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

[Valhall]

I think the confusion lies where in your post you said it was not the BRADLEY IRWIN family. Maybe that was a typo?

It's not the family comprised of Deborah Bradley and Jeremy Irwin. It was a contact close to the Irwin family.

 

[alwaysonmymind]

I am not going to go into a big discussion about that. But there are a heck of a lot of people who begin relationships before they are divorced and are separated from their current spouse. It has no bearing on anything in this case in my opinion.

Really? A heck of a lot- that move-in, get pregnant and have a child while still married to someone else?

Not where I'm from.

 

[octobermoon]

Anyway, if JT is correct and cadaver dogs hit on dead skin cells a cadaver dog will hit in every car because people shed skin cells wherever they go.

JT is full of BS

IMO JMO MOO

 

[Moreack]

I haven't been able to keep up with this thread...

Seeing the mom on Dr. Phil made me believe her. Dad didn't say anything worth thinking about. I thought "they" did it, but now I'm not so sure.

 

[Donjeta]

So why is it that we don't believe the cadaver dog hit in the house means a cadaver in the because cadaver dogs aren't that accurate, but at the same time we believe that no cadaver dog hit in the car means no cadaver in the car because cadaver dogs are so accurate?

 

[In da Middle]

Perhaps because the tiny body was wrapped in blankets and/or towels and then layered in plastic bags. Then, put into a plastic box of some type and that wrapped in plastic bags and sealed, then finally, that package wrapped in plastic, sealed, and put in another plastic box. Then that box to be sealed with the tape from the dispenser that was taken from the house. Sort of like a "nesting dolls" situation. This "package" could have been transported for the short distance to the river and not be detected by the dogs. This is a simple scenario, and what I believe happened. I don't necessarily know that Lisa was taken in the family car, but I'm sure in my heart about the rest...

Wow, with all of that movement, it seems like a dog would have had to hit on much more than the 7 items listed on the search warrant I would think. And the dog handlers have said that a good dog should be able to detect this. I recommend a look at the HRD thread.

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

the only thing better than an un-named source is a "reliable" un-named source

MOO and all that jazz

 

[norest4thewicked]

So why is it that we don't believe the cadaver dog hit in the house means a cadaver in the because cadaver dogs aren't that accurate, but at the same time we believe that no cadaver dog hit in the car means no cadaver in the car because cadaver dogs are so accurate?

Just like the 9-11 conspiratory theorists - it's easier to believe that thousands of people in the US government were involved with making 9-11 happen, than to believe that 19 guys with box cutters did it. But, I won't get into that discussion here. Some just have their minds made up and can't accept logical theories.

 

[Donjeta]

Wow, with all of that movement, it seems like a dog would have had to hit on much more than the 7 items listed on the search warrant I would think. And the dog handlers have said that a good dog should be able to detect this. I recommend a look at the HRD thread.

Would they have brought back the plastic bags and the towels after disposing of her?

 

[Deleted member 39678]

So why is it that we don't believe the cadaver dog hit in the house means a cadaver in the because cadaver dogs aren't that accurate, but at the same time we believe that no cadaver dog hit in the car means no cadaver in the car because cadaver dogs are so accurate?

You mean a false negative? I don't think it could work that way. How could no hit mean anything?

 

[Sparklin]

It makes sense to me and I never thought that literally all the lights were on in the home (there was a list of five, four lamps or so somewhere) but while explaining away the presumed strangeness that an abductor would put on all the lights she created an inconsistency where there was none before. In previous instalments she had put out all the lights it was highly unusual for the lights to be left on and it was a clue that something was wrong. Now she's saying that it was normal to leave some lights on.

It was overexplained and overjustified imo and I must wonder if the story of the lights is one of the hard questions from LE.

SB supposedly said that she saw the lights go out when DB went to sleep but I wonder if there was another witness who said something else.

bbm = I always thought she meant the overhead ceiling lights, not necessarily every lamp or night light.

 

[Valhall]

You mean a false negative? I don't think it could work that way. How could no hit mean anything?

The same way that no DNA on an item doesn't mean that someone wasn't handling the item during a crime. No hit by a cadaver dog gives us no information, but it doesn't mean anything either way - it's not a yes or no.

A hit by a cadaver dog gives us information. How we choose to value it is another issue. Defense attorneys apparently value it much differently than I do.

 

[Sherbie]

Another curiosity for me was Deb's mentioning (again) the medicine she took and making sure to state (again) that it was NOT a narcotic. I am not a medical professional, but I've unfortunately had to take a boatload of medication most of my life. Plenty of them have cautions about taking with alcohol. Lots of meds besides narcotics can react with booze to exacerbate effects of one or both, lower blood sugar, blood pressure, etc.

So, okay...it wasn't a narcotic. Why the need to keep stressing that. I believe she's stated it was an anxiety med. I haven't taken those, but I would think they would also interact badly with alcohol depending on type/dose. Is this possibly a protests-too-much kinda thing? Might she have been upping her buzz a bit by supplementing with either her anxiety med or some other medication?

It just seems there are a lot of "it was insignificant" type declarations - leaving a baby in bed since late afternoon, drinking to excess, taking meds with alcohol, discrepancies in timelines, in accounts of things such as the lights. Like others have mentioned, stressing just how insignificant something is can tend to make you wonder sometimes.

 

[norest4thewicked]

Wow, with all of that movement, it seems like a dog would have had to hit on much more than the 7 items listed on the search warrant I would think. And the dog handlers have said that a good dog should be able to detect this. I recommend a look at the HRD thread.

Thank you for your recommendation. But I have read the HRD thread. I didn't see anywhere in it that stated that there would be too much movement for a dog hit. If everything was brought from around the house to the exact spot on the floor that Lisa laid before she was packaged up (sorry to say it this way), then I think it would have been easily done. I am one who doesn't believe all the big plotting and planning. I believe it was just an accident that was covered up.

 

[Donjeta]

You mean a false negative? I don't think it could work that way. How could no hit mean anything?

I don't know how to explain it any better. Why is it that the positive results of the HRD dog are believed to be false but at the same time a negative result absolutely means that there couldn't have been a body.

 

[In da Middle]

When did they search their cars? And how do we know there wasn't? They don't always keep a car.

There were many media reports regarding the cars on the 17th. We were wondering what they meant then. The search warrants states 'any and all vehicles' are to be re-searched on the 17 hour search. Why wouldn't they keep the car if a dog hit on it. Wouldn't that become evidence with a hit? A very major piece of the puzzle piece of evidence at that IMO.

 

[Sparklin]

So difficult to watch. She, (DB) is so in control of all of this! WOW! This gal thinks she is everything and forever..do you think she is REALLY bright enough to pull this off?

What say you, dear WS's??????????????

I don't think she is 'pulling' anything off at all, bright or not...I think she is a very sad mommy missing her baby girl.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

If she had not had her handlers with her, she could have been arrested if she was allowed to talk for the whole hour.

How does JI manage to fly under the radar? He is the most bland human around. Somebody needs to buy him a personality.

bbm:

:floorlaugh: hilarious ... and I hope you don't mind if I use your "saying" :innocent: ... it "fits" a few people I know ... lol ...

Now ... on a serious note ... JMO, but I "think" that one day Jeremy just might "break" ...

He is very WEAK, and again JMO, but I think that one day the "stress" will "take its toll" on him and he may BUST ...

And THAT IS WHY Deborah and the defense team do NOT want Jeremy to talk to LE ALONE ...

LE CAN -- and -- WILL BREAK Jeremy ...

Of course ... MOO ...

:seeya:

 

[melissasmom]

So why is it that we don't believe the cadaver dog hit in the house means a cadaver in the because cadaver dogs aren't that accurate, but at the same time we believe that no cadaver dog hit in the car means no cadaver in the car because cadaver dogs are so accurate?

I never said that cadaver dogs aren't that accurate. What I am trying to say is that if there had been a dead body in that car, I do not think that cadaver dogs would have passed it by.
I think the hesitancy about the cadaver dog hit in the house that some of us are having, is that even the experts here said if a dog hits, a second dog should be brought in to verify that the hit is good. There is no indication that a second dog hit on the same spot as the first dog. So it is questionable.
If the dog hit in the house, then it seems it would have also hit in the car (for those who believe the DB drove Lisa away). There wasnt even one hit on the car let alone two.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I don't know how to explain it any better. Why is it that the positive results of the HRD dog are believed to be false but at the same time a negative result absolutely means that there couldn't have been a body.

Were getting off topic here but it's not that the HRD dog hit is false, it's just not 100%. Much more on the two dog threads that we have.