ME ME - Ayla Reynolds, 20 mnths, Waterville, 17 December 2011 - # 4

[my_tee_mouse]

Thank you!

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/08/us/maine-missing-toddler/

"During her interview with CNN, DiPietro said Friday that she "didn't hear anything" when asked if she heard any noise the night Ayla disappeared. She added that there was not a party at the house, noted she wasn't the last one to go to bed and said she wasn't sure whether the doors to the house were locked.

On Sunday, DiPietro said she wanted to make clear that she wasn't home the night Ayla disappeared and that her information about what happened that night came from others."

So...she didn't hear anything because she wasn't there to hear. She was probably told there was no party, but she doesn't state that she's relating what she was told...not what she knows first-hand. And she wasn't the last one to go to bed because she wasn't there to go to bed? Not "lying," just being "deliberately evasive," or so it would seem.

I was taught that being deliberately evasive is the same as lying. And yet, she doesn't "really lie." She probably thought she was helping out her son by keeping the public from honing in on him. And yet, now it seems to have done just the opposite. Sigh. This is why it's best to tell the truth in the first place or just hush.

 

[Helenstreet]

Thank you!

So...she didn't hear anything because she wasn't there to hear. She was probably told there was no party, but she doesn't state that she's relating what she was told...not what she knows first-hand. And she wasn't the last one to go to bed because she wasn't there to go to bed? Not "lying," just being "deliberately evasive," or so it would seem.

I was taught that being deliberately evasive is the same as lying. And yet, she doesn't "really lie." She probably thought she was helping out her son by keeping the public from honing in on him. And yet, now it seems to have done just the opposite. Sigh. This is why it's best to tell the truth in the first place or just hush.

I agree that Grandma DiPietro was being deliberately evasive in her interview on Friday, AND she lied. It is very obvious to me at this point that she was trying to give the impression that it was a normal, everyday night in Granny's house--bedtime at 8:00 pm in the G-rated, wholesome DiPietro home. At this point, I do not trust one word that comes out of the woman's mouth. It is quite obvious that she has been trying to protect her son from public scrutiny. I sincerely don't believe that the woman has a clue what happened that fateful night other than what her son has told her. Now, I am wondering if she was truly home when Ayla broke her arm? Is she covering for her son for that 'accident' too? I don't have a good feeling about this whole thing. Where is little Ayla?

 

[Helenstreet]

I can't figure out why LE didn't pull her in to question her again if what she said in CNN was a lie. And LE had no comment today on her 'clarifying' where she was. So which is the truth, or what LE thought was the truth? And why did sp wait two days to tell CNN what she said Friday was not true? And why bother to, why not go back to not speaking to media? I'm so confused.

How do we know that law enforcement hasn't brought her in for questioning again? Just because law enforcement has 'no comment' doesn't really mean anything, IMHO. This is a major criminal investigation, and I personally would rather they cross every 't' and dot every 'i' behind the scenes so that nothing is compromised in this case.

 

[Lera213]

So let me get this straight, Grammy wasn't there and doesn't want to say where who she was with or where. Now I know why LE searched the Airport area. Hotels etc. MOO

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

On Sunday, DiPietro said she wanted to make clear that she wasn't home the night Ayla disappeared and that her information about what happened that night came from others.

Glad she wants to make that CLEAR. Ugh. Where is Ayla. Enough of these games already.

Well. I wonder if she was really there when Ayla's arm was broken.

 

[katydid23]

I am really getting a sick feeling too. I soooo wanted this to be that TR went and took Ayla and things snowballed from fear. Now I am not so sure. This is a very BIG lie...if nothing to hide, there would have been no need to fabricate a lie and certainly not for the reason she stated

I was leaning towards believing the father, mainly because I thought he was home with his mom and sister and baby niece that night. But now...
:thud::thud::thud::thud:

 

[Donjeta]

Ok so if grandmother wasn't there does it mean there was one less adult at home than reported or that there was one more unrelated adult at home the night disappeared?

Was Ayla even there? Maybe she was at an undisclosed location too.

I feel now like I should be expecting a "clarification" to everything else that has been stated about the case.

 

[Donjeta]

Lavanda, if the URL doesn't work and goes all starry when you paste it here it means that it's not a WS approved source. (but thanks for the hint to look there).

 

[Donjeta]

Ok, I haven't been following this case closely, but know a bit about it.

IF you listened to the Websleuths radio show TODAY, you may have a clearer picture of the situation.

The Dad said LE had asked him to NOT talk about the case, ie to media. Mark Klass said that LE did that to him as well when Polly went missing. However, Mark said that with the popularity and influence of the internet, this may be, in other words, old school.

That is why, I gathered IMHO, the dad didn't speak about the broken arm after rumors surfaced about how the child broke her arm, and IF you read the grandmother's statement, AFTER hearing the Websleuth's broadcast, you see the grandmother was trying not to change the perception already out there. But it APPEARS, to ME, that she realized for some reason, it was not the way to go because she KNEW she wasn't there. She was just trying to answer questions to NOT rock the boat, so to speak, of what was already out there.

In her CNN statement, recanting the info she'd given on Friday (?), that she didn't hear anything, she wanted to be clear, TO BE HONEST, that she wasn't there.

It's no one's business where she was. She was NOT there. LE KNOWS. It's only seemingly new info to the public. It seems like she wasn't being truthful. But she was truthful where it counts, to LE. THEY know.

I haven't followed this case daily like many of you, but this is IMHO from today's Websleuth broadcast.

JMHO
fran

PS................
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/websleuths/2012/01/09/websleuths-radio
Websleuth's January 8, 2012 radio program

I am just wondering if she "clarified" because she wanted to be truthful or because someone who knows she wasn't home that night was outraged of the misleading interview and she wanted to beat that person before they got out on TV and told everyone she was lying.

Whatever happened to good old "no comment, I've been told not to reveal things that are part of the investigation"?

I don't understand why LE would have anything against JDP or PDP talking about how Ayla broke her arm. It happened weeks ago and supposedly it was a benign accident so why would it matter in this investigation or influence the quality of the tips they're getting if people know what the family's explanation is or not?

Going along with false information presented by the interviewer has a good chance of rocking the boat and jeopardizing the case imo. Suppose someone saw Ayla with someone in the evening before she was reported missing, and didn't call in the tip because they figure that it must be a false sighting, the grandma was there and witnessed Ayla being put to bed at 8 pm.

 

[IHAVENOCLUE]

Ok so if grandmother wasn't there does it mean there was one less adult at home than reported or that there was one more unrelated adult at home the night disappeared?

Was Ayla even there? Maybe she was at an undisclosed location too.

I feel now like I should be expecting a "clarification" to everything else that has been stated about the case.

BBM...VERY good question...was Ayla even there that night? Where was she?

 

[cityslick]

Never good when the story changes from what you originally told MSM (even though she didn't deliberately lie).

My only thing is her being evasive to MSM is not the same as LE. She very well in fact may have told LE the truth (that she wasn't there). Of course we have no way of knowing that.

 

[stilettos]

I was leaning towards believing the father, mainly because I thought he was home with his mom and sister and baby niece that night. But now...
:thud::thud::thud::thud:

....and now I want to know if Dad and his Sis had a little party while Gma was gone...and who was there!

 

[Donjeta]

Never good when the story changes from what you originally told MSM (even though she didn't deliberately lie).

My only thing is her being evasive to MSM is not the same as LE. She very well in fact may have told LE the truth (that she wasn't there). Of course we have no way of knowing that.

My problem with this reasoning is that if you make misleading statements in the media it may undermine the value of anything truthful that you may have said to LE. If it comes to a trial one day and your witness testimony is the crucial bit that's going to hang the perp you don't want their defense impeaching you by digging up a CNN clip in which you're caught with your pants on fire.

JMO, it was a deliberate lie in my book. She must have known that the assumption behind the questions was that her answers were relevant because she had first hand knowledge. Even though it may have been true that she heard nothing that night wherever she was it's a lie because the unspoken assumption is that her answer is relevant in ruling out a commotion in her home that night.

She could have said that she's not going to answer any questions about that night Ayla disappeared and just talked about the child in general.

 

[Lavanda Dolce]

Ok, I haven't been following this case closely, but know a bit about it.

IF you listened to the Websleuths radio show TODAY, you may have a clearer picture of the situation.

The Dad said LE had asked him to NOT talk about the case, ie to media. Mark Klass said that LE did that to him as well when Polly went missing. However, Mark said that with the popularity and influence of the internet, this may be, in other words, old school.

That is why, I gathered IMHO, the dad didn't speak about the broken arm after rumors surfaced about how the child broke her arm, and IF you read the grandmother's statement, AFTER hearing the Websleuth's broadcast, you see the grandmother was trying not to change the perception already out there. But it APPEARS, to ME, that she realized for some reason, it was not the way to go because she KNEW she wasn't there. She was just trying to answer questions to NOT rock the boat, so to speak, of what was already out there.

In her CNN statement, recanting the info she'd given on Friday (?), that she didn't hear anything, she wanted to be clear, TO BE HONEST, that she wasn't there.

It's no one's business where she was. She was NOT there. LE KNOWS. It's only seemingly new info to the public. It seems like she wasn't being truthful. But she was truthful where it counts, to LE. THEY know.

I haven't followed this case daily like many of you, but this is IMHO from today's Websleuth broadcast.

JMHO
fran

PS................
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/websleuths/2012/01/09/websleuths-radio
Websleuth's January 8, 2012 radio program

Respectfully, I disagree. While I do still believe JD and Ayla's broken arm, I can now see why PD did not agree with him that she should have gone to ER. I think he put too much faith in his mom and quite honestly, I don't think PD (grandma) realizes the seriousness of a criminal investigation.

One just does not lie and on national television...for ANY reason. That leads me to believe that maybe PD needs to stay away from any interviews and media reporting.

She may not have the maturity or intellectual capacity to fully grasp the situation of how a lie can have detrimental effects on the case. In other words, we do not know her. It's pretty clear she is a bit "different" than others with a higher intellect/knowledge because not many grandmothers would hold a photo smiling for cameras of their missing grandchild. This says, to me, she is in a different place maturity wise than the normal. Most would have a genuine very sad look. This is not to say PD is not grieving or in terrible distress, it says she does not fully grasp the situation...if that makes sense.This by any means is not to say something "not nice" about PD , it is to say that she may not be the best to understand and grasp complex situations.

With that said, she does know right from wrong so to lie was definitely wrong. It is going to change the entire aspect of the search for Ayla and that is what bothers me most. Know those in Maine who have learned this are going to assume that Baby was indeed harmed and may not put any efforts into looking for her So yes, this was NOT a good thing to do and while I do believe she is hurting for her granddaughter missing, I am not not so convinced that she herself did not come back and take Ayla away and give her to someone. At this point...all theories have changed that I have felt and hoped. I still do not believe JD lied or gave false info. Not yet, anyhow.

 

[cityslick]

My problem with this reasoning is that if you make misleading statements in the media it may undermine the value of anything truthful that you may have said to LE. If it comes to a trial one day and your witness testimony is the crucial bit that's going to hang the perp you don't want their defense impeaching you by digging up a CNN clip in which you're caught with your pants on fire.

JMO, it was a deliberate lie in my book. She must have known that the assumption behind the questions was that her answers were relevant because she had first hand knowledge. Even though it may have been true that she heard nothing that night wherever she was it's a lie because the unspoken assumption is that her answer is relevant in ruling out a commotion in her home that night.

She could have said that she's not going to answer any questions about that night Ayla disappeared and just talked about the child in general.

Fair enough. I'd place more on whether she was there or not if there were not other adults there as well. I'm not willing to say there was nefarious intent behind being evasive just yet because there is very little to go on right now. She is his mother, she sees TR (and her family) pointing all sorts of fingers at him, perhaps she was just trying to help him. I agree, it's better if she just had came right out and said, I wasn't there.

 

[Lavanda Dolce]

My problem with this reasoning is that if you make misleading statements in the media it may undermine the value of anything truthful that you may have said to LE. If it comes to a trial one day and your witness testimony is the crucial bit that's going to hang the perp you don't want their defense impeaching you by digging up a CNN clip in which you're caught with your pants on fire.

JMO, it was a deliberate lie in my book. She must have known that the assumption behind the questions was that her answers were relevant because she had first hand knowledge. Even though it may have been true that she heard nothing that night wherever she was it's a lie because the unspoken assumption is that her answer is relevant in ruling out a commotion in her home that night.

She could have said that she's not going to answer any questions about that night Ayla disappeared and just talked about the child in general.

Donjeta, I have to run and won't be back until late eve...I wanted to tell you that your statement is absolutely, 100% accurate. It is CRUCIAL and what she did was so detrimental to the case that I barely slept last night. What a terrible mess this has made!! I can only hope and pray that the Chief speaks out and makes it CLEAR to the public they need to look for a living baby...because all theories have now changed with the public I will look for your thoughts later this eve. Good post. Have a good day.

 

[Lavanda Dolce]

My problem with this reasoning is that if you make misleading statements in the media it may undermine the value of anything truthful that you may have said to LE. If it comes to a trial one day and your witness testimony is the crucial bit that's going to hang the perp you don't want their defense impeaching you by digging up a CNN clip in which you're caught with your pants on fire.

JMO, it was a deliberate lie in my book. She must have known that the assumption behind the questions was that her answers were relevant because she had first hand knowledge. Even though it may have been true that she heard nothing that night wherever she was it's a lie because the unspoken assumption is that her answer is relevant in ruling out a commotion in her home that night.

She could have said that she's not going to answer any questions about that night Ayla disappeared and just talked about the child in general.

Yes. It was. And she more or less admitted it

 

[Donjeta]

Fair enough. I'd place more on whether she was there or not if there were not other adults there as well. I'm not willing to say there was nefarious intent behind being evasive just yet because there is very little to go on right now. She is his mother, she sees TR (and her family) pointing all sorts of fingers at him, perhaps she was just trying to help him. I agree, it's better if she just had came right out and said, I wasn't there.

Do we know what the other adults had to say and if they stayed until the morning?

If she wanted to help him she needs someone to advise her because it may have backfired. Now there is a shadow of doubt over everything else she said; is she being truthful or is she just trying to help her son?

 

[Lavanda Dolce]

Never good when the story changes from what you originally told MSM (even though she didn't deliberately lie).

My only thing is her being evasive to MSM is not the same as LE. She very well in fact may have told LE the truth (that she wasn't there). Of course we have no way of knowing that.

Read my loooong post above. lol. Sorry. I've been known to be called Lavonda on and on and on and on da! (Never was good to make a long story short! ) However, I do respectfully disagree. She wasn't evasive, she out and out lied My post above explains a bit more.

 

[Beagle]

Hi all, have been lurking in the background here

The thing that I found troubling is the little smirk she has each time she says no in the interview ..... I am no body language person but it suggests to me that she still telling lies and believing that she is getting away with it. There is very little other expressions on her face throughout. Unfortunately is was a terrible interview as the interviewer didn't let her expand on anything and she didn't put any more direct questions to PD.

Interested to know what others think on this.