AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #24

[Aura]

I cannot believe these girls called 911 3 times. I did prank calls when I was younger. I would call my friends and prank them. Not 911. But I do know kids do that. My friends son when he was 4 called 911 and they showed up to the house and scared the crap outta him. Happened again to my step daughter. But to call 3 times, and play like your kidnapped? I just dont understand that. Kids are bolder today. I would NEVER have done that at their age. I was scared of the cops back then. And then to do it with a major case in out state. Im glad the parents are embarrassed and doing something for them to understand you dont do something like that.

 

[OtherEyes]

I think about beautiful Isabel every day. I am saddened that the only news has been about cruel prank calls to 911. There are those of us who care and want to know what has happened to this precious little one.

My prayers go out to all those who love her and worry for her. May they have peace. May answers come and justice served for this sweet girl!:rose:

 

[Prof]

Where is my proof for thinking they are concerned? Interviews? Bringing in TES? Doing something other than asking for $$$? (no, nope, nyet).

If LE does not want public searches, they may not want TES either. Just because TES is not involved, does not mean that parents have not asked for TES.
A lack of evidence, IMO cannot be made into evidence.

"Special note: Texas EquuSearch can only accept a missing person case if it has been filed with the appropriate law enforcement agency, a case number has been assigned, and law enforcement gives their consent for Texas EquuSearch to become involved."
http://texasequusearch.org/\

TES is not involved in many cases. The fact that they are not involved in a case should certainly not be used as evidence of guilt on any party.
LE in this case has been very strict about not wanting public searches.

What are the statistics that prove that parent interviews bring a missing child home?

What I have seen is that the interviews tend to make the parents the target of internet bashing, rather than successfully bringing a child home. JMO

Where is the evidence to show that the Celis family are cashing in on Isa's disappearance? I have seen none.


JMO

 

[Madeleine74]

I was listing some examples of actions that other parents have utilized in cases. Not each and every action is required to prove a family's concern, but seeing passivity is certainly curious and nothing the Celis parents have done have shown much concern lately. As for TES, I doubt the family ever contacted them.

You may see a worried and distraught family desperate to get their child back; what I have seen in interviews, listening to SC's 911 call, reading statements, etc. is something different.

There have been donations to the Celis family. Public statements by the family have continued to encourage people to donate. What are those monies being used for aside from printing of flyers and some wrist bands? There have been no events occurring that require funding. Yet the money is obviously going somewhere. If monies are going into the Celis' pockets and being used for their personal living expenses, that could be considered unethical by those who donated.

 

[Prof]

I am not seeing evidence.
I am seeing the lack of evidence interpreted as evidence.

I see families of missing children as victims until I see evidence that make them not victims. It is simple for me.

I am also careful not to post anything that might hinder an investigation by LE, or in some way hinder a child being found.
To make unfounded accusations against parents in missing child cases, IMO does not help the investigation or help tips get called in to find the child.

I don't know if the family is invovled or not. They could be. They could just as well not be.
All JMO.

 

[Shelby2]

I am not seeing evidence.
I am seeing the lack of evidence interpreted as evidence.

I see families of missing children as victims until I see evidence that make them not victims. It is simple for me.

I am also careful not to post anything that might hinder an investigation by LE, or in some way hinder a child being found.
To make unfounded accusations against parents in missing child cases, IMO does not help the investigation or help tips get called in to find the child.

I don't know if the family is invovled or not. They could be. They could just as well not be.
All JMO.

I truly understand that..but still I do not know what to make of their silence.
And the CPS action is bothering me...Honestly my feelings about this case are not going in any specific direction anymore, just sadness.

 

[SapphireSteel]

I am not seeing evidence.

I am seeing the lack of evidence interpreted as evidence.

I see families of missing children as victims until I see evidence that make them not victims. It is simple for me.

I am also careful not to post anything that might hinder an investigation by LE, or in some way hinder a child being found.
To make unfounded accusations against parents in missing child cases, IMO does not help the investigation or help tips get called in to find the child.

I don't know if the family is invovled or not. They could be. They could just as well not be.
All JMO.

There is evidence, it's just circumstantial.

100 years ago, it's all juries had. Now we expect - no, demand - not only means, motive and opportunity, but DNA as well.

A double-edged sword.

:banghead:

 

[TxLady2]

Ooops my bad.

Well I've had my opinions on that too, even before it happened, and got howled down in no uncertain terms.

My opinions were expressed in the form of "America's pathetic gun laws" or something like it.

I keep away from shootings because that's all I've got to say and Mr and Mrs America just doesn't want to hear it....their right to keep a shooting stick in the house overwhelms the right of a bunch of kids to see a movie without losing their lives I guess.

:banghead:

I hear you! But more gun laws won't stop this kind of thing. How about more security at theaters or similar places? How about laws preventing people from buying guns over the internet? I could go on. It's not the guns we have to worry about, it's the crazy people who can get access to them. Those guns don't shoot themselves.

 

[TxLady2]

I agree there's a big difference, however I can't say that a 9 yr old and an 11 yr old would distinguish content of one call versus the dire seriousness of a different one. I suspect they didn't understand what the full outcome would be when they made that call and that a bunch of cops would show up and haul them away in handcuffs. That in no way excuses their behavior, and I'm not saying it does.

If either of these kids were missing they'd probably be referred to by many as babies..."bring those babies home!" (as was done in some prior cases).

Kids do not have the reasoning ability that adults have, which is why the law doesn't recognize someone as an adult until they're 18. Punished they should be for sure, but attaching adult thoughts and adult motivations to them doesn't seem valid to me.

I understand your point. But this is how kids learn about responsibility. If they're never made to realize that there are consequences to such actions, then they will just keep on doing more and more until one day it really might cause serious harm. You cannot wait until a child is almost an adult to teach them responsibility, you have to start when they're young.
Of course they didn't think about a bunch of cops showing up! Of course they never thought it through before they made that call! But a 9 and 11 y.o. child should have been taught long ago to NEVER dial 911 unless it is an emergency. They had to know what they were doing was wrong, or they just didn't care. Kids do stupid things all the time... but it has to be dealt with, not just ignored..... like, "oh, well, no one was hurt, kids will be kids, yada, yada." Sorry, but I see too many parents nowadays just laughing things like this off, and it concerns me.

 

[TxLady2]

bingo.

911 is no prank and no pre-tween i know would EVER use that as a source of humor...boredom notwithstanding...

i find nothing funny or irrelevant about it. 25 officers swarmed a neighborhood. all other calls were avoided to respond. that's a crime.

these girls should be devoid of any I-device for a long...time. ipod, ipad, iphone, itouch, icarly...and perhaps a parenting semester for their caregiver(s).

my mundane thoughts for the evening...

Thank you. I agree. I'm glad they were hauled down to the police station in cuffs, maybe that will put enough fear in them to prevent them doing anything like that again.
Pulling a prank is one thing, but this goes way beyond a prank, IMO.

 

[TxLady2]

they called 911 three times???

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/cri...cle_d6237802-f278-50c1-92d1-b798986b1555.html

Nearly $4,700 in resources was spent investigating a prank call made by a pair of sisters who called 911 Sunday and claimed to be missing Tucson 6-year-old Isabel Celis, the Tucson Police Department estimates.

The girls called 911 three times saying that a man was coming for them, giving the name “Isabel” and saying they were kidnapped, according to 911 tapes released Monday afternoon.

In the first call one girl repeats “he’s coming” when asked what she was calling to report, before hanging up the phone.

In the second call, a girl says “Isabel” when she’s asked what she’s reporting, when asked again why she was calling she replied “I’m kidnapped” and gave the address of “East Old Spanish Trail” when a dispatcher asked where she was calling from.

In the third call one of the girls again says “he’s coming.” When the dispatcher asked who’s coming she replies “The guy he’s coming for us, help me.”

Well, there you go. I wouldn't classify it as a harmless prank. They were not just bored, this was deliberate. Three calls... not just one.
I can only imagine what my parents would have done to me if I had pulled something like this at that age.

 

[Shelby2]

I know all kinda are different but when my kids were that age they would have know better. But I honestly don't know anything about these kids..I can only imagine how the police must have felt.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

There is evidence, it's just circumstantial.

100 years ago, it's all juries had. Now we expect - no, demand - not only means, motive and opportunity, but DNA as well.

A double-edged sword.

:banghead:

I don't think we should be using the 1910's decade as an "inspiration" for today. Didn't they lock people up into mental hospitals if they showed even a tiny sign of incompetence? I'm glad that Sergio can't be convicted because of his demeanor in the 911 call, and the fact that he's not allowed to see his kids.

I don't see what's wrong with wanting to know means, motive, and opportunity. Why is wanting to know the why, the how, the where, and the when of a crime such a bad thing?

 

[Madeleine74]

Well, there you go. I wouldn't classify it as a harmless prank. They were not just bored, this was deliberate. Three calls... not just one.
I can only imagine what my parents would have done to me if I had pulled something like this at that age.

I never said it was a harmless prank.

Some people were looking for a deeper psychological reason why a 9 yr old and an 11 yr old would do something like this. My point, which has gotten lost, is that there probably isn't any deep/dark reason why they did something so stupid. They're kids who were likely bored and they did something that amused them. They should be and they will be soundly punished. At no point am I excusing their actions. At no point am I saying "oh well, no biggie."

 

[No Stone Unturned]

I don't think we should be using the 1910's decade as an "inspiration" for today. Didn't they lock people up into mental hospitals if they showed even a tiny sign of incompetence? I'm glad that Sergio can't be convicted because of his demeanor in the 911 call, and the fact that he's not allowed to see his kids.

I don't see what's wrong with wanting to know means, motive, and opportunity. Why is wanting to know the why, the how, the where, and the when of a crime such a bad thing?

I think in Sky M's case, Julia should be locked away on circumstantial evidence. As for Sergio, there is more there that LE hasn't made public. I'm sure they have some clues.

 

[Madeleine74]

I am not seeing evidence.
I am seeing the lack of evidence interpreted as evidence.

The only assertion I'm making is that I don't see the parents too concerned about their missing child. I see posters here more vocal and more frantic about this child. That's what I can see. And yes, what I can see may be misleading and I certainly recognize that.

That doesn't automatically mean the parents did anything to Isa and I'm not saying they did. I'm not accusing them of a crime. That's up to LE to determine.

 

[Lark2]

Some here post with an authoritarial tone that has the effect of giving great weight to their words. One might construe from those posts that LE doesn't suspect the parents at all in this case; that LE doesn't have any idea what happened to Isabel Celis; and that LE is, in fact, completely supportive of the parents and their actions.

But the record says otherwise. We remember the times LE has questioned the parents' behavior and called them out for their lack of concern; we remember that the father in this case is not allowed contact with his other children based on info that came to light in the investigation of his daughter's disappearance; we remember LE's comments, both on and off the record, about the Celis' lack of candor under questioning. We recall LE's actual statements that the parents lacked "a sense of urgency" about Isabel's "abduction," and when they released the 911 call, we heard that lack of urgency with our own ears. When looking at the facts in this case (all documented here in these very threads), it becomes clear that LE are focused on the parents as the "perps."

IMO, for LE, this is not a "who done it" case but rather a "we know who done it and we've removed the only children who might be in harm's way from having it happen again." LE is in "sit tight" mode until the parents produce the child because they believe, as do many others, that she is not dead; and that she is being used as a pawn in a money and publicity-making scheme cooked up by her parents.

They're not looking for her because this is not an abduction.

They're acting as responsible stewards of the public's money, knowing they have massive leverage over the parents with the no contact order. In other words, they know the parents will have to produce her at some point if Dad ever wants to see his sons.

That such a massive fraud could be prepetrated on the public for money and fame is sure to outrage the citizens of Tuscon, and these parents face unprecedented charges.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

I have a hard time believing that people who are carrying out a hoax for money and attention would be going months without talking to national media. And after the hoax is revealed, then what? I doubt there's much of an audience for that after the initial news coverage.

 

[white rabbit]

Some here post with an authoritarial tone that has the effect of giving great weight to their words. One might construe from those posts that LE doesn't suspect the parents at all in this case; that LE doesn't have any idea what happened to Isabel Celis; and that LE is, in fact, completely supportive of the parents and their actions.

But the record says otherwise. We remember the times LE has questioned the parents' behavior and called them out for their lack of concern; we remember that the father in this case is not allowed contact with his other children based on info that came to light in the investigation of his daughter's disappearance; we remember LE's comments, both on and off the record, about the Celis' lack of candor under questioning. We recall LE's actual statements that the parents lacked "a sense of urgency" about Isabel's "abduction," and when they released the 911 call, we heard that lack of urgency with our own ears. When looking at the facts in this case (all documented here in these very threads), it becomes clear that LE are focused on the parents as the "perps."

IMO, for LE, this is not a "who done it" case but rather a "we know who done it and we've removed the only children who might be in harm's way from having it happen again." LE is in "sit tight" mode until the parents produce the child because they believe, as do many others, that she is not dead; and that she is being used as a pawn in a money and publicity-making scheme cooked up by her parents.

They're not looking for her because this is not an abduction.

They're acting as responsible stewards of the public's money, knowing they have massive leverage over the parents with the no contact order. In other words, they know the parents will have to produce her at some point if Dad ever wants to see his sons.

That such a massive fraud could be prepetrated on the public for money and fame is sure to outrage the citizens of Tuscon, and these parents face unprecedented charges.

by far, IMO, the best post for any particular case. JMO.

 

[TxLady2]

I never said it was a harmless prank.

Some people were looking for a deeper psychological reason why a 9 yr old and an 11 yr old would do something like this. My point, which has gotten lost, is that there probably isn't any deep/dark reason why they did something so stupid. They're kids who were likely bored and they did something that amused them. They should be and they will be soundly punished. At no point am I excusing their actions. At no point am I saying "oh well, no biggie."

I believe the post you quoted, I was replying to another poster, but I did get the impression that you at first passed it off as a prank. Sorry if I was mistaken. One call could be explained, possibly, but three such calls?.... I don't think so.