but debra has always denied involvement in her daughter's disappearance. as the months passed, the searches eventually stopped. and the story faded from the spotlight. until now. "the kelly file" has obtained never-before-seen interviews of lisa's parents in the days immediately after her disappearance. secret secret tapes recorded by a former top cia officer a government-trained spy and interrogator. and what and what he found could change everything you thought you knew about this case. >> what involvement did you have in the disappearance of lisa? >> i'm sorry. >> is there any evidence that indicates that you were or are involved? is there any reason that anyone will come forward with evidence, legitimate evidence or information, that would indicate or identify involvement on your part with your daughter's disappearance? >> no. >> how do you know debra didn't do anything? >> because of her reaction when i said she's not in there. >> so what happened? >> i said she's not in the crib she's not in the crib! and that's when all hell broke loose. and we were just and we were just running all over. i said we i said we got to find her, we got to find her. i remember her being -- she was sitting on the floor by the front door crying and screaming, my baby, my baby. >> in minutes my exclusive interview with the man they call the human lie detector who interrogated lisa's parents. but first, a look back at the case that riveted the nation. november 11 2010, little lisa irwin is born to parents deborah bradley and jeremy irwin. they live a quiet life in kansas city missouri, along with jeremy's 8-year-old son blake and deborah's 5-year-old. money is tight so jeremy works overtime when he can, including on the night of october 3rd 2011. baby lisa is 10 months old. jeremy leaves the family home around 5:30 in the evening. within hours disaster will strike. at 6:40 p.m. deborah puts lisa in her crib, then she heads to her porch to visit with a female neighbor. the pair will spend the pair will spend hours on the porch drinking wine lots of it. deborah goes to bed four hours later. sh she initially tells police that she checked on lisa, who she says was asleep in her crib. she turns out all the house lights and goes to sleep with her son michael in her bed. the time is 10:40 p.m. at 4:00 a.m. jeremy returns home. immediately he immediately he notices something unusual. all of the house lights he says are turned on, and the front door is unlocked. he tries to wake deborah, but she is groggy. so he goes to check on lisa. and here begins the story of every parents' nightmare. his 10-month-old daughter is gone from her crib, his baby appears to have vanished. jeremy tells deborah, he says they both become distraught. he runs next door banging on his neighbor's door. the neighbornswers and he asks whether lisa is there. he's told she is not. he returns home and now notices that the three family cell phones are missing from the kitchen. he he uses his work phone to call 911. authorities show up and begin authorities show up and be searching for the girl. searching for the girl. jeremy jeremy tells police about the lights and the front door and something else he noticed. he says in their computer room down the hall from lisa's bedroom the screen in the window appears to have been tampered with. investigators search the area, but there's no sign of little lisa. they they tell the public the parents are cooperating. the next day the story goes national when jeremy and deborah appear on tv to beg for lisa's safe return. >> please, bring her home. our two other boys are waiting for her. please, just drop her off anywhere. we don't care. just somewhere safe where she can come home, please. >> deborah is soon given a lie detector test. she later reveals police claim she failed. within days the kansas city police say the parents are no longer cooperating, which deborah and jeremy deny. one week after lisa went missing, the fbi and police stage a break-in to discover ways an intruder could have entered the home. police find climbing through the tampered window is actually rather difficult and conclude the intruder would have made noise. fox news also traveled to kansas city and visited the irwin house. this right here is this right here is the window through which the family believes the intruder entered their home on the night in question. it leads into a it leads into a computer room, through that computer room you can get to baby lisa's room. right over here, right over here, is the family's backyard. you can see it's fenced in. they say they have a dog who stays in this backyard, normally, 24/7. they did not hear their dog bark. and right here is and right here is the neighbor's house. they they also have a dog. here he comes. who also stays in the backyard 24/7. his family his family tells me that he barks at just about anything. over the next few days firefighters drain a well under the porch of an abandoned nearby home. and missouri and missouri governor jay nixon orders a one-day deployment of 25 national guardsmen to help with the search. still, nothing comes of it. then two bombshells. this is a fox news alert on breaking developments in the disappearance of 11-month-old lisa irwin. yesterday america live unearthing major new developments in this story. i flew to kansas city, missouri and sat down for a two-hour one-on-one interview with little lisa's parents deborah bradley and jeremy irwin. during that interview deborah admits to heavy drinking on the night her daughter disappeared telling fox news she drank five to ten glasses of wine. and then she changes the entire timeline of the evening. she now claims she's not sure if she checked on her baby at 10:40 as she originally claimed. she says she thinks the last time she saw her child may have been at 6:40 p.m. let's talk about the wine. how much did you consume that day? >> >> i had several glasses of wine. >> when you say >> when you say several, more than three? >> yeah. but that has nothing to do with her. >> >> more than five? >> probably. >> more than ten? >> no. >> when you went in at 10:30 after the neighbor left. >> uh-huh. >> what did you do? >> probably went right to my room. >> >> why probably? >> because sometimes i check on her -- well, most of the time i check on her. >> you don't remember? >> no. >> so it's possible you did not check on her before you went to bed at 10:30? >> yeah. >> the last time you saw your daughter alive in your home was when you put her down at 6:40? >> yeah. >> the new information is a major development. an additional four hours has now been added to the case. and that wasn't the only part of deborah's story that changed. listen to the answers she gave two fox news anchors regarding the house window. do you think they came in through that window? >> absolutely. >> based on the condition it was in could someone have gone through that? that you saw? >> no. >> days later a missouri judge grants a search warrant for police to search the irwin's home. investigators remove brown investigators remove brown paper bags along with bags along with lisa's clothes and toys. it is now 15 days since lisa disappeared. the fbi brings in cadaver dogs, the first time officials have brought in canines potentially giving up an important clue they might have discovered had they used the dogs on night one. one of the dogs hits on something reportedly marking the scent of possible human remains in an area on the floor near deborah's bed. november 8th, more than a month has now passed. and new potentially important details emerge about the family's missing cell phones. police records prove that deborah's phone was used the night baby lisa disappeared hours after deborah claims she went to bed. according to police the first phone call is attempted at 11:57 p.m. then again at then again at 3:17 a.m. someone attempts to check deborah's voicemail and access the internet. five minutes five minutes later another attempt to check voicemail and access the internet. in all deborah's attorneys say there were five attempts that night. the cell phones never got more the ce than one-third of a mile away from the irwin home. remember, the phones were used around midnight and then three hours later, which raises the question who would steal a baby and three cell phones only to sit by the baby's occupied house for several hours on a cold autumn night? as for that midnight phone call that was attempted, police looked into the number dialed. the call was to a woman named megan wright. she lived in a shared home noun to be used by drug seekers. >> apparently there was a 50-second phone call made from one of the family's phones to my cell phone. about 50 seconds in length. i don't know what was said or who called or who answered my phone. >> wright >> wright tells police she did not answer any call because she says she didn't have her phone that night. she claims she shares it with her roommate. wright also says she does not know the irwins who live about a mile away. and the irwins attorneys say cell phone records show no prior calls between meg gan's number between deborah or jeremy. and now a new twist develops in the case. megan wright claims her ex-boyfriend might know the irwins. he's a neighborhood he's a neighborhood handyman known known as john jersey tanko. he's referred to as jersey joe. a man with a criminal record, a man who is bald and a man who just happens to fit the description given by three of the irwins' neighbors who tell police they saw a bald man with a baby on the night of lisa's disappearance. another neighbor another neighbor claims jersey once broke into a home only a block away from lisa's house. deborah's attorney pushes the claim jersey was heard bragging about collecting $300 to steal baby lisa. that claim is never verified. he says he gave police this information but police say jersey is not a suspect that he has some sort of an alibi and that he's been cleared of any involvement. the irwins want jersey investigated, but police aren't biting. late in the case late in the case deborah's attorney reveals she didn't actually fail the police-administered polygraph test. he says police he says police admitted to him that they lied about that to try to force a confession. it didn't work. and to this day deborah maintains her innocence. i want to ask you this to people who may still be watching and having doubts about whether you had an involvement in this. what do you say to them? >> there's a bad guy out there with my baby right now. and there's people that are judging me. please just look for her. >> next, the never-before-seen interviews of little lisa's parents. hear hear deborah's response when she is asked point-blank whether she is responsible for lisa's disappearance. and why our next guest and his analysis may change everything you thought you knew about this case. go, go, go, go, go! in the nation, misfortune doesn't take a holiday. but add brand new belongings from nationwide and we'll replace stolen or destroyed items with brand-new versions. making sure every season is the season of giving. just another way we put members first. join the nation ♪ nationwide is on your side ♪♪ ♪ nineteen years ago, we thought "wow, how is there no way to tell the good from the bad?" so we gave people the power of the review. and now angie's list is revolutionizing local service again. you can easily buy and schedule services from top-rated providers. conveniently stay up to date on progress. and effortlessly turn your photos into finished projects with our angie's list app. visit angieslist.com today. ♪ welcome back to our "the kelly file" special investigation, the baby lisa mystery. "the kelly file" has exclusively obtained never-before-seen interviews of lisa's parents conducted in the days immediately after the baby's disappearance. interviews performed by a former top cia operative who challenged both parents about exactly what happened here. >> i think the first question that i need to ask you this morning, okay, is what involvement did you have in the disappearance of lisa? >> none. the only thing i did wrong was drink that night. and possibly not be alert not hear. i'm i'm sorry. >> phil houston worked for the cia for 25 years. he has conducted thousands of interrogations and grilled double agents and terrorists. and he is credited with developing a deception detection method that is used throughout the usa intel and federal law enforcement worlds. he is also ceo of qverity and co-author of "spy the lie." phil, great to see you. >> good to see you as well. >> what most of america did not know is in the days after baby lisa went missing, you and another partner went to interview deborah and jeremy about the disappearance. and you went in with an open mind. it's on the it's on the tapes. you say i'm not you say i'm not here to represent you, i'm here to represent the baby. >> correct. >> and i may bring this to the police, this is going to be an open interview. why did you set the stage like that? >> i wanted -- she'd been through a ton of questioning. as had jeremy. and one of the things that we were concerned about is that they would be conditioned to answer these kinds of questions. and if we're going to be able to spot a lie, there has to be a fear of detection, a fear of getting caught. and we wanted to make sure that that fear was instilled or re-instilled, if you will. >> did you go with any preconceived notions about their guilt? >> we >> we did. you said we you said we went in with an open mind, it wasn't quite true in the sense that riding out there on the plane i really believed that based on what i'd heard and based on what i'd heard from the comments by the kansas city p.d. and others that the parents were probably guilty. and also just statistically. >> that's right. >> it's heavily slanted toward, you know, parental involvement. so i assume there was a high probability that they were guilty. >> so when you >> so when you asked that question there and you heard her answer, what was going on? >> i was surprised. because if you notice what i didn't ask her was did you do it. because if i say did you do it because if i s every criminal in the world expects to be asked that question. >> what involvement did you >> have? >> what involvement is >> what involvement is presumptive. pres the psychological the psychological difference is the truthful person doesn't have to -- they're hearing did you do it. the deceptive person the criminal, what involvement did you have what do they know, what is it that they've spotted what have they uncovered? and all that processing will manifest itself as deceptive indicators. >> in that answer what did you hear? >> we didn't see >> we didn't see those deceptive indicators. she answered the question directly. we're not giving her we're not giving her credit for answering it directly, what we're giving her credit for is not exhibiting the deceptive indicators. we didn't see any significant nonverbals. what we also saw that got our attention immediately is in the question she immediately went to the fact that she had been drunk that night. so she was actually accepting some culpability for perhaps what had happened. >> which is the behavior of a truth teller? >> well, you certainly don't see criminals taking culpability for, you know for the event. and that was a bit odd. >> let me play the second question of the interview. >> is there any reason that anyone will provide information or evidence that indicates that you were or are involved in her disappearance? >> no. no. >> what's >> what's happening there? >> the same thing. what's really interesting is and it's perhaps not obvious on camera, is that between the first question and her answer and then that answer and that question was about eight or nine seconds. that's a long time for that's a long time for someone who has done something who has done something as horrible and as horrible and as despicable as either, you know, cover-up the death of a child or were responsible for the death of the child and aren't disclosing it chlgt and so you saw immediately she answered that question without hesitation. without any of that processing that i referred to a moment ago. again, i confess i was a bit surprised when i saw that. >> a guilty person would be looking to get out of bounds somehow on the answer. >> exactly. in other words again, what do i know. it it plants what we call a mind virus. what evidence have they what evidence have they uncovered? what do they what do they know? where did where did i not cover my tracks so to speak? and there was none of that processing. it was i it was immediate, no, no. but again, we're not -- you know, we're not ready to walk away and say, okay she didn't do it. >> right. there's much more to the interview including your interview of jeremy, which they were to perform separately. and we're going to get to much much more after this break. up next, what jeremy irwin has to say about the moment he realized his daughter was missing and why phil and his partner found this so important. ♪ ah, push it. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ push it. ♪ ♪ p...push it real good! ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ow! ♪ ♪ oooh baby baby...baby baby. ♪ if you're salt-n-pepa, you tell people to push it. ♪ push it real good. ♪ it's what you do. ♪ ah. push it. ♪ if you want to save fifteen percent or more on car insurance you switch to geico. it's what you do. ♪ ah. push it. ♪ i'm pushing. i'm pushing it real good! jeremy, if the police were to walk in here right now and say to you jeremy we have come across some evidence which clearly indicates that you're involved in lisa's disappearance, what would you say? >> >> it's not possible. it's not possible. because i wasn't. so it would just be another one of their lies. >> joining me again, phil houston. what did we see what did we see there? >> >> again a very tough question especially for someone who is lying, okay? and in this particular case we didn't see deceptive behavior. we didn't see what sounded like a lie. it was a question that's designed to provoke deceptive behavior from a deceptive person. >> like the police have got something. >> exactly. >> exactly. and we didn't see that. >> what about the body language? it looks like he's kind of looking down. his manner in general is pretty sort of quiet and laconic. >> exactly. that's jeremy's personality and manner. and one of the and one of the things that we know is there were some people i recall when we were watching on tv before we ever went out and interviewed lisa and jeremy they said -- excuse me. deborah and jeremy. that jeremy looked guilty. and you can't make those kinds of assessments based on someone's appearance. because you're only guessing at why they're behaving that way at that moment. what you have to look for with deception is understand what the stimulus is for potential deceptive behavior and then see if it provokes deceptive behavior. >> could they have been coached? >> c could a lawyer have said when you get asked these questions be definitive don't hedge just deny it outright. don't elaborate. period. can't they can't they be coached into deceiving you? >> people could be coached, but the likelihood of that masking deceptive behavior is highly unlikely. >> you don't think they could fool you? >> i don't think so, but one never knows. there's no such thing as a human lie detector. there really isn't. people call us that you know, and so forth, but at the end of the day we're human. >> what would the body language have been if they were being deceptive? >> one of the things that we would have seen would have been some physical activity a spike in anxiety. for example, if you're worried that i know something that the police have that you don't know it's likely to spike your anxiety without even thinking about i