Was the carpet removed from Lisa's room?

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

Link?

I certainly don't remember that. Not saying you are not right. But it really means very little. . the carpet still could have came from inside the house.. . .from the house. . .to the shed. . .to the driveway. Unless LE or the FBI that was investigating that day, leak that it was never inside the house, than it could have still come from inside the house.

It was live footage, I'm not sure there would be a link.

 

[hambirg]

I'm talking about the spin that the lawyers put out to the media that a potential jury would take as fact. LE can stop the spin about were that roll of carpet came from without tipping their hand to any defense lawyer. Why don't they?

How would they do that? If LE says the carpet came from inside the house, how is that not going to tip the defense? Now the defense comes up with some story that DB thought she heard something from inside the house at 8:30pm. If LE allows the defense to believe that the carpet came from inside the shed. .. the defense isn't prepared to rebut that. A jury is going to find it totally bizarre that DB only remembered hearing something inside the house. . what? . .6 months later.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

How would they do that? If LE says the carpet came from inside the house, how is that not going to tip the defense? Now the defense comes up with some story that DB thought she heard something from inside the house at 8:30pm. If LE allows the defense to believe that the carpet came from inside the shed. .. the defense isn't prepared to rebut that. A jury is going to find it totally bizarre that DB only remembered hearing something inside the house. . what? . .6 months later.

Your losing me. If Cyndy Short says that the roll of carpet came from the shed when it really was inside of the house, how does LE acknowledging that it was inside the house help the defense?

 

[hambirg]

Your losing me. If Cyndy Short says that the roll of carpet came from the shed when it really was inside of the house, how does LE acknowledging that it was inside the house help the defense?

Because it allows the defense to come up with an explanation.

Just like they did after they learned about the dog hit. The timeline changed at that point.

DB says she saw an alive BL at 10:30pm.

Dogs hits in house in bedroom.

It makes no sense that a SODDI would take a deceased BL into the bedroom where DB says she was sleeping from 10:30pm on.

So DB says she doesn't remember if she checked on BL at 10:30pm

New timeline is BL alive at 6:40pm :doh:


See how that works? Action, reaction. Statement. . . rebuttal.

If LE doesn't let the defense know what they know, then the defense will have to build their case around some false assumptions.

Take Jersey for example. We can all agree that he is not a boy scout. He has a long rap sheet. Neighbors didn't trust him. He was around that neighborhood for some time. Bad guy.

Once LE took him into custody NOBODY has been able to get to him. Good. The defense can build their whole defense around this creepy guy as the SODDI. He's a defense attorney's wet dream.

Flash forward to a trial.

Prosecution is vague during their opening.

Defense opens with all the stuff pointing at Jersey.

Prosecution counters with a tape of Jersey in an emergency room all night. OR he was incarcerated in the neighboring town's drunk tank.

Defense is screwed.

Prosecution rests. Prosecutor's wet dream.

End of story,

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Because it allows the defense to come up with an explanation.

Just like they did after they learned about the dog hit. The timeline changed at that point.

DB says she saw an alive BL at 10:30pm.

Dogs hits in house in bedroom.

It makes no sense that a SODDI would take a deceased BL into the bedroom where DB says she was sleeping from 10:30pm on.

So DB says she doesn't remember if she checked on BL at 10:30pm

New timeline is BL alive at 6:40pm :doh:


See how that works? Action, reaction. Statement. . . rebuttal.

If LE doesn't let the defense know what they know, then the defense will have to build their case around some false assumptions.

Take Jersey for example. We can all agree that he is not a boy scout. He has a long rap sheet. Neighbors didn't trust him. He was around that neighborhood for some time. Bad guy.

Once LE took him into custody NOBODY has been able to get to him. Good. The defense can build their whole defense around this creepy guy as the SODDI. He's a defense attorney's wet dream.

Flash forward to a trial.

Prosecution is vague during their opening.

Defense opens with all the stuff pointing at Jersey.

Prosecution counters with a tape of Jersey in an emergency room all night. OR he was incarcerated in the neighboring town's drunk tank.

Defense is screwed.

Prosecution rests. Prosecutor's wet dream.

End of story,

I have to commend you on a nice well thought out post that covers a lot of ground.

However I still don't see where Cyndy Short saying that the carpet came from the shed out back vs inside the house is addressed.

Why can't LE state that the roll of carpet came from inside of the house if that's where it originated from?

I don't see how releasing that fact could hurt their investigation or possible prosecution.

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

If the parents are charged with a crime, anything the prosecution brings in has to be given to the defense ahead of trial anyway, so not sure why them holding that info back now would affect a trial.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

If the parents are charged with a crime, anything the prosecution brings in has to be given to the defense ahead of trial anyway, so not sure why them holding that info back now would affect a trial.

I know what you mean Dewey. But specifically in regards to the roll of carpet seen being brought outside by LE, obviously JI/DB know were it was found. And in turn so did their lawyers. And so did LE when they picked it up and carried it outside.

The only ones who are unsure of it's location when picked up by LE and brought outside for the cameras is us the public. And the potential jury pool.

 

[vlpate]

If the parents are charged with a crime, anything the prosecution brings in has to be given to the defense ahead of trial anyway, so not sure why them holding that info back now would affect a trial.

LE may be looking for JI or DB to do something, go to a location, you never know, but they wouldn't want to tip either of them off. IMO anyway.

 

[hambirg]

I have to commend you on a nice well thought out post that covers a lot of ground.

However I still don't see where Cyndy Short saying that the carpet came from the shed out back vs inside the house is addressed.

Why can't LE state that the roll of carpet came from inside of the house if that's where it originated from?

I don't see how releasing that fact could hurt their investigation or possible prosecution.

Well, let's try what I did above.

Cyndy Short spins the story that the carpet came from the shed (remember she wasn't there.. . she doesn't know anymore than you and I know.

LE Counters with the carpet came from. . .eh. . pick one. . .DB's bedroom.

Defense comes with since DB was drinking that night, she forgot to tell us that she went to SB's house. She doesn't know if some SODDI snuck in at 7:50pm. . cause she wasn't really on the stoop! :what:

Blech. . .problem for LE

Now if LE keeps their mouth shut and doesn't say that the carpet came from the bedroom. . then the defense doesn't explain it with some "new" revelation. Their story is that the carpet came from the shed.

MOO. .. and all that.

 

[4Jacy]

LE may be looking for JI or DB to do something, go to a location, you never know, but they wouldn't want to tip either of them off. IMO anyway.

BBM

LE may be looking for them to do that but dollars to donuts they never will. If they are responsible they would be scared out of their wits to do that. Of course, just my opinion.

 

[vlpate]

I have to commend you on a nice well thought out post that covers a lot of ground.

However I still don't see where Cyndy Short saying that the carpet came from the shed out back vs inside the house is addressed.

Why can't LE state that the roll of carpet came from inside of the house if that's where it originated from?

I don't see how releasing that fact could hurt their investigation or possible prosecution.

They just don't go on TV and spar with Defense teams. If they disputed everything the DT said that was spin or just incorrect, it would start to sound petty and not very professional - then it would really be tried in the court of public opinion. Deann has asked them to confirm or deny certain things and they will not.

Why wouldn't they correct the DT on their assertion that there are three credible witnesses/sightings of Lisa. I think they've probably figured out who all three are but they are under no obligation to call the DT on it. LE has never put out a plea for the public to come forward if they know who the blob is. They likely know.

Same old story, different missing baby.

 

[hambirg]

If the parents are charged with a crime, anything the prosecution brings in has to be given to the defense ahead of trial anyway, so not sure why them holding that info back now would affect a trial.

It has to come out in discovery, but it seriously hampers the DT in their spinning of the story for a potential jury pool. .. .let alone they might be caught in some lies and have to back track and eat their words.

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

Well, let's try what I did above.

Cyndy Short spins the story that the carpet came from the shed (remember she wasn't there.. . she doesn't know anymore than you and I know.

LE Counters with the carpet came from. . .eh. . pick one. . .DB's bedroom.

Defense comes with since DB was drinking that night, she forgot to tell us that she went to SB's house. She doesn't know if some SODDI snuck in at 7:50pm. . cause she wasn't really on the stoop! :what:

Blech. . .problem for LE

Now if LE keeps their mouth shut and doesn't say that the carpet came from the bedroom. . then the defense doesn't explain it with some "new" revelation. Their story is that the carpet came from the shed.

MOO. .. and all that.

BBM: Now I'm even more confused :blushing: So DB says I went over to SB's and a perp snuck in and removed the rug to a different room or to the shed? :what:

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

It has to come out in discovery, but it seriously hampers the DT in their spinning of the story for a potential jury pool. .. .let along they might be caught in some lies and have to back track and eat their words.

ITA: Which is why I can't see them lying to the public now about the rugs / carpeting.

 

[hambirg]

I know what you mean Dewey. But specifically in regards to the roll of carpet seen being brought outside by LE, obviously JI/DB know were it was found. And in turn so did their lawyers. And so did LE when they picked it up and carried it outside.

The only ones who are unsure of it's location when picked up by LE and brought outside for the cameras is us the public. And the potential jury pool.

You better believe JI and Db know where that carpet came from. .. just like they knew about whether that dog hit was valid or not.

The question is what is their "story: to justify it.

We know with the dog hit, they changed their timeline. What does that tell you? If they were innocent and thought the dog hit was invalid. . they wouldn't have changed the timeline. . but they did. They know the hit is valid.

 

[hambirg]

BBM: Now I'm even more confused :blushing: So DB says I went over to SB's and a perp snuck in and removed the rug to a different room or to the shed? :what:

No. DB explains how a SODDI could have took a deceased BL into her bedroom without her knowing. Just like she described how the SODDI couldn't have brought a deceased BL into her bedroom while she was sleeping there at 10:30pm. She's changes her story.

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

You better believe JI and Db know where that carpet came from. .. just like they knew about whether that dog hit was valid or not.

The question is what is their "story: to justify it.

We know with the dog hit, they changed their timeline. What does that tell you? If they were innocent and thought the dog hit was invalid. . they wouldn't have changed the timeline. . but they did. They know the hit is valid.

BBM: The onus is on LE / prosecution to justify the hit, not DB, JI or the DT, it's the Prosecutions "evidence" they are the ones who will have to prove the dog hit was legit by backing it up with more solid evidence.

 

[hambirg]

ITA: Which is why I can't see them lying to the public now about the rugs / carpeting.

They have already been caught in many lies. . like DB saw BL at 10:30pm. .. like it was a "normal" night where DB fed, bathed changed and put Lisa to bed. She has changed all of that. . .the spin is that she is NOW coming clean. She has nothing to hide.

My response to that is that a parent who's baby is missing and has nothing to hide, doesn't change their story. They tell the truth the first time. . .and they keep telling it however many times they need to. They are on the steps of the police station everyday saying. .. help me find my baby. .. this is what I know. Have you learned anything new? I lay awake at night knowing that there must be something else I have forgotten.

An innocent parent NEVER says I have already told you everything.. . NEVER!!!! They are laying awake at night racking their brains trying to come up with anything new they can remember. There surely must be something they have overlooked. It's NEVER over. EVER.

MOO

 

[hambirg]

BBM: The onus is on LE / prosecution to justify the hit, not DB, JI or the DT, it's the Prosecutions "evidence" they are the ones who will have to prove the dog hit was legit by backing it up with more solid evidence.

Do they want to find their baby or not?

An innocent parent would be horrified by a cadaver dog hit. It would imply their precious child is dead. Their attitude isn't. . .well prove it.

I can guarantee you, if my child was stolen out of their crib in the middle of the night and LE told me they got a cadaver dog hit in my house. I would be afraid to be there. I would be a mess. I would probably not even fathom how I could possibly go on. My reaction wouldn't be to say. .did you verify that with another dog?

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

Do they want to find their baby or not?

An innocent parent would be horrified by a cadaver dog hit. It would imply their precious child is dead. Their attitude isn't. . .well prove it.

I didn't realize this thread was about their attitude, I thought it was about where the carpet came from? I'm calling it a night.