Skip to comments.Baby Lisa's Parents Are Avoiding Our Questions, Say Police As FAA Halts Flights Near Search
Posted on 10/19/2011 6:53:00 AM PDT by truthkeeper
The high-powered New York lawyer hired by an anonymous donor to represent the parents of missing baby Lisa Irwin gave an interview this morning, alongside the family's private investigator, to tout the couple's innocence in spite of recent claims that the mother may have been blackout drunk on the night of the 10-month-old's disappearance.
Federal aviation officials have also stepped into the search, by temporarily restricting flights that go over a wooded area near the Missouri couple's home, where authorities are now searching for the fourth time in hope of clues.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
They must be running a heat seeking mechanism over the site via plane.
Baby Lisa ping. On or off the list, let me know.
I figured they just wanted to keep media helicopters from filming in case they wanted to bring in their own police helicopters.
But I don’t really know anything about it.
—Baby Lisa’s Parents Are Avoiding Our Questions, Say Police...—
Never talk to the cops: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik
I heard on the news this morning that this search is being conducted without their consent, which means they would have had to obtain a search warrant.
I don’t know what to make of this case yet.
The part about the missing cellphones is especially odd. The cops can get the records, so why take the phones when they can be tracked if used? Or maybe they were taken to keep someone from calling police quickly.
I wonder if they can tell a location by pings from those phones, or did someone dump them in a lake? Who knows?
A person here posted that maybe some pictures on the phones could be the reason they were taken. Possibility maybe.
They must have shown some cause to get a search warrant. Hmmnn
I agree, a very strange case.
Maybe to keep track (map) areas covered??
"Joe Tacopina says he would not have taken the case if he had even the slightest hesitation that the parents were involved."
At this point no one knows for sure what the involvement of the parents is, but I don't believe anything Tacopina says.
Or heat of decomposition.
Police to Execute Search Warrant at Baby Lisas Home
A Kansas City Police patrol car sat outside the home of missing baby Lisa Irwins parents overnight to watch over the property while detectives prepared to execute a search warrant that was obtained late Tuesday. A police spokesman said he expected some activity at the house on Wednesday morning.
Authorities have conducted previous searches of the home with the consent of the family, but the fact that they have now sought a warrant could be the latest sign of tension between police and the missing 10-month-olds parents.
A police spokesman said earlier Tuesday that mother Deborah Bradley and father Jeremy Irwin have not sat down for an interview with investigators since October 8 and that there are still some questions detectives have that only the parents can answer. The couples attorney has maintained that they are being cooperative, but he has also criticized some of investigators tactics.
Police spent much of the afternoon Tuesday searching a wooded area near the Irwin homean effort that prompted the FAA to initiate a no-fly zone over the site for several hoursbut Capt. Steve Young told reporters that the lead they were pursuing there ultimately didnt pan out.
“The cops can get the records, so why take the phones when they can be tracked if used?”
Dopey people in a panic who need to explain why they waited to call the police, or who have calls on their phones they don’t want to explain, would ditch the phones. I’ve read in many places that many people who commit crimes are just plain dumb and make mistakes it’s hard for intelligent people to understand.
Anyway, I don’t believe for a second that some bogeyman kidnapped that baby and grabbed three cell phones on his way out.
Only if Mr. Irwin owns the land.
No true. Renters are entitled to refuse to allow the police to search their houses unless the cops have a search warrant.
Exactly...I don't know how Tacopina even had the nerve to spout such nonsense.
Me neither. Didn’t he represent OJ at one time? Or maybe just advocated for him on the legal talking head shows...
I was referring to the forest, not the house. Would a warrant be needed to search the woods, at all, irrespective of ownership?
Oh, got it. I think it depends on whether the woods are part of the property the Irwins are renting. Beyond that, you raise an interesting question about whether you need a warrant to search undeveloped land, regardless of who owns it. I don’t know the answer.
If she had indulged in a few classes of wine no one would think a thing about it - but from something she said in the interview it appears she gets very drunk a lot.
And as I discussed with another freeper - most folks outside of big cities have drivers licenses. We have little to no public transportation and grocery stores/shopping/schools aren't always in walking distance - I don't know any adults who do not have a license. Does anyone know why this woman does not have a license to drive?
I noticed!!! That interview has me convinced that the mother is probably a sociopath and guilty. If that were ME and my baby was still missing I would be a wreck and swearing to quit drinking and whatever else it might take, ANYTHING, forever, if I could just get my baby back. I’d be desperate and ready to trade God my own life for my baby...this woman is NOT behaving like a normal mother! I also thought that the fathers behavior spoke volumes. I think he knows she did it but is lying to himself.
I don’t know quite what to make of this incredibly weird set of circumstances. All I know is that if my baby were missing, I’d be talking to the police every day—if not several times a day.
Well, except you might want to talk to the cops if your baby is missing and you know that you are innocent... that is if you actually want them to find your baby.
“why take the phones when they can be tracked if used?”
Why report your car stolen if it was seen fleeing the scene of a DUI crash?
Thermal imaging can be used to find burials as well as living creatures. There is sometimes a different signature for recent burials than the surrounding area.
My take—Mom wasn’t used to dad being gone in the evenings. Had a number of glasses of wine (as many as 10 by her count). Puts baby in for her bath, passes out drunk while baby is still in bath. Dad comes home. Here’s where we have some of the truth in their story. All the lights in the house were on and the front door is unlocked. Right, because mom never shut the house down, she was passed out. Dad finds baby in the bath, drowned, wakes mom up, both panic. Dad decides to help cover up the death, because they have the other two kids, and he needs her to take care of them. If she goes to jail, who takes care of the other kids? So, they hide the body and the phones, make up a story, and call the cops.
Now, I’m not completely sold on the drowning, but I’d lay good money on something that qualifies as negligent homicide, happening to that baby while mom was passed out drunk.
Yes, something like that could have happened. Very plausible scenario.
I think you could be onto something. Not necessarily a drowning, but some negligence that caused the child’s death is not out of the question.
Thermal imaging and GPR (ground penetrating radar) are two different things.
—Well, except you might want to talk to the cops if your baby is missing and you know that you are innocent... that is if you actually want them to find your baby.—
I’ll have to google that and see how effective they are when not focussed on the parents. My gut tells me they are pretty worthless, other than at finding a body, at which point it’s pretty academic.
You would be surprised at how many mothers in this age range (20-30) think it’s OK to drug their babies so they can have what they call “Mommy time” or “grown-up time” in the evening. I used to follow a grandniece in Texas on Twitter, and her evening routine was to put the kids to bed early (7 p.m.) , open a bottle of wine, and tweet all evening. One evening she fell down the stairs while trying to get a reluctant 4-yr. old to go to bed. She broke her own arm in three places.
After that, an intervention took place, and I think (I hope) the drinking and drugging stopped. This girl was a successful insurance executive by day. Besides the wine, she admitted to taking Ambien and being on Effexor.
Re: her girls—she took them to the doctor at least once a month for “colds” and got prescriptions for meds that would help their congestion, etc. Plus she would add doses of Sudafed.
All so she could have her “Mommy Time.”
Maybe Baby Lisa was drugged in a dose her little body couldn’t take, so that Mommy Deb and her girlfriend could sit on the stoop and consume a gallon of boxed wine.
“Mommy Time” ...indeed!
Obviously, but what I said is about thermal imaging, not ground penetrating radar.
“Only the surface temperature is actually detected, though thermal imaging may be used to detect burials to a certain extent. For example, a decomposing body buried at about 1m is a few degrees warmer than surrounding soil, but greater depths may make detection more difficult.”
Regardless of how effective they usually are, they’re not going to be any more effective if you withhold pertinent information from the investigators.
Please keep me on the baby Lisa ping list! Thanks
Sure...we all know innocent people are never charged with a crime...
There has been nothing reported on the two boys (ages 6 & 8)
What do you suppose they were doing while Mom and the friend were getting drunk? Were they sleeping, watching TV, playing with the baby sister?
Did they open the door while Mom was passed out and baby Lisa walked out of the house? Did they look for her and not tell the mother she was gone because they were afraid of being punished ? Were they playing with the cell phones?
The parents never mentioned the boys being asleep or being roused to ask if they knew anything. Were the boys jealous of the new baby?
—Regardless of how effective they usually are, theyre not going to be any more effective if you withhold pertinent information from the investigators.—
Not true. They may be effective at convicting YOU.
I’m not making a stand here, really. If one of my kids was abducted I’d probably tell them everything they want to know. But I’d tell them EVERYTHING up front. Including the “damning” stuff. Heck, this woman being drunk at the time is a non-starter for me. A lot of people, from time to time, and in the privacy of their own home, and even WITH kids sleeping, will get drunk. It’s irrelevant on its own. She could have been passed out drunk and it wouldn’t matter. Some people sleep hard too. Doesn’t mean they are irresponsible and their irresponsibility led to their child being abducted.
Getting drunk while three children (one being a sick infant) are in your care is totally irresponsible. And she told Megan Kelly she drinks several times a week. There is NO EXCUSE for this! She should at least be charged with child neglect/endangerment.
Some 40 years ago my toddler wandered off into the woods behind the house. Dad working in the front yard, Mom working in the back. Each thought the baby was with the other one.
That was one hair-raising experience. Fortunately, the dog was the culprit - baby had followed it into the woods and then turned it into a game of hide-and-seek. Of course, 40 years ago we did not call the cops - we asked the neighborhood kids to help. We never considered stranger abduction. The dog finally barked when he heard us yelling.
That was 40 years ago - and times were very different.
—Getting drunk while three children (one being a sick infant) are in your care is totally irresponsible.—
Well, first we have to ask, “how drunk”. And it matters.
—And she told Megan Kelly she drinks several times a week.—
Which begs the queestion, does she get DRUNK three times a week.
—There is NO EXCUSE for this!—
What is to be excused?
—She should at least be charged with child neglect/endangerment.—
I live in an area overrun with Southern Baptists that are tea totalers. I live in a dry county. Some of those people would think it was irresponsible to have a glass of wine with dinner. Fortunately, their opinion carries no weight. I’m a bit more forgiving of people than that.
Being a man, I know the heart of man. I know that we ALL take risks on a daily or hourly basis. Some more dangerous than others. I intentionally spun my car out with the eBrake yesterday. I was in my OWN 8 acre recently mowed hayfield and the risk was pretty much non-existent.
Getting “drunk” (not pass out, falling down drunk) while your children sleep is not all that risky. Until I know HOW drunk she was, I’ll reserve judgement.
BTW, I used to come home to a wife who was drunk and asleep every day. I had three daughters. I was never worried for my kids safety because she wasn’t “that” drunk. It takes more than a bottle of wine to make a person dangerous drunk. Frankly, it takes more than a couple of bottles, unless they are driving or operating heavy machinery.
On a side note, that woman divorced me and works in the wine department of a grocery store. :-D
—That was 40 years ago - and times were very different.—
In some ways they are not as different as one would think. I remember when they first started putting kids pictures on milk cartons. I had three young daughters and was concerned about the incredibly high child abduction statistics. Then one day I did some research and discovered that, save one or two kids per state per year, the abductions were done by relatives and, most often, estranged spouses.
I stopped worrying about it.
Megyn Kelly on now and confirming that the mother last checked on Lisa at 6:40 pm. NOT 10:30 pm. It’s not clear when the drinking buddy left and when Mom passed out.
Not discussed - where were the two little boys during this period?