LE Serves Warrant on Family Home #6

[cluciano63]

I don't see how this fuzzy video clip proves anything except that someone seems to have been out and about with a baby, could have been anyone, including family member of the parents, etc...

 

[jjenny]

I don't see how this fuzzy video clip proves anything except that someone seems to have been out and about with a baby, could have been anyone, including family member of the parents, etc...

You can't see any babies on that video. There is no babies.

 

[Rooster27]

But um...this man doesn't even fit the description witnesses gave, does it? :waitasec:

No it doesn't. I like how they say in the release that it supports the abduction theory, but my first thought was, that it was "in house". Someone who was involved with the family, assisting in something, transfer of baby (hopeful) or disposal of baby. 2:30? The couple, i believe, said they (or just the husband, according to first accounts as reported,) saw the baby close to midnight-ish? So I don't see how this relates to the man in the woods. Do they give a location of the woods where this "man in white" was seen? The time line doesn't work if it was close in time to the other baby sighting by the couple. Does anyone else, doubt that a man would be walking around outside for 3 or 4 hours with a baby? I do. Motorbike man is mentioned in the report right after this new surveillance information, as if they are tied together, but i can't see that. IMO

 

[curiousjo]

LE removed a roll of carpeting. We heard the cadaver dogs hit on carpet in master bedroom. Yet, the master bedroom still has carpet. Well- what if DB replaced the carpet with another piece - so, the clicking noise the boys heard was DB tacking the new carpet down. The LE did not take the carpet currently in master bedroom, because that was the replaced piece. The roll of carpet they took was the carpet that was actually in the room that night (before replaced) that they may have found stashed somewhere in the basement or garage after DB had removed it.

The man carrying the baby most likely stopped somewhere along the way - if they can figure out who he is then need to look at his car, home, etc.

 

[TxLady2]

Good to see you too! They took a whole bunch of stuff from the home so perhaps they're waiting on the results. Hopefully, the results will be back quickly!

I wonder where the items were sent for testing? Not the body farm.....anic:.

Not everything they took will be used in court, and a lot of it will turn out to be useless, evidence-wise. They nearly always end up taking a lot of stuff that COULD be evidence, but maybe isn't. That's standard procedure.
And yes, all of it has to be tested.
It's going to be a big blow if that spot that the HRD dog hit on turns out to be from 20 years ago.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

No it doesn't. I like how they say in the release that it supports the abduction theory, but my first thought was, that it was "in house". Someone who was involved with the family, assisting in something, transfer of baby (hopeful) or disposal of baby. 2:30? The couple, i believe, said they (or just the husband, according to first accounts as reported,) saw the baby close to midnight-ish? So I don't see how this relates to the man in the woods. Do they give a location of the woods where this "man in white" was seen? The time line doesn't work if it was close in time to the other baby sighting by the couple. Does anyone else, doubt that a man would be walking around outside for 3 or 4 hours with a baby? I do. Motorbike man is mentioned in the report right after this new surveillance information, as if they are tied together, but i can't see that. IMO

If you add the witness sightings to a map, and then add the video of the white blob (which doesn't have a baby that I can see), you get this:

1 am. man and woman on N Chelsea see man carrying a baby
2:19 dumpster fire responded to
2:30 white blob with no baby
4:am Motorcycle rider sees man dressed in white t and jeans with baby

So...did white blob set the baby down in the woods, start the dumpster fire, retrieve the baby from the woods, change clothes, and then walk all the way over to 48th and Randolph (3 miles away)?!

:waitasec:

 

[Tuffy]

Not everything they took will be used in court, and a lot of it will turn out to be useless, evidence-wise. They nearly always end up taking a lot of stuff that COULD be evidence, but maybe isn't. That's standard procedure.
And yes, all of it has to be tested.
It's going to be a big blow if that spot that the HRD dog hit on turns out to be from 20 years ago.

IMO, it'll be a big blow for the use of cadaver dogs period. I'd be willing to bet it all that more than one dog hit there. The FBI certainly has the resources to have a second dog on hand to confirm a positive hit, right? Especially, in a high profile case with a missing baby.

If this hit turns out to be that old, that leaves a lot of questions about how useful dogs like that are in a search.

 

[Rooster27]

If you add the witness sightings to a map, and then add the video of the white blob (which doesn't have a baby that I can see), you get this:

1 am. man and woman on N Chelsea see man carrying a baby
2:19 dumpster fire responded to
2:30 white blob with no baby
4:am Motorcycle rider sees man dressed in white t and jeans with baby

So...did white blob set the baby down in the woods, start the dumpster fire, retrieve the baby from the woods, change clothes, and then walk all the way over to 48th and Randolph (3 miles away)?!

:waitasec:

I am not sure if the reports have been exact about this, but the first sighting was around midnight, or 12:15, i thought. So three miles away, two hours later, there is a report of a fire and a "white blob" is seen leaving the area of the fire. Now i do see, when i look up directions between these two locations, that the highway is right there and convenient, it's kind of a straight shot isn't it? Maybe someone who lives nearby will weigh in on that fact, and the surveillance shows us the location being right near a large gas station....this could have been a way of obtaining gasoline perhaps? Wow. grabbing a straws, sorry. But If the man carrying the baby did use a vehicle nearby and an astute poster reminded us about the alleged phone call at 2:30, perhaps to someone who was picking him/her/blob/baby up after some deed was done, this could work i suppose. I still am having trouble with the 4:00am sighting. Not sure i believe the baby would be carried outside at this point though. Doesn't seem at all logical, unless someone didn't want any trace evidence in a car. Again JMO.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I don't even think it's shirt and pants-I think it's a robe.
The man supposedly seen with a baby is described as wearing dark jeans and white t-shirt.

Homeless wizard, perhaps?

 

[cluciano63]

I hate that the family's lawyers and reps are focused on disputing the search warrant, the hit, the carpet, etc...everything but on the missing baby...it just sickens me to watch as they attempt to defend their case, when these supposedly innocent parents have not so much been named as POI's. JMO

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I hate that the family's lawyers and reps are focused on disputing the search warrant, the hit, the carpet, etc...everything but on the missing baby...it just sickens me to watch as they attempt to defend their case, when these supposedly innocent parents have not so much been named as POI's. JMO

Exactly. You just know this gas station footage came from them.

"Looky! A person who appears to be going into the woods! Told ya!"

You could no doubt find endless video footage, from all over the city, and claim it had something to do with this case. It's stupid, imo.

 

[Sammiejam]

And the defense spin begins.

SICKENING!

I am sure that A MAN WALKS NEAR WOODS nearly every night of the friggin' week!

I bet the lawyer who so kindly walked the ABC through THE CRIME SCENE while pointing out supposed FLAWS in the police work, is the very same person that got the sinister surveillance footage of MAN WALKING NEAR WOODS and also gave THAT to the ABC to put with the rest of their lovely little story!

I can see where all this is headed and it breaks my heart. I pray there will be justice for the beautiful child. And that she is found soon.

 

[iluvmua]

And the defense spin begins.

SICKENING!

I am sure that A MAN WALKS NEAR WOODS nearly every night of the friggin' week!

I bet the lawyer who so kindly walked the ABC through THE CRIME SCENE while pointing out supposed FLAWS in the police work, is the very same person that got the sinister surveillance footage of MAN WALKING NEAR WOODS and also gave THAT to the ABC to put with the rest of their lovely little story!

I can see where all this is headed and it breaks my heart. I pray there will be justice for the beautiful child. And that she is found soon.

And that the parents of little Lisa be arrested very soon. I believe she is gone and one or both are involved.

 

[jjenny]

The motorcycle guy didn't even come forward for a week. How does he even know when he saw something (assuming he saw anything at all)? A week later I am not going to remember people I saw on the street. But look at the press mapping it in.

 

[Rooster27]

And the defense spin begins.

SICKENING!

I am sure that A MAN WALKS NEAR WOODS nearly every night of the friggin' week!

I bet the lawyer who so kindly walked the ABC through THE CRIME SCENE while pointing out supposed FLAWS in the police work, is the very same person that got the sinister surveillance footage of MAN WALKING NEAR WOODS and also gave THAT to the ABC to put with the rest of their lovely little story!

I can see where all this is headed and it breaks my heart. I pray there will be justice for the beautiful child. And that she is found soon.

I thought that too, when I first saw it. Just a random soul, walking near a random woods. Just a souped up press story from the lawyers. But doesn't the location tie in with something? Isn't that why they are relating it? Does anyone have the location info on the woods they were searching (not the area next to their house, the search that happened days earlier) the dumpster fire, and this surveillance footage location? I am going to look back.

 

[Pita]

Is anyone else thinking this is a possible accident cover up, I don't think she would have been buying baby wipes if she had murder on her mind..just a thought.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Is anyone else thinking this is a possible accident cover up, I don't think she would have been buying baby wipes if she had murder on her mind..just a thought.

My personal feeling is that whatever happened to Lisa was unintentional. That said, I'm loathe to call it an accident...more like criminal child endangerment.

JMO

 

[iluvmua]

I don't know if it was an accident or murder but .........something happened to cause Lisa to be killed.

 

[Sammiejam]

I think she bought the wipes and the food because a) to make everything appear *normal* like Lisa was still ok, (but Lisa was already gone) or b) she hadnt flipped out and murdered her yet.

 

[LadyPirate]

I really, really hope that it turns out Lisa was kidnapped because I can't stand the thoughts of a mother or father killing their own child.

IF it does turn out she was kidnapped, then what ramifications will this have on future cases such as this? Will a dogs alert be instantly dismissed? Will LE have to work even harder to prove their case? How many guilty parties will walk free because of it? It's disturbing to think of what the fallout could be.