1184 users online (191 members and 993 guests)  



Websleuths News


Page 1 of 84 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 1251
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    29,182

    Police say parents are not answering vital questions #2

    Please continue here.

    The parents of missing toddler Lisa Irwin haven't submitted to an interview with detectives for the last 10 days to answer questions about things "they might only know," police said today.

    The 11-month-old girl vanished from her crib Oct. 3. Police have not named any suspects in the girl's disappearance, but the story of mother Deborah Bradley has altered somewhat and she has admitted to being drunk that night, possibly even blacking out.

    Kansas City Police Capt. Steve Young expressed some frustration today with Bradley and the girl's father, Jeremy Irwin.

    "The last time that the mom and dad sat down with detectives to answer questions about things they might only know was Oct. 8," Young told ABCNews.com.

    "And that time, and previous times, there came a point when Deborah became uncomfortable and stopped the questioning," Young said.

    Young conceded that the parents have spoken with detectives since Oct. 8, but only to clarify information about tips that have come in.

    "We strongly believe that that parent's cooperation and involvement is critical [in finding Lisa]," Young said.
    http://abcnews.go.com/US/missing-baby-lisa-parents-dodge-questions-police/story?id=14760706

    PLEASE READ THIS MESSAGE FROM OUR MOD ADNOID and apply it to your posting. Please don't attack others for their opinions.

    ~Respectfully snipped w/minor editing changes and some highlighting by me~
    Quote Originally Posted by adnoid View Post
    I have never understood the concept of being afraid to voice an opinion, especially here on a discussion board. I cannot answer for all boards as this is the only crime discussion board I'm a member of where I'm also privy to the behind the scenes stuff, but I can state categorically that nobody has ever been banned from posting here based on their opinion. People certainly HAVE been banned for the manner in which they express themselves, and we will continue to do that no matter what side they pick, if any. If you come on here and call the members who disagree with you a mob of koolaid-drinking sheep who just want to be in the majority, and when told to not do it you respond that you have the absolute right to post that way because you are right and everyone else is wrong, you're going to get the boot and your point of view has nothing to do with it.

    From a logical standpoint the number of people that hold a particular view is totally irrelevant to the process used to substantiate that view. With that in mind, if someone were to come on here and try to argue that [JI/DB are] innocent because [Baby Lisa] never existed and was just a figment of everyone's imagination, they would be immediately challenged with the ample evidence of [Lisa]'s existence. So that fact that a post is challenged does not automatically mean that the challenge is invalid. Nor does it mean the theory posted is invalid.

    In my professional life I live in a world where, on a regular basis, people from outside come in to look at my work and question what I am doing, so I am used to justifying my decisions and actions without taking offense. I'm not an attorney, but I've paid a few attorney bills in my time and I understand the adversarial system - you've got to either be able to back up your position to the trier of fact OR convince your opponent that they will not prevail if they push it if you think can't back it up. Like poker. The same thing works here on the board - if you feel strongly about your position, post it and defend it. You may be right.

    The moderators here are not in a position to pad the world's corners for the meek. We are all known here only by a random name we have chosen unless we chose to reveal more about ourselves. Anyone here can take a position they feel is true and back it up with facts and passion as long as the TOS is followed - which in general is that you give others the respect that you would expect to receive.

    People leave this board every day. People join this board every day. There are lots of crime discussion sites out there, and if someone feels they can only express themselves through profanity, belittling and insult there are lots of places where they can do that. I'm sure there are boards out there somewhere that support [JI/DB] and remove people that do not - I remember that situation vividly with the Scott Peterson case where I was, in fact, removed from a couple of boards for stating that I felt Scott was guilty.

    There are a lot of people posting here who have been touched by crime. Some talk about it openly, some I just know about from private conversations. This board is biased, and it's no secret - it's in the mission statement. We are here for the victims, the innocents, the ones who have been hurt by the evil that is criminal behavior. The anger you will see expressed on these pages against players such as criminal defense attorneys is based on the knowledge that, in our system, they can consider their day a success if an individual that actually committed the criminal acts with which they have been charged is found "not guilty" because they can pick apart the efforts of the police. But that's how our system works, and if I was ever unjustly accused I'd want to be afforded the best opportunity possible to clear my name.

    I hold my fellow posters in very high esteem. It pains me when they attack each other. I don't care if they attack me, I'm tough and I can take it. But before anyone launches an insult at a fellow poster, realize what that really means - it means you don't think you are able to argue your point, so maybe you would be better served reflecting on your position and the weaknesses in it.
    Thanks,

    Salem

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    19,250
    Quoting Sparklin from a previous thread

    IIRC - Jim Spellman said it would not be feasible to walk to the river in the dark - that it wasn't a straight path, there were obstacles, an incline and not so easy in the light let alone dark etc... InDaMiddle could probably clarify, although I think she has already.

    So, carrying her dead baby, unsure if her kids will get up and scream to high heaven for her, not knowing when Jeremy is going to be home...and alcohol level HIGH ~ quite the chance to take ~ and then to walk back home after having done this and throw the container in the dumpster and somehow get a massive roaring fire going. I can't see it imo
    __________________

    Granted, it sounds very uncomfortable and not something that anybody would particularly like to do but people have done a number of uncomfortable things in order to try and avoid a prison sentence. The alternative of sitting back and doing nothing, waiting to see what happens when someone comes home could be seen as a bit risky as well.

    I am not 100% sure her alcohol level was so very high. Apparently the female neighbor says they were drinking but IIRC Shane said he didn't see them drink when he was there. Imo the way the drinking was reported sounded a bit like it could be just an excuse that the timeline of seeing Lisa changed.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    7,230
    Quote Originally Posted by Donjeta View Post
    Quoting Sparklin from a previous thread




    Granted, it sounds very uncomfortable and not something that anybody would particularly like to do but people have done a number of uncomfortable things in order to try and avoid a prison sentence. The alternative of sitting back and doing nothing, waiting to see what happens when someone comes home could be seen as a bit risky as well.

    I am not 100% sure her alcohol level was so very high. Apparently the female neighbor says they were drinking but IIRC Shane said he didn't see them drink when he was there. Imo the way the drinking was reported sounded a bit like it could be just an excuse that the timeline of seeing Lisa changed.
    IMO, for all the grief DB gets for not being the worlds greatest parent that night, I think the fact that she was outside, able to be seen by people, helps her. It puts another set of eyes on where she was and what she was doing. Granted, she still could be responsible, but the window of opportunity starts to get smaller and smaller. The fact that someone said she was drinking does somewhat give her drunk story a possibility of being true, whereas if nobody saw her drinking would make it even more suspect.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Centered
    Posts
    2,916
    [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/member.php?u=74701"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]
    Registered User
    Join Date: Jun 2011
    Posts: 229




    Three hours to dump her and the phones in the river. I think that is very possible from where the house is on Lister. I don't think it's a stretch at all.



    Brought above over from other thread

    SBM
    We are talking only 15 minutes or so for the phones though.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,380
    Quote Originally Posted by In da Middle View Post
    Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community
    Registered User
    Join Date: Jun 2011
    Posts: 229




    Three hours to dump her and the phones in the river. I think that is very possible from where the house is on Lister. I don't think it's a stretch at all.



    Brought above over from other thread

    SBM
    We are talking only 15 minutes or so for the phones though.
    I know. That's why I ETA that that isn't what I think happened with regards to the phones. I was just trying to show that the window of opportunity was there. . . .that 3hours (it was actually 4hours) is plenty of time.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    209
    So a drunken deb...unfit and out of shape...was able to stumble through the woods with a dead baby...somehow dispose of her far enough away that she has never (yet) been found. And was able to do all this in a small time frame..whilst drunk or at least tipsy...and get rid of all evidence to show she has done this. All soil from shoes..fingertips..clothes..soil she brought in on shoes..clothes etc to the house. Plus footprints.

    Yeah....not buying it..no way! LE went through that house..debs clothes and shoes with a fine tooth comb...if there was ANY evidence of a midnight romp through the woods..DEb would be under arrest.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,380
    Quote Originally Posted by tink92 View Post
    So a drunken deb...unfit and out of shape...was able to stumble through the woods with a dead baby...somehow dispose of her far enough away that she has never (yet) been found. And was able to do all this in a small time frame..whilst drunk or at least tipsy...and get rid of all evidence to show she has done this. All soil from shoes..fingertips..clothes..soil she brought in on shoes..clothes etc to the house. Plus footprints.

    Yeah....not buying it..no way! LE went through that house..debs clothes and shoes with a fine tooth comb...if there was ANY evidence of a midnight romp through the woods..DEb would be under arrest.
    There are just too many things we don't know.

    What makes you think that there was no soil from shoes, etc? If LE has that evidence they aren't telling us. I don't think they have shared any evidence with us.

    ETA-We can only surmise what LE knows based on their behavior, because they are not telling us anything. So maybe some of the searches would give a hint as to what evidence they have.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    582
    http://www.news-leader.com/article/2...-not-out-steam

    The article linked above was from 10/18/11. My most recent (working) link is from 11/11/11. I believe there were other statements made in between by Steve Young. There may be one after as well.

    "I'm not saying they're not cooperating," he said. "They have met some of our needs. What I've been talking about specifically is sitting down, separate from each other, to be interviewed by detectives. In regard to that, no, that hasn't happen since the 8th of October."

    Young started all this nonsense on day 2 when he publicly announced that the family was no longer cooperating. A month later he says "I am not saying that they aren't cooperating". And we are still trying to figure out what it all means.

    I think that the only way to figure this all out will be when LE addresses how much cooperation they are actually getting, instead of dancing around the issue. Young is as bad as some lawyers when it comes to answering questions without answering them.

    No matter what the family and their attorneys say, some people will not believe it until LE confirms it. I hope that the family have been documenting the contact between them and LE, because I have the feeling that it's much more than LE is implying. Just my opinion.
    In a controversy, the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth and have begun striving for ourselves. ~Buddha~

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    11,080
    The police are not the the enemy. If Deb has something to say, she has ABC panting after her, waiting for any words of wisdom she wishes to utter. If she doesn't want to say it, she has more than enough attorneys to say it for her. She has supporters all over the internet defending her. LE doesn't say much because they can't. Defense attys. and perps know this. The media knows this. In the meantime, baby Lisa is somewhere....I believe wherever her mother put her after killing her.....but, <modsnip>. An alive and breathing Deb. Getting all the attention she could have only dreamed about. MOO
    Last edited by Salem; 11-22-2011 at 04:02 PM. Reason: Everyone is entitled to thier opinion - please don't belittle them for it.
    IMO

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    228
    I think that we have a really good discussion going here, and nothing at all nasty. This is a revelation to me who has been constantly mocked and derided elsewhere. I have even clicked "Thanks" on some posts that I don't actually agree with because they in some way made a point.

    My blood pressure has gone down by many points, and I wish that I had come back here sooner.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    438
    Has anyone that thinks deb killed her daughter ever come up with a motive, I can't think of any. She has another child and she never killed him when she drank before, so I don't think we can blame it on the booze. Anyone?
    Daniel 2:22
    He reveals deep and hidden things; he knows what lies in darkness, and light dwells with him

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    294
    Quote Originally Posted by Amster View Post
    The police are not the the enemy. If Deb has something to say, she has ABC panting after her, waiting for any words of wisdom she wishes to utter. If she doesn't want to say it, she has more than enough attorneys to say it for her. She has supporters all over the internet defending her. LE doesn't say much because they can't. Defense attys. and perps know this. The media knows this. In the meantime, baby Lisa is somewhere....I believe wherever her mother put her after killing her.....but, all we hear about is poor, pitiful Deb. An alive and breathing Deb. Getting all the attention she could have only dreamed about. MOO
    I don't understand the attention aspect I think DB and JI stay to far from the media. They seem to shun all reporters and all the attention. They came out told their story to the media got picked apart and now don't even use the medial at all. The interviews were on different channels besides ABC and they're attorney has been on many different networks. I honestly think if anyone has a deal it is fox, they seem to be the outlet pushing stories the most.......I get people think DB did it I have even said I think the parents should make more statements to the media pleading for their daughter. I see nothing that makes DB look like a media hound looking for fame. Seems to me she isn't saying enough to the media and isn't out there enough.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Karmaa View Post
    http://www.news-leader.com/article/2...-not-out-steam

    The article linked above was from 10/18/11. My most recent (working) link is from 11/11/11. I believe there were other statements made in between by Steve Young. There may be one after as well.

    "I'm not saying they're not cooperating," he said. "They have met some of our needs. What I've been talking about specifically is sitting down, separate from each other, to be interviewed by detectives. In regard to that, no, that hasn't happen since the 8th of October."

    Young started all this nonsense on day 2 when he publicly announced that the family was no longer cooperating. A month later he says "I am not saying that they aren't cooperating". And we are still trying to figure out what it all means.

    I think that the only way to figure this all out will be when LE addresses how much cooperation they are actually getting, instead of dancing around the issue. Young is as bad as some lawyers when it comes to answering questions without answering them.

    No matter what the family and their attorneys say, some people will not believe it until LE confirms it. I hope that the family have been documenting the contact between them and LE, because I have the feeling that it's much more than LE is implying. Just my opinion.
    Maybe they are kinda cooperating. LE has certainly continued to search, interview witnesses and track down leads which leads me to believe that some new information may have emerged since Oct.8. Whatever one's opinion of the parents' level of cooperation, limited cooperation, mostly cooperative, pick and choose cooperative, it is apparent that they are not fully cooperative which seems strange assuming they want to find their daughter, especially since LE has made it clear that they not asking the parents to come in without their attorneys. All MOO

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    19,250
    Quote Originally Posted by tink92 View Post
    So a drunken deb...unfit and out of shape...was able to stumble through the woods with a dead baby...somehow dispose of her far enough away that she has never (yet) been found. And was able to do all this in a small time frame..whilst drunk or at least tipsy...and get rid of all evidence to show she has done this. All soil from shoes..fingertips..clothes..soil she brought in on shoes..clothes etc to the house. Plus footprints.

    Yeah....not buying it..no way! LE went through that house..debs clothes and shoes with a fine tooth comb...if there was ANY evidence of a midnight romp through the woods..DEb would be under arrest.
    It's not illegal to have dirt in your shoes or footprints. There are plenty of perfectly innocent ways to dirty your shoes. I don't think anybody's ever been arrested for having dirty shoes or dirty clothes unless there is something specific in the dirt to connect the person to a crime scene. No one knows where Lisa is so there is no way to connect any dirt to where Lisa was taken.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    438
    I just want to see justice and the longer the LE wastes on the parents (if they are innocent) the more the case goes cold IMO.. That's what I'm wanting. I want them to find out what happened to Lisa ASAP And its just frustrating to me that all we hear is they wanna talk to the parents. Cause it's time wasting IMO again. When I think that neither parent has any info that will help solve this case because A. The father was working during this period and. B. the mother was more than likely unable to remember anything of the night due to her drinking..I wanna see Lisa found..but I wanna see them do it before its to late to help her or to late to find evidence that's needed to find her..just beating a dead horse for weeks isnt doing Lisa justice IMO.
    Daniel 2:22
    He reveals deep and hidden things; he knows what lies in darkness, and light dwells with him

Page 1 of 84 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 223
    Last Post: 10-03-2016, 02:47 PM
  2. 100 questions from the jury: Arias answering on her 17th day on the stand #78
    By nursebeeme in forum Travis Alexander Trial - The State vs. Jodi Arias
    Replies: 1567
    Last Post: 03-08-2013, 01:41 PM
  3. 100 questions from the jury: Arias answering on her 16th day on the stand #74
    By nursebeeme in forum Travis Alexander Trial - The State vs. Jodi Arias
    Replies: 3726
    Last Post: 03-06-2013, 08:09 PM
  4. Replies: 1315
    Last Post: 02-07-2012, 01:59 PM
  5. Police say parents are not answering vital questions
    By nursebeeme in forum Lisa Irwin
    Replies: 780
    Last Post: 11-22-2011, 02:03 PM

Tags for this Thread