AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #18

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
The accident I am speaking of does not involve one of the parents being the cause but rather one of the boys. And the reason why the parents would go to such lengths for a coverup would involve keeping the boy or boys out of the judicial system in any way. They lost one child, they don't want to lose another...I am not saying that is what happened or even that it is likely, just that its a possibility.
 
deanna82437 said:
I'm about sick of this house lol. Here are more details that might explain the difference in size.

http://www.trulia.com/homes/Arizona/Tucson/sold/1082567-5602-E-12th-St-Tucson-AZ-85711

3802 sq ft - 5602 E. 12th

http://www.trulia.com/homes/Arizona/Tucson/sold/371824-5601-E-Cooper-St-Tucson-AZ-85711

2288 sq ft - 5601 E. Cooper

There is another pic of the floor plan that I indicated pages back as what I used for the layout. Of course, I can't find it now, but it was a floorplan, at an angle (not flat) and had a hand in the image.
Click to expand...


Is 5602 the Celis house? If so, the description says it is two story. Or am I reading the wrong description? tia
 
oceanblueeyes said:
Nowadays everyone is much more aware of abuse. Becky was very visable and was socially active in her community and seen by many people who could observe if they thought any abuse was happening to her such as being fearful when around Sergio or having bruises often.

No one that lives in that community has said Sergio is abusive to his family. In fact no one that really knows him has said one untoward thing against him in over a month with reporters snooping everywhere looking for some kind of story.

Abusers are often bullies and while the victim may not tell ...people do notice things anyway and we have heard none of that in this case concerning Sergio.
Click to expand...

Sorry i have to disagree.
PPL only see what the family lets them see.
JMO
 
Eileen730 said:
Well most times you dont want anyone to know that your husband or BF is abusing you.

As i see it there is some reason he cant be with his children! and that is a big red flag to me!
Click to expand...

I agree, a lot of people do not want anyone to know their partner/spouse is abusing them.

I'm not saying SC is definitely not an abuser... just not really sensing that. My first thought is that he got into a tiff with the oldest son at some point or the other - maybe that is because my own brother started challenging my dad when he was a teen, my dad really really did not like it and did not want to react. I am perhaps also thinking this is the case because little Sergio sounded more manly than big one! But another clue is possibly because he took it upon himself to call 911, I thought that was notable and maybe he is a take charge kind of kid who thinks he's not only 14 going on 15, but able to be the man of the family or make more decisions on his own than he's ready for. SC also said something about maybe now they can have more rules and boundaries. I think it's entirely possible SC is separated from the boys because he got frustrated with some behavior and did try to influence the older one. But it could be he thinks he knows something or was angry at something that has been happening - like leaving at night, staying out too late, leaving doors unlocked, hanging around older boys or the wrong crowd, etc.
 
galiuro said:
The accident I am speaking of does not involve one of the parents being the cause but rather one of the boys. And the reason why the parents would go to such lengths for a coverup would involve keeping the boy or boys out of the judicial system in any way. They lost one child, they don't want to lose another...I am not saying that is what happened or even that it is likely, just that its a possibility.
Click to expand...


that i can understand but if it was an accident why cover it up?
 
Dee10 said:
That doesn't bother me as much as she left at 6:30 when the 911 call says 7:00. That is a problem for me. Another concern is she didn't check on her even though she left for work early, but maybe it is normal for RC not to do that?

Transcript:

BECKY CELIS: My husband. I went to work this morning at 7:00. And I just -- I didn`t even come in and check on her! I should have checked on her!
Click to expand...

*Typically we would say, I left for work at 7:00; or I got to work at 7:00.

For me, I went to work leaves it fuzzy.

*Typically we would say, I didn't even go in and check on her!

To me, I didn't even come in and check on her, infers that BC was not in the house that night. I am not saying I suspect that this is the case.

I am surprised that neither the 911 operators nor the reporters sought to clear up this fuzziness in BC's timeline.

I realize that we all have our personal way of expressing ourselves, but - hey - in a matter as crucial as the *abduction* of a precious 6-year-old child, clear communication is crucial.
 
Whisperer said:
In order for this all to work to believe a stranger took Isa, many assumptions have to be made:

1. we have to believe three dogs didn't bark
2. we have to believe the stranger knew where Isa slept (if her curtains were closed)
3. we have to assume Isa didn't put up a fight.
4. we have to assume the brothers never heard a thing
5. we have to assume sergio and rebecca both sleep very soundly.
6. we have to assume if the dogs did bark, not one member of the house heard them.
7. we have to assume CPS is just separating sergio for stupid reasons.
8. we have to assume the 911 call was just a fluke and sergio is a cool cucumber.
9. we have to assume the neighbor is wrong about voices and barking dogs because no criminal would abduct in the wake of dawn.
10. we have to assume the parents passed a poly.
11. we have to assume the "Hit" was a scent dog hit of a stranger; not a cadaver dog hit.

See, in order to fit a stranger, we would have to make all these assumptions and, imo, we can't base a theory of stranger abduciton and elimate the parents on this many assumptions.
Click to expand...

With deep respect, I disagree with this list.
1. We don't have to assume three dogs didn't bark. Many people have dogs that bark routinely, if someone passes by, if a cat creeps around, etc. Some people have incessant barkers. As a result, many people ignore or sleep through barking, which becomes routine to them.
When I was a kid, I had two big dogs. One was a horrible barker. One night, they were outside and Timber was barking as usual. We kept telling her to shut up. After about two hours (I know, horrible), of incessant barking, my dad said, "You know, something sounds wrong. Something's different."
He went outside and the patio was covered in blood. The other dog, Tara, had jumped onto a broken piece of glass that my stupid brother left on the side of the house. It had caused her to bleed out. We raced her to the pet hospital and she barely survived (a week in the hospital). Two hours, and my poor dog was barking, while we ignored it. She was trying to tell us something was wrong, and we ignored it. Why? Because she barked all the time.
2. I agree with this. But, he could have been watching the house and figured it out, like other stranger-predators have (duncan, couey).
3. Likely true because we have heard nothing about signs of a struggle. But several kids have been taken by strangers without putting up a fight (Danielle Van Dam, the Groene kids, Elizabeth Smart, Polly Klass, Jessica Lunsdford, etc). So I don't think we need to assume Isa didn't struggle, in order to find a stranger did this.
4. Not necessarily. We don't know if they heard something. Just because they didn't go into her room or awaken their parents doesn't mean they didn't hear anything. They could have and then just gone back to sleep or whatever.
5. Not necessarily. If Sergio had finally gone to his bedroom, then both parents could have been there when Isa was removed from the house. It's on the other side of the home. Also, it's not hard to move around a house without making a noise, even with a small kid in tow, especially if you threaten them. Besides, perhaps the parents did hear something but figured it was nothing and went back to sleep. Happens to me all the time.
6. Not true. See number 1. Again, lots of people ignore their barking dogs. Barking dogs is the cause of many a neighborhood feud.
7. Not necessarily. There could be a very valid reason. Like, they think he is responsible (I don't blame them after hearing his 911 call), and luckily, there is another, unrelated reason they were able to get CPS involved, to help pressure him. Parents with problems, even crummy parents, are sometimes victims too.
8. Or he just doesn't give a darn about his kid. But, to me, this is the number one issue that points to his involvement. Coupled with the CPS involvement, it is a real problem. Nothing much else matters to me. It can all be logically explained.
9. Nope. Why couldn't she have heard laborers of some kind, unrelated to the disappearance? Or maybe she was simply wrong about the time?
10. No we don't. Guilty people fail polys or have inconclusive test results, quite a bit. You know polygraphs are not fool proof, which is why they are usually not allowed to be admitted into evidence. So, you know the parents don't have to have passed in order for this to be a stranger abduction.
11. I don't know. We don't know what dogs exactly were in there.

I hope you don't think I'm being rude. :please:I get your point but I'm a stickler for logic. And, why couldn't it be, not a stranger, but someone who knows them? Someone who has been in that house? I mean, for the parents to be innocent, it doesn't have to be a stranger who did it and a person who knows them would explain a lot.

I guess stranger or not, a stronger argument for me would be that in order for this to not have been the parents, we must overlook several coincidences, rather than make assumptions:

1. LE has not warned the public about a predator on the loose.
2. Neither the family or LE will release the parents' poly results.
3. The mother stated, in her 911 call, that the gates were locked.
4. Apparently, there was not enough disturbance from dogs, Isa or the intruder, to alert Sergio, Becky, or either son, that something was happening.
5. The family was very reluctant to get before the media and beg for help. When they finally, did, many felt Sergio was "off".
6. Sergio's 911 call was bizarre, to say the least, as if he was calling about a loud party down the street.
7. Statistically, most disappearances of children involve a family member.
8. Isabel has not been found. Strangers who abduct and kill kids often tend not to hide them that well.
9. CPS is involved and Sergio suddenly cannot have any contact with his children.
10. No evidence has been released to indicate an intruder broke into the house, other than the parents' statements about the screen and open window.
11. LE is clearly, seriously focused on the family.
12. A dog "hit" on something in that house and the focus has never really shifted from the family.
13. The family hasn't been cleared.

I am leaning hard toward Sergio at this point after initially having a strong feeling that the parents were not involved. The 911 call really did it for me, coupled with CPS involvement.

I actually, really think that the number one thing that focused this investigation, besides statistics and possibly no legitimate signs of entry, was that 911 call. I really believe LE heard that and went, "Bam! There's our man." I just hope that's not a mistake.
 
mck16 said:
Is 5602 the Celis house? If so, the description says it is two story. Or am I reading the wrong description? tia
Click to expand...

The address you have is correct. The description you are reading is wrong.
There is some wrong info both at the county and other places. The 2 story is actually across the street on 12th.
 
Eileen730 said:
that i can understand but if it was an accident why cover it up?
Click to expand...

well...IF it was an accident, it would depend on the type of accident and would it cause a risk of them losing their other kids?

today....many days later...i still feel everything is on the table....including that...


the accident theory is one i apply to baby lisa case....which mom & dad are back in the limelight today :floorlaugh: << which is so ridiculous
in fact, watching them on America Live/Fox w/ MKelly right now and if my TV wasnt so nice, id be throwing things at it :floorlaugh: :vomit:
 
mck16 said:
Is 5602 the Celis house? If so, the description says it is two story. Or am I reading the wrong description? tia
Click to expand...

The information on the website link posted is the wrong information. The description of the size of the house, is the house directly across the street from the Celis home on 12th Street.

The county records also have it wrong.
 
This is a bit closer with regards to size and rooms for both homes that appear to be identical. I am not saying this is fact, but a lot closer in size and rooms.

I accessed this information by going to http://www.realtor.com and then put in both addresses.

5601 E. Cooper Street
3 Bedrooms
3 Bathrooms
Size:2,288 Sq Ft
http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/5601-E-Cooper-St_Tucson_AZ_85711_M25171-10893

5602 E. 12th Street (Celis' Home)
4 Bedrooms
3 Bathroom
Size: 2,350 Sq. Ft
http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/5602-E-12th-St_Tucson_AZ_85711_M21045-52912
 
Dum-Dum Sucker said:
*Typically we would say, I left for work at 7:00; or I got to work at 7:00.

For me, I went to work leaves it fuzzy.

*Typically we would say, I didn't even go in and check on her!

To me, I didn't even come in and check on her, infers that BC was not in the house that night. I am not saying I suspect that this is the case.

I am surprised that neither the 911 operators nor the reporters sought to clear up this fuzziness in BC's timeline.

I realize that we all have our personal way of expressing ourselves, but - hey - in a matter as crucial as the *abduction* of a precious 6-year-old child, clear communication is crucial.
Click to expand...

My DH does this with the english language ALL the time. It's not that he isn't educated - he has an MBA. It is just the way he words things. It's hard not to read more into these statements because after all it is what we have to work with right now.
 
I wish I was a local so I could go to the county and look at the records and at least tell them they have it all wrong on their website.
 
peeps: we can link to social media but we cannot copy and paste comments. Thanks so much.
 
GutFeeling! said:
When something like this happens information starts coming out of the woodwork - usually anonymously to a media source. Folks will report every single incident they have witnessed, every childhood bruise seen on child and even go back three years and say the spouse had a black eye ... happens all the time. And if the media could find anything to back that up - trust me they would - enough anonymous tips can be a story. This hasn't happened here and it seems like reporters are searching anything possible (note in closet comes to mind)
Click to expand...

Yeah, look at the Lisa Irwin case and Deborah Bradley's "friends."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 76 more.
Total: 2,911 (members: 77, guests: 2,834)

Online statistics

Members online
77
Guests online
2,834
Total visitors
2,911
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,182
Messages
17,964,769
Members
228,714
Latest member
hannahdunnam
Back
Top