MO - Lisa Irwin, 10 months, Kansas City, 4 Oct 2011 - #12

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a court document from 2008 that I would like help decoding/understanding.

irwincustody.jpg


I tried to shrink it so it wouldn't eat up too much space in the thread, what it says is:

(I blacked out the name of the mother of Jeremy's son, as she is not been brought into the case by LE):

Date Filed: 07/17/2008
Location: Clay Case Type: FC CS Admin Order w/ Hrng
Disposition: Dismiss by Ct w/o Prejudice Date of Disposition: 10/21/2009
Judge/Commissioner At Disposition: ROBERTS, SHERRILL PAGE


Link for this:
https://www.courts.mo.gov/casenet/cases/nameSearch.do

Type in "Jeremy Irwin" and for the year type "2008".

So, what does "FC CS Admin Order w/ Hrng" mean? What does "Dismiss by Ct w/o Prejudice" mean? What does the date of disposition (10/21/2009) mean?

Thank you!

Reason for this sleuthing activity: My theory is that JI feared losing custody of his son and so staged this kidnapping with DB to prevent that. This appears to have resulted from an accidental death IMO, as no other motive for the parents is visible to me at this time. They appear to have loved this child. MOO.

:seeya:

FC CS Admin Order w/ Hrng

Family Court: Child Support Administrative Order w/ Hearing.


Jacie answered the dismissal question.

Date of disposition means the day the Judge signed off on the case.

This case was filed by the State for child support. Mom filed other documents that were subsequently dismissed for want of prosecution.
 
MOO...but I am not buying stranger abduction. I agree with donegonecute, just too much to deal with. I would like to see parents administered lie detector test again now that the case has progressed. If my child were missing and I was COMPLETELY in the dark about what happened I would do ANYTHING to help focus LE in right direction. MOO...something is not what they claim....
 
I'm not sure how to stress this more than I already have.:banghead:
Parents don't give up on their children if there's been an accident. They just don't assume the child is beyond help. The parents instinct is to get help,to do CPR as best they can. Even abusive parents will try to get help and then lie about what happened .
Only if the intention was to kill the child ,would the parents then get rid of the body.

I feel so strongly about this that I'm going to put it in my siggie.

I don't know this for sure, because there are many missing children who have not been found; we don't know what the circumstances were in those cases. Some of those children could well have died accidently, overdosed, or some other way and parents reacted badly.
 
Okay, JoCo moratorium! But I just wish some rich family there had paid for a baby Lisa to raise as their own, after, I don't know, fertility problems maybe. Too close to home for a destination, it's true, and thus unlikely, but it would mean the child is still alive. So maybe somewhere that's the case and the baby was taken to be raised by another.

A rich family is much more likely to go for legal adoption, not kidnapping.
 
Perhaps the police did not initially believe there was truth to the kidnapping theory....but doesn't the fact that they did a reenactment of the kidnapping show that they now they may believe it could be true?
 
Perhaps the police did not initially believe there was truth to the kidnapping theory....but doesn't the fact that they did a reenactment of the kidnapping show that they now they may believe it could be true?

That could very well be what's going on, however, I just think that someone within the family has more info that they're giving, or the police have more info than they are releasing. I can't figure out why they'd be in Edwardsville. I guess it could have been a tip that they were following up on and found nothing during that search.
 
Perhaps the police did not initially believe there was truth to the kidnapping theory....but doesn't the fact that they did a reenactment of the kidnapping show that they now they may believe it could be true?

I don't necessarily agree with that. IMO, LE has to explore every option whether they think that is what happened or not. Since they don't KNOW what happened, they have to explore every possibility. And, they could have done a re-enactment to prove that it *couldn't* have happened the way it has been suggested. Who knows. Oh, to be a fly on the LE wall.....
 
Stop!! lol It's not fair to lump us all together. :) Our schools are awesome, and there are "normal" areas in the county. Sadly, what most people see if the snots and the problems they cause.


Aww...wasn't trying to make you feel outted here.

Just playful banter for the most part. Would it help if I said I live close to Independence Ave? We all know what the rumor mill is about that! ha ha
 
You see, not everyone is rich in JOCO. That's the myth. I do have many friends that live way beyond their means, but that's also something you see everywhere. We can only hope that someone is raising Lisa as their own, but I just don't think that's what's going on. Unfortunately.

I am in my "Fried Green Tomatoes" stage of life and I just don't care. :) I was raised in the Dotte, so maybe that's why. We moved for the schools and don't regret that decision.

Yeah, I don't either (sigh). One can dream though. Anything to think the child might still be alive.

o/t you can razz me about being an "09-er" for many years - it's the ritzy zip code in San Antonio (78209) which is a lot like JoCo; except I was middle class (or lower!) so I know there are all sorts, everywhere.
 
If someone is trying to pass of a very large 10 month old (most people would probably guess her age closer to 18 months) for a new adoption and the adoptees don't know she was stolen and don't care that she's not an infant, then why not adopt out of the foster system? If you are willing to adopt a baby that isn't a newborn, then there are plenty of easier options out there than hooking up w/some shady adoption agency that is selling stolen babies. Right?

Maybe I'm just very naive as far as black market babies go.

But they wouldn't have to give her true age. Claim she is 12 months to try to avoid suspicion.
 
It's not hard to cover a kid's mouth and take them out. Also, some kids may keep on sleeping, even if lifted. And some kids may not cry if a stranger woke and picked them up. Didn't the mom say Lisa is very friendly and will go to anyone?


Hi gitana1 ! I agree that some children may NOT cry when picked up "in the middle of the night" ... BUT those 3 missing cell phones ... why steal the 3 cell phones that just "happened" to be sitting on the counter ?

An "intruder" has to be CERTAIN that the 10 month old does not CRY and CERTAIN that those 3 cell phones do not RING.

IMO ... it's a lot to do to keep a baby's mouth covered and pick up those 3 phones, put them in your pockets, and get out a house with NO ONE seeing or hearing you.

MOO ...
 
MOO ... I was hoping it made some kind of sense - lol ... I have tried to give the parents the "benefit of the doubt" as well ... but IMO, nothing "fits".

And as far as the intruder, if the intruder came in and out of the same window and took only the Baby, a big MAYBE an "IDI" ... but those 3 cell phones that are missing from the home don't point to an "intruder" IMO ...

I wish we had more info from LE, which makes me believe that LE KNOWS what "most likely" happened ... and IMO, I don't think LE believes the "intruder theory".
I just hope they find Baby Lisa soon !

MOO ...

BBM. I really agree with you here. I'm afraid LE knows exactly what happened and that is why we aren't seeing a reward offered or hearing many details that could help in finding Lisa. I'm also afraid that "reinactment" yesterday was simply to disporove the intruder theory for a future court date. From the screen cap I saw the "perp" was requiring help to get in the window so they either proved that 2 people were there for the abduction or that it simply didn't happen as reported/thought. It is unbelievable enough that ONE person took this baby and left NO trace of themself but TWO? Even I can't buy that.
 
Perhaps the police did not initially believe there was truth to the kidnapping theory....but doesn't the fact that they did a reenactment of the kidnapping show that they now they may believe it could be true?

The re-enactment indicates to me they were attempting to rule out or include the window entrance as a possibility. I would think, however, it would have been done earlier rather than several days after the fact; therefore it appears it was mainly to document how unlikely this scenario was.
 
I would think that would be true. Or at least a private adoption through a doctor or attorney.

Adoption isn't cheap but if the family is rich there is no need for them to kidnap a child when they can adopt one.
 
I know we have to explore all theories but remember... many times the simplest answer is the right one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
85
Guests online
3,496
Total visitors
3,581

Forum statistics

Threads
592,284
Messages
17,966,625
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top