Parents of baby Lisa Press Release 10/21/11

[jjenny]

Because if LE had been able to rule that out, they would say so. They would announce who the person was ("neighbor with a colicky baby, who's been cleared"), which is what they usually do. IIRC, they have specifically said they have not ruled it out.

This has been asked and answered several times on various threads. That's why it is still being raised. The fact that ANOTHER person has come forward is also strange, and LE has not ruled his sighting out.

Considering that other person waited a week before contacting LE, I have no idea how LE is supposed to rule his sighting in or out.

 

[dovebar]

BBM. The mom in this case not only drank, she admitted she got wasted on the front stoop while children were alone inside. I can understand why Young would view such a person unfavorably. I do, too.

JMO

Because no one ever does that....

This all reminds me, very sadly, of the case in Australia where the child was dragged off by dingos - and the mother was crucified in a way similar to the way LE is treating this family. Sadly, she was right, and later the child's bones were found in a dingo's den.

 

[dovebar]

Considering that other person waited a week before contacting LE, I have no idea how LE is supposed to rule his sighting in or out.

Maybe, detective work? It's harder than berating a lower-class woman in the media.

 

[jjenny]

Because no one ever does that....

This all reminds me, very sadly, of the case in Australia where the child was dragged off by dingos - and the mother was crucified in a way similar to the way LE is treating this family. Sadly, she was right, and later the child's bones were found in a dingo's den.

I don't think they got dingos in MO.

 

[dovebar]

Cadaver dogs hitting next to DB's bed is pretty telling, IMO.

Except that it's not. After a 17-hour search, a cadaver dog "hitting" is more likely to be a false hit than a correct one - the tired dog is simply desperate to pick up on clues as to what the handler wants it to find.

 

[dovebar]

I don't think they got dingos in MO.

No, but they appear to have police who fixate on mothers, instead of following harder leads.

 

[Wise Old Owl]

Except that it's not. After a 17-hour search, a cadaver dog "hitting" is more likely to be a false hit than a correct one - the tired dog is simply desperate to pick up on clues as to what the handler wants it to find.

The 17 hour search is the execution of the actual search. The dog hit was 2 days before and that was what was used to get the search warrant.

They didn't work that dog for 17 hours.

 

[MyBelle]

Because no one ever does that....

This all reminds me, very sadly, of the case in Australia where the child was dragged off by dingos - and the mother was crucified in a way similar to the way LE is treating this family. Sadly, she was right, and later the child's bones were found in a dingo's den.

No dingos in MO.

JMO

 

[mysteriew]

Except that it's not. After a 17-hour search, a cadaver dog "hitting" is more likely to be a false hit than a correct one - the tired dog is simply desperate to pick up on clues as to what the handler wants it to find.

You really think it took 17 hours to walk the dog through the house? LOL I didn't think it was that big.

The search from the warrant took 17 hours. They don't say how long the dog was there. But I sincerely doubt it was for 17 hours. I've met dog handlers like those before. And they are very protective of their dogs. Including limiting how long they will work one.

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

To me, it remains to be seen that they've done anything wrong, just based on the way they appear in the media. This is why trials are moved all the time, because people make up their minds based on what they think people "ought" to be like in these circumstances, rather than on the evidence.

It is a natural thing for us to do as we don't have the evidence, but it doesn't really mean much except that we all have our expectations of what we think we'd do.

In reality, if it were us, we might be exactly the same way. We are predicting actions from situations where our children are home safe in bed.

Also, these people are relatively uneducated, not Parents of the Year, and just fumbling their way through life.

The man-with-baby sightings, the dumpster fire, these things alone give me reasonable doubt until the D.A. can prove otherwise. And from their perspective, a "flashy" lawyer might simply be one they can afford - one who will waive his initial fees, because he's got a successful television commentary gig in addition to his lawyering.

A thank you was not enough. You have said most of the things I've been thinking. BTW i don't think the family "hired the lawyer" from what I've gleaned, a sponsor has hired and paid for their attorneys. IIRC.

 

[cluciano63]

Except that it's not. After a 17-hour search, a cadaver dog "hitting" is more likely to be a false hit than a correct one - the tired dog is simply desperate to pick up on clues as to what the handler wants it to find.

There is no way the dogs were working 17 hours, if that was printed by the media it is just plain wrong, IMO. And the FBI is probably not going to take the "word" of one dog, just to be sure, when they are dealing with something as crucial as trying to find a baby, or any person, they would have the result verified.

Either you believe in trained dogs or you do not, that is your right, but the dogs knows their job and the handlers used by the FBI are likely among the best.

 

[azwriter]

From an old newspaper reporter's point of view: Innocent parents of a missing child do not put out a press release from an attorney's office which attempts to outline how the parents have been handling such a tragedy.

They stand up and answer questions and beg, plead the public to help find their baby.

They address the person or persons responsible for kidnapping the child to bring her back, to return her to her parents. And list reasons the person(s) should do so.

They take every opportunity to get in front of tv camera's, radio mikes and print reporters to push for exposure to identify the child through various photos and get the message out far and wide, as quickly as possible.

Innocent parents do not need a public relations campaign.

just my O

 

[Turnadot]

Maybe, detective work? It's harder than berating a lower-class woman in the media.

LE has done no such thing.

Any berating done to DB in the media has come out of her own mouth, and ex-friends, or the talking heads who pick apart what she willingly says to them. If she doesn't want to be judged by the media, then she should stfu. The media will do it anyway, but DB is the one giving the media the amo; not LE!

The only thing LE has said, at one point was that the parents were no longer cooperating and the parents won't answer vital questions.

LE aren't the ones changing their story; DB is.


IMO

 

[Melanie]

When my children are sick I never leave their side except to get drinks, food, medicine, blankets, potty.. And with my little guy he's normally on my hip... My oldest yes even 16year old I even lay with.. I'm a little bit of a freak I guess but I'd rather be safe then sorry...

Me too. DS was home from school yesterday and my whole schedule changed. Like most moms, we work extra hard to keep our sick children comfortable and keep a very close eye on them. Mine is 14, but I don't treat him much different than when he was 2 - LOL. Plus, he's used to it and expects me to wait on him hand and foot.

I just can't imagine putting a sick child to bed and proceeding to get black out drunk with a neighbor on the front porch. Baby Lisa deserved much better treatment.

MOO

Mel

 

[azwriter]

I thought I read that JI was the one that consented to the cadaver dog, being the owner of the home. I don't think he knew that there was anything for the dog to hit on. I think he came home and was shocked to find the baby missing.

Yes, katydid, it may well be that way. But I wanted to add that maybe daddy didn't know there would be anything for the dogs to detect cause Mommy didn't tell him everything that happened.

From watching the father's reaction to the media, his head down and not making eye contact, it's my opinion he does know something about Lisa's fate. But, not the entire story. I can imagine mommy would lie to him too.

I do suspect, that the next break in the case will come about from the father. He does not look at all comfortable with his part of advancing the story of his daughter's disappearance; to addressing the public for help or speaking out to whomever took his daughter, if that is the case.

I think he is getting ready to turn on the child's mom and tell cops what he does know - the story she told him as to what happened to Lisa. But, again this is all Just My O. And a feeling I have.

 

[miabellamoure]

I just posted about the same thing before I read your post. Man walking with a DEAD baby.

I had eluded to this earlier today...wondering if the eyewitnesses described this man carrying this diaper clad infant and whether they noticed if the infant was awake or appeared to be "asleep"...

I'm feeling like this case has taken a terrible turn and most of all for baby Lisa.

I'm hoping against odds that JI will be proven not involved and that at least his son will be spared losing a parent to the prison system. DB's son may not fare so well if things continue down the path they're on...

 

[TJGirl]

Hello all, having followed this (as if it's my second job) since the day things unfolded, I am still unclear on something.. Did the neighbor that came over, having drinks on the porch, SEE Lisa? I've always assumed she must have. And what time did she arrive at the house?

I sometimes see ppl post theories that the baby might have been 'gone' long before any reported abduction – and I guess I automatically discount those theories, as we know Lisa was at the house, the other children & neighbor’s child watching a movie, then sent to bed sometime around 7pm. Am I off in thinking this?

 

[Kat]

Hello all, having followed this (as if it's my second job) since the day things unfolded, I am still unclear on something.. Did the neighbor that came over, having drinks on the porch, SEE Lisa? I've always assumed she must have. And what time did she arrive at the house?

I sometimes see ppl post theories that the baby might have been 'gone' long before any reported abduction – and I guess I automatically discount those theories, as we know Lisa was at the house, the other children & neighbor’s child watching a movie, then sent to bed sometime around 7pm. Am I off in thinking this?

AFAIK, we've never gotten confirmation that the neighbor saw Lisa. We haven't heard from the neighbor and LE hasn't commented on that.

According to DB's most recent timeline she put Lisa to bed at 6:40 PM. She stated in her earlier timeline (but didn't restate it in her new timeline) that her neighbor was over at or about 7:30. She stated in her first timeline that she had checked on Lisa at 10:30. Her new timeline suggests she doesn't remember if she checked on Lisa or not before going to bed.

Your guess is as good as mine JMHO

Congrats on your first post! Glad you joined in

 

[gwenabob]

Because no one ever does that....

This all reminds me, very sadly, of the case in Australia where the child was dragged off by dingos - and the mother was crucified in a way similar to the way LE is treating this family. Sadly, she was right, and later the child's bones were found in a dingo's den.

Nope. No bones found. No part of her body ever found. They only found her matinee jacket in an area of dingo dens.

 

[Curious Me]

I just wanted to post this for anybody doing catch up this weekend.


Cadaver dog ‘hit’ inside house in Lisa Irwin case
http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/21/3221138/cadaver-dog-has-hit-inside-house.html

It makes me realize that if a man was running around with a baby Lisa that night, then the baby was no longer alive because the baby died in the house. Oh, who cares what the parents want to announce now, really.