‘Mother hen’ to media villain: The life of Debbie Bradley - Kansas City Star 11/5/11

[cowtowner]

She begged God, the police, the judge and anyone else who could help her until her baby was returned to her. JMO

Did she do this on camera every time for all the world to witness and verify that she was doing so suitably?

The point stands, the parents of this missing girl have been on camera begging for the return of their daughter. Whether or not they have done subsequent begging of God, police, or anyone else is (1) unknown to us and (2) something they shouldn't have to do publicly to anyone's satisfaction.

Frankly, the way some people have been judging them based on some arbitrary and subjective standards, it's just as likely that if they were still begging on camera people would be saying "see, look at the histrionics! These attention *advertiser censored*! They did it!"

 

[cowtowner]

A gazillion if that is what it takes until Baby Lisa is found! MOO

Odd that some say she's likely to be guilty because she's not publicly begging enough, and others say she's likely to be guilty because she's got "Histrionic Disorder."

 

[Desdemona]

And the comparisons between JI/DB and Hitler and Bundy are appropriate based on?????

Bundy was a serial killer, guilty of raping and murdering many people. JI/DB are two lower-middle class kids who may or may not have accidentally or purposely injured, killed, or disposed of their baby . . . once.

I'm sorry, but the level of criminal sophistication between Bundy and JI/DB isn't even close. Much less using a genocidal maniac as an example.

Just respectfully pointing out that IMO no one here was comparing Baby Lisa's parents, nor their level of sophistication, to Bundy or Hitler.

IMO the OP's implication seemed to be that if DB had anything to confess, she would have already done so during the limited LE questioning she consented to.

Bundy and Hitler were then brought up as infamous and obvious examples to refute the (IMO illogical) inference that a person's refusal to continue answering questions or to confess is evidence of innocence.

JMO

(ETA: Actually, Bundy did partially confess... AFTER his convictions.)

 

[MissJames]

BEM: Not to go OT, but since you brought it up....JT now makes excuses for Vandersloot, saying he went off the deep end after years of being falsely accused of killing Natalie Hollaway.

Now he's doing what his job is to do, make excuses for his client, even when they are absurd and have no basis in reality or validity.

Edited to reiterate this post has to do with the mother hen article in that it speaks to cooperation and lawyer's statements concerning their cooperation and LE demands.

I think defense attorneys should protect their clients, insure that their rights are upheld ,point out any positives in their character and fight like hell if they are convinced their client is innocent.
I don't think they should make up stories ,often called lies or theories.Go ahead, make sure your murdering client receives fair treatment,but lie to get them off? To me that's aiding and abetting. JMO and I'm sure plenty disagree with me,but Justice doesn't require you sell your soul. Justice doesn't mean murderers go free.

 

[cityslick]

I think defense attorneys should protect their clients, insure that their rights are upheld ,point out any positives in their character and fight like hell if they are convinced their client is innocent.
I don't think they should make up stories ,often called lies or theories.Go ahead, make sure your murdering client receives fair treatment,but lie to get them off? To me that's aiding and abetting. JMO and I'm sure plenty disagree with me,but Justice doesn't require you sell your soul. Justice doesn't mean murderers go free.

I recently watched the Lincoln Lawyer and in one scene, the cop asks the lawyer how he sleeps at night. The lawyer brought up a case where he was defending a client of a charge and the prosecution decided to tack on two more additional charges (because they were greedy). That was why he was a defense lawyer, to prevent stuff like that from happening.

It's from a movie, but I would be surprised if all lawyers think like this.

 

[stilettos]

Did she do this on camera every time for all the world to witness and verify that she was doing so suitably?

The point stands, the parents of this missing girl have been on camera begging for the return of their daughter. Whether or not they have done subsequent begging of God, police, or anyone else is (1) unknown to us and (2) something they shouldn't have to do publicly to anyone's satisfaction.

Frankly, the way some people have been judging them based on some arbitrary and subjective standards, it's just as likely that if they were still begging on camera people would be saying "see, look at the histrionics! These attention *advertiser censored*! They did it!"

I believe that analysis of the parents behavior is valid. Body language, whether they are or are not cooperating fully with LE and yes, even their media appearances asking and pleading (or not) for the safe return of their child are fair game. As are paid media exclusives, parading your other children before the camera, etc, etc. JMO

I do not know if DB has histrionic personalty disorder as I am not a psychiatrist. I do find her behavior puzzling regarding her defense of her "adult" "black out" time.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

I too am from an LE family and I agree with a lot of what you said. There is every reason to believe that KCPD wants to find Lisa, and those who are involved. And, to be fair, the reason these defense strategies of deflecting blame onto LE work is because they are based in real life.

Let's acknowledge that these members of the LE community that you righty say should not be in the profession have been responsible for too many people who have lost their lives and/or rotted away in prison for crimes they were accused and convicted of yet did not commit. This includes kidnapping, murder (WM3 anyone?), sex crimes against children (a man in the KC area (not KC proper) was recently awarded a multi-million-dollar award because he was wrongly convicted of a sex crime against minors).

Is this the norm? Absolutely not.

Are these terribly devastating consequences perpetrated by the very members of LE you appropriately say should not be in the profession? Yes.


The fact is these VERY VERY few cases of poor LE judgment can and do wreak devastating consequences for those wrongly accused, the department and the community.

Considering my family LE member trained investigators, in part, on how to avoid the investigative tunnel vision - I have to acknowledge that it does exist. I personally don't easily dismiss that.

Yes, it does exist as you said, "VERY VERY few cases of poor LE judgment." So add to that very low statistic (rogue investigators/LE) another one of very low probability; the tiny percentage of stranger abduction of infants from a home. The likelihood that both occurred in the same case is even harder to conjure up. The stats, alone, would be minuscule; wouldn't they?

 

[cityslick]

I believe that analysis of the parents behavior is valid. Body language, whether they are or are not cooperating fully with LE and yes, even their media appearances asking and pleading (or not) for the safe return of their child are fair game. As are paid media exclusives, parading your other children before the camera, etc, etc. JMO

I do not know if DB has histrionic personalty disorder as I am not a psychiatrist. I do find her behavior puzzling regarding her defense of her "adult" "black out" time.

So it's your opinion you should be in front of the camera every day?

 

[cityslick]

Yes, it does exist as you said, "VERY VERY few cases of poor LE judgment." So add to that very low statistic (rogue investigators/LE) another one of very low probability; the tiny percentage of stranger abduction of infants from a home. The likelihood that both occurred in the same case is even harder to conjure up. The stats, alone, would be minuscule; wouldn't they?

It's only a tiny percentage (of stranger abductions) until it happens to you, then it's 1 to 1. Elisabeth Smarts parents would probably agree.

 

[MissJames]

And just maybe they're afraid of having those boys re-interviewed because of fear they could reveal other details that might indicate a pattern of neglect or other dangerous conduct in the Irwin home. Conduct that could lead to the boys being removed from DB's and JI's custody.

Those kids are old enough to know something is terribly wrong, and that their baby sister is missing. As you said, they've already been questioned once and didn't fall apart. As for evaluating what information the boys could provide, since the parents aren't trained investigators, wouldn't it make sense to leave it to professionals to determine what might be helpful?
I'm aware we aren't talking about Casey Anthony here, but IMO, there are more similarities to the Anthony case than there are dissimilarities.

IMO, LE appears to be running parallel investigations. While they remain focused on getting more information from the parents, they're also checking out other leads and tips. And I've seen no evidence that they are ignoring any leads that do not wind a path to Deborah.

What disturbs me most: the parents seeming unwillingness to do anything other than cover their own backsides.

I agree.I think they have to run parallel investigations for a couple of reasons. They have to follow every lead to find that baby,wherever that takes them,but IF the parents are eventually charged with something ,LE needs to show they were able to rule other scenarios out.
WE might be focused on the parents,but that doesn't mean LE is . I heard the FOX report this afternoon about MW and Jersey and the phone call. JMO

 

[stilettos]

So it's your opinion you should be in front of the camera every day?

It is my opinion that cameras in the face should be the least of the parents concern. Their daughter's fate should take precedence. Damage to myself be dam*ed, I would take it. I am of the opinion that the child should come first.

 

[Paige SC]

It's only a tiny percentage (of stranger abductions) until it happens to you, then it's 1 to 1. Elisabeth Smarts parents would probably agree.

I don't think the Smart's went into hiding and lawyered up and/or or refused to cooperate with police, either. Neither did Mark Lunsford or Adam Walsh or Mark Klaas a whole host of other innocent parents.

 

[annalia]

I think defense attorneys should protect their clients, insure that their rights are upheld ,point out any positives in their character and fight like hell if they are convinced their client is innocent.
I don't think they should make up stories ,often called lies or theories.Go ahead, make sure your murdering client receives fair treatment,but lie to get them off? To me that's aiding and abetting. JMO and I'm sure plenty disagree with me,but Justice doesn't require you sell your soul. Justice doesn't mean murderers go free.

My bolding

But sadly that's what it's become, especially in high profile cases. It's all about the "win". Reasonable doubt and how to plant it to get that win is the name of the game. That and the media spotlight which might get them another high profile case. JT, in my book, is a perfect example. That's what keeps him in suits worth thousands.

JMHO

 

[menmo]

Did she do this on camera every time for all the world to witness and verify that she was doing so suitably?

The point stands, the parents of this missing girl have been on camera begging for the return of their daughter. Whether or not they have done subsequent begging of God, police, or anyone else is (1) unknown to us and (2) something they shouldn't have to do publicly to anyone's satisfaction.

Frankly, the way some people have been judging them based on some arbitrary and subjective standards, it's just as likely that if they were still begging on camera people would be saying "see, look at the histrionics! These attention *advertiser censored*! They did it!"

You know it isn't even the not begging for Lisa every day that bothers me the most. I can only imagine how hard it would be to do that but I know I would do it. I'd have to for my own sanity. The part that upsets me most, though, is the fact that after DB being what I consider very irresponsible, is that she and JI hook up with an attorney that IMO is not promoting getting to the bottom of what has happened to Baby Lisa and doesn't seem concerned with getting Baby Lisa back! If they would fire their attorney and get one that is pro Baby Lisa and finding what's happened, while protecting their rights I could probably start to look at this a little differently. Yes, they've wasted all this time when they could have been showing they cared about Baby Lisa, but instead showed me they care about themselves. I used to feel bad for JI but no more. Man up!
MOO

 

[MissJames]

So it's your opinion you should be in front of the camera every day?

It is mine.
On camera , LE on speed dial, calling in TES, KlassKids, any local searchers and tracking dog handlers,plastering posters across the country,facebook page updated constantly,command post in my house, media my new best friends.
I would be seeking out other parents who experienced something similar,getting therapy for my kids and keeping the story in the news every day . Why take the chance of the public forgetting or moving on?

I don't mean this as a criticism or judgement,so please ,don't (anyone) take it that way,but do you really have a grasp of what it would do to a mother to have her baby suddenly ripped from her,not knowing what was happening to her?

She doesn't know if Baby Lisa is dead or alive, if she's being raped, hurt , hit.
Is Lisa scared? hungry ? cold? Wouldn't any mother want to spare their child another moment of that? Wouldn't any mother do everything in their power to save their child?

As a parent wouldn't you do anything and everything to get that baby back ? This is not a stolen car .
YES,they should be on camera every day at the very least :maddening:

JMO

 

[Karmaa]

Just respectfully pointing out that IMO no one here was comparing Baby Lisa's parents, nor their level of sophistication, to Bundy or Hitler.

IMO the OP's implication seemed to be that if DB had anything to confess, she would have already done so during the limited LE questioning she consented to.

Bundy and Hitler were then brought up as infamous and obvious examples to refute the (IMO illogical) inference that a person's refusal to continue answering questions is evidence of innocence.

JMO

That was NOT the original point. The original point was that MOST people would have cracked or invoked after that long accusatory interrogation.

Trained LE interviewers are good at what they do. They use very specific psychological tactics to get the suspect to confess (so good that they get FALSE confessions in way too many cases). Not many people can hold up under that kind of pressure. From what both of the parents have said, they were being interviewed by well-trained interviewers, who know how to do it. (Many of the things they said are exactly what LE is taught to do to get a confession, and NO - I am not talking about the "white-trash" comment).

So, in order to proceed LOGICALLY, you would need to find cases of guilty people who didn't confess after 11+ hour interrogation sessions. I doubt if there are many.

And, the examples of Bundy and Hitler were pretty ridiculous. First of all because they were both terribly mentally ill, secondly because they were both people who enjoyed killing and did it often, and thirdly because I am pretty sure that Hitler didn't undergo an 11+ hour interrogation by LE about his crimes before he killed himself. I don't remember about Bundy, but the OP said "most" anyway, so I am not going to go research it.

:seeya:

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

It's only a tiny percentage (of stranger abductions) until it happens to you, then it's 1 to 1. Elisabeth Smarts parents would probably agree.

cityslick, I so understand this. That's why it isn't said that it's impossible. But it does not defend the point that a merging of those two small possibilities is the likely explanation of what happened to Baby Lisa. It makes it less likely.

 

[In da Middle]

The first time LE was at the house with the dog, DB & JI gave verbal consent on what rooms they could search. The master bedroom was off limits! This info was on WS early on and I do not know how to track past info like our long time sleuthers.

If there were never consented searches done in the bedroom, how did a dog hit on it prior to the search warrant? :waitasec:The dog hit on it to get the search warrant and all searches prior to the warrant were consented to.

 

[Karmaa]

I believe that analysis of the parents behavior is valid. Body language, whether they are or are not cooperating fully with LE and yes, even their media appearances asking and pleading (or not) for the safe return of their child are fair game. As are paid media exclusives, parading your other children before the camera, etc, etc. JMO

I do not know if DB has histrionic personalty disorder as I am not a psychiatrist. I do find her behavior puzzling regarding her defense of her "adult" "black out" time.

BBM Could you please link information that they have been paid? I haven't see that anywhere. Thanks

 

[MissJames]

My bolding

But sadly that's what it's become, especially in high profile cases. It's all about the "win". Reasonable doubt and how to plant it to get that win is the name of the game. That and the media spotlight which might get them another high profile case. JT, in my book, is a perfect example. That's what keeps him in suits worth thousands.

JMHO

I know, and I'm sure there's good argument for it,but ,like I said,it's selling your soul,IMO.
Any of us might need a defense attorney some day. I'm sure many are ethical and believe in what they are doing,but what we are seeing lately in these cases is not right .