909 users online (153 members and 756 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 75
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    17,673

    Police Chief Darryl Forte good reasons to not suspect the child's parents

    At a meeting with The Kansas City Star's editorial board, Forte said the police were "not trying to vilify the family" in the Lisa Irwin case.
    http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/2527...nth-kansas.htm

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    17,673
    Could the good reasons be they already have their suspect?

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by ~n/t~ View Post
    Could the good reasons be they already have their suspect?
    Could be. I was just wondering when lab results would start coming back. The lab work might be coming back and showing something to support the SODDI theory.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,372
    Quote Originally Posted by ~n/t~ View Post
    Could the good reasons be they already have their suspect?
    Wonder what questions they still need answers to? Could they be questions that DB/JI are not answering? He said there are good reasons not to suspect them, but I'm wondering if they feel there are also good reasons TO suspect them.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    17,673
    Quote Originally Posted by NotSoSherlock View Post
    Could be. I was just wondering when lab results would start coming back. The lab work might be coming back and showing something to support the SODDI theory.
    I'm thinking the same. For the police chief to come out and say such a statement, I'm guessing lab results didn't implicate either parent.

    Interviewing the children would also be a major factor in their investigation on what may have happened that night.

    I wonder what they found if anything to suggest it may have been SODDI?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    17,673
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigh Sister View Post
    Wonder what questions they still need answers to? Could they be questions that DB/JI are not answering? He said there are good reasons not to suspect them, but I'm wondering if they feel there are also good reasons TO suspect them.
    IDK maybe their relationship with the other characters in the case?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,096
    I'm not following the case very closely, but I don't take it that he is saying that. I mean I can read that statement at face value and his saying that LE is not focusing on the parents says to me that they just want to know the truth so that whoever is responsible can be brought to justice and Lisa can be brought home and laid to rest.

    LE always, or hopefully always, goes where the evidence takes and I have faith they look at these crimes from all different angles leaving no stone unturned even though we may not know what is going on behind the scenes. Maybe LE really has to put this out there so defense attorneys can't say that their clients are being persecuted at the expense of the truth?

    IDK. How horrible about his knowing one of those recent victims. Maybe its difficult at times to see all this attention on this one case when he has so many of them that deserve equal attention. Not to mention the crime stats that deserve attention too.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    17,673
    Quote Originally Posted by daisy.faithfull View Post
    I'm not following the case very closely, but I don't take it that he is saying that. I mean I can read that statement at face value and his saying that LE is not focusing on the parents says to me that they just want to know the truth so that whoever is responsible can be brought to justice and Lisa can be brought home and laid to rest.

    LE always, or hopefully always, goes where the evidence takes and I have faith they look at these crimes from all different angles leaving no stone unturned even though we may not know what is going on behind the scenes. Maybe LE really has to put this out there so defense attorneys can't say that their clients are being persecuted at the expense of the truth?

    IDK. How horrible about his knowing one of those recent victims. Maybe its difficult at times to see all this attention on this one case when he has so many of them that deserve equal attention. Not to mention the crime stats that deserve attention too.
    If they have good reasons to believe they're not involved, why continue focusing on them and wasting time and resources where it shouldn't be? I took his statement to mean they've moved on.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,380
    I hate to say it, but I think that reporter for International Business Times may have gotten it wrong. (I'm not fond of "According to a KMBC.com report" and that report only has a portion of what follows or "Forte is believed to have said")

    I did find the KMBC.com report. . .it's here:

    http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/19...kc-police.html

    I think that reporter was talking about this from the Kansas City Star quote.

    http://www.kansascity.com/2011/11/19...kc-police.html

    But on Wednesday, in a meeting with The Star’s Editorial Board, Forte said the police are “not trying to vilify the family.”

    The police have good reasons for doing what they are doing, the chief added. That’s essentially a response to the attorneys, who have indicated the police have been overbearing in their treatment of the parents, implying they were involved in the disappearance of baby Lisa.

    Forte said he wouldn’t comment further on the case, adding that the department has one spokesman - Steve Young - handling the crushing number of local and national media requests about this matter.

    Why so reticent?

    Joking or not, Forte said this strategy was designed to hold down the number of subpenas that might be issued in the future regarding the case.

    To me, this was a broad hint that, as many people expect, this case is not going to end well, either for baby Lisa Irwin or for her parents.

    And let’s hope I’m wrong, wrong, wrong.


    ETA-I hope that is ok to link. I realize it is an editorial piece, but I couldn't find any other MSM referencing that quote and it's context. And I much prefer the word of a writer who was actually in the Kansas City Star editorial board meeting than a reporter in India who was not.

    MOO
    Last edited by hambirg; 11-21-2011 at 08:10 AM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    17,673
    If that's the case then his statement about not trying to vilify the parents makes no sense. That is exactly what they're doing.

    If they have the evidence they would be arrested and charged by now instead they're back home and no further search warrants as far as I know.

    I think if DB truly did fail a polygraph, they would've polygraphed the dad as well and they haven't done so which leads me to believe they did whatever they needed to do with the searches of the home to rule out the parents.

    Test results should have been back by now and so far there has been no indication that anything was found to implicate either parent.

    To hold down the number of subpeonas? What in the world does that mean? Is that what they're basing this case on? Seriously?


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,863
    Quote Originally Posted by daisy.faithfull View Post
    I'm not following the case very closely, but I don't take it that he is saying that. I mean I can read that statement at face value and his saying that LE is not focusing on the parents says to me that they just want to know the truth so that whoever is responsible can be brought to justice and Lisa can be brought home and laid to rest.

    LE always, or hopefully always, goes where the evidence takes and I have faith they look at these crimes from all different angles leaving no stone unturned even though we may not know what is going on behind the scenes. Maybe LE really has to put this out there so defense attorneys can't say that their clients are being persecuted at the expense of the truth?

    IDK. How horrible about his knowing one of those recent victims. Maybe its difficult at times to see all this attention on this one case when he has so many of them that deserve equal attention. Not to mention the crime stats that deserve attention too.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,380
    Quote Originally Posted by ~n/t~ View Post
    If that's the case then his statement about not trying to vilify the parents makes no sense. That is exactly what they're doing.

    If they have the evidence they would be arrested and charged by now instead they're back home and no further search warrants as far as I know.

    I think if DB truly did fail a polygraph, they would've polygraphed the dad as well and they haven't done so which leads me to believe they did whatever they needed to do with the searches of the home to rule out the parents.

    Test results should have been back by now and so far there has been no indication that anything was found to implicate either parent.

    To hold down the number of subpeonas? What in the world does that mean? Is that what they're basing this case on? Seriously?
    Idk. . .take it however you want. Personally, I take it to mean that they are not "trying" to vilify the parents. . .just investigate a missing baby case and get to the truth.

    ETA- I feel like the thread title should be changed because he is not quoted as saying "good reasons to not suspect the child's parents" It's reported by Mr. Abouhalkah that what Forte said was. . .The police have good reasons for doing what they are doing,
    Last edited by hambirg; 11-21-2011 at 08:32 AM. Reason: typo

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,863
    Quote Originally Posted by ~n/t~ View Post
    If that's the case then his statement about not trying to vilify the parents makes no sense. That is exactly what they're doing.
    respectfully snipped

    I think he says "we're not trying to vilify the family". But that's neither here nor there. IMO, it's prudent for a police chief to make such a statement whether or not they're focusing on the family.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    17,673
    Quote Originally Posted by hambirg View Post
    Idk. . .take it however you want. Personally, I take it to mean that they are not "trying" to vilify the parents. . .just investigate a missing baby case and get to the truth.
    I'm sorry if I came across as snarky it was not intended towards you at all. It just irks me that these parents are going through hell and there may be a custody battle for JI's son because they were vilified. It's all so sad.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,863
    Quote Originally Posted by ~n/t~ View Post
    I'm sorry if I came across as snarky it was not intended towards you at all. It just irks me that these parents are going through hell and there may be a custody battle for JI's son because they were vilified. It's all so sad.
    IDK if you can blame the custody battle over public perception. DB did admit to being drunk the night her child disappeared. That's pretty reckless behavior.

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. GUILTY ND - Police chief & ex-judge Randall Hoffman charged w/child sexual assault
    By believe09 in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-31-2016, 02:09 AM
  2. GUILTY CA - Suspect Downloads Child Pornography At Police Station
    By Filly in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-23-2016, 03:14 AM
  3. GUILTY KS - Police Chief Mike Akins for child sexual abuse, Inman, 2010
    By Missizzy in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 04-08-2011, 07:30 PM
  4. FL - Police Chief Daniel Saylor for child rape coverup, Windermere, 2011
    By Steely Dan in forum Crimes-Spotlight on Children
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 01-19-2011, 11:41 PM

Tags for this Thread