Dan Abrams ABC to Interview Lisa's parents 10/17/2011 & Today Show

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mountain_Kat said:
DB: "We can't even look for her if we wanted to."

Wow. IF we wanted to?!
Click to expand...

Eh, I think this is just the phrasing used to emphasize we are not allowed to look. I don't think that means they do not want to. Just a phrase family members used to emphasize "against their will." Drives me nuts though.
 
natsound said:
This string of comments began with a poster hypothesizing that PD has burned clothes, cell phone pings and statements from a neighbor. My argument was, if PD had all those things, they would have enough evidence to make an arrest, which they have not done. A murder arrest was made, however, in the Anthony case without a body.
Click to expand...

Maybe they like her being in front of a camera giving interviews instead of in a cell refusing to talk.
 
He's lying, imo. Per not_my_kids transcript he stated he mentioned the window to Deb. He didn't check on the kids first..but went into the computer room? I don't think he saw the window open before he went into the house...or he's never mentioned that if true, iirc.
 
jjenny said:
Police really doesn't like making an arrest without a body. There are quite a few of current cases where they have not.
Click to expand...

Yep, and DB/JI are both probably already thinking, "No body. No case." jmo
 
I havent finished reading the whole thread, so I am sure this has been said, but.. Isn't 6:40 awfully early to put the baby to bed? I even thought 7:30 was a little early as my daughter went to bed around 8pm when she was 10/11 months, right after dinner with the family in her high chair and a warm bath.. But 6:40? Wow and mom was drinking! 10/11 month olds (if sleeping thru the night) tend to sleep around 10-12 hours, so who was going to take care of her when she got up at 4:30-6:30 if mom was hungover? Dad who had worked all night? WOW, all I can say is WOW!
 
cachmo said:
My niece, who was 6 at the time, witnessed something bad happen to her little brother, he was 2. She was questioned by LE 3 times. I was there for all 3 at the request of her mother. (My brother is bi polar and takes NO responsibility for her...thats another subject) The lady that interviewed her was in street clothes and 2 of the times they were in a room with a few toys coloring books that kinda thing. This woman was as gentle as you could get. The last time was at the park at school. My niece never realized she was talking to police. She was recorded in one session and that helped convict the man that hurt her brother.
My point is IF this is the way MY child was interviewed Id have no problem.
(they both went thru therepy because of the whole situation. It was the worst thing Ive ever had first hand knowledge of)
Click to expand...

I think the trauma of knowing their sister was snatched out of her crib is gonna outweigh any conversation LE may have with the boys, IMHO. I know in this day and age it can be done quite discreetly and calmly. I would most certainly want to be present, or have a family member there though. But I don't understand why some would say "never, or only once". It doesn't make sense when a child could hold the key in finding another child who may be in grave danger...or worse.

Thanks for sharing your experience.

MOO

Mel
 
Kamille said:
I wondered why they weren't wearing those t-shirts, holding a big recent picture of Lisa and asking people to keep looking for her too. Three national media interviews and not one picture shown.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Even if pleas were edited out (and I would have a serious issue with any network that would do that) the parents could have been wearing shirts with her face on them and/or holding her missing poster or a blown up pic of her. Why aren't we seeing these things?

ETA: Norest has pointed out that mom did have on a shirt and pin. I missed that somehow (was getting kids out the door and my youngest had lost his sax). My apoligies.
 
curiousc said:
In this case, a Grand Jury is meeting tomorrow and it is up to them to decide if charges will be filed. I am actually surprised that a Grand Jury is meeting so soon about this case, which to me means that LE does have evidence with the exception of finding Lisa.
Click to expand...

:waitasec: I thought the Grand Jury was meeting because of wanting "media interviews that the family did with the local media?" Did I miss something again?
 
I don't think a drunk person would be capable of telling times. Deborah is changing her story. It would be more believable to me for her to say 'I was drunk I don't know what time.' I still believe she is guilty and she knows more than what she is saying. She is another Casey, blame everyone but herself. :twocents:
 
HatesSociopaths said:
Maybe they like her being in front of a camera giving interviews instead of in a cell refusing to talk.
Click to expand...

I agree. The more she talks, the more DB incriminates herself. Lots of juicy tidbits coming out in these interviews. jmo
 
Very troubling for me is LB stating she had not asked her two other kids about that night. That they have even told her they heard noises, but that SHE would not be able to tell if it was before or after...
So, not only does she not want LE questioning them, she won't even bring it up with them?
That stink I smelled early on? Now it is getting really whiffy!!
 
21merc7 said:
Eh, I think this is just the phrasing used to emphasize we are not allowed to look. I don't think that means they do not want to. Just a phrase family members used to emphasize "against their will." Drives me nuts though.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought too 21merc7. In other cases I have followed the parents are not allowed to search...or at the very least it is frowned upon as evidence could be compromised if the parents actually 'found' the child.

IDK if they can really be prevented from doing their own searches or not? Maybe someone who participates in searches can weigh in.

wm
 
Karmaa said:
Unfortunately this is not always true. I am doing my thesis on false memories and false confessions. It is actually pretty easy to get a child to say what you want them to say. Also unfortunately, not all "trained psychologists" are looking out for the best interests of the child. If the psychologist is hired by/employed by LE, s/he may also believe the mother is guilty and feel like she is allowing the child to "open up".

If you can find the video of the Fox interrogation, you will see that the child said NO about 150 times. He was crying and begging for his parents. He was curled up in the fetal position, and they kept asking him. He finally said "maybe" and the let him go. This was just a few years ago. The Fox case is a great example, because Kevin Fox was absolutely, positively cleared after 8 months of horror.

Also, think back to the McMartin pre-school case, where trained psychologists GOT the children to tell how they were sexually abused by the staff. If you aren't familiar with that case - go look it up. It's scary.

Nope, I know too much about how it actually works. I would protect my other children, and protect myself as well. No interviews without a lawyer, full video-taping from start to finish, and probably even observation by a psychologist of my own choosing.
Click to expand...

I'm also speaking from experience, (although different experience than yours.) I have worked for three different law enforcement agencies in my lifetime (including one in Kansas City) and every one of them were extremely careful and delicate in handling child interviews.
 
Did anyone notice in the Peter Alexander interview that DB had her hand on JI's knee but he has his hands clasped together and NOT holding hers? It looked weird to me.

Also, do we know anything about the friend that she was drinking with? How about THAT person's relatives?? Any of them going thru fertility issues and might desperately want a baby?

There are just SO many inconsistencies in their stories... siigghh... I pray that this child was taken by someone who thought she needed a better family and was not harmed in any way. To me that's what my gut is telling me, at least right now.
 
GourmetSoy said:
I'll see if I can find the direct quote, but in the interview (with Dan I believe) JI was asked about the break in and DB not hearing anything. He says that DB sleeps with the fan on high and their room is on the opposite side of the house.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I just wanted to get the exact wording so we can put it in the Facts thread for reference. :blowkiss:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151262"]Just the facts, ma'am. - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]
 
norest4thewicked said:
Were they interviewed separately or was the camera just on one at a time?
Click to expand...

The tease was that they were interviewed separately to see if they told the same story, so they were interviewed separately. I'm sure if it. There would be no reason for GMA to not actually interview them apart, if they said they interviewed them apart.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 218 more.
Total: 3,718 (members: 219, guests: 3,499)

Online statistics

Members online
219
Guests online
3,499
Total visitors
3,718
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,649
Messages
17,972,488
Members
228,852
Latest member
janisjoplin
Back
Top