Police say parents are not answering vital questions #3

[Deleted member 39678]

To get back on topic, I was of the opinion that DB/JI going back and doing more interviews would have little risk to them legally. But as MyBelle has said, anything that they say can be used against them during a trial. I don't think that its worth the risk at this point. One mistake and bam, your in trouble.

 

[alwaysonmymind]

Did anyone see baby Lisa that night? The neighbor, brother to DB, anyone else?
The last time seen changed, iirc, and that has been troubling.

 

[In da Middle]

Did anyone see baby Lisa that night? The neighbor, brother to DB, anyone else?
The last time seen changed, iirc, and that has been troubling.

What changed? At the minimum SB and her daughter saw her. Maybe more that have just not said anything to the media. It was a beautiful evening and they were always out, so there could have been more.

 

[In da Middle]

For the one dog vs. many RANCH has brought forward this from the HRD thread
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7554225&postcount=257"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Human Remains (*cadaver) Detection (HRD) dog questions and answers **NO DISCUSSION**[/ame]

Originally Posted by sarx
Depends on the dog, some have accuracy rates in the high 90's. This is part of why you bring another dog in blind.

Thanks, RANCH!
this means that the BEST dog's rate is in the high 90's. What was this ONE dogs rate?
And to bring it to topic, the parents would have to be said as cooperating when they allowed this dog to come in voluntarily.

 

[alwaysonmymind]

What changed? At the minimum SB and her daughter saw her. Maybe more that have just not said anything to the media. It was a beautiful evening and they were always out, so there could have been more.

Deborah's story changed. By 4 hours.

 

[iamnotagolem]

I saw a Missing Lisa poster today! It's the first one I've seen. It's sad that it's taken 4 months to get one up, but it's nice to know that someone cares.

 

[In da Middle]

I saw a Missing Lisa poster today! It's the first one I've seen. It's sad that it's taken 4 months to get one up, but it's nice to know that someone cares.

Very cool! Can I ask what area of the county you are in? They are ALL over here, as they should be. Just curious as to how far away you are.

 

[MyBelle]

That should not ever be enough for anybody. WHAT did it hit on then? And even dog handlers will tell you one hit is NOT enough.
Just as finding blood at a crime scene is not evidence itself. It needs to be tested to see if it is even human and then it needs to be matched to a specific person. Where it is found and what it is found on is also important. It might have nothing to do with the crime that is being investigated.
In this case, what was it found on? Where exactly was it found? What, if any, cross training did the dog have (it matters)? What did the testing come back say if anything that was collected happened to be what the dog hit on?
Ok, say something bad happened at my house and they found your fingerprint on something in my house. Does that mean that you committed the crime? Does it even mean that you were ever in my house even? NO, it could mean that you touched something at the store that I brought home. Now, what if everybody was saying that your print had no business being in my home so you surely must have something to do with it and LE kept insisting that you come in and explain why your print was in my house but you had no answer as to why.

I can remember where I've been. No black-outs here.

One dog hit is enough for me, especially so if they seized items such as a blanket and found more evidence. LE isn't about to share that info prior to an arrest.

The defense always has an opportunity to explain evidence such as dog hits and persuade them it doesn't matter.

JMO

 

[In da Middle]

I can remember where I've been. No black-outs here.


One dog hit is enough for me, especially so if they seized items such as a blanket and found more evidence. LE isn't about to share that info prior to an arrest.

The defense always has an opportunity to explain evidence such as dog hits and persuade them it doesn't matter.

JMO

And if you remembered everywhere you have been, wouldn't it be especially irritating if LE kept bringing you in to question you about my hypothesis above as in having you explain why your print is in my house?

Was the blanket even taken because of a dog hit? And again, if it was, was it verified by another dog or other testing. ALL things taken must be listed in the inventory log as this is Federal law. If they have something that is not in the log, they are taking the chance for it to be tossed. Would that be a something LE would risk, especially since they have attorneys? And again, one dog hit would not and should not ever be enough. Even for a dog handler.

Originally Posted by sarx
Depends on the dog, some have accuracy rates in the high 90's. This is part of why you bring another dog in blind.

 

[LillieBelle]

Very cool! Can I ask what area of the county you are in? They are ALL over here, as they should be. Just curious as to how far away you are.

I saw a poster of Lisa Irwin at the Walmart in far northwest Austin, Texas,a very nice part of town. It was front and center in the display case, and had two pictures of Lisa as a child, and not those infant pictures. It made me hope that a nice family has her because they wanted her to complete their family and she will have a good life. I can only hope, unfortunately, it's not what I believe in my gut...

 

[MyBelle]

And if you remembered everywhere you have been, wouldn't it be especially irritating if LE kept bringing you in to question you about my hypothesis above as in having you explain why your print is in my house?

Was the blanket even taken because of a dog hit? And again, if it was, was it verified by another dog or other testing. ALL things taken must be listed in the inventory log as this is Federal law. If they have something that is not in the log, they are taking the chance for it to be tossed. Would that be a something LE would risk, especially since they have attorneys? And again, one dog hit would not and should not ever be enough. Even for a dog handler.

I agree it would be irritating for LE to keep bringing me in to question me about a fingerprint but it's yet to happen and I don't anticipate it happening at any time in my future.

All I know is that some type of bed covering was seized. Cops aren't about to reveal the evidence they have until an arrest is made. I do believe those doing the seizing are aware of the applicable laws and that there is more evidence in this case than just one dog hit.

JMO

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

But Miranda is for people that have been ARRESTED. No arrests here. No Miranda warning to be had.

http://fox4kc.com/2011/11/11/exclusive-irwin-family-attorney-john-picerno-talks-to-fox-4s-john-holt/

From Part 1 (bolding by me):

Q: She's not been charged, he's not been charged. The perception out there is: Why lawyer up? Why do you need a lawyer if you haven't been charged and are supposedly cooperating?

JP: Sure. I have this discussion all the time with my father, and with other people. It's a common question, and I think it's a good question. Generally speaking, someone who is going to be interrogated by the police should have a lawyer to give them advice on what their rights are, when they can refuse to answer questions and when they should answer questions. In this case, JI and DB subjected themselves to 5 different interviews/interrogations. Two without attorneys, where they agreed to waive their Miranda rights, or at least Debbie did, and speak to LE on their own, the first time was 8 hours for JI and 11 hours for DB, they did so. And then they went back a second time, and they did so again without a lawyer. It wasn't until the third time that a family member who is also a law student suggested to them "hey, next time you talk to the police, it would be a good idea to have a lawyer go with you."

 

[In da Middle]

http://fox4kc.com/2011/11/11/exclusive-irwin-family-attorney-john-picerno-talks-to-fox-4s-john-holt/

From Part 1 (bolding by me):

Q: She's not been charged, he's not been charged. The perception out there is: Why lawyer up? Why do you need a lawyer if you haven't been charged and are supposedly cooperating?

JP: Sure. I have this discussion all the time with my father, and with other people. It's a common question, and I think it's a good question. Generally speaking, someone who is going to be interrogated by the police should have a lawyer to give them advice on what their rights are, when they can refuse to answer questions and when they should answer questions. In this case, JI and DB subjected themselves to 5 different interviews/interrogations. Two without attorneys, where they agreed to waive their Miranda rights, or at least Debbie did, and speak to LE on their own, the first time was 8 hours for JI and 11 hours for DB, they did so. And then they went back a second time, and they did so again without a lawyer. It wasn't until the third time that a family member who is also a law student suggested to them "hey, next time you talk to the police, it would be a good idea to have a lawyer go with you."

Red by me. For those convinced that they only were questioned one time and then lawyered up.

 

[Whisperer]

I agree it would be irritating for LE to keep bringing me in to question me about a fingerprint but it's yet to happen and I don't anticipate it happening at any time in my future.

All I know is that some type of bed covering was seized. Cops aren't about to reveal the evidence they have until an arrest is made. I do believe those doing the seizing are aware of the applicable laws and that there is more evidence in this case than just one dog hit.

JMO

Items taken into evidence:

multi-colored Comforter/blanket
glow worm
purple shorts
disney themed shirt
cars themed blanket


....Oh, Rolls (plural) of Tape, and dispenser

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyjKnXHljGk"]Details Of Lisa Irwin Search Warrant Released - YouTube[/ame]

I was under the impression only one blanket was taken...not according to this report. I wonder where they located these items; that would be important.

 

[cityslick]

I think some people are using their emotions to decide that DB/JI are guilty of something and will be not just be arrested but found guilty. A personal dislike of someone should not be used against them in my opinion. Evidence alone should be used.

I think you pretty much hit on it. Folks take DB's actions that night as an affront to being a mother and a parent and they have judged her guilt mainly on that. They get emotionally charged about it because there was neglect there. But when you take emotion out of it, there isn't a whole lot there that shows she or JI harmed their child. She won't win any mother of the year awards, but it doesn't make her a killer either.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

http://fox4kc.com/2011/11/11/exclusive-irwin-family-attorney-john-picerno-talks-to-fox-4s-john-holt/

From Part 1 (bolding by me):

Q: She's not been charged, he's not been charged. The perception out there is: Why lawyer up? Why do you need a lawyer if you haven't been charged and are supposedly cooperating?

JP: Sure. I have this discussion all the time with my father, and with other people. It's a common question, and I think it's a good question. Generally speaking, someone who is going to be interrogated by the police should have a lawyer to give them advice on what their rights are, when they can refuse to answer questions and when they should answer questions. In this case, JI and DB subjected themselves to 5 different interviews/interrogations. Two without attorneys, where they agreed to waive their Miranda rights, or at least Debbie did, and speak to LE on their own, the first time was 8 hours for JI and 11 hours for DB, they did so. And then they went back a second time, and they did so again without a lawyer. It wasn't until the third time that a family member who is also a law student suggested to them "hey, next time you talk to the police, it would be a good idea to have a lawyer go with you."

Thanks for the link. So DB/JI waived their rights to have a lawyer present while being questioned. They answered LE questions while knowing that what they said could be used against them. Seems like LE got a shot at getting them to incriminate themselves. Does LE want a do over?

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

Items taken into evidence:

multi-colored Comforter/blanket
glow worm
purple shorts
disney themed shirt
cars themed blanket


....Oh, Rolls (plural) of Tape, and dispenser

Details Of Lisa Irwin Search Warrant Released - YouTube

I was under the impression only one blanket was taken...not according to this report. I wonder where they located these items; that would be important.

Thanks for the link, I notice that the reporter also said "possible" (not 100% positive) hit for decomposition.

 

[Whisperer]

passed right over the rolls of tape and dispenser...

 

[In da Middle]

Thanks for the link. So DB/JI waived their rights to have a lawyer present while being questioned. They answered LE questions while knowing that what they said could be used against them. Seems like LE got a shot at getting them to incriminate themselves. Does LE want a do over?

And for 8 and 11 hours on the very first day no less! Also, for those convinced that they were not interviewed separately already, how do we get different hours on the first day? This means that they had her at the very LEAST 3 hours by herself, most likely more as I am sure that part of his hours were alone.
It seems like a neighbor KCPD officer who explained to me that Miranda is only for an arrest may have been wrong.

 

[Whisperer]

It could be a possibility that cadaver dogs hit on both blankets. One or both could have been on the floor at one time.