Posted on 10/07/2011 1:31:50 AM PDT by AnAmericanAbroad
The parents of a missing 10-month-old Missouri girl planned to make a public statement Friday after police announced that the couple had stopped talking with detectives investigating the baby's disappearance.
Jeremy Irwin and Deborah Bradley didn't speak to the media Thursday night after a police news conference accusing them of no longer cooperating, but relatives read a statement insisting they never had stopped. The family said the couple would have more to say Friday.
(Excerpt) Read more at seattlepi.com ...
“not when they are off”
Best bet is to remove the batteries.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCyKcoDaofg
“Another possibility is that the parents were involved in something hinky, but unrelated to the kidnapping, and didn’t want the police investigating their cell phone contacts, so they quickly “lost” them.”
Service provider logs all calls, sent or received.
We no longer have a landline. We use cellphones. I don’t take my cell phone in the bedroom at night. I leave it on my desk by my computer. My husband brings his in the bedroom.
What if you buy a phone with pay as you go service? How do they know who you are if you don’t tell them? Just buy a $10 phone with some free minutes, activate, use a few times, toss away. No?
Yeah, that’s what made me start wondering.
Some might drop a phone off next to the garage....but these parents are young people. The phone is usually their connection to the world - Facebook, texting friends, etc. It usually stays welded to the pocket.
And, this couple has young children (6 and 8). That alone would keep me from leaving a cell phone out...don’t want them playing with it, calling China, etc.
I just think the cell phone thing is odd...especially since the dad was just coming back from work, sans cell phone. The story is that his wife was ‘programming’ his phone, which is why he didn’t have it with him.
And think about the perspective of the kidnapper. He’s just nabbed a baby....and some cell phones. Everybody knows the cell phones can be located, and even track which direction he went. So he takes the time to remove the batteries and/or destroy the cell phones, before he makes his getaway?
Its just very odd...
“Learn the diff”
For some reason, this person is trying to get under people’s skin on this thread.
My cell phone is around 5 years old. It uses towers to triangulate my location...it tells me its good up to 3 meters...and it is - it even shows what part of a building you’re in.
I understood your point...and people have generically used the term ‘GPS’ for cell phone tracking for a few years now. Coincidentally, one of the first instances of the police very publicly using cell phone tracking was another tragic case here in the Kansas City area - a girl abducted from a Target parking lot.
And your GPS point is worth pondering - obviously the police haven’t been tracking these cell phones. Since the police have not even indicated which direction the kidnapper may have gone, one could conclude they were disabled immediately after he left the house. This, of course, makes no sense - a kidnapper would be moving out fast.
Just another aspect of the cell phone caper which doesn’t make sense.
I’m familiar with that case too, having seen it on the Investigation Discovery Channel. They too, hired an attorney who advised them to limit their cooperation with the police, as did the Ramsey’s.
And, this is what caught my eye, because I usually don’t pay much attention to these media hyped cases.
The police, justifiably, suspect the parents. However, certain personalities within the police department will focus 100% on the parents to the detriment of ANY OTHER possibilities. Where these parents have more than one child, I’m just not sure. But, any good lawyer will tell you - DON’T TALK TO THE COPS...
Thanks for the ping.
I’ll agree with you on the wisdom of a lawyer helping them navigate the “justice system.” As sad as it is, the authorities aren’t necessarily our friends.
With kids, though, I insist on having a landline. If the kids need to call for help sometime, or on the rare occasion that we have a sitter, I don’t want them relying on cell coverage. Plus, our kids don’t have their own cell phones and I’m not going screen sitters based on whether they have a cell phone.
The only cases I can think of are the ones in which that actually happened - although the girls were older than an infant (Polly Klaas...)
Sleep with a cell phone? Well the cell phone company has their way with me at least once a month.
“DON’T TALK TO THE COPS...”
I don’t know if this is reasonable advice to give the parents of a missing kid.
Assuming they are innocent, they’d be telling the cops everything they know to help. Regardless of incriminating themselves inadvertently. I know I would.
I’d not be convinced that I should be quiet around the cops to possibly save my skin when my kid was just abducted. I’d be telling them everything I could think of and checking in constantly.
“What if you buy a phone with pay as you go service? How do they know who you are if you don’t tell them? Just buy a $10 phone with some free minutes, activate, use a few times, toss away. No?”
You’d never be able to dial a number associated with you. The cops would pull the phone records of a suspect’s family, friends, work, etc., to look for suspicious connections. The cops/gov’t have the advantage of having done all this stuff thousands of times already and they’re usually one step ahead of the average evildoer.
If you watch the movie “RED” with Bruce Willis, you notice the first thing he does with the girl’s phone when he snatches her is throw it out the window.
Ok, other possibility. The parents habitually recharge their phones in one spot, and three phones happened to be there. The kidnapper saw them and decided not to take a chance on any of them being rigged to record things. I know, that is a stretch, but maybe he isn’t tech savvy and thought one of them might be an audio recorder.
Of course, if it were me I wouldn’t turn lights on to steal a baby...and I’d make darn sure I knew the home security situation before going in. You can’t just go in with a flashlight and a T-bone steak anymore.
ABC News says FBI now searching a local landfill.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/missing-baby-lisa-fbi-searches-landfill/story?id=14688581
Interesting post from a local after the article:
zekester20 “ I live in KC.
They’re reporting a phone call was made from the house around 2 am.
The wheels are coming off their story (dealing w/some mental giants; throw the phones away—they’ll never know!).
Also, a dumpster was set on fire about a half mile from their home on that same morning around 2:30 am.
Along w/the lie detector test she ‘failed miserably.’ ....”
This is a very suspicious case.
This kind of abduction is so rare—someone coming into the house and walking off with an infant—that the relatives become immediate suspects.
I agree. But there comes a point in the investigation, after the cops have interviewed everyone and done a forensic examination of the scene, that they will ALWAYS return to their gut feeling that the parents were involved. They will return to do follow up interviews. They will return at inconvenient times for another interview. They will be on a constant “fishing expedition” and then they will return again for another “follow-up” interview, hoping to find cracks in the narrative. Because in their hearts, they KNOW the parents were involved. It is at this point that the parents need to clam up and FORCE the cops to explore other avenues. Sometimes, albeit rarely, the parents are NOT involved...
Agreed, this is odd.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.