Why hasn't there been an arrest?

[Melon]

BBM IIRC LE said that they had JI on video at Starbucks. It could be possible that he had some involvement after he left work, but I doubt it. JMO but I believe that LE is focused on DB, and DB only. I think they know it was her but just lack the evidence it would take to get a conviction.

I know there is video of JI at Starbucks but I am not certain that video excludes him from involvement entirely. :moo: I didn't word my alibi thought as clearly as I should have. He has at least a partial alibi but I am not certain it all checks out and they can exclude him. :moo: JI had the means and opportunity to dispose of BL on the way to work if he was of the need or desire to. Who knows if he had other opportunities during his work shift.


<modsnip>

 

[cityslick]

I know there is video of JI at Starbucks but I am not certain that video excludes him from involvement entirely. :moo: I didn't word my alibi thought as clearly as I should have. He has at least a partial alibi but I am not certain it all checks out and they can exclude him. :moo: JI had the means and opportunity to dispose of BL on the way to work if he was of the need or desire to. Who knows if he had other opportunities during his work shift.


<modsnip>

The problem with this line of thinking is we have no idea what the boys (and SB's daughter to a certain extent) told LE in their interviews with them. If anyone one of them saw or even heard BL at any time post JI leaving to go to work, that blows the 'JI taking BL when he went to Starbucks' out. We also have no idea what SB told LE. For example, did SB tell LE that she really did see BL and was that after JI had left for work? We have no idea what PN told LE about when he last saw BL.

The problem with this case is a strict timeline has never been established (as far as I know) as to exactly where everyone was at certain times. What time did JI leave and was PN/SB still in the house when he left? What time did PN leave? When exactly did DB/SB sit outside? Were the boys/SB's daughter sitting in the family room the entire 4+ hours in the house or did they move around to bedrooms?

 

[Melon]

The problem with this line of thinking is we have no idea what the boys (and SB's daughter to a certain extent) told LE in their interviews with them. If anyone one of them saw or even heard BL at any time post JI leaving to go to work, that blows the 'JI taking BL when he went to Starbucks' out. We also have no idea what SB told LE. For example, did SB tell LE that she really did see BL and was that after JI had left for work? We have no idea what PN told LE about when he last saw BL.

The problem with this case is a strict timeline has never been established (as far as I know) as to exactly where everyone was at certain times. What time did JI leave and was PN/SB still in the house when he left? What time did PN leave? When exactly did DB/SB sit outside? Were the boys/SB's daughter sitting in the family room the entire 4+ hours in the house or did they move around to bedrooms?

BBM. ITA absolutely. Any of those scenarios can blow a hole in the JI "on the way to work" theory. I would add the caveat that I really do not put much weight in SB's daughter, if she in fact told anyone she saw BL alive. Children are not mini adults and their little brains do not work the same way adult brains do. The same could be said for BL's brothers. You really have to tread carefully with children as witnesses. Their cognitive skill, their memory recall, their reasoning skills, their ability to establish reality from fantasy and many other factors come into play when trying to rely on their eyewitness accounts, especially in this particular situation. BL was a huge part of the brother's lives and I gather SB and her daughter saw her often. We have all done something that is routine and have no memory of it at one point or the other. Leaving the garage door open or coasting through a light and not having any memory of what color the light was are two examples that come to my mind. I am in no way equating BL to an intimate object but we really have no way to know what any of the children told LE and how reliable that info is. That leaves us with PN and SB. It would be interesting to know when the last time those two saw BL up and about and not just laying in her crib.

There isn't much in the way of a lot of concrete info for us to discuss. For me, I have not seen anything concrete to exclude JI from suspicion and that is why I discuss him. Even if the "on the way to work" theory is wrong, I do think JI would also have had time to "run to the river" after work if he had a need or notion to. It's not that far, it doesn't put him "out of play" for a great length of time. :moo:

I do think the parent's had something to do with the disappearance of BL and she had to be disposed of somehow.:moo: Just how it happened is a huge question. For me, I have no problem with anyone trying to fit the pieces we have together and trying to make sense of them, even if it means rearranging them and their theories a time or seven.:moo:

 

[4Jacy]

DB has to be guilty because of at least one lie: She said she never asked the boys if they heard anything that night!!:banghead: What mother, or father, would not ask their children what they had heard the night their baby sister went missing! Dear God!

 

[KsStormy]

DB has to be guilty because of at least one lie: She said she never asked the boys if they heard anything that night!!:banghead: What mother, or father, would not ask their children what they had heard the night their baby sister went missing! Dear God!

Bradley also said she didn't discuss that night w/ her drinking buddy, nor Jeremy... :waitasec:

 

[4Jacy]

:heartbeat:

Bradley also said she didn't discuss that night w/ her drinking buddy, nor Jeremy... :waitasec:

Yeah, her concern, or lack thereof, is too disturbing on so many levels. Even though the police talked to all the neighbors, I would be out there myself, begging, questioning everyone that lived in that community for any information they may have!! Poor Little Lisa, I pray you didn't suffer. :heartbeat::heartbeat:

 

[KsStormy]

:heartbeat:

Yeah, her concern, or lack thereof, is too disturbing on so many levels. Even though the police talked to all the neighbors, I would be out there myself, begging, questioning everyone that lived in that community for any information they may have!! Poor Little Lisa, I pray you didn't suffer. :heartbeat::heartbeat:

Didn't she say something to the affect of "our daughter is missing, the last thing we are going to do is talk about it" ?? Why wouldn't she ask the boys what they heard? The excuse was 'to specifically not put them thru any more'" or some such... why NOT talk about it with the boys, with the drinking buddy, with Jeremy?? I seriously cannot comprehend how ANYONE buys this BS, I just can't.
:moo:

 

[Whisperer]

The VERY first thing the parent would do is ask the children what they heard or saw. DB doesn't want the answer, just like she didn't want to look in the backyard afraid of what she may find. She lives in the state of denial and has cindy anthony as a neighbor.

 

[cityslick]

DB has to be guilty because of at least one lie: She said she never asked the boys if they heard anything that night!!:banghead: What mother, or father, would not ask their children what they had heard the night their baby sister went missing! Dear God!

I'm confused when you say it's a lie. Do you really think she did ask the boys if they heard BL and is lying when she said she didn't? You know, DB said that in that interview, but what about JI? Did JI question the boys? I don't remember that question ever being posed to him.

The other thing I see is one side saying that you need to be careful how your treat information from minors (the boys) as it's often very unreliable but at the same time the parents are criticized for not asking the boys if and when they heard BL, as if that all of a sudden becomes reliable information.

Finally, this thought process that DB has to be guilty simply based off of actions she did or did not do seems like a fallacy to me but that's just my opinion. I do wonder sometimes if by some miracle it turns out that BL is found alive if that truly will be celebrated or will some folks still be sore over the fact that DB didn't turn out to the monster they thought she was.

 

[Donjeta]

It depends on the age of the child and what the question is imo. Children may be able to tell you what they saw and what happened but I don't have much faith in their ability to tell the time reliably, report timelines and confirm they saw someone at six o'clock for the last time. A few years also mean a lot in that age. There is a difference between a four year old and a ten year old too.

The reason why strikes people as odd that if a missing child's parent says she didn't ask and didn't discuss the child's disappearance with X people is because it seems like the natural response would be to go through the events over and over again desperately trying to find clues, something that was overlooked, to find the child.

It's got nothing to do with the perceived reliability of the information from persons X imo. Anybody can say something helpful, and the best chance of getting anything would be from the people who were in that home. Even if not, many parents would be hoping against hope and trying to think of something, anything, any little thing that would help, pick everybody's brain hoping somebody's got the last clue.

Guilty persons not discussing the events with friends and family would be more understandable since they already know what happened and may be afraid of saying something that may come back to bite them later.

I think it's a bit insulting to imply that people want Lisa to be dead just to be right about DB.

 

[Melon]

I'm confused when you say it's a lie. Do you really think she did ask the boys if they heard BL and is lying when she said she didn't? You know, DB said that in that interview, but what about JI? Did JI question the boys? I don't remember that question ever being posed to him.

The other thing I see is one side saying that you need to be careful how your treat information from minors (the boys) as it's often very unreliable but at the same time the parents are criticized for not asking the boys if and when they heard BL, as if that all of a sudden becomes reliable information.

Finally, this thought process that DB has to be guilty simply based off of actions she did or did not do seems like a fallacy to me but that's just my opinion. I do wonder sometimes if by some miracle it turns out that BL is found alive if that truly will be celebrated or will some folks still be sore over the fact that DB didn't turn out to the monster they thought she was.

My statement about the children was more from a LE perspective than DB asking the boys anything. If you co-mingle individual reasoning into an entire group i.e. "one side" like you have, you are going to have a mishmash of ideas and some of those will conflict. My thought process and reasoning are my own, people should not apply them to anyone else's statements, even if I agree with someone on a particular subject.

I do criticize DB for not questioning the children if she didn't. I do criticize her for keeping the boys away from LE for so long for that second interview. Any useful info they could provide that could be verified somehow could have slipped away by allowing their memories to degrade. DB's behavior is counter-intuitive of what one would expect from someone who has a child go missing. That invites criticism.

 

[4Jacy]

It depends on the age of the child and what the question is imo. Children may be able to tell you what they saw and what happened but I don't have much faith in their ability to tell the time reliably, report timelines and confirm they saw someone at six o'clock for the last time. A few years also mean a lot in that age. There is a difference between a four year old and a ten year old too.

The reason why strikes people as odd that if a missing child's parent says she didn't ask and didn't discuss the child's disappearance with X people is because it seems like the natural response would be to go through the events over and over again desperately trying to find clues, something that was overlooked, to find the child.

It's got nothing to do with the perceived reliability of the information from persons X imo. Anybody can say something helpful, and the best chance of getting anything would be from the people who were in that home. Even if not, many parents would be hoping against hope and trying to think of something, anything, any little thing that would help, pick everybody's brain hoping somebody's got the last clue.

Guilty persons not discussing the events with friends and family would be more understandable since they already know what happened and may be afraid of saying something that may come back to bite them later.

I think it's a bit insulting to imply that people want Lisa to be dead just to be right about DB.

Donjeta, thank you. You answered Cityslick post to me perfectly. I also find it insulting, and most people here will agree I'm sure, that we want Lisa to be found dead to prove DB is a monster. That is not who we are and it's not what WS is about.

 

[cityslick]

It depends on the age of the child and what the question is imo. Children may be able to tell you what they saw and what happened but I don't have much faith in their ability to tell the time reliably, report timelines and confirm they saw someone at six o'clock for the last time. A few years also mean a lot in that age. There is a difference between a four year old and a ten year old too.

The reason why strikes people as odd that if a missing child's parent says she didn't ask and didn't discuss the child's disappearance with X people is because it seems like the natural response would be to go through the events over and over again desperately trying to find clues, something that was overlooked, to find the child.

It's got nothing to do with the perceived reliability of the information from persons X imo. Anybody can say something helpful, and the best chance of getting anything would be from the people who were in that home. Even if not, many parents would be hoping against hope and trying to think of something, anything, any little thing that would help, pick everybody's brain hoping somebody's got the last clue.

Guilty persons not discussing the events with friends and family would be more understandable since they already know what happened and may be afraid of saying something that may come back to bite them later.

I think it's a bit insulting to imply that people want Lisa to be dead just to be right about DB.

I didn't say they want her dead but I do believe that some are so adamant, so convinced in one way of thinking that it's inconceivable to the point of impossibility that another way is possible. Lets face it, as the mods have pointed out recently, this forum has become less about Lisa Irwin and more about Deborah Bradley and critiques/judgements about her.

Ask yourself this. If BL was found alive and returned, how many do you think would still hold DB accountable as partially the cause of going missing due to her being drunk?

JMO

 

[Donjeta]

No, you didn't say people want her dead and murdered but that is implied if finding her alive and well isn't a cause for celebration and if people are sore that someone is less of a monster they imagined.

What is the cause for Lisa disappearing in your scenario? Is it a given that the caretaker being drunk wasn't a contributing factor?

All the parents who get drunk out of their minds and pass out while solely responsible for several children including sick babies should be held accountable for that even if nothing bad happens to the children as a consequence. If you can't stay conscious get a babysitter. But that's just MOO.

 

[Little Ol Me]

DB has to be guilty because of at least one lie: She said she never asked the boys if they heard anything that night!!:banghead: What mother, or father, would not ask their children what they had heard the night their baby sister went missing! Dear God!

Was she lying, or misleading.....
In a Today show interview, about 2 weeks after Lisa was reported missing, when ask about what the boys may have heard or seen, she answered...
"They heard noises, ...."
So DB or JI. did ask them about what they heard. We know that they, or one of the boys, heard clicking or tapping sounds.
DB goes on to say, when answering that question, "I have not sat them down and talked to them about it, speciffally, not to put them through anything more.
I can thing of several reasons why she would have said that on national tv, at that particular time.

 

[norest4thewicked]

If Lisa was found alive, I would come here and apologize for thinking the way that I have. I would admit I was wrong about everything. I have absolutely no problem with that and have had to admit I was wrong more times in my life than I can count. It's a childish and mean spirited person who would feel that anyone wants Lisa to be dead so that they can be "right". I can't even imagine anyone feeling that way.

 

[cityslick]

No, you didn't say people want her dead and murdered but that is implied if finding her alive and well isn't a cause for celebration and if people are sore that someone is less of a monster they imagined.

What is the cause for Lisa disappearing in your scenario? Is it a given that the caretaker being drunk wasn't a contributing factor?

All the parents who get drunk out of their minds and pass out while solely responsible for several children including sick babies should be held accountable for that even if nothing bad happens to the children as a consequence. If you can't stay conscious get a babysitter. But that's just MOO.

If it comes to light that BL was truly abducted then I think that DB should be thought of like every other innocent parent who has had their child go missing, regardless of the circumstances. JMO

 

[RANCH]

If Deborah is guilty, why hasn't she been arrested?

Do you believe LE has a lack of evidence? Do you think they need to find Lisa before they can move forward? How big of a role is the benefactor and their team playing in Deborah being a free woman? How much power do they really have---or are we mistaking TV air time for power/influence?

(BTW, if you think an intruder is responsible, feel free to comment too.)

It's been a year and a half since Lisa Irwin disappeared. If Deborah Bradley is guilty the only reason why she has not been arrested is because of a lack of evidence. In the past people have said that LE is waiting on forensic tests to come back or LE is "putting their ducks in a row" before making an arrest.

I think that the time has past for any of those things to take place.

The lack of an arrest says to me that there is a lack of evidence against anyone, including a stranger who may have abducted Lisa.

I'm afraid that this case has gone cold. Hopefully something will come up soon that will "break" this case and bring it to a satisfactory conclusion.