AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #11

[Prof]

I don't think that LE or other agencies investigating Isabel's disappearance have no clue about what happened. Rather, I tend to think that, at this juncture, they do not have enough evidence for an arrest or charges. LE proclaimed that "(the perp/s) did an adequate job of (covering their tracks, cleaning up the scene, etc.)" which leads me to believe that they have a good idea what happened to Isabel and probably even who they suspect in the "disappearance" but not enough to insure a conviction. :moo:

Adequate was an interesting word to choose.
As far as I remember in that presser, it was in comparison to the reporter who was basically suggesting that the person responsible handled it so well to stump LE.

I just felt that LE was not about to give that kind of rating.
In my world an "adequate" is "C." (punching the clock/do the basics to cya) The reporter seemed to be suggesting an "A" in my world.

 

[taagean]

I can't believe there has been no indication (that we know of) where Isabel could be. For some reason, I figured this would be solved pretty quickly.
Here's hoping LE has information we are not privy to and Isabel can be brought home.

 

[Donjeta]

Not sure how I missed this article, just find it interesting, he seems to have quite a bit of experience in these areas.


http://www.kvoa.com/full-coverage/finding-isabel/

He has 25 years of law experience, plus another 20 in psychology. He analyzed the parents' body language.
"He has access at closing of the eyes every time you do interviews and people look away or lose eye contact, you need to suspect deception," said Baggot, when referring to the Celis'.




He also talked about the question of the parents' possible involvement in their daughter's disappearance.
"Most important they asked clearly if he had anything to do with his daughter's disappearance, he doesn't answer the question. Watch their body movements during that question. No support, no hands crossing. She looks down to the right, I would expect her to watch him and watch him deny it, but he evades the question," said Baggot.

I always note evasive responses too but I don't understand what he means with the bbm. He has access at closing of the eyes? Doesn't everybody?

IMO eye contact is a bit difficult to assess in videos of interviews. In taped interviews and pressers with several people in the room but not visible on the tape it's not so easy to tell if the person has eye contact with someone. Not looking at the camera doesn't mean they're not looking someone in the eye, unless someone looks at the floor, then you may reasonably say that there was no eye contact with anyone.

Some liars use eye contact to appear trustworthy.

 

[Prof]

The reason no one suspects the person who stole Isabel imo is mainly because he works full-time and has weekends off. He took her on the weekend so he could show up on time for work Monday morning. This would mean he didn’t have to change his normal routine and because he is showing up for work eversince Isa disappeared, no one suspects him.

If this is his first offence against a child, he wouldn’t be a RSO which also enables him to stay anonymous and at large. He could have an undiagnosed mental condition.

My impression of the kidnapper is he is single, employed full-time, and possibly works and lives in Isa's community. If he is a homeowner who lives alone, he can lock her in a room and still work. If he's been employed for over 10 years, I guess he is in his early to mid-thirties.

mo

Good profile, IMO.

 

[Shelby2]

I agree. Both interviews asked what they thought about others who question the family's involvement. What's he going to say? I would say, well I cannot control what other people who do not know me, think of me.
He probably does not like it. He might even think they are misguided, or worse, but he does not come back by putting them down for thinking so, which is what I have seen some people do in general (not here, but in the big world out there). IMO!

To me, it almost seemed as if the question didn't register with him. He just kept asking "Why did this happen?"

 

[Boodles]

Remember the family discussing how difficult it was for them to be in the house because "everything is Isabel." With hope for her return, wouldn't that be comforting?

But yet another red flag went down, IMO, when Sergio inserted the tidbit: "but we check our phone messages" (referring to the home phone line). Wow! They would leave their phone line unmanned while their daughter is missing and supposedly abducted? That's just crazy.

 

[Shelby2]

BBM
The only place I can think of to conduct searches is in the desert near the roads that lead out of the Celis' home area and into the desert. I do not want to think about trying to find a body, but at least it might help find the person who did this. I really don't understand why they haven't searched (or allowed community to search) in these areas. It wouldn't be the first time someone has placed a body fairly near highways. I realize the whole desert can't be searched, but why not these most likely spots?

I don't understand either. LE must really think that somehow this would hurt the investigation-or-they have a good idea of who she is with.

 

[pieper4]

Interesting. IMO the dog which alerted was not a cadaver dog. The other tyope, the type that can detect 'foreign " scent in a house.

Because after the dog alerted,LE then got the search warrants for the other houses.

Thre is an RSO on the Celis's block. That would surely aacount for one of the search warrants.

IMO the other warrant was to search the house of that young guy, who was seen entering the courtyard of the Celis's home. With his father. MOO They live on the Celis's block too.
This is they young guy ( looks like a teenager ) who LE reportedly questioned very closely.... * speculation * : This is the one...MOO

I guess I figured one of those two warrants would be for the grandparents' home down the street. Interesting...

 

[gitana1]

I speak about my son in the past tense, 'he was', etc. He is deceased, he was killed in a motor vehicle accident. That doesn't make me guilty of his death.

Yes, but he's not missing and I presume was not.

I'm so sorry about the loss of your precious son. God bless you.

 

[callyn]

I always note evasive responses too but I don't understand what he means with the bbm. He has access at closing of the eyes? Doesn't everybody?

IMO eye contact is a bit difficult to assess in videos of interviews. In taped interviews and pressers with several people in the room but not visible on the tape it's not so easy to tell if the person has eye contact with someone. Not looking at the camera doesn't mean they're not looking someone in the eye, unless someone looks at the floor, then you may reasonably say that there was no eye contact with anyone.

Some liars use eye contact to appear trustworthy.

That sentence from the expert - "He has access at closing of the eyes every time you do interviews and people look away or lose eye contact, you need to suspect deception," said Baggot - sounds like English is not his first language (I did not hear the interview, just read it) or he meant 'He has EXCESS closing of the eyes.....
Otherwise, it makes no sense at all to me.

 

[Zuckerschnecke]

I was thinking about that and the only thing I can come up with is that they think it was someone in the neighborhood. They either don't want evidence destroyed or they are watching a particular place or person. I do agree it is out of the norm. jmo

I am not watching the pressers here from Germany so thank you for the updates!

The more this plays out this way, the more I agree with your statement and think the police have an idea what happened and it's being investigated internally. I also think the parents have an idea what happened too and this is hitting close to home. Not saying the parents did anything directly but they may have been irresponsible or trusted the wrong person and now are in waiting mode. Hope she is found soon. Everyone needs closure.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

Not sure how I missed this article, just find it interesting, he seems to have quite a bit of experience in these areas.


http://www.kvoa.com/full-coverage/finding-isabel/

He has 25 years of law experience, plus another 20 in psychology. He analyzed the parents' body language.
"He has access at closing of the eyes every time you do interviews and people look away or lose eye contact, you need to suspect deception," said Baggot, when referring to the Celis'.




He also talked about the question of the parents' possible involvement in their daughter's disappearance.
"Most important they asked clearly if he had anything to do with his daughter's disappearance, he doesn't answer the question. Watch their body movements during that question. No support, no hands crossing. She looks down to the right, I would expect her to watch him and watch him deny it, but he evades the question," said Baggot.

RBBM. I have to disagree with this expert (Baggot). I think the question was poorly worded and not clearly asking him if he had anything to do with Isa's disappearance. The question was actually asking him about his reaction to being questioned about his involvement ~ not if he was involved or had anything to do with her disappearance. It's actually a parallel question to what she had just asked Becky:

"AC: As you know, any time there is a case of a missing child, the parents and family come under scrutiny. Becky, what do you want to tell us about how intense that scrutiny is now? Has it lessened? Is it still as intense? And how do you feel about it?"

And here's the exact question she asked Sergio:

"AC: You know, there is no easy way to ask this question, but because this is your first live television interview, Sergio, let me ask you this question. What do you want to say about questions about whether you had anything to do with your daughter’s disappearance?"

 

[~n/t~]

The reason no one suspects the person who stole Isabel imo is mainly because he works full-time and has weekends off. He took her on the weekend so he could show up on time for work Monday morning. This would mean he didn’t have to change his normal routine and because he is showing up for work eversince Isa disappeared, no one suspects him.

If this is his first offence against a child, he wouldn’t be a RSO which also enables him to stay anonymous and at large. He could have a hidden mental condition no one is aware of that hasn't been diagnosed and treated.

My impression of the kidnapper is he is single, employed full-time, and possibly works and lives in Isa's community. If he is a homeowner who lives alone, he can lock her in a room and still work. If he's been employed for over 10 years, I guess he is in his early to mid-thirties.

mo

Any neighbours within that 3 mile radius with this description? I wonder.

 

[panthera]

Even though they have little information to provide, they feel these updates are good to provide opportunity for questions.

[Personally, I think they do keep story out there.]

Agree, the updates from LE are keeping Isabel in the news. Sadly, unless an arrest is made or she is found, there probably won't be anything LE can say that gives the public any clues as to the progress in the investigation.



MOO

 

[liz b.]

I guess I figured one of those two warrants would be for the grandparents' home down the street. Interesting...

Yes, the grandparents home would have been searched. Absolutely MOO

Does any article state that only two search warrants were issued ? I thought it just stated warrants, in the plural sense...MOO

 

[~n/t~]

Remember the family discussing how difficult it was for them to be in the house because "everything is Isabel." With hope for her return, wouldn't that be comforting?

But yet another red flag went down, IMO, when Sergio inserted the tidbit: "but we check our phone messages" (referring to the home phone line). Wow! They would leave their phone line unmanned while their daughter is missing and supposedly abducted? That's just crazy.

Good point.

 

[mck16]

Yes, the grandparents home would have been searched. Absolutely MOO

Does any article state that only two search warrants were issued ? I thought it just stated warrants, in the plural sense...MOO

The number two may be coming from the fact that they got a second warrant to search the Celis home. That is when they searched the car. jmo

 

[cluciano63]

No one expected Sergio to say "yes, I do have something to do with her being missing"...any more than they expect any convicted murderer or suspected one, to admit it, but the interviewer always asks the question and the person always answers "no, of course not, I could never hurt so and so..."

So-it seemed odd that he did not just say no. JMO

 

[galiuro]

BBM
The only place I can think of to conduct searches is in the desert near the roads that lead out of the Celis' home area and into the desert. I do not want to think about trying to find a body, but at least it might help find the person who did this. I really don't understand why they haven't searched (or allowed community to search) in these areas. It wouldn't be the first time someone has placed a body fairly near highways. I realize the whole desert can't be searched, but why not these most likely spots?

Any real desert area is quite a bit away from the Celis residence, ie the end of 22nd/Broadway/Speedway and would involve a considerable bit of searching on private land, I think. Not sure the police nor the private land owners would want a bunch of folks out traipsing around...

 

[katydid23]

No one expected Sergio to say "yes, I do have something to do with her being missing"...any more than they expect any convicted murderer or suspected one, to admit it, but the interviewer always asks the question and the person always answers "no, of course not, I could never hurt so and so..."

So-it seemed odd that he did not just say no. JMO

I feel the same way. It was not a 'satisfying' answer. imo.

Sure, he must be sick of being considered a suspect. But he was being interviewed on a national show with a huge audience. Most people were seeing jim for the very first time. He had the perfect opportunity to dispel suspicions.

I think it is usually answered along the lines of :

" I understand why the family has to be looked at first, but we have had no involvement in this tragedy, and we need to be cleared so they can move on and find the guilty party."

But I felt like his response was kind of ambiguous. imo