Monday, July 29, 2013

What To Do ?




We will let the public decide by releasing the "unequivocal evidence".. before the summer is out.. 



Jeff

My question is, is the reason for your statement due to the frustration of Justice moving so slowly? Doesn't it deserve another look before the leap? I do trust your judgement, and I am sure you will look at it more than once. It is ultimately up to Trista, but you have probably been her adviser on the right thing to do many times.

The fear we all have is could it compromise the authorities case in bringing Justice for Ayla. Could they be a week, or a month away from cracking the case wide open, and by showing the evidence put them back to square one. Could Ayla be a week, or a month away from being reunited with her loved ones, only to have it postponed for months due to frustration for lack of answers.

I know this must all weigh heavy on your mind and heart. We want you, along with Trista, to know that you both will be in our thoughts and prayers, as you struggle with this major decision.

207 comments:

  1. I believe if Trista/Jeff were truly motivated by frustration, there are better ways to go about it. I'm not sure "strong-arming" LE is the way to go.

    Trista could take her story to the media.

    It is, I believe, a good story. If this "unequivocal evidence" truly exists, why should Trista have to bear the truth in silence and isolation?

    Let the media apply the pressure to LE, and let LE explain themselves to the public as to why the evidence should not be released.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Trista could do that, without the media printing what she said before applying the pressure to LE that might just work.

      Delete
    2. That's a good idea except that the media in Maine does not strike me as the type to do some investigative digging and to be willing to apply pressure to LE. They seem content to report what they are told.

      Delete
    3. I have to agree they seem to only care about selling papers. Not trying to assert pressure for the good of the people. All about bottom line I guess.

      Delete
    4. You may be right, Dee.

      But I don't think the piece would require any investigative digging...the media need only provide a platform for Trista to vent her frustrations with LE.

      Really...no different than a Letter to the Editor or an opinion editorial.

      Delete
  2. I posted this on the other thread but also posting it here so everyone sees it...


    Dana, you have gone above and beyond what was asked of you here and we appreciate it wholeheartedly. You are an integral part of this blog as are the many commenters here, many of whom have been cast out of U4A and others who have come here from JSTL, even those who swore months ago they would never comment here, and many who used to comment but stopped for awhile have found their way back here. This blog has made great strides in maintaining a fair, open, and mostly respectful platform for all sides to share their thoughts and I am pleased with the progress. None of it could have happened without any of you.

    I know it is frustrating to try to debate with some people and even if we did have the capability to block people on this blog, I would be hesitant to do so because then we are doing the same thing to others that many did not like being done to themselves. I can only plead with people to PLEASE keep things respectful, allow others to have their own opinion-opinions are not up for debate only facts and details of the case are and the more you push someone into changing their opinion, the more they will not be willing to look at your point of view. I would be extremely dismayed to know people left this blog because they were feeling like they could not state their opinion without being ridiculed or challenged because of it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dana reminds me of the brilliant custodian in "Good Will Hunting."

      Dana was appointed to spam-patrol, but has proven to be more intelligent than most here...myself included.

      Delete
    2. Thanks Tori! Very good comment. I think a lot of people have learned something (by that I mean the blogs). I do hope JSTL will blog again, I do believe he had a part in making this blog possible.!

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    3. "I do believe he had a part in making this blog possible.!"

      hmmm, so do I .

      Delete
    4. There was a lot of nastiness going on for awhile, within blogs, and then it spread. I think Obscure put an end to all of that with JSTL blog!

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    5. Obscure started the nastiness

      Delete
  3. I always liked that photo of Ayla above, that Jeff did.
    He said it was suppose to convey the light at the end of the tunnel.
    That was in April of 012.
    It's been a l-o-n-g dark and twisted tunnel, full of obstacles and trash.
    We all want Ayla to be found at the end of that tunnel.

    I understand their frustration.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I searched high and low because I love that particular photo and I thought it would go good with the post.

      Delete
  4. I guess as long as what Trista releases doesn't hurt the case for Ayla, or get her in trouble with LE.The thing is though is it something the public should know? Would it effect a jury pool or cause it so LE couldn't prosecute the person responsible for Ayla's disappearance? I can't imagine Trista would want that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Looking At The FactsJuly 30, 2013 at 9:07 AM

      I feel if something is going to be released it should be through LE, not Trista, not Jeff. The last 2 things they have released have either been changed or retracted. The trip to Machiasport was one thing, the story was released then pulled and edited once people started questioning things, and then that story changed one more time. The other was the Justin's trip to Portland that was then retracted. Although I appreciate that Jeff retracted it and said he was wrong, if it is something that LE releases you know they will make sure they have the facts straight before releasing anything.

      Delete
    2. Looking, You have made a statement of fact that is not factual. "The last 2 things they have released have either been changed or retracted." Factually, the Machiasport and Portland trips were not the last two items to be released by the maternal family. Or do the 30-40 picture slide show of "unequivocal evidence", the call to Derek before the call to 911, and the trip at 8 PM by Justin to buy wine, and many many other items not count? You are quick to point out the 2 elements that have changed, in your opinion, yet you ignor everything else that has not. I only point this out for purposes of clarity and correctness. There are 30 other items that have not changed or been said to be untrue by LE for the 2 items you mention.

      As for the release of the information cited by Jeff, I am sure he is not foolish enough to release anything that may hinder prosecution. You may assume releasing this information is going to hinder it, but I assume that if LE does not tell him not to, it will not.

      Think about this POSSIBILITY! LE has already collected, cataloged, tested, documented, photographed and compiled their evidence and since they do read blogs I am sure they are aware of the statement by Jeff. By the family releasing the information they have been told, which is obviously not all information, is that going to change the evidence? Could it possibly spark a memory in someone we have not yet heard from? Could it possibly instill a conscience in one of the people responsible for whatever Ayla's fate was? There are many ways to look at this information from Jeff. I for one HAVE TO believe that the family would not do anything that is not in the best interests of Ayla!

      Delete
    3. Looking At The FactsJuly 30, 2013 at 11:39 AM

      First I do not need to be schooled by you. As for any info released by anyone other than LE is not reliable. You speak of so much info as fact that has never been confirmed. Once LE confirms it I will take it from there. Good Day

      Delete
    4. anonymous from maineJuly 30, 2013 at 12:57 PM

      Well said looking!

      Delete
    5. Furthermore, I'm not aware that Jeff, John or Trista hold any kind of degrees or education in law or law enforcement or a crystal ball that will tell them which evidence is ok to release. None of their other "factual" releases of information have helped move the case along. It's reckless arrogance to think they know better than law enforcement, especially when they're the ones screaming for us to trust and listen to LE, in my opinion.

      Delete
    6. John,
      You're being mighty nit-picky, aren't you?
      I could point out something every day that is said at U4A that is not exactly factual, for clarity and correctness.

      The FACT is there are many more than 2 things that Jeff has said and or released that has changed or found to be not accurate. I'm not listing them, or going into reasons.
      Thus, many people don't trust or have faith in everything he says and releases. Nor do
      I believe they should. I certainly don't.
      I do agree though, that LE is aware of what Jeff releases and says.
      I also don't think it is going to hinder MSP investigation or the prosecution of anyone.

      Delete
    7. My comments are obviously not wanted.

      Looking, I tried to school no-one, I pointed out that a statement that said "the last 2 peices of information were retracted or changed" was not correct, that is all. I also never said any of the items I mentioned were facts, just that they were released by the maternal family.

      Tomato Soup, nothing I said I stated as fact or claimed to have been verified by LE. I need no law degree to point out that those items mentioned had been released "BY THE MATERNAL FAMILY" after the Machiasport and possibly even after the Portland retraction. But please choe to read what you want to read.

      Anon 1 I agree with everything you said except the nit-picky. My comment was no more nit-picky than you choosing to question my interpretation of the beat-down of Justin Linnel. The statement by Looking was not factual and I questioned it. I thought I did so in a polite fashion and pointed out that in fact other information had been released that had not been retracted or change. That does not make any of it factual though, and I never said it did.

      Obviously because of my name alone, people do not want me to even comment. Even when attempting to be polite and accurate I am chastised by most creating a distraction from the only thing that matters, Ayla Bell Reynolds! Anon1 I do thank you for at least being civil. It was a great experience talking with you concerning Ayla. I pray that some others here have the fortitude some day to actually just talk about Ayla and her case and forget what another commenters name may be. Justice For Ayla is all anyone should want. Anon1 I hope I get the chance to speak with you again about Ayla.

      Delete
    8. John some may not want your comments but like I have said no one should be silenced here or anywhere. Your comments are welcome here right along with everyone else s. I don't want to see anyone stop commenting just because of a difference in opinion.The only thing I can think of is to read pause and think then respond.

      Delete
    9. Thank you Dana, for all you do For Ayla. It is rso vital that you be allowed to continue the work you ar doing. I will try to remain polite, but if it becomes a distraction to Ayla I will have to depart. Nothing is more important that none of Ayla's voices be silenced.

      Delete
    10. I agree Looking, but will add, most everything has "either been changed or retracted" especially after being questioned!

      John, a rather moot point : "You have made a statement of fact that is not factual. The last 2 peices of information were retracted or changed.....".

      You say, "Or do the 30-40 picture slide show of "unequivocal evidence", the call to Derek before the call to 911, and the trip at 8 PM by Justin to buy wine, and many many other items not count?" Are those factual John? Where did you hear these "facts"? Just because MSP hasn't said anything about these comments, doesn't make them fact. Do you really think LE is going to give them info that could destroy the case? I thought you trusted LE? Why would LE give them evidence that could hurt the case, when they know how they spout off to the public.

      John, which story do you believe about the trip to Machiasport, and why do you belive one over the over? Why did the story change? Also, Trista, at first, said she was at the motel that night with Raymond, later it came out, her sister was also there. You ask why the Dipietro family doesn't talk, well I ask why doesn't Ayla's maternal grandmother, aunt, and uncle not talk? Even Ron, after his "gut wrenching" episodes", became quiet after a few months. What's up with that?

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    11. John, please reread my comment. You completely missed the point.

      Delete
    12. Tomato soup, You said "None of their other "factual" releases of information have helped move the case along. It's reckless arrogance to think they know better than law enforcement, especially when they're the ones screaming for us to trust and listen to LE, in my opinion."

      None of my points were said to "factual" and there is no arrogance at all in fighting to get Ayla answers any way possible. The maternal family believes the release of information MAY someday jog someones memory, or POSSIBLY move LE and the AG to action on what they already know. I do not see any arrogance in that what so ever. I don't think I missed the point Tomato Soup, I read your own words as you printed them.

      I do appreciate though that you asked me to reread, it shows me you want all of Ayla's voices to be heard, and that is all I want as well.

      Delete
    13. GRP, I do not know why I am responding, but for the sixth time, nothing I said was stated as fact. It was infact staed that it was released by the maternal family and has not changed or been retracted. For the last time, PLEASE stop twisting what I write to suit your gripes against me personally.

      You ask which Machiasport version I believe and why. I think that would make for a great post. Why don't YOU write up a post with the differing versions of the story and I will tell you what I believe in the comments of that post. Dana has asked for input, my answer to your question is, give the input to Dana or Tori and I will gladly respond there, not on this post concerning the grief the family is already going through and the decision in front of them.

      You can include your other question on that post as well, I won't turn this heartfelt post for Ayla into what you appear to want to see. Until then GRP, you have many happy days.

      Delete
    14. Way to skirt around the answers and cover up... never a straight answer.

      Delete
    15. My opinion is my opinion, John. You have wanted us all to trust the actions and words of LE, yet now you believe that civilians know better than the law enforcement agencies as to how they should proceed? When Justin and Elisha questioned the actions of law enforcement it was not tolerated. They also did it in the name of finding answers for sweet Ayla. I just don't understand why Trista would risk saying anything that could hinder or obstruct answers and without the complete picture of what LE does have for evidence, that could happen if she releases what she knows. I guess what I'm saying is, no one knows the evidence or how it could be used to help Ayla better than the professionals with the training and education to use it. On the other hand, Trista has a track record of sharing information she has allegedly received from LE with the public so maybe they wouldn't tell her anything they didn't want the whole world to know.

      Delete
    16. tomato soup, thanks for your opinion!

      Anon 10:13 PM, that was my exact reaction when I read his post!

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
  5. I don't have the feeling that LE is going to prosecute anyone. It's almost 2 years since Ayla disappeared, and all the evidence they collected was after she disappeared. There has been no new development since. The evidence they have has been analyzed. If they have not prosecuted anyone yet, it won't happen in the future, except if there are some new elements discovered.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sadly, I agree Bonnie.

      McCausland said LE is still looking for that one tip. That tells me they don't have a solid case as of yet.

      Delete
    2. I'm thinking they may know what, they just don't know who. Which is why they need a tip or witness.

      Delete
  6. My concerns have already been stated above...if it hurts the case in any way or hinders the investigation, it is irresponsible of anyone to release anything.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Michelle! Why would LE tell them anything that could hinder the investigation?

      Trista/Jeff have told stories, only to be changed or retracted months later. (And why is it when the public questions their statements their story is later changed, with no valid explanation)?

      LE can't be that stupid to give them pertinent information on the case, when they know it will be spouted off to the public.

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    2. Exactly. I've always wondered if the MSP are telling them things to see their reaction. Clearly they know that telling them to keep information private does no good, which begs the question....how come they've kept this info to themselves (besides the little "teasers" released hinting at "unequivocal evidence") all this time? Will we hear *everything* they were told, or just what they want the public to know. There had to be something in the info that has kept Trista quiet all this time. How kindly will MSP take basically being strong-armed into doing something? It's all just so mysterious. If it ever ends and the truth comes out, maybe someone should make a movie out of it

      Delete
    3. I'm with you Michelle, it is so mysterious. It is just outright strange!

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
  7. If you have an additional opinion and/or theory regarding this case that has not yet been discussed, no matter which side you support, we would love to hear it! Please feel free to submit your ideas to: torigifford@icloud.com

    ReplyDelete
  8. John P says: July 30, 2013 at 1:27 pm
    Good job or not, I have to question this. We have been told over and over just because Jeff or Trista say so does not make it fact. Well here the same thing applies, just because Katie says so, does not make it fact and I am sorry but this comment from Katie is definately stated as fact. I for one do not believe Justin had anything to do with it, especially since I have recieved multiple messages from multiple sources that have seen Justin pawning personnal items, trying to borrow money, and so on. Now just because people have told me this does not make it fact, just like Katie comments do not make it a fact they hired a PI. JMO
    ________________

    Jeff said of the DiPietros:

    "Passing out flyers and hiring a detective is all well and good, but Justin, Courtney and Elisha lost Ayla on their watch and I have not seen or heard of any of them taking accountability for neglecting Ayla,...."

    U4A, ..The Kidnappers, A Fairy Tail.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I for one do not believe Justin had anything to do with it, especially since I have recieved multiple messages from multiple sources that have seen Justin pawning personnal items, trying to borrow money, and so on. Now just because people have told me this does not make it fact, just like Katie comments do not make it a fact they hired a PI. JMO."
      ________________________

      I'm sorry, John. I don't understand what these rumors (and thank you for stressing these are just rumors) of Justin pawning personal items and borrowing money has to do with the price of tea in China.

      If true, it would only indicate to me that Justin is low on funds. So am I!

      I fail to see a connection to Ayla.

      Delete
    2. McKee,

      Jeff's comment was in response to the claim by Katie earlier that Justin had hired a PI.

      My Comment ws in relation to this comment by Katie

      “*:*Katie*:*July 30, 2013 at 10:01 AM
      Anon 516…. where were you when I disclosed the PI information? I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, Justin has done this. To think he wouldn’t when he was being pressed by LE is almost pointless. He has. and He is working with one.”

      My point as I stated clearly in another comment in the thread is that just because Katie says it is so, makes it no more a fact than what I said about Justin pawning or borrowing, or any more a fact that Phoebe was in Augusta for the night of Dec 17th just because Tori said it. Nothing in that thread was stated as fact except by Katie stating that the DiPietros had hired a PI. That is how it relates to Ayla IMO and why I felt it should be clarified.

      Delete
    3. "Jeff's comment was in response to the claim by Katie earlier that Justin had hired a PI."
      __________________

      That makes sense, John.

      I missed where Jeff clarified that he was just taking Katie's word that Justin hired a detective. Do you have a quote from Jeff confirming this?

      Dang...he was just here. Wish he piped in on the issue.

      Delete
    4. No McKee no quote at all. I made the logical conclusion that he had since I had seen it nowhere else other than from Katie. That was my mistake by not saying "I bleieve" first.

      Delete
    5. "I made the logical conclusion that he had since I had seen it nowhere else other than from Katie.". Excuse me John, but you saying it was the logical conclusion, and then, "That was my mistake by not saying "I bleieve" first". What does that mean? You do that a lot John, putting out hearsay that you try to pass off as the truth! You are learning well from Jeff, or is he telling you what to say?!!!

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
  9. Does anyone think that LE has shown both sides of the family the same slide show, and unequivocal evidence?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think it was exactly the same either Dana. Sorry I became a distraction on such a great post Dana. Keep fighting for Ayla, you are doing great work for this angel.

      Delete
    2. I don't either Dana. MSP has publicly stated numerous times they don't believe the three people in the house that night are telling all they know. I don't think they'd show the same "evidence" or whatever it was they showed to a family they suspect and a family they say has cooperated and have never publicly called out as not telling all they know. I think they may have been a bit more specific with Trista.

      Delete
    3. Remember, MSP said they only showed Trista the evidence "a" mother should know. Not that they showed her all the evidence.

      Delete
  10. Thanks McKee,
    This is why I used the quote from Jeff.

    It may or may not be accurate. It makes perfect sense to me that Justin and/or the DiPietro family would hire a P.I.
    He may have had help with the expense, SO WHAT?
    What difference does that make?

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think it is important to remember that "unequivocal evidence" is Jeff-speak. LE never said "unequivocal evidence."

    LE never mentioned a "slideshow" either.

    Or 30-40 photographs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Looking At The FactsJuly 30, 2013 at 2:26 PM

      Very true Mckee and correct me if I'm wrong but once LE sat down with both families didn't they say communication had been reopened with the paternal family? I may have the wrong meeting but if this was the meeting something tells me that they did not talk about or show unequivocal evidence that proves any of the 3 guilty. If they did have this evidence I would hope Justin or anyone else would not be free to come and go like you or I.

      Delete
    2. The whole thing is plain.....

      Remember that Jeff said that MSP ask Trista not to talk about this "unequivocal evidence", from the 30 to 40 picture slide show, so as to not jeopardize the investigation.
      Then he said that the next in line to see the slideshow was Derek and Courtney.
      Does that make sense? Not to me.
      Wouldn't showing it to Derek and especially Courtney, jeopardize the investigation?

      Delete
    3. Your memory serves you well, Looking:

      http://www.pressherald.com/news/Communication-improving-between-Aylas-father-and-police.html?pagenum=full

      Anononymous1...makes no sense to me either.

      Delete
    4. One last comment to Anon 1. Excellent question. The only thing I can think is that the evidence to be shown to Derek and Courtney, could it be an attempt to use the shock factor (if that is what is contained in the photos) to get those they believe may be withholding evidence to Speak for Ayla? Just a possibility.

      Delete
    5. John,

      It's hard for me to answer your question. I'll try.

      If MSP ask Trista not to reveal what was in this slideshow because it may jeopardize their case.
      It would seem to me that showing the slideshow to Derek and Courtney,...no matter the shock value....could jeopardize their case.
      Using it for shock value, make not have the desired effect. Then they have jeopardizes their case.



      Delete
    6. I agree Anonymous1. Why would they ask her not to reveal it to the public when they're giving the same info to non-family members! She has "clammed up" at other times using that excuse. Yet, at the same time she says LE has told her she can say whatever she wants, they just won't back her on it. If this evidence they told to her would really jeopardize the investigation, why is she using it to pressure them?

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    7. LE may not have wanted her to say anything UNTIL they got a chance to talk with Courtney and Derek and do any followup. They may not have known when that could be arranged and whether it would happen as planned once it was arranged. They may not have been ready to talk to Derek and Courtney at the same time as Trista if they wanted to talk to them about multiple subjects in one interview. I would imagine with Derek evidence of Ayla's death would be coupled with discussion of the life insurance policy he sold Justin on Ayla's life and his apparent admission online he was at the DiPietro house on the day Ayla died, for example.

      Delete
  12. anonymous from maineJuly 30, 2013 at 3:30 PM

    Where has LE ever stated that Derek was withholding anything?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. READ THE LAST THRE FRIGGIN WORDS ANON FROM MAINE! It says Just a possibilitity in case you missed it. It also says "Could it be" or did you miss that also. You F'ing win Okay! Ayla loses because you friggin idiots want to make this about me and it isn't.

      Delete
    2. Narcissistic much john? It was a one sentence question that was directed to NO ONE IN PARTICULAR (I can use caps lock too). Your the one taking it personal. Why don't you ease up and give your heart a breather... jeesh

      Delete
    3. John,
      Some advice for your own good, try not taking things so personally.
      It's not you personally that people are attacking and questioning, rather it is the things you believe.

      Delete
    4. Calm down John! Nobody thinks this is about you!!!!! You attack anybody for asking a question that doesn't agree with your thinking. Anybody who states anything that does not put down the DiPietro family, or their friends, receives an attack from you.

      Really John, get a grip. How can a factual statement such as "anonymous from maine" said deserve such a response?

      Maybe you need to step away from the computer for awhile!

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    5. Anon 1 Thanks for the advice and I will try.

      GRP, Anon from Maine made the comment directly below my question to Anon 1 concerning LE's reason for showing Courtney and Derek the slideshow. There was no statement made that LE believed Derek was not forthcoming, I asked Anon 1 if it could be a possibility, once again I ask to Please stop reading only what you chose from my comments.

      And BTW, I guess we each have our own interpretation of what you consider me "attacking" anyone with a differing view than mine.

      Delete
  13. My reason for asking if both sides of the family had seen the slides, or photos is that the only danger of compromising the case would be. Because they think someone else is responsible for the disappearance. 2. They wouldn't be able to find an impartial jury. 3. They didn't handle the case 100% the way they should have. Am I leaving any other reason out?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder if it would help push the DA into action if more information was released?
      Maybe LE has all the information it needs except for Ayla?

      Delete
    2. It could, but I don't know if they would actually start something until they knew they were ready anyways. I would think LE would share all they had with the DA.

      Delete
    3. There have been several cases where the DA would not prosecute until people showed up on the steps of their office demanding answers and justice.

      Delete
    4. Dana said..."It could, but I don't know if they would actually start something until they knew they were ready anyways. I would think LE would share all they had with the DA."

      I think LE has shared all their knowledge and findings with the DA. I'm not saying it is the case in Ayla's case but some DA's are exceedingly cautious. They don't want to prosecute unless they have a slam dunk and a body to go with it. If it's a case built on circumstantial evidence, they are sometimes loathe to go forward with charges. Or the DA can be intimidated by higher paid, well connected defense attorney's like in the Jon Benet Ramsey case where Alex Hunter, the DA, had a Grand Jury indictment in hand and still didn't bring charges against the Ramsey's.

      Delete
    5. That is not hard to believe, I wish we could get a few listed here.

      Delete
    6. Dana also read on the Alissa Guernsey case that Tori profiled on the blog. I think it was a while ago, maybe Feb. The family forced the prosecution to happen.

      Delete
    7. Dee I agree there are lawyers out there that if you have enough money can get you off from anything. I think they the DA don't want to start anything until they know they can't lose.

      Delete
    8. Thanks Dee I will check it out.

      Delete
    9. "like in the Jon Benet Ramsey case where Alex Hunter, the DA, had a Grand Jury indictment in hand and still didn't bring charges against the Ramsey's"

      ...In the end he made the right decision.

      On July 9, 2008, the Boulder District Attorney's office announced that as a result of newly developed DNA sampling and testing techniques, the Ramsey family members are no longer considered suspects in the case. In light of the new DNA evidence, Boulder County District Attorney Mary Lacy gave a letter to John Ramsey the same day, officially apologizing to the Ramsey family.

      Delete
    10. Here is a fantastic site on JohBenet.

      http://solvingjonbenet.blogspot.com/

      Delete
    11. That decision not to prosecute the Ramseys is now thought to be a faulty one. The DNA evidence of someone else on JonBenet's panties could have come from the factory where the panties were assembled.

      But their are other reasons why the DA didn't prosecute the Ramseys.

      Delete
    12. I'm not familiar with the reasons why the DA didn't prosecute the case, as I didn't keep up with that.
      From what I've read it seems to have been the right decision.
      According to what I've read, there was 3 samples of unfamiliar male DNA found on 2 separate items of clothing.
      Don't have time to find the link right now.

      Delete
  14. Dana B; I appreciate the vote of confidence (and the insightful post), but the truth is that It is difficult to predict the outcome of making said "unequivocal evidence" public. As such, I cannot put your concerns to rest, but I can tell you this:

    The Dipietro’s were shown this evidence in November (notice the lawyer’s response): http://www.onlinesentinel.com/news/Communication-improving-between-Aylas-father-and-police.html How much of this evidence was shown remains in question, but Trista was told that MSP showed them everything. ..and frankly, after reading the lawyers response, that is not possible, unless he is severely downplaying the evidence for the press.

    A major concern in releasing this information to the public is not with the evidence itself, but with the tainted jury it would help to create. However, I’m told there are plenty of people who know nothing about this case that could fill a jury box. Just because we live with the case for Ayla every day does not mean that everyone else does (hard to believe I know).

    The Maine State Police’s lead detective on Ayla’s case; Sergeant Jeff Love now has foreknowledge of this intent to post from discerning Justice for Ayla and United for Ayla’s previous comments and has spoken with Trista. In addition, Trista has received counsel from several involved parties and has based her decision on all the information that was available to her. Once again, Ayla will always be Trista's daughter and the choice was hers to make.

    Trista has veered from the public eye since she saw the state’s evidence of her daughter’s blood throughout the Dipietro’s home,http://www.onlinesentinel.com/news/investigators-meet-with-trista-reynolds_2013-01-04.html, but fully intends to hold a press conference soon after this information is made public. It’s her call and soon as she is well enough to make it (as most of you know she is due 8/15) she will set the date. That’s all were waiting for ..and I’m waiting too…

    Thank you for the opportunity Dana B

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the kind words Jeff. My main concern was the jury. Hopefully they can find the people they need. At the same time it makes me sad that J4A and U4A aren't reaching more people for Ayla. The media being silent about Ayla means fewer people remembering the night of December 17, 2011. We want Justice for Ayla.

      Delete
    2. Jeff...I reviewed the MS article you cited and saw no mention of Ayla's "blood throughout the DiPietro's home."

      How exactly will we be seeing this evidence when Trista releases it? Did LE give Trista a copy of the "slideshow"?

      Hope Trista has a safe and easy delivery of baby Anthony.

      Delete
  15. Jeff,

    I understand it is hard to predict what might happen, but could you tell us what it is you (and Trista) hope to accomplish by releasing said evidence? Thanks in advance.

    ReplyDelete
  16. mckeekitty; I was not referencing the link.. I should have placed it after "she saw the state’s evidence".

    I will describe the evidence found as the three people who saw it did ..with MSP's input.

    LE did not give Trista a copy.. and thank you for your kind words.

    Anon 6:24; We hope to bring Ayla home..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Two other people saw the slideshow with Trista? Who were they?

      Delete
  17. Looking At The FactsJuly 30, 2013 at 8:24 PM

    OT Not sure if anyone is following this case
    http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Missing-Oregon-boys-mother-drops-lawsuit-217638361.html

    ReplyDelete
  18. Answers4Ayla says:
    July 30, 2013 at 8:17 pm



    ..and other than a few photos of the items found at the damn, the slide show was 98% blood evidence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You caught that as well Dana. It is so so sad. :(

      Delete
  19. I'm still puzzled. How can it be that it's unequivocal evidence that Ayla is dead and on the other side, the lawyer says that it could be something else than blood, and the people on Violette avenue were shown the same evidence and think that Ayla is alive ? I really don't think that if Ayla is dead they are all involved in her disappearance, so how can they be hopeful on one side and sure she's dead on the other side ? When was the house really closed for the checking of evidence ? Why does the lawyer say that what was highlighted in the house could be something else than blood ? I'm not doubting Jeff's words, but I'm quite sure the police would have shown the lawyer all the evidence, I guess they have too, or it would be against the law. So why such different interpretations, it's been almost 2 years !!!!! Why why why ???????????

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Never trust a lawyer.

      Delete
  20. Wouldn't a lawyer risk being arrested for making such statements about a possible murder if there was not some doubt somewhere ?

    ReplyDelete
  21. I mean would this be allowed for a lawyer to lie about evidence of a possible murder or accident ? He said that what was highlighted could be something else than blood. Are lawyers allowed to lie about evidence without risking going to jail ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An attorney works for who hires him. They are paid to make their client look innocent. Take what he said with a grain go salt.

      Delete
    2. Bonnie,
      S. Bourget, the lawyer who represents Elisha and Phoebe, was not at the meeting that MSP had with the DiPietro's in Nov.
      He didn't see or hear whatever was shown and told to the DiPietro's. His comments about the meeting are what the DiPietro's relayed to him...according to what he said.

      Delete
  22. The way I see it, Trista knows this whole nightmare better than anyone. She knows as many details as can be known at this point. She's talked to the professionals concerning this move.

    I have to have faith that as her mother, Trista, will make the right moves in assuring her daughter's Justice & bringing Ayla home.

    It has to be the worst possible burden a mother can bare.

    I would hope if I felt compelled to make such a heart wrenching & serious decision that I would have the support of those around me.

    ReplyDelete
  23. And who knows, LE could be encouraging that this info be released.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I would like to say it is wonderful to see so many of you talking about Ayla again. You are just all the greatest. thank you for your kind words and voices for Ayla.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Why does Trista wish to taint the jury pool?

    Jeff's statement said it would help to taint, not that it might.

    Knowing this, why would she deliberately taint a jury pool? Why doesn't she want the best possible chance of Justin receiving a fair trial, if she believes such evidence and trial will lead to a conviction? Of course, there is always change of venue, which is likely to happen anyway, but still...I don't understand, if this is, in fact, a major factor in why she has been advised not to release said information.

    So, we already know (thanks Jeff) basically what is going to be released, scores of pictures of blood evidence throughout the DiPietro household. All that is left to reveal is possibly where, how much and possible patterns.

    How will this change perception against the DiPietros? I don't think it will change anything at all. Those who already believe they are guilty of something nefarious will continue to believe that, and those who don't, won't. They will accuse Jeff and Trista of lying and things will go back to the status quo.

    Until LE makes the evidence available to the public, which they will not do until a trial, anything Trista says about the slideshow will be subject to interpretation.

    This tactic will accomplish nothing. It is merely another smear tactic campaign against the DiPietro's. Haven't we had enough of that?

    My opinions only.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've had enough of it anon! We are suppose to believe his description from the "three people" who did see it, and also get MSP's input. I thought MSP told Trista not to release the info? Another inconsistency before the news is even released!

      Why is LE giving them info they don't want released, but at the same time are giving them input on what they are about to release. Didn't Jeff say it was Trista's call, whether LE approved it or not? Why does Trista want to release something that could jeopardize the case concerning her daughter?

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    2. Well what woud you suggest?

      I think if they really had that evidence of blood and other things from a body which showed DNA, they'd have arrested Justin DiPietro long ago.

      I think the DA in Maine will never proceed without a body. Some DAs in a few states have done this and have gotten convictions with less evidence than "blood all over the house." But I think the Maine DA will never proceed with this case and I don't think Ayla will ever be found.

      There's a fast flowing river near the DiPietros in Waterville and Ayla was probably out to sea within a couple of days of her "kidnapping" whether any of the DiPietros or guilty or not.

      God bless you little angel, Ayla. You are so precious.

      Delete
    3. I tend to agree, if LE does not want the info released then I don't think it should be released. I understand it is Trista's decision ultimately what she decides to do but I don't think it is going to change anything coming from Jeff and Trista because many will not buy it and LE already said they won't confirm or deny anything released on the blogs. If it came straight from LE it would have more impact. I also don't know if they evidence given to Trista is the same evidence shown to Justin and if it wasnt, LE had good reason to show them both different things. If LE wanted both parties privy to the info, they would have shown the same to both and I don't know if they did or not but if they didn't they must have had good reason and if there is a possibility that this info could jeopardize the case or taint the jury then it shouldn't be released.

      The evidence would only be given to the other party once an arrest is made and the person was arraigned then they would get the information in their discovery, where there hasn't been an arrest and has been no arraignment, no one is entitled to the discovery, if Trista is confident Justin or someone else in the house harmed Ayla then she should not want to show LE's hand to them, even if only a partial hand.

      Some have expressed they feel it is possible that LE gave Trista fabricated evidence in order to elicit a reaction, if this is the case then releasing info that is not accurate or true will only muddy the waters more. It is a possibility that LE did fabricate evidence, and not only because they think Trista is involved but also to gage if she is in contact with Justin or talking to someone who talks to him. If Justin mentioned something only Trista was shown in a conversation with LE then they would know where he got that info.

      Hopefully, Trista will rethink her decision to release the info after she has had the baby and leave any public updates to LE. We as the public may have a desire to know more but it really isn't our right to it at this time, that is what a trial is for. Until then we just speculate and hope..

      Delete
    4. Food for thought, definitely.

      Delete
    5. I think there is a BIG point that is being overlooked by many. Correct me if I am wrong but the evidence that is to be released , if that decision is what Trista choses, is evidence that was shown to Trista as "unequivocal evidence" that Ayla is no longer with us? It is not evidence to convict him of any crime or her of covering it up or them of disposing it. The evidence is that Ayla is gone, not the prosecutorial evidence of interviews, phone records etc that will be used at trial to obtain a conviction.

      Delete
    6. John,

      Same said evidence is the evidence that would be used to prosecute someone. MSP may have used this evidence to show the maternal family how they came to their conclusions but in turn that same evidence would have to be used in a trial against whomever they finally prosecute, to think otherwise would mean that what the maternal family was shown was fabricated for the purpose of showing that Ayla is likely no longer with us.

      Oaklandrez

      Delete
    7. It looks like LE is using Trista to do their work for them. Anything Trista says will just hang out there in the Maine air and LE will say "No comment" or something equally fearless!

      But crafty LE is trying to get a RISE out of Justin DiPietro. That's the only way I can see the reasoning behind Trista releasing "evidence" She is being used and probably doesn't realize it or mind since Ayla is her baby and she gets no answers from the DiPietros.

      Justin is not revealing one thing LE told him in October. You can bet on it. Justin only makes statements when Trista makes an accusation or goads him. Trista is LE's button for getting Justin angry enough to make any kind of reponse.

      I'll bet Justin will be heavily pressured by his lawyer to keep trap firmly disengaged no matter what Trista says about the evidence. And good advice it will be, too.

      Justin's supporters may cry, again, and say it is heinous for Trista or anyone else to come out and repeat LE's "unequivocal evidence" that Ayla is dead.
      The Maine prosecutors surely agree. No body , no arrest. Ayla is well-hidden. No slip up there.

      I also think Justin is on a 24/7 watch by LE. How else to explain an off duty "lieutenant" (a pretty high grade of police officer)being "just in the neighborhood" to see an ex-lovers' spat twixt CR and JD go down? Sounds very phony. But promising to the Justin haters.

      Justin will not answwer questions, and so far he's played it extremely smart, whether he is guilty or innocent. Only Trista gets him going. He's in the catbird seat as long as he resists the temptation to trounce on Trista. Man, he's Trista obsessed (as much as she was with him...the perfect storm) and so are his supporters...all obsessed with Trista. She's the straw that broke all kinds of backs.

      If Justin keeps a lid on, he's home free.The police do not have enough to arrest Justin. Even if the house is awash in Ayla's blood, the law can't say who did what to Ayla in that house. They'd have to arrest the whole lot of them and I don't think LE even knows who was there that night. Elisha said they didn't find fingerprints of friends who were in the house around the time Ayla went missing.

      For LE to pinpoint who was on the scene when and for how long, they would have to have a coherent schedule of events for that day or night in Waterville to check thoroughly. I don't think the Waterville 3,4 etc. gave LE a damm thing. And that's why LE says the household is not forthcoming. it is sort of an understatement.

      Delete
    8. Agreed Oakland. My point was not clear. I know it will be used at trial. It is not all the evidence. The phone records, digital forensics everything else is not being released. This evidence must be used at trial, but it is not all the evidence that MSP has. Sorry for the vague statement.

      Delete
  26. Tori, the voice of reason.. Just a final thought from reading through the comments. Once Again, this has not been a smear campaign against the Dipietro's. I understand that things have gotten muddled in past blog commentary.

    But make no mistake, our sole objective is to bring Ayla home and Justice for Ayla cannot be deterred from that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are too kind, I am hardly the voice of reason ;)

      Delete
  27. I don't think Trista releasing any information is going to hurt this investigation. Baby Ayla needs Justice. Trista's family needs Answers. One side is talking and one side is silent.

    He see's nothing, hears nothing and will speak nothing.

    He hurts this investigation by not speaking for Ayla.

    Why Justin?? Why?? Elisha and Courtney? Why? May God have Mercy on your Soul.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I sobbed all the way through the video of the dove's being released for Ayla. Did Phoebe, Elisha , Courtney, Heidi and Angela shed one single tear?
    It tore my heart apart!

    We all need Answers for Ayla?

    Justin-Now is the time to speak-now is the time to let Ayla come home to the family that loved her. Now is the Time!

    ReplyDelete
  29. I wonder what the DiPietros make of Trista's intention to go against the wishes of LE. Do they even have a say? Last I checked, they too are Ayla's family.

    Justin may not want Trista making this decision unilaterally. He just might want to protect the integrity of an ongoing investigation regarding his missing daughter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh Please. Explain McKee kitty to all of us-how you think Ayla blood was found "Down in this house"

      Explain why Justin hasn't said much for 2 years. about little Ayla. HIS Daughter. Explain why Grammie Phoebe and Auntie Elisha and Courtney who loved her like a daughter has not spoken in this time a word about Ayla.

      Explain why you feel they should have a say . Protect the Integrity of an on going investigation! Justin wants to protect himself only. And the more crap you say I Believe you are one of the Diepietro family.

      Protect the Integrity-And Justin in the same sentence -equals total BS.

      Delete
    2. I agree anonymous 2:33, Every time I read one of her posts I feel she is either Obscure or a Dipietro. Justin lost his rights to Ayla when he lost Ayla in my opinion. I still don't believe that he hurt her on purpose, but do believe he is covering up what exactly did happen to this poor child. I can not even imagine what Trista has been going through. I can imagine that Justin isn't sleep as well as he used to before Ayla "came up missing" and I believe it is because he is not stating all he knows. Disgusting!

      Delete
    3. Oh, McKee just is still angry with Jeff and John.

      Delete
    4. Looking At The FactsJuly 31, 2013 at 3:59 PM

      If this so called slide show showed all this blood evidence then why would McClausland say this of the meeting with the Depietro's
      "We wanted to give them an update, and we were very frank in the information we shared with them," he said. "I viewed the meeting with the DiPietros as positive."

      How is showing Justin Ayla's blood supposedly all over the house positive in any shape or form.

      Delete
    5. Anon 3:35
      I agree anonymous 2:33, Every time I read one of her posts I feel she is either Obscure or a Dipietro

      Your feelings may be why you shouldn't be shown the evidence the way you jump to conclusions.

      Delete
    6. @ Looking... "I viewed the meeting with the DiPietros as positive."

      Positive doesn't necessarily mean "good". It could mean it was a fruitful discussion. It could mean positive in the effect that the DiPietro's agreed to meet with investigators. It could mean a positive step in the investigation.

      Delete
    7. add on to comment above. Maybe I can say that a better way. If you think you can guess who someone is by what they say, maybe you shouldn't try to read to much into the evidence you are going to be reading about.

      Delete
    8. Looking At The FactsJuly 31, 2013 at 5:47 PM

      Dee
      That is true it could mean that and that is what makes this whole case so darn frustrating. I know LE owes the public nothing but they have been so cryptic. The does not pass the straight face test, we think or we don't think, view the meeting as positive, told her what a mother should know, and I'm sure there are many more drive me nuts they are hoping for more tips, first, second, or third person info it seems tome if they released some of the things they know it may jog someone's memory of something they didn't even realize they knew. They don't have to release all key details but a little something may help to bring Ayla home.

      Delete
    9. I agree on how frustrating it is. LE needs to clarify a few things. I don't like their vagueness our silence.

      Delete
    10. LE's vagueness and silence have much to do with them having nothing. They know who's probably guilty, but can't prove a thing.

      Delete
  30. The investigators did not fabricate blood evidence to guage Trista's reaction. That is preposterous on multiple levels.

    I am confident that what Trista saw was real and what she will release is her best effort at describing what she saw and what investigators told her it meant. Her description may not be perfect because she is human like the rest of us.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. anonymous from maineJuly 31, 2013 at 11:22 AM

      Then maybe she shouldn't speak at all if her description may change. That maybe why LE wants her to not talk about what she's been told.

      Delete
    2. "I will describe the evidence found as the three people who saw it did"... Trista, Alex and his mom all witnessed the presentation.

      Delete
    3. OK, so LE didn't want Trista revealing this information back in January when they gave it to her, but they let 2 completely uninvolved parties view the slideshow as well? Did they have to sign non-disclosure agreements? What has kept them from releasing this information themselves?

      Delete
    4. This is Trista's daughter, she can do whatever she wants, if Justin wants to release what he saw he can. . . Im sure he won't. At this point I believe he is just waiting for the other shoe to drop. Im not saying Justin killed Ayla, but I believe there was a fatal accident and instead of calling 911 for fear of being called negligent, they all decided to get rid of baby Ayla. How heartless a decision that is. . . for Ayla. . . Ayla deserves justice!

      Delete
    5. If there was an accident and they hid the body would that make it a manslaughter case?

      Delete
    6. "This is Trista's daughter, she can do whatever she wants."
      ____________________

      Ayla is also Justin's daughter.

      I would be fit to be tied if the mother of my missing child went against the wishes of LE.

      Wouldn't you?

      Delete
    7. Hiding a body does not make manslaughter out of an accident. However, if they hid the body it would tend to suggest that maybe the "accident" wasn't really an accident and cause investigators to look again.

      A reckless or malicious or negligent action leading to death could lead to a murder charge, including a manslaughter charge.

      I think people are using "accident" in this blog to cover a hypothetical genuine accident (Ayla is being watched and cared for appropriately but suffers a serious injury during a momentary supervisory lapse or in a situation where the accident happened so quickly an adult couldn't stop it); an unintended consequence of a hypothetical angry action not directed at her (such as throwing something that wasn't intended to hit her but does); an unintended consequence of a hypothetical angry action directed at her (punching her for crying, for example); and a hypothetical accident due to negligence such as leaving her alone at home or leaving illegal drugs in the house where she could gain access to them. Most of these hypothetical scenarios would not be "accidents" even if there were no specific intention to harm Ayla.

      Delete
    8. Jutin lost his rights when he refused to come forward with what actually happened to that precious baby. He was responsible for her and no matter what happened (I believe it was a fatal accident) he needs to act like a man and start talking. I feel so bad that Trista has had to go on for this long and not know where that poor child is. Who would be that heartless????? He is an evil person for being that heartless. If it was an accident why would he not come forward right from the beginning. If it was an accident caused out of anger I can see why he didn't feel he could come forward. WHERE IS AYLA JUSTIN?

      Delete
    9. I had a very vivid dream the other night Ayla was in front of me at the top of a big staircase, she tumbled to the bottom, then got up and smiled at me. . . I was shaken by the dream but figured that I had it because I think of her constantly. I live close to the area and it is very hard to drive by any of the lakes or rivers without thinking about her. . .

      Delete
    10. I would not anticipate that Trista will get anything right when she talks about the "unequivoval evidence". She means well, of course, but she is so rattled when she says anything and sometimes gets things absolutely wrong. I don't know how I'd react to anything if my child had been missing for all this time, and my pleadings for information got a piss fountain from Justin. And from his supporters.

      Maybe LE is counting on Trista getting a few things wrong, hmmm? Maine MSP seems very devious to me. That's how you get when you are desperate for answers.

      Delete
    11. @anonymous from maine

      Classic!

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    12. CG said,
      'I am confident that what Trista saw was real and what she will release is her best effort at describing what she saw and what investigators told her."

      ...I'm not as confident as you.
      I'm sure you'll remember that as late as Feb. 2013 Trista was confused about what investigators shared with her. Not just minor details, but MAJOR details.

      Delete
    13. anonymous from maineAugust 1, 2013 at 9:30 AM

      @GRP :-)

      In all seriousness, every time she opens her mouth she then changes what she says multiple times. Maybe just be quiet and let the police do what they've been trained to do!

      Delete
    14. CG, you say, "The investigators did not fabricate blood evidence to guage Trista's reaction. That is preposterous on multiple levels."

      That's a huge statement without any explanation! Would you please explain these "multiple levels"?

      (CG) "I am confident that what Trista saw was real and what she will release is her best effort at describing what she saw and what investigators told her it meant. Her description may not be perfect because she is human like the rest of us."

      So you are saying Trista will give it her best effort, but it may not be correct? Is that why Jeff needs to give his description of what the three people told him?

      Why would LE invite Trista's new boyfriend, and "HIS MOTHER", to this meeting? Weird as weird can get!!!

      So Trista is going to release the info from this meeting (remember, it is her decision alone), then she will give a "Press Conference", why the need for Jeff's interpretation? Why do we need Jeff when Trista is talking straight to the media?

      Someone please explain it to me!!!! I don't get it!

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    15. What I don't get is why have 2 people that are not family at that meeting, why was Becca, Jeff or Ron not there?

      Oaklandrez

      Delete
    16. Maybe she felt that they were the most supportive to her at the time. It's been said (not sure it's true) that she's not always on good terms with everybody in her family.

      Delete
    17. GRP, re my comment that police did not fabricate blood evidence--

      To fabricate blood evidence in the DiPietro's house would require spraying a substance that looked like blood inside their house and faking lab reports, taking photos, etc. Not realistic at all.

      Not only is the physical scenario a no-go, think about the pr aspects of doing something like this. Can you imagine the public reaction/ lawsuits over police essentially inventing a crime, particularly when that crime involves telling parents (falsely in the hypothetical) their baby is likely dead? And telling a community that a missing baby is likely dead at the hands of someone in the father's house?

      From a liability standpoint, the implications are monumental. Ditto from a human decency standpoint.

      I do not know but suspect that getting the recollections of all three who saw the slideshow is an effort to maximize accuracy.

      Delete
    18. Yes but LE has still not told the public what evidence they have. Is everything coming from Ayla's blood ? Is it partly blood, partly dna ? Which could be pee pee accident ? Did they offer different interpretations to Trista and the Di Pietros ? Did they show them the same slides ? I have trouble believing that they would tell Trista that Ayla is dead if they didn't think there was some doubt. But why did the same slides bring hope to the Di Pietros ? Have they offered them another interpretation ? Are they 100 % sure that the provenance of the stains highlighted is blood ?

      Delete
  31. Replies
    1. Bonnie...I believe Jeff is referring to Alex Fazzi, Trista's current boyfriend/fiancée.

      Delete
  32. Answers For Ayla said.
    "But make no mistake, our sole objective is to bring Ayla home and Justice for Ayla cannot be deterred from that"

    ...I believe that. As I said earlier in this post, I can understand Trista's anguish and frustration.
    I'm sure frustration is putting it mildly. If this was my daughter I'd be pushing MSP as well. I don't know if I'd be doing it this way, but...

    That said, nothing you have said has swayed my belief that Ayla could have been abducted.

    I send my best wishes that Trista have a swift delivery, birth, and Anthony a healthy baby.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you believe Ayla is still alive or abducted, why do you believe this?
      What leads you to thinking this?

      Delete
    2. For many of the same reasons that others believe that Ayla is deceased.

      Comments made by MSP. As well as comments NOT made.
      The actions and behaviors of Ayla's family.

      Delete
    3. I sincerely don't get how comments from LE make you think Ayla was abducted.

      How many times have LE announced that Ayla was NOT abducted. That there is no evidence of an abduction? I think on that one point at least, LE, has been forthcoming and consistent.

      Oh, and Ayla did not walk away on her own.

      What scenario is left, according to LE? (With the blood evidence LE has supposedly shown Trista?)

      Of course all those here who say Trista is not to be trusted to speak correctly, and they will only believe anything about the blood evidence if it comes from LE's mouth, are also the ones who say LE is not speaking the truth, or LE got it all wrong, or LE mismanaged the investigation.

      So I confess to being amazed that some here want it all ways as long as the DiPietros are not suspects.

      How about this: Ayla was left alone. Someone went on an errand thinking that Ayla was down and out for a nap. While the caretaker was gone, Ayla got up from her nap looking for somebody and tumbled down the stairs. An accident due to negligence. Because the caretaker was gone too long, the ME could have discovered approximately when Ayla died from her fall.
      LE question might be: Why did you wait so long to report this child's accident? She had been dead approximately X hours before you called.

      Delete
    4. Why won't LE just be direct, then? If Ayla's blood loss was so extensive that her survival is an absolute impossibility and her death is an absolute certainty, then what's with MSP peppering their statements with we "think", we "believe", we "feel"? Why leave the wiggle room for doubt?

      Also, I don't know how one "proves" no abduction. How can LE know this with such absolute certainty? An abductor could have been in a closet for hours waiting for the right moment to strike. Waits until the house is quiet, lights extinguished, Ayla asleep. Simply snatch Ayla and slip out.

      Trista stated that Ayla knew how to open doors, and by all accounts her arm was well on the mend. How can LE be so certain that Ayla didn't slip out by herself?

      Delete
    5. I completely agree McKeekitty. As long as LE is not more clear and doesn't state that they are sure 100 % that Ayla is dead rather than "it is highly unlikely...." there will be ground for doubt. Why is communication with the DiPietros viewed as positive and open again if they showed them that Ayla's blood was splattered and died there ? I doubt the communication would have been that positive and hope renewed for the DiPietros if LE had showed them clear proof that Ayla died in the basement. Have they shown the same thing to the DiPietros and to Trista ? Have they offered different interpretations ? Or is it that the Di Pietros and Trista viewed the photos differently ? There is too much uncertainty at this stage.

      Delete
    6. Mckee...To the first part of your statement - it's called CYA.
      LE departments do it all the time in cases and I hate it. I wish they would say "Due to the evidence we recovered, we know that Ayla (or insert many of the other missing children's names) sustained a life ending injury." But they don't and they won't. They hardly ever do in any case with no body and it's exasperating.

      "Also, I don't know how one "proves" no abduction."
      It's easy to prove no abduction if you have evidence that fatal harm came to someone. Now I don't know if that's the case here, as LE has been so tight lipped on what evidence they've collected, but just for s & g's - what if their evidence proves Ayla sustained a life ending injury? Then they can safely say, no abduction happened.

      "Trista stated that Ayla knew how to open doors, and by all accounts her arm was well on the mend. How can LE be so certain that Ayla didn't slip out by herself?"

      Same as above.

      Delete
    7. "To the first part of your statement - it's called CYA.
      LE departments do it all the time in cases and I hate it."

      ...Yeah, in case they're wrong.

      Delete
    8. Another way to look at it is what they do know. They know how much of Ayla's blood was shed in that house and they know Justin's refrain nothing bad ever happened to Ayla down in his house. They know Ayla was reported missing after this suspicious injury that involved substantial bloodletting -- let's just say for the sake of argument they know the injury would have killed her in the absence of immediate medical treatment and they've canvassed medical facilities and found she wasn't treated. Could she by some miracle survived and been hidden away somewhere against the odds and against where all known evidence points-- IF medical attention was found outside a hospital or treatment center by someone in cahoots with the DiPietros, or if Ayla is a miracle child whose body replaces blood 5 times faster than average, for example- but that's why our courts employ a standard of REASONABLE DOUBT, not any doubt at all or any preposterous "possibility" a lawyer can think up. Reason tells us Ayla is deceased based on the massive blood loss (yes, I know some of you don't accept LE's description of the blood loss as "substantial" because the WGME reporter did not put it in quotations, but it's been said and it's not been corrected and it's consistent with what the Reynolds' say they've been told and it fits with Heidi's description of pen point-size blood droplets-- aspirated blood or results of blunt force trauma in the DiPietro house-- she allegedly viewed herself). Reason tells us Ayla is deceased because her father claims she was at home at night and gone in the morning yet police discovered that she was the victim of foul play in the room where her father sleeps.

      Common sense is a virtue.



      Delete
    9. I just wonder why they are not more assertive then that Ayla is dead. We have seen many cases of missing children whose bodies were never found, but LE was then a lot more assertive from the beginning about them being dead. If they presented the same unequivocal evidence to Trista and to the DiPietros, how could the resumed communication be seen as positive from the police's point of view and bringing hope to the other side ? How could showing unequivocal evidence that Ayla died in the house be perceived as hopeful ? Given the relationship between the DiPietros and LE since the beginning of the investigation, how can this unequivocal evidence that Ayla died in the house lead to renewed communication and hope ??????

      Delete
    10. Anytime folks are talking there's a chance they'll have a change of heart and spill or accidentally let something slip. No opportunity for that when there's no communication.

      Delete
  33. Mckeekitty said, "Ayla is also Justin's daughter.

    I would be fit to be tied if the mother of my missing child went against the wishes of LE.

    Wouldn't you?"

    Maybe, maybe not. In this case, given the specific evidence of Ayla's blood in and around the house including in the basement where he slept the night he says Ayla vanished, it's hard to believe he doesn't have any knowledge of what happened to Ayla. But playing the devil's advocate and saying he was duped by others in the house, he could be mad at Trista, fearing she is compromising the investigation or this could be something that he understands and feels is warranted given the failure to bring charges or find Ayla. How any of us would feel in his shoes would likely depend on not only our innocence or guilt but our frustration level, our trust in the police to close the case, etc.

    There are also assumptions here that may or may not be warranted. Just because the police don't want to release info themselves doesn't mean either they don't want it released or that it will harm the investigation if it is released. And if they felt it might harm the investigation at one point in time (perhaps because they wanted to surprise someone with it), it doesn't follow that it would hurt the investigation at another point in time.


    Is MSP asking Trista NOT to release this evidence, knowing of her intent to do so?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It would be as simple as McCausland going public and saying "The evidence we showed Trista is unequivocal of Ayla's fate, and we have asked her not to release it"! I believe if this were to happen Trista would not release, but I am not expecting this to happen.

      Delete
    2. I'm not following your reasoning here CG, "Just because the police don't want to release info themselves doesn't mean either they don't want it released or that it will harm the investigation if it is released. And if they felt it might harm the investigation at one point in time (perhaps because they wanted to surprise someone with it), it doesn't follow that it would hurt the investigation at another point in time. ".

      Isn't this the meeting that Jeff says if Trista released the information it would jeopardize the case, and that they had Trista sign a non-disclosure agreement. Why wouldn't they release the info themselves? Why would they give Trista the info to release, wouldn't it be more "factual" coming from them, and isn't it their job, not Trista's? If they have changed their mind at this point in time they should release the info to the public. I wonder if Trista, through Jeff, releases this info if McCausland will confirm it? If MSP doesn't care if it is told I think the public deserves a statement from them.

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    3. Getrealpeople,

      This meeting was not the subject of the NDA according to Jeff. There was an NDA but it involved something else.

      I don't think investigators gave Trista this information to release. I think they gave it to her because they felt it was time to let her know Ayla was dead.

      As far as why police might in some cases prefer not to release certain info themselves, even if they'd like to see it in the public realm, everything they say or do is going to be used in some way if possible by defense attorneys to suggest they got it wrong early on and ceased investigating alternative theories or maligned their client in some way. If police say next to nothing publicly, they minimize that potential. That also means the concerned public learns next to nothing about the case from official sources even though a murderer may be living in their midst- or not- and that seems like something the public should know to protect themselves and other children or ease their minds if there is not such a threat.

      When a crime is committed, IMO it is a matter of public concern. When public tax monies are used to investigate a crime, the public should be given information about the progress of the investigation they are paying for. It took almost six months for the public announcement Ayla was most likely dead, even though the news had been leaked 4 months earlier and a grand jury had been convened 3 months earlier.

      Delete
    4. Jeff says LE showed Trista, her new boyfriend, and his mother, "unequivocal evidence". They must not of wanted her to release it if they had her sign a non-disclosure agreement. Did her boyfriend and his mother sign a non-disclosure agreement also? I don't see how it is not "unequivocal evidence" , or will not jeopardize the investigation, at this time, but it would 7 months ago.

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    5. Thanks for your response CG, makes sense!

      The NDA though, I believe Jeff changed it to what you said after his original post.

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    6. If I remember right, Jeff stated the NDA was not for this evidence. It's in the posts, 5-6 blog submissions back. I don't think he said what the NDA was for.

      Delete
  34. This is Trista's daughter, she can do whatever she wants."
    ____________________

    Ayla is also Justin's daughter.

    I would be fit to be tied if the mother of my missing child went against the wishes of LE.

    Wouldn't you?
    Mckeekitty:

    I wouldnt be upset at all if it brings coverage to my daughters case. Plus i would love to hear Justins response to blood evidence found "down in my home"". He would probably start with the word "normal" He likes to use that word..

    ReplyDelete
  35. Justin is not about to comment on anything Trista says, that is, if she really goes to the media with what LE has shown her. I doubt we'll hear a thing.

    He'd be the biggest fool in the world to say a dern thing. Especially ANYTHING against Trista. Or make a comment on what she says.
    I'm sure his lawyer has explained this carefully to him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does anyone know if Justin showed up with a lawyer at last weeks hearing? I didn't read the news reports.

      Delete
    2. He won't respond to Trista personally. He will just post Anon. Doing everything in his power to destroy her. This is Normal, Justin. IMO

      Delete
  36. Question for Jeff:

    "...other than a few photos of the items found at the damn, the slide show was 98% blood evidence."

    I know I can be a bit slow but does this statement mean that there was other "state's evidence" shown to Trista BESIDES the items found at the dam???

    I ask because I can only think of one thing (besides the *amount* of blood) that would be considered "unequivocal evidence". I don't even want to state I'm thinking it might be - because it's just so awful But if this were found at Ayla's last known location, it would be pretty indicative of something horrific happening to Ayla.

    Also, I'm ever hopeful that Ayla will receive justice soon. I'm hoping this move by Trista gets the ball rolling!

    LE: the people of the State of Maine want & need to see justice for this baby girl! "The time is right"!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah shoot. I messed up this paragraph:

      I know I can be a bit slow but does this statement mean that there was other "state's evidence" shown to Trista BESIDES the items found at the dam???

      I MEANT:

      I know I can be a bit slow but does this statement mean that there was other "state's evidence" shown to Trista BESIDES *the blood evidence* & the items found at the dam?

      Delete
    2. Negative ChickenLittle, and thank you

      Delete
    3. Got it. Well that's a relief! Thank you very much Jeff. :)

      Delete
  37. Anon 8:48

    "I would not anticipate that Trista will get anything right when she talks about the "unequivoval evidence". She means well, of course, but she is so rattled when she says anything and sometimes gets things absolutely wrong."

    This may be the exact reason Jeff is writing the post from the perspective of all three people that were there? Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. John,

      you said..."This may be the exact reason Jeff is writing the post from the perspective of all three people that were there? Just a thought."

      Honestly that doesn't make that any better, now instead of second hand info, it becomes 3rd hand info that is interpreted...it becomes a game of "telephone" at this point.

      Oaklandrez

      Delete
  38. Please help us brighten Ayla’s rooms.

    http://www.gratefulness.org/candles/candles.cfm?l=eng&gi=ayla
    http://www.gratefulness.org/candles/candles.cfm?l=eng&gi=ARAA
    http://www.gratefulness.org/candles/candles.cfm?l=eng&gi=WIA

    ReplyDelete
  39. Is this blog just an extension of U4A? All I seem to see lately is John P. spouting off answering every comment whether it is directed to him or not. If wanted to know what John P thinks, I will go to his blog.

    Get a life John. Seriously.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think we are here for the same reason but no we are not an extension. John has been commenting here and I think at some point he an anon were having a discussion, he could have thought that was part of it. If not no foul,no harm done just another voice.

      Delete
  40. I wonder how long Trista has been seeing Alex... Why would LE show evidence to someone uninvolved? Unless they wanted a reaction from them also... Trista and Alex could break up and he wood have no vested interest in Ayla, right? I say, go ahead and talk, Trista. Unfortunately, every time she talks she ruins her own credibility. It seems like it's more important to her to create public disdain towards Justin than to follow the advice and requests of LE. Jury tainting, anyone?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is this the same Alex Fazzi that was rumored (on JSTL I believe) to be a cocaine dealer? The one who was just run off the road in a road rage incident that WENT ON FOR 3 MILES?

      Well, if I remember correctly Trista said on her facebook in December 2012 "This last year has been" so I guess she met him right before or after Ayla went missing. So much for the grieving mother, or Ray's fiance, or Justin's dirty little secret. She sure gets around.

      Delete
    2. 1:37am What I see is someone who has much hatred towards Trista. Tearing someone down like this, makes you feel what? NORMAL No, You just give your identity away. Say Di-Pee-Tro

      Delete
    3. Yes, 6:05... if anyone dares question Trista's choices, they're automatically a DiPietro.

      Delete
    4. LOL I knew when I posted it, that you would be the one to jump on it Michelle. The hate that you show if anyone speaks against the Diepetro's is very telling:) Hook, Line and SINKER!

      Delete
    5. Congrats. But FYI, and before you start your little victory parade, I would do the same if someone went around claiming that anyone who put down the DiPietros was Trista & Co. Which would be just as ridiculous.

      Delete
    6. Wow Michelle- comment removed- must of been some more smut!

      Delete
    7. FYI, I removed it myself. See that part where it says "this comment has been removed by the author"? The author was me.

      Omigosh, you just faze me so much.

      Delete
  41. I wonder why the media hasn't made mention of Jeff's announcement about an announcement? Why hasn't MSP commented? Could it be that they don't take him seriously?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. BEEEEEEEEEEEP. Take two steps back and lose a turn, Foil.

      You failed to mention Ayla Bell in your comment.

      That's a no-no.

      Delete
    2. LOL

      I know some won't see your comment as funny McKee.
      A sense of humor, at times, is a great thing.
      Helps relieve tension. Sometimes it's the best medicine.

      Delete
  42. Tori-I had much respect for you when you first started blogging. I read and agreed with all your thoughts. I followed your Grace interactions. Thinking how crazy Grace was.

    Now I FEEL that this blog has just been an extention of JSTL. You've definitely got a few evil people working their smut on your page,

    Sorry Tori, you seem to have a hard time keeping respect on this page.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. anonymous from maineAugust 1, 2013 at 9:27 AM

      The only evil smut I see here are the dipietro haters!

      Delete
    2. So Tori's thoughts don't agree with yours anymore, that makes her a bad person?

      Why are you even here?

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    3. No where above have I said Tori was a bad person. NO WHERE! So GETREALPEOPLE you do just that. Every blog that is started has eventually ended up entwined with JSTL. They can't even run their own blog because they are to busy showing hate and contempt on the nicer blogs!

      So GETREALPEOPLE Just why are you here?

      Stop tooting your horn and pissing on people who are here for Justice for Ayla!

      This is what the blogs are about-not a pissing contest!

      Delete
  43. Oh yes do tell what is Justine's dirty little secret?
    Does it involve blood?
    Does it involve anger?
    Does it involve not hearing or seeing or speaking?
    Does it involve just a normal day in the life of sweet, innocent Justine. Calling the kettle black?
    Justin's track record isn't very clean either. He's been pretty busy? Right Courtney?

    ReplyDelete
  44. So Michelle we will agree to disagree.
    You feel what you feel and I'll feel what I feel.

    Time will tell. If I'm wrong I will apologize and you can do the same.

    I am sure justice will be coming soon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree to disagree on what exactly?

      Delete
    2. Jeesh-Omigosh-You are a Hoot!

      Delete
    3. Since you clearly don't get why I'm asking, I will attempt to explain. After this, I refuse to entertain you when you insist on attacking rather than speak reasonably in a respectful discussion. Comprendez-vous?

      okay... so, you are anonymous, along with God-knows-how-many other anonymous posters here. When you respond, no one has any way of differentiating you from anonymous and anonymous and, oh, anonymous. So, when you tell me we'll just have to agree to disagree, I have literally NO IDEA which conversation to which you're referring.

      On top of that, I didn't have a disagreement with anyone within this particular thread. I simply stated recently that I would say the same thing if it was a reverse situation (which I can honestly say I would). You never disagreed with me that I can see, so why do we need to "agree to disagree"? We never had a disagreement.

      Get it now?

      Delete
    4. You're a hot-spit, Michelle. I love your spunk and moxie.

      Don't ever change.

      Delete
    5. Hey McKee you said that about me is there 2 of us?

      Delete
    6. Ha!

      I respect any and all willing to look at this case with eyes wide open.

      Glad many here are willing to do just that.

      Glad there is a forum here to do just that.

      Delete
  45. AND THAT"S A FACT EXLAX :)

    ReplyDelete
  46. Would it be possible that the evidence presented to Trista and to the Di Pietros was presented two different ways ? To Trista, that it was blood, and to the Di Pietros, that it was her DNA, but not necessarily blood ? Remember that Mc Causland said that contact was renewed with the Di Pietros and that it was very positive? And their lawyer said that they felt that LE was not working against them ? I just wonder if they gave two different interpretations, or if they told Trista was their feeling was that what was hightlighted on the floor was blood without being 100 % sure of it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Many people have the same questions and thoughts Bonnie.
      Wish we knew the answers.

      Delete
  47. Can anyone here remember where the baby gate was actually in place? I know Angela said it was at the top of the basement stairs and Justin broke it over when he came bounding up the stairs upon learning Ayla was missing.

    I believe Selena, Phoebe's sis (on JSTL)mentioned that it was not at the top of the stairs, but at some other place to keep the toddlers out of the kitchen.

    Does anybody have the "lowdown" on where the baby gate was placed?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh puhleease, don't get that started again!!!! NOBODY HERE KNOWS!

      signed:getrealpeople

      Delete
    2. Anon 12:17 what Selena said was conjecture and she stated that in her description of where she supposed the baby gate might have been

      Delete