MO - Lisa Irwin, 10 months, Kansas City, 4 Oct 2011 - #13

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
There is another theory that I have kicked around a bit. What if it was the dad, and it happened before he went to work? Would DB cover for him? I think as hard as it is to think about, she might. She constantly looks at him out of the corner of her eyes, I find that strange. She has a good home with him, and she seems to be a person who takes a lot of guilt on herself. Could she have possibly thought, "If, I had done this or that, or been here or there, this would not have happened, and so I am going to support him, and go along with the story?"

In some ways she is so open and honest, that I believe that she might not be lying. But if she did flunk the LD test, it could have been because she knows what happened, and is covering.

A motive for either of them lying for the other could be the custody issue of the other two boys. In his case especially, if the mother lost custody and people speak of him as "ruthless" in getting custody of his son, perhaps DB would feel badly for him for that reason, as she too has custody of her son from a prior relationship.

I frankly don't know what to think anymore...a bunch of theories and nothing to really prove any of them, one way or the other.
 
I'm having a hard time understanding how media interviews could be evidence, given that it's not required to tell the truth in them.

Aside from that, along with the idea that maybe there is a POI in the background, what about the possibility of there being evidence in the background? What I'm thinking is - they are now paying more attention to a neighbor's property. What if it is obvious that something was recently moved/removed from that property, but it might still be there on the earliest tapes? Or some other physical thing they could be looking for in the background.
 
LadyPirate said:
Exactly what I said earlier. I'm sure he has a reason for not wanting to be seen. I just hope it doesn't involve a 10 month old girl.
Click to expand...

This doesn't bother me too much (although I can see why it might bother some) because I wouldn't want to be on camera either. I swear they pick the worst possible sound bites so that the most intelligent person can sound like they don't have two brain cells to rub together. All I ever picture is those poor people after tornados who always say, "It sounded like a train was coming right at me..."

I'd help in any way I could to help find a missing child, but I'd really shy away from the news cameras.

Edited to add: Not "poor" as in financial...poor as in deserving of sympathy because of what happened. I realized after I wrote it that it sounded like I was making fun of people of lower incomes. Just wanted to clarify.
 
Gosh guys, I don't know. What is the crime? A baby is missing, but we don't know for sure who took her, or what happened to her, or what the motive was...is that enough for a grand jury?

Also, I tend to get pretty good reads on people. Like TH for example, I saw her and KNEW she did it. But this lady? She seems appropriately devastated. I just don't know...I'm baffled. I need to know more before I can decide if she is responsible or not.
 
Just K said:
The helicopter, today! There and then almost immediately GONE!
Click to expand...

From what I saw on Twitter today, the news helicopter was asked to leave the area that is why they weren't there long. Wonder if they found anything that they asked the news to leave.
 
frankie069 said:
I am new here, so forgive my posting etiquette. Did anyone notice on the grand Jury subpoena that the footage they are asking for isn't going before the grand jury until October 18th. That is over a week away. You would think they would want this stuff asap. IMO they have nothing if they can wait this long to get this footage. Court date states October 18th.
Click to expand...

Welcome to Websleuths! As to the timing of the Grand Jury hearing, there has to be time to convene the jury and make certain that all necessary documents, videos, etc. are available. Courts were closed today for the holiday, so the 18th is actually a week from tomorrow. Doesn't seem like an inordinate amount of time to me. jmo
 
frankie069 said:
I am new here, so forgive my posting etiquette. Did anyone notice on the grand Jury subpoena that the footage they are asking for isn't going before the grand jury until October 18th. That is over a week away. You would think they would want this stuff asap. IMO they have nothing if they can wait this long to get this footage. Court date states October 18th.
Click to expand...

Welcome to Websleuths frankie069, thanks for joining the conversation. We are a bit confused as to why they are waiting til Oct 18. Typically, a GJ is convened at certain times, such as every three months, every six weeks, etc. Now occasionally a Special Grand Jury might be convened earlier that the normal scheduled ones.

It is possible that the Oct 18th date is simply because that was when the next already scheduled GJ was to meet.

Quite a few of us are wondering why whatever they are subpoenaing does not seem important enough to need til the 18th but is important enough to subpoena. It does seem a bit odd to me.
 
OK - the guy in the jean shorts and black tank top is the one whose back stays to the camera? If anybody thinks he's the perp, I have got one thing to say:

NO WAY could that gut fit through that window. Just sayin'................
 
wfgodot said:
How fast is our pace? Just got up to make a sandwich, typical bachelor thing, nothing fancy, salami on light rye w/cheese, no cutting involved, slap 'em on there and squirt it with mustard and - done! and came back in here. Number of posts in that time: 33.
Click to expand...

Good Lord Woofy - Call out for a pizza, for crying out loud!
 
curiositycat said:
There is another theory that I have kicked around a bit. What if it was the dad, and it happened before he went to work? Would DB cover for him? I think as hard as it is to think about, she might. She constantly looks at him out of the corner of her eyes, I find that strange. She has a good home with him, and she seems to be a person who takes a lot of guilt on herself. Could she have possibly thought, "If, I had done this or that, or been here or there, this would not have happened, and so I am going to support him, and go along with the story?"

In some ways she is so open and honest, that I believe that she might not be lying. But if she did flunk the LD test, it could have been because she knows what happened, and is covering.

A motive for either of them lying for the other could be the custody issue of the other two boys. In his case especially, if the mother lost custody and people speak of him as "ruthless" in getting custody of his son, perhaps DB would feel badly for him for that reason, as she too has custody of her son from a prior relationship.

I frankly don't know what to think anymore...a bunch of theories and nothing to really prove any of them, one way or the other.
Click to expand...

That's one of my theories as well...
 
I looked for any "raw video" that I could find. This is the first one taken by channel 5 and they refer to it as "raw video" it's a little over 3 minutes long. I put it full screen, nothing stood out as "odd" to me, but maybe someone with better eyes then mine will see something;
http://www.kctv5.com/category/222182/search-for-lisa
 
Man, I go to work and come back and there are 2 threads that I've missed. Would someone be willing to catch me? I think I heard something about GJ subpena and someone thing about a homeless man?? What's going on? Also, any word on the teen neighbor? Have they found the cell phones yet?
 
BethInAK said:
I would be very upset if they were investigating me instead of looking for my kid.
Click to expand...

I've often thought that if, God Forbid, I was ever in this situation, I would tell LE that they could have a team of investigators follow me around night and day, asking me the same questions repeatedly, hook me up to a polygraph...heck, sleep in my house and eat my food....I wouldn't care AS LONG as they also had a huge team dedicated to investigating other leads. Investigate me all you want to, but for God's sake, don't stop looking somewhere else too.
 
obody said:
I'm having a hard time understanding how media interviews could be evidence, given that it's not required to tell the truth in them.

Aside from that, along with the idea that maybe there is a POI in the background, what about the possibility of there being evidence in the background? What I'm thinking is - they are now paying more attention to a neighbor's property. What if it is obvious that something was recently moved/removed from that property, but it might still be there on the earliest tapes? Or some other physical thing they could be looking for in the background.
Click to expand...

Thats what I am thinking not so much someone but something. Maybe even seen part of something at one place and part of it at another place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 99 more.
Total: 3,237 (members: 100, guests: 3,137)

Online statistics

Members online
100
Guests online
3,137
Total visitors
3,237
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
594,156
Messages
17,999,797
Members
229,324
Latest member
Websleuth0000
Back
Top