sarx
Verified Expert/Professional in SAR and K9SAR
Or perhaps that the dogs couldn't pick up anything after that much time with no body there?
The engaged couple's two boys, 5 and 8, were also in the house at the time. When Irwin, 29, returned around 3:45 a.m. from a late work shift, he says the front door was unlocked, lights were on, a window was open and their daughter was missing.
BritsKate - I agree. She drank, got frustrated and now I'm thinking banged the baby's head against the floor in her room over and over or choked her. DB's demeanor to me is one of horrible regret/sorrow and fear. Fear she will be caught and can't un-do what she did while intoxicated. I do feel sorry for her, but mostly I was hoping that poor baby was truly taken and would be returned and now it seems the most obvious thing we all feared did happen - mom lost it and killed the baby.
Some of us were wondering if anyone else had died in that house, possibly in that bedroom. If so we wondered if the dogs could still "hit" on it.
This woman lived there, the one in the document, but there is no obituary that the person found attached to that name.:innocent:
Just a thought. What if while DB was on the stoop drinking wine the boys got the baby out and they were playing in Mom and DAd's room. She fell off the bed and was dead but the boys didn't pay attention. Instead of DB reacting like a mother should and call911 that her baby wasn't breathing she protected the boys. I know this a long shot and I'll get many pfffft responses but I have to wonder. They don't want to boys talking to cops anymore. Why?????? They handled this all wrong because I don't believe that this mother killed this child either intentionally or by shaken baby syndrome. I won't believe it till I read it. Thoughts?
ETA: I do not believe this child was murdered but still if accident they handled it all wrong. I hope they talk and soon. I am so sad over these results.
Or perhaps that the dogs couldn't pick up anything after that much time with no body there?
Bouncing off your thread thank you...I can understand you feeling sorry for her, I really do. But, I have to say I don't, because she is causing added suffering for her children (they have no closure etc.), the whole town, family members, friends, LE & their families. This case is costing a fortune & it ain't over by any means. No, she is being selfish for not telling the truth, whatever the truth may be! It is the selfishness that is causing me to not feel sorry for her. I am not sure if Jeremy is not involved either, something is wrong there...I can't see him being in that much denial IYKWM? Thinking about Kayne (Kyron's Dad). If he is in denial, when the truth comes out...well my heart breaks thinking about it.
I also totally believe the wine was a cover-up for the "I can't remember" scenario, although, I am sure she had a glass or two. Makes me wonder when this happened. She seemed a bit proud & wanted to be clear the message was she "could have blacked out." Why would someone want to get that message across? :innocent:
I haven't seen any links about the neighbor seeing or not seeing the baby but I have been wondering if it is the reason DB changed her timeline. Maybe she had to put Lisa to bed earlier because the neighbor didn't see Lisa and was there at 7.30 and didn't see DB putting her to bed.
Here's what I don't understand . Why is it easier to believe a mother would not try to save her child,and would discard that child,as opposed to a mother who would kill her baby?
I know a lot of people think there might have been an accident ,but what mother would look at her baby and just assume the child could not be saved ? Would not care enough, to try? To have a service of some sort? A burial or cremation?
IMO ,if a mother could so easily let their child go without getting help,they could also hurt that baby, because they didn't care enough to begin with.
I mean no disrespect to you ,KLjohnson,but I am not following the reasoning.
correct me if I am wrong but we have..
Lisa not actually seen, accept by parents since Sunday Birthday party
Father accepts the night shift job on Monday the day of the job
Neighbor dosen't see the baby while over drinking on front step from 6:30-10:30
Something happened either Sunday night or Monday IMO
I've had the same thought.
Perhaps the neighbor came over shortly after 6:40 (which is why DB changed her timeline to putting the baby to bed).
Well, I do not believe the mom was drunk at all. Here's why: if I was sitting with a neighbor/friend who had three small children in the house and she had in excess of 5 glasses of wine and was fall-down/black-out drunk, I would never leave her alone in the house. Has the neighbor confirmed that she was drunk? I'm highly doubtful that someone would leave her in that condition to take care of two kids and a baby. I'd camp out on the sofa (whether she liked it or not) until her husband got home.
Can someone come hold my hands away from my keyboard, please. TIA
Just a thought. What if while DB was on the stoop drinking wine the boys got the baby out and they were playing in Mom and DAd's room. She fell off the bed and was dead but the boys didn't pay attention. Instead of DB reacting like a mother should and call911 that her baby wasn't breathing she protected the boys. I know this a long shot and I'll get many pfffft responses but I have to wonder. They don't want to boys talking to cops anymore. Why?????? They handled this all wrong because I don't believe that this mother killed this child either intentionally or by shaken baby syndrome. I won't believe it till I read it. Thoughts?
ETA: I do not believe this child was murdered but still if accident they handled it all wrong. I hope they talk and soon. I am so sad over these results.
My distinct memory which can be wrong was I heard early on in one of the interviews that JI stated that they searched a little bit around the yard outside. Another inconsistent statement. Does anyone else recall that? It was the same time when JI stated he went to the neighbor's to make the 911 call, but nobody answered, so he went back and that is when they realized he had his work phone in his pocket.
Here's what I don't understand . Why is it easier to believe a mother would not try to save her child,and would discard that child,as opposed to a mother who would kill her baby?
I know a lot of people think there might have been an accident ,but what mother would look at her baby and just assume the child could not be saved ? Would not care enough, to try? To have a service of some sort? A burial or cremation?
IMO ,if a mother could so easily let their child go without getting help,they could also hurt that baby, because they didn't care enough to begin with.
I mean no disrespect to you ,KLjohnson,but I am not following the reasoning.
Can someone come hold my hands away from my keyboard, please. TIA