Lisa Irwin - Missing - One Year Later

reply to post by silo13


No, it wouldn't be hearsay if the boys were there and saw Lisa, either alive or not. It would be eye-witness.
But since they are minors, I don't know how that works.
It seems the interviews would have been recorded for later review by the FBI. They could use that as evidence I think...but I don't know for sure.

If they just said "Mom told us she had to take Lisa outside." or something, that would be different though.

Hey I just checked the Baby Lisa Updates page on FB --
couple of hours ago Johnny C posted that he's coming to Kansas City this week.

I wonder if he is "uncle" they wanted to interview (the PD)....?

I thought they meant someone local.
Hmmm...

Yeah, edit to add:
What nerve they have to think they can "be there" during the interviews with family, but still "refuse" to talk to the police themselves.
EDIT TO ADD: Picerno said:
...The police said they were told that if they wanted to come in and talk to police themselves, they would perhaps be "briefed" as to what occurs, but if not, no dice. Cooperate fully or butt out.

Probably one of you posted the link already, but here it is, what Picerno had to say.
They find it "offensive"? Okay. Whateva.

Here are some of Johnny C's FB posts/comments from today:

Am I supposed to support my family after a lifelong list of tragedies that they brought on themselves and that I have spent my life speaking out against all the immorality that has plagued my family since 1968 when my dad was killed by a drunken driver and we began the viscious cycle of being a 'dysfunctional family' ? Should I lie about who we are ? We have a baby missing and this is what it has come to.

Family members are trying to lash out at me for being honest. They want to keep their secrets. I am a real person and I have always been open and honest. My family is responsible for this baby missing and that is not just a matter of opinion. I know who they are and how they live their lives. And this is what happens. I have no history of substance abuse and I am the educated one in my family. I have many accomplishments despite where I come from. Yes I got in trouble but nothing that serious. No violence on my record. I found myself alone after being against the way my family lived and that got me in trouble. When tough times came I had no one to turn to and I got in trouble.

I have not been in any trouble for 9 years. It was me who spoke out against all the substance abuse that still is a big part of my family today. Somebody said my brother Vince doesnt even like me. True. He has been smoking PCP for the past 20 years while living with my 68 year old mother who is recovering from a stroke. Vince wakes her up at 2am and tells her to 'get it off me' as hes all highed up and thinks something is crawling on him. I have been on him for years to stop. Yah Vince dont like me.

I have talked to investigators since day 2 and gave them a personal insight about who we are so they know. I wanted Lisa found immediately and I tried to prevent this circus. They are still in contact with me. What I have to say is very important to this investigation. We are not some innocent family. This is what happens when you live the wrong way. For Christs sake .. nobody took that baby.

Hmmm.... if...IF ..this really is Deborah's uncle, he is sticking his neck out or else he is adamant that the family secrets be revealed.

Anyone have any opinions about it??

I'm not sure whether to take him seriously or not.

And this last one...the "first" in the series posted above...

These weirdos come on here and try to make me out to be the bad guy based on my criminal record. There is nothing that serious on there. I got the hell away from all the crap in my family and traveled all over the world in the military. But when I returned home I didnt want to go home. And I ended up alone and that got me in trouble a few times. I lived in my car and burglarized a church and got caught. That was my most serious crime. And I take full responsibility for my mistakes. But I am not like the others in my family.

He also says he is convinced that Deborah's father killed her mother Lisa. And that Deborah and her two brothers think so too, and he has just reopened the case of his sister Lisa's death (Deborah's mother, after whom Baby Lisa is named).

Guess we'll find out if he comes to town..maybe.

I am 50% inclined to believe him. The other 50% inclined that he must have escaped some asylum OR be playing the biggest trick of his life on all the eager FB watchers. I cannot tell which. But when the KCPD said they wanted to speak to the aunt and uncle, he is exactly who I thought of . If it turns out he actually spoke to the KCPD while in town, it will have to give him a little bit more credibility.

reply to post by wildtimes


Minors can testify in court, It just depends on what the crime is and what they witnessed. It also depends on maturity / mental capacity / etc etc. Usually efforts are made to try and find other witnesses so minors dont have to testify.

When thats not an option ground rules are set so they aren't steamrolled while on the stand. While defense attorneys like to make hay out of prosecution witnesses, when it comes to minors the approach is gentle (or supposed to be).

Usually the questions asked are very direct, usually requiring yes or no answers or brief explanation of what they saw / heard. Also, again depending on the crime / charges / situation, leeway is given during questioning. When lawyers question people on the stand, and the question is complex, often times you will see the person on the stand hesitate to answer. Attorneys will go back and ask the question in smaller bits, however they usually fall into the category of whats called leading the witness / leading questions.

Its when a lawyers question is phrased in such a manner that it deliberately provides the information / answer to the question. Essentially the attorney is giving the witness the answer in the question asked.

With that being said the judge sometimes gives leeway to the attorneys when questioning a minor / child. If experts can get tripped up on the stand imagine a child up there being treated as an adult witness. From a non legal point of view if the jury sees the defense / prosecuting attorney going after a kid on the stand, it tends to piss them off. Thats anger that could filter into deliberations.

This info is generic and will vary from state to state, case to case, etc etc etc.

reply to post by wildtimes


Wow.. All I can say is if he knows the baby was not taken, then why is he not talking about it in specifics?

As far as the lawyer goes, that makes no sense to me. I dont understand the reason the family wants to be present at the interview. The only thing I can think of is they dont get along and the want to be present so they an counter accusations, which does no good.

reply to post by Xcathdra


I read some more of "Johnny"'s posts...
he said at one point in a screen shot that someone else posted that his sister Lisa (Deborah's mother) was killed by her husband (Deborah's father) D Netz, and that "Deborah killed Lisa."

That was pretty blunt.

I really don't know if he's legit or not - he is accusing others of being family logged in as impostors, and discrediting him, and he is also accused of not being who he claims to be.

He maintains that the Irwins (Jeremy's fam) have nothing to do with any of it, it's all about Deborah's family of origin on both sides.

I wonder, though...if he is a fraud, and spreading this info, isn't he committing libel?
Just wondering.

reply to post by wildtimes


Sorry are Johnny's posts on face book?

If they are, and he is annoyed with posts from family, then why doesn't he just block them?

reply to post by Xcathdra


He has been blocking them, according to his posts. He is posting as a participant on the "Baby Lisa Irwin Updates" FB page. His own personal page is a friends-only (not public), and he says he has refused all kinds of requests, and blocked people who are trying to discredit him.

his most recent: Johnny...

... is recieving Text Messages from a girl walking along the banks of the Missouri River around Avondale in an area not marked by previous searchers.

Here's the link to the FB page...you can read a little of it if you're not a member or logged in. You have to log in (which I hate doing) to see the whole page and open all the comments.

www.facebook.com...

Maybe it was yesterday that Uncle Johnny had some kids on there. They were 13 and 23 yrs old and I guess were his niece and nephew and said they ahd his phone and were writing on fb for him and it was all so silly and ridiculous that I really felt he was just playing a game and if that is so then is anything he said ever been true? See what I mean? REALLY a couple of kids just pick up your phone and write and write on ur account for an hour and you're nowhere to be found? It seem hoaxish at best.

reply to post by Xcathdra

As far as the lawyer goes, that makes no sense to me. I dont understand the reason the family wants to be present at the interview. The only thing I can think of is they dont get along and the want to be present so they an counter accusations, which does no good.

In my opinion it’s a see-through plow by their counsel. I can hear it now:
‘We wanted to sit down with the police! We begged to sit down with them (and listen to their briefing, not go give up any information) but they wouldn’t allow it! And they don’t understand why the parents are hesitant to be interviewed again?!

See what I mean?

peace

reply to post by wildtimes

I believe the guy to some point. The family is dysfunctional. There's widespread 'issues' and many concerning substance abuse. Suspicious deaths and suspicious lies. Sure. All that I believe. Does he know what happened for sure the night Lisa went missing? I think he might have a very good idea, but, know specifics and 'all that happened'? Not exactly. If only because the family (as he states) doesn't trust him and doesn't like him - I doubt they'd give up the info to him. Then again, in a moment of tragedy and fear? Something might have slipped.

The only reason I can think of (and has been pointed out in reference to others) he may be 'dummying up' about specifics is he was directly told to do so by the investigators.

Great job!

reply to post by schmae

They were 13 and 23 yrs old and I guess were his niece and nephew and said they ahd his phone and were writing on fb for him and it was all so silly and ridiculous that I really felt he was just playing a game and if that is so then is anything he said ever been true?

I hadn't seen that. I'd crack some heads together for that for sure, lol.
On the other hand what is he really saying? Debora's a drunk? We know that. The family is dysfunctional at best. Check, we know that too. More? He knows the family is responsible. This is the only debatable 'fact'.
I guess we'll have to see but thanks for pointing out about the 'others' who got a hold of his phone.

peace

reply to post by silo13


Well the only thing he says that is important , IF TRUE, is that Deb called family members that night begging for help. She says there has been an accident and wants their help....... to dispose of a body? What kind of help she asked for is unknown or I haven't seen him say. But family members that she called told her CALL POLICE and basically hung up or said we're not helping you . So I'm guessing Johnny himself was not called, but heard this from other family members. ie: aunt sue, uncle fred, cousin harold etc all talking about a weird call they got from deb at midnight night before. Maybe they thought she was drunk and just being a drama queen until they saw on the news that the baby was missing. It sound plausible. But the source being so weird makes it seem false. I would be very interested to know if he is the one police want to talk to or if he's just giong to KC to cause more drama and further insert himself into the circus.
Other than the phone calls, he hasn't said anything important at all,,, just mindless chatter.

I'm very very upset

www.facebook.com...


''''A source close to law enforcement tells me that cadaver dog in the Lisa Irwin missing baby case hit on a blanket, a toy, and her clothes last reported wearing. If true, that means the fluid that secretes from the body upon death were possibly on those items.''''

If the clothes she was 'last reported wearing' were inside Deb's bedroom when police got there, what does that mean?

Can anyone sum up the story please, i believe i haven't been keeping up since a "man" was caught on camera.

Thanks in advance!

To be fair, even the best trained dogs can have a little trouble from time to time.
A police dog missing since early saturday morning has been found, ODDLY enough
in the very area where baby Lisa lived.

www.kmbc.com...

So police dogs, cadaver dogs all may be trained to the hilt but occasionally their inner ' animal'
gets out .

Originally posted by schmae
www.facebook.com...
If the clothes she was 'last reported wearing' were inside Deb's bedroom when police got there, what does that mean?

Just read that too and it has me confused!!!

So the clothes that Lisa was last reported as wearing is not the clothes she went missing in???

What a sticky point. Maybe Lisa had 2 pairs of purple shorts??

Just as a refresher, here is what was listed as being removed:

The affidavit lists items that investigators took from the house, including a multicolored comforter, purple shorts, a Disney character shirt, a glow worm toy, a Cars-themed blanket, rolls of tape and a tape dispenser.

Bradley has previously told investigators that Lisa was wearing purple shorts and a purple t-shirt when she last saw her on the night of Oct. 3, the night Lisa vanished. abcnews.com

OiO

reply to post by schmae

If the clothes she was 'last reported wearing' were inside Deb's bedroom when police got there, what does that mean?

I believe it means the 'things' they took from the home? The 'Cars theme blanket' the 'glow worm' toy and clothes? has 'death' on them.



And for OIO, it sounds to me like someone changed her out of what she was last wearing into...something else...or nothing...