LE statement on the case to be released

[Deleted member 39678]

I'm seeing a lot of posts about Jeremy Irwin and the possibility that he is responsible for Lisa's disappearance. The recent statement from KCPD doesn't even mention him by name but they do say this about Deborah Bradley.

As the only adult in the home at the time of the baby’s disappearance, police continue to have questions to which only she can provide answers

Does KCPD really mean this or do they believe that Jeremy is involved? If they thought that he was involved I hope that they would want answers from him also. JMO.

http://media.kshb.com/pdf/LisaIrwinStatement.pdf

 

[Whisperer]

Ranch, I don't think they are able to talk to JI. DB at least spoke with them at first. JI is the type that shuts down, imo. I bet JI never took a poly.

You're right, DB is the one they have to speak with and she isn't going to talk w/o JI by her side plus an attorney or two.. So it is a no deal. If they want to speak with her alone, they will have to charge her with something...but she has counsel and I am convinced they will not answer the questions LE is after.

This case could have been resolved in the first two weeks, imo, but LE was not able to interrogate her the way they must to elicit information. If you recall another baby disappeared about the same time in KC. After two weeks of LE interrogation, the mother confessed. In the Bradley case, they are lucky if they got two days...my guess is more like two hours.

It is too late now...the time has passed to get info/confession. They are waiting for a break. These two have two attorneys ready to take LE to the cleaners if LE makes one wrong move.

 

[Whisperer]

I always found it odd that they refused to cooperate with LE disregarding the fact that LE are the ones who are going to find Lisa...NOT attorneys, there cause is the polar opposite. I've never seen an attorney find a missing child but I've seen some of them hide the child's whereabouts from LE.

Jeremy is the weak link. If they could get him alone, they would get some info, imo. He is being guarded like Fort Knox.

 

[Melon]

Good working theory and at the top of my list. I say hundreds of dumpsters. If he were smart he would have driven out of the area and placed her in a dumpster a good distance from the house on Lister.

BBM: "Someone who cheats on their husband"..slight correction.

Thanks for that correction, I was just stating from memory and bungled it a bit.

If that work van did not have any employer tracking function, JI could have driven a few minutes out of the way of work and disposed of BL somewhere closer to where he was working. Not too close, not so far out of the way as to take any noticeable amount of time. Also wondering if that may be why the kids were kept away for re-interview for so long. IDK. Just thinking out loud in that vein.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Ranch, I don't think they are able to talk to JI. DB at least spoke with them at first. JI is the type that shuts down, imo. I bet JI never took a poly.

You're right, DB is the one they have to speak with and she isn't going to talk w/o JI by her side plus an attorney or two.. So it is a no deal. If they want to speak with her alone, they will have to charge her with something...but she has counsel and I am convinced they will not answer the questions LE is after.

This case could have been resolved in the first two weeks, imo, but LE was not able to interrogate her the way they must to elicit information. If you recall another baby disappeared about the same time in KC. After two weeks of LE interrogation, the mother confessed. In the Bradley case, they are lucky if they got two days...my guess is more like two hours.

It is too late now...the time has passed to get info/confession. They are waiting for a break. These two have two attorneys ready to take LE to the cleaners if LE makes one wrong move.

Some kind of communication has been taking place between KCPD and Lisa's family. Just not "one on one" with Deborah Bradley.

While communication with the family has been ongoing, police have not had the opportunity to sit down one-on-one to speak with Lisa’s mother, Deborah Bradley.

LE had only one shot at a "one on one" questioning of DB and that was at the very beginning. They got that. Expecting it now is a fantasy.

Even if DB is charged with a crime LE can't ask her questions without her attorney if she wants one present. I'm not sure what you mean by "interrogate her the way they must to elicit information". You can't force a confession out of a suspect.

I agree that at this point it's too late to get a confession. A break in this case would be most welcome by everyone. JMO.

http://media.kshb.com/pdf/LisaIrwinStatement.pdf

 

[Melon]

I'm seeing a lot of posts about Jeremy Irwin and the possibility that he is responsible for Lisa's disappearance. The recent statement from KCPD doesn't even mention him by name but they do say this about Deborah Bradley.

Does KCPD really mean this or do they believe that Jeremy is involved? If they thought that he was involved I hope that they would want answers from him also. JMO.

http://media.kshb.com/pdf/LisaIrwinStatement.pdf

I doubt they would pass over the opportunity to talk to him if it arose but he isn't the priority yet.

My thinking in trying on the different theory of JI taking BL with him when he left for work doesn't change how I think LE would question the parents.:moo: JI can say I drove to work and worked, the end. DB has much more time to account for on her own with only SB's word to verify, which I imagine would be viewed with more skepticism even if it were the complete truth.

If LE even remotely thinks BL went in the van with JI, I think it would be most important to speak to her first because she would have to recreate her evening and add BL back in to the events and actions which leaves more room for mistakes. That thinking makes DB's blackout excuse even more interesting to me. I had previously thought it would be to cover her own actions, thinking this way it would be to prevent having to invent an entire evening's events and getting caught lying. As I said upthread, I am just thinking out loud as I explore this different to me theory.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I doubt they would pass over the opportunity to talk to him if it arose but he isn't the priority yet.

My thinking in trying on the different theory of JI taking BL with him when he left for work doesn't change how I think LE would question the parents.:moo: JI can say I drove to work and worked, the end. DB has much more time to account for on her own with only SB's word to verify, which I imagine would be viewed with more skepticism even if it were the complete truth.

If LE even remotely thinks BL went in the van with JI, I think it would be most important to speak to her first because she would have to recreate her evening and add BL back in to the events and actions which leaves more room for mistakes. That thinking makes DB's blackout excuse even more interesting to me. I had previously thought it would be to cover her own actions, thinking this way it would be to prevent having to invent an entire evening's events and getting caught lying. As I said upthread, I am just thinking out loud as I explore this different to me theory.

BBM
All I know is that Jeremy wasn't even mentioned by name in the KCPD press release that is the subject of this thread. If LE has reasons to believe that he was involved in Lisa's disappearance they better make it their priority and you would think that they would have worded their press release to reflect that. They focused on DB and ignored JI.

Perhaps a thread devoted to "Jeremy did it" theory's should be started for discussion about him. Seems to be off topic to this thread if you ask me.

 

[norest4thewicked]

That was a good article, thanks for linking it.

If JI pointed the finger at his estranged parents in the initial days, I am going to have to rethink some things. He later made that cryptic statement about "someone who cheats on their spouse" which would be pointing the finger at someone else a second time. Could he have taken BL to work with him and disposed of her somewhere? That would explain why DB never seemed to check on her that evening. Do we know if there is any employer installed GPS device on his work van and if the HRD dogs ever checked it? Wonder how many dumpsters there are between their home and that Starbucks.

This (loosely) has been my theory all along. They are both involved. It's obvious from the way that they are sticking together. Just like the Ramsey's. One did it and the other participated in some way. That part is pretty clear to me.

Edit: Except that I think that Lisa went into the water. I won't discount the dumpster theory, I just think water is more likely.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

This (loosely) has been my theory all along. They are both involved. It's obvious from the way that they are sticking together. Just like the Ramsey's. One did it and the other participated in some way. That part is pretty clear to me.

Edit: Except that I think that Lisa went into the water. I won't discount the dumpster theory, I just think water is more likely.

BBM
Another way of looking at it is that their sticking together because their both innocent. JMO.

 

[Donjeta]

BBM
Another way of looking at it is that their sticking together because their both innocent. JMO.

But how do they know that? Supposing they're telling the truth, all Jeremy knows is that he came home and his partner who was supposed to take care of his baby claims she's not sure if she even saw Lisa all night because she was so plastered. How does he know she is innocent?

All Deborah knows that she was so drunk she doesn't know if she even saw Lisa all night so how does she know that Jeremy didn't do something to Lisa?

 

[Whisperer]

They should both have reason to believe the other one may have done something to the baby. Instead, they stick together. They refuse to be interviewed w/o being together and with an attorney. This tells me they are behaving like partners in crime. They refuse to be split up!

No innocent people with a missing child refused to talk seriously with LE. LE is going to hammer them. All parents go through this and go through it gladly to get their child back.

 

[cityslick]

That was a good article, thanks for linking it.

If JI pointed the finger at his estranged parents in the initial days, I am going to have to rethink some things. He later made that cryptic statement about "someone who cheats on their spouse" which would be pointing the finger at someone else a second time. Could he have taken BL to work with him and disposed of her somewhere? That would explain why DB never seemed to check on her that evening. Do we know if there is any employer installed GPS device on his work van and if the HRD dogs ever checked it? Wonder how many dumpsters there are between their home and that Starbucks.

The theory about the statement was that it pertained to SB since it was some kind of coincidence that her ex moved out of her house 24 hours before BL went missing, this coincides with her ex taking a lie detector test. According to their story, the first thing JI did after finding out Lisa was missing was go to SB's house to see if she was this (LE could easily collaborate this with SB). It's my theory that he went to her house in an accusatory demeanor since he thought she took the baby. This also explains his comment about 'someone who cheats on their spouse'. To further expand on this theory:

SB was at the Irwin house earlier that day while JI was still home. I think at that time SB was going on and on about her ex moving out (or kicking him out), JI leaves for work and then comes home, finds Lisa missing and the first thing that pops in his head is what he heard SB go on and on about before he left for work. Thus the statement is made. In fact, it's my theory that a bulk of the conversation that DB/SB had on the porch that evening concerned SB's marital issues.

 

[cityslick]

But how do they know that? Supposing they're telling the truth, all Jeremy knows is that he came home and his partner who was supposed to take care of his baby claims she's not sure if she even saw Lisa all night because she was so plastered. How does he know she is innocent?

All Deborah knows that she was so drunk she doesn't know if she even saw Lisa all night so how does she know that Jeremy didn't do something to Lisa?

BBM

To the first point, it could be just a simple thing as trust. JI trusts DB, he knows DB better than anyone else and would not/could not believe this person would harm his daughter.

To the second point, I believe even with changing the time she last saw BL, that still puts it past the point that JI left for work. So she knows that BL was in the house after JI left and she was outside so she didn't see JI come back. Plus, she probably also thinks that if JI came back, one of the boys would of saw him in the house. After that, what would lead her to think JI came home after she went to sleep to take BL? It again goes to trust, she knows him, probably has no reason to believe he would harm his daughter.

If the both were in on it and nobody really has a good answer for this, what was the motive? I can see either one possibly having a motive, moreso DB (especially in an accident scenario), but what would be the motive for both of them together? I've never heard any report or story that indicated that they never wanted BL.

 

[passionflower]

Like the Ramsey's, the Cumming's, the Anthony's something is so very wrong when they stick together like glue. JMOO
It makes me think they both are to blame.
Put them in jail and see who squeals first on the other.
I always wondered also if Bradley got drunk that night BECAUSE Lisa was dead already and it was her odd way to deal with it??????
I really never trusted the 'neighbors' who claimed Lisa was in her bed and was ok. etc JMOO

 

[CHICANA]

They should both have reason to believe the other one may have done something to the baby. Instead, they stick together. They refuse to be interviewed w/o being together and with an attorney. This tells me they are behaving like partners in crime. They refuse to be split up!

No innocent people with a missing child refused to talk seriously with LE. LE is going to hammer them. All parents go through this and go through it gladly to get their child back.

Didn't LE tell Deborah that Lisa was found dead early in the case ?

 

[tlcya]

Didn't LE tell Deborah that Lisa was found dead early in the case ?

I think LE told DI that the KNEW she had killed baby Lisa and that they had proof. I don't think they claimed to have a body but simply insinuated that they had evidence that she had killed and disposed of her baby.

This info comes to us via DI during the time period they initially stopped communicating with LE.

 

[norest4thewicked]

BBM
Another way of looking at it is that their sticking together because their both innocent. JMO.

I don't believe that. And, statistics don't support that.

 

[Donjeta]

BBM

To the first point, it could be just a simple thing as trust. JI trusts DB, he knows DB better than anyone else and would not/could not believe this person would harm his daughter.

To the second point, I believe even with changing the time she last saw BL, that still puts it past the point that JI left for work. So she knows that BL was in the house after JI left and she was outside so she didn't see JI come back. Plus, she probably also thinks that if JI came back, one of the boys would of saw him in the house. After that, what would lead her to think JI came home after she went to sleep to take BL? It again goes to trust, she knows him, probably has no reason to believe he would harm his daughter.

If the both were in on it and nobody really has a good answer for this, what was the motive? I can see either one possibly having a motive, moreso DB (especially in an accident scenario), but what would be the motive for both of them together? I've never heard any report or story that indicated that they never wanted BL.

Personally, for me, trust would fly out of the door the minute I found out that the person I trusted to take care of my precious baby got so drunk s/he can't even remember if the baby was seen all night i.e broke my trust. No reason to trust someone who can't be trusted.



She was asleep or passed out when JI came home so he could have done who knows what and she wouldn't have been any wiser.

 

[cityslick]

Personally, for me, trust would fly out of the door the minute I found out that the person I trusted to take care of my precious baby got so drunk s/he can't even remember if the baby was seen all night i.e broke my trust. No reason to trust someone who can't be trusted.



She was asleep or passed out when JI came home so he could have done who knows what and she wouldn't have been any wiser.

Why would she think this though about JI? We have no back story on their relationship, if there was trust issues between them. Unless he's slipped up to her after the fact, according to her he was at work.

As far as JI is concerned, why can't it be that DB made a horrible mistake in his eyes (drinking). He may have been angry with her, but that doesn't mean he would think she did something to BL. I have no idea about their relationship, neither does anyone else and to assume how one would react to the other in this situation is simply guessing.

 

[hambirg]

Why would she think this though about JI? We have no back story on their relationship, if there was trust issues between them. Unless he's slipped up to her after the fact, according to her he was at work.

As far as JI is concerned, why can't it be that DB made a horrible mistake in his eyes (drinking). He may have been angry with her, but that doesn't mean he would think she did something to BL. I have no idea about their relationship, neither does anyone else and to assume how one would react to the other in this situation is simply guessing.

Gaslighting perhaps.

I don't think JI would be that forgiving. He is not the forgiving type. . .he comes across as being the suspicious type. As well as the type who probably holds grudges.

MOO