Why have Lisa's parents stopped talking to the media?

eileenhawkeye

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Messages
8,755
Reaction score
130
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the last time the Irwins made a media appearance was on Halloween....two months ago. If they are innocent, and believe that their baby was kidnapped, why aren't they keeping her name out there? Remember when we had daily MSM threads about this case? Why does it feel like her parents want the case to fade away?
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the last time the Irwins made a media appearance was on Halloween....two months ago. If they are innocent, and believe that their baby was kidnapped, why aren't they keeping her name out there? Remember when we had daily MSM threads about this case? Why does it feel like her parents want the case to fade away?

I wish that DB/JI would be more vocal with the media. If just for the fact that some people don't care for lawyer's speaking for them. I'm not sure that the lack of media contact means that their guilty of some kind of wrong doing. I'm also not sure that the media would spend a lot of time covering them saying "bring Lisa home" and "please help us find Lisa" after three months have gone by. Without any new information being released, what would the story be for media to publish or broadcast?
 
I wish that DB/JI would be more vocal with the media. If just for the fact that some people don't care for lawyer's speaking for them. I'm not sure that the lack of media contact means that their guilty of some kind of wrong doing. I'm also not sure that the media would spend a lot of time covering them saying "bring Lisa home" and "please help us find Lisa" after three months have gone by. Without any new information being released, what would the story be for media to publish or broadcast?

I don't know if the parents speaking out now would get them on any of the morning shows at this point. I tend to think they are still newsworthy. But no way Vinnie, JVM or NG wouldn't like to interview them. All MOO.
 
I don't know if the Irwins speaking out now would get them on any of the morning shows at this point. I tend to think they are still newsworthy. But no way Vinnie, JVM or NG wouldn't like to interview them. All MOO.

Sure, they would be good for maybe one round of all those shows. Long term to keep Lisa in the news, I"m not so sure. If they really wanted to do those appearances, they should have done it before now and not leave it to their lawyers to do it for them.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the last time the Irwins made a media appearance was on Halloween....two months ago. If they are innocent, and believe that their baby was kidnapped, why aren't they keeping her name out there? Remember when we had daily MSM threads about this case? Why does it feel like her parents want the case to fade away?


BBM: JMO and MOO ... because they are "guilty" ... DB knows exactly what happened to Baby Lisa ...

Deborah and Jeremy "lawyered up" and when they did so, their lawyers told them to "shut up" ...

And that way ... nothing that they say can be used against them in a court of law ... that is, if the "body" is found ... again ALL JMO ...

Very telling ... very, very telling ... NO more "pleas" for the "kidnapper" to return Lisa ...

MOO ...
 
It's working isn't it? They aren't talking and they aren't in jail. I think that is their main goal. Period.

Yes, norest, it is so unfortunate that it is working in their favor. Do you think the defence attorneys can have a confortable nights sleep????

Sooo sad, that darling little girl, and no one has the b___s to step up 4 this crime, no man/woman will admit what they/she/he did too cover up for this horrid, horrid death!
 
I have a hard time believing that the Irwins have stopped talking to the media because the media isn't interested anymore. We are talking about a case that was on the cover of People magazine, and on many national TV shows. The Irwins could have definitely spoken to the media a few times between Halloween and now.
 
I have a hard time believing that the Irwins have stopped talking to the media because the media isn't interested anymore. We are talking about a case that was on the cover of People magazine, and on many national TV shows. The Irwins could have definitely spoken to the media a few times between Halloween and now.

I would guess that they stopped talking directly to the media because their lawyers directed them not to. The question is, should they have followed that advice? What do you think eileen?
 
Nothing would stop be from being in the medias face....not even a hot shot lawyer. I would be pleading my heart out to the kidnapper for the return of my baby...but then again if there was no kidnapper....what would you plea for????? So that tells me why they are not speaking to the media!
 
Who thinks that DB and JI have stopped talking to the media because of what their lawyers are telling them to do? What other parents have stopped talking to the media, if any? Of the ones who have stopped talking to the media, how many were eventually brought to trial?
 
"One shot on the evening news is worth 20,000 posters" -- Patrick Sessions (from NCMEC's "Family Survival Guide")
 
We know why they have stopped talking to the media and LE. Let's move on, shall we, they are: G.U.I.L.T.Y.

ALSO, what happened to the kitten?
 
IMO, They aren't speaking to local media, b/c, IMO, the media twists things, i honestly think that is the reason behind them doing the DrPhil show. To not just tell the locals, hey stop saying bad things about us, but to tell the world. (IMO, that appearence had NOTHING to do with Lisa at all) DB cares way too much of what the world thinks of her and Jermey, the way i have viewed this case, MUCH more than they care about their daughter being returned.

All JMO
 
I haven't seen the media twist anything in this case. The only ones twisting things are the parents with their constant story changes.
 
DB cares way too much of what the world thinks of her and Jermey, the way i have viewed this case, MUCH more than they care about their daughter being returned.


i agree with KsStormy... it's not the media who twists things. AI denied that DB was bothered by what was said about her (see quote below) and the opposite has been shown... JT states that a cadaver dog hit on a dirty diaper (lol)... very apparent it's the bradwin's/their team who twists the truth in this case. there's only one reason why they'd do this imo.


"She doesn't care what happens to her, she doesn't care what people say about her, she doesn't care what people think about her, all she cares about it getting Lisa home."



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aby-Lisa-Irwin-Mother-preparing-arrested.html
 
i agree with KsStormy... it's not the media who twists things. AI denied that DB was bothered by what was said about her (see quote below) and the opposite has been shown... JT states that a cadaver dog hit on a dirty diaper (lol)... very apparent it's the bradwin's/their team who twists the truth in this case. there's only one reason why they'd do this imo.


"She doesn't care what happens to her, she doesn't care what people say about her, she doesn't care what people think about her, all she cares about it getting Lisa home."



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aby-Lisa-Irwin-Mother-preparing-arrested.html

BBM: Do you have a link that supports the part I bolded? IIRC he said a HRD dog could have hit on a dirty diaper. I don't even see a statement by JT on the link you provided.
 
JoeT: We brought in the nations number one cadaver dog expert, if you will, and what he told me was that there's no such thing as a hit for a dead body. What a cadaver dog can detect is uh, basically, dead skin cells, or deteriorating or not living DNA, so what the d- the expert told me, was that if there was a diaper in that room, when she changed her babies diaper, some fecal matter got onto the rug, even the slightest bit, not even detectable by the human eye, that is enough to cause a dog to wag his tail or do what he does.
From the Dr. Phil show

ETA: He does NOT state the dog hit on a diaper!

http://www.kmbc.com/news/30361421/detail.html#ixzz1lG7Bb2Hp
 

No he does not, he says it COULD be, at no point does he say, as you stated earlier, that the dog DID hit on a dirty diaper.

I find it ironic that when talking about DT spinning the facts those very people, distort what he said. :banghead:

i agree with KsStormy... it's not the media who twists things. AI denied that DB was bothered by what was said about her (see quote below) and the opposite has been shown... JT states that a cadaver dog hit on a dirty diaper (lol)... very apparent it's the bradwin's/their team who twists the truth in this case. there's only one reason why they'd do this imo.
ETA Quote / BBM
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
112
Guests online
805
Total visitors
917

Forum statistics

Threads
589,800
Messages
17,926,148
Members
227,972
Latest member
pinkfloyd44!
Back
Top