Dumpster Fire - related to Lisa's disappearance?

[Rallihanna]

I think it is. LE hasn't said it isn't and they have quickly said that about other things. Plus now that she is admitting she was drunk it makes me think even more than she could have done something "radical" if she found poor Lisa dead (say by accident). She could have been under the influence...

JMO

 

[Mountain_Kat]

But... If you consider the dumpster fire call was dispatched at 2:19am, but it was lit before someone called the fire department (unknown how long it was burning), then a phone call at 2:30 am, the phone apparently wasn't in the dumpster burning.

The reports of a man walking with a baby was around 1am.
http://www.kctv5.com/story/15611288/authorities-intensify-search-for-missing-baby

See why this doesn't make sense?

Do I see why evidence couldn't have been burned in that dumpster? Not really. Do I see why cell phones couldn't have been burned in that dumpster? Possibly. That would depend on being able to nail down definite times. I can't. I don't know the exact time that cell phone call was made. I don't even know that it was made, kwim?

But sure, if it's verified that the call was at 2:30 , and the dumpster fire was was at 2:19, then I'd agree that at least one of the cell phones didn't go into the burning dumpster.

How's that.

 

[indepmo]

Do I see why evidence couldn't have been burned in that dumpster? Not really. Do I see why cell phones couldn't have been burned in that dumpster? Possibly. That would depend on being able to nail down definite times. I can't. I don't know the exact time that cell phone call was made. I don't even know that it was made, kwim?

But sure, if it's verified that the call was at 2:30 , and the dumpster fire was was at 2:19, then I'd agree that at least one of the cell phones didn't go into the burning dumpster.

How's that.

Sorry, I've got to think like a criminal for a minute...

"Hey! Let's go a couple of blocks from the house, go into a multi family dwelling where there are hundreds of apartments and people coming and going at all hours of the day and night, make a big red glow in the sky so people can see HEY! I'm committing a crime!"

Or...

Let's go a couple of blocks south, dispose of phones in the river where they will NEVER be found...

I don't even like to see a cell call mentioned in these threads because "it's unconfirmed information and only speculation".

Earlier reports put the handyman at around 20 something years old. He's 42.

How reliable is this unconfirmed information that we are receiving? It's not.

It's no different than the Judge show last night where they were discussing the Irwins dog and the guy made a comment "I'm sure the burglar wouldn't have walked up to the window banging pots and pans together to make sure the dogs were barking". Same applies to anything that would draw attention. I don't think the dumpster was neither a diversion nor a way to dispose of evidence. I own a fire restoration company and I specialize in restoration of fire damaged structures and I can show you where a whole house burned down, and in the middle of melted plastic I recovered cell phones in the room that totally burned, I was able to pry the plastic apart and see the green componant board. Why did I do this? The homeowner was disputing with his insurance company the brands of several items he had, and the only way to prove what he had was to go into electronic componants and provide numbers off of the chipsets that were located in the electronics. I did the same thing a few years back where a malfunctioning space heater caught a house on fire. I ended up with a pile of melted plastic and some metal coils and turned it into evidence for a defective product lawsuit.

Even if badly burned telephones were recovered in the dumpster/landfill, I can't even say law enforcement would have released that information to the public but I'm guessing they didn't based on more heat on DB or JI. I also believe they could have traced final pings to that location. I have a feeling LE is still waiting on phone records too, but once again it's insiden information and only speculation at this point.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Bringing these 2 posts over from another discussion about another dumpster fire. Check out the location, date and time.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7240071#post7240071"]Peter Alexander reports that Debbie was drunk the night Lisa went missing - Page 21 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]



[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7240220&postcount=573"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Peter Alexander reports that Debbie was drunk the night Lisa went missing[/ame]

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Sorry, I've got to think like a criminal for a minute...

"Hey! Let's go a couple of blocks from the house, go into a multi family dwelling where there are hundreds of apartments and people coming and going at all hours of the day and night, make a big red glow in the sky so people can see HEY! I'm committing a crime!"

Or...

Let's go a couple of blocks south, dispose of phones in the river where they will NEVER be found...

I don't even like to see a cell call mentioned in these threads because "it's unconfirmed information and only speculation".

Earlier reports put the handyman at around 20 something years old. He's 42.

How reliable is this unconfirmed information that we are receiving? It's not.

It's no different than the Judge show last night where they were discussing the Irwins dog and the guy made a comment "I'm sure the burglar wouldn't have walked up to the window banging pots and pans together to make sure the dogs were barking". Same applies to anything that would draw attention. I don't think the dumpster was neither a diversion nor a way to dispose of evidence. I own a fire restoration company and I specialize in restoration of fire damaged structures and I can show you where a whole house burned down, and in the middle of melted plastic I recovered cell phones in the room that totally burned, I was able to pry the plastic apart and see the green componant board. Why did I do this? The homeowner was disputing with his insurance company the brands of several items he had, and the only way to prove what he had was to go into electronic componants and provide numbers off of the chipsets that were located in the electronics. I did the same thing a few years back where a malfunctioning space heater caught a house on fire. I ended up with a pile of melted plastic and some metal coils and turned it into evidence for a defective product lawsuit.

Even if badly burned telephones were recovered in the dumpster/landfill, I can't even say law enforcement would have released that information to the public but I'm guessing they didn't based on more heat on DB or JI. I also believe they could have traced final pings to that location. I have a feeling LE is still waiting on phone records too, but once again it's insiden information and only speculation at this point.

Maybe you should give KCPD a call and tell them that, they're the ones who initially had an interest in this dumpster fire. I'm just following their lead. :crazy:

 

[marge_rita]

:banghead:Another dumpster fire, another coincidence.

 

[RANCH]

How could someone vote yes or no on this poll without firsthand knowledge of who started the fire and why? That only leaves maybe. JMO.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

So according to DB's most recent interview, LE showed her burnt clothes?

Wow.

 

[DLT88]

The report about the man and the baby had the baby wearing only a diaper. It makes me wonder if the perp might have burned the baby clothes, and MAYBE the cell phone sim cards, as a way to try and destroy any evidence of a connection to the baby.

I have wondered if maybe somebody wanted that baby and paid the perp to snatch her form the home that night. Maybe for revenge, or maybe just because they wanted a baby to raise.

That's my hunch -- the baby clothes she was wearing were burned in that dumpster. They should have gone through that dumpster with a fine-toothed comb to fine threads or anything from that outfit that might have survived.

I also believe that baby was stolen to sell.

 

[Wanting2Help]

I voted yes. I thought it was too much of a coincidence before this article, now I am even more convinced.

In an appearance on “Good Morning America,” Bradley said that while being questioned by police, investigators showed her burned clothes and a “Doppler thing with pings” from her cell phone.

“I hope the burned clothes weren’t real,” she said on the news program.

Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/17/3212350/mother-tells-today-show-she-was.html#ixzz1b3zUqUdO

BBM

 

[MaryAnn]

I voted yes. Especially after reading that LE mentioned something to Lisa's Mom about burnt clothing. I hope and pray little Lisa is still with us.

If my Son ever has a baby, I'll be up there within minutes to install dead bolts, alarms, surveillance camera's, have their dog trained to attack intruders. it's just so scary to me all these babies snatched up and dissapearing. So sad.....

 

[Katana]

So, Debbi denies knowing about the clothes and assumes LE is making it up. If her baby was missing shouldn't she be more concerned about burnt baby clothes found in a dumpster near her home. Wouldn't she want answers? She just blows it off and is just way too relaxed.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

So, Debbi denies knowing about the clothes and assumes LE is making it up. If her baby was missing shouldn't she be more concerned about burnt baby clothes found in a dumpster near her home. Wouldn't she want answers? She just blows it off and is just way too relaxed.

Even weirder, she implies that LE lied to her about the clothing belonging to Lisa. Now, if she doesn't know what happened to Lisa, why would she assume ANYTHING about the burnt clothing she was being shown? Let's say you truly didn't know what happened to your child, and LE showed YOU burnt clothing...what would YOUR reaction be? Would it be that LE was trying to screw with you? :waitasec:

 

[curiositycat]

Well, that comment about the burnt clothing was electric..my hair stood on end. Tomorrow IIRC is the GJ date. Hopefully we will know more after that time.

 

[IrishMist]

Even weirder, she implies that LE lied to her about the clothing belonging to Lisa. Now, if she doesn't know what happened to Lisa, why would she assume ANYTHING about the burnt clothing she was being shown? Let's say you truly didn't know what happened to your child, and LE showed YOU burnt clothing...what would YOUR reaction be? Would it be that LE was trying to screw with you? :waitasec:

I don't think that's what she thought when they showed it to her; it's what she thinks now. Since they said she failed the LDT, and she knows she's innocent, it's calling into question the other things they showed and said to her.

That's how I took it, anyway.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I don't think that's what she thought when they showed it to her; it's what she thinks now. Since they said she failed the LDT, and she knows she's innocent, it's calling into question the other things they showed and said to her.

That's how I took it, anyway.

But she's ALWAYS maintained that she doesn't KNOW what happened to Lisa. So, why would she assume ANYTHING about the burnt clothes she was shown?

 

[IrishMist]

But she's ALWAYS maintained that she doesn't KNOW what happened to Lisa. So, why would she assume ANYTHING about the burnt clothes she was shown?

Because now, in hindsight, she knows about the dumpster fire and suspects the police were trying to rattle her into a confession? (Just like they "lied" about her failing the LDT.)

 

[katydid23]

I wonder if the burnt clothing is real? It makes sense to me, especially given the story about the man walking with a child wearing only a diaper. I think that was about midnight. He may have taken the child somewhere and stashed her safely, and then retrieved the clothing and gone and burned it to conceal evidence.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Because now, in hindsight, she knows about the dumpster fire and suspects the police were trying to rattle her into a confession? (Just like they "lied" about her failing the LDT.)

Even in hindsight, if LE told her about the dumpster fire, why would she assume LE was screwing with her? Is it because she knows Lisa's clothes weren't burnt in a dumpster? Or because she knows they WERE burnt in the dumpster?

My point is this...if I genuinely have no idea what happened to my child, and LE accuses me of killing my child and shows me burnt clothes, my reaction is gonna be, "OH MY GOD!!! MY BABY!!!", not, "Hey man, quit screwing with me."

That is the kind of response I'd expect to see from someone who knows exactly what happened to as child, not someone clueless.

JMO

 

[HatesSociopaths]

Speaking of the dumpster fire, it's interesting that Debbie says she was confronted with the burnt clothes. In an earlier interview (at least a few days after the crime) she said that she had heard something about it, had asked a family member about it and didn't hear if anything came of it. Jeremy said he hadn't heard of it at all.

Well, they both lied there, IMO. Debbie knew about it because she was confronted with the burnt clothes by police, and you know she talked about it with Jeremy. Jeremy would have known about it anyway if he had any curiousity about finding his daughter Lisa. MOO.