Police say parents are not answering vital questions #3

[~n/t~]

Posting this for discussion, from Oct.10th. I think this is very interesting. I really have to wonder how this case would be different if LE would have tread lightly on the parents in the beginning.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1110/10/ijvm.01.html
MIKE LERETTE: There`s just a lot of miscommunication, to be honest. That they were being interviewed again downtown. And after several hours, Jeremy -- Deborah was already gone, and Jeremy said, "I had enough for today." And as soon as they left was when they announced there was an impromptu press conference. They said, you know, were -- you know, the parents aren`t -- or the family is not cooperating any more. And that was -- that was that.

I think the failed polygraph is what caused LE to suspect DB. I'm very surprised they didn't give one to JI at that time even though he was willing to take one. Perhaps some of the miscommunication would've been cleared up and we wouldn't be where we are today. I don't blame JI for getting fed up. After hours of interrogation and finger pointing, I'd walk out also. I'd tell them they're wasting their time investigating the wrong people.
Very strange.

 

[In da Middle]

bbm
If that's the case, then wouldn't that be considered cooperating with investigators? If that's not considered cooperating, I don't know what is.

I think regardless of what agency they decide to communicate with is irrelevant. Both work in conjunction with each other so ultimately whatever is gleened from an interview, evidence or whatever will be handed over to local PD. Yes, indirectly but who cares if the end result is solving the case. They allowed their children to be interviewed so imo, there is some dialogue going on.

yes! and they also allowed the FBI dogs to search theirs and PN's property so it seems there is quite a bit of actual communication going on on multiple fronts between them and the FBI. I am not sure how this is not considered cooperation, either.

 

[MyBelle]

bbm
If that's the case, then wouldn't that be considered cooperating with investigators? If that's not considered cooperating, I don't know what is.

I think regardless of what agency they decide to communicate with is irrelevant. Both work in conjunction with each other so ultimately whatever is gleened from an interview, evidence or whatever will be handed over to local PD. Yes, indirectly but who cares if the end result is solving the case. They allowed their children to be interviewed so imo, there is some dialogue going on.

The public is left to make up our own minds as to the definition of "cooperating." I don't believe stonewalling and refusing to be questioned individually is "cooperating" with those who have a goal of finding a defenseless child. The parents phoned 911 and asked the police for help and then the parents decided they call the terms and conditions. Law enforcement doesn't work that way as the parents are finding out.

JMO

 

[Deleted member 39678]

The public is left to make up our own minds as to the definition of "cooperating." I don't believe stonewalling and refusing to be questioned individually is "cooperating" with those who have a goal of finding a defenseless child. The parents phoned 911 and asked the police for help and then the parents decided they call the terms and conditions. Law enforcement doesn't work that way as the parents are finding out.

JMO

BBM
Law enforcement may be finding out that their tactics have failed. They want to interrogate Debbie and Jeremy separately (again) and it's not happening.

 

[MyBelle]

BBM
Law enforcement may be finding out that their tactics have failed. They want to interrogate Debbie and Jeremy separately (again) and it's not happening.

Failed how? Crimes aren't solved overnight. Public pressure is on them and it can lead to one of them finally deciding to cut a deal.

Even if they do interrogate them separately, there is no guarantee they will tell the truth.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

yes! and they also allowed the FBI dogs to search theirs and PN's property so it seems there is quite a bit of actual communication going on on multiple fronts between them and the FBI. I am not sure how this is not considered cooperation, either.

they knew the FBI would have no problem getting a warrant. It's little more than cooperation by default.

JMO

 

[cityslick]

Failed how? Crimes aren't solved overnight. Public pressure is on them and it can lead to one of them finally deciding to cut a deal.

Even if they do interrogate them separately, there is no guarantee they will tell the truth.

JMO

What if they are innocent though? What has been accomplished then?

 

[cityslick]

they knew the FBI would have no problem getting a warrant. It's little more than cooperation by default.

JMO

Wasn't the only reason they got a warrant was due to the dog hit that they (the parents) allowed? I may be wrong, just asking for clarification.

 

[In da Middle]

they knew the FBI would have no problem getting a warrant. It's little more than cooperation by default.

JMO

They would have to have probably cause to get a warrant. No probable cause - no warrant.

ETA the FBI did not get the warrant even after this, KCPD did off of the FBI hit from a voluntary search.

 

[MyBelle]

What if they are innocent though? What has been accomplished then?

Innocent of what? Thanks to their unwillingness to speak separately with police, LE isn't certain what crime has been committed. The only innocent in this circus is their child. I'm sorry but there is no excuse for their refusal to speak separately. They have only themselves to blame for that one.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

They would have to have probably cause to get a warrant. No probable cause - no warrant.

missing child is probable cause. They invited police to investigate by calling 911. Police are not the bad guys in this case.

JMO

 

[In da Middle]

Failed how? Crimes aren't solved overnight. Public pressure is on them and it can lead to one of them finally deciding to cut a deal.

Even if they do interrogate them separately, there is no guarantee they will tell the truth.

JMO

Failed how? Well publicly stating that the parents were not cooperating, when they were, failed. LE then had to retract this statement publicly by restating that they were in fact, cooperating, just not coming in for separate interviews (interrogations). Now, if they were being asked to do 50 thingsn (made up number here), and only 1 was not being done, then that to me is cooperating. And if I was doing 49 out of 50 things and somebody went blabbing that I was not doing anything, they would get just that. Nothing.

 

[Jacie Estes]

bbm
If that's the case, then wouldn't that be considered cooperating with investigators? If that's not considered cooperating, I don't know what is.

I think regardless of what agency they decide to communicate with is irrelevant. Both work in conjunction with each other so ultimately whatever is gleened from an interview, evidence or whatever will be handed over to local PD. Yes, indirectly but who cares if the end result is solving the case. They allowed their children to be interviewed so imo, there is some dialogue going on.

BBM Exactly! Are Jeremy and Deborah being caught in a jurisdictional matter between agencies? The locals know exactly where the FBI office is in KCMO; let them compare notes. Apparently the FBI is satisfied. http://www.fbi.gov/kansascity/

 

[In da Middle]

missing child is probable cause. They invited police to investigate by calling 911. Police are not the bad guys in this case.

JMO

Not when initial days of unfettered access to the house produced absolutely no evidence for probable cause. They let police investigate. LE had the house for 3+ days all to themselves then they were there many times afterwards. Still nothing.

 

[In da Middle]

Wasn't the only reason they got a warrant was due to the dog hit that they (the parents) allowed? I may be wrong, just asking for clarification.

Yes it was.

 

[cityslick]

Innocent of what? Thanks to their unwillingness to speak separately with police, LE isn't certain what crime has been committed. The only innocent in this circus is their child. I'm sorry but there is no excuse for their refusal to speak separately. They have only themselves to blame for that one.

JMO

I guess my question would be (and only LE could answer this) is how is them unwilling to be interviewed seperate hindering their investigation? If both parents are innocent of wrongdoing, what information does LE think they could get that would help in their search that they wouldn't get by talking to them together?

 

[MyBelle]

Failed how? Well publicly stating that the parents were not cooperating, when they were, failed. LE then had to retract this statement publicly by restating that they were in fact, cooperating, just not coming in for separate interviews (interrogations). Now, if they were being asked to do 50 thingsn (made up number here), and only 1 was not being done, then that to me is cooperating. And if I was doing 49 out of 50 things and somebody went blabbing that I was not doing anything, they would get just that. Nothing.

That's up to them. All actions have consequences. My opinion is that they haven't cooperated. I am a member of the public. Police statements greatly influence public opinion. It is the public who serve on juries. Nobody can force these people to cooperate but they have only themselves to blame.

Refusing to sit down as individuals to answer questions is publicly perceived as reflection of guilt.

JMO

 

[In da Middle]

I guess my question would be (and only LE could answer this) is how is them unwilling to be interviewed seperate hindering their investigation? If both parents are innocent of wrongdoing, what information does LE think they could get that would help in their search that they wouldn't get by talking to them together?

I really can't think of a single thing. It would keep at bay them trying to pit one against the other using false info. Such as telling them the other one told us this when they really didn't say such a thing. I think a LOT of this happened in the first days and it backfired in a big way.

 

[In da Middle]

That's up to them. All actions have consequences. My opinion is that they haven't cooperated. I am a member of the public. Police statements greatly influence public opinion. It is the public who serve on juries. Nobody can force these people to cooperate but they have only themselves to blame.

Refusing to sit down as individuals to answer questions is publicly perceived as reflection of guilt.

JMO

BBM
Yes ALL actions do. Even LE's actions and IMO this is the consequence of them.

 

[Jacie Estes]

I think the failed polygraph is what caused LE to suspect DB. I'm very surprised they didn't give one to JI at that time even though he was willing to take one. Perhaps some of the miscommunication would've been cleared up and we wouldn't be where we are today. I don't blame JI for getting fed up. After hours of interrogation and finger pointing, I'd walk out also. I'd tell them they're wasting their time investigating the wrong people.
Very strange.

BBM

Invalid assumptions are being made about pass/fail on lie detector tests; they are not Gospel or written in stone.

There have been a number of previous reviews of the validity of the polygraph and related techniques (e.g., Levey, 1988; U.S. Office of Technology Assessment, 1983; see also Lykken, 1981; Murphy, 1993), each of which has examined partially overlapping sets of studies, though it is unlikely that any review (including ours) covers every study done. What is remarkable, given the large body of relevant research, is that claims about the accuracy of the polygraph made today parallel those made throughout the history of the polygraph: practitioners have always claimed extremely high levels of accuracy, and these claims have rarely been reflected in empirical research. Levey’s (1988) analysis suggests that conclusions about the accuracy of the polygraph have not changed substantially since the earliest empirical assessments of this technique and that the prospects for improving accuracy have not brightened over many decades.

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10420&page=107

John Walsh stated on the GMA program that a psychopath can pass a lie detector test.

In the When Your Child Goes Missing handbook it says that the parents are under duress because of the child being missing and lie detector test results can be inaccurate.