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

[norest4thewicked]

Devil's advocate: Maybe she doesn't have an overpowering, grandiose personality but is fed up with being accused of harming or disappearing her child?

Oh, THAT (her grandiose personality) has been shown in her very first interviews, before she was ever "accused" and also from people who have known her in the past. The people who said they knew her from before said this was her personality.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

By not just focusing on that one sentence, but the entire context of the conversation they are having at the time, I take it as she is not saying that is what he said, but what others are exaggerating about that is what he said. Aren't they, at that time, talking about what others are misstating?

The entire context of the conversation was that they wanted to let people know that JI didn't actually find most or all of the lights on as he/they had originally said (not b/c other people were exaggerating it).

DB talked about JI being an electrician and always aware of the lights, always going behind her turning them off. She was clearly saying that because of his hypervigilance with lights, he had exaggerated when he said most/all (<---take your pick, doesn't matter) the lights were on.

They didn't compare notes on the lights early on because they were focused solely on Lisa, she said. Now that they've had a chance to sort it out, they want us to know that only a few specific lights were actually on.

The point really wasn't about outsiders exaggerating anything. The point was that they, after having time to reflect on it, wanted to clarify that their original contention about the number of lights was incorrect and that the change shouldn't be viewed as an inconsistency, but rather a clarification.

In this segment you can see that Deborah begins by talking about being drunk, how it has been "blown so far out of proportion . . .," then she talks about how her drinking on the porch has been blown into "such a theatrical, giant 'theory-fest' . . ." She goes into detail of the rumors of which she is aware. ". . . the internet . . . can also make way for giant rumor mills. . ." Then she talks about how this distracts people from looking for Baby Lisa and this point Dr Phil defends, to some degree, the peoples' concerns by saying "I think people jumped on this alcohol thing because you gave an interview on the 5th of October. . . "
They both then go into some details about her drinking. THEN Dr Phil says, ". . . so you were drunk. But do you remember, for example, you reported that the lights in the house were turned off. . ."
And that is how the the entirety of the conversation evolved from drinking to theory-fest back to drinking and finally segued into the lights discussion.
IMO, it could be part of what she feels the public has not understood.

http://drphil.com/slideshows/slideshow/6721/?id=6721&showID=1783 (The first link with the small camera beside it.)

 

[norest4thewicked]

It's just really hard to believe that an intruder would sneak into a house and then turn on the lamp in the front living room, two kitchen lights, accent lights and the plug in light.

It's a very small house, easily seen from the outside. If the neighbors could see if lights were on or off from the outside, if an intruder could see if lights were on or off from the outside, the intruder would have known that they could have been spotted from the outside by turning on lights. Plus adding in taking the chance that it would wake up the people inside the house.

If the accent lights are usually left on then it would have been enough light to get around for a kidnapper.

JMHO

^^^^Agree with this 100%^^^^

 

[francie]

She doesn't look happy to me IMO. She looks like someone that has a ton of guilt to live with. What that guilt actually is....we don't know for sure yet.

Debbie looked happy to me when telling a local reporter how "excited" (her word) she was to go on McGraw's show and was releasing new pics of Lisa for the supposed audience of 7 million people. Which begs the question, why didn't she release those pics when Lisa "disappeared", why wait until after 3 months of silence. And the pics are old now anyways because Lisa is older. If she’s alive. And why is Debbie licensing Lisa's pics for money instead of giving them to media?? I saw on HuffPost that the licensing agreement for Lisa’s pics had expired when Debbie was in hiding. I see zero guilt that Lisa is gone or desperate sadness like we see in other parents whose children are truly abducted. She cried at first but apparently couldn't keep up the pretense so she went into hiding & still refuses to cooperate with police. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out. All JMO.

 

[natsound]

Hearing now that the poor baby had an ongoing ear infection really angers me. You do not close a child up in her room,especially an infant, just because she is 'fussy' when she actually has an infection like that, imo. She was in pain and she needed comfort and attention and meds and putting her in bed at 4 and 5 and 6:40 and then ignoring her so you can get drunk is not the sign of a loving mother. imo

My experience with young ones and an ear infection is that it hurts and they can get a fever from it. If any of this is true, Lisa may have been given antibiotics and a pain reliever/fever reducer like baby Tylenol, and that may have made her very drowsy. However, to put the baby to bed at 6:40 and then never checking on her again.... that's crazy.

 

[mrsu]

Or the main overhead lights were off and the neighbor couldn't see the lamp light in the living room or the smaller lights in the kitchen. IF the blinds/curtains were closed, I'm not sure how one would see this and know for 100% certainty. Also...how drunk is the neighbor?

Also...does this neighbor live across the street? right next door? If she lived right next door, I don't know how she would know all the lights were out unless she went out her front door and stood in front of Debbie's house.

 

[melissasmom]

It's just really hard to believe that an intruder would sneak into a house and then turn on the lamp in the front living room, two kitchen lights, accent lights and the plug in light.

It's a very small house, easily seen from the outside. If the neighbors could see if lights were on or off from the outside, if an intruder could see if lights were on or off from the outside, the intruder would have known that they could have been spotted from the outside by turning on lights. Plus adding in taking the chance that it would wake up the people inside the house.

If the accent lights are usually left on then it would have been enough light to get around for a kidnapper.

JMHO

I was thinking about the light thing. DB said that both of the boys initially were in her bed, then I guess later one of them went back to their own bed. If DB said she turned the lights off before she went to sleep, maybe the little boy turned some lights on when he went to his own bed. My kids do that all the time. Get up in the middle of the night to go to the bathroom, and leave a trail of lights in their wake. And of course they don't turn them back off, so when I get up in the morning I'm like, "Oh, I see one of the kids must have been up last night."
Just a thought.

 

[francie]

Devil's advocate: Maybe she doesn't have an overpowering, grandiose personality but is fed up with being accused of harming or disappearing her child?

If she's fed up with being accused, why doesn't she tell the complete truth, at least to police, to clear up all the inconsistencies? JMO.

 

[octobermoon]

I was wrong he does hold her hand.

 

[natsound]

If she's fed up with being accused, why doesn't she tell the complete truth, at least to police, to clear up all the inconsistencies? JMO.

It's telling to me that DB uses the word "story" to describe what happened that night. She says she and JI didn't "compare stories" until several days later.

 

[mrsu]

If she's fed up with being accused, why doesn't she tell the complete truth, at least to police, to clear up all the inconsistencies? JMO.

I'm not defending her what so ever, but what if she feels like she has told the truth and that having the police keep talking to her is barking up the wrong tree.

I really have no clue what happened anymore. :innocent:

What do we make of the man spotted with the baby several times throughout the night? All that was explained away and verified to be 100% not involved?? Those men have come forward and said it was me and police have verified the child was not Lisa? If not, for me, the sightings need to be 100% disproved in order for me to focus on Debbie. If those men haven't come forward...why not? I'm almost certain that was ALL OVER the local news. Surely someone would come forward if it was indeed them in order to rule out that theory.

 

[natsound]

And DB says the "all the lights on" thing was an exaggeration. Why would JI even say "why are all the lights on" or even "most of the lights on", when all that was on, according to DB, were the track lights in the computer room, a small lamp in the living room, the stove light and a clock radio?

Essentially, the only room lit up was the computer room. Why would JI ask why all the lights were on, or most of the lights were on? I don't think he did. It seems this was part of DB's "story", the one she didn't compare with JI until days later.

 

[norest4thewicked]

Also...does this neighbor live across the street? right next door? If she lived right next door, I don't know how she would know all the lights were out unless she went out her front door and stood in front of Debbie's house.

My understanding is that she lives one house over from DB, across the street, but I'm not positive on that. I know she doesn't live next door.

 

[cityslick]

Debbie looked happy to me when telling a local reporter how "excited" (her word) she was to go on McGraw's show and was releasing new pics of Lisa for the supposed audience of 7 million people. Which begs the question, why didn't she release those pics when Lisa "disappeared", why wait until after 3 months of silence. And the pics are old now anyways because Lisa is older. If she’s alive. And why is Debbie licensing Lisa's pics for money instead of giving them to media?? I saw on HuffPost that the licensing agreement for Lisa’s pics had expired when Debbie was in hiding. I see zero guilt that Lisa is gone or desperate sadness like we see in other parents whose children are truly abducted. She cried at first but apparently couldn't keep up the pretense so she went into hiding & still refuses to cooperate with police. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out. All JMO.

What do you mean, DB licensing pics for money? Do you have a link that verifies that?

 

[norest4thewicked]

I was thinking about the light thing. DB said that both of the boys initially were in her bed, then I guess later one of them went back to their own bed. If DB said she turned the lights off before she went to sleep, maybe the little boy turned some lights on when he went to his own bed. My kids do that all the time. Get up in the middle of the night to go to the bathroom, and leave a trail of lights in their wake. And of course they don't turn them back off, so when I get up in the morning I'm like, "Oh, I see one of the kids must have been up last night."
Just a thought.

But, the big thing that JI was stating was that the lights in the front were on. I doubt a child whose bedroom was in the back would go out and turn the front lights on while going to the bathroom.

 

[cityslick]

And DB says the "all the lights on" thing was an exaggeration. Why would JI even say "why are all the lights on" or even "most of the lights on", when all that was on, according to DB, were the track lights in the computer room, a small lamp in the living room, the stove light and a clock radio?

Essentially, the only room lit up was the computer room. Why would JI ask why all the lights were on, or most of the lights were on? I don't think he did. It seems this was part of DB's "story", the one she didn't compare with JI until days later.

I think it's just a figure of speech. You're looking too hard into the words. If I saw one room on, I'd probably say something similar, why are the 'lights' on, even though one room was lit.

 

[norest4thewicked]

It's telling to me that DB uses the word "story" to describe what happened that night. She says she and JI didn't "compare stories" until several days later.

I noticed that too and found it odd. DB admitted in the beginning that she had watched a lot of shows on television about crime stories. Please don't ask me to find a link...haha. But, she did say it, I promise!

 

[norest4thewicked]

I'm not defending her what so ever, but what if she feels like she has told the truth and that having the police keep talking to her is barking up the wrong tree.

I really have no clue what happened anymore. :innocent:

What do we make of the man spotted with the baby several times throughout the night? All that was explained away and verified to be 100% not involved?? Those men have come forward and said it was me and police have verified the child was not Lisa? If not, for me, the sightings need to be 100% disproved in order for me to focus on Debbie. If those men haven't come forward...why not? I'm almost certain that was ALL OVER the local news. Surely someone would come forward if it was indeed them in order to rule out that theory.

About the spotting of the baby and the man - It wasn't several times, it was two times with 3 sightings. The first time was a husband who was outside and spotted what he thought was a man with a baby and this was around midnight. Then he told his wife who looked out through the blinds of her house and said she saw it too. That was in the area of the Irwin home. Then, hours later (around 4 am I think) and miles away, a man on a motorcycle said he saw a man with a baby. My personal thought about the last sighting is that it was just someone coming forward with a story after hearing about this case and wanting some camera time. Those were the only supposed sightings.

 

[natsound]

I think it's just a figure of speech. You're looking too hard into the words. If I saw one room on, I'd probably say something similar, why are the 'lights' on, even though one room was lit.

It's strange to me, because supposedly JI asked her "why are all the lights on?" When really there was only one light on that would light an entire room.

I believe DB is sticking to her story that she turned all the lights off. Are we to believe the intruder turned the stove light on, and the small lamp on in the living room?

 

[cityslick]

It's strange to me, because supposedly JI asked her "why are all the lights on?" When really there was only one light on that would light an entire room.

I believe DB is sticking to her story that she turned all the lights off. Are we to believe the intruder turned the stove light on, and the small lamp on in the living room?

The problem here is DB's 'story' of turning all the lights off can't be disputed at this time, because SB says the lights were 'off' at 11:30pm. Unless there is another witness that saw lights get turned on after that time.

If the lights were still on when SB saw the house, then it's an obvious lie.