AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #13

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
oceanblueeyes said:
Well according to this article it is not about the endangerment of the two boys. When that happens CPS has to SERVE an order to remove the children and it seems like it was voluntarily done between CPS and the parents.

CPS "instituted certain measures to ensure the continued welfare" of the children, police said. Police would not elaborate on what measures were taken or what led to the action.

Pacheco said the move was driven by the ongoing investigation of Isabel's disappearance.

Police officers did not have to serve a temporary custody notice, he said.

That's when children are taken from their parents because they are endangered.

"We just wanted CPS to come in and perform an assessment based on information from detectives," he said.


Read more: http://azstarnet.com/news/local/cri...0be-5d95-8b33-f3eb7b22b0f2.html#ixzz1uqjYukMo
Click to expand...


Well that's clear as mud isn't it? What information could the detectives have gotten? No contact order and "barred" (used in other articles) sounds serious.

Hope the 2 pm PC will clear some of this up. Won't hold my breathe though.
 
I am thinking something was discovered or turned up during the investigation into Isabel's disappearance which, while perhaps not directly related to the case, raised serious red flags about her father. MOO evidence of drug use or distribution.
 
oceanblueeyes said:
Well according to this article it is not about the endangerment of the two boys. When that happens CPS has to SERVE an order to remove the children and it seems like it was voluntarily done between CPS and the parents.

CPS "instituted certain measures to ensure the continued welfare" of the children, police said. Police would not elaborate on what measures were taken or what led to the action.

Pacheco said the move was driven by the ongoing investigation of Isabel's disappearance.

Police officers did not have to serve a temporary custody notice, he said.

That's when children are taken from their parents because they are endangered.

"We just wanted CPS to come in and perform an assessment based on information from detectives," he said.


Read more: http://azstarnet.com/news/local/cri...0be-5d95-8b33-f3eb7b22b0f2.html#ixzz1uqjYukMo
Click to expand...

Here's the thing that puzzles me, the point about the parents "no longer living together." CPS cannot make recommendations to separating the parents, only the minor children. So that leads me to think that this separation was Becky's choice, possibly as a way to shield and protect her boys. Then when LE called CPS, they made the recommendation for no contact by the dad. The question is why? What did Sergio do or say that put the boys' welfare in jeapordy? Had to be something more than just his depression, maybe he made threats to them, or threatened to harm himself in front of them. If he was suicidal they would hospitalize him.
It's not like the boys are 3, 4 or 5 years old. One is 14... hardly a small child, and 10 is old enough to figure out that Dad is very upset and saying things that sound spooky but probably doesn't mean them.
No, Mom took the initiative to separate herself and the boys from their father and CPS stepped in and made it mandatory. No contact, not even supervised visits. That has to mean something more than "I'll get a gun and blow my brains out if they don't find my daughter."
 
TxLady2 said:
Here's the thing that puzzles me, the point about the parents "no longer living together." CPS cannot make recommendations to separating the parents, only the minor children. So that leads me to think that this separation was Becky's choice, possibly as a way to shield and protect her boys. Then when LE called CPS, they made the recommendation for no contact by the dad. The question is why? What did Sergio do or say that put the boys' welfare in jeapordy? Had to be something more than just his depression, maybe he made threats to them, or threatened to harm himself in front of them. If he was suicidal they would hospitalize him.
It's not like the boys are 3, 4 or 5 years old. One is 14... hardly a small child, and 10 is old enough to figure out that Dad is very upset and saying things that sound spooky but probably doesn't mean them.
No, Mom took the initiative to separate herself and the boys from their father and CPS stepped in and made it mandatory. No contact, not even supervised visits. That has to mean something more than "I'll get a gun and blow my brains out if they don't find my daughter."
Click to expand...

I tend to agree that this is more serious than an overwrought, suicidal parent's threats.

IIRC, one of the articles said that the children were initially removed from both parents by CPS, and returned to BC only. I apologize if this is wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
FrayedKnot said:
I tend to agree that this is more serious than an overwrought, suicidal parent's threats.

IIRC, one of the articles said that the children were initially removed from both parents by CPS, and returned to BC only. I apologize if this is wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


I got the impression from LE that the parents were together until CPS got involved.

I do remember Gitana on this thread stating this.

"The second thing CPS can do is to threaten to take a child into protective custody unless a parent agrees to a safety plan which could include a no contact requirement. That does happen with DV allegations or evidence of DV, or of child abuse of some sort. Then, if the parent refuses to follow the safety plan, CPS can remove the child. "

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7911636&postcount=99
 
I think the parents have been fighting a lot and perhaps dad has become violent and they just need to seperate and the kids need to be protected from him for now.

I don't think it is anything more than that. MO
 
southsleuth said:
I'm sure he works in a dental office at or near the TMS. It was posted earlier that he was a hygenist but some are saying he's more like an assistant or receptionist. Ca't find the quote, not enough hot tea yet! Morning!
Click to expand...

He is a dental surgical assistant. He discussed it in the interview with local reporters. I'm not positive, but someone I know that works at TMC told me that he works at TMC, just like BC does. He likely works at an outside office near the TMC campus and assists at the hospital, but I'm not positive. Most of the specialty doctors have offices in the general area and work at that hospital specifically.
 
Taminator said:
He is a dental surgical assistant. He discussed it in the interview with local reporters. I'm not positive, but someone I know that works at TMC told me that he works at TMC, just like BC does. He likely works at an outside office near the TMC campus and assists at the hospital, but I'm not positive. Most of the specialty doctors have offices in the general area and work at that hospital specifically.
Click to expand...

ETA: And sorry if I'm repeating myself, I just got out of work so I'm out of it...lol.
 
TxLady2 said:
Here's the thing that puzzles me, the point about the parents "no longer living together." CPS cannot make recommendations to separating the parents, only the minor children. So that leads me to think that this separation was Becky's choice, possibly as a way to shield and protect her boys. Then when LE called CPS, they made the recommendation for no contact by the dad. The question is why? What did Sergio do or say that put the boys' welfare in jeapordy? Had to be something more than just his depression, maybe he made threats to them, or threatened to harm himself in front of them. If he was suicidal they would hospitalize him.
It's not like the boys are 3, 4 or 5 years old. One is 14... hardly a small child, and 10 is old enough to figure out that Dad is very upset and saying things that sound spooky but probably doesn't mean them.
No, Mom took the initiative to separate herself and the boys from their father and CPS stepped in and made it mandatory. No contact, not even supervised visits. That has to mean something more than "I'll get a gun and blow my brains out if they don't find my daughter."
Click to expand...

Respectfully, CPS cannot force a parent to separate from another but they can "recommend" that if one parent wishes to maintain custody, they must remove the other from the home. It happens all the time. If one parent is deemed to be a possible threat but the other is not, CPS can and does give the non threat deemed parent a choice. "Get the danger deemed parent out of the household or lose the kids."

So yes, Becky may have had a "choice" but it may have been thrust upon her.
 
IHAVENOCLUE said:
It was just a thought at the time...

But it could explain some things.

IDK
Click to expand...

Yes, it is probably as good a theory as any other right now... MOO

Only thing that's odd is that SC cannot even call his sons at this time. And vice versa. So it's hard to see how the contact order could be about SC's emotional distress, and it not being good for him to be around the boys ? No contact whatsoever is quite extreme. MOO

Hopefully,if SC is drinking too much,and/or using again, he will be able to get some help...MOO
 
liz b. said:
Yes, it is probably as good a theory as any other right now... MOO

Only thing that's odd is that SC cannot even call his sons at this time. And vice versa. So it's hard to see how the contact order could be about SC's emotional distress, and it not being good for him to be around the boys ? No contact whatsoever is quite extreme. MOO

Hopefully,if SC is drinking too much,and/or using again, he will be able to get some help...MOO
Click to expand...


BBM

What do you mean by using "again"? TIA
 
Re: The report/rumor of a body found near a beach resort was circulating on several websites in the early afternoon yesterday. I had seen some links but knew better than to bring them here without reliable source information. The original source was said to be the Facebook page of a local reporter.

I hope there is new information on the case during today's news briefing.
 
~n/t~ said:
BBM

What do you mean by using "again"? TIA
Click to expand...

Only that it has been posted that SC had some DUIs in the past...not the recent past,though. Would hope that he can get help,if he has present problems with any type of substance abuse...JMO
 
BetteDavisEyes said:
Re: The report/rumor of a body found near a beach resort was circulating on several websites in the early afternoon yesterday. I had seen some links but knew better than to bring them here without reliable source information. The original source was said to be the Facebook page of a local reporter.

I hope there is new information on the case during today's news briefing.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a rumour. It's being reported that the body appears to have been there for several months. I don't think it's Isabel.

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/cri...cle_959884b6-9d70-11e1-b173-0019bb2963f4.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 181 more.
Total: 3,211 (members: 182, guests: 3,029)

Online statistics

Members online
182
Guests online
3,029
Total visitors
3,211
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,576
Messages
18,158,830
Members
231,773
Latest member
benjysmom
Back
Top