Found Deceased NH - Celina Cass, 11, Stewartstown, 25 July 2011 # 9 *Arrest*

[Darcyline]

11-12 year olds shouldn't be out late at night, but sometimes they do go. It was around that age that I took my first nighttime walk by sneaking out a window. It isn't that abnormal for kids to rebel just a little and maybe see what it feels like to see the neighborhood at night.
I honestly don't think that is what happened to Celina, but I don't think it is as bizarre or rare as people are making it out to be.

 

[katydid23]

11-12 year olds shouldn't be out late at night, but sometimes they do go. It was around that age that I took my first nighttime walk by sneaking out a window. It isn't that abnormal for kids to rebel just a little and maybe see what it feels like to see the neighborhood at night.
I honestly don't think that is what happened to Celina, but I don't think it is as bizarre or rare as people are making it out to be.

I snuck out at night when I was 12 or so, but never alone. I would go with my girlfriends and TP houses. But I would not have run around alone. I was a chicken.

Celina was just out of 4th grade though. I think she was young for her age. If that makes sense.

 

[Tugela]

Toxicology tests are standard procedure for a suspicious death. It's just one more piece of evidence investigators use to build a case. It also can be used to dispute a defendant's claim that someone died from a drug overdose.

Positive results for drugs or alcohol do not necessarily give them a cause of death. They can establish cause of death if tests indicate a deadly concentration or a deadly combination of drugs. They also can provide clues to a victim's activity before death. Sometimes, those clues can link a victim to a suspect even if the tox results don't indicate that the cause of death was drug- or alcohol-related.

Well, if the body has a bullet hole, ligature marks on the neck, or blunt force trauma you don't need toxicology to determine the cause of death. The only reason to do it would be when the cause of death is not apparent or it appears to be accidental with odd characteristics. Since they are saying that the death is suspicious and are awaiting toxicology results it would imply that there was no obvious cause of death but the circumstances of the body were unusual.

 

[Tugela]

Remember - she was only in 4th grade. That's still elementary school. That's young. I don't think she would have went out walking by herself at night. Not at that age. Think about how you handled your child (if a Mom) at 10 or 11 years of age. Think if you EVER see a 10-11 year old walking around at night.

Websleuths has plenty of cases where kids that age are doing exactly that.

 

[MarthaM]

I still haven't heard enough evidence or details (real ones, not rumor or hearsay) to decide whether I think this is a homicide or a tragic accident. Instead of things becoming clearer as the days go on, they're getting murkier. At least for me.

 

[clayangel]

Does anyone have or know where a screenshot is for WN FB that yall are talking about?

 

[Codger]

She talked about taking a walk another day, about 3-4 days before she disappeared...

Wasn't that about the last posting she did on FB? Was it posted the evening of the 22nd? And, the last time, so far as we know, that she was seen by anyone outside of the household?

 

[MsFacetious]

OK I'm going bonkers here thinking up all kinds of things.
I need the real thing!!

What's JY's number?

1-800-Patience Grasshopper... (It's an overseas number... you know, Europe or something, a long one.) :giggle:

Or 1-800 - Don't Speak. :innocent:


Yes, it has now been almost 9 days since they found Celina.
16 days since she went missing.

I still have 100% confidence in Jane Young and her team.
This case is a bit different because of the circumstances of the people involved... that may affect timing of an arrest.
However, I wouldn't be surprised if there is still an arrest very soon. Possibly early next week.

I find it interesting that the tribute videos and in dedication videos have included pictures of KM & CC. I would think that if there was any one suspecting that he was involved that they would not use those pictures. I just find it hard to believe, that if he was a suspect in their mind, that they would use pictures of CC & her murderer in a tribute to her.

But then again, there have been some very strange things going on in this entire case, so really, who knows.

I agree. I think that the community doesn't believe KM was involved. I guess we can take that in whatever way we want to take it.
I find the community is often correct in who they believe is involved... and in this case people don't seem to believe it's KM.

Will they be right?
I don't know. I initially suspected KM... and after seeing no suspicion from the community I don't have those suspicions either at this point.

 

[gnomony]

Yes, and no. Perhaps some are lazy. I don't believe that they get their news from the AP.. The AP usually picks up stories from a reporter (who gets paid for it) and then it releases it.. Some reporters send directly to AP also..

I usually get my information from the most direct source, which in this case is the police or the AG's office. Neither the police nor the AG office is saying anything.

You can check past court reports, and convictions, but that has nothing to do with the current case. You can interview neighbors, but doubt that nothing new would come out of that since the police have done so.

You can't print rumors or your own opinions. And as far as Noyes goes his medical records are not available under Hepa laws.

Reporters also don't make a lot of money and they don't get paid to be a detective. Like any other business a reporter gets paid to produce.. They may want to follow it on their own time but that is a different story.

AP is a cooperative owned by the media outlets that are its U.S. users and contributors. When I was a newspaper editor, we always had more stories that we wanted to follow than we had available reporters, so when something happened far away (especially where we'd have to pay for transportation, meals & lodging for the reporter), we'd almost always ask AP to cover it for us. If there was a particular local interest in our primary circulation area, we might send a reporter for the first few news cycles, and then drop back to AP coverage. And, of course, we often would augment AP copy with whatever our own reporter could get on the phone.

(And all newspapers have much tighter budgets and fewer reporters today than they did a while back...)

When I was a reporter following a case like this, I'd make a daily call to LE and/or the AGO, just before my deadline, asking for updates (and often would be on the phone with the AGO about other things, anyway) but never found it productive to pester them. We each understood that the other had a job to do, so the phone calls were friendly and very, very short. "Anything new on XYZ?" "Okay, thanks." With maybe one follow-up question...

I'm trying to remember a time when LE or AGO asked me to keep something out of the paper. If it ever happened, I think it would have been because it would make someone an immediate target of violence, and if I ever agreed, it would have been for a very short period. I certainly never was asked (and never would agree) to keep mum on an entire story to give law enforcement time to develop a case. That would be a dance with the devil, and very shortly you would be getting requests that were based on PR and detective-supervisor relations rather than any legit public safety issue.

One final thing: Rarely in my experience has LE or an AAG told me an outright lie. It's just not a career-enhancing thing to do. If I were an editor and the AGO lied outright to my reporter, I can assure you that our next investigation would be of the AGO.

FWIW...

 

[Magdalyn]

Well, if the body has a bullet hole, ligature marks on the neck, or blunt force trauma you don't need toxicology to determine the cause of death. The only reason to do it would be when the cause of death is not apparent or it appears to be accidental with odd characteristics. Since they are saying that the death is suspicious and are awaiting toxicology results it would imply that there was no obvious cause of death but the circumstances of the body were unusual.

Respectfully, they would still do toxicology. The cause of death may look like one thing but be another.

Just like we can't assume Celina drowned just because she was found in water, we can't assume, even if she looks to have died one way (violently in the ways you mentioned) that she wasn't actually killed by another means.

A person could be decapitated. And if you saw a body without a head, you would think that's how they died. But they may have been strangled first, suffocated, or overdosed. Then decapitated after the fact just cause the killer wanted to.

The little boy in NY found dismembered. But he was drugged first. Perhaps not drugged to death, but they need the entire picture of what happened. In theory, he could have been dismembered after death or it could have been cause of death.

Her cause of death may be something obvious like a gunshot wound, but if she were drugged by roofies or something, that would change the picture too.

The state needs a complete picture of how the death occured when they press charges.

Also, they said they were waiting toxicology AND other investigative tests, I believe, which would/could include DNA. We're still under 2 weeks; 2 weeks is still be phenomenally fast to get these tests back, IMO.

 

[twzzlrgirl]

Respectfully, they would still do toxicology. The cause of death may look like one thing but be another.

Just like we can't assume Celina drowned just because she was found in water, we can't assume, even if she looks to have died one way (violently in the ways you mentioned) that she wasn't actually killed by another means.

A person could be decapitated. And if you saw a body without a head, you would think that's how they died. But they may have been strangled first, suffocated, or overdosed. Then decapitated after the fact just cause the killer wanted to.

The little boy in NY found dismembered. But he was drugged first. Perhaps not drugged to death, but they need the entire picture of what happened. In theory, he could have been dismembered after death or it could have been cause of death.

Her cause of death may be something obvious like a gunshot wound, but if she were drugged by roofies or something, that would change the picture too.

The state needs a complete picture of how the death occured when they press charges.

Also, they said they were waiting toxicology AND other investigative tests, I believe, which would/could include DNA. We're still under 2 weeks; 2 weeks is still be phenomenally fast to get these tests back, IMO.

Also (and this has been mentioned by others): the "waiting on toxicology" may also be a way of stalling the media until they can get their ducks in a row for an arrest. The media frenzy will stay somewhat at bay while also awaiting these results.

 

[bstnh1]

Frma story on WMUR.com (Channel 9 Manchester NH):

"The attorney general's office said Tuesday that investigators are not announcing any suspects or an exact cause of death until more test results come in."

 

[elmomom]

Hmmm, wonder what it's like using a router off a dial up internet service setup? Thats all they have in that town.
You say with the iphone, you can also use cellular wireless internet, but for that you need a cell tower,but you can use FB without having phone reception.
Maybe your iphone works better than mine:waitasec:
In order to get into FB with an iphone, you must have internet access...no cell tower =no internet service , no phone reception=no cell tower close by.

One thing is for certain, if a iphone is used to post on FB , the post will indicate that it was. EXAMPLE: posted via iphone or posted via android

Anyway, I doubt there's a mystery person posting on FB using WN's name. MOO...

I know it isn't important but I don't like leaving things I have said unclear and being misinterpreted.

You DO need internet to use FB on iPhone.

BUT you do NOT need a cell tower, or cellular internet.

You can have dial up internet at your home, and have your phone line connect to a wireless router. This will give out a wifi signal that your iPhone can use to connect to the internet.

Wifi is not cellular internet, cellular internet is not dependent on anything other than cell towers. Wifi is local internet from a router.

 

[elmomom]

Frma story on WMUR.com (Channel 9 Manchester NH):

"The attorney general's office said Tuesday that investigators are not announcing any suspects or an exact cause of death until more test results come in."

Hmm. Oh well, I guess several = 3. On Saturday they said no announcements for several days. Today is day 3.
Today the announcement is that they are waiting for "more" test results.

Could it be a second round of tests?

 

[HeinekenMan]

Well, if the body has a bullet hole, ligature marks on the neck, or blunt force trauma you don't need toxicology to determine the cause of death. The only reason to do it would be when the cause of death is not apparent or it appears to be accidental with odd characteristics. Since they are saying that the death is suspicious and are awaiting toxicology results it would imply that there was no obvious cause of death but the circumstances of the body were unusual.

Bullet holes don't necessarily mean that someone was killed by gunfire. The person could be shot post-mortem. The person could be stabbed post-mortem. Also, toxicology does more than give you cause of death. If I'm drugged and kidnapped before I'm killed, the investigators need to know that. Perhaps they can tie the drugs used to a person of interest. I can be strangled to death, but the killer might wait until I'm drunk to do it.

You always do toxicology with a suspicious death. But there are times when investigators are confident enough to announce the COD before toxicology testing is complete. We don't know what they know right now. We just know that they're not telling us. It's possible that they suspect a certain COD, and it's possible that they have no idea what COD is.

 

[HeinekenMan]

My guess is that they will not announce a COD or provide any details until they make an arrest. Obviously, that would change if they are unable to make an arrest.

 

[bstnh1]

There are a lot of theories posted here and all are very good. They are all within the realm of possibilities and they all make sense. And they all share one common characteristic. Every one of them is based upon one or more assumptions that are not supported by any evidence or facts that have been made known to date. So we can keep dreaming up theories and hypothetical scenarios, but what does that accomplish? Until more facts are made available, to sit here and dream up scenario after scenario amounts to nothing more than an exercise in futility.

 

[twzzlrgirl]

I don't think they need to make an arrest because the person they will be taking into custody is already being held (albeit not in jail). JMHO.

 

[bstnh1]

Hmm. Oh well, I guess several = 3. On Saturday they said no announcements for several days. Today is day 3.
Today the announcement is that they are waiting for "more" test results.

Could it be a second round of tests?

I think it's significant that the statement said "more tests back" rather than "the tests back". That implies that some test results have been received.

 

[bstnh1]

I don't think they need to make an arrest because the person they will be taking into custody is already being held (albeit not in jail). JMHO.

I know where you're going, but I don't think that's the right direction. Just my opinion.