AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - # 8

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
What do you guys make of LE saying that the parents should do a (1?) one-on-one interview instead of saying that they should just make the media rounds?
 
liltexans said:
Can you link the article that has the comments? I think it's okay to refer posters to the comments section if you provide the link to the article.
Click to expand...

liltexans. It is on the last page of thread #7...because...I...umm..don't know how to do a link...(hangs head in shame )...
 
PAXIMUS said:
Well the most simple explanation for them not going back to the home is that it is so soon and there are a lot of memories there of their little girl, I am not sure I would be able to face that either, its a raw and open wound and emotionally it would be very hard to go back living in that house with reminders of their little Isabel all around them.
Click to expand...

For me, assuming their innocence, it is the feeling that their home has been violated by someone who entered it and abducted their daughter. The place they once felt "safe" has now been intruded upon and they still have two other children.

MOO
 
Oneoffourhills said:
Hello!
I have also been a lurker for years. Isabels case being very close to my home has inspired me to post.

My thought on the video release yesterday, was that while LE did want to speak to the 5 walkers, the intention of the legnth of the video, was to let the 6th person know that he was recorded. Perhaps to effect some sort of change in his daily pattern-rattle his cage-so that he would begin desplaying clues for others to become suspect of.

Secondly, and the thought that I cannot get out of my mind are the 3 dogs becoming loose exactly 1 week, prior to the abduction. I certainly could have missed major discussion on this point, and if so please direct me. But I feel like this could have been a failed attempt-releasing the dogs, to acquire access to Isa. Or, releasing the dogs to LOOK like an intruder, and something interrupted the actual abduction on this day. Are there any previous comments on the dogs being out the prior Friday?

According to AZ public access, there are no additional reports\charges on dogs loose ever before. I know I had a dog that is a runner, and one that is not. The "runner" was a repeat offender. Seems coincidental that the only time the dogs have ever gotten loose was 1 week prior, same day.
Click to expand...

:welcome:GREAT FIRST POST! I agree about the dogs getting loose---odd coincidence.
 
liltexans said:
Family is not back in the home. The home has been under their control for several days now. He doesn't know why they haven't gone back; it's their choice. Perhaps they don't feel quite comfortable there.
Click to expand...

If someone broke into your home, where you had previously felt safe, and stole one of your children, would you truly feel safe there? I can understand feeling so insecure, such anxiety, returning to a place where you had previously felt so safe, only to have that come crashing down.

If the family does not know what happened to Isabel, I can easily see not returning to the home, not only because of the emotions connected to having your sense of security completely blown, but also because of your other children that you have to protect.
 
It is really depressing to watch all of these press conferences when there's not really much new information. :(

Come home, Isa.
 
BetteDavisEyes said:
From the get-go, I thought it was very strange that Isabel's parents did not speak to the media to plea for the safe return of their daughter. When they did appear, their "statements" were scripted, and the dad's histrionic "meeting (your) demands" speech was just plain bizarre. There was an uncomfortable disconnect between Isa's parents, at which time my hinky-meter went berserk and hasn't regulated itself since. :moo:
Click to expand...


After a lot of thought, I have a theory about mom and dad and why they have acted the way they have, but it's kind of out in left field and pure speculation, so I'm going to leave it alone.

Suffice it to say, I think they are married in legalities, parenting and appearances only.
 
BetteDavisEyes said:
From the get-go, I thought it was very strange that Isabel's parents did not speak to the media to plea for the safe return of their daughter. When they did appear, their "statements" were scripted, and the dad's histrionic "meeting (your) demands" speech was just plain bizarre. There was an uncomfortable disconnect between Isa's parents, at which time my hinky-meter went berserk and hasn't regulated itself since. :moo:
Click to expand...
I could not agree more. The parents' behavior has been bizarre. Great word to describe it! Out of synch with the scenario.
 
eileenhawkeye said:
What do you guys make of LE saying that the parents should do a (1?) one-on-one interview instead of saying that they should just make the media rounds?
Click to expand...

I thought that was a very interesting choice and perhaps makes me think that LE knows more than we think. A one on one interview would make the parents more sympathetic, I would think. Couple that with the father's not often heard statement for demands, and it could be possible that LE thinks that there's a possibility of recovering Isabel if they play their cards right.
 
SurfieTX said:
After a lot of thought, I have a theory about mom and dad and why they have acted the way they have, but it's kind of out in left field and pure speculation, so I'm going to leave it alone.

Suffice it to say, I think they are married in legalities, parenting and appearances only.
Click to expand...

Oh come on! Share the theory!
 
I'm not reading much into "one to one" or "one on one" coming from LE. I think he meant that they should sit down with the media, probably together, in an interview setting. In other words, with a reporter/interviewer talking to them and asking them questions. Not that the interviewer needs to interview each parent separately. We know that LE has interviewed each parent separately already.
 
ITA with the dogs - it is quite a coincidence.

If the family is staying away from their house because they think it might be bugged, how long do they think they can stay away? They have to go back 'home" at some point. ???
 
liltexans said:
I'm not reading much into "one to one" or "one on one" coming from LE. I think he meant that they should sit down with the media, probably together, in an interview setting. In other words, with a reporter/interviewer talking to them and asking them questions. Not that the interviewer needs to interview each parent separately. We know that LE has interviewed each parent separately already.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. Instead of reading a statement sit down and answer some questions. jmo
 
BetteDavisEyes said:
LE would like the parents to speak to the media. The parents don't want to speak to the media so that the focus remains on Isabel. The parents have avoided media appearances. Why?
Click to expand...

I think LE wants the family to talk to the media as a way to get them to continue to talk about that night in question. Everything they say becomes part of the record, which LE can then use for comparison purposes and to possibly impeach them in the future with discrepancies. How many times have we seen media interviews introduced in court as evidence?

I also think this will all come to a head soon. IMO, based on Friday's briefing, LE has administered LD tests. I think they also have preliminary forensics, and right now they're waiting and keeping the lines of communication open for as long as they possibly can. That strategy may involve bringing up scenarios that they know aren't at play here, and being very non-specific.

MOO.
 
I don't understand the parents' reluctance to do more press with the excuse of "keeping the focus on Isabel". Isn't that their job?! Who else is going to keep the focus on Isabel if not her own parents? I know they mean they want the focus on Isabel and not them, but...they're all she's got. I don't understand how or why they are not out there, begging for their daughter and giving more info. It's perplexing. The focus SHOULD be on Isabel which is why they SHOULD be giving interviews. I hope they change their mind as this case gets colder.
 
Do I remember correctly that LE requested footage/pictures of Isabel at her ball game on the Friday evening?

Did they get anything/confirm she was there?
 
Lark2 said:
I think LE wants the family to talk to the media as a way to get them to continue to talk about that night in question. Everything they say becomes part of the record, which LE can then use for comparison purposes and to possibly impeach them in the future with discrepancies. How many times have we seen media interviews introduced in court as evidence?

I also think this will all come to a head soon. IMO, based on Friday's briefing, LE has administered LD tests. I think they also have preliminary forensics, and right now they're waiting and keeping the lines of communication open for as long as they possibly can. That strategy may involve bringing up scenarios that they know aren't at play here, and being very non-specific.

MOO.
Click to expand...

What do you think they have for forensics. I have not heard or seen anything about what they took out of the house. I believe I heard they took stuff out of another home they did a search on. tia
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 134 more.
Total: 3,296 (members: 135, guests: 3,161)

Online statistics

Members online
135
Guests online
3,161
Total visitors
3,296
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,205
Messages
18,168,988
Members
232,136
Latest member
Ademith83
Back
Top