cluciano63
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 41,198
- Reaction score
- 27,291
I don't have a dead horse icon but really, the pajama vs. shorts thing is filling pages here, to no avail...
JMO
JMO
Sounds even worse. Metal detectors in their back yard??? :banghead:
I don't have a dead horse icon but really, the pajama vs. shorts thing is filling pages here, to no avail...
JMO
:thewhip: lol
Lots of kids pj sets come with a top, a pair of shorts and a pair of pants. And they're pj's. There's nothing wrong with putting a baby to bed in shorts and a top - sounds like it was a matched set.
In fact, my daughter had pj's that fit the same description when she was a toddler. Purple top with a white kitten on it, and matching stretchy purple shorts. They were sold as pj's - think I got them from Target or maybe even Costco.
Believe me, I suspect the parents big time, but there's nothing about the bedtime outfit that is strange, IMO.
I'm getting the scenic view on here....am I in the right place for the live streaming?
I don't have a dead horse icon but really, the pajama vs. shorts thing is filling pages here, to no avail...
JMO
Good catch. Especially, if his daughter was sick, and he knew it, it would have seemed he would go there first.
This is not looking good.
Hold the phone, something just hit me. We're talking about a 10 month old, right? A SICK 10 month old? I don't know about anyone else's kids, but I can guarantee you my kid would have been screaming bloody murder if a) someone awoke her, ESPECIALLY if she wasn't feeling well and b) that someone was not a primary caretaker. Short of the intruder drugging the child, is mom claiming Lisa is so mild-mannered that she'd allow someone to take her out of the house without making a peep?
I was only responding to the first part of your post, which I bolded. It said or implied that every call is answered by either a person or voice mail and I thought that maybe you were making an invalid assumption.But if you check your cell phone record, you will still see a record of when you made that call and what the number was. The number would indicate who the phone carrier was, and the carrier would have a record of the owner of that number. Unless it was a throw away phone, then you would have to trace down where they were buying the minutes and hope they used a credit or debit card.
It can get complicated, but it can and has been done. Most people have an idea of who might have tried to call them at 2:30 in the morning. That is not a time that most people would try to call.
Thank you! again! and here is some info to support my earlier post about the dangers of the flame retardant chemicals on children's pajamas....
////snipped////
"Generally, the chemicals used on pajamas or pajama fabrics include chlorinated and brominated flame retardants, inorganic flame retardants such as antimony oxides, and phosphate-based compounds.
Unfortunately, chlorinated and brominated flame retardants are contaminating the environment and accumulating in the human body. For example, polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) have been linked to damage to the nervous and reproductive systems and impairing thyroid function. And you generally cant tell what flame retardant is being used on any particular clothing item. And you cant really wash the flame retardants out."
http://www.pediatricsafety.net/2009/10/childrens-pajamas-and-flame-retardants/
Me too. I'm tired as if I had done hard labor for 8 hours. At some point this evening I am going to have to take a shower and I am going to ask that everyone stop posting for 15 minutes. Thanks in advance.
http://www.kctv5.com/story/15642798/authorities-search-joco-landfill-for-missing-baby-lisa
"Irwin said he came home from his overnight shift around 4 a.m. Tuesday. He noticed a first-floor window open in the front of the house. After checking on his sons, 6 and 8, he went to the bedroom of his daughter, Lisa, and noticed her missing. Deborah Bradley said she ran through the house screaming for her daughter but there was no answer"
OK, something is wrong here. I watched the video on The Today Show, and their computerized image, IIRC, showed the baby's room more easily accessible from the front door. But according to this article, the dad bypassed the baby's room and checked on his two sons first (one was in his own room and the other sleeping with mom). Only after that he went to the room that was most easily accessible when he walked in the front door? Hmmm. He would have had to walk by the baby's room TWICE if he checked on one son, then the other.