Two missing girls

I did not see that. I assume we are talking boyfriend meaning not the father of one of the girls.

I believe that Dan Morrissey is a step-father to Lyric, but what I read indicated that it was Misty Morrissey's current bf that was arrested (as they are separated/divorcing).
 
I did not see that. I assume we are talking boyfriend meaning not the father of one of the girls.

Yea, from the tone of what I read, it didn't seem like the father, or step-father of either of the girls, just someone else she (I'm assuming Misty Morrissey) was seeing.
 
Watching today's law enforcement presser. FIrst part of it they have not been shy about saying the parents are not being cooperative. In fact if I understood her correctly she said they are being a hindrance.
That seems so odd to me why there would not be full and utmost cooperation.

The thing is, they were extremely cooperative for a week, and the investigators couldn't 100% rule them out as suspects. I'm not saying they have no ties to what happened, and I'm not saying the police are wrong for still not clearing their involvement, but if it were me, and even if I knew I was 100% not involved in any way, I would contact an attorney for advice if I was being treated as a suspect.
 
The thing is, they were extremely cooperative for a week, and the investigators couldn't 100% rule them out as suspects. I'm not saying they have no ties to what happened, and I'm not saying the police are wrong for still not clearing their involvement, but if it were me, and even if I knew I was 100% not involved in any way, I would contact an attorney for advice if I was being treated as a suspect.

You can have an attorney and be cooperative.

From how I read it, they're being babies because they are being questioned more than they think they should be. However, if they didn't have the past that they CHOSE to have, they probably wouldn't face as much questioning by the police.
 
I wouldn't say "being babies."
They mentioned being awakened early (like 3 AM) and pressed to make a confession of some sort, and that led them to feel that they needed a lawyer.

I don't know these people, but I'd want a lawyer when questioning started.
 
You can have an attorney and be cooperative.

From how I read it, they're being babies because they are being questioned more than they think they should be. However, if they didn't have the past that they CHOSE to have, they probably wouldn't face as much questioning by the police.

We dont know how they were questioned. Maybe the questions got very pointed, accusational. Its easy to say 'they have to do that' (and they do, the parents must be ruled out), but if you're on the other side of it its also easy to see why someone would refuse to be treated like that when their kid is missing.
 
I wouldn't say "being babies."
They mentioned being awakened early (like 3 AM) and pressed to make a confession of some sort, and that led them to feel that they needed a lawyer.

I don't know these people, but I'd want a lawyer when questioning started.

I agree, in fact, I probably would've gotten a lawyer ASAP.

But you can have a lawyer and still be cooperative with police.
 
You can have an attorney and be cooperative.

From how I read it, they're being babies because they are being questioned more than they think they should be. However, if they didn't have the past that they CHOSE to have, they probably wouldn't face as much questioning by the police.

I wont argue that they chose their past and that is the exact reason they are being questioned, but I've also heard that the police have been very rough on them.
 
95% of fanatics say its because the parents don't want to look bad in front of the media.
5% of fanatics say its because the parents know something about it because they were saying the kids were abducted before the lake was searched.

I'm part of the 5%, saying the parents know something about it, and the whole thing is drug related.

Weren't you also the one saying "count me as one who believes they are in that lake"?

Not that it matters either way, but to me it just sounds like you've been trying to make yourself out to be sherlock holmes with however it turns out, when the point of the thread should be concern for the kids...
 
I wont argue that they chose their past and that is the exact reason they are being questioned, but I've also heard that the police have been very rough on them.

I'm sure there is a reason the police have been hard on them.

I know polygraph tests were done. Do we know that they passed them 100%? Even if they failed the entire test, can they be arrested? I don't believe you can actually arrest someone because of a polygraph.
 
Weren't you also the one saying "count me as one who believes they are in that lake"?

Not that it matters either way, but to me it just sounds like you've been trying to make yourself out to be sherlock holmes with however it turns out, when the point of the thread should be concern for the kids...

I've said the parents are in on it the entire time for coming out right away and saying their children were abducted before the lake was even searched.

I'm 99% certain I never said the children were in the lake. I will go back now and check.
 
I think polygraphs are sort of secondary evidence If that makes sense. Like used to legitimate other evidence.
 
I'm sure there is a reason the police have been hard on them.

I know polygraph tests were done. Do we know that they passed them 100%? Even if they failed the entire test, can they be arrested? I don't believe you can actually arrest someone because of a polygraph.

Could be that the police pressed for good reason. Could be that they pressed because they're getting nowhere and need something.

We don't know enough to be real sure here.
 
Weren't you also the one saying "count me as one who believes they are in that lake"?

Not that it matters either way, but to me it just sounds like you've been trying to make yourself out to be sherlock holmes with however it turns out, when the point of the thread should be concern for the kids...

Just checked. July 17th I asked how the water will go back in the lake when the search is finished and if all the fish would be killed - that is all I've said about the lake in this thread. Also, since July 17th, I've said I think someone in the family knows something about this.
 
Weren't you also the one saying "count me as one who believes they are in that lake"?

Not that it matters either way, but to me it just sounds like you've been trying to make yourself out to be sherlock holmes with however it turns out, when the point of the thread should be concern for the kids...

This. The parents of these kids have been questioned already. They have undergone polygraph tests. They had cooperated up until Thursday, and all of this speculation about their involvement revolves around something the cops knew the entire time. This kind of stuff doesn't naturally happen in Iowa, not even in DSM or Cedar Rapids. The Waterloo area is like the 4th biggest metro in the state after DSM, CR, and Quad Cities areas. We have enough cops working on this case as it is, we don't need morons on the internet to spout their opinions about the families.
 
Could be that the police pressed for good reason. Could be that they pressed because they're getting nowhere and need something.

We don't know enough to be real sure here.

If they need something, I think it's alright they go to two people with an extremely suspicious past, especially if it is their children that are missing.
 
It's easy to see why the police would be tough on these two in questioning. Parents are always prime suspects, even when they don't have extensive criminal history.
 

Help Support Us

Become a patron