Police Chief Darryl Forte good reasons to not suspect the child's parents

[Whisperer]

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/252758/20111120/missing-baby-lisa-irwin-tough-month-kansas.htm

This is from a Buisness/Law mag. Where is the direct quote? I don't doubt you but I have seen this type of reporting grow legs and none of it be accurate or sometimes out of context. The wording of that reporter leaves a lot to be desired.

When the Chief of Police does an interview, it usually is videotaped. I am too tired right now to hunt down the tape. I will research later today.

 

[Rooster27]

This is from a Buisness/Law mag. Where is the direct quote? I don't doubt you but I have seen this type of reporting grow legs and none of it be accurate.

It is already all over the web now. It is Monday, expect more to come. The little bees are hard at work already.

When the Chief of Police does an interview, it usually is videotaped. I am too tired right now to hunt down the tape. I will research later today.

that's what we've mainly been discussing on this thread. the direct quote is not there. this article is using old news and rehashing a previous quote that did not contain what the headline promised.
MOO

 

[Whisperer]

could have written your post, except added this

4. "drunk mom"- wasn't this also info that came from DB? correct me if i'm wrong.

it is so important to know the sources of our information. If I thought LE had told the public all those things, I would be wary of them too.

the only thing i have heard them say is, the the Irwins are not being cooperative in that they have not been interviewed since October 8 or answered questions that LE has to ask them.

since we are sort of off topic of this thread.
has anyone seen this:
i posted in the media links about twenty minutes ago found it to be interesting news that again the lawyers have spun something that may not be true.

MOOMOOMOOMOO

it's new this morning. if there is a thread for this, let me know.

http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/nation...pposedly-implicated-handyman-in-disappearance

The Private Investigator Bill S. has NOT interviewed anyone in this case yet...WTH?

I see the busy legal bees are back at their desk this morning. We know it's Monday...time for spin and deflection.

 

[AlmostGone]

I agree they should start from the inside and then work themselves out BUT it has been what? 47 days now? I think if they haven't moved away from focusing on the parents, they're making a huge mistake especially if no evidence was found to arrest them for this crime.

I'm hoping they've moved on.

As for vilifying....I've been guilty of vilifying parents in the past who turned out to be totally innocent and I'm not going to take that stance anymore. Unless there is absolute proof a parent is involved, I will consider them victims.

So far, the parents in this case, except for DB getting drunk, there is no past history of crime, drugs or anything to even suggest they harmed baby Lisa.

They have done everything a parent should do in a missing child case and still they're villified by the public and the media. It's wrong.

o/t I remember following the Petit Family Home Invasion Case. Many thought the dad was involved because he was the only one who escaped the brutal and horrific crime. This man went through hell but yet people still thought he was somehow involved. Very sad.

We are all outsiders trying to look In.. It's hard for everyone.. Children and adults shouldn't ever have to fear abduction, abuse, any type of physical and mental harm.. So sad...

 

[hambirg]

could have written your post, except added this

4. "drunk mom"- wasn't this also info that came from DB? correct me if i'm wrong.

it is so important to know the sources of our information. If I thought LE had told the public all those things, I would be wary of them too.

the only thing i have heard them say is, the the Irwins are not being cooperative in that they have not been interviewed since October 8 or answered questions that LE has to ask them.

since we are sort of off topic of this thread.
has anyone seen this:
i posted in the media links about twenty minutes ago found it to be interesting news that again the lawyers have spun something that may not be true.

MOOMOOMOOMOO

it's new this morning. if there is a thread for this, let me know.

http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/nation...pposedly-implicated-handyman-in-disappearance

There is a thread(closed now) on it here:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=155082"]Irwin Attorney: ‘Jersey’ Bragged About Kidnapping Lisa Irwin - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

 

[dog.gone.cute]

MOO ...

IMO ... I believe that LE has been very "fair" with the parents and have treated them with "respect" ...

The only thing that has been "interpretted" by "some" as "negative" is that the family has NOT sat down with LE for SEPARATE INTERVIEWS -- which is basically SOP !

If you have a "missing baby", truly INNOCENT parents would be CAMPED OUT day and night asking the police to FIND their baby ... and would be WILLING to talk to LE separatley ... and we have NOT SEEN this from DB and JI ...

EVERYTHING that has been said regarding the "investigation" has come "out of the mouths" of :

1. DB
2. JI
3. Their Defense Attorneys -- Tacopino, Picerno (Short - no longer on case)
4. Bill Stanton
5. :waitasec: and a number of "allegations" that have NOT been VERIFIED by LE from "neighbors" ... the "handyman" ... the "communal house" ...

IMO ... LE is doing a "CYA" for a reason -- and one is that DB and JI "Lawyered Up" very EARLY ON in this case ... and that was to TIE THE HANDS OF LE ...

IMO ... LE has "something" and are NOT sharing it for an "obvious reason" ...

MOO ...

 

[Abby Normal]

my bolding

LE can't be blamed for any of that. They never came out and said anything in the media about the poly, it was DB herself who told the media about the failed poly, so blame her for that. Was she trying to sway public opinion to feel sorry for her?

LE also went to court to try to have the details of search warrant stricken from the media, they lost, so they can't be blamed for that either.

The simple fact is that they aren't cooperating, LE needs more vital questions answered, LE never said that they couldn't have their attorneys present during questioning. DB doesn't run the investigation, neither do their attorneys.

It seems to me that the LE bashing is not based on the true facts of the case.

JMHO

exactly. DB was way too open with the public at the start of this case. She can never undo that over-sharing. She never had to tell the public that she was drunk either, only LE needed to know that.

 

[Karmaa]

They're not.

That's kind of the point. They are two separate things that apparently happened weeks apart, but a copy writer in India decided to merge and morph them into something they are not.

Clear as mud, huh?

I don't think that's necessarily the right person. The one in India is a scientist w/ a climate background. Not TOO likely she would be writing about crime in the US.

No idea where this reporter is from, and no reason to doubt her credentials. Not everyone with an Indian name lives in India. There is one person with the same name in Ohio on FB - could be her, or could be someone completely different.

But are we supposed to investigate the background of REPORTERS on legitimate news sites anyway? Just curious.

 

[frankie069]

It's just my opinion...but DB was apparently told by LE that she failed her poly, this however, has never been confirmed by LE. But I believe they did tell her that and I believe they lied. Although polygraph results are not admissible in a court of law, they are most certainly allowed in the court of public opinion and often times serve only to sway said opinion. It has also been reported that the cadaver dogs hit on a location in DB & JI's bedroom, I believe this too was a lie, designed by LE to put public pressure on DB. There is also the little fact that LE continues to say that DB & JI aren't cooperating, aren't answering certain questions, all the while DB & JI insist through their attorney that they are cooperating. So failed poly, drunk mom, decomp in bedroom, and not cooperating...I'd pretty much say they have vilified DB.
With that said; I agree wholeheartedly that DB was extremely irresponsible to get drunk while caring for the children, but I do not believe that makes her a murderer. I don't even know if I believe that makes her 100% responsible for the disappearance of her daughter. Who knows, she could have been stone cold sober and Lisa might still have been abducted.
Again it's just my opinion and that I believe is the greatest thing about WS, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Just a side note on that comment I bolded. The search warrant which had to be signed by a judge stated the dog made a hit. I do not for one minute think that LE would lie to the court to get a warrant. Do you realize that ANYTHING found during that search would have to be thrown out if that were the case. There had to be documented proof that dog made a hit. I dont think LE is looking to screw up this case. IMO and JMO

 

[Karmaa]

Much ado about nothing here. If Chief Forte had indeed issued a statement promised by this thread's title, the Kansas City Star would report it - would feature it, would pronounce it in headlines.

Instead, we get an International Business Times reporter nattering on about something she feels Forte "is believed to have said" regarding a separate issue entirely.

The article combines two incidents which happened weeks apart - Forte's meeting with the KC Star editorial board, and the shooting deaths of six Kansas Citians on one weekend.

The "have good reasons to not suspect the child's parents" line is, apparently, the invention of the writer, based on nothing.

IBT should no longer be taken seriously in comments about the Irwin case, if it ever was in the first place.

Why not?

Also, there is nothing to indicate that the writer invented anything, and she cited her source.

AND, the article was about Forte's first month, and the two big things he has had to deal with. The two incidents may not be related to each other, but they are both related to him, and are relevant to the overall story.

 

[wfgodot]

But are we supposed to investigate the background of REPORTERS on legitimate news sites anyway? Just curious.

Reporters who "report" sensational information without attribution of any kind should definitely be fair game.

 

[hambirg]

I don't think that's necessarily the right person. The one in India is a scientist w/ a climate background. Not TOO likely she would be writing about crime in the US.

No idea where this reporter is from, and no reason to doubt her credentials. Not everyone with an Indian name lives in India. There is one person with the same name in Ohio on FB - could be her, or could be someone completely different.

But are we supposed to investigate the background of REPORTERS on legitimate news sites anyway? Just curious.

Drishya Nair
Journalist at International Business Times
Bengaluru Area, India | Media Production
Current: Journalist at International Business Times Past: Journalist at International Business Times, Lecturer at St. Aloysius College Education: Manipal Institute of Communication

http://in.linkedin.com/pub/dir/Drishya/Nair

I don't care who the reporter is. When they write a piece like THAT one. I'm going to check them out as a source.

 

[wfgodot]

Why not?

Also, there is nothing to indicate that the writer invented anything, and she cited her source.

AND, the article was about Forte's first month, and the two big things he has had to deal with. The two incidents may not be related to each other, but they are both related to him, and are relevant to the overall story.

Forte stressed that in the case of Lisa Irwin, the police have good reasons to not suspect the child's parents.

To whom did Forte say this? When? Attribution in the case of a case-changing quote like this has to be far more than "Forte stressed."

Good: "Speaking to an ibtimes.com reporter, Forte stressed...."
Bad: (see original quote above)

As for the two incidents, when reporters do not make clear that the incidents were separate in time by two weeks and that Forte was not addressing the Kansas City Star editorial board when discussing the six killings, we have a problem. Indeed, we have a fiction.

 

[annalia]

MOO ...

IMO ... I believe that LE has been very "fair" with the parents and have treated them with "respect" ...

The only thing that has been "interpretted" by "some" as "negative" is that the family has NOT sat down with LE for SEPARATE INTERVIEWS -- which is basically SOP !

If you have a "missing baby", truly INNOCENT parents would be CAMPED OUT day and night asking the police to FIND their baby ... and would be WILLING to talk to LE separatley ... and we have NOT SEEN this from DB and JI ...

EVERYTHING that has been said regarding the "investigation" has come "out of the mouths" of :

1. DB
2. JI
3. Their Defense Attorneys -- Tacopino, Picerno (Short - no longer on case)
4. Bill Stanton
5. :waitasec: and a number of "allegations" that have NOT been VERIFIED by LE from "neighbors" ... the "handyman" ... the "communal house" ...

IMO ... LE is doing a "CYA" for a reason -- and one is that DB and JI "Lawyered Up" very EARLY ON in this case ... and that was to TIE THE HANDS OF LE ...

IMO ... LE has "something" and are NOT sharing it for an "obvious reason" ...

MOO ...

I agree

Re the bolded, I'd like to know where in the constitution it states that boyfriends and girlfriends ( especially ones who may be potential suspects ) should be be questioned together if they demand it, and if they're not it's a violation of their rights.

 

[nursebeeme]

this thread is going to close to posting until a decision is reached on whether it stays or goes...as the IB times is not main stream media.

Thanks so much