Are WE to blame for being suspicious?

[otto]

My read on the first post was whether we, the curious public, are to blame for the media hype regarding the case ... whether we, the hungry public, want a good story to chase and whether we are partially responsible for speculation that the mother is responsible for her missing daughter. I haven't really followed the case, but I did hear an awful lot about whether mom drinking wine on the front step was a dreadful thing to do ... then a whole lot of speculation about alcoholic moms. Next, I'm hearing that cadaver dogs can hit on toenails that were left on the floor. Are we to blame if every crazy story in the book is put forth as an explanation about what happened? I think to some degree, yes.

 

[tink92]

I can guarrantee that God forbid any one here ever had a child abducted..they would be hauled over the coals and damned to hell by a LARGe proportion of web sleuths!...Unless you have lived the life of a sober nun ..people will pick at everything you have ever done..and sum it up to guilty!

I have seen it with every case...Little Breanne..parents had nothing to do with it..yet after a couple od days the finger pointing and suspicion started...next thing you know we had outlandish theories of mom killing the child and dad disposing of body. IF the case had gone on any longer..in fact IF little Breanne was still not found..I have NO DOUBT there would be a forum on here baying for the blood of those innocent parents...and that saddens me.


I see the same thing happening here.

 

[BritsKate]

I can guarrantee that God forbid any one here ever had a child abducted..they would be hauled over the coals and damned to hell by a LARGe proportion of web sleuths!...Unless you have lived the life of a sober nun ..people will pick at everything you have ever done..and sum it up to guilty!

I have seen it with every case...Little Breanne..parents had nothing to do with it..yet after a couple od days the finger pointing and suspicion started...next thing you know we had outlandish theories of mom killing the child and dad disposing of body. IF the case had gone on any longer..in fact IF little Breanne was still not found..I have NO DOUBT there would be a forum on here baying for the blood of those innocent parents...and that saddens me.


I see the same thing happening here.

BBM
I think these are unfair statements really. Many websleuthers have watched these cases unfold for decades - long before websleuths or the internet ever existed. If there is a reason to suspect parents, family members, or those last seen with a victim there is good standing for it. Statistically it is often the case that a perpetrator is indeed known to the victim. More often than not, sadly, it is the parent involved in the death/abduction of a young child. Personally I do not understand what ignoring known statistics adds to the cases we follow. :waitasec:

In this case we have a changing timeline and several comments made by both parents that has only encouraged suspicion, in my opinion. We do not know what law enforcement knows but we have been afforded a wealth of information in way of family and family advisors comments to media.

I did not follow the Breanne Rodriguez case but I fully support that parents, based on statistics, should be investigated and eliminated while following all other possible leads.

As for 'baying for blood'...if the parents are involved I hope LE has the evidence to secure a conviction unlike so many other cases I am following. If someone outside of the parents is responsible I hope LE has the evidence to secure a conviction as well. I would hardly call that baying for blood.

JMHO

 

[~n/t~]

My apologies, the word "man" was not intended as a reference to gender but to species, as in humankind. Below is a link to dictionary.com:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/man




You would only be irrational if you refused to weight the evidence to the best of your abilities, or formed opinions that ran counter to what the evidence indicated (for example: saying, "I don't care what the facts show, I think Space Aliens kidnapped that poor child" would qualify). If you conclude you lack suffient information to form an opinion then this is not irrational. It would only be irrational if, having suffient evidence to arrive at a conclusion, you chose instead to ignore that evidence and your best judgement

bbm....what evidence? As far as I know the results from the items taken at the home are not back yet but I just logged on and hopped in this thread. Was there breaking news that the mom(parents)are now suspects? Were they arrested?

If you can point me to the evidence in this case, I'd appreciate it. Please don't include the one hit cadaver dog. I need more than one hit in one spot.

Off to read ...

 

[2goldfish]

I can guarrantee that God forbid any one here ever had a child abducted..they would be hauled over the coals and damned to hell by a LARGe proportion of web sleuths!...Unless you have lived the life of a sober nun ..people will pick at everything you have ever done..and sum it up to guilty!

I have seen it with every case...Little Breanne..parents had nothing to do with it..yet after a couple od days the finger pointing and suspicion started...next thing you know we had outlandish theories of mom killing the child and dad disposing of body. IF the case had gone on any longer..in fact IF little Breanne was still not found..I have NO DOUBT there would be a forum on here baying for the blood of those innocent parents...and that saddens me.


I see the same thing happening here.

in all cases the parents have to be ruled out first for a variety of reasons which you probably already know. on some cases, like this one, the parents CANT be ruled out (as far as we know, cause LE isnt talking and they may well have ruled them out for reasons unknown to us) and for me, anyways, I will stay on the fence until LE releases more info, if ever. mind you nothing would make me happier than lisa being found alive, unharmed, and through no fault of the parents. I'd be more than happy to be wrong about the suspicions I do have but they are only that- suspicions. I've got nothing else to go on, as LE isnt talking and DB talks too much.

I suspect unless a body is found, alive or not, this will go the way of the kyron horman case - absolutely nowhere to date

 

[~n/t~]

BBM

The Lindbergh baby? Charles and Ann Lindbergh were never even suspected of hurting their little boy. He was kidnapped by an intruder.

I don't understand why the Lindbergh baby would be included in this opening post. Charles Lindbergh was an American hero to my grandparent's generation.

Last time I checked, Lisa's parents are not suspects in this case.

 

[pkz]

Are WE to blame? a good question on a philosophical level.

First accepting BLAME = FAULT = GUILT

I do not do GUILT, so no, WE are not to blame for anything

As far as the question as to whether we are to blame for the suspicion of parents...it reaches into US on a bunch of different levels. Parents are SUPPOSED to love, shelter and protect their children. Children should be able to grow knowing this, feeling this, living this every single day of their lives with unconditional love. When a child is lacking one or all of those, WE feel it, maybe because we lacked some of this in our childhood and/or without it goes against our morales, values, logic, or religion.
IMHO~ parents abusing, torturing, killing a child is equated to a priest or mentor doing the same thing...it crosses a line, a straight narrow line called right or wrong

Pertaining to this case...DB said early on she follows missing child cases, always blamed the parents, mother specifically. That, on it's face is interesting and may be not a coincidence.

 

[LaLaw2000]

I'm not sure I understand the question. Are WE to blame? I will say a resounding NO!

Some parents just have the propensity to harm their babies and children. Then we have the pedophiles and other criminals that harm babies and children as well. We also have the copycat crimes against babies, children, teens, and adults.

I am just grateful that so many of us have such love for our children that the thought of harming our babies and children would never even enter our minds.

IF you mean the media and some popular talk shows sensationalize these missing babies and children to create a national sensation/obsession thereby causing more parents, pedophiles, and criminals to commit such crimes, then we are still not to blame. (sorry for long sentence)

We are also not to blame when someone does a copycat crime seeking attention/infamy, or even for profit. These people already have it in them already to do this.

I also feel that it is a very good thing that people seem to have become much more aware of the plight of missing children/adults. The sad thing is that it is becoming more commonplace for parents to sell children for money and drugs. Again, these people already had it in them to do such a thing to begin with.

MOO

 

[Sigh Sister]

BBM
I think these are unfair statements really. Many websleuthers have watched these cases unfold for decades - long before websleuths or the internet ever existed. If there is a reason to suspect parents, family members, or those last seen with a victim there is good standing for it. Statistically it is often the case that a perpetrator is indeed known to the victim. More often than not, sadly, it is the parent involved in the death/abduction of a young child. Personally I do not understand what ignoring known statistics adds to the cases we follow. :waitasec:

In this case we have a changing timeline and several comments made by both parents that has only encouraged suspicion, in my opinion. We do not know what law enforcement knows but we have been afforded a wealth of information in way of family and family advisors comments to media.

I did not follow the Breanne Rodriguez case but I fully support that parents, based on statistics, should be investigated and eliminated while following all other possible leads.

As for 'baying for blood'...if the parents are involved I hope LE has the evidence to secure a conviction unlike so many other cases I am following. If someone outside of the parents is responsible I hope LE has the evidence to secure a conviction as well. I would hardly call that baying for blood.

JMHO

There are many on here who have their minds made up that DB and/or JI are guilty based in part on things like:

DB got her hair done. Off with her head!
DB and JI had both had one hand in their pocket during pray vigil. Off with their heads!
There are halloween decorations in their windows. Off with their heads!
DB's father was wearing a shirt that said Sinister. They're an evil family. Off with their heads!

There are more examples, but I think I made my point. There are legitimate reasons to have some suspicion of them, but many here seem desperate to find anything that points to their guilt, even if it really doesn't point to their guilt at all.

 

[Taminator]

I don't think WE are to blame, per se, but I do think the changing times and the way we are able to access information is to blame. It's like the game of "Telephone". I tell "you" something, "you" tell Joe Shmoe something, etc., etc., etc.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing necessarily all the time, but I think people tend to hammer on details that may or may not have anything to do with any given case.

In the case of Baby Lisa and for the most part all cases, until I see or hear evidence that doesn't add up in my mind, I try my best to be objective. Fact of the matter is, I haven't seen or read any evidence in this case that can sway my opinion one way or the other. I try to imagine how I would feel if every tiny detail of my life was made me look like a bad parent in the public's eye.

I'm not saying that getting "blackout" drunk while you are tending to your sick child and other children isn't a problem, but where is the evidence that this is something that goes on all the time with DB? Clearly, there is no excuse for this when you are the sole caregiver, BUT could it simply be a regretable situation?

I can tell you right now that if one of my kids went missing right now, I'm sure there are plenty of things that people could say about me. I have dirty dishes in my sink, my toliet could use a scrubbing, and I have days of mail stacked up on my dining room table. I smoke cigarettes in my home. If I happen to do something out of the norm and my child goes missing, does that automatically make me a guilty person, a bad parent, or what?

 

[SoSueMe]

Please try to stay on topic. If you want to discuss the Lindbergh case, please go to the appropriate forum.

The subject is "Are we to blame for being suspicious?" I think you've all made some very good points.

Please carry on.

 

[4Jacy]

I read the OP's question like "who can blame us for being suspicious". Maybe I'm way off base.

Thank you, you got it right! Sorry I didn't go more indepth with my post.

 

[LaLaw2000]

Thank you, you got it right! Sorry I didn't go more indepth with my post.

Thanks, 4Jacy! IWillDare got it. Sorry I didn't.

It is a great question!

 

[Elley Mae]

I don't think I am overly suspicious of parents at the start. At the beginning here when I saw the video' http://www.hollybaby.com/2011/10/06/baby-lisa-irwin-kidnapped-video/

of deborah I felt sorry for her. But after reading that she was plastered the night lisa went missing, I have to re-think my first opinion. Let's face it, well at least I think this way, the police, detectives know that something is not adding up. There are too many discrepancies in their story. I believe that "they" know more then is being told.

 

[stilettos]

No I am not flipping to blame for being suspicious. I am suspicious of any parent who claims to be blackout drunk while caring for three children, one an infant who was sick. THAT is why I am suspicious because that is abuse, IMO. Changing stories just make me more suspicious....but it is the Mother's own statements that have caused it...so the blame should lie there.

 

[djm41]

I don't think I am overly suspicious of parents at the start. At the beginning here when I saw the video' http://www.hollybaby.com/2011/10/06/baby-lisa-irwin-kidnapped-video/

of deborah I felt sorry for her. But after reading that she was plastered the night lisa went missing, I have to re-think my first opinion. Let's face it, well at least I think this way, the police, detectives know that something is not adding up. There are too many discrepancies in their story. I believe that "they" know more then is being told.

Thats exactly how it was for me. I saw a missing baby on TV. My heart went out to the family, and I said prayers that the baby would be returned home safe and sound. It was the mother defending the adult time that made me suspicious. I couldn't understand it. If she would have said that it was a mistake that she wished she could take back, that I can understand. Some would say I am judging her. I don't believe I am. I just don't comprehend her way of thinking and I don't know how someone rationalizes in their mind that even with what happened, it was still okay behavior on her part. It gets my mind to wondering what else she might rationalize in her mind.

 

[Gardenlady]

Not sure I understand the question. Are you asking if we are to blame for suspecting the parents?

If so: it is the job of all men, as rational creatures, to think and reason, and to accept the conclusions of evidence irrespective of how we might wish things to be. It is our ability to THINK which allows us to survive, to provide for ourselves and our families, to recognize danger and react.

We suspect parents, family, and friends first because, in about 90% of all cases, this is the correct answer. In this particular case we can also look at more than statistics. We can examine the facts as we know them and see that all of them, ALL of them, seem to point directly to one suspect, a suspect that the statistics also show to be the most likely culprit.

Further, there is nothing to mitigate this. Mom, by her own admission, places her temporary pleasure ahead of the safety and welfare of her children. Again, by her own admission. She sees nothing even questionable about getting black-out drunk while leaving a sick infant alone, unwatched, and unloved. She even planned ahead to do it.

So while she might cry and put on a show in public, we know that this is deception. As was her initial story, and the one after that, and the one after that. Just as you would be a fool to trust her with a child, you would be equally a fool to trust her to tell the truth or to behave in a responsible manner.

Ayn Rand, is that you??

Humans might be distinguished by their ability to reason, but we also are capable, and at times yes, hampered by, emotion, which often has nothing to do with logic and reason. Ask any seasoned detective what role a hunch often plays in breaking a case, and how often that hunch might be considered illogical or unreasonable by others.

Statistics might say that family is most often involved in cases like this, but there are those that don't fit the statistical norm. If we wish to follow a case purely logically, as you say a man's job is, then evidence needs to be followed, and so far as we know, there is none to point to mom or dad. Drinking is not evidence of murder. Drinking after the kids are in bed, or while they're watching a movie in bed, isn't evidence of murder. I'd say it's not even evidence of neglect: otherwise many of us who grew up with older generation parents, for whom quite a few cocktails or beers and cigarettes were the staple of any social gathering, could consider ourselves products of abusive or neglectful childhoods.

Further, the lack of evidence against the parents means both parents, not just mom. I notice you reserve most of your suspicion for her alone, yet the circumstances of the evening that Lisa went missing could equally allow for a suspicion against dad. Add me to the opinion that there's some evidence of sexism in your attitude. You were, after all, the one who earlier back in the case accused those of us who found it interesting that the teen was the only reported person to have had a DNA sample taken of being scared of men, teen men in particular.

I'm not impressed by implications that men are some sort of victim when it comes to looking at who commits a crime. After all, I think logic and statistics would bear out the fact tha the overwhelming majority of violent crime is committed by men.

:twocents:

 

[Leila]

Are we to blame……let’s think about this. The Lindbergh baby, Susan Smith, Kyron, Zahra, Haleigh Cummings and many I have missed. I think the latest is the Caylee Anthony case. All of these children looked well fed, well dressed, very well taken care of. We look at these parents and say, “no, not them, they would never hurt their precious children.” But then we find out that they did. How are we, the public, supposed to react to little children who goes missing, who dies? I don’t thing we cannot help but be suspicious to these situations. It disturbs me immensely, but it is fact. We are only human.

No, we are not to blame for being suspicious. There's far too many cases, as you've enumerated, that tell us that a parent can be responsible for their child's disappearance or death, no matter how well taken care of the child appears to be.

The fact that LE also looks at the family first, and usually eliminates them, before throwing all their resources into a search for a missing child, tells us that a parent being responsible for their child's disappearance happens frequently enough that there's a protocol for LE.

When an adult goes missing, it's the same procedure by LE. The spouse is usually suspect until cleared.

In this case, we're entering the fourth week since baby Lisa's disappearance, and the parents apparently have not yet been cleared. I think that's all the more reason why the public is skeptical of the parents story of an abduction.

 

[MamaK]

Not sure I understand the question. Are you asking if we are to blame for suspecting the parents?

If so: it is the job of all men, as rational creatures, to think and reason, and to accept the conclusions of evidence irrespective of how we might wish things to be. It is our ability to THINK which allows us to survive, to provide for ourselves and our families, to recognize danger and react.

We suspect parents, family, and friends first because, in about 90% of all cases, this is the correct answer. In this particular case we can also look at more than statistics. We can examine the facts as we know them and see that all of them, ALL of them, seem to point directly to one suspect, a suspect that the statistics also show to be the most likely culprit.

Further, there is nothing to mitigate this. Mom, by her own admission, places her temporary pleasure ahead of the safety and welfare of her children. Again, by her own admission. She sees nothing even questionable about getting black-out drunk while leaving a sick infant alone, unwatched, and unloved. She even planned ahead to do it.

So while she might cry and put on a show in public, we know that this is deception. As was her initial story, and the one after that, and the one after that. Just as you would be a fool to trust her with a child, you would be equally a fool to trust her to tell the truth or to behave in a responsible manner.

BBM How did I miss this was Ayn Rand last night? :doh: Sorry for my crappy post last night, which I think was deleted by a mod. :shakehead: Note to self - no more posting when feeling crabby and it's after bedtime. :crazy:

 

[scmom]

I guess we're each to blame for whatever our suspicions are. It seems to go a little like this:
Is Lisa gone from her family's home? Yes. This is not suspect. It is a fact.
Who reported Lisa missing? Her father. This is a fact, not a suspicion.
How does he know someone took her out of her crib? How does he know she was in her crib? How does he know what time she was last seen? If he was not there, these are only a few of the questions he could not answer as fact.
Now, if the person/persons providing him with the answers to these questions keeps changing their answers, which of the answers can be said to be factual? Or can he now suspect that the person providing this information is lying?