Why hasn't there been an arrest?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree with you on the LE knows she is dead part.

LE has been so tight lipped we really have no idea where they are in the case. I would assume they have cleared all leads they had when the parents were on the Dr Phil show by now, but we have no way of knowing if they have or haven't. We have no idea if they cleared all the info from DB's hundred pages of notes. We have no idea if all the investigators have wrapped up their portions of the case. Since the media interest seems to have died down unless self initiated by the Irwin camp, LE may be still conducting an active investigation, doing searches and the like, and we just don't know it. We have no idea if the case is mostly wrapped up but some little niggling detail needs to be worked out before it's presented to the proper authority for progressing to charges. Are LE biding their time hoping her body is recovered in some time frame before proceeding? You could just go on and on with reasons and possibilities.

There isn't enough evidence for me to conclude the lack of arrest is due to lack of evidence.

I see no need for rushing this case, especially this late in the game. It's too late to save BL, she is in the same non-living state she was in from the moment her parents reported her missing. It's probably too late to recover any evidence from her body should it be found right now unless it's pretty drastic skeletal damage. The best you can do for her is putting together the best case possible. If it takes years, so be it.

BBM
I agree with most of your post and would like to comment on the sentence that I bolded.

I would say that LE has collected evidence in this case. But whatever evidence they do have is at this time not enough for them to make an arrest. There's no reason for them to wait if they have enough evidence to arrest and possibly convict someone in the disappearance of Lisa Irwin. JMO.
 
BBM
I agree with most of your post and would like to comment on the sentence that I bolded.

I would say that LE has collected evidence in this case. But whatever evidence they do have is at this time not enough for them to make an arrest. There's no reason for them to wait if they have enough evidence to arrest and possibly convict someone in the disappearance of Lisa Irwin. JMO.

Sorry, I just don't see the lack of arrest currently as the "not enough evidence" gotcha people like to trot out. We do not even know if the case is complete yet. Perhaps if the case is announced as completed and shelved and years go by with no charges, I will entertain the "not enough evidence" argument. It's waaay to early in the case for that for me. :moo: YMMV.
 
i believe reports were that no new or helpful information came from that info/meeting with LE...
I do remember hearing that but you know LE had to validate and verify whatever it was she wasted their time with. I wonder if they are finished with that.
 
I do remember hearing that but you know LE had to validate and verify whatever it was she wasted their time with. I wonder if they are finished with that.


i'm sure it didn't take a lot of time to rule it all unrelated and irrelevant... :moo:
 
The case is cold. The two parents have high profile attorneys and a rich benefactor to hide and guide them. I don't think these two are affected much by all of this. They have moved on to a better life. Life is not a struggle for them right now.
 
Sorry, I just don't see the lack of arrest currently as the "not enough evidence" gotcha people like to trot out. We do not even know if the case is complete yet. Perhaps if the case is announced as completed and shelved and years go by with no charges, I will entertain the "not enough evidence" argument. It's waaay to early in the case for that for me. :moo: YMMV.
What I'm getting out of this post is that there is still an ongoing investigation and it's not a cold case yet. I can agree with that. JMO.
 
Maybe I'm looking at the fact that there hasn't been an arrest yet in this case along more legal terms then some other members.

In order for LE to arrest someone they need whats called "probable cause". What does that mean? Here's something I found on lawyers.com.

It is well established that probable cause for arrest exists only when the facts known to the arresting officer "would lead a man of ordinary care and prudence to believe and conscientiously entertain an honest and strong suspicion that the person is guilty of a crime",

Does that mean that LE needs to know every single fact possible before they arrest someone? I don't think so, but they do need evidence to allow them to have an "honest and strong suspicion" of guilt.

I think that some members already feel that LE has an "honest and strong suspicion" of guilt pointing towards Deborah Bradley.

And here is where I think that my feelings diverge from some others. The word "strong" is what makes me believe that LE is lacking evidence to arrest anyone at this point. An honest but weak or mediocre suspicion isn't enough. Evidence that supports a "strong suspicion" of guilt needs to be accurate and compelling. I feel that if LE had such compelling evidence an arrest would have been made by now.

I do agree with people who say that the investigation is ongoing and LE could make an arrest next week, next month or next year.
JMO.

http://criminal.lawyers.com/blogs/archives/507-How-does-the-law-define-probable-cause-to-arrest.html
 
I don't post much here but I do read the threads often.

I have to disagree a little about the meaning of probable cause. Most DA's will not prosecute a case unless there is enough evidence to ensure a conviction. They are the ones who make the decisions whether to arrest someone, not just LE. They have to feel pretty certain that they've got enough to prosecute, and that would have to mean a little more than just a strong belief.

Do we know if they have given this case to a grand jury? If not, then they obviously feel like they don't have enough evidence for a GJ to even consider it.

I don't know of course, everything they do have, but I do think it's going to be tough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt if they don't have any more than what we've seen so far. If DB is guilty, then she's done a pretty good job of covering her tracks, which is quite a feat for a woman who was drunk enough to pass out.

JMO.
 
Consider, Nancy Grace, was an Atlanta, GA Prosecutor....

Enough said...
 
I don't post much here but I do read the threads often.

I have to disagree a little about the meaning of probable cause. Most DA's will not prosecute a case unless there is enough evidence to ensure a conviction. They are the ones who make the decisions whether to arrest someone, not just LE. They have to feel pretty certain that they've got enough to prosecute, and that would have to mean a little more than just a strong belief.

Do we know if they have given this case to a grand jury? If not, then they obviously feel like they don't have enough evidence for a GJ to even consider it.

I don't know of course, everything they do have, but I do think it's going to be tough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt if they don't have any more than what we've seen so far. If DB is guilty, then she's done a pretty good job of covering her tracks, which is quite a feat for a woman who was drunk enough to pass out.

JMO.

All we have to go on is her claim that she was drunk enough to pass/black out, and IMO her word is not good enough.
 
All we have to go on is her claim that she was drunk enough to pass/black out, and IMO her word is not good enough.

While I'll agree that Deborah Bradley's truthfulness may be lacking, does that mean that we have to consider everything that she has said as being false?
 
While I'll agree that Deborah Bradley's truthfulness may be lacking, does that mean that we have to consider everything that she has said as being false?

Pretty much. :sigh:
 
Is there a possibility that DB killed her baby while in a black-out?
1. Did she, herself do the cover up alone or
2. did JI arrive home and remove the baby? or
3. is it possible that she called her brother to help and dispose.

People do things in black-outs and they appear to be acting normally. They have no recollection of what they do during the time of the black out and never will recover the memory of that time.

IMO, DB is an alcoholic and is familiar with the term "Black out". Did she imbibe the stronger alcohol that night and is just simply stating she only drank wine? After all her BFF made a liquor run, why? Was SB intending on consuming it all herself or was she going to share what she bought?

It must be considered that DB may have blacked out and has no recall of what happened. She wants to distance herself from the term "blacked out"...for that surely lends her to be a suspect in the death of her child. She went as far as to admit being drunk and at one time included blacked out. Since attorneys came on, that term has dissappeard from her vocabularly.

She could have blacked out. She could be a serious alcoholic too. She could have killed her baby also. She could have been alone and got in that parked car at the end of the driveway and drove to a dumpster out of the neighborhood. Blacked out also may account for her knowing what Lisa was wearing when in bed....yet that clothing described was found on a search of the property. So somehow, she wasn't aware the clothing was removed. This is typical of people in a black out...doing things like changing clothes, driving, etc.

Where did the stray kitty come from? Was there an explanation for that? Perhaps she picked up the kitty wherever she left Lisa.
 
I guess that's a vote for saying that everything that Deborah has said is false. Pretty much or kind of sort of. Maybe?

No, it's a vote for having to scrutinize everything she says and having to judge whether she is being truthful or lying, because she is a known liar.
 
I think we can all agree on one thing:

Lisa is most likely dead and her parents (one or both) are more than likely involved.

I would love for DB to go down for this and i hope someday she does.

I think there will be an arrest when we least expect it and i hope when one or both get arrested, I hope it is a total shocker to both of them esp. DB.

JMO:banghead:
 
I think we can all agree on one thing:

Lisa is most likely dead and her parents (one or both) are more than likely involved.


I would love for DB to go down for this and i hope someday she does.

I think there will be an arrest when we least expect it and i hope when one or both get arrested, I hope it is a total shocker to both of them esp. DB.

JMO:banghead:

BBM

I don't agree with this statement.
 
I think we can all agree on one thing:

Lisa is most likely dead and her parents (one or both) are more than likely involved.

I would love for DB to go down for this and i hope someday she does.

I think there will be an arrest when we least expect it and i hope when one or both get arrested, I hope it is a total shocker to both of them esp. DB.

JMO:banghead:

I totally agree.
 
I think we can all agree on one thing:

Lisa is most likely dead and her parents (one or both) are more than likely involved.

I would love for DB to go down for this and i hope someday she does.

I think there will be an arrest when we least expect it and i hope when one or both get arrested, I hope it is a total shocker to both of them esp. DB.

JMO:banghead:

I do not agree with this statement. I have not seen one piece of conclusive evidence that lends weight to any particular theory as to what happened and who was involved, let alone enough weight to convince me that the child is dead and her parents did it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
161
Guests online
473
Total visitors
634

Forum statistics

Threads
625,782
Messages
18,509,933
Members
240,845
Latest member
Bouilhol
Back
Top