was, in fact, limited to the tattoo information. Are you saying that there is some minimum level of information a source must provide before anyone should share what was shared? Do I have to go by word count or letter count? And irrespective of which, what are those minimums?

I was only responding to a previous post is all. Nothing more, nothing less.

ETA I have personally, physically seen her in the last two weeks with out sleeves and I personally, physically did not notice any tattoo. I also clarified that I was not looking for one either, though as I only saws her in her yard and did not know of any such thing at the time.

 

[highflyer]

:cow:

There is something wrong.
And they know it.

:cow:

They who?

 

[Sparklin]

It's just a bit strange that they'd have to go over the story together when they both were there to begin with.

In effect her excuse is that their stories don't match because they didn't have time to agree which one of them would lie instead of say what s/he remembered.

I think it's more along the lines of Jeremy being not only an electrician, but the bill payer, saw 'all the lights on' and Deb who had a few drinks before going to bed, thinks it was a 'few lights on'...

 

[Sparklin]

Nope. Still here. :fence:

Me too, me too ~ and very firmly too so move over