NOTE: The following calls for speculation. If you do not want to speculate, or do not want to read speculation, avoid this post!
We all have our own theories, but I would like to see these very basic questions answered. No matter what you believe, I'd like to see your reasoning, and how you can explain these things. It would be even better if you could incorporate FACTS confirmed by law enforcement; however, I realize we have few facts to work with.
Any takers???
WHO is responsible for Ayla's disappearance?
(suspects or accessories)
WHAT are the circumstances surrounding her disappearance?
(her condition, the situation she was in, kidnapping, injured, etc.)
WHEN was Ayla taken/removed from the DiPietro home?
(date/time)
WHERE is Ayla now?
(location-obviously it won't be specific or she would have already been located)
WHY did she disappear?
(motive)
HOW did Ayla come to be where she is now; how has she been there so long?
(cover-up, police missteps, luck, magic, river flow, weather, etc.)
Those
of you who claim to be interested in "justice for Ayla" surely realize
that a prosecutor will have to be able answer these questions before a
prosecution can even be considered, right? Think Casey Anthony for a
moment. She was found not guilty, because prosecutors had no answers for
the above questions. They could answer "why", but not much else. Motive
is not necessary to prosecute, but it helps jurors grasp the totality
of the circumstances. By that same token, motive alone will not prove a
case.
I'm looking forward to reading what you all have to say, if you choose to say anything!
I'm looking forward to reading what you all have to say, if you choose to say anything!
pogamen16:13 @KJ - Yes. Yes. Multiple reasons.
ReplyDeleteDo you understand that everything I have written can either be confirmed or disputed by involved individuals?
pogamen, Yes I do believe everything you have said can be confirmed or disputed by the involved individuals. I only wonder why they have done neither. - KJ
Can't everything that's been stated by anyone be confirmed or disputed by involved individuals?
Deletesigned:getrealpeople
I have confirmation...Lance says they always get everything wrong."If Justin Linnel could get him in a head lock he'd beat his own sorry ass up." Maybe I shouldnt have quoted that...I always get the just of things...I did ask him if I could quote him....I thought it was funny....when asked about Bob Vear he said..." I wish he was walking with Linnenl."
DeleteAlls Justin would have to do to not see it is turn his head...You know it...he knows it and the judge knows it.Wonder why that judge sided with Justin and Lance? maybe just maybe...he knows more than everyone else here does about these young men.Maybe he knows why Lance beat the shit outta Linnel...hmmmmm....Maybe WTVL LE knows more about these boys too...hmmmm it didnt turn into a crime scene until MSP took over. WHY???
Selena, I'll throw this one your way and see if you can get someone to listen. Bob Vear is not an innocent. He puts that stuff on his facebook, all the children in his neighborhood, and keeps it up to date with activity. That's why I call him Binocular Bob. Worse than a Peeping Tom. BB is watched by LE too closely. He has similar friends online. The friend can come into BB's neighborhood with a fair idea of where these children are. Isn't it great that they can share?
DeleteThank William for BB's friend's demise on or shortly before Dec 15. It's not our way to take a life, but William is only now learning the reasons for that. He's entitled to a first mistake or two, or three. BB's assistant was moving in and out via train. This time, the train didn't stop for Cardinal. (I don't know if Cardinal is a Roman Catholic title, a pet name, a bird name, a baseball team, an online moniker, or whatever. I only suspect the Cardinal was Catholic and that you can find him here, and here, and here, and over there...
posted by pogamen 8/25/2012
Pogamen...you have no idea how just one hug from that creature has violated my soul...errrrrr maybe you do.
DeleteThank you, William...from all of us.
BB has no wiggle room...someone needs to give him a rope.
Ill ask around about the Cardinal
@pogamen
DeleteBB was a Grand Knight for the Knights of Columbus, a catholic fraternal society....perhaps your cardinal has something to do with that.
WHO is responsible for Ayla's disappearance?
ReplyDeleteWHAT are the circumstances surrounding her disappearance?
WHEN was Ayla taken/removed from the DiPietro home?
WHERE is Ayla now?
WHY did she disappear?
HOW did Ayla come to be where she is now; how has she been there so long?
Those are the questions that everyone would like to see answered!
While I would like to say that I have an answer for any or all of the questions above, the fact is I have no answers at all. In fact, I have no theories or opinions, other than I do believe the police when they say that the DiPietro family knows more about the case than they are sharing with the police. Now, perhaps not all the DiPietro's have information they are withholding, it may be that only some have information they aren't sharing.
It may be that they hold information they don't even realize they know. Silly as that may sound, there are time we witness or know something and only after the truth comes out do we realize that we held a piece to the puzzle.
It may be that none of the DiPietro's hold the answers and the police are wrong.
That is why I have to say again, I just don't know.
And that may very well be the bottom line for everyone. We don't know and that is what causes people to theorize, speculate and wonder, what happened to Ayla. She is a physical being, so reasonable thought is that she must be SOMEWHERE. And if she is somewhere, why hasn't anyone seen her or found her?
All we have is questions. But out there somewhere is someone who knows all the answers to every question listed above and every question we have ever asked. The only thing left for all of us to do is wait until that time when, either someone trips over the answers, or those holding the answers decide to talk.
Until that time, your guess is as good as anyone else's guess. I'm just not willing to guess. I'm going to wait until the truth comes out. - KJ
KJ, you are absolutely right about there being times when you find out you were holding pieces to a puzzle & didn't even realize it until the truth is eventually revealed.
DeleteI do believe, however, that Justin et al have wracked their brains constantly, and have tried to piece together anything they can think of that will reveal where Ayla is. Whether or not the police, or the general public, will believe them is another question.
I'm willing to believe they are, based on what I know of them & their closest friends. I choose to have faith that Ayla is still breathing, and I will hold on to that hope until *solid* proof reveals otherwise. I honestly believe a lot of the people who think Ayla died at the hands of Justin or one of the DiPietros have watched one too many CSI shows or something....
@KJ - re: "I do believe the police when they say that the DiPietro family knows more about the case than they are sharing with the police."
DeleteI noticed in the June pc that McCausland spoke of believing that 1 or more of those in the house that night OR someone associated with the house are not telling all they know.
Did anyone else understand that similarly?
the space between, the two most obvious possibilities for who he was referring to would be Phoebe and Lance, Phoebe because she owns the house and lives there, even though she wasn't there that night, and Lance because he's a close family member who seems to spend a lot of time there.
Delete@associated - did you understand him as saying 1 or more but not necessarily all of them? I agree the 2 most obvious possibilities would be Phoebe and Lance, but could he also mean someone outside the family who had frequented the house?
DeleteP.S. I tried to find the video of the press conference to listen again, but couldn't find it.
Deletehttp://www.wgme.com/news/features/raw-news/stories/vid_12.shtml
Delete@associated 17:45
Delete"the two most obvious possibilities..." is just an opinion on your part. It certainly is not "obvious" who LE are referring to. Trista also falls into the category as being someone who is associated with the house, as well as anyone else, electrician, plumber, etc.
signed:getrealpeople
@KJ - Your thoughtfulness to respond from the last page is appreciated. Thank you. I want to explain, for your kindness.
DeleteIt doesn't matter if the involved individuals +/- my comments publicly. When I say involved individuals, it's not limited to the DiPietros and Reynolds. By choice, it's up to them to strain to hear what I'm saying and nudge them into remembering something that hasn't been questioned. The involved individuals are the ones that must move mountains; my words are no more than whispers. Recently, Justin D. (paraphrased), I heard, 'I'm not inclined to talk online.' It is as it should be, not required or mandatory. Rue the day that it is, but that day may come. Ayla's blogs - participation is small. Check online and you find very little attention given to Ayla of Maine - awareness suffers.
Unquestioned events - when family members are so comfortable that they stop using words for mundane talk - assumptions are made about what wasn't observed. Example not yet mentioned - Justin D. had to turn the bathroom light on appr. 10pm Dec 16. Why was it off? There were others in that house the evening of Dec 16. If LE has given them a clean slate - Why?
I have one more story that I would like to post, but it must wait until the DiPietros make a discovery of their own. The email trail that Obscure posted has already confirmed my belief - zero doubt. I get it. They get it. But the discovery has yet to happen; the reason will come from me. The public doesn't see this interaction, nor do they have an ability to know.
KJ, I have a proposition for you, if you want proof of what I see, and you are willing to publicly acknowledge the results to the missing children bandwagons in the blog-o-sphere.
posted by pogamen 8/24/2012
@pogamen 19:19
DeleteI don't get the significance of, "Justin D. had to turn the bathroom light on appr. 10pm Dec 16. Why was it off?" Did everyone in the house have an agreement to leave the light on? (Myself, I turn lights off, if not being used.) Was someone visiting that didn't know this house rule? I am clueless on what you are saying about a light being turned off. Could you explain what you think it means?
signed:getrealpeople
getrealpeople - Selena has even mentioned this... the bathroom light is on by family habit. Nothing is mentioned (online) of non-family members having been in the house that evening. Why was it off? My unspoken thought about this time frame has always been - LE is not telling the truth about all the people they know to have been there. Why?
DeleteJustin D's comment - LE knows who was here. If they... There's more to the comment, but I don't want to paraphrase such an important aspect.
posted by pogamen 8/24/2012
the space between- yes, that's what I understood him to mean and I suppose he could have meant anyone who was known to have been there that night or frequently
Deleteget real people- note the topic here. People are asked to give their opinions. I never said my opinion was fact.
@stacy - Thank you! Unfortunately, the link didn't work for me. I got a blank page that said
Delete"Error 503 Service Unavailable
Service Unavailable
Guru Meditation:
XID: 43398604
Varnish cache server"
@associated - thank you for confirming your understanding
Light in bathroom is always kept off. That was not the light that was kept on. And Justin did not turn on bathroom light or the other light.
DeleteOMG..I understand you. *Runs from the room holding her head* aaaahhhhhhhhahhahhh
DeleteMichelle, I wish I knew them as well. I acknowledge that I do not know the DiPietro's personally, or even by association, so my viewpoint is just from what I hear and see on the internet. That, of course, is not a very accurate view, I'm sure. I do temper much of what I think about them, by the words that are spoken by those that do. I am definitely more inclined to believe those who know them, versus the word of people who do not know them at all. I'm still praying that Ayla is alive and hidden, but hoping she is found soon and returned to her family.
DeleteThe Space between, I also think that when the LE says that "the people that were in the home that night aren't telling everything" that it may not mean ALL of the people there that night. It could mean only one, or more than one. As I mentioned above, I think the information being withheld may be information they do not realize they know.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Delete@ associated 21:41
DeleteI believe I stated your opinion was just that, an opinion. I, however, don’t understand how it is “obvious” who LE are referring to. Your comment seems to infer that anyone associated with Phoebe’s house, has to be a Dipietro. (You did rescind that comment later, so I assume now, that you realize someone associated with the house does not have to be a DiPietro.)
Which brings up Trista!
Nancy Grace Dec. 19, 2011:
GRACE: And you have fully cooperated with police, is that true?
TIRSTA REYNOLDS: Fully cooperated. And Nancy, there`s one thing I want to clear up with you.
GRACE: OK.
TIRSTA REYNOLDS: Someone just said that -- it was said that Ayla had her own bedroom at her father`s house. She does not have her own bedroom. She sleeps in the same room with her cousin, who is, I think, two months younger than her. So, if -- so why wasn`t she taken? If my daughter went missing, why didn`t her cousin -- you know, at least make a noise or scream or be taken as well.
GRACE: So you`re telling me that, Trista, that there would have been somebody else sleeping in the room with her?
TIRSTA REYNOLDS: Yes! Like, I`ve been to that house myself, and I have been in the bedroom to where Ayla sleeps, and she sleeps in the same exact room as Justin`s sister`s little girl.
So, Trista seems to know the layout of the house. She seems very adamant on setting the record straight on sleeping arrangements.
Hmmm…would you say she is also an obvious possibility for whom McCausland was referring to?
(I also have to add, Trista did not have much to say to Nancy’s question, “And you have fully cooperated with police, is that true?” She changed the subject really quickly! Maybe an SA person could help out here.LOL)
JMO
signed:getrealpeople
I have also always thought Trista's statement, "If my daughter went missing, why didn`t her cousin -- you know, at least make a noise or scream or be taken as well. " was very odd!
DeleteI don't know what it means, but it has never set well with me.
signed:getrealpeople
KJ, I'll put together a file on one of the 'future' abduction cases coming up. It will take some time to assemble my notes and email them to you. There's one to two years time before the occurrance. It's extremely high profile (money), so there's no end to the people that want to 'help'. I've already seen the results if police are not informed, after police were informed, and with additional private security in place. They all end badly.
DeleteI'm also disturbed by something else. You said 'things such as this don't happen where I live' (paraphrased). I heard, 'What a silly thing to say, there's a case not two blocks away from her house.' I don't know the 'when'.
I completely agree with your saying - doing the same things will net the same results. I've always said, 'Never do the same thing twice.'
posted by pogamen 8/26/2012
I'll watch for the email.
DeleteNot two blocks from my house. I'll think about that one.
Thanks pogamen. - KJ
One of the anonymous posters asked if I was the same person as "the space between"...or at least I think that's what you were asking. And my answer is no. I'm Michelle. I've always been Michelle on here, except for once way back when I posted as Tour Guide Barbie.
ReplyDeleteI wish all of you anonymous people would pick a moniker & stick with it so we can categorize your posts properly. It's not that hard. Honest.
Michelle,
DeleteUntil you brought this up, I was always under the impression that if we chose the name/URL option, we had to use both. Which is why I always post as anonymous - because I didn't want to attach a URL. Now I realize that I only have to fill in one of the two fields. Thanks!
And I, for one, would LOVE to hear your thoughts on these questions, Stacy4Ayla.
DeleteMy theories are weak, but I'm comfortable with "something stinks like shit."
McKeeKitty,
DeleteAnd mine are even weaker. :( I'm in a period of re-evaluation currently. But, I will say that I am done with censorship in any form.
Right now I'm hung up on a good point brought up by another poster in which is was noted that very little support/defense was being offered to certain people publicly. That's interesting. And, I enjoy pondering interesting facts.
Regarding my choice of posting over here now... I think the censorship and ultra-sensitivity began the moment the undesirable questions and speculation began. The reactions were... well, wow... I can't think of anything more politically correct to say about it. I don't believe in creating a public forum and then locking it down to fit a very narrow-mindset unless those posting outside the box are treated with a little respect. But what actually happened was a few counter-arguments were raised and suddenly I was hearing this dull roar from the background of the blog that sounded like: "Grab your torch and pitchforks!"
@Stacy - I am familiar with that roar. :/
DeleteMy re-evaluation began when my six spiral notebooks of notes pointed to A4A, J4A, and U4A being the "original sources" for sensitive, confidential information...again, again and again. Nothing in the media. Nothing confirmed/denied by LE.
DeleteCensorship is ugly...but passive-aggressive censorship is even more reprehensible. Allow certain posts to stay, but delete those that go against-the-grain? No thank you.
Re-evaluation is good, responsible, and intelligent. Looking at all angles is healthy. It is how we get answers for Ayla, not blog friends.
Glad to see a kindred spirit here.
@Michelle - an unfinished discussion about Justin D. telling the truth. Did you think he was dishonest about what he said and you decided to fit your personal truth and common sense into his words for motive? That would be creative. I am not creative, and lack the imagination to see what is not there. From his view, without actually touching him, I did not see Lance and Justin L., not straight ahead, not peripherally, and not through rear and side vehicle mirrors. He didn't see it. As insignificant as this was, I left with zero doubt - such a wasted trip, until something else was mentioned...
DeleteThis may interest someone in that community. Cool Street was the location of the men, furry boots woman, and toddler. It was opportunity to check them out, too. Someone claimed to see Phoebe. First, I don't think their natural language is English. There were three men, a short woman, and a toddler that was clearly underdressed and cold. I began to wonder if the child was alive or if it was a doll. It turned out that there were four men, one arrived later. A symbolic grouping - an anchor baby, the mother, and four fathers (forefathers). They stayed in that area, a warehouse nearby. Translating was difficult, the woman did all the talking and gave instructions, and this is what we got... 'we are the voice box, we speak for people that can't speak for themselves. We give them voice so they can be heard by others. We make them important.' THEY ARE BALLOT BOX STUFFERS. I have to say that was a jaw-dropper. Until then, we didn't understand their thinking, but translation is no longer a problem. If you live there, go find out for yourself.
posted by pogamen 8/24/2012
Whrn I said that about Justin, I was responding to your implication that Justin stopped the car for other reasons than to confront Justin L. I said nothing about him seeing or not seeing what actually happened.
Delete@ Michelle: I don't think anyone really care who you are. Just because you say you are Michelle, don't may it so. You could be Minnie Mouse. You could be Obscure, Selena, Grace, Tori, Pogamen, Mckitty-cat, the space between, the space above, the space below etc. And, you probably is. No one really care who you are. So... get over yourself. I want to know why my comment was not posted on who is responsible for Ayla's disappearance. The other crap you are referring to, is just that...CRAP.
DeleteROFL! Well, Heather... I was asked on the closed thread if I was the same person as "the space between" & I took the time to answer. I certainly don't expect some grammar-challenged person named Heather to believe me if she chooses not to.
Delete@ Michelle, seems your 'eagle eye'is blind as a bat. My comment concerning you being "the space between" was NOT posted. lol So how would you know what was written? IMPOSTER! Now, I'm ROFL at the dumbo ears you are wearing, dumbo. Think before you post.
DeleteMichelle, must now stand naked, bathed in her own lies.
DeleteYour post was posted. I read it as well...it was not clear exactly what you were stating and I think that is why Michelle felt the need to respond.
DeleteYes, it was posted, actually. The reason the thread was closed by Obscure is because the comment count went above 200, and, when that happens, you have to click "see more comments" in order to see them all. I saw the post like anyone can, and responded here.
Delete@anon, thank you :)
SMH - wow, intuitive geniuses
Delete@Michelle - I don't know about you, but I'll refrain from commenting such random posts in the future.
@ Michelle: Next time, be mindful of how you respond to 'random' posts in the future. You get what you give :)
DeleteSame here, Space. I think I'm being confused with someone else, lol. Oh well. No biggy.
DeleteThe comment WAS posted. Why do people feel the need to make conspiracies out of the most trivial things?
DeleteI'm not sure. Apparently I'm getting what I gave. I guess I missed what I did to deserve this terrible ass-whooping. It hurts. It hurts so bad.
DeleteI don't know, Obscure... but it's "interesting, interesting" and now poor Michelle must "stand naked, bathed in her own lies." Crazy, irrelevant bullshit.
Deleteo.O
DeleteNo kidding.
Delete"I don't believe in creating a public forum and then locking it down to fit a very narrow-mindset unless those posting outside the box are treated with a little respect."
DeleteStacy4Ayla, I could not agree more with that statement. Limiting what people can discuss limits the chances of thinking of all the possibilities. Part of the reasons people talk over cases is to see if one person can offer a piece not thought of prior. I think that while it is important to allow open discussion, it is equally important to see what everyone thinks and why. If any blog only allows one side, or limited thoughts, nothing changes. It's like they say, if you want to keep getting the same result, keep doing the same things. - KJ
Michelle, I like those new ears. Can I borrow them sometime? I'm a huge Mickey and Minnie fan. :) - KJ
DeleteOf course you can. We can call it our thinking cap? ;)
DeleteTEST TEST am i blocked here also?
ReplyDeleteHas Obscure blocked anyone on this site? I don't think so.
DeleteObscure?
Anyone who says they are blocked is lying.
DeleteI'm a cheap skate, so I have not paid the money to upgrade my IP tracker subscription from "free" to basic or any other level; therefore, I do not have the ability to block anyone.
The things people make up are just ridiculous.
I didn't think you had. Paranoia at its best, right there. Thanks for clarifying.
DeleteMy assumption is that was Kadoe "testing" the waters to see if he was blocked here since he's been blocked from U4A.
DeleteNo problem, Michelle.
DeleteReally?---I guess so, but I have read others *Ahem--Suzanne Cotter aka Suz* say that they have been blocked from here as well.
Kadoes not blocked, maybe McKee ?
DeleteNo...I don't believe I was ever blocked at U4A. I was, however, contacted by Jeff that he received "several complaints" for the "graphic nature" of my comments. Still can't figure that one out. Therefore, Jeff saw fit to put me in "mandatory moderation" status. I don't do "mandatory moderation."
DeleteAnyway, Jeff posted the next morning that I was no longer being moderated and free to post, but the damage was done. Fortunately, there are other venues to discuss Ayla that encourage open and uncensored dialogue.
I still maintain that the Dips have a hand in all this crap, but the way U4A allows the DiPietro family to be torn to shreds is intolerable. What about Bob Vear? What about an unknown? Nope...it is Justin and don't dare question that...otherwise, feel free to post your opinion. My ass.
I recently saw "Dana P" being ripped apart by the hyenas. Why? Because she had the audacity to lean towards a "live" Ayla.
I know many of you have issues with Tori, but I have to say that her personal life is of no concern to me or this case. I think she ran a good blog, and she was fair. I felt safe expressing my opinion, often contrarian to the flow, at J4A. The blogs merged, Tori jumped ship without so much as a goodbye, and all hell broke loose.
For all your intelligence McKee, I have to shake my head at you. Tori got "Graced". Jeff took over her blog, and shut her out.
DeleteWhy you might ask? I guess it all started with me. She couldn't control me and I was getting closer to the truth than Jeff cared.
Then I showed everyone what manipulative, conning, evil people are running that blog. Tori included.
Here's a thought. If Justin DiPietro is such an upstanding citizen, why is he rooming (for 5 years) with Tori's brother-in-law? Tori's "husband" has shown us his stripes via his police record. How upstanding can his brother be? And if he is so upstanding, why is he REFUSING to discuss this case? We don't even know his name, never been revealed as far as I know. Do we really believe that this is the ONE secret Tori can keep?
Tori said on many occasions that she was being harassed and pressured by his family because of her blog. Right before she went into surgery she told me her husband had threatened to kill her in her sleep. I was worried, and was making plans to go out there and help her get away from that family. KJ can back me up on that claim, even though I didn't tell her the real reason, just that I was going to help Tori.
Doesn't it concern anyone that she is now MIA?
Oh right, JohnP keeps us informed of Tori's status. Through emails. Yeah, and they didn't hack my email account and get a pic of one of my foster kids that has never been posted online anywhere?
I have proof of that. PROOF.
Pay no mind to that man behind the green curtain folks. Nothing to see. Move along.
Pogamen, I am calling you out on your bullshit right now. Just stop. Or I am going to sic Obadiah's orb and the Probes of Law on YOU.
Player of online games = troll. STFU
i'm the guy with the furry boots.
ReplyDeleteSo you have furry boots? Okay. So tell us what that has to do with Ayla.
Deletesigned:getrealpeople
I thought "furry boots" was a gal not a guy?
Deleteperhaps he's saying he's Kadoe... the guy with the furry boots story
Deleteseveral years ago phoebe worked at kmart. during winter months she wore furry boots. i have heard this from several people who worked there.
Deleteanon - several years ago I wore neon tights under dresses - but that was several years ago. Call Ben McCanna at the Morning Sentinel so you can ease your mind. Perhaps the woman that was seen would agree to meet with the witness. Couldn't hurt to ask.
DeleteSeveral people said Phoebe worked for DHHS also but that was not true. Several people said that she was related to Karen Small but that was not true. Oh the things I have read! There are so many stories out there that it is impossible for them all to be true because for one to be true it makes at least two to three null and void.
DeleteCan someone describe the furry boots? As in all furry all over? Lots of fur? Does someone have a better description of the boots that were seen on this person?
Delete@Curious - I'm assuming you're kidding - but you left out, what color are the furry boots? Were the furry boots pull on, zip, or tie? If they tied, how many eyelets did the furry boots have? Was there anything stuck to the bottoms of the soles of the furry boots? Did the furry boots look old or new?
Delete@kadoe - This story has been voiced repeatedly in more than one location. I understand your obsessed with the story and that is hard for you to deal with each day, as certainly I've become somewhat uncomfortable just reading about it as much as I have. You and your associate really should contact Ben to see if you can put your hearts and minds at rest.
I may be wrong and Texas is pretty far from Maine but furry boots have been pretty popular for several years now. I have been through quite a few states and have seen people wearing them everywhere. Lots of people own and wear furry boots. Couldn't be me though. I think they are hideous. I also think there are really cheap/expensive versions making them obtainable by anyone.
Delete@anon 13:50 - I'm in Maine. I haven't seen furry boots in years, I think my mom had a pair in the 70s. Regarding the relevance - supposedly people who used to work with Phoebe at KMart many years ago said she always wore furry boots in the winter. (Seriously, why would a number of people remember that?) So, we are to take this as supporting evidence that Phoebe was so incredibly stupid, despite her years of living and experience, that she would arrange the kidnapping of her own granddaughter and what? Hope people would think her son murdered his baby instead? It makes no sense whatsoever. Further, if Kadoe and the witness don't want to talk to Ben McCanna, why? Are they afraid they will be disabused of their story?
Deletethe space between, I'll confirm that. I'm in Maine as well and haven't seen furry boots since the mid/late 70s. I suppose, one might find a pair in an old attic, or a goodwill store. But I would definitely not call them common footwear in Maine. - KJ
DeleteYet another Mainer replying that furry boots are not something I've seen in Maine in ages. Uggs (and their many copies), Bean boots, and Bogs/rubber boots are the most common types of boots I've seen here.
DeleteMichelle, True enough! I'm thinking those furry type would not be very practical in the snow. And if Mainer's are anything, they are practical. :) KJ
DeleteI saw a photo taken at one of the vigils and there was a woman there with furry boots on. I sent the photo to LE. I had also read early on from someone who worked with phoebe at one time and that she did wear furry boots at that time. selena said something about phoebe not being a frilly girl? Well the brown furry boots that I have seen are not frilly or girly.
Deletephoebe worked K mart, They still sell several types of furry boots.
DeletePhoebe worked at Kmart in 90's
DeleteWow that was 15-20 years ago I can not remember what I wore yesterday.
DeleteCarry-over discussion with Grilled Cheese Sandwich!
ReplyDelete@'Grilled Cheese Sandwich' posted a comment - 'Gabby wasn't potty trained.' Anonymous follower says 'Ayla probably wasn't either.' Grilled Cheese Sandwich, that sounds pretty personal to me. So, why did Gabby RETURN to the bathroom because she forgot to flush the toilet?
GCS - Fair assessment, I'm not able to bring anything to the table. A few more comments, and I will limit my comments until I can return to the table with Jess Parker's right hand in my left hand.
posted by pogamen 8/24/2012
Not sure what is "personal" about Gabby not being potty trained at 1 1/2 years old .
DeleteSo you are saying one and half year old baby Gabby went to the bathroom by herself and then went back again to flush also? Just making sure I have this correct.
GCS - U 1st. Do you have any personal information - straightforward or untoward - that Gabby wasn't potty trained? Or are you guessing?
Deleteposted by pogamen 8/24/2012
Gabby was not potty trained. I already told you I don't guess.
ReplyDeleteGCS, ? why does this matter
Delete@GCS - Is that straightforward (like you changed a Gabby diaper on Dec 16)? Or untoward (like you had a vision of a Gabby diaper change)? I smile about this, but I want you to *feel me* and know where I'm coming from. Your 'word' does not make me doubt my self. It does make me pull back and consider the memory to see if I missed a context (I didn't). How do you know?
Delete@huh? - It's a carry-over discussion from the page that's closed out. It's a small detail, and a verifiable fact, from a comment I made on the other page.
posted by pogamen 8/24/2012
Straightforward as in I just know in reality. Definition of memory is in fact something that has been learned. But is what you are seeing a past memory? Are things jumbled perhaps? Pull back consider.
Delete@Pogsters- It's common sense (ie general knowledge) among those of us who have small children that what you're describing just isn't typical behavior at Gabby and Ayla's age. A lot of children aren't potty trained at that age, but of course some are. Even toddlers who are potty trained at 18-20 mos. don't get up at night by themselves to use the bathroom, much less think to return to the bathroom because they forgot to flush.
DeleteIt's just one of those details that you pass off as fact which defies reality. Let me know if you need more examples.
@Animal crackers - You leave me numb, dazed, confounded; oh yeah, confused. It's common sense, general knowledge, and fact? I have used a detail that defies reality? There's only one fact about diapers - Any parent can tell you exactly what payday they stopped having to buy diapers.
DeleteApparently my own children and grandchildren have defied your rules of reality. I've cared for hundreds of children over the years. Some were early learners and some were not. Babies of alcoholics and drug users were not early learners - not one.
For the sake of a blog and public, my description wasn't the model of exactness, but that wasn't the point I was trying to make. You lost me on the nighttime routine. What, exactly, is the chld supposed to do at night?
Yes, you may provide more examples - cite some Child Psychology studies that I can research please.
posted by pogamen 8/25/2012
Whaaaat? You want scientific/psychological studies cited all the sudden? Can we ask the same of you re: your visions?
Delete@Michelle - If there is a study that makes diapering a 14 to 20 month toddler a fact, then I need to see the study. I will certainly take the time to counter that study. Children born of mothers using intoxicants during pregnancy should not be used to establish a norm. I find this stuff sometimes, and it needs to be corrected before the study grows legs and is cited as a given in other studies.
DeleteMy words may sound harsh, and that was not my intention. Diapers don't share the scope and breadth of global warming, but the studies should maintain accuracy, even for toddlers. It was a subject of interest (hobby), ferreting out faulty studies that were paid for by our tax dollars. There was a study that claimed global warming was the result of too many baby diapers in the landfills. I'm saying that if a study is the reason for this age and activity to be considered fact, I would like to read it. Thank you very much, I don't think there's anything more I can say to make my words any more clear (trite) without using word repetition and run-on sentences.
Can you ask the same of me? There are some studies in the Parapsychology section that I could correct/expound on. I'm not inclined to do so, and I'm not inclined to cite faulty studies, either.
posted by pogamen 8/26/2012
https://www.google.com/search?q=mostcommonageforpottytraining&sugexp=chrome,mod=2&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Deletehttp://www.pottytrainingconcepts.com/A-Potty-Training-Age-Readiness.html
http://www.webmd.com/parenting/tc/toilet-training-topic-overview
http://www.livestrong.com/article/121054-average-age-potty-training-girls/
Perhaps my kids and grandkids (5) were just slow, but none of them (that I know of) were toilet trained before the age of 3 or 4. Not sure if that's the norm or not. Perhaps kids today are trained earlier. - KJ
DeleteI have two year old twins (boys). One is potty trained, one is not. I think it just depends on the kid (since obviously I am doing the same thing with both of them.) My oldest was potty trained at 3.5 years.
DeleteGabby is not potty trained still.
Delete@Pogamen-You are missing my point--I wasn't debating if a child at the age of 18-20mos could be toilet trained or not (in fact if you read my post, I said some are at that age) But if you don't get me, well...no worries. Citing child psychology studies would probably not aid you, you'd probably want some pediatric urological studies for that subject. Moving on...
Delete@Anonymous 16:54 - Thank you. The age range is 12 mos to 6 yrs, depending on the sponsor of the website and products offered.
Delete@Animal crackers - I got your point the first time. I don't see the divorce from reality in the assumption I made (as to her reason for being up at night), nor in the assumption you make for my reasoning being wrong. [This has become so stupid and counter productive. Moving on... ]
Seems to me Pog the point is that you are wrong.
DeletePogamen please answer this, since you seem to know all that has happened and know all the answers why dont you share with all of us what you know and see. I am not undersanding why its all such a mystery with what you write. Just come out with what you know so Ayla can be found. Enough with the craziness
ReplyDeleteBut I pull back from explicit description and specific items that can still be used as evidence of involvement, and I have mentioned very little involving Dec 15 and 16, 2011.
Deletehttp://www.juststopthelies.blogspot.com/2012/06/today-is-day.html
You can use the Find: feature to go to the comment title...
making my crime tip public
NEXT - On the same page, use the Find: feature to go to...
not provided to LE
----------
Insignificant notes: There are several comments from 'Tomato Soup' and 'Grilled Cheese Sandwich'. I commented with the title of 'Mountain Dew' so there was something to wash it down. Too close to home? Is that it? BTW - There is a closet.
--------------
In summary, I tried to focus on the points that were most relevant to learning what happened to Ayla by side-stepping the piles of related problems that are delaying closure - to no effect. There's so much more; this blog isn't big enough for the discovery, especially with the (ex)Jesuit Preist's testimony included. Thank William.
posted by pogamen 8/24/2012
Not sure what you are trying to say by you are side-stepping the piles of related problems that are delaying closure. I am stating facts you are incorrect about. Simple. No closet. Just trying to help.
DeleteWell said, GCS. Perhaps that's what's been bugging me the most about Pogamen...her inability to just talk straight without the riddles, innuendo, and talking in circles as if to try & confuse us. I'd much rather have someone just say what they want to say without all of that. It rubs me the wrong way. Just say it, Pog.
DeleteMichelle - I did just say it. I said it in four words. It was the title of the comment: Been there done that. The rest of the comment provided instructions to easily access what I wrote and where it is located, and added insignificant notes and a another summary (worded differently). Don't you find it funny?
Deleteposted by pogamen 8/26/2012
Problem is Pog your words don't make sense. Now that I find funny.
DeleteGoing back to the press conference:
ReplyDelete"Based on everything we know, the thousands of hours of investigation, the 1,127 leads that have been received and acted on, we think it is highly unlikely that Ayla Reynolds will be found alive," McCausland said.
"It's a culmination of everything," he said. "The evidence, the searches and the fact that it has been 166 days."
________________________________________
McCausland needed only state: "The evidence we've recovered leads us to conclude that Ayla is likely dead."
Thousands of hours of investigation doesn't translate to a dead Ayla.
1,127 leads that did not pan out doesn't translate to a dead Ayla.
Its a culmination of everything doesn't translate to a dead Ayla. Without citing specifics, what is "everything?"
The fact that it has been 166 days doesn't translate to a dead Ayla.
I see many weaknesses in McCausland's statement. "Culmination" suggests to me that not a single piece of evidence can stand on its own that Ayla is gone. The email cites the amount of blood and items found in the dam as the reasons that LE reached their conclusion. LE refuses to comment on this. They offer up a statement that reads to me like "look, we've really looked hard and we just can't find her. So she's likely dead."
@McKee
DeleteCould not agree more. It seems to me they are saying at every turn that it is the lack of evidence that equals a crime committed.
@mckee - "Culmination" suggests to me that not a single piece of evidence can stand on its own that Ayla is gone.
DeleteAgreed - this is the same pc in which he said "this case is far reaching" - well, what does that mean? If Ayla died in the basement of the DiPietro house how far reaching would that be?
This is also the pc in which he said "we called both parents beforehand" - and then when questioned further, he seemed to be searching his own memory in how to describe both Trista and Justin's responses. Jeff mentioned that one of Ayla's detectives is the person who contacted Trista, which I find believable after watching again to note McCausland's use of "we" instead of "I." I find this misleading, whether it was intentional or not, McCausland described their reactions based on hearsay rather than first hand experience.
In response to kitty--my opinion is that McClausland revealed to the public as much as he safely could without compromising the integrity of an active criminal investigation and a future court trial. McClausland knows what he's doing, and the MSP would not announce a major press conference based on hearsay.
DeleteAnon 12:30---If McCausland revealed things to the public with the interest of protecting the investigation, how does one explain the information released by Trista? Would that information be considered in the same light (protecting an investigation, preserving court trial)?
DeleteHope this makes sense....
I agree with all three of you (mckeekitty, lisa, and space)
DeleteMcCausland never directly answers any question asked of him. His PC's tell me they have no evidence of what happened to Ayla.
I think they started off on the wrong foot. They didn't want this case to go the way the Caylee Anthony and Baby Lisa case went. (The public is a concern in cases like this. Also, in certain cases, people have been wrongly accused to appease the public's outcry and make them feel safe.)
McCausland seems to focus on Justin in his PC's, but Justin has never been named as a POI. They apparently don't have the evidence necessary to say he did something to Ayla, or anybody else for that matter. I think they missed their "window of opportunity" at the beginning, because they were focused on one scenario and refused to look elsewhere.
Just my opinion!
signed:getrealpeople
@Anon 12:30
DeleteObscure 12:49 brings up a good point.
So, does that mean the information Trista says LE told her, is false? Why release info to her that LE won't confirm or deny? Why would they compromise a criminal investigation and future court date?
Why does McCausland always say, "We think....", We believe..."? You can't just say you think you know something, you need evidence to back it up. It doesn't appear LE has the evidence to back up what they "think" they know!
signed:getrealpeople
Anon 12:30...I agree. But it was not necessary for McCausland to say more than "our evidence concludes that Ayla is likely dead, and we cannot comment further as this is an active investigation." Or something like that.
DeleteMy issue is that McCausland listed some rather lame excuses to corroborate his "Ayla is likely dead" statement.
Yes, at the time of the PC, it had been six months. Yes, this investigation has a $500K tab running. Perhaps these factors played into the statement?
At the same PC, McCausland stated that future searches will not be announced in advance, and he did not offer up an explanation for this disonnect with the media and the public. No one has reported seeing a fly-over, a cadaver dog, a dive team, a ground search...nothing. Nothing since June 1. Hopes were raised that lowering the waters was actually a clandestine search for Ayla, but even the owner of the dam said no...it was for routine maintenance. There were no sightings of a police presence at the dam during the maintenance.
My fear is that LE has very little to go on, and thus the "Ayla is likely dead" statment. JMO.
I don't know if this is related to Ayla's case or not, but there was a huge ground search with MSP, game wardens, and dogs (I heard 40+ dogs) at both Veterans' cemeteries in Augusta a couple weeks ago. Police cars were lined up on both sides of the entry road of the older cemetery.
DeleteLE can and will say anything they want to conduct their investigation. They are allowed to out right lie to the people involved and the public if necessary. Their only obligation is to solve the case.
Delete@Points to ponder
DeleteYour statement, to me, suggests LE are above the law. I don't think so.
signed:getrealpeople
Not above the law at all. As far as I know it is not against the law for them to lie to the public or to the people they are dealing with. Show me that law. I am not trying to be rude. I am saying that it is their job. And I am also here to tell you they absolutely do lie to get their job done. I have seen them do it. And I have sources that tell me so.
DeleteYes, police can and do lie to crack a case. Lying to the media and the public is, however, a big no-no:
Delete"What, then, are the consequences of police deception? Law enforcement officers are not obligated to tell everyone about everything and a suspected criminal may not have any expectation of truthfullness (Brooks, p.6). A ‘no comment’ is not a lie–disagreements over public disclosure is a matter for the courts, but the public does have a right to expect truthfullness. Deception erodes public confidence and may create a perception of law enforcement as being of the same sort as felons and fugitives, even if the deception is publically acknowledged later, as Bok would demand (p.11). Lying is effective only as long as the person being deceived believes and the deceiver’s credibility remains intact–public disclosure of previous deception puts that at risk."
http://www.ohio.edu/ethics/1999-conferences/the-ethics-of-police-deception/index.html
I read the above article. It confirms that yes police do indeed use many tactics to crack cases. Including lying. I did not read anywhere in the article however where it stated that it was a no no to lie to the media or the public. Maybe I missed it? Thank you for the link. Very interesting and informative.
DeleteBut...just to play devil's advocate on that... didn't they state that MSP was using some brand new kinds of tactics in this case? Way back in January? Anyone have a link to that interview handy? I remember it because I turned it over and over in my head, as to what kind of brand new tactics a police force could use in a missing child case. And I then began to wonder if it was a new tactic gone awry, at a certain point.
Deletepogamen stands for:
ReplyDelete------------------
p-Pure
o-Outrageous
g-Garbage
a-A
m-Mental
e-Encripts
n-Nonsense
-----------------
jmo
what pogamen means to me
Deletep-player
o-of online
g-games
amen :)
Anonymous 05:42 - 'of' gets to walk? That should be poo gamen. Why does 'of' walk, 'for' stays, and 'because of' is never used? It's not a riddle. Amen. Excuse me, I gotta go p.
Delete@McKeeKitty: Agree with what you've just written. The following statement sums up my feelings as well. When someone, especially a child, is missing for that long a period and assuming LE has truly looked hard and followed up on all leads, then I think it is a common sense conclusion that the child is probably dead. There must be statistics out there somewhere that shows how many missing children are eventually found about 6+ months. Not many I'll bet. :
ReplyDelete"They offer up a statement that reads to me like "look, we've really looked hard and we just can't find her. So she's likely dead."
I believe that some detective (not McCausland) may have fed the Reynolds' some of that information they share on the web. I don't necessarily believe it's true, though.
I meant found ALIVE.
DeleteOr they are saying based on the evidence we have including her blood in the DiPietro basement, the LIP and other stuff we aren't about to publicly disclose, we believe she is deceased. But on the remote chance we're wrong, we've been searching high and low and found nothing, and that sadly corroborates our conclusion that Ayla is likely dead.
DeleteBystander, I doubt that anything is fed to anyone without full knowledge and approval of the investigating team. I believe that information has been given to Trista and her family, with full knowledge, on LE's part, that it would be "leaked". Whether Trista knew it was given to her for the purpose of leaking it, is another thing. I have no doubt that Trista was given certain information and was told by LE that they would neither confirm or deny the information. What the point was for this by the LE, only they know.
Delete@M-I-M: Regarding leaking info to Trista, obviously I only have an opinion, no fact. I'll be honest here, as I always am, and admit that I don't have 100% trust in LE. I do believe that a detective could give less than accurate information to Trista et al based on his/her opinion rather than fact. If LE gave info to Trista hoping it would be leaked, I guess I'm missing the point as to why. I guess you are wondering why as well M-I-M.
Delete"I believe that information has been given to Trista and her family, with full knowledge, on LE's part, that it would be "leaked". Whether Trista knew it was given to her for the purpose of leaking it, is another thing. I have no doubt that Trista was given certain information and was told by LE that they would neither confirm or deny the information. What the point was for this by the LE, only they know."
Delete_________________________
First, Trista doesn't run these A4A, J4A, and U4A blogs...Jeff and Tori do. Why would LE "leak" the information to a biased blog?? What "audience" is LE trying to reach here?
I have a hard time accepting that LE uses a blog as a vehicle to deliberately release sensitive information. So...LE tells Jeff "hey...tell your herd that 'it was more than a cupful' but be aware we won't be confirming your statement or credibility, okay? It is for the greater good of the case."
This isn't Watergate and "Deep Throat" folks.
And I guess Jeff got LE's nod of approval to cite the amount of blood and items found in the dam in an email sent prior to the PC? And LE said something like "sure, Jeff...release some details about the the PC to some special friends."
I don't think so.
Anonymous 21:08, No Trista does not run A4A, J4A or U4A blogs. The LE does not give information to a blog, they give information to the mother and father of the missing child. WHAT information they give to either, is up to them. Obviously, the information posted by Jeff/Tori on the blogs was obtained (supposedly) from Trista.
DeleteI would have an extreme hard time believing that the LE would give information to any blog. And you might note that I never said that the LE gave information to the blogs.
I doubt the LE tells anyone to "release" certain information, but I am sure they tell certain information knowing it will be released. There is a difference there. As I'm said, I am sure that whatever information was given Trista and the family, they were most likely told that as far as the LE goes, they will not confirm or deny any information. (true or not).
When I say that information was given to Trista and her family, with full knowledge that it would be leaked, I mean that any information the police did not want out there, wouldn't be given to anyone. I highly doubt the police said, "hey Jeff, leak this." The LE is smarter than that! - KJ
"I doubt the LE tells anyone to "release" certain information, but I am sure they tell certain information knowing it will be released. There is a difference there."
Delete__________________________
I'm sorry, KJ. You lost me. LE tells "certain information knowing it will be released." But they will not deny/confirm the released findings or statements? Enter the question of credibility.
I respect your views. I just don't get this. This stuff isn't "leaked" to the media...only to a particular parent (blog) with an audience dwindling in numbers. What's the point? IMO, LE is desperate. Or the Reynolds clan is desperate.
In peace, my friend!
Anonymous 23:21 - No worries. At times I don't understand myself!
DeleteApparently I wasn't able to express what I meant. I was just trying to say that I believe that the LE sometimes says things to people just to see where it goes. And to gauge reactions to what they say. It's just a tactic. I don't think the LE specifically releases any information to a blog. It just happens that the Stepfather of Trista runs a blog and he has stated things there. Seriously, who knows what the sources is for the information stated. If we don't hear it directly from the horses mouth (LE), and they won't "confirm or deny", it shouldn't be taken as truth. JMO
Peace right back at ya!
Regarding the furry boot thing, here is a photo of Phoebe the morning of the disappearance. She is wearing what looks like sneaks. Am I to believe that she ditched the furry boots because she thought Kadoe's source saw her wearing them? No, I think not.
ReplyDeletehttp://media.photobucket.com/image/%2522ayla%20reynolds%2522/klaasend/missingtot1copy.jpg
thats exactly what phoebe did. ditch the boots.
DeleteMost excellent, Bystander
Deletethe witness that saw phoebe in furry boots that morning was 4 feet away from her ugly mug. that was the first time the witness had ever seen phoebe. a few weeks later the witness and spouse were watching the evening news.i believe it was an interview with phoebe. the witness freaked when they saw her. "that is the woman i saw that morning with the child". believe it or not, but that is the truth. why would a decent person make that up?
Deletekadoe. A decent person can be mistaken.
DeleteWhen would Phoebe have had time to ditch the boots? Their home was closed to them the very day that Ayla went missing. They were not allowed back in for weeks. They were not allowed to bring any belongings.
DeleteFurther more if you were going to steal a child wouldn't you probably wear clothing that was a little more discreet? I mean I am just thinking I would probably at least not put on my big furry boots!
Adding to what Really? said, eyewitness identifications are so often mistaken, it's frightening to think how heavily our justice system relies on them.
Deletehow could a person mistaken phoebe at 4 feet? come on !!!
DeleteI don't know - how could a strange man approach me in a parking lot once insisting I was the "girl" he saw there the week before? I said I wasn't, he looked at me like I was lying. Whatever. It happens. Why don't you get back to us after you talk to Ben McCanna.
Delete@Anonymous
DeleteYou said this person did not know Phoebe when they saw her at 4 feet away that morning. "IT was the first time they had ever seen Phoebe" Then you said it was a few weeks later they saw her on tv. Sounds like the perfect ingredients for mistaken identity to me!
why is it so difficult to accept the fact that phoebe was involved in the disappearanmce of Ayla Reynolds? i don't understand what else is needed. is it to simple for your minds to comprehend?
DeleteKadoe - What else is needed? How about LE telling us they followed your tip and that's what happened? We understand what you're saying - we just don't believe it. Is that so complicated? Is it also too complicated for you to call Ben McCanna and ask him what he knows? This is my last comment to you until you can say anything more than what you've been repeating for weeks.
Deletemel we're on making a cake here buddy. some dirtbag took a beautiful child and has alot of people hurting.
DeleteIf Phoebe was involved LE would have been all over her. They barely took notice of her. No she was not a concern for them and they filed that tip away with the other 1000's of tips they received sadly as not valid.
DeleteMaybe the tip you should be concerned with is the one with Trista having been sighted with Ayla at her motel on the evening of Dec 19th and again the morning of Dec 20th putting a child of her description in a vehicle.
Deletereally. i did call ben earlier today. i left a voicemail. i shared this story with ben very early into the investigation, when LE took almost a week to respond to the initial lead. i have not spoken to him since than. i have never shared this story on this blog before. i guess i have now. i have no desire to correspond any further. Ayla is always in my thoughts.
Delete@kadoe - I hope you get resolutions to your concerns.
Delete@ GetReal, LE uses that type of terminology in almost all scenarios. If they had someone on video killing someone, they'd likely say "we have Joey on video killing Mrs. Robinson" and leave the "we know" "we are certain" comments out. If they did not do so, they'd likely get sued and /or cases would be thrown out all over the place. Even on trial, they say things like "the evidence points to". This is normal language and behavior.
ReplyDeleteAre you just making this stuff up as you go?
DeleteSTOP generalizing. You probably have heard public statements from about 20 LE agencies. There are many more than that.
Exactly, Charlie. You are correct that it is SOP.
DeleteHmmm. Okay.
ReplyDeleteYou know what bothers me? Ayla's name isn't even on this list: MSP Missing Persons in Maine
ReplyDeleteI checked out "missing persons in maine" to make sure it wasn't an old site you found. (No offense meant :) ) The last entry of a missing person is 2004. Why aren't they keeping up this site?
Deletesigned:getrealpeople
Nor is the "Unsolved Homicides" page being updated.
Deletethanks, getreal, for taking the time to check into that. It does have bearing on the conclusion one can draw, when the site/page hasn't been updated in 8 years. So of course they wouldn't have listed a 7 month old missing persons case.
Deletetruth be told23:22
Deletethanks, getreal, for taking the time to check into that. It does have bearing on the conclusion one can draw, when the site/page hasn't been updated in 8 years. So of course they wouldn't have listed a 7 month old missing persons case.
****************
I already knew it hadn't been updated. anyone who takes the few seconds to click the link would see that right away. I think it's terrible. And you, thinking it's acceptable for the MSP to claim they are using all available resources to locate Ayla when they won't take the time to update their own missing persons page doesn't sit right with me. It would take a minute to add Ayla's name.
Anyway, I stated a fact. What conclusion do you draw from this fact?
I can draw a conclusion, TT. MSP may not be on top of their game. Why in the world leave a 2005 stale website of the missing suspended on the internet?
DeleteThis from the MS on January 1:
"Investigators in a missing-child case must consider a huge spectrum of possible motives and potential suspects, said Vogel, the former FBI agent. He urged police to take advantage of technology to bolster their investigation, such as setting up a website dedicated to Ayla."
Sounds like a good suggestion to me. But they can't even update their own MSP page?
mckeekitty09:11
DeleteI can draw a conclusion, TT. MSP may not be on top of their game. Why in the world leave a 2005 stale website of the missing suspended on the internet?
This from the MS on January 1:
"Investigators in a missing-child case must consider a huge spectrum of possible motives and potential suspects, said Vogel, the former FBI agent. He urged police to take advantage of technology to bolster their investigation, such as setting up a website dedicated to Ayla."
Sounds like a good suggestion to me. But they can't even update their own MSP page?
**************
That's exactly right. It's not like they have to create a new website. It's a matter of adding Ayla's name to an existing official maine.gov page and including some basic facts to help aid and arm the public with reliable information.
Why can't the MSP can't have their facts recorded in one public place? Is it because they are relying on U4A? No way.
So what's stopping them? No web updating budget?
Laziness?
Oversight?
Reluctance?
????
"Why can't the MSP can't have their facts recorded in one public place?"
DeleteStrike the second "can't."
Agreed, there should be a comprehensive list of still missing and missing/found persons (descriptions, dates, circumstances) that is maintained at the state level. Perhaps with all the down-sizing and reassigning of duties it is not part of someones job right now. It would be nice if the state police (of each state) had a clerk specifically assigned to this task.
DeleteTT: Are you familiar with the Kitty Wardwell case? MSP took some heat for that one.
DeleteNo, kitty, I am not...
Deletemckee - isn't she the one found in a freezer in a Lewiston storage unit after the owner of the unit died?
DeleteAnonymous16:53
ReplyDelete"the witness that saw phoebe in furry boots that morning was 4 feet away from her ugly mug. that was the first time the witness had ever seen phoebe. a few weeks later the witness and spouse were watching the evening news.i believe it was an interview with phoebe. the witness freaked when they saw her. "that is the woman i saw that morning with the child". believe it or not, but that is the truth. why would a decent person make that up?"
Ok I got a bit to say....first off who the hell are you to decide who is a "decent" person?? MOST decent people wouldnt right out and say my sister has an "Ugly mug" dont you think your "friend" should be carrying the burden of getting people to notice what she has said she saw?? Why would a "decent" person call you friend??
Apparently Ben has resolved WHO the person in the fur boots is. My sister has been very nice to you by giving you the information you need to further your investigation and call someone else names.Phoebe wouldnt be caught dead wearing fur boots....sounds like your sense of style! ya...I can see someone with your mentality wearing furry boots with pom poms swinging to and fro yelling out to strangers how ugly their mugs are....
I think perhaps a few lessons in manners and 4 or 5 years of education should bring you up to par so that you can write over here.
Way to go Selena! Why is kadoe so insistent that the friend saw Phoebe? Why doesn't the friend speak up? Maybe they are one and the same. Kadoe, give us a break and contact Ben. And yes, your "ugly mug" comment is telling! It really doesn't matter if we believe you or not, but we heard your story the first time, let it go already. Your friend has access to tell what they saw, why do you continually speak for them? You and your "group" continue to say the Dipietro's say nothing, yet Phoebe answered your question. Oh, I know you don't believe her, you can't prove it was really Phoebe answering, It doesn't matter what they (the DiPietro's) say, even though you people keep asking them to give answers, you don't believe anything they say when they do answer. So what is it you really want?
Deletesigned:getrealpeople
getrealpeople, this is the first I've heard of Kadoe (and story) beyond side-comments about the other site. I posted a comment to Michelle (above on this page) that's relevant. It's the one about ballot box stuffers. That's not all they do, it's a year-round operation. It's one of those piles to side-step. You and Selena defensively reply the way I would react to such a claim. But I would like to add this...
DeleteYour question: So what is it you really want?
Possible Answer: If it isn't Phoebe, then why does the woman looks so much like Phoebe. And reading their comments, I would like to know that, too. Are those four men dopplegangers for men in town? This is something that matters to these people; I can see why. I hope Ben McCanna takes a good look at this.
posted by pogamen 8/26/2012
LOL furry boots with pom poms swinging to and fro you are killin' me Selena! ;)
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't matter what they (the DiPietro's) say, even though you people keep asking them to give answers, you don't believe anything they say when they do answer. So what is it you really want?
ReplyDeleteOnly the facts ma'am, just the facts. And to me facts translate into the truth. If only truths are told by those involved with Ayla at the time she disappeared, there should be no reason why she is NOT home yet. So I guess we have some involved who do not want her found.
Sadly, we have statements being made that are being passed off as "facts" and "truth." I can appreciate LE not commenting, denying, or confirming statements...this is, afterall, an on-going investigation. But when LE doesn't deny/confirm a statement, it is permitted to float out there and sway SOME opinions.
ReplyDeletepogamen @ 15:33
ReplyDeletekadoe's story was checked into, LE told her/him that the tip didn't have legs.
Kadoe still keeps pushing it on blogs.
Since kadoe is not happy with the answer he/she received then its time to get off the blogs, carry their behind & witness to the police station.
Whining on a blog doesn't get results.
@Anonymous 17:57 - We agree, in part. I hope the news reporter investigates for these people. Some people have a talent for recognizing faces, even after decades of time - I don't. While it may be that the woman isn't tied to Ayla's disappearance, there is still the doubt because of recognition. It does drive curiosity.
Delete'Whining on a blog doesn't get results.' Total agreement.
the witness was NOT 4 ft away from the people they saw. Those who heard the tip in the first weeks know that is not the case. The witness was an entire street over, and wasn't close enough to make out the type of vehicle. But they described what they could glean from the distance at just after 5 a.m. on a dark winter pre-dawn morning.
DeleteRegarding the babygate discussion from the 1st part of this blog - thoughts I've been pondering about the gate still being up in the morning...
ReplyDeleteIf the gate is tall enough that Ayla and Gabby couldn't go over it, I wonder how tall an adult would have to be to step over it without disturbing it? Presumably, still, for one to keep their balance there would be fingerprints or glove fibers on the door casing where the gate was. If a kidnapper removed the gate, there should be fingerprints or fibers on that, but then it seems doubtful a kidnapper would take the time to put the gate back up. So, if we assume LE did a thorough check of that area - how tall and agile would someone have to be to quietly step over the gate without holding on to the door frame?
Depends on the style of the gate. Older model verses newer model.
Deletehttp://www.bing.com/images/search?q=baby+gates&qpvt=baby+gates&FORM=IGRE
The older type you could push to the side and open, they had a latch to lock it closed, to casing of door.
My recollections of the baby gate are a bit fuzzy.
DeleteHow do we know the gate was still up in the morning? The only mention of a gate came from Angela Harry, right? Third hand information. I remember her writing that Justin crashed through the gate and broke it or something like that. Perhaps the gate was already open. He still could have crashed into it in some way couldn't he?
Now if the gate was still up, then I would say that an intruder would have had to come in the front door or through the window. What do you think?
@Bystander - see the discussion in "My Challenge to You (closed for comments)" - I'm assuming they didn't leave both the side door AND the front door unlocked (certainly that would serve no purpose) - I can't imagine an intruder going in the front door of a residence - it seems the kitchen, entry, and basement stairs are off the side door which is the one that was often unlocked - if I'm understanding everything I've read about it correctly. The kidnapper would have entered the side door (unlocked) - gone up the stairs into the kitchen, past the cellar stairs, stepped over the babygate, entered Ayla's room and either passed her out the window to someone or walked back the way they came, stepping over the gate while holding Ayla. Unless, the kidnapper took the gate down and left it down - and someone got up to use the bathroom and assumed someone forgot to put it up and then did so.
DeleteAngela Harry specifically stated that the baby gate was placed there each morning. So, apparently it was not in place overnight. Someone had to have placed it there that morning. It was originally stated that Elisha found that Ayla was missing, but updated to state that it was Courtney. Then Courtney went to tell Justin that Ayla wasn't there. Then Justin came storming up the stairs, into the baby gate. That particular scenario doesn't make full sense, in my opinion. Why did Courtney even replace the gate during such a horrible event? I'm just curious, not asking in any accusatory way. Does anyone have any better insight, into what exactly happened that morning?
DeleteThe gate was probably up. And Elisha yelled to Justin or Courtney. Who went to tell Justin. I have baby gates all over my home we step right over them all day and night long.
Delete@Anonymous
DeleteI do not understand your question. What do you mean why would Courtney even replace the gate? Did someone say she did? I thought the gate was already up? Didn't Elisha put it up that morning when she first woke up before going in to check on Ayla? That is how I understood it.
Maybe Elisha only put the gate up but was not the one who checked on Ayla she went back in her room first to get Gabby and Courtney saw first that Ayla was missing.
DeleteIt was NEVER stated that Elisha discovered her missing. It was by wrongly worded sentences that people were able to incorrectly assume that was being said. It was Elisha that placed it there in the morning, as she had a habit of doing, to prevent the toddlers from wandering to the top of the stairs. In the original blog post that you, Anon, are referring to, there is NO sentence that states that Elisha told Justin Ayla was not in her room. That is a lie, but it is a lie derived from an understandable misunderstanding. The problem with this lie is that when Angela tried to correct the jumping to conclusions that people did, she herself was called a liar for it.
DeleteThe whole sequence of events with regards to that is not complicated or confusing, it was just MADE OUT TO BE by people who wanted to make a mountain out of a molehill. Many others in this case, and those on Trista's side by and large, have made much bigger and more obvious gaffs or flubs that have all been swept under the rug time and again. For whatever reason people are oblivious to their hypocrisy.
Courtney didn't replace a baby gate at the stairs, as anon 22:04 suggests must have happened ... she had stepped over it in the first place upon going upstairs and stepped back over it on her way back down. In that moment of exchange where Justin was awoken with questions about where his daughter was- if not there and not in her room- he bolted up the stairs and in an effort to get over it and do so quickly he knocked it over. And in Angela's telling of the morning's events, she had felt that it illustrated the panic of that moment and included it. She wasn't asked to write anything at all, and didn't run it by anyone before writing what she did. No one had any oversight on what she wrote about it. So the fact that people want to make it seem like it was some kind of intentional diversion tactic is laughable to those who know that know such thing EVER happened.
I meant *no* such thing ever happened. The later it gets the more typos...
DeleteAlso, why are we even talking about this? The gate was not even placed somewhere that was in the path of someone coming into the house on the ground/main level.
So, if the gate is placed there in the morning, what is to keep Gabby or Ayla from getting up in the middle of the night and toppling down the stairs? Would make more sense to me to remove the gate from the hallway at night and place it directly at the top of the stairs. Then in the morning, move it back.
DeleteAnd what about little Ayden down in the basement? He could have gotten up and went up the stairs and fallen back down.
All those children and only one baby gate?
I live in a condo and I have one 18 month old toddler living with me. It is two story. Before she could walk we had two baby gates, one between the living room and kitchen and one at the bottom of the stairs.
Now that she can walk, we took the baby gate from the kitchen and placed it at the top of the stairs.
She is still in her crib so no worries about midnight wandering, but she is a fast little bugger and an ounce of prevention is worth a broken bone or worse from a stair fall.
The gates are not permanent, but they are metal. They have a latch and door that swings open, so no taking up and down.
Grace, you should only use a permanent gate at the top of the stairs--seriously. The pressure-mounted gates are very dangerous for the top of stairs. I recommmend KidCo walk-thru metal gates. Expensive, but like carseats--you can't put a price tag on safety.
DeleteSince I don't own this condo, I can't do that. My daughter is moving out soon, if her new house has stairs I will look into that. Thank you for the information!
DeleteYes the pressure mounted ones aren't the best, but the metal ones are much more stable than the wooden ones, and can't be broken.
@truth be told - thank you for your response
Delete- "It was Elisha that placed it there in the morning, as she had a habit of doing, to prevent the toddlers from wandering to the top of the stairs."
I assumed the gate stayed up in case the toddlers got up in the middle of the night - to prevent them from wandering to the top of the stairs while the adults were sleeping.
-"Also, why are we even talking about this?"
We haven't really talked about it before, that I recall.
- "The gate was not even placed somewhere that was in the path of someone coming into the house on the ground/main level."
I'm not sure this matters anymore if the gate wasn't up at night anyway. I was hoping it would tell us something about the kidnapper - how tall they would have to be if they didn't leave evidence on the door jamb, and the thought of there being an accomplice that Ayla was passed out the window to.
I think the babygate is an important part of the case. First of all Truth be told posts on here to clear up the baby gate confusion, but leaves me even more confused. Just the simple fact there is no door to the cellar is scarey for toddlers, Then insert the baby gate being put up in the mornings, when we have heard that Gabby sometimes sleeps with Elisha in a bed, and could at any time get up and go into the kitchen without the babygate up.
ReplyDeleteAlso how agile does one have to be to step over a baby gate coming up from the cellar stairs, plus how dangerous is it for adult to step OVER a babygate to go down the cellar stairs?
I think the report (tip,rumor) about the people talking of the abduction at the drug clinic, on the morning of 17th, before it was reported that Ayla was missing is an important part of this case ! Is it a fact or rumor that the person did report this to the police ?
ReplyDeleteThe methadone clinic incident is reported here in the comments. You will notice that Ben McCanna chimes in that nothing came from the lead.
Deletehttp://justiceforayla.blogspot.com/2012/02/what-happened-to-ayla-reynolds.html
That story never seemed alarming to me. I would assume Justin made a few phone calls before calling the police - for instance "mom, did you come get Ayla?" - "Lance, is Ayla with you?" - that kind of thing. It's within the realm of possibility that one of them would know someone that goes to or works at the clinic.
Deletetruth be told:
ReplyDeleteHarry said she has kept in touch with DiPietro over the years, and they have spoken on the phone nearly every day since Dec. 17 --the day Ayla was reported missing from her Violette Avenue home. DiPietro could not be reached Friday for comment.
The narrative posted on the website is a compilation of those phone conversations, Harry said during a phone interview Friday with the Morning Sentinel.
DiPietro last saw Ayla on Dec. 16. Harry describes the evening as ordinary.
There were six people in the house: DiPietro and Ayla; his sister Elisha DiPietro, 23, and her young daughter; and DiPietro's girlfriend Courtney Roberts, 24, and her young son. Roberts and her son were visiting from Portland.
Ayla was sleeping in a room by herself, Harry said. Elisha DiPietro and her daughter shared a room, while DiPietro, Roberts and Roberts' son shared a room in the basement.
"The night of Friday, December 16th, 2011, was no different than most any other night," Harry wrote. "Everyone went to bed, Ayla was checked on at 10 p.m., and sometime after 8 a.m. on that Saturday morning, people in the house started waking up and realizing that their entire world had just turned into a nightmare."
Elisha DiPietro was the first person to wake up that day, Harry said.
"It was at about 8:30 (a.m.) that Justin's sister, whose room is closest to (Ayla's) room, awoke and started moving about the house in her Saturday morning routine," according to the website account.
Elisha DiPietro checked Ayla's room and discovered Ayla wasn't there.
"After a rushed trip down the stairs and the discovery that Justin did not have Ayla either, there was instant panic. (DiPietro) bolted up the stairs, knocking over the gate that was placed there every morning for the two little girls, and into her room. Nothing. She wasn't there. She wasn't anywhere inside. Outside --nothing," Harry wrote.
http://www.onlinesentinel.com/news/new-website-offers-fresh-details-on-ayla_2012-01-20.html
truth be told, there is also this (the original account by Angela Harry was clear, it wasn't confusing, and it wasn't just one sentence. There was a lot of emphisis placed on Elisha finding that Ayla was missing:
DeleteHarry's original story said DiPietro's sister, Elisha DiPietro, discovered Ayla's room was empty, and she informed DiPietro that his daughter wasn't in her room. Later, Harry revised the story to say it was Roberts who told DiPietro. Harry said the revision was a clarification, not a wholesale change. "It's not that I'm changing my story," she said Monday. "It's just that I wrote something that wasn't clear; and when I clarified it, it set everybody off."
Harry said the revision was a clarification, not a wholesale change.
"It's not that I'm changing my story," she said Monday. "It's just that I wrote something that wasn't clear; and when I clarified it, it set everybody off."
http://www.kjonline.com/news/website-for-ayla-reynolds-generates-some-controversy_2012-01-23.html
Also FYI, both of these interviews with Angela Harry are reported by Ben McCanna
So... I'm simply trying to understand what exactly happened the morning Ayla was discivered missing. Elisha's name should be replaced with Courtney's name - that is what Angela said, correct? So then why would Courtney rush down stairs to see if Ayla was there? She just came from there, no? Or is the whole story a "mix up"? It seems (truth be told), there was not a lie made up about the story, from the Reynolds side, as you would like others to believe or think (or maybe thats just what you think). The lie seems to be from Angela. She clearly stated she spoke with Justin daily. She clearly DID state Elisha found Ayla missing and rushed down the stairs, and discovered Ayla was not there either. Was it Elisha or Courtney. If Courtney, she knew Ayla was not there, so she would not need to rediscover that she was not there.
DeleteThis is very important, to know what happened, exactly, that morning. I don't think its wrong to have questions about the story that was told and revised, especially as the revision does not make sense.
We have to be able to question both sides here. As McKee says, we need to ask the tough questions.
Phoebe reads here, and has posted. Maybe she could clear this all up?
So I am reading the above post. I do not know the answer to what happened that morning but as I read I have to wonder if maybe in their panic they all remember exactly how it happened either. Who yelled first? Who ran where? Who looked where?
DeleteYou ask why would Courtney look back downstairs when she had just been there and knew she was not there. I don't know that answer. But I do know that if my child was missing I would maybe in panic start retracing my steps. Looking where I had already looked. So I don't know what happened that morning but I am sure that they were in a panic and either Elisha told Courtney who then went to tell Justin or Courtney herself saw and went to tell him. Maybe they were both in the hall about the same time. That would make sense. I do know one thing they all must have been in a state of shock.
Another point about the baby gate: if it was not up during the night, the babies had access to the kitchen where they could interact with a stove or turn on water, and if any cleaning chemicals were stored there, possibly get into those (although cabinet locks might be effective in preventing the latter).
ReplyDeleteWhy all the talk about the baby gate? The main reason I can think of is it was broken when police arrived and they needed an explanation of why it was broken. If it was kicked down in anger (such as during the clean-up), it may be a lot more broken or broken differently than if Justin was just trying to get past it and ran it down. It could be a very important piece of evidence.
The baby gate points to a possible Dec. 16 death, because if the death occurred earlier and they were staging a kidnapping, they might have thought to have either removed it or replaced it.
If the gate is a key piece of evidence, it could easily point in the other direction. If there was a death and the gate was involved, surely it would have been put away (at the very least) and could easily have been explained that it had been broken for some time. Possibly broken when someone fell on it, possibly kicked or thrown during an argument, almost any excuse could be used. The fact that it was noticeable and included in the story suggests that there was, in fact, a panic that morning. Could it have possibly been staged along with the kidnapping?? Sure. But in staging you would usually develop a logical and consistent story.
DeleteAgreed it could be evidence either way. I doubt they would have told police it was kicked down in anger even if that being done had nothing to do with Ayla's death. It's possible they lied to cover something up that wasn't related to what happened to Ayla. It wouldn't look good for them that there was violence in the house no matter whether it was what led to Ayla's absence or not.
DeleteYes why all the talk of the baby gate? Good question. Ask yourself this. Who is doing all the talking about this baby gate though. And who ever said the baby gate was broken? Where is that coming from. Good grief.
DeletePogamen, can you please just state clearly what it is you see. There is just so much confusion with what you write, it just does not make any sense. Can you please explain to all of us how you go about seeing these events. If you can do what you say maybe you can tell me if you can see me and describe what i look like or describe a room in my home. Above you stated that an abduction was going to occur in about 2 years for money and will be high profile, if you can see this and know who it is then why cant you stop this event from happening and alert the person or LE about this.
ReplyDeleteI would like to get back to a comment I made earlier. Trista said, "If my daughter went missing, why didn`t her cousin -- you know, at least make a noise or scream or be taken as well. "
ReplyDeleteHow could a 17, 18 month old know to scream for help. Trista’s comment is very disturbing to me. How can she say, as a mother, if you’re not going to make a noise or scream, be taken as well.
Trista is saying that Gabriella should of made a noise, or screamed, yet Ayla was the one abducted. If either child were to wake up while an intruder was in the room, wouldn’t it more likely be Ayla. Children, at that age, can be picked up and moved all over the place without waking up. Yet, Gabriella, 2 months younger than Ayla, should of screamed out for help when her cousin was being taken? Children at that age would most likely cry, they certainly would not "scream".
So, did Ayla wake up, when the intruder came into her room and picked her up? Did Ayla know the person and that is why she did not cry?
I still don’t understand it, and I still find her statement odd.
Anyone else have an opinion on this?
Signed:getrealpeople