How much does Jeremy know?

New Posts

DIRK SCHILLER said:
Police said Lisa Irwin was last seen on Monday at 10:30 p.m. asleep in her crib, but how we know that?
because the parents said so....who was the last person that saw her alive except the mother, bros ,sis, dad ?
what did the other children in the house said to police about seeing her alive?
maybe she was killed/had an accident before that night?
I would not believe what parents said,,,,just my opinion
Click to expand...

Exactly!!! Not one single person has come forward to report that Lisa was seen all day Monday.

It IS my opinion that Lisa was disposed of by her parents and you, DIRK SCHILLER, are the living and breathing example of WHY I believe what I do. Your son WAS kidnapped decades ago, yet you are STILL looking for him and will until the day you die. THIS is also my opinion, but I think I am right. You will never stop looking for him and neither would any parent whose child was taken away from them. These parents are guilty. And, yes, that's MY OPINION again. Thank you for your post and bless you!
 
Whisperer said:
No one has admitted on camera to seeing Lisa on Monday. Knowing the defense and the tactics they like to use, they would be parading any and all witnesses around to back up their claim.

Phil N has been noticeably absent from ALL sceneraios. It was stated he was there earlier and he was there at dinnertime YET nothing has come forth about his interactions with Baby Lisa. I choose to be suspicious of the reasoning in keeping him so far under the radar. BS wanted to get out the story that Lisa was observed and he floated with some media'a approval that a four year old saw her @ 4:30...Yet there were adults in the house ... and he reports nada on them. If he wanted to make sure there were people that saw Lisa, he could have done a better job than promoting a toddler as the lone witness.
Click to expand...

I think BS reported that SB saw her too, but, if she did, you KNOW that she would be touting it to everyone who would listen. No one saw Lisa all day Monday, because if they did, we would have known about it early on. And, this takes care of the problem of the timeline and why JI could have been on camera (which I still don't believe) all night and could still have disposed of little Lisa.
 
norest4thewicked said:
Thank you! EVERYTHING here is everyone's opinions. It's interesting that some of us aren't allowed to have ours while others are. :banghead:
Click to expand...

You used the word 'fact' in a sentence, that get's everyone up in a lather. :seeya:
 
norest4thewicked said:
I think BS reported that SB saw her too, but, if she did, you KNOW that she would be touting it to everyone who would listen. No one saw Lisa all day Monday, because if they did, we would have known about it early on. And, this takes care of the problem of the timeline and why JI could have been on camera (which I still don't believe) all night and could still have disposed of little Lisa.
Click to expand...

It is certainly curious what topics the defense will touch on in public and what they leave. Especially since they are up on the internet discussion and have addressed a few of those things (i.e. change in timeline, the wonky stories about the lights) yet left others, ones that could paint DB and JI more favorably.

As for a body disposal, if you look at the map Just K posted here, [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7310913&postcount=4"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Maps related to case and search areas[/ame] and drag it to the west a bit, you will find a few streets riddled with dumpsters. 15 by my shaky count. About half of those fall within the 1/3 of a mile cell phone ping radius of the Irwin home. It would be a short, short, short car ride to hit a good majority of those dumpsters and dispose of a packaged, tiny body. It wouldn't be that far of a walk to hit them either, especially if you cut through yards.
 
norest4thewicked said:
I think BS reported that SB saw her too, but, if she did, you KNOW that she would be touting it to everyone who would listen. No one saw Lisa all day Monday, because if they did, we would have known about it early on. And, this takes care of the problem of the timeline and why JI could have been on camera (which I still don't believe) all night and could still have disposed of little Lisa.
Click to expand...

I'm curious why you think this (that SB would be shouting from the hills about her seeing BL)? From every report we had seen (either JS or RR), SB was still supporting DB (they were still keeping in contact with each other). Surely she (SB) knows what was in the People article, if there was something specifically false in it, especially something as vital as a 'sighting' of BL that's being attributed to her, wouldn't you think something like that would be cleared up? SB hasn't made any public comments, neither has PN so who's to say what they did and did not see that day?
 
Whisperer said:
No one has admitted on camera to seeing Lisa on Monday. Knowing the defense and the tactics they like to use, they would be parading any and all witnesses around to back up their claim.

Phil N has been noticeably absent from ALL sceneraios. It was stated he was there earlier and he was there at dinnertime YET nothing has come forth about his interactions with Baby Lisa. I choose to be suspicious of the reasoning in keeping him so far under the radar. BS wanted to get out the story that Lisa was observed and he floated with some media'a approval that a four year old saw her @ 4:30...Yet there were adults in the house ... and he reports nada on them. If he wanted to make sure there were people that saw Lisa, he could have done a better job than promoting a toddler as the lone witness.
Click to expand...

:seeya:

1st BBM: This is a great point ! And ya know the "defense team" would have been "parading" their "witnesses" from day one !

2nd BBM: Phil N has always been on "my radar" ... I still think that Phil and Deb's "wine run" is HINKY ... "something" about it ... it's almost like she wanted to be seen "on camera" somewhere :waitasec:

JMO ... but I believe that PN knows "something" ...

Hmmm ... but does Jeremy KNOW that Phil knows that "something" ?

:waitasec:
 
dog.gone.cute said:
:seeya:

1st BBM: This is a great point ! And ya know the "defense team" would have been "parading" their "witnesses" from day one !

2nd BBM: Phil N has always been on "my radar" ... I still think that Phil and Deb's "wine run" is HINKY ... "something" about it ... it's almost like she wanted to be seen "on camera" somewhere :waitasec:

JMO ... but I believe that PN knows "something" ...

Hmmm ... but does Jeremy KNOW that Phil knows that "something" ?

:waitasec:
Click to expand...

1st point - Why does saying something in front of a camera (in this case SB saying in front of a camera she saw BL at a certain time) need to be some sort of validation that SB is telling the truth? Especially in this case where SB hasn't said anything in front of a camera, pro or con against the parents. SB/PN or anyone else are under no obligation whatsoever to tell their stories or what they know to the public. They are under obligation to tell one entity the truth, that's LE. And last I checked, they (LE) weren't saying anything about what was said to them (from anyone) to the public either.

2nd point - Someone, I think Nina posted upthread (or even in a different thread, can't remember) that SY made a comment about the video at some point, basically saying there was nothing to it (as far as the investigation is concerned). I would be very surprised for the police spokesman to make comments like that when it in fact, there was more to the video that pertained to the investigation.
 
cityslick said:
1st point - Why does saying something in front of a camera (in this case SB saying in front of a camera she saw BL at a certain time) need to be some sort of validation that SB is telling the truth? Especially in this case where SB hasn't said anything in front of a camera, pro or con against the parents. SB/PN or anyone else are under no obligation whatsoever to tell their stories or what they know to the public. They are under obligation to tell one entity the truth, that's LE. And last I checked, they (LE) weren't saying anything about what was said to them (from anyone) to the public either.

2nd point - Someone, I think Nina posted upthread (or even in a different thread, can't remember) that SY made a comment about the video at some point, basically saying there was nothing to it (as far as the investigation is concerned). I would be very surprised for the police spokesman to make comments like that when it in fact, there was more to the video that pertained to the investigation.
Click to expand...

Here is a link to that post if anyone is interested. :)

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7681101&postcount=302"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - When was the last time Lisa was seen alive[/ame]
 
cityslick said:
1st point - Why does saying something in front of a camera (in this case SB saying in front of a camera she saw BL at a certain time) need to be some sort of validation that SB is telling the truth? Especially in this case where SB hasn't said anything in front of a camera, pro or con against the parents. SB/PN or anyone else are under no obligation whatsoever to tell their stories or what they know to the public. They are under obligation to tell one entity the truth, that's LE. And last I checked, they (LE) weren't saying anything about what was said to them (from anyone) to the public either.

2nd point - Someone, I think Nina posted upthread (or even in a different thread, can't remember) that SY made a comment about the video at some point, basically saying there was nothing to it (as far as the investigation is concerned). I would be very surprised for the police spokesman to make comments like that when it in fact, there was more to the video that pertained to the investigation.
Click to expand...


:seeya:

1st BBM: You bring up a good point and I agree -- BUT -- since LE is NOT talking, :innocent: it would be nice to hear something "straight from the horse's mouth" -- KWIM ? :innocent:

2nd BBM: Maybe -- BUT -- JMO ... I wonder if SY made that comment because he did not want to give out any of LE's strategy ?

MOO ...
 
Lisa is reported (by MSM and LE, and other sources)as being missing as of the night of Oct. 3.

LE has not made a statement (or even insinuated, from what I can tell) that Lisa was not seen earlier in the day on Oct. 3. Nor have they said she was not seen on Oct. 2, or Oct 1. Or Sept. 28, or August 15, or July 7, or June 6, or ANY OTHER DAY. Why haven't they? Because they already STATED that she went missing Oct. 3. Why would they feel it necessary to clarify that she was seen prior to that? THEY know the timeline, they stated it already. And even said they had no reason to change it.

So people can speculate away, I am going with what LE has stated, and what is in the published material on this case. Lisa went missing the night of Oct. 3.
 
BBM
cityslick said:
I'm curious why you think this (that SB would be shouting from the hills about her seeing BL)? From every report we had seen (either JS or RR), SB was still supporting DB (they were still keeping in contact with each other). Surely she (SB) knows what was in the People article, if there was something specifically false in it, especially something as vital as a 'sighting' of BL that's being attributed to her, wouldn't you think something like that would be cleared up? SB hasn't made any public comments, neither has PN so who's to say what they did and did not see that day?
Click to expand...

4Jacy said:
Just keep telling it like it is girlfriend. We have a voice and we will be heard.
Click to expand...
I would think if I had a friend that I knew was lying about her baby missing and I was on her side hoping she wouldn't get in trouble for it, and I saw something wrong in print about said night the child disappeared, I'd keep my mouth shut! I mean, I'm here to support my friend and hope she gets the eyes off of her, so why would I point it out??

Just my take on why SB might not have said if there was an error in print or otherwise. If I knew my friend (or anyone) was guilty of this I would not support her and I would not keep my mouth shut!

MOO
 
Just one more thing JI knows. . .

after Oct 6th LE told him that the window was not a possible point of entry.
 
LE has not said ANYTHING of substance about the case after the initial few days. Do people here honestly think that they have learned nothing after the first few days? It is not just speculation on my part that LE has a whole S-load of things that they know that has not been released to the public. And, no, I can't provide links for any of this because, as I said, this was not released to the public. But, there are a lot of theories out there in the LE community of what happened to Lisa. None of them include a SODDI. This isn't going to change anyone's mind who wants to believe that SODDI. Even if DB confessed, there will always be those who will refuse to believe it. That's the way some people are. However, I'm not personally going to sit back and let people change my words or meanings. If someone wants to do that, knock yourself out. Just know that it's not going to affect me.

This post is to no one in particular, just revealing my personal opinion on the matter.
 
norest4thewicked said:
Yes, but didn't JI and DB say on Dr. Phil that this was the point of entry? Maybe JI doesn't believe LE.
Click to expand...

They have waffled on it for sure. Before the 6th they talked about it, like they believed an intruder came through the window. On the 6th JI stated that LE informed them that it wasn't possible. After the 6th, in several interviews DB and JI stated that an intruder didn't come in the window. Then on Dr Phil. . .they waffled again.

MOO. .all about creating reasonable doubt.
 
norest4thewicked said:
LE has not said ANYTHING of substance about the case after the initial few days. Do people here honestly think that they have learned nothing after the first few days? It is not just speculation on my part that LE has a whole S-load of things that they know that has not been released to the public. And, no, I can't provide links for any of this because, as I said, this was not released to the public. But, there are a lot of theories out there in the LE community of what happened to Lisa. None of them include a SODDI. This isn't going to change anyone's mind who wants to believe that SODDI. Even if DB confessed, there will always be those who will refuse to believe it. That's the way some people are. However, I'm not personally going to sit back and let people change my words or meanings. If someone wants to do that, knock yourself out. Just know that it's not going to affect me.

This post is to no one in particular, just revealing my personal opinion on the matter.
Click to expand...
BBM.
I'm not sure what theories LE are looking into. I would hope that they would entertain a SODDI theory to either rule it in or to rule it out. Since they haven't released any information regarding theories it's hard to say what has been ruled out at this point. JMO.
 
RANCH said:
BBM.
I'm not sure what theories LE are looking into. I would hope that they would entertain a SODDI theory to either rule it in or to rule it out. Since they haven't released any information regarding theories it's hard to say what has been ruled out at this point. JMO.
Click to expand...

I agree. As far as I know, no one here posting is KCMO law enforcement or FBI or any of those entities. None of us know WHAT LE knows (except the bits they have released) or what they don't know.

I am looking at facts, things that have been released, not what I THINK LE may know.

And yes, everyone can give their opinion, but if I see something stated as fact and it is NOT fact, I will indeed point it out. FACT is supposed to be a part of WS. This is not Facebook where people just go crazy with wild speculation and say whatever they want and then it spreads around and pretty soon people think it IS fact, because they heard it so often. People are obviously free to speculate here, or have theories, etc., but I don't think something should be stated as fact just because you think it fits. Look at known facts=come up with a theory, that is how I think things should be done. NOT- come up with a theory=make the facts(or lack thereof) fit your theory.

My opinion, and this is my opinion only-I just wonder if MAYBE, those who want to believe that the timeline LE released is not the REAL timeline, want to believe this because of the whole disposal/time issue. i.e. DB would have really been cutting it close to do whatever to Lisa, then find a way to dispose of her body (apparently so well that no one has found her yet) in the timeline presented. She must of gotten REAL lucky to pull this off so "cleanly". SO, since this timeline is so tight, lets make up a NEW timeline which better fits this theory. DB needed time to dispose of Lisa and get away with it, so lets expand the timeline. This fits in with the whole "if the facts don't mesh with your theory, then make up some new "facts" that do" This is just my own opinion. It is just a general thought that popped into my head.
 
norest4thewicked said:
LE has not said ANYTHING of substance about the case after the initial few days. Do people here honestly think that they have learned nothing after the first few days? It is not just speculation on my part that LE has a whole S-load of things that they know that has not been released to the public. And, no, I can't provide links for any of this because, as I said, this was not released to the public. But, there are a lot of theories out there in the LE community of what happened to Lisa. None of them include a SODDI. This isn't going to change anyone's mind who wants to believe that SODDI. Even if DB confessed, there will always be those who will refuse to believe it. That's the way some people are. However, I'm not personally going to sit back and let people change my words or meanings. If someone wants to do that, knock yourself out. Just know that it's not going to affect me.

This post is to no one in particular, just revealing my personal opinion on the matter.
Click to expand...

bbm = How do you know that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 247 more.
Total: 3,599 (members: 248, guests: 3,351)

Online statistics

Members online
248
Guests online
3,351
Total visitors
3,599
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,253
Messages
17,966,128
Members
228,733
Latest member
jbks
Back
Top