"I'm not convinced DB is guilty" - Post your theories here.

beach · Feb 19, 2012

Instead of putting the old thread back out, we're going to give this another go.

I tweaked the thread title because what I discovered after reading the entire thread is not a single person proclaimed they felt or knew that DB is innocent, but rather that they were not convinced of her guilt for a wide variety of reasons, per the facts and evidence that are known so far.

Please keep this thread on topic.

ACCEPT the fact that people are going to have opposing opinions. Instead of "right fighting", open your minds and LISTEN to the points being made. I see so little of constructive discussion and that is sad. If both sides would be more open-minded and respectful of their fellow posters, this thread could be very productive.

It is what you guys choose to make it. No matter what, post respectfully and responsibly, please.

Sparklin · Feb 20, 2012

I'm not convinced that Deb is guilty ~ I know there are inconsistencies, oddities, strange behaviour...but I truly don't think she is a cold blooded child killer. I don't think it could have happened earlier in the day since I don't believe she would have carried on her evening drinking, smoking and chatting while they boys were inside watching a movie. If it were an accident, I believe she would have called 911. As for later in the night, I don't think the time line is feasible. There is no doubt that she was at the very least 'tipsy' and I don't think she would have had the capabilities to murder her child (accidentally or on purpose) and had the fortitude to 'clean up' the crime scene, to the extent it seems to have been cleaned ~ dispose of the baby ~ and be in pj's in bed when Jeremy gets home. I can't help but go back to the Tori Stafford case and the inconsistencies in Tara McDonalds stories, the drugs, the lies/the polygraph/the motorcycle ride/the rich benefactor of the reward.... so many similarities.

I think what we see in the media is only part of the truth and not always in the proper context. I think that Deb and Jeremys initial explanation of that morning would be fuzzy and confusing considering their thought process. I have no doubt that not everything was registering except that their daughter was gone.

I don't have an alternative to what happened, no theory at all. I know she didn't just up and walk out, but I truly, at this moment, do not believe her parents are responsible.

cityslick · Feb 20, 2012

I'm not convinced she's guilty or innocent, mostly based on lack of verifiable information that ties anything together. Because of this lack of information, you can come up with a lot of theories that in some ways make sense but in other ways make no sense. If I were to simply look at what ties DB to a crime, all I'd come up with is the dog hit. And then there is enough variability in that dog hit to not feel confident to say what exactly happened to BL in the house.

Do I believe a crime happened in that house (kidnapping, cover up, murder, etc). Yes
Can I tie that crime to DB or anyone else who was in that house from the period of 5pm - 4am? No, I cannot.
Can I tie that crime to an intruder? No, I cannot because again, lack of information limits what is and is not plausible.

So, because I cannot tie any one individual to what happened to BL, I cannot say for certain that DB is guilty nor can I say that DB is innocent. I just don't know.

highflyer · Feb 20, 2012

cityslick said:
I'm not convinced she's guilty or innocent, mostly based on lack of verifiable information that ties anything together. Because of this lack of information, you can come up with a lot of theories that in some ways make sense but in other ways make no sense. If I were to simply look at what ties DB to a crime, all I'd come up with is the dog hit. And then there is enough variability in that dog hit to not feel confident to say what exactly happened to BL in the house.

Do I believe a crime happened in that house (kidnapping, cover up, murder, etc). Yes
Can I tie that crime to DB or anyone else who was in that house from the period of 5pm - 4am? No, I cannot.
Can I tie that crime to an intruder? No, I cannot because again, lack of information limits what is and is not plausible.

So, because I cannot tie any one individual to what happened to BL, I cannot say for certain that DB is guilty nor can I say that DB is innocent. I just don't know.

Very much where my thoughts are on this case also.

Jacie Estes · Feb 22, 2012

I believe in the concept of Innocent Until Proven Guilty. Statistics and coulda, shoulda, woulda don't factor in for me. There are too many things in the air to accuse anyone of harming Lisa, especially her parents.

Quizzical · Feb 22, 2012

cityslick said:
I'm not convinced she's guilty or innocent, mostly based on lack of verifiable information that ties anything together. Because of this lack of information, you can come up with a lot of theories that in some ways make sense but in other ways make no sense. If I were to simply look at what ties DB to a crime, all I'd come up with is the dog hit. And then there is enough variability in that dog hit to not feel confident to say what exactly happened to BL in the house.

Do I believe a crime happened in that house (kidnapping, cover up, murder, etc). Yes
Can I tie that crime to DB or anyone else who was in that house from the period of 5pm - 4am? No, I cannot.
Can I tie that crime to an intruder? No, I cannot because again, lack of information limits what is and is not plausible.

So, because I cannot tie any one individual to what happened to BL, I cannot say for certain that DB is guilty nor can I say that DB is innocent. I just don't know.

I totally agree.

Cappuccino · Feb 22, 2012

Jacie Estes said:
I believe in the concept of Innocent Until Proven Guilty. Statistics and coulda, shoulda, woulda don't factor in for me. There are too many things in the air to accuse anyone of harming Lisa, especially her parents.

^ This.

I'm sure Lindy Chamberlain looked guilty at the time too, but it turned out a dingo really did eat her baby.

Minette · Feb 22, 2012

As others have said, there is simply not enough evidence known to us for me to know who is guilty. Further, there is not enough evidence for me to know WHAT someone is guilty of doing. Was Lisa taken by someone? A stranger? A person known to the family? A family member? Was Lisa killed? If so, was it accidental? Was it deliberate? Who did it? Did they act alone? I almost feel there should be a different thread: for those who believe DB is guilty, what exactly do you think she's guilty of doing and what charges do you think should be brought? Because until more evidence is made known, I don't see how this thread is going to produce anything more than "I'm waiting to see more evidence before I make up my mind" and then all the theories of people who think DB is guilty.

I have to believe that if LE thought they had a substantial enough circumstantial case to get a conviction they would have brought charges already. Or if they had enough forensic evidence, or a combination of the two. They can't just say well she's guilty of ... of SOMETHING so throw the book at her. They have to make specific charges (which could be inclusive of lesser charges) and then they have to prove it. The mere presence of defense attorneys does not prevent LE or the DA from doing their job. And if jurors do their job honestly, then they have to vote 'guilty' or 'not guilty' based on actual evidence, not the court of public opinion.

As far as I know, 'you acted hinky when you spoke to the media' is not a prosecutable offense, and neither is 'you aren't doing as much as many people think you could or should be doing to find your baby.' 'You drank while you had the care of three small children and one of them disappeared on your watch' may well be prosecutable, but so far those charges have not been brought.

So I'm waiting for more developments.

beach · Feb 22, 2012

I just removed several recent OT posts.

"I'm not convinced DB is guilty" - Post your theories here.

Steer it back on topic, please.

vlpate · Feb 22, 2012

Jacie Estes said:
I believe in the concept of Innocent Until Proven Guilty. Statistics and coulda, shoulda, woulda don't factor in for me. There are too many things in the air to accuse anyone of harming Lisa, especially her parents.

Innocent until proven guilty is not a burden we, as citizens carry - the prosecution carries that burden. We as citizens are free to think and feel and speculate either way, guilty or innocent until we land in a jury box. If we waited until trial and a verdict to opine, this place would be dead!

Sometimes I think DB is guilty, and sometimes I think she's an innocent bystander whose propensity for irresponsible adult time caught up with her. Where I lose my own argument in virtually every theory, is, where the heck is she, dead or alive - the time constraints are just too glaring. Only if I found out there is evidence DB spoke with someone through email, text, or on the phone that night when she said she was sleeping, will I believe she had help and may be good for it....OR, if LE felt the hood of either car and it was warm - which we don't know one way or the other.

melissasmom · Feb 22, 2012

Jacie Estes said:
I believe in the concept of Innocent Until Proven Guilty. Statistics and coulda, shoulda, woulda don't factor in for me. There are too many things in the air to accuse anyone of harming Lisa, especially her parents.

Yes, thank you. As do I. I realize that we are NOT a jury, people are here to speculate, throw out theories, etc. But that is how I have to look at it. I take this very seriously and I cannot in good conscience say I know that DB is guilty of anything if I do not see any evidence of it. "Hinkyness" or "gut instinct" is not evidence and if you were on a jury and you used such "reasoning" to convict someone of a crime, that would just be a mockery of the whole concept of innocent until proven guilty. Because that is not proof.

Like I said, I take it very seriously. I don't care if I don't know the people in this case. I can't just blithely say "Oh yeah she is as guilty as sin" with no evidence, and then if later down the line it is proven that DB/JI have no involvement, just say "Oh well, I was wrong" I hold myself to a different standard than that. I would rather err on the side of what I feel is right and just.

This is not to disparage anyone. Just telling you my own personal standard.

I do think that yes, there is obviously a chance that DB or JI are involved in some type of coverup, accident, what have you. I do not say I am 100% convinced of their innocence. But I am certainly not convinced of any guilt on their part either. We just don't have enough information.

I have said before, that I do feel that Lisa was most likely abducted by someone that knew of this family, connected in some way. I hope that she is alive, but I go back and forth on that. I think there is a strong possibilty that she may not be.

nursebeeme · Feb 24, 2012

PLEASE THANK THIS POST BEFORE POSTING

The Lisa Irwin forum appears to be made up of cliques. You know, the type you have in high school before you begin to understand that there are a lot of interesting people and places in the world and your fear of such limits the personal boundaries you set for yourself. The disrespect between the two cliques is tiresome.

That being said, we need another review of the rules (which is really just a curtesy as everyone should know them or how to find and read them by now): This is NOT hard. Post YOUR thoughts, theories and interpretations (easy enough right?). Read the thoughts of others (not hard). Respond to those that may be of a like mind (okay, that should work). If you disagree with another poster and cannot post nicely, MOVE PAST THEIR POST (how hard is that?) If another poster gets under your skin, PUT THEM ON IGNORE (only takes about a minute). If you must refute their post - then use a link and state the fact as YOU see it (you all know this case, it can't be that hard). THEN DROP IT! That's it. See, not hard. If a post offends you, ALERT it, DO NOT RESPOND TO IT, and MOVE ON. It is okay to disagree, but it is NOT OKAY to attack or make fun of others. AND THE SNARK...well, that needs to just STOP.

It is our hope this gets the message across. There are many good posters here and no matter what opinion we may hold on who we feel is responsible we all are here for Lisa Irwin and want her to come home safely and soon.

Thanks so much,

The Lisa Irwin forum moderators

askfornina · Feb 25, 2012

From Oct.30th. It's very interesting to read this again after so many months. It's definitely worth taking a look if you haven't seen it before. It is outdated, I would like to see Mr.Abeyta interviewed again to see how his thoughts may or may not have changed.

http://www.examiner.com/missing-per...rking-day-and-night-as-catalyst-for-baby-lisa

"They're like zombies, they can't function," he said. "They're like wounded people. I saw the pain and suffering. It was very sad. They need help. They're not working, they probably have no money coming in. They need people to show compassion and love. They need people to help them, not judge them."

The problem is that their lawyers are keeping those who do want to help them away.

Gil said that once Stanton came on the scene the parents were told to stop talking with local media which he felt was a big mistake. He wishes he'd gotten there before Stanton, he might have been able to avoid some of the craziness we've seen in this case.

marlame · Feb 25, 2012

I posted some of this on another thread but just saw this topic thread and wanted to share...

I think Jersey would be the most likely abductor, based upon what we know thus far and the criminal profile of a child kidnapper/murderer. I sure hope the police have completely investigated him and his actions and whereabouts leading up to and following Baby Lisa's abduction.

Here is some info from my research notes on the criminal profile involving child abduction that I compiled for a research project while in college...

Non family abductions are motivated by sexual gratification, retribution, financial gain, desire to kill, or maternal desire. The most common type non family abduction is sexually motivated and poses the highest risk of victim mortality.

Based upon info from US National Center for Missing and Exploited Children...non family abductions of infants (1 month - 12 months of age) tend to be carried out by white males between the ages of twenty and forty. They are typically not married, are loners, and have difficulty interacting with adults. They are a transient worker or day laborer with marginal social skills. Profit based offenses (drug related or ransom) are rare. Infants are usually abducted by a male who is an acquaintance or stranger of the victim/family, commonly a neighbor with a history of sexual misconduct. Race of victims and perps is consistently same. And most are victims of opportunity. Interesting to note also is the abductor's prior crimes are similar in M.O. (i.e. Jersey likes to set fires and a fire was discovered the night baby Lisa went missing).

This link is a MUST read: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/pr/201316.pdf

In the above linked Handflan research report it states: 64% of non family female infant/toddlers (ages 1-5) abductions tend to be killed by family friends/acquaintances, 28% by strangers, and ONLY 8% tend to be killed by a family member (See Table 7 page 23). The primary reason for child abduction is sexual assault. All that is needed is an opportunity for the killer/abductor to act.

Everything about Jersey/John Tanko fits with the crime profile data!
He was in the neighborhood at time of abduction, is known to break into peoples homes through windows (similar M.O.), has a criminal past, and was experiencing personal crisis & stressors (break up with girlfriend, homeless, financial problems, etc.). All of which are consistent with the criminal profile of child kidnapper/murderer! Add that there could be a link to cell phone call to his ex-Megan Wright...it sure doesn't look good for baby Lisa.

If I lived in the area I would be searching a 200ft radius of where Jersey was last seen and also where the last reported sighting of man walking with baby. Especially, wooded or secluded areas. Anywhere that would be a good place to conceal a body.

This case is so sad...I sure hope the police find Baby Lisa!

lease:

JMHO~ MarlaMe

Jacie Estes · Feb 25, 2012

marlame said:
I posted some of this on another thread but just saw this topic thread and wanted to share...

I think Jersey would be the most likely abductor, based upon what we know thus far and the criminal profile of a child kidnapper/murderer. I sure hope the police have completely investigated him and his actions and whereabouts leading up to and following Baby Lisa's abduction.

Here is some info from my research notes on the criminal profile involving child abduction that I compiled for a research project while in college...

Non family abductions are motivated by sexual gratification, retribution, financial gain, desire to kill, or maternal desire. The most common type non family abduction is sexually motivated and poses the highest risk of victim mortality.

Based upon info from US National Center for Missing and Exploited Children...non family abductions of infants (1 month - 12 months of age) tend to be carried out by white males between the ages of twenty and forty. They are typically not married, are loners, and have difficulty interacting with adults. They are a transient worker or day laborer with marginal social skills. Profit based offenses (drug related or ransom) are rare. Infants are usually abducted by a male who is an acquaintance or stranger of the victim/family, commonly a neighbor with a history of sexual misconduct. Race of victims and perps is consistently same. And most are victims of opportunity. Interesting to note also is the abductor's prior crimes are similar in M.O. (i.e. Jersey likes to set fires and a fire was discovered the night baby Lisa went missing).

This link is a MUST read: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/pr/201316.pdf

In the above linked Handflan research report it states: 64% of non family female infant/toddlers (ages 1-5) abductions tend to be killed by family friends/acquaintances, 28% by strangers, and ONLY 8% tend to be killed by a family member (See Table 7 page 23). The primary reason for child abduction is sexual assault. All that is needed is an opportunity for the killer/abductor to act.

Everything about Jersey/John Tanko fits with the crime profile data!
He was in the neighborhood at time of abduction, is known to break into peoples homes through windows (similar M.O.), has a criminal past, and was experiencing personal crisis & stressors (break up with girlfriend, homeless, financial problems, etc.). All of which are consistent with the criminal profile of child kidnapper/murderer! Add that there could be a link to cell phone call to his ex-Megan Wright...it sure doesn't look good for baby Lisa.

If I lived in the area I would be searching a 200ft radius of where Jersey was last seen and also where the last reported sighting of man walking with baby. Especially, wooded or secluded areas. Anywhere that would be a good place to conceal a body.

This case is so sad...I sure hope the police find Baby Lisa! lease:

JMHO~ MarlaMe

Not just :goodpost: but EXCELLENT POST. :gthanks:

jersey is just too enmeshed in this scenario to not be involved in Lisa's disappearance. Notice how quickly he was put in a cell; they know where he will be for awhile and they can further charge him. Besides Megan W., was he involved with anyone in that neighborhood, male or female? Why was he trusted to turn sprinklers on/off? There are too many ???? to count him out.

eileenhawkeye · Feb 25, 2012

marlame said:
I posted some of this on another thread but just saw this topic thread and wanted to share...

I think Jersey would be the most likely abductor, based upon what we know thus far and the criminal profile of a child kidnapper/murderer. I sure hope the police have completely investigated him and his actions and whereabouts leading up to and following Baby Lisa's abduction.

Here is some info from my research notes on the criminal profile involving child abduction that I compiled for a research project while in college...

Non family abductions are motivated by sexual gratification, retribution, financial gain, desire to kill, or maternal desire. The most common type non family abduction is sexually motivated and poses the highest risk of victim mortality.

Based upon info from US National Center for Missing and Exploited Children...non family abductions of infants (1 month - 12 months of age) tend to be carried out by white males between the ages of twenty and forty. They are typically not married, are loners, and have difficulty interacting with adults. They are a transient worker or day laborer with marginal social skills. Profit based offenses (drug related or ransom) are rare. Infants are usually abducted by a male who is an acquaintance or stranger of the victim/family, commonly a neighbor with a history of sexual misconduct. Race of victims and perps is consistently same. And most are victims of opportunity. Interesting to note also is the abductor's prior crimes are similar in M.O. (i.e. Jersey likes to set fires and a fire was discovered the night baby Lisa went missing).

This link is a MUST read: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/pr/201316.pdf

In the above linked Handflan research report it states: 64% of non family female infant/toddlers (ages 1-5) abductions tend to be killed by family friends/acquaintances, 28% by strangers, and ONLY 8% tend to be killed by a family member (See Table 7 page 23). The primary reason for child abduction is sexual assault. All that is needed is an opportunity for the killer/abductor to act.

Everything about Jersey/John Tanko fits with the crime profile data!
He was in the neighborhood at time of abduction, is known to break into peoples homes through windows (similar M.O.), has a criminal past, and was experiencing personal crisis & stressors (break up with girlfriend, homeless, financial problems, etc.). All of which are consistent with the criminal profile of child kidnapper/murderer! Add that there could be a link to cell phone call to his ex-Megan Wright...it sure doesn't look good for baby Lisa.

If I lived in the area I would be searching a 200ft radius of where Jersey was last seen and also where the last reported sighting of man walking with baby. Especially, wooded or secluded areas. Anywhere that would be a good place to conceal a body.

This case is so sad...I sure hope the police find Baby Lisa! lease:

JMHO~ MarlaMe

64% of non family female infant/toddlers (ages 1-5) abductions tend to be killed by family friends/acquaintances, 28% by strangers, and ONLY 8% tend to be killed by a family member

I'm pretty sure that's saying that out of all NON-FAMILY abductions, 8% are killed by a family member. I don't think it's saying that 92% of murdered victims between the ages of 1-5 are killed by a non-family member.

marlame · Feb 25, 2012

SyraKelly said:
Marlame- That was a great post-but if I am to believe Jersey did this-then I have to believe he killed Lisa on the floor (Dog hit) in a bedroom where her mother and brother are sleeping-not waking them up-then he carried a dead Lisa out the front door-put her down on the ground to put the screen back on the window-then walked around town with a dead naked baby for 3 1/2 hrs until the MT sighting!! I just don't think that works for me in this case..although the last couple of days of reading on other sites-I am starting to believe Jersey knew someone in the house-but I do not believe he kidnapped nor killed Lisa..

Thank you for your comments. This is why I love WS...it challenges us to think and analyze.

The cadaver dog that searched the home was on or around Oct. 17 (almost 2 weeks after the disappearance). The parents consented to the search. Per the search warrant affidavit... "indicated a positive 'hit' for the scent of a deceased human in an area of the floor of Bradley's bedroom near the bed,". My understanding is that the 'hit' was on something lying on the floor . We know the hit wasn't the carpet because LE did not remove any carpet. What we DON'T know is what that something is that was lying on the floor. The item that produced the hit could very well have come from Lisa Irwin's bedroom. Blankets toys and clothing were the items removed per the search warrant. It is very possible someone could have inadvertantly picked up the item and it just ended up being on the parent's BR floor on the day the of the positive dog 'hit' (which was 2 weeks after she went missing). The entire home (i.e. evidence) had been disturbed prior to the dog hit.

Also, the consistency and accuracy of cadaver dogs has been challenged in past cases. We just do not know enough about the actual dog and its training to make a determination if the 'hit' was even valid. The mention of the 'hit' in a search warrant and the 'hit' holding up in a court of law are two very different things.

JMHO~ MarlaMe

hambirg · Feb 25, 2012

eileenhawkeye said:
64% of non family female infant/toddlers (ages 1-5) abductions tend to be killed by family friends/acquaintances, 28% by strangers, and ONLY 8% tend to be killed by a family member

I'm pretty sure that's saying that out of all NON-FAMILY abductions, 8% are killed by a family member. I don't think it's saying that 92% of murdered victims between the ages of 1-5 are killed by a non-family member.

Yes, read the summary at the top. . .

There is approximately one child abduction murder for for every 10,000 reports of a a missing child.

The murder of a child that is abducted by a stranger is a rare event. . . .less than one-half of one percent of the murders committed.

The statistics posted above are qualified with the statement. . .

The family members or intimates who are killers in this study differ from the typical parent murderer in that they are implicated, somehow, in the actual or fraudulent abduction.

I'm not sure LE is convinced there was ever an abduction in this case.

MOO

hambirg · Feb 25, 2012

marlame said:
Thank you for your comments. This is why I love WS...it challenges us to think and analyze.

The cadaver dog that searched the home was on or around Oct. 17 (almost 2 weeks after the disappearance). The parents consented to the search. Per the search warrant affidavit... "indicated a positive 'hit' for the scent of a deceased human in an area of the floor of Bradley's bedroom near the bed,". My understanding is that the 'hit' was on something lying on the floor . We know the hit wasn't the carpet because LE did not remove any carpet. What we DON'T know is what that something is that was lying on the floor. The item that produced the hit could very well have come from Lisa Irwin's bedroom. Blankets toys and clothing were the items removed per the search warrant. It is very possible someone could have inadvertantly picked up the item and it just ended up being on the parent's BR floor on the day the of the positive dog 'hit' (which was 2 weeks after she went missing). The entire home (i.e. evidence) had been disturbed prior to the dog hit.

Also, the consistency and accuracy of cadaver dogs has been challenged in past cases. We just do not know enough about the actual dog and its training to make a determination if the 'hit' was even valid. The mention of the 'hit' in a search warrant and the 'hit' holding up in a court of law are two very different things.

JMHO~ MarlaMe

But do we know that was the first cadaver dog to be brought in? We know that at least three dogs were brought in on Oct. 5th. Do we know that one of them wasn't a HRD dog? Was the dog on the 17th just a verification dog? I don't think LE was obligated to disclose that on the affidavit.

marlame · Feb 25, 2012

hambirg said:
Yes, read the summary at the top. . .

There is approximately one child abduction murder for for every 10,000 reports of a a missing child.

The murder of a child that is abducted by a stranger is a rare event. . . .less than one-half of one percent of the murders committed.

The statistics posted above are qualified with the statement. . .

The family members or intimates who are killers in this study differ from the typical parent murderer in that they are implicated, somehow, in the actual or fraudulent abduction.

I'm not sure LE is convinced there was ever an abduction in this case.

MOO

Good point! But it appears LE can't rule out either way.

If Jersey was involved he may not have ever intended to abduct Baby Lisa but in the midst of an attempted burglary the baby woke up and was crying. He may have suffocated her as he was trying to keep her quiet. After, he killed her he realized he had to take her to conceal what he did.

I just am not convinced either DB or JI are guilty of murdering their daughter. Maybe it is wishful thinking on my part? It is just so sad...

JMHO...

"I'm not convinced DB is guilty" - Post your theories here.

Verified Expert

New Member

New Member

New Member

Medical Marijuana Advocate

Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Verified Expert

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Registered User

Well-Known Member

Member

Medical Marijuana Advocate

Well-Known Member

Member

New Member

New Member

Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics