GUILTY Arizona girl, 2, left in car by father on 109-degree day and is found dead #2 (guilty plea, father found dead 5 November 2025 before sentencing)

  • #1,141
Not o my
I’ll never understand why this nasty man received special snowflake treatment by the judge.

The only other case I can recall of a murderer getting special treatment is Marci Kitchen, the California mother who ran over and killed her daughter and daughter’s friend while driving drunk. She too was allowed to go on vacation while awaiting trial.

Why are children still regarded as property with lesser status? What if Chris had locked his sleeping grandmother in the car? Would the judge have been so lenient?

What’s horrific IMO in this case is how quickly Parker’s parents shifted focus from her to the murderer. Mom reduced her death to a mistake. WTH? It seems like the neighbors cared more.

Put Chris in prison where he can’t harm his surviving children or kill someone while drunk driving. He’s a danger to society and needs to be locked up.

Argh!

I’ll never understand why this nasty man received special snowflake treatment by the judge.

The only other case I can recall of a murderer getting special treatment is Marci Kitchen, the California mother who ran over and killed her daughter and daughter’s friend while driving drunk. She too was allowed to go on vacation while awaiting trial.

Why are children still regarded as property with lesser status? What if Chris had locked his sleeping grandmother in the car? Would the judge have been so lenient?

What’s horrific IMO in this case is how quickly Parker’s parents shifted focus from her to the murderer. Mom reduced her death to a mistake. WTH? It seems like the neighbors cared more.

Put Chris in prison where he can’t harm his surviving children or kill someone while drunk driving. He’s a danger to society and needs to be locked up.

Argh! JMO
Not only did Marci run over and kill her own daughter and her daughter’s friend while drunk, she drove home and tried to convince her son to drive the car into a basketball hoop to explain the damage to the car. So she literally committed a hit and run against her own daughter.
 
  • #1,142
My opinion only:

We don't know how C treated E behind closed doors or why she made the choices she made. Being intelligent, educated, and with a fancy job doesn't make it any easier psychologically to deal with certain things. Certainly it gives you more access to resources and financially the ability to leave...but psychologically?

The family just really needs to get away from him, so...may the judge take that into consideration.
BBM:

Is this the same judge that let CS go to Hawaii last May on a family vacation with wife and 2 children?


 
  • #1,143
I’ll never understand why this nasty man received special snowflake treatment by the judge.

The only other case I can recall of a murderer getting special treatment is Marci Kitchen, the California mother who ran over and killed her daughter and daughter’s friend while driving drunk. She too was allowed to go on vacation while awaiting trial.

Why are children still regarded as property with lesser status? What if Chris had locked his sleeping grandmother in the car? Would the judge have been so lenient?

What’s horrific IMO in this case is how quickly Parker’s parents shifted focus from her to the murderer. Mom reduced her death to a mistake. WTH? It seems like the neighbors cared more.

Put Chris in prison where he can’t harm his surviving children or kill someone while drunk driving. He’s a danger to society and needs to be locked up.

Argh! JMO

I have noticed with a lot of cases where children or elderly are killed, the sentences are usually light. I have often wondered if it is based on their social status. Although, in many of the cases with lighter sentences, it was due to a plea agreement, no trial was done.

Of course, along the continuum, there are always glaring anomalies.

I really don't understand the justice system. There are so many loopholes, and "judicial discretion" that it seems like a complete crapshoot to me. And of course, the more money you have, that seems to pave the path.

But, usually, in the end, justice does come. Usually.
 
  • #1,144
BBM:

Is this the same judge that let CS go to Hawaii last May on a family vacation with wife and 2 children?


Yes, same judge, the Hon. Kimberly Ortiz.

Oh.. and they had a nanny watching their dogs while they were in Maui. Should have had one to watch their kids, instead of CS. :confused:


 
  • #1,145
This is not new, but seems to be the consensus. (However only 5 minutes is scheduled !)

"As part of the agreement, Scholtes will remain out of custody until Nov. 5, when the court will determine when he will be taken into custody."

 
Last edited:
  • #1,146
Wait so even after all that, he still may not even be going to prison until 11/21? Wtf
If this is the date, imma bet you all that wife E is preparing a whiny bitchy plea that Christopher should be allowed "one last Thanksgiving with his loving family as a loving and caring father" and on and on..... (Thanksgiving is the following Thursday in the USA, big family holiday gatherings.)

If this took place in a family with fewer digits in their net worth, you KNOW dad would not be roaming free this ENTIRE TIME. Ffs.
 
  • #1,147
If this is the date, imma bet you all that wife E is preparing a whiny bitchy plea that Christopher should be allowed "one last Thanksgiving with his loving family as a loving and caring father" and on and on..... (Thanksgiving is the following Thursday in the USA, big family holiday gatherings.)

If this took place in a family with fewer digits in their net worth, you KNOW dad would not be roaming free this ENTIRE TIME. Ffs.
I was surprised he hadn’t already taken off for Mexico but now I see why. I will be shocked if we see him go to prison here in the US on 11/21. They just gave him even more time to take off,and we know Erika the Clown will support it.
 
  • #1,148
Does anyone remember hearing that one of his stipulations as part of his bail conditions was that he be required to surrender his passport? Seems like it's usually stated in the court hearing by the judge if that's required.
 
  • #1,149
Does anyone remember hearing that one of his stipulations as part of his bail conditions was that he be required to surrender his passport? Seems like it's usually stated in the court hearing by the judge if that's required.
I don’t remember hearing about surrendering his passport. Here’s what was reported July 2024 at the first hearing:

Conditions of release include:
  • No possession of alcohol or illegal drugs
  • No firearms possession
  • No unsupervised time with children

I doubt he followed the conditions when he was on vacation in Hawaii, at least about no alcohol and no unsupervised time with the kids. JMO
 
  • #1,150
Does anyone remember hearing that one of his stipulations as part of his bail conditions was that he be required to surrender his passport? Seems like it's usually stated in the court hearing by the judge if that's required.
No, the judge never made him give up his passport, even when he was in Hawaii and halfway to Asia!

Scholtes petitioned the court for permission to travel to Maui with his wife and surviving children from May 1 through May 9 just days after rejecting that plea deal.

In her order approving the request, Judge Ortiz wrote that Scholtes would still be required to adhere to all the conditions of his parole, and stressed that he must contact pretrial services throughout his trip and not have any unsupervised contact with children, including his own.

Prosecutors then requested that the court order Scholtes to surrender his passport before making the nearly 3,000-mile trip to Hawaii, but Ortiz denied that motion, court records show.

 
  • #1,151
He will probably talk about what a great dad he is now. To his remaining children.

I always liked getting my kids out of their car seats, they seemed to be comfortable, but quite restraining. The fact that he didn't even care about his daughter's safety or comfort...insanity.
 
  • #1,152
No, the judge never made him give up his passport, even when he was in Hawaii and halfway to Asia!

Scholtes petitioned the court for permission to travel to Maui with his wife and surviving children from May 1 through May 9 just days after rejecting that plea deal.

In her order approving the request, Judge Ortiz wrote that Scholtes would still be required to adhere to all the conditions of his parole, and stressed that he must contact pretrial services throughout his trip and not have any unsupervised contact with children, including his own.

Prosecutors then requested that the court order Scholtes to surrender his passport before making the nearly 3,000-mile trip to Hawaii, but Ortiz denied that motion, court records show.

I am aghast at the judge's answer. He could have traveled to Hawaii without his passport, AFAIK. He could have used his DL or even a state ID, I believe. If that's correct, what reason could she have possibly had in her mind when she said he could keep hold of it?? I can't think of a single thing he would have needed it for, either there at home or on his trip or anywhere, any time! So what could have been her reason?? The ONLY thing I can come up with is to enable him to flee! Isn't that the only thing a passport is ever required for, to enter a foreign country? And that couldn't be it... could it?
 
  • #1,153
Scholtes is set to be taken into custody Wednesday, following his guilty plea two weeks ago
___________


The lawsuit accuses Christopher and Erika Scholtes of emotional distress, assault, battery, and fraud.
__________
The lawsuit seeks more than $50,000 in damages.

The fraud claim relates to a conservatorship Christopher filed in February 2020 in Pima County. "He filed the conservatorship right before custody was supposed to go back to mom," Eisenberg said. The daughter, a Type 1 diabetic, has been receiving social security benefits, and they are questioning if Christopher has been collecting SSI funds that were not distributed to the daughter.


 
Last edited:
  • #1,154
From the link in post 1153 - @kvoa

Despite numerous attempts, Christopher Scholtes has not responded to inquiries about the lawsuit. Eisenberg said they have a process server who has tried serving the Scholtes' the lawsuit unsuccessfully after two attempts.

First Daughter is suing Christopher and Erika and Does 1-10 for emotional distress, assault, battery, and fraud. She has tried to have them served but they refuse to answer the door! I’m curious, can she serve him tomorrow when he shows up at the court house?

LE is representing First Daughter in the suit bc she is a minor, she is her former guardian. The full file is available to download at the link

IMG_0723.webp
 
  • #1,155
Maybe he's not answering the door, because he's already on a beach in San Carlos!
 
Last edited:
  • #1,156
I hope she does have him served as he shows up for court today. That would be interesting after they are obviously trying to avoid it.
 
  • #1,157
I hope she does have him served as he shows up for court today. That would be interesting after they are obviously trying to avoid it.
And if not then, he'll be a sitting duck pretty soon (if he doesn't flee!) Inmates can be served behind bars too.
 
  • #1,158
  • #1,159
The suspense is killing me. Will he show? Or is he truly stupid enough to attempt to ditch? Time will tell tick tock Chris ;)
 
  • #1,160
Do we have any idea whether it will be broadcast?

Yeah, I know, just a dream
 

Guardians Monthly Goal

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
123
Guests online
1,944
Total visitors
2,067

Forum statistics

Threads
635,353
Messages
18,674,444
Members
243,174
Latest member
Bedroom Detective
Back
Top