Lisa Irwin - Missing - One Year Later

reply to post by wildtimes


Meh.. Dont waste your time responding to her. All its going to do is derail the thread even more. Let her rant and accuse on her own and ignore her. There is no point in getting a warning / ban from the mods because we were being baited.

Lets move back to on topic and continue from there.


I found the facebook comments interesting that weree just posted. Adds a possible twist, and if true supports the theory i gave you in the U2U.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Yes, and to me, that's the most likely scenario. I've thought of it but didn't dare suggest it here. but again, certainly someone she called would have reported it, wouldn't they?

Or did they just all agree to conspire with her, and hire Mr Fancypants from NYC to get right on it?
Weirdness, that. Very weird.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by gabby2011

 

So then the answer would be no, you cannot provide information to support your accusations that there is incompetence / corruption / lack of doing ones job in the Baby Lisa case.

Nor can you provide proof that their is NOT incompetence / corruption / lack of doing ones job!

What we can do is observe differences, and question those differences! The simple fact remains that baby Lisa HAS NOT BEEN LOCATED, and no one has been charged! Contrasts that to the other child reported missing in Mo, and one notices differences, in the attitudes of the LE involved!

You should go back then and edit your psots where you make those accusations and should refrain from doing it in the future inless you have proof of it.

You also are great at making unsupported claims, when were you planning on editing your unsupported claims?

Ironic though that you get upset when anything occurs to the Erwins yet you refuse to extend the same rights to the police.

Ironic that you get upset at the thought that perhaps the KCPD could have gone about this different and gotten better results...

When you decide to bring real information to the thread instead of derailing it with your accusations and personal attacks, you and dave can have a conversation with each other.

Whom gives you the AUTHORITY to suggest when a member can and can not post?

An interesting little video,



Perhaps this goes to show what KCPD possibly feared in having the dogs recorded?

Originally posted by Dav1d
Nor can you provide proof that their is NOT incompetence / corruption / lack of doing ones job!

Actually everything I have seen would suggest the police are doing their job quite competently. I base that on my experience, training and understanding of how it works.

Originally posted by Dav1d
What we can do is observe differences, and question those differences! The simple fact remains that baby Lisa HAS NOT BEEN LOCATED, and no one has been charged! Contrasts that to the other child reported missing in Mo, and one notices differences, in the attitudes of the LE involved!

Your conviently leaving out the level of cooperation and attitude from the parens in those cases as well.

Originally posted by Dav1d
You also are great at making unsupported claims, when were you planning on editing your unsupported claims?

Actually my claims are supported by the fats and actions of law enforcement to date. Again based on experience, training and my knowledge of how this type of crime works.

Originally posted by Dav1d
Ironic that you get upset at the thought that perhaps the KCPD could have gone about this different and gotten better results...

Actually thats not what upsets me, but its not surprising you and gabby see it that way. What upsets me is when people who dont have a clue about how law enforcement and investigations work constantly make claims and accusations against the police on how bad of a job they are doing for no other reason than they just dont like the police.

You an Gabby have made that position, not liking the police at all, front and center in your posts to date.

If you dont know how law enforcement, the laws that govern it, or investigations work, then how can you competely state something is broke / corrupt / or not working?

Originally posted by Dav1d
Whom gives you the AUTHORITY to suggest when a member can and can not post?

The T and C of this site do when it states a person shall not make any comments / posts that are knowingly false. Since neither of you know what you are talking about, your claims are just that, false, with absolutely nothing to support it, aside from personal attacks and obfuscation.

You are the one who sent me the U2U inviting me into this conversation. You wanted me to review what you were saying to confirm whether or not you were right or wrong. Ironic that when I dont agree with your position, you turn around and attack me and my profession.

If you wnated nothing but a yes man / woman, then stick to gabby.

If you wish to learn how this stuff works, then ask me.

If your only goal was to get a law enforcement officer into the thread for the sole purpose of attacking them, then you are no better than those you accuse of being incometent and corrupt.

reply to post by Dav1d


A few terms to learn -
Federal Government - 1
State Governments- 46
Commonwealth governments - 4

Jurisdiction
established precedents
Federal appeals circuit and impact on local jurisdiction by rulings.

Once you learn about those, feel free to come back and explain how the video you posted is relevant to the baby lisa case.

reply to post by wildtimes

That's NOT backpedaling. That's "keeping an open mind and reserving the right to decide later." Can't have that, now, can we? People who are willing to be educated by experts who by all evidence appear to be genuinely concerned about this little girl, who stretch themselves to tolerate ludicrous assaults, and stretch themselves outside of their COMFORT ZONES to try to see ALL the angles and to be RESPECTFUL.

If only you would have kept an open mind from the beginning wildtimes.. I would have so much more respect for you..you only took that stance of not deciding till all the evidence is in till much later in this thread..while I took that stance from the beginning.

here are some examples of your posts..earlier on..

She looks, IMO, like ignorant, irresponsible trash, and NOT ONE picture of that baby illustrates a "happy baby." Her mother is not a "happy mother" or a healthy person. And she doesn't want the other kids, the older boys, who certainly MUST be aware of what's going on, to be talked to by authorities? Uhn, WHY NOT??

and this is a ^6professional response ^^and outlook on a mother?

My latest idea on this case: That baby was nearly a year old. If she wasn't walking yet, she was really close to it. Was she sleeping in a proper crib? Was the door closed? If she was just on a "cot", and the bedroom and front door were open (not unlocked, actually ajar), she might have crawled out herself, and no one would have noticed with mommy drunk and Junior asleep..... or.... yeah, probably not. That baby is not going to be found alive, I fear. Sucks

Does ^ that seem like someone who has decided to remain "open minded"..?? ^

Hmmm. Okay, giving Dad time to do...what, exactly? Wash out the wine glasses for her? Get rid of the phones? Give the boys a heads up?

Flames shooting up? Wouldn't that happen if a BATTERY was blown up, maybe? A cellular phone battery, or three? And combined with an empty wine box? Which may or may not have been refilled with other things like clothing?

And SHE is an idiot for allowing the media to contact and PAY HER to talk. Disgusting. Again, I wonder how much money she's been offered and received for these "exclusive" interviews? And are they flying her all over the place to do them, or they coming to her home??

I was a psychotherapist, clinical social worker specializing in Children and Families, emphasis on therapy.

have to wonder about a"professional" working in the field of families saying things such as below..

She looks, IMO, like ignorant, irresponsible trash, and NOT ONE picture of that baby illustrates a "happy baby." Her mother is not a "happy mother" or a healthy person.

So, from a clinical psychological POV, this whole family is a big mess. If I were the counselor assigned, I would be looking at the entire system. Deborah is married but has a child with a different man. Her son from her original marriage lives with her. The father of her baby girl is the ex of someone who is in a 'group home.' Doesn't say much for Jeremy's judgment in selecting partners, nor for his knowledge of birth control.

More "professional" attacks against a blended family..as well as very little empathy for people struggling with medical issues as is the mother of jeremy's other son..Thats right wildtimes more accusations against the family.. and because they are blended..and one parent has been out of the picture that's a reason to be so accusatory..which you have been at the beginning.

You're a prime example of someone I would not want working with any family..you're judgement of families that may have problems is concerning ..did you talk about all the families you helped that way?



There are more posts.. but hey.. its obvious you had an open mind all the way through this thread..

reply to post by Dav1d

Why was the media told not to film the FBI dogs?

It was reported earlier in this thread - with a link - the trainers/FBI/Police asked the dogs not be filmed in order not to 'divulge' training techniques and to distract the dogs - so they could perform to the best of their abilities.

peace

reply to post by schmae

BUT last night he wrote..........words to the affect " An accident happened, re: baby Lisa. Deb called 'all the family' asking for help. The family refused and hung up and told her to call the cops. Deb, in desperation called ' the dopers' for help in disposing of body. She was weighted down and thrown in the river' .........

Let me see if I can find those posts. They're out there on FotoBucket, etc.
Honestly, I just don't want to see them. But, I'll look.
Thank you Schmae.

Edit to Add:

I don't know if I'm up for posting the FB quotes from the Uncle.

Maybe I'll take screen shots and post?

Basically the theme is 'Tacopina is a criminal. Deborah was ready to come clean and he convinced her she could get away with it.'

Ahhh helll....

Edit to Add - Again

Ahhh hell again...



peace

reply to post by Xcathdra

The T and C of this site do when it states a person shall not make any comments / posts that are knowingly false. Since neither of you know what you are talking about, your claims are just that, false, with absolutely nothing to support it, aside from personal attacks and obfuscation.

if that is the case , why would you make statements that I said ALL law enforcement is corrupt and incompetent..??

Actually thats not what upsets me, but its not surprising you and gabby see it that way. What upsets me is when people who dont have a clue about how law enforcement and investigations work constantly make claims and accusations against the police on how bad of a job they are doing for no other reason than they just dont like the police.

And what upsets me is that you make the accusations we don't like the police..I can't speak for david.. but I know that is not why I suggest that they could have fouled up..or "someone" in the department is covering up something..

That in NOWAY implies I dislike police.. and I am tired of you labeling me as cop hater when its simply not true.

Quote by "X"

You an Gabby have made that position, not liking the police at all, front and center in your posts to date.

wrong again.. here are some examples of some of my posts..

Quotes by gabby regarding this case.

I hope the truth comes out for the sake of finding the little girl, whether she is dead or alive.

I'm sure the police do a good enough job of suspecting the parents...and maybe with good reason.

I do focus my attention on human trafficking..and have posted , and started threads on it. If I could join a police force to help..I would in a heartbeat,and I'd do it for free...but I don't think they would have any use for someone my age with no background training.

If Debbie broke down.. and confessed it was an accident, I think they need to take into account that she let the police force spend a lot of money and time trying to uncover the truth...and that the tax payers shouldn't be responsible for footing the bills to uncover her lies. That can be said for all criminals who lie, and cost the taxpayers money to uncover the truth.... even the elite.

I really hope that if Debbie is guilty in any way that she gets the encouragement to be honest, and put an end to this fiasco.. and give the people who care about baby Lisa the peace of mind of knowing what has really happened. If she is not, my prayers for baby Lisa as well as her whole family.. and may the truth be revealed soon.

This is just a small example of my posts "X"..and police blame is NOT front and center in all of them..so once again you are misinforming on this thread...I have asked you to read back into my posts before making accusations.. but..no..you felt like you had enough evidence to make false claims about me and continue to do so..

Was that in your police training ?

Just for the record.. I like most cops..especially the ones I have met..but I also know that not all cops are upstanding citizens.. and some are down right nasty...and use the law to play games..and feel entitled to be above the law.

The fact that police officers have demonstrated because they feel they should have perks to not being accountable to what other citizens are accountable for pretty much says I'm right.

reply to post by gabby2011

You're a prime example of someone I would not want working with any family..you're judgement of families that may have problems is concerning ..did you talk about all the families you helped that way?

Nope. That would be unprofessional.

I talked about how I saw Deborah because that's how I saw her, not as her counsellor, but as an educated person who knows something about family systems, behavioral health, blended families, childhood development, free divorces (aside from the cost of filing), the importance of being first and always a responsible parent when children are in your care, unselfishness, self-control, setting priorities, and so on and so forth.

Whether you like it or not, there are ignorant people who don't exhibit behavior that comes naturally to someone who is intelligent and well-brought-up. I've come across many. Not everyone gets the training or nurturing that would optimize their functioning. And some, even if its offered, refuse to hear it and carry on with their unseemly lifestyles and just continue to repeat the same old patterns established before they were born.
But of course, you are so holy and righteous that you never make judgments about people, do you, gabby? Naw. You wouldn't do that.

I would have done what I could to assist the family with mending strained relationships, improving parenting skills and exercising good judgment. Either no one has done that for them, or they haven't learned it on their own.I would have suggested that Deborah
*get a divorce,
*marry her daughter's father,
*deal with the traumas from her childhood head on
*strive to include her son's father in his life, for the sake of her son
*refrain from drinking while she was the parent in charge,
*monitor her sick baby,
*be careful who she spends her time with, what she does with them, and when
*and review her goals and priorities.

But, no one can force anyone to behave responsibly or to clean up their act. It's ultimately up to them.

Oh, and btw, you are a prime example of the type of person I would not want to attempt counseling with, based on what you said about being creeped out by a counselor who suggested to you the possible causes of your problems with your child. You and I working together? Nope. Just woudn't be a good fit. Not a good fit at all. Waste of time. In the end, counseling only works when the client is willing to listen, to think, and to try to grow and learn. When a counselor discovers the client isn't listening or doing the work, they will resign from the case.

Some parents just don't get it. They can't see the forest for the trees. Can't see the picture when they're in the frame. Can't take it when they are called on to take ownership of their responsibility for relationship problems. But we've been over all of this, haven't we? Yes, we have. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have more important things to do than waste time with you.

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by Dav1d

 

Why was the media told not to film the FBI dogs?

It was reported earlier in this thread - with a link - the trainers/FBI/Police asked the dogs not be filmed in order not to 'divulge' training techniques and to distract the dogs - so they could perform to the best of their abilities.

peace

This was reported... That does not make it true as has been demonstrated more than once in this thread! The dogs are not "training" at this location, (so there would be no divulging of training techniques, just a chance for independent observation) they are after all suppose to be working. They are supposed to be highly trained, distraction is one of the things they are trained to overcome and are selected for.

As the video states the dogs and handlers had false hits.
The handlers reported "hits" where the handlers thought there should be hits. That is telling.
This study was done before baby Lisa went missing.
There are examples of fraud, of planting evidence when it comes to dogs and handlers.
That the handlers fear being observed, is interesting...

From many sources -

Deborah was drunk.
There was an accident.
She called family members for help.
No one would help her - all said call the police.
She didn't.
The 'sightings' were 'disposal' of Lisa.
Her brother was involved with the 'disposal'.
The FBI's 'hands are tied'.
The police know.
Tacopina is NOT getting paid by a benefactor of the family he 'came aboard' for publicity.
Tacopina knows the truth and convinced Deb she could 'get out of it'.
Jeremy is being lied to big time.
The police also know - but - their hand's are 'tied' too.
Deborah was ready to 'come clean' before Tacopina got into the act.

So - That's the scuttlebutt. Listing only for the sake of keeping information in the thread that is 'out there' on FB, Twit, blogs, other forums, etc.

Take it for what you will.

peace

reply to post by wildtimes

Oh, and btw, you are a prime example of the type of person I would not want to attempt counseling with, based on what you said about being creeped out by a counselor who suggested to you the possible causes of your problems with your child.

There you go again..putting words in my mouth.. did they teach you that as well in school?

When I was having problems with my son..who was diagnosed ADHD at the time.. yes I did go to a "professional" because I wanted to help my son.

When I sit down alone with a a "professional" and he continually is looking at my chest...asks me no questions about my son, then goes onto to pry into a married womans sex life.. yes ..it does send off warning signals..

If you want to use the excuse that he was trying to find the possible causes of my sons problems.. by steering the conversation totally to sex, while he had a gleam in his eye, and was looking to where he shouldn't be..go right ahead.

I'm no fool.. and I could see what kind of person he was.. and it wasn't professional at all.

reply to post by wildtimes

Oh, and btw, you are a prime example of the type of person I would not want to attempt counseling with, based on what you said about being creeped out by a counselor who suggested to you the possible causes of your problems with your child. You and I working together? Nope. Just woudn't be a good fit. Not a good fit at all. Waste of time. In the end, counseling only works when the client is willing to listen, to think, and to try to grow and learn. When a counselor discovers the client isn't listening or doing the work, they will resign from the case.

I have gone to personal counseling .. where it went very well.. My personal counselor was a woman who helped me and encouraged me to get post secondary education , which I did.

Just because I have awareness on someones very unprofessional behavior who is supposed to working in the best interest of a child..doesn't mean I discredit all counselors.. though I have to admit..some are very crappy at their jobs.. and think much to highly of themselves.

The woman I had was great.. and I never got the feeling once that she made condescending remarks about her clients behind their backs.

I have a question regarding the people offering the reward money. Does anyone know which family they are tied to? It is it Deborah's or Jeremy's family?

Just curious.

OiO

reply to post by OneisOne

I have a question regarding the people offering the reward money. Does anyone know which family they are tied to? It is it Deborah's or Jeremy's family?

Exactly what I'm looking into now - because - since there's a question now about Tacopina's involvement (that he came 'on board' for free/publicity) I've got a question now about this 'supposed' family member...

I'll let you know what I find out...

reply to post by silo13


I'm pretty sure it was via her cousin (Mike LeRette?) a law student in Texas; I thought someone in Texas was offering the money.
But could be mistaken.

reply to post by gabby2011

The woman I had was great.. and I never got the feeling once that she made condescending remarks about her clients behind their backs.

Well, I'm glad to hear that!! You aren't supposed to get that feeling!
Do you suppose she possibly, sometimes, made condescending remarks about people who were NOT her clients from time to time?? To other people who were NOT her clients?

ya know, gabby, you still haven't disclosed just what your post-secondary education was in...