Police say parents are not answering vital questions #2

[cityslick]

Of course maybe the crib was her "babysitter" while Mom enjoyed her adult time.

As opposed to someone using the TV as a 'babysitter'? Same principle.

 

[cityslick]

FWIW. A picture of the baby monitor on the bedside table. I think it is the 6th one down.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2052957/Lisa-Irwin-missing-Photos-Baby-Lisas-bedroom-handprints-wall.html

And there is no proof that she didn't have the monitor outside with her. Shane not mentioning it doesn't confirm or deny it, especially if it's a person that is young and is not familiar with such a thing.

 

[Donjeta]

Except we don't know if she was just playing happily in her crib or actually in there for a nap, so we can make a case for either side. Or maybe she was put down for a nap but didn't actually sleep, therefore was exhausted by 6:30.

DB said Lisa was fussy. When I picture a fussy baby I don't picture one that is happily playing in the crib but that's JMO.

 

[Donjeta]

As opposed to someone using the TV as a 'babysitter'? Same principle.

It sounds to me like DB and SB possibly did that too... the older children were watching a movie and according to SB2 no one went inside while he was there. So, was there any evening snack, did anybody tell the children to brush their teeth, get changed for the night, go to bed, see to it that they do? Not that we've been told.

 

[yllek]

Once again though, as with every other interview and article in this case, the auto assumption is if it wasn't said, it didn't happen. Shane didn't mention a baby monitor, thus she didn't have one out. Was he asked specifically if he saw a baby monitor?

Wasn't assuming anything definitive in my post. Since Debbi did mention that the monitor was on in her room that night, I take that to be confirmed at this time. Since she never mentioned taking it outside, it's open as to whether she did or not. As I posted, I figured and hope she might have done so. When Shane B was introduced into the mix and stated he had no idea that Debbi had a baby, it lowered the possibility that Debbi was using the baby monitor while she was out on the stoop, imo. Still a possibility, but I think it's less likely that Debbi was using the monitor outside when you add the facts that she never mentioned it and Shane was unaware that there was a baby was inside. Less likely, not impossible. JMO...

 

[Donjeta]

I'm assuming she stopped drinking when she went inside at 10:30 but that's an assumption, so it puts it more 4.5 hrs. I think the point I was trying to make is knowing what we know so far, some level of coordination was necessary to do all this and not leave anything around. I didn't even mention trying to hide the cell phones. When your drunk, you have a very low level of coordination (take it from one who time drank about as much wine as is implied here, and I think I have a pretty decent tolerance for alcohol).

Not that I'm too proud of it but I've been drunk and managed to walk through a forest without killing myself.

Not to leave anything around? Like what?

I actually think that the phones could be a drunken mistake, instead of a brilliant move that you simply can't do drunk. Like, I'm in trouble. Carp, I gotta hide this. Try to call someone. Carp, the phone doesn't work. OK, I can do it myself... OK, done hidden the baby. Now I'll just lie down and lie that I slept all night and didn't hear a thing when someone came in and took her. I'll just check my voice mail first.... Oh DARN, they'll figure out I wasn't sleeping because I used my phone...Carp carp carp, now what'll I do now???

 

[tink92]

[/B]
1st BBM - Funny how some give DB a pass for not checking on Lisa because by DB opening the door it might have awakened Lisa. If this is the case, then the alleged abductor would have woken up the sleeping Lisa and DB should have heard the intruder and her baby that was awake now as the baby monitor was on the bedside table.

2nd BBM - 6:40pm is not normal sleeping time for a baby of this age. True, it might have been a catnap but more than likely she would have wanted up to play for a while before bedtime. She might have been sleepy due to her illness and just slept through this nap but then that should have alerted this experienced Mother that something wasn't right and she needed to check on her child.

Just want to add here..that my eldest child went to bed for the night at 6pm and slept through till 6am the next day....from about this age.

 

[cluciano63]

It would be nice to hear from Mom that she always or often put Lisa down by 6:30PM...not that we are hearing anything from her at all, but it would make this case seem a little less full of possible coincidences, if Lisa was normally in her crib, unchecked, for such a long period of time. I don't think we've ever heard a comment such as "I put her to bed at her usual time" for instance. Clearly, something very very unusual happened there that night...just wondering if it happened amid "normalcy" or amid highly unusual circumstances that someone took advantage of.

I am not convinced that the parents are to blame, although I loathe and do not understand their resistence to LE, as well as the fact that Mom seems to have been intoxicated and not really supervising her baby at all. Unless this was her normal routine (Lisa in bed so early and the wine coming out) then her actions that night did most likley contribute to Lisa's abduction, at the very least. IN MY OPINION

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

Just want to add here..that my eldest child went to bed for the night at 6pm and slept through till 6am the next day....from about this age.

3 grown kids, several grown nieces and nephews close in range to the same ages and now grandbabies, one of which is a month older than Lisa. Children of friends. My experience has been that if a baby/toddler gets that nap at around 4:30 there is no way that child is going to bed for the night at 6:30. There was no way I would put my babies to bed at 6:30pm, it's dinner time, then bath time and once all that was done it was 8:30 or 9:00pm. Honest to goodness I have never heard of people putting an 11 month old to bed at 6:30pm and expecting them to sleep all through the night. 6:30pm some people are not even off work yet, home from their daily commute or participating in the other children's activities and sports. I guess you learn something new everyday.

 

[hambirg]

Just want to add here..that my eldest child went to bed for the night at 6pm and slept through till 6am the next day....from about this age.

My kids usually went to bed around 7pm and slept through the night at this age too, but not if they had a late nap. My children had pretty much given up daytime naps by this age, but it was a trade I was willing to make because they did sleep through the night.

 

[Donjeta]

Should we move this discussion to another thread before a mod comes and slaps us?

 

[octobermoon]

Baby should have been in her arms. But DB wanted her "adult time" gimme a break GRRRRRRRRR

 

[yllek]

It would be nice to hear from Mom that she always or often put Lisa down by 6:30PM...not that we are hearing anything from her at all, but it would make this case seem a little less full of possible coincidences, if Lisa was normally in her crib, unchecked, for such a long period of time. I don't think we've ever heard a comment such as "I put her to bed at her usual time" for instance. Clearly, something very very unusual happened there that night...just wondering if it happened amid "normalcy" or amid highly unusual circumstances that someone took advantage of.

I am not convinced that the parents are to blame, although I loathe and do not understand their resistence to LE, as well as the fact that Mom seems to have been intoxicated and not really supervising her baby at all. Unless this was her normal routine (Lisa in bed so early and the wine coming out) then her actions that night did most likley contribute to Lisa's abduction, at the very least. IN MY OPINION

Good post. I too am not entirely convinced about who is to blame for Lisa being removed from her home. But, I remain most suspicious of the parents due to their post-disappearance actions, statements (made by them personally and on their behalf by their attorneys), and their refusal to use their high powered attorneys to protect their rights while answering questions separately for LE. The last one bothers me the most; by refusing the separate interviews, they are hindering LE's ability to most effeciently progress the investigation and find the truth of what happened to Lisa, imo. Even if they claim not to know anything more than they knew in the first 4 days of the investigation, LE knows more and needs to check things out with them. They are a roadblock, imo.

One point that is fuzzy in my mind that I'd like to see addressed is regarding the drinking time line. Here's what I understand:
-At 5:00 pm, Debbi comes home with a box of wine.
-At 6:30 pm, Samantha Brando makes a run to the store to buy liquor.
-By 7:30 pm, Shane comes by and says neither lady was drinking, though he could tell that they had been. He claims no one was drinking during his 90 minutes on Debbi's stoop. He leaves at 9:00 p.m.

Makes me wonder why they weren't drinking while Shane was present (unless they were and he just didn't realize what they were drinking). Had they been drinking heavily earlier and stopped for a while? Did they start up again after Shane left? If Debbi didn't start drinking until Lisa was put to bed at 6:40, that's less than an hour of drinking before Shane shows up and then she's dry for at least 90 minutes. Then, if she starts drinking again after he leaves, that's only 90 minutes of drinking before she calls it a night. We really don't know, however, what happened after Shane left. I wish we knew more about what was going on that night and who else might have stopped by or gone inside (and was the stoop activity normal or out of the ordinary).

JMO...

 

[cityslick]

It sounds to me like DB and SB possibly did that too... the older children were watching a movie and according to SB2 no one went inside while he was there. So, was there any evening snack, did anybody tell the children to brush their teeth, get changed for the night, go to bed, see to it that they do? Not that we've been told.

I don't think you can conclusively say yes or no to any of the questions based on what little information there is right now.

 

[yllek]

Should we move this discussion to another thread before a mod comes and slaps us?

Is this discussion okay here since the time line and activity surrounding Lisa is a vital question that LE would likely want to address again with the parents after having investigated the events of that night and interviewed witnesses? I'm betting LE wants to know how Lisa was feeling, when was she really last seen and by whom, who else could have been invited in or snuck in anytime that evening...Lots of the same questions we all have. But, I'll follow you wherever you go!

 

[cityslick]

Not that I'm too proud of it but I've been drunk and managed to walk through a forest without killing myself.

Not to leave anything around? Like what?

I actually think that the phones could be a drunken mistake, instead of a brilliant move that you simply can't do drunk. Like, I'm in trouble. Carp, I gotta hide this. Try to call someone. Carp, the phone doesn't work. OK, I can do it myself... OK, done hidden the baby. Now I'll just lie down and lie that I slept all night and didn't hear a thing when someone came in and took her. I'll just check my voice mail first.... Oh DARN, they'll figure out I wasn't sleeping because I used my phone...Carp carp carp, now what'll I do now???

BBM

Evidence.

 

[Donjeta]

BBM

Evidence.

I was hoping for something a bit more specific because I see three problems in believing that DB couldn't have done anything because she could not possibly have avoided leaving evidence behind.

First, there are things that could have happened that do not leave much evidence behind. If there are no bullet holes that require covering, no smashed furniture, not a lot of bodily fluids involved that would require clean up, what kind of evidence would we expect to see? Her DNA is everywhere in the house anyway. You can, say, smother or drug or hit a baby without leaving behind a mess. Some things could be explained away as results of a non-fatal accident.

Second, LE haven't confirmed that no evidence was left behind. I have no idea what kind of clues she might or might not have left there. (Just as I have no idea what the abductor left behind. LE are not saying.)

Third, some details do not really mean anything to the naked eye and may not be considered evidence until you know what happened and can figure out if they fit in the story and how. For example, a normal looking prescription drug bottle in the cabinet with a family member's fingerprints on it might not mean much in itself but if they found Lisa and realized she was overdosed with that same stuff it would become incredibly important.

 

[Karmaa]

My kids usually went to bed around 7pm and slept through the night at this age too, but not if they had a late nap. My children had pretty much given up daytime naps by this age, but it was a trade I was willing to make because they did sleep through the night.

We don't know if Lisa was sleeping (or had slept) at 4:30. If Debbie put Lisa down for a late nap and she didn't actually sleep, I could see taking her out of the crib, letting her play, and then putting her down again at 6:30. If the baby was already tired, didn't nap earlier, and then was up again for a few hours, she could easily be down for the night at 6:30, especially if her normal bedtime was 7:30-8 (which we don't know, but is not an uncommon bedtime for that age, at least in my experience.)

 

[Whisperer]

In almost any murder mystery, it is almost impossible to convict w/o a body. When the parents DNA is over the house, how is anyone going to leave evidence if it were a soft kill.

But "Death" was very probable in that house. Why did the parents mislead LE when they arrived. They led them to the Baby's room and the open window. LE did not have persmission or any reason to search their bedroom..hmm. LE has stated they had conflicting information by the people involved in the case.

Now we have a cadaver dog hit in the parents' bedroom. BL most likely did not die in her bedroom and the parents were well aware of that. It is my opinion, they steered the investigation from the beginning AWAY from their bdrm. And now there is a cadaver hit. Another coincidence? How many do we have and how many people are gong to continue to find excuses for these two?

 

[Whisperer]

What in the world were two rifles doing in their bedroom? They were out in plain sight. Who does that with young children in the home?