Interviews Lisa's Parents Good Morning America, Fox, The Today Show 10/17/2011 #2

[STEADFAST]

http://video.insider.foxnews.com/v/1222193477001/sneak-peek-lisa-irwins-

..in her sneak peek---megyn kelly also mentions the cell phones.

--the family says those phones were under restricted service

--they hadn’t paid their bill, so weren’t allowed to make outgoing calls.

--they believe the police aren't being truthful about the alleged 2:30 a.m. call since the phone couldn't make an outgoing call anyway.

( so why the big deal about reprogramming phones that weren't able to make calls anyway? )

I've heard of land lines having restricted service like that for unpaid bills. You only pay on land lines when you make a call not when your receive one. But cell phones? You pay whether you make the call or receive it -- you're paying for the air time. Cell phones are shut off both ways for non-payment. They might retain 911 capabilities but they wouldn't receive calls.

Also, who starts reprogramming phones when they're so drunk they are passing out?

 

[Pinkhammer]

Who is MK?

Her interview was very good . Amazing the inconsistencies when compared to Judge Jeannine's interview a few days ago.

The story is constantly changing.

Not good for the parents' credibility.

 

[Mish]

I think that LE would have done that don't you? I can't imagine not doing it.

Unless they knew the phones were "dead"; can't recall- did the parents say phones were lined up being charged, or had been fully charged?

I'm forever leaving my phone on until it dies, so calling it is worthless for me. Just wondering if that might be the issue in this case?

ETA- just remembered, if the phone "pinged", would that not mean it WAS turned on and had at least some battery life left at that time?

 

[katydid23]

:waitasec: How do you call it if you don't have it???

They have a landline and JI has a work cell.

 

[angeleleven]

The more I think and read, the more I feel like Lisa was accidentally overdosed with cold medicine so that mom could party without being bothered. Parents do this. I think it happens in a whole lot of households. The babies usually don't die, but maybe mom gave her a dose AFTER she had to much wine and gave her too much.

I guess if the mom doesn't remember anything, she very well could have given Lisa medicine, then kept giving her medicine.....not remembering that she already gave her medicine.....ending in a result of overdose.

 

[yllek]

She herself said she was drunk. The media didn't pull THAT out of thin air...she said so. No one is "speculating" on that little piece of the puzzle.

Yep. Drunk enough to possibly have blacked out. No debate about it - straight from the horse's mouth.

Funny that Wild Bill has since said Debbi's definition of "drunk" may be different from others. I think if you believe it's possible you blacked out after excessive drinking, it's safe to say you're drunk by any definition! MOO.

 

[Abby Normal]

My opinion (for what it's worth) is that once again the media is in a feeding frenzy and it getting everyone worked up.

We don't know if DB told LE about her drinking that night. We know that DB told the media, but LE did not tell the media.

We don't know for certain how much DB drank that night, or how intoxicated she was. We also don't know if the cops have the answers to these questions.

We don't know if there is any truth to whether burnt clothes were found, or if the cell phone pinged at 2:30am. We know that DB says that the interviewer told her (possibly showed her) these things.

We don't know what she told LE about the times she checked on the baby. Since the friend was there till 10:30, she could have just said she checked because she KNOWS Lisa had not yet been kidnapped.

We don't know what her body language is telling us. Just reading the forums you can see that about half think she was flippant or annoyed. The other half thing she was concentrating and seemed self-conscious. Half of us are wrong.

We don't know why LE bumped up their search today. It could be due to the interview this morning, or it could be that they got a relevant tip, OR it could be to try and psych out the parents.

We don't know how big her wineglasses were, how much alcohol content was in the wine, how much she normally drinks, whether she normally drinks on weekends, whether she and the neighbor routinely sat around drinking, etc.

In other words, we are speculating on a whole lot of stuff. And some of this is big. I personally have no reason to NOT believe the mom yet. But Fox news said that LE didn't know about the drinking. Now we find out that Fox doesn't REALLY know if LE knows about the drinking or not. That right there was about to change my opinion. If LE was lied to that's a big deal. If DB told them upfront, that night, then the drinking is not necessarily a big deal.

On this note, I was thinking today- has there ever been a case like this where almost all the incriminating information that fueled public speculation of guilt came from the parent herself to the media- yet that same parent withstood hours of interrogation w/o confessing?

I've seen the opposite, but not this. That said, I'm not as well-versed on various cases as many of you are.


I can't remember one like it.

 

[nursebeeme]

Yes, I guess we cant call her an alcoholic because we do not know this, but I can firmly say that her drinking IS a problem...her baby "disappeared" while she was intoxicated.

bbm... just using your post to point this out: we can discuss her drinking but we don't need to be calling her an alcoholic when that is not known..

great post joyless:rocker:

 

[Karmaa]

That pretty much sews it up for me. The only reason you would not call these phones is if you KNEW where they were.

How would they call the phones? They claim the phones were stolen and had no home phone. LE probably told them not to call the phones. I would imagine that if there was actually an answer, LE would want to have all the equipment up and ready to ping it.

I don't think this is a red flag.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

She herself said she was drunk. The media didn't pull THAT out of thin air...she said so. No one is "speculating" on that little piece of the puzzle.

I think what she is saying is DB could be lying about being drunk.

 

[21merc7]

They did not call the phones b/c they were stolen. What is the point in trying if they are stolen? You would not hear it ring.

Wouldn't you think the police might try to see if a perp answered one?

 

[powayparent]

I've heard of land lines having restricted service like that for unpaid bills. You only pay on land lines when you make a call not when your receive one. But cell phones? You pay whether you make the call or receive it -- you're paying for the air time. Cell phones are shut off both ways for non-payment. They might retain 911 capabilities but they wouldn't receive calls.

But a restricted phone will redirect an outgoing call to customer service, so perhaps what LE knows is that that a call was attempted in the early a.m.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

How does she know where she left the cell phones if she was drunk?

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I'm glad I hopped off the fence about JI yesterday, because when I heard him say that this has brought the two of them closer, I really wanted to puke.

Your wife gets plastered while the sole adult in charge of 3 small children, and your baby is missing, and this makes you feel CLOSER to her?! WTH?!

 

[lonetraveler]

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2011/10/1...-questions-caused-her-to-fail-polygraph-test/

• The mother of three also admitted that police told her she failed a polygraph test administered after the 10-month-old’s disappearance on the basis of one question.
“[It was], ‘do i know where she’s at’?” she said.
Following the polygraph failure, Bradley told police that it was ‘not possible’ that she knew her daughter’s whereabouts and was concealing them from police.

 

[Patty G]

Her interview was very good . Amazing the inconsistencies when compared to Judge Jeannine's interview a few days ago.

The story is constantly changing.

Not good for the parents' credibility.

O/T Well, she is and she is NOT as she made a major mistake last week announcing that the prosecutor was going to speak on the Baby Lisa case and it was the prosecutor for a Bishop being charged.

 

[Pinkhammer]

On this note, I was thinking today- has there ever been a case like this where almost all the incriminating information that fueled public speculation of guilt came from the parent herself to the media- yet that same parent withstood hours of interrogation w/o confessing?

I've seen the opposite, but not this. That said, I'm not as well-versed on various cases as many of you are.


I can't remember one like it.

The JonBenet Ramsey case comes to mind.

 

[CN2Souls]

I'm glad I hopped off the fence about JI yesterday, because when I heard him say that this has brought the two of them closer, I really wanted to puke.

Your wife gets plastered while the sole adult in charge of 3 small children, and your baby is missing, and this makes you CLOSER to her?! WTH?!

Smells allot like Ron Cummings and Misty....

 

[Pinkhammer]

O/T Well, she is and she is NOT as she made a major mistake last week announcing that the prosecutor was going to speak on the Baby Lisa case and it was the prosecutor for a Bishop being charged.

Whatta mistake-a to make-a!

 

[angeleleven]

They did not call the phones b/c they were stolen. What is the point in trying if they are stolen? You would not hear it ring.

Wouldn't you think the police might try to see if a perp answered one?

I call my phone a lot of times when I can't find it. Sometimes I misplace it or leave it in my purse....True, if they were stolen, that wouldn't help.