Did Lisa's Mom do it? Poll

[Whocanitbenow]

Not everyone thinks DB is guilty. Many of us are on the fence.

While it was utterly dumb and disgraceful for her to be plastered and not remember the last time she saw Lisa, and I find that repulsive - I have to think of the other side of it, too: that doesn't mean she harmed Lisa, and it could have been the first time in months she got plastered (she said she has adult time 3-4 times a week, but that doesn't mean she gets drunk those nights); she comes across to me as naive and a bit childish (I mean that literally, not negatively), because she just puts everything out there to the media, says whatever comes to mind, without regard for how she comes across: defiant and a know-it-all, like a teenager. Her lawyer should tell her to stop talking with the media about herself, keep the focus on Lisa, hold up her photo, etc.

I am not going to say DB is guilty until there's actual evidence of it. I feel with Casey Anthony, it was a no-brainer. But in this case, it is possible that a "perfect storm", a collection of "just happened to's" created the perfect time for someone to kidnap Lisa. It would have been so easy that night.

As unlikely as the kidnapping scenario may seem, sometimes the most unlikely turns out to be true.

IMO

I think my post was kind of just frustration. I am trying to watch for information but a lot of seems to come from a " She is guilty" place, So it makes it hard to watch. I am new here and finding my way around, So forgive me please.. It just seems like most the threads are all coming from a place of guilt.

 

[marge_rita]

Dr. Drew is supposedly going to implicate others on his show tonight because he believes he checked the timeline and decided there wasn't time for Deborah to do "this".
:long annoyed sigh:

Dr. Drew is a sex therapyist and a drug counselor. What does he know about time lines? :banghead:

 

[iluvmua]

I don't understand how people can be so sure she did it and yet there is absolutely no evidence that she did anything. If there was she would be locked up. All speculation and no proof but every one is sure she is guilty. I am amazed.

I have known liars that will look right at you and lie, and some that will look away.. usually looking up is more of a sign of lying than looking down. But still, Speculation only..

Do I think this is the Mother of the year? No, But still she did not deserve to have her child stolen and be treated like a criminal from day one. I get that people are so jaded after Susan Smith and Casey Anthony.. But She is not them. Let's just look for Lisa first and wait until there is some proof before we convict someone.

Well, if Deborah is in fact innocent, she is trying her hardest to look Guilty.

 

[Pensfan]

Out of Dr. Drew's (the internal medicine doctor not a psychiatrist) mouth: Deborah's neighbor (chick with whom she got wasted) is estranged from her husband and the neighbor's husband wasn’t allowed home the night that Lisa was abducted.

He also said he was privy to info. that Deborah's family has a long history of abuse, neglect, and alcohol addiction.

 

[UMfanforever]

Out of Dr. Drew's (the internal medicine doctor not a psychiatrist) mouth: Deborah's neighbor (chick with whom she got wasted) is estranged from her husband and the neighbor's husband wasn’t allowed home the night that Lisa was abducted.

He also said he was privy to info. that Deborah's family has a long history of abuse, neglect, and alcohol addiction.

Child Protective needs to step in NOW and interview Deborah's kids about what happened that night, in addition to questions about any abuse when Deborah is drunk .

 

[Whocanitbenow]

Well, if Deborah is in fact innocent, she is trying her hardest to look Guilty.

See, I don't see guilt in her at all.

 

[Pensfan]

Dr. Drew is a sex therapyist and a drug counselor. What does he know about time lines? :banghead:

Actually he did his residency in internal medicine. (These docs mostly take care of elderly people and their chronic diseases.)

So...... was Dr. Drew's inside info. supposed to implicate the neighbor's husband or the neighbor? :long sigh:

 

[Turnadot]

I think my post was kind of just frustration. I am trying to watch for information but a lot of seems to come from a " She is guilty" place, So it makes it hard to watch. I am new here and finding my way around, So forgive me please.. It just seems like most the threads are all coming from a place of guilt.

I understand. I'm glad you decided to join in, and hope you stick around!

For me, I think it's far too early to say she's guilty.

One thing that I think of is that, she was plastered and has admitted to that. I know some believe it's a lie, but I really do believe she was drunk after watching her interviews, because she defends it. My personal opinion is that if she was smart enough to lie to set up a defense, she'd have been smart enough to fake contrition. In fact, she was so plastered she can't recall the last time she saw Lisa: was this woman really capable in her drunken state to not only kill her baby in some way, but then hide Lisa so well that LE can't find her? I just can't see it, really.

There's speculation that DB had help with hiding Lisa, but there's no evidence of either DB harming Lisa, or anyone helping her cover it up at all, so I kind of feel like imaginations are spinning and these theories are cropping up because this a sleuthing board, and people like to bounce off theories, but I can't imagine there can be a coherent one without evidence on which to base it on.

It's unlikely that she was so drunk she accidentally killed her baby, then covered it up, given her state at the time. But possible.

It's also unlikely a kidnapper took Lisa, turned on the lights, took the cell phones, then walked right out the door. But possible.

Hence my azz getting sore on this fence.

IMO

 

[Minette]

I am not going to say DB is guilty until there's actual evidence of it. I feel with Casey Anthony, it was a no-brainer. But in this case, it is possible that a "perfect storm", a collection of "just happened to's" created the perfect time for someone to kidnap Lisa. It would have been so easy that night.

As unlikely as the kidnapping scenario may seem, sometimes the most unlikely turns out to be true.

IMO

Thank you, this expresses my position as well. People say "it just couldn't happen" about someone coming into a house full of people and taking a baby, but there was a poster here who had that happen to her own baby brother
25 years ago.

STRANGE stuff happens all the time. Here in Georgia in the past week, someone wearing full camouflage and a ski-mask broke into a home one morning after the wife of the homeowner went to work and had a physical confrontation with the homeowner. The intruder ended up being shot in the head and died during the struggle. Sadly, that scenario isn't all that outlandish. BUT--the intruder was a former co-worker of the homeowner, a registered nurse......and a 53 year old woman. LE has no idea why she broke into the house but no charges are expected to be filed against the homeowner. Her car was found parked a mile away from the home.

 

[Whocanitbenow]

I understand. I'm glad you decided to join in, and hope you stick around!

For me, I think it's far too early to say she's guilty.

One thing that I think of is that, she was plastered and has admitted to that. I know some believe it's a lie, but I really do believe she was drunk after watching her interviews, because she defends it. My personal opinion is that if she was smart enough to lie to set up a defense, she'd have been smart enough to fake contrition. In fact, she was so plastered she can't recall the last time she saw Lisa: was this woman really capable in her drunken state to not only kill her baby in some way, but then hide Lisa so well that LE can't find her? I just can't see it, really.

There's speculation that DB had help with hiding Lisa, but there's no evidence of either DB harming Lisa, or anyone helping her cover it up at all, so I kind of feel like imaginations are spinning and these theories are cropping up because this a sleuthing board, and people like to bounce off theories, but I can't imagine there can be a coherent one without evidence on which to base it on.

It's unlikely that she was so drunk she accidentally killed her baby, then covered it up, given her state at the time. But possible.

It's also unlikely a kidnapper took Lisa, turned on the lights, took the cell phones, then walked right out the door. But possible.

Hence my azz getting sore on this fence.

IMO

See I am having a hard time catching up with the threads so I am having trouble with what may be speculation and what is actually based on facts of the case. It moves fast here. I just need to get the hang of it. Thanks for sharing your theory with me..

 

[Turnadot]

See I am having a hard time catching up with the threads so I am having trouble with what may be speculation and what is actually based on facts of the case. It moves fast here. I just need to get the hang of it. Thanks for sharing your theory with me..

I had the same problem when I first signed up. I generally take the media, speculations, and pet theories, with a grain of salt.

The only things I know for sure about this case are: Lisa is missing, and DB was the only confirmed adult inside the home at the time.

Everything else is spin; he said, she said between LE and DB. Now, I'm not saying LE is lying, but legally, they can and do lie, so I'm not gung-ho about taking them at face value.

So I'm between a rock and a hard place, because considering that DB was drunk, I can't take any of her recollections of that night at face value, either.

I just hope the search turns up evidence, hopefully of a live and well Lisa.

 

[Minette]

When a child is hurt or killed, there is always a desire to punish someone. That is natural. But sometimes I feel that mothers get held responsible out of all proportion because we as a society (and human beings!) believe that the mother-child bond is sacred, or should be. And sadly, we know it isn't always, but I honestly do believe that the initial reaction to a child's death on a mother's "watch" invokes a sort of visceral reaction, especially if the mother in question isn't picture perfect.

Here's an example from my neck of the woods:

Last year, a mother and her 3 children got off a bus and stood on the median of a busy highway, waiting to cross. Her 4-year old son, A.J., pulled away from her hand and ran into traffic. He was struck and killed by a guy who had been drinking and taking meds and had two previous hit and run convictions. Result? The driver was convicted for a hit-and-run and served 6 months. (Yeah. He served less than a year for his other two convictions.) The mother was convicted of second-degree vehicular homicide, reckless conduct, and failure to use a crosswalk. She could potentially have served more time than the man who actually hit and killed her son!

Was it a great idea for her to be trying to cross a street with three children not using a cross walk? No. But how is she worse than a guy who now has three hit and run convictions?? Because in the eyes of society she's the mother, and her kid got killed on her watch, that's why. Anyway, the mom in this case has just opted to have a whole new trial instead of taking the sentence she was given of 12 months probation and 40 hours community service. It was the judge who offered her the option of a new trial, not the result of appeal. It's a weird case, and I apologize if this is totally O/T, but I see a bit of this at play with DB as well, because she's admitted she's a less than perfect mommy.
http://www.ajc.com/news/cobb/jaywalking-mom-taking-big-1205934.html

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43896116/ns/today-today_people/t/mom-thankful-no-jail-sons-jaywalking-death/#.Tp-BQmDe74c

And now, between sitting on this fence and sitting on this computer chair, my azz has gone to sleep so I'm going to take it to bed. I hope to wake up tomorrow to the news that Lisa has been found safe and well. (What can I say, I'm an eternal optimist.)

 

[MsMacGyver]

When a child is hurt or killed, there is always a desire to punish someone. That is natural. But sometimes I feel that mothers get held responsible out of all proportion because we as a society (and human beings!) believe that the mother-child bond is sacred, or should be. And sadly, we know it isn't always, but I honestly do believe that the initial reaction to a child's death on a mother's "watch" invokes a sort of visceral reaction, especially if the mother in question isn't picture perfect.

Here's an example from my neck of the woods:

Last year, a mother and her 3 children got off a bus and stood on the median of a busy highway, waiting to cross. Her 4-year old son, A.J., pulled away from her hand and ran into traffic. He was struck and killed by a guy who had been drinking and taking meds and had two previous hit and run convictions. Result? The driver was convicted for a hit-and-run and served 6 months. (Yeah. He served less than a year for his other two convictions.) The mother was convicted of second-degree vehicular homicide, reckless conduct, and failure to use a crosswalk. She could potentially have served more time than the man who actually hit and killed her son!

Was it a great idea for her to be trying to cross a street with three children not using a cross walk? No. But how is she worse than a guy who now has three hit and run convictions?? Because in the eyes of society she's the mother, and her kid got killed on her watch, that's why. Anyway, the mom in this case has just opted to have a whole new trial instead of taking the sentence she was given of 12 months probation and 40 hours community service. It was the judge who offered her the option of a new trial, not the result of appeal. It's a weird case, and I apologize if this is totally O/T, but I see a bit of this at play with DB as well, because she's admitted she's a less than perfect mommy.
http://www.ajc.com/news/cobb/jaywalking-mom-taking-big-1205934.html

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43896116/ns/today-today_people/t/mom-thankful-no-jail-sons-jaywalking-death/#.Tp-BQmDe74c

And now, between sitting on this fence and sitting on this computer chair, my azz has gone to sleep so I'm going to take it to bed. I hope to wake up tomorrow to the news that Lisa has been found safe and well. (What can I say, I'm an eternal optimist.)

Thanks button wasn't enough....Well said.....:seeya:

 

[Chewy]

It's not some "sacred bond" to have a mother try to cross a busy roadway with a 4 year old that she had a hard time controlling and JAY WALKING so he ran out into traffic.

It's common sense. People get pissed off at mothers who don't seem to have any freaking common sense and leave horrible messes for the rest of society to deal with and have to rule on.


Common sense is that "adult time" is not a good idea with a sick kid in the house and dad gone until 4:30 in the morning.

People are annoyed because it seems like this is yet another stupid mother who has children and is reckless about that responsibility.


Then expects society to feel sorry for her when it goes horribly wrong.

 

[Abby Normal]

Speaking for myself, I think this is a load of bunk. I think it's pop-psychology that's been popularised in books and TV, but I've not seen any peer-reviewed study that supports it. Not one. As a matter of fact, everything I've read seems to debunk it. From my own studies the eyes have 3 zones, upper left or right is processing visually. When the eyes move to the lower zone, the person is processing feelings. When in the middle zone, the person is processing sound. And not everyone conforms to even that model. In other words, there's not a one size fits all. I often look to the left when answering a question, because I'm reconstructing. That's how I remember things, by reconstructing events.

The only real way to tell if someone is lying is if they tell you, or you catch them in a lie.

IMO

This is about what I've gathered in academic journals as well- give or take depending on the scope of the study.

If you watch someone when you aren't trying to catch them in a lie, or when you are confident they are telling the truth, their eyes will veer off too. The other day the FBI spokes person was looking off to her left, the thing is- she wasn't saying anything interesting enough to be lying. She was simply looking off to the left. Nothing more nothing less.

 

[MsMacGyver]

Thanks, but I hope you don't think I was trying to "school" you or prove you wrong or anything like that. We all have our own opinions and experiences. What I think is bunk may work well for you in sussing out liars.

I mean, no peer review supports the existence of God, yet I still believe. I'm just saying that like you nicely stated, it's not black and white.

Not to worry...I took no offense ...my post was totally honest...You make alot of sense and are very straightforward..I enjoy that in a person.....

Ice packs work wonders for sore bottoms.....I'm having the same problem....:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[southern_comfort]

When a child is hurt or killed, there is always a desire to punish someone. That is natural. But sometimes I feel that mothers get held responsible out of all proportion because we as a society (and human beings!) believe that the mother-child bond is sacred, or should be. And sadly, we know it isn't always, but I honestly do believe that the initial reaction to a child's death on a mother's "watch" invokes a sort of visceral reaction, especially if the mother in question isn't picture perfect.

Here's an example from my neck of the woods:

Last year, a mother and her 3 children got off a bus and stood on the median of a busy highway, waiting to cross. Her 4-year old son, A.J., pulled away from her hand and ran into traffic. He was struck and killed by a guy who had been drinking and taking meds and had two previous hit and run convictions. Result? The driver was convicted for a hit-and-run and served 6 months. (Yeah. He served less than a year for his other two convictions.) The mother was convicted of second-degree vehicular homicide, reckless conduct, and failure to use a crosswalk. She could potentially have served more time than the man who actually hit and killed her son!

Was it a great idea for her to be trying to cross a street with three children not using a cross walk? No. But how is she worse than a guy who now has three hit and run convictions?? Because in the eyes of society she's the mother, and her kid got killed on her watch, that's why. Anyway, the mom in this case has just opted to have a whole new trial instead of taking the sentence she was given of 12 months probation and 40 hours community service. It was the judge who offered her the option of a new trial, not the result of appeal. It's a weird case, and I apologize if this is totally O/T, but I see a bit of this at play with DB as well, because she's admitted she's a less than perfect mommy.
http://www.ajc.com/news/cobb/jaywalking-mom-taking-big-1205934.html

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43896116/ns/today-today_people/t/mom-thankful-no-jail-sons-jaywalking-death/#.Tp-BQmDe74c

And now, between sitting on this fence and sitting on this computer chair, my azz has gone to sleep so I'm going to take it to bed. I hope to wake up tomorrow to the news that Lisa has been found safe and well. (What can I say, I'm an eternal optimist.)

I do understand what you are saying, but you lost me in the first sentence, where you lamented that "mothers get held responsible out of all proportion".

Being a mother is a gigantic responsibility. Completely innocent, helpless human beings depend on their mothers to a degree that is "out of all proportion". It makes perfect sense that a mother's responsibility to nurture and protect is, likewise, out of all proportion. It IS out of all proportion.

We, as a society, have forgotten how naturally immense a mother's responsibility is. In the age of feminism and working mothers and abortion and villages, we have forgotten! There is no substitute for what a mother used to provide (and still does in some cases... thank you, to those moms). I, personally, do not feel that anything is gained for womanhood when we forsake motherhood. To the contrary: What we lose is immeasurable.

This isn't directed at you, but I'll take the opportunity to say that I am appalled at the attitudes I've seen about mothering in the wake of this. I truly had no idea that things had reached this state. Every time I see someone defend the idea of a mother getting drunk while having sole responsibility for an infant... as though there can be any excuse for it at all!!!!... my jaw drops and I quite literally have to sit here for a moment, speechless, and heartbroken for all of these children.

 

[carole]

I do understand what you are saying, but you lost me in the first sentence, where you lamented that "mothers get held responsible out of all proportion".

Being a mother is a gigantic responsibility. Completely innocent, helpless human beings depend on their mothers to a degree that is "out of all proportion". It makes perfect sense that a mother's responsibility to nurture and protect is, likewise, out of all proportion. It IS out of all proportion.

We, as a society, have forgotten how naturally immense a mother's responsibility is. In the age of feminism and working mothers and abortion and villages, we have forgotten! There is no substitute for what a mother used to provide (and still does in some cases... thank you, to those moms). I, personally, do not feel that anything is gained for womanhood when we forsake motherhood. To the contrary: What we lose is immeasurable.

This isn't directed at you, but I'll take the opportunity to say that I am appalled at the attitudes I've seen about mothering in the wake of this. I truly had no idea that things had reached this state. Every time I see someone defend the idea of a mother getting drunk while having sole responsibility for an infant... as though there can be any excuse for it at all!!!!... my jaw drops and I quite literally have to sit here for a moment, speechless, and heartbroken for all of these children.

Amen.

 

[MsMacGyver]

I heard it reported on NG tonight and also a very kind fellow sleuther pointed out that LE did find the homeless man so thats off my list. Not that NG reports are without mistakes...don't get me started on how much incorrect information comes from some news outlets....It becomes a problem when LE starts pulling things to obtain responses, now I wonder if LE is telling the whole story also...not good!
When I watch the video of mom and brother out buying booze and baby wipes, she appears to just be shopping, no worries. I realize this could be misleading but I find myself backing up a few steps...

For me, one piece of evidence at this point thats critical is finding whether mom said Lisa was sick, cough and cold. I will search tomorrow as my behind is also suffering.
I believe this is important because...if Lisa was sick, it's possible she did experience some kind of health issue and passed away in her crib while mom was outside drinking. It is possible Lisa was more ill than mom will admit. Mom could have found her deceased and went into cover up mode. DB, from LE reports, did fail the question of did she know where Lisa is. This bothers me but I also know that lie detector tests are not reliable, thats why their not admitted as evidence in a court of law. Alot depends on whose running the show, this info we don't have. LE are the good guys, my brother is with the K9 unit. Their not above reproach. It seems LE has certain areas they have visited and those areas have lead them back to the home.
When I get lost I always go back to the beginning..I told my daughter..."this mom knows what happened"

 

[Turnadot]

I do understand what you are saying, but you lost me in the first sentence, where you lamented that "mothers get held responsible out of all proportion".

Being a mother is a gigantic responsibility. Completely innocent, helpless human beings depend on their mothers to a degree that is "out of all proportion". It makes perfect sense that a mother's responsibility to nurture and protect is, likewise, out of all proportion. It IS out of all proportion.

We, as a society, have forgotten how naturally immense a mother's responsibility is. In the age of feminism and working mothers and abortion and villages, we have forgotten! There is no substitute for what a mother used to provide (and still does in some cases... thank you, to those moms). I, personally, do not feel that anything is gained for womanhood when we forsake motherhood. To the contrary: What we lose is immeasurable.

This isn't directed at you, but I'll take the opportunity to say that I am appalled at the attitudes I've seen about mothering in the wake of this. I truly had no idea that things had reached this state. Every time I see someone defend the idea of a mother getting drunk while having sole responsibility for an infant... as though there can be any excuse for it at all!!!!... my jaw drops and I quite literally have to sit here for a moment, speechless, and heartbroken for all of these children.

I respect your feelings, but not every woman bases her measure of womanhood on motherhood.

I sure as hell don't. My son means more to me than anyone in this world, but I'm not defined by my ability to have babies. Some women "forsake" motherhood because they don't have maternal instincts, don't want babies. In their case, it's the responsible thing to do. My womanhood is directly related to my honour, character, and strong code of ethics. I'd rather be a woman on my own terms rather than because of my uterus. The uterus is a happenstance of nature; my position in life and how I got where I am today, is not.

I've not forgotten; I'll just be damned if someone else gets to define what make me a woman.*


*Not saying you did this, it's just a general comment.

e2a: This was just some of my random personal thoughts on my own womanhood. I respect your views very much and didn't mean this post as a challenge, or debate with you. I was just musing.