When was the last time Lisa was seen alive

[psychomarz]

I would hesitate to guess that the reason JI seemingly threw DB under the bus was because he suspected her, blamed her in some way, or to throw LE off the trail of who really took the baby.

 

[highflyer]

I would hesitate to guess that the reason JI seemingly threw DB under the bus was because he suspected her, blamed her in some way, or to throw LE off the trail of who really took the baby.

When did JI throw DB under the bus? And hello.:wave:

 

[cityslick]

Regarding the searches, I'm a little confused how when and where they searched gives any indication that LE believe the parents were the ones responsible for putting BL in those areas at that moment in time (late Oct).

 

[norest4thewicked]

Hey there psychomarz! Welcome to Websleuths!!! :welcome:

 

[dog.gone.cute]

I think it is logical.

Oct 3rd the assumed last time BL was seen alive is 10:30pm

Oct 6th SY says, ""This evening we will be shutting down the command post. We believe we have done all we can regarding geographic searches and will continue tracking leads as we get them or develop additional information."

Oct 10th LE is looking for Jersey
Oct 10th LE is investigating the Festival Foods tape (we learn about this when the story breaks on the 12th)

Oct 15th Jersey is in custody

Oct 17th FBI cadaver dog gets a hit inside the home on Lister
Oct 17th DB's timeline changes from 10:30pm to 6:45pm

Oct 19th LE executes the SW

Oct 27th LE searches the pond behind Festival Foods

I don't think anybody is going to convince me that it was a random search. Way back on Oct 6th SY says they are done with geographic searches. If that pond was searched just because it was a body of water near the home, it would have been done before Oct 6th.

If you follow the timeline, you can see how the investigation may have been changing based on what LE was learning. It's logical. LE is not in the habit of randomly doing stuff just for the sake of it. You can almost see the train of thought. I do think it's logical to surmise that on Oct. 27th LE entertained the idea that BL could have been deceased before DB and PN left for Festival Foods, otherwise, there is no logical explanation for why they searched that pond.

:seeya: Good Morning ... Good Timeline.

RBBM: But the date should be Oct 3 ... Lisa was reported missing Oct 4.


What I would like to know is WHO is the last person to see a LIVE Lisa on Sunday Oct 2

:seeya:

 

[hambirg]

Thank you for your reply.

So you think police were lying when they repeatedly said about various searches including the pond one you are talking about on Oct. 27 that it was NOT because of new information but clearing a geographic area?

Police said specifically that the pond was searched NOT because of new information. There were a number of searches after Oct. 6 in which that was the standard line.

I could give you a number of links but here's one. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/10/27/police-search-pond-for-missing-11-month-old-missouri-baby/

I guess the short answer would be yes. Look, we know they had new information. They are actively investigating at that time. They brought Jersey into custody, I'm sure he was questioned. That would be new information. LE got the dog hit. That was new information. LE executed a SW and went over the house forensically for 17hrs. That would be new information.

I believe SY when he said on the 6th that they were finished with the SOP geographic, parameter searches. Everything after that was based on tips or information they gained through their investigation. . .including the pond.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

I think it is logical.

I don't think anybody is going to convince me that it was a random search. Way back on Oct 6th SY says they are done with geographic searches. If that pond was searched just because it was a body of water near the home, it would have been done before Oct 6th.

If you follow the timeline, you can see how the investigation may have been changing based on what LE was learning. It's logical. LE is not in the habit of randomly doing stuff just for the sake of it. You can almost see the train of thought. I do think it's logical to surmise that on Oct. 27th LE entertained the idea that BL could have been deceased before DB and PN left for Festival Foods, otherwise, there is no logical explanation for why they searched that pond.

Snipped and BBM: I totally agree ...

I don't think it was a 'random search' either ... "something" led LE there ... and LE MUST look at any and all possibilities at least 24-48 hours BEFORE a person is reported missing ...

JMO ... but I have thought that "wine run" was HINKY ... something about it has always raised my radar to the roof !

And IF Baby Lisa was deceased BEFORE Deb and her brother went to buy the wine -- JMO -- but that wine run was to dispose of the baby...

:waitasec: oh :doh: that's right ... Deb also bought some "baby supplies" ... which would be nothing but a "cover" ...

MOO ...

 

[hambirg]

All police had to say was...we're not telling you why we searched that pond.

There are a number of things that they won't answer or discuss publicly. (Jeremy on tape, the lights, etc etc). They won't release the 911 call.

But they were very specific to everyone that the pond search was NOT because of a tip or lead but clearing a geographic area (or it could have been to put pressure on someone by such a public search but that's another thread).

They could have said we're not telling you why we searched that pond. Period. They didn't have to say...it was NOT because of a tip or lead. I just don't get why they would lie when they have an easy out...like so many things they could have said....we're not discussing that or going there.

That's not an out and out lie. They most likely didn't get a tip or a lead for that, meaning, no citizen called in and said, "I saw somebody throwing something in the pond behind Festival Foods." It was a geographical search based on the new information they had learned.

It's clear that before Oct15th, LE was operating under the assumption that Jersey could be the suspect. But once he was in custody, that seems to have stopped. Two days later they went into the house with a cadaver dog. Two days after that they executed the SW. LE is operating under some different assumptions after Jersey was questioned. It's obvious.

So yes, they went back and looked at the parent's movements. They searched an area geographically that might be an area to dispose of BL based on where the parents had traveled. The fact that DB traveled to Festival Foods before 6:40pm, leads me to logically assume, at that point, on Oct 27th, LE was not confident in the timeline they were given by the parents.

 

[cityslick]

:seeya: Good Morning ... Good Timeline.

RBBM: But the date should be Oct 3 ... Lisa was reported missing Oct 4.


What I would like to know is WHO is the last person to see a LIVE Lisa on Sunday Oct 2

:seeya:

What about Grandpa (who lent DB his phone)? Did he come to the house to give her the phone or did she go to his house?

 

[cityslick]

I guess the short answer would be yes. Look, we know they had new information. They are actively investigating at that time. They brought Jersey into custody, I'm sure he was questioned. That would be new information. LE got the dog hit. That was new information. LE executed a SW and went over the house forensically for 17hrs. That would be new information.

I believe SY when he said on the 6th that they were finished with the SOP geographic, parameter searches. Everything after that was based on tips or information they gained through their investigation. . .including the pond.

I'm confused, at what point do we take what LE says at face value and at other times do not? Especially if LE is the only word we are taking as 'facts'?

If I'm not to believe every single statement that LE has issued, on top of the questionable statements from every other character in this case, then what exactly am I supposed to believe, beyond the fact that BL is missing?

 

[hambirg]

What about Grandpa (who lent DB his phone)? Did he come to the house to give her the phone or did she go to his house?

I thought it was stated that she received the new phone at the birthday party (that came from DN, I believe.)

 

[cityslick]

That's not an out and out lie. They most likely didn't get a tip or a lead for that, meaning, no citizen called in and said, "I saw somebody throwing something in the pond behind Festival Foods." It was a geographical search based on the new information they had learned.

It's clear that before Oct15th, LE was operating under the assumption that Jersey could be the suspect. But once he was in custody, that seems to have stopped. Two days later they went into the house with a cadaver dog. Two days after that they executed the SW. LE is operating under some different assumptions after Jersey was questioned. It's obvious.

So yes, they went back and looked at the parent's movements. They searched an area geographically that might be an area to dispose of BL based on where the parents had traveled. The fact that DB traveled to Festival Foods before 6:40pm, leads me to logically assume, at that point, on Oct 27th, LE was not confident in the timeline they were given by the parents.

Didn't LE search in other areas as well though later in Oct? Areas that as far as we know may or may not have anything to do with the parents movements?

I still go back to DeAnn's report. She asked SY point blank about the timeline, the same timeline that's been established in the media. SY knows what timeline she is referring to because that's the only timeline (last seen at 6:40pm) that's been in the media. He says nothing has changed about that timeline. How else can you possibly interpret that?

 

[hambirg]

I'm confused, at what point do we take what LE says at face value and at other times do not? Especially if LE is the only word we are taking as 'facts'?

If I'm not to believe every single statement that LE has issued, on top of the questionable statements from every other character in this case, then what exactly am I supposed to believe, beyond the fact that BL is missing?

Behavior. You have to filter what anybody says through their behavior. Hindsight is helpful too. Like we know that they went to the house with a cadaver dog two days after Jersey was in custody.

LE is not going to tell us what they are learning through their investigation. They even tried to have the search warrant sealed. There are valid reasons for them not to tell us everything they know and what they are thinking. We have to surmise what is going on behind the scenes based on their behavior.

 

[cityslick]

Behavior. You have to filter what anybody says through their behavior. Hindsight is helpful too. Like we know that they went to the house with a cadaver dog two days after Jersey was in custody.

LE is not going to tell us what they are learning through their investigation. They even tried to have the search warrant sealed. There are valid reasons for them not to tell us everything they know and what they are thinking. We have to surmise what is going on behind the scenes based on their behavior.

I understand, but not saying something versus making a statement about 'clearing a geographic area' are two different things. It's like DeAnn said, if you don't want to reveal about what led you to the area, don't say anything. LE has been tightlipped about most details in this case, the few times they do volunteer information, I would think there would be some validity to it.

For example, DB says she failed a LDT and JT says he was told they passed. LE comes out and says they never told anyone about the result, which I take as the truth because why come out and make a statement about it to refute it?

DeAnn asks questions about the timeline, SY says there is nothing new. Wouldn't it be better to say 'I can't talk about details of the investigation at this time if there were things that 'were' new instead of outright lying about it?

 

[dog.gone.cute]

What about Grandpa (who lent DB his phone)? Did he come to the house to give her the phone or did she go to his house?

BBM: Good Question -- do we know IF GPa went to the Irwin home ?

And if so, did Grandpa see a LIVE Lisa ?

MOO ...

 

[hambirg]

Didn't LE search in other areas as well though later in Oct? Areas that as far as we know may or may not have anything to do with the parents movements?

I still go back to DeAnn's report. She asked SY point blank about the timeline, the same timeline that's been established in the media. SY knows what timeline she is referring to because that's the only timeline (last seen at 6:40pm) that's been in the media. He says nothing has changed about that timeline. How else can you possibly interpret that?

I will have to go back and look what areas were searched in late Oct. But I'm confident that they weren't random. They were either based on tips or leads from the public or on information that LE learned through their investigation.

I also would be severely disappointed in any LE agency that is using the same timeline as the one reported in the media by an unnamed source, instead of a timeline they have established through their own investigation. They are privy to a lot more information than anybody else. They have their own timeline based on that information not available to the public. JMHO

I also didn't see SY reference that timeline. I believe he was speaking to LE's timeline.

ETA- I just saw your last post. I don't think it's a lie when SY says there is nothing new. The timeline that they have been operating under at least since Oct 27th hasn't changed.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

I'm confused, at what point do we take what LE says at face value and at other times do not? Especially if LE is the only word we are taking as 'facts'?

If I'm not to believe every single statement that LE has issued, on top of the questionable statements from every other character in this case, then what exactly am I supposed to believe, beyond the fact that BL is missing?

BBM:

:seeya: Hope this helps the "confusion" ... LOL ...

LE has released very little info on this case ... so I would say that what they have released is probably all FACT ...

I sure wish they would release more FACTS -- anything -- tell the public something -- anything ...

JMO ... but this "playing everything close to the vest" just does not seem to be helping solve this case -- and other missing persons cases as well ... I am NOT "bashing" LE when I say this -- just saying that it is time that they try another, or opposite approach -- and see where it gets them ...

At this point, what do they have to lose ? Keeping quiet is NOT getting them anywhere --

UNLESS they have LOTS of evidence that they do not want to compromise the investigation -- and IF that is the case, THEN WHAT IS THE HOLD UP ?

JMO and MOO ...

 

[hambirg]

With regards to the timeline. . .Oct 17th. I find that day curious. It's the day LE went into the house on Lister with the cadaver dog and it's the day that DB changed her story from last seeing BL at 10:30pm to 6:40pm. Why???? If it was really that she was drunk and couldn't remember, she would have changed the timeline back on Oct 12th when the drinking story broke. So the cadaver dog hit and the new timeline have to be connected.

After mulling it over, I've come to the conclusion that they (DB/JI. . both or one of them) knew that there was likely going to be a dog hit in the bedroom. Ruh roh! That creates a timeline problem! If DB was supposedly sleeping in the bedroom from 10:30pm to 3:45am, no SODDI is going to lay a deceased BL in on the floor of the bedroom while DB is just inches away sleeping. Sooooo. . .they have to open the timeline. A SODDI could have snuck in the house after 6:40pm and did this while DB was on the stoop. . .or that's the new story anyway.

So, the real question is was 10:30pm really the last time BL was seen alive, and something happened after that time? In that case, the dog hit would imply DB was involved. Or was the 10:30pm time made up? Something happened earlier to BL, but the dog hit messed up the 10:30pm timeline because it doesn't work with a SODDI theory? Hmmmm. . . .:waitasec:

 

[cityslick]

With regards to the timeline. . .Oct 17th. I find that day curious. It's the day LE went into the house on Lister with the cadaver dog and it's the day that DB changed her story from last seeing BL at 10:30pm to 6:40pm. Why???? If it was really that she was drunk and couldn't remember, she would have changed the timeline back on Oct 12th when the drinking story broke. So the cadaver dog hit and the new timeline have to be connected.

After mulling it over, I've come to the conclusion that they (DB/JI. . both or one of them) knew that there was likely going to be a dog hit in the bedroom. Ruh roh! That creates a timeline problem! If DB was supposedly sleeping in the bedroom from 10:30pm to 3:45am, no SODDI is going to lay a deceased BL in on the floor of the bedroom while DB is just inches away sleeping. Sooooo. . .they have to open the timeline. A SODDI could have snuck in the house after 6:40pm and did this while DB was on the stoop. . .or that's the new story anyway.

So, the real question is was 10:30pm really the last time BL was seen alive, and something happened after that time? In that case, the dog hit would imply DB was involved. Or was the 10:30pm time made up? Something happened earlier to BL, but the dog hit messed up the 10:30pm timeline because it doesn't work with a SODDI theory? Hmmmm. . . .:waitasec:

BBM

That's not very realistic or believable though, is it? Because if you are DB and you are floating the notion that an intruder came in the house, you are also saying this happened with at least 2 (boys) other people in that house who didn't see or hear anything. Looking at the floorplan, if the boys were in the living room, the intruder would have to come in from the back of the house, get BL, kill BL, get phones, walk past the living room entry to the master bedroom, put BL on the floor, pick BL up, walk back across the living room entry and exit. All while two, sometimes 3 (SB's daughter) kids were in the house. And nobody heard anything?

 

[hambirg]

BBM

That's not very realistic or believable though, is it? Because if you are DB and you are floating the notion that an intruder came in the house, you are also saying this happened with at least 2 (boys) other people in that house who didn't see or hear anything. Looking at the floorplan, if the boys were in the living room, the intruder would have to come in from the back of the house, get BL, kill BL, get phones, walk past the living room entry to the master bedroom, put BL on the floor, pick BL up, walk back across the living room entry and exit. All while two, sometimes 3 (SB's daughter) kids were in the house. And nobody heard anything?

ITA. No, it's not.

ETA-but even less believable is that a SODDI would take a deceased BL into the bedroom where DB and at least one of the boys, maybe both of them, were sleeping and laid her on the floor. They really backed themselves into a corner with the BL was alive and well at 10:30pm story. . .so they changed it.