AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #22

[passionflower]

Why do people graffeti? Can it also spray paint when angry?
A poster in the beginning said SC has a temper?
Have we seen any?
Do parents drink allot?

 

[MBK]

Trying to connect more dots.
CpS, Sc not allowed to be with sons, graffitti?
Dad into graffitti?
IMO Isa never made it to bed.
IMO her hair was never done,bath etc.
What happened after game? In her room?
I do believe dad went to bed at 5 am,after
a huge clean up.
Did he make boys help?
JmOO

I wonder if LE asked Rebecca if Sergio ever made it to bed that night. I mean, I know HE says he did, but did SHE?

 

[azmary]

Graffiti and Opera. Hmmm. Not so sure Sergio would have been into graffiti. Maybe one of the sons, a childish prank? Hopefully, not gang related.

From my understanding, the "no contact" business stemmed from a concerns LE developed during the course of the investigation. Not sure if or how it's related to the abduction of Isabel. No contact, not even supervised visits. Think about it.

Maybe SC know's who took IC and he had to tell what he know's about this.
Perhaps the other children would be at risk to go missing also.

 

[passionflower]

Maybe SC know's who took IC and he had to tell what he know's about this.
Perhaps the other children would be at risk to go missing also.

Not sure,to nab the perps,I would think LE would want everyone to act as a normal family unit. LE did this right away and never said why. Who is protecting RC & boys?:banghead:

 

[white rabbit]

The reports that focused on Isa's room, one a report on photos taken, the other a report on evidence taken do mention two evidence numbers that are not detailed, so those evidence numbers could have something to do with "other items."

The report mentions
DJN1L and DJN2L both are latent fingerprints on sill

The report also mentions
DJN1 through DJN6

DNJ1 -- where fingerprint dust collected on part of the outside screen but no actual print visible -- sent in for DNA tests

DNJ2 -- where dust collected on the actual window sent in for DNA test

DNJ3 -- apparent blood in Isa's room

DNJ4 -- apparent blood in Isa's room

DNJ5 --included at bottom -- ? (other items?)

DNJ6 -- -included at bottom ---? (other items?)


ETA found the article you meant http://www.azpm.org/news/story/2012/6/4/1558-police-on-missing-tucson-girl-there-are-suspects/

Yes, I do find it interesting...

thank you for the attatchments prof...what if the furniture in her room wasn't wiped down for fingerprints? what if it was wiped clean because of blood (spatter)? if there are two items or locations with "apparant blood", couldn't there have been more (regardless of the items 'included at bottom' as we're not certain they were located in the bedroom) which were more easily 'cleaned up' than the carpet and other item/location?

just a thought.

 

[laniefi]

BBM

That's how I feel too, oceanblueeyes. If you are suspicious of the parents, I guess don't give, it's your choice. BUT, like you, once I give someone money, it is theirs to do with as they wish. Just like if I give someone begging for change or holding a sign (will work for food) $10 or $20- I HOPE that person uses it for food, but if they use it for booze or whatever, oh well, that is their choice. If I was concerned about it I wouldn't give it.

I wish more people gave this way...

I do the same, although I don't have much to give with a 21 month old at home.

The same goes for lending people money. If asked, I say no - I can't LOAN you money but I can GIVE it to you. If I truly can GIVE it, I will. I don't ever expect it back. If someone that I have given money to pays me back then GREAT. If not, I never expected to be paid back anyways.

 

[cluelessinNY]

My husband and I always give when we can. We have donated to a few wonderful causes in the last few years and it always feels good to give. When we feel led to give, we do so with no expectation of anything back. With that said, we do pay close attention to what the money is supporting. We'd never want to give money to an organization that was involved in crime or using the money for something that would unknowningly go against our conscience. A good example is giving to 'homeless' folks on our local streets. In the past, we've given money to them without reservation. Now, if we're really led to give, we'll go to the nearest food place and purchase a sandwich, fruit and a bottle of water. We've decided it would be better to give something like that than to unknownly support a scam or drug/alcohol habit.

Isa's abduction is a crime and her parents have not been ruled out yet. Villaseñor of the TPD just said so a couple of days ago. So until they are ruled out, we cannot support them financially at this time.

 

[DIRK SCHILLER]

any news, update?
TIA

 

[iSleuth]

They "follow" everyone that follows them? I'm gonna go follow them. I keep meaning to look at it. I'm on Twitter ALL the time.

They are following twice and many people as are following them.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Curious if people have heard the statement analysis (by PH) of this case and what you all think? I noticed on one site there was a reference to the WS poll here so I was also wondering.....

Are we allowed to post/ share the blogtalk radio link with the statement analysis interview?

See post #1148 on this thread.

 

[GutFeeling!]

I may be missing something about prints on the dresser. I just looked at mine and it had a nice film of dust LOL (Don't be judging me) - point is - not a finger print in sight and I use it several times a day - there is just no need to touch the top of the dresser.

 

[GutFeeling!]

I have been chatting to a CPS caseworker about this case on and off for a while now. The no contact orders are very common for things that can be fixed, they usually have things you have to do to get contact again - like rehab, AA etc .... 90 days is VERY rare but I think that was an assumption here not a given. I can't find anything that says it was 90 days, only AzLawyer saying it can be 90 days. (That is the maximum is Texas not sure about Az)

CPS get involved on day one of every missing child case.

 

[liz b.]

I may be missing something about prints on the dresser. I just looked at mine and it had a nice film of dust LOL (Don't be judging me) - point is - not a finger print in sight and I use it several times a day - there is just no need to touch the top of the dresser.

Was it only the top of the dresser ? Or was it the drawers too ? IMO the place on the dresser to have the most prints would be the handles on the drawers ? If there are no prints there it COULD mean that the whole dresser was wiped down... For some reason. JMO

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

I have been chatting to a CPS caseworker about this case on and off for a while now. The no contact orders are very common for things that can be fixed, they usually have things you have to do to get contact again - like rehab, AA etc .... 90 days is VERY rare but I think that was an assumption here not a given. I can't find anything that says it was 90 days, only AzLawyer saying it can be 90 days. (That is the maximum is Texas not sure about Az)

CPS get involved on day one of every missing child case.

I hope that there is a very good reason for the no-contact agreement. If not, it seems like undue punishment for father and sons. School is out now, and the boys could be spending lots of quality time with their dad, especially if Sergio hasn't returned to work. :moo:

 

[cluelessinNY]

I have been chatting to a CPS caseworker about this case on and off for a while now. The no contact orders are very common for things that can be fixed, they usually have things you have to do to get contact again - like rehab, AA etc .... 90 days is VERY rare but I think that was an assumption here not a given. I can't find anything that says it was 90 days, only AzLawyer saying it can be 90 days. (That is the maximum is Texas not sure about Az)

CPS get involved on day one of every missing child case.

BBM. This part I believe is understood. What I think is not clear at all in this case is why the father has a no contact order against him. Unless this is SOP for all missing children, that one of the parents must have ABSOLUTELY no contact with the remaining children in the home, then I think this is cause for concern.

 

[GutFeeling!]

BBM. This part I believe is understood. What I think is not clear at all in this case is why the father has a no contact order against him. Unless this is SOP for all missing children, that one of the parents must have ABSOLUTELY no contact with the remaining children in the home, then I think this is cause for concern.

The cause of concern for my grandson (just been through this) was drugs. The parent had to attend rehab - no contact at all for 30 days, initiated by what they said was a "drug induced" tantrum (for lack of a better word).

It is not SOP for no contact.

 

[GutFeeling!]

Was it only the top of the dresser ? Or was it the drawers too ? IMO the place on the dresser to have the most prints would be the handles on the drawers ? If there are no prints there it COULD mean that the whole dresser was wiped down... For some reason. JMO

There would certainly be prints on the drawers. I was just reading and understanding people were talking about the top - may have misunderstood.

 

[Prof]

thank you for the attatchments prof...what if the furniture in her room wasn't wiped down for fingerprints? what if it was wiped clean because of blood (spatter)? if there are two items or locations with "apparant blood", couldn't there have been more (regardless of the items 'included at bottom' as we're not certain they were located in the bedroom) which were more easily 'cleaned up' than the carpet and other item/location?

just a thought.

You are welcome!
I suppose that's possible...
Do we know there was carpet? The report said floor, but it also called outside the window a floor lol

I am more inclined to believe that nothing was wiped down. If any wiping down occured (and so far the only thing I have seen point to this is poster speculation) why wouldn't the screen, the sill, the floor where evidence was found all be wiped down? The wiping down makes no sense to me, and there is no evidence of wiping down. Nothing was said in MSM, pressers or the doc dump about wiping down.

I personally cannot consider the lack of evidence as evidence of anything.

I have posted many different links that show why negative results in tests for latents does not mean that something has been wiped down.

LE never said anything was cleaned up, covered up, or wiped down.
There were 8 pieces of evidence packaged up from Isa's room alone, that we know of... from that first day, supplied by the doc dumps, which are only a portion of the reports LE has...

So, sorry for the repetition... I am open to your idea though as being possible.. I just have not seen any evidence that points to this...

 

[CJMAJORGIRL24]

Pediatric nurse here. Since 1989.
(typically)
That happens all the time from about age 3 to 6.
I found it to be most common at the 5 yr check up.

Babies should triple their birth weight by one year.
7# , 21 inches at birth
21# , 30 inches at first birthday.
Then the weight gain slows down considerably- as the
height continues to increase at a more rapid rate.

At two years of age a child may weigh only 30# but is USUALLY already 1/2 of what their adult height will be. A 36 inch 2 year old will end up approx 72 inches (6 ft)

You end up with 38 inches 38# at 3
44# 44 inches at 5 (or 6) etc...

As kids age their height ends up beng less than their weight
and it stays that way for life.

*this is just a general rule for growth and does not apply to ALL children!
DNA does factor in as well as the height and weight of the parents

just a lil FYI

Thanks so much for the lesson!! I will remember it-and what a great profession!! I wanted to go into medicine, but sometimes I faint at the sight of blood. :floorlaugh: So my family said that wouldn't be the right profession for me. lol!!

I was really hoping that there woud be a break in Isabel's case this morning.

 

[iSleuth]

See post #1148 on this thread.

Yes - I that is why I asked, I don't want to mess up and post anything that would be a violation.

The blogtalk radio session I am curious about is not the interview with the family about the Tshirt sales. It is from may 26 th about the 911 call and other released statements etc. People may have missed it because it was around the time of the "Great Document Dump"and has examples about this case and the Ayla Reynolds case also.