Discussion in 'Lisa Irwin' started by momtective, Oct 20, 2011.
I thought DB said they could not make outgoing calls?
Exactly. Why charge cell phones you can't use?
This time I have heard either of these as facts...do we know whether these 2 statements are facts or spectulation?
Heard that she was loading the numbers from the old phones into the used phone that she had gotten Sunday from JI's parents. The phones would still need to be charged in order to access the phone books on the phones.
In case an intruder wants to restore service and make a call or text from it later that night? :innocent:
This is another thing that puzzled me. DB stated that the phones were turned off for non-payment and that you could call in on them but not call out.
I know you can call 911 from phone where service has been turned off but never heard of the situation DB stated.
Of course I have never had a phone turned off for non payment to know whether that was true or not but sounds weird to me. If a company was going to cut you off I would think it would both incoming and outgoing, 911 excluded.
I also have Sprint and the way they work is if you haven't paid your bill by the due date then 2 days later your service is restricted....meaning you can only call out to the sprint payment center or 911 but no other number and you can still get incoming calls....same with text messages....you cannot send them but can receive them....this restricted service is only for 48 hours to give the customer time to get the bill paid....after 48 hours the phones have no service incoming or outgoing except to sprint payment center and 911. Not sure if this helps or not but thought I would share.
Didn't that used phone have service either? Why would she have needed to program her numbers in it if it didn't work?
This is exactly how it works with TMobile too.
I just have to think the man carrying diaper clad baby down DB street at midnight was Baby Lisa. Right place, right time. It fits. Since cadaver dogs hit at DB bedside, I assume she was deceased.
This may have been a last minute, panic request per DB for the man to get rid of deceased child. In that case, the man was contacted sometime after neighbor left at @10:45-11:40PM to help out. He was most likely at home in bed or watching tv -wearing his white T-shirt. He put on black pants, raced over and took the baby around midnight. Since the last siting of man with baby was 4 miles away @ 4AM by hwy/grave yard... I suspect Baby Lisa remains in that area. DB got rid of phones in early am hours. Text to her cell was to inform her that someone was waiting to meet her to get rid of phones - most likely in the river.
Now, you add in DB changing her story, then acting unconcerned when she announced - I was drunk and may have passed out. As someone said, it was like she was saying F U - no big deal that I was drinking and having adult time while my sick infant goes missing. No remorse, embarrassement, apology, regret... NO TEARS ... when she made this statement. The attitude is not right. Something is wrong with this girl.
I agree. Who does she know that would do that for her? The thing is.... Did DB have any kind of idea when the father was coming home?
The Mystery Man would walk over so that no car could identify him taking routes via wooded walks.
Was she having an affair? Was this a route he was familiar with taking. Did he originally come over with a coat on? Did he feel he had been seen in the coat and light it on fire in a garbage bin?
If leaving the outdoor light on was to indicate to come on over as a neighbor indicated... did that also mean in the middle of the night... when someone she was having an affair with would know to come into the house? He would walk over.
Did this guy come over and somehow the baby gets killed and he leaves with the baby to cover up for both of them? The window and phones are staged to make it look like someone broke in? Family friend so his prints and DNA in the home would not be suspicious.
A man walking with a baby in the middle of the night... at least two completely different witnesses. NOT A COINCIDENCE
More thoughts on "affair man" helping get rid of the baby.
He could drive to an area to park his car and then walk over. So no one notices. A door is left open for him.
Does he panic when he leaves and not grab his coat. Does DB realize he left the coat or shirt etc. and go over the garbage bin and light it on fire to get rid of it?
I also had another thought.... What if the baby is alive... and with somenoe she knows...someone that walked back to their home in the middle of the night with the baby and this whole thing has been done for money... media money...
AND the plan is to have the baby suddenly be dropped off somewhere... when they feel enough money has been made... this person gets a chunk of the money the family makes selling the photos and videos of the baby?
Maybe it is the guy she is having an affair with.... and once the baby is returned... and the story dies down... she dumps the father and takes off with him...
But the dogs hitting is.... NOT GOOD... how long have they lived in that house? Could someone have died in the bedroom before they moved in... and the scent is still there...
I bought a condo and found out the guy had died in the tub....
Interesting. The male witness on the motorcycle was just on GMA and ID's a photo of the already questioned and arrested on another matter "Jersey" as the man he thinks he saw walking with a baby the night of the abduction.
Curiouser and curiouser.
The GMA story says that cadaver dogs will alert on something like feces from a dirty diaper! Can our serach and rescue experts tell us if this is possible with a cadaver dog? Will they alert on a dirty diaper? If so that makes sense. But if not that raises my hinky meter.
I really want to believe the man seen with the diaper clad baby has Baby Lisa and she is well and safe. I'm still on the fence here.
They have stated that cadaver dogs will not alert to any type of dirty diaper. Think about it, cadaver dogs would be alerting all over the place inside and outside everywhere if that were true.
Yes and then the neighbor, LP, who originally said her husband saw the man with the baby and now says she did, too, said the man was tall and thin and his head seemed bald or balding. Neither has described his race.
Then JT said that three "unrelated" witnesses have described the man carrying the baby. Who is the third? Because, if he is talking about the neighbor's husband that is not "unrelated." Is he trying to infer that the person who saw a man walking away from the dumpster fire is another witness?
Did we ever see a picture of Jersey? The LE cleared him. I would be surprised if this was an infant kidnapping by a handyman. It will be interesting to find out who the couple that saw this mystery man picked out of a line up of photos. I am still going with my gut - Mom very involved, possibly Dad too. Anyone else is simply an accomplice. Time line changes, lights on, door open, window open, cell phones taken, failed lie detector test, cadaver dogs hit, F U statement about being drunk and passing out, copycat Fort Bragg baby murder ... I don't buy Mom's story.
See, that may not be true that all three of those phones had no service. What about the one that she had borrowed? Was it a spare phone that had no service or was it a working and up to date (paid) phone that was meant to tide her over until she paid her own bill?
We hear there was:
A broken phone (Her's, with no service for lack of payment?)
Jeremy's Phone (no service for lack of payment)
Borrowed phone (was it active or just an old spare...?)
It has been stated that they did not have SIM cards, so if she wanted to add this borrowed phone to her plan she would have had to do that through her provider. It seems more likely that the family member said, "Here, just use this phone until you get yours working."
There is still the possibility that Mom worked out some kind of arrangement with him (Jersey) or someone else to fake a kidnapping...to get money from media and publishing their story.