AZ AZ - Adrienne Salinas, 19, Tempe , 15 June 2013 - #4

[Seajay]

He was DNA tested. They won't say if he refused to take the poly. But I think they would have said if he passed one. JMO

True. At least not publically. And I forgot he was DNA tested.

 

[MissDemeanor]

I would not be distraught if a random girl I didn't know from Eve went missing before I picked her up at my job. I would be puzzled, perplexed, and curious - but not distraught. I would also not want or need a PR blitz from a family member. JMO

I would welcome the opportunity to go on national television to tell my version so that perhaps it might help to find her! Unless I had been advised not to by my attorney.

 

[cluciano63]

No, not sure at all. Just looking for clarification on what appeared to be conflicting information. May be he implied that he gave it back to her at that point in time . . . Looked for the article and only saw this reference to her phone:

"Arteaga then told officers when he came up to a stop light at 5th Street and Mill Avenue in Tempe, Salinas got out of his car and began walking home.
Arteaga says he also got out of the car to give Salinas her cell phone that she had left on the passenger seat of the car.
Arteaga then showed officers his phone records showing that he made a call shortly afterwards to one of Salinas’ roommates to tell them she was walking home."

Read more: http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/regio...e-after-argument-with-boyfriend#ixzz2ZvL3taTV

Can you point me to the article stating that he did in fact returned the phone to her (BBM) when she got out of his car as he was stopped at a red light on Mill & 5th, then noticed her phone on his passenger seat, so he got out to look for her but couldn't find her . . . then called one of the roommates at 3:23 am to say she was walking home . . . so then he left and went home, I guess? So many missing pieces to this puzzle. It's just so strange, that's all.

I will look but I feel certain she was using the same phone all night...it was her phone records that were pulled by LE and the records showed all the calls to him after he left as well as calls to cab, according to LE.

 

[2Hip2BSquare]

And a 3 minute call to begin with (at what time?)? What was he standing by on the phone while she was walking to meet him?

 

[GGE]

I would not be distraught if a random girl I didn't know from Eve went missing before I picked her up at my job. I would be puzzled, perplexed, and curious - but not distraught. I would also not want or need a PR blitz from a family member. JMO

prolly came across this thread yesterday, that'd make the dude distraught. cant think of any other reason for him to feel distraught though IMO. odd wording indeed.

 

[Tonto]

I would welcome the opportunity to go on national television to tell my version so that perhaps it might help to find her! Unless I had been advised not to by my attorney.

Thing is - and don't take this wrong way - I don't think I would care enough about it to go on TV. If this had nothing to do with me, I'd be like "I hope they find her" and maybe put up a flier or two if asked, but other than that I would just go on about my bid'ness.

Like I said, I would certainly be perplexed and curious, due to its proximity to me that night, but not enough to insert myself into the public aspect of any investigation. Especially in what I perceive to be a PR blitz more than anything.

 

[The Count]

I find it likely that when AS went back home she did not intentionally leave her wallet. Remember alcohol was in play here. If she was going to have to pay someone for a ride back to her bf's place and then realized she had no money on her, the person transporting her may have decided he was gonna "collect" in another way from this pretty young drunk girl. If you were going to do that, silencing the victim would be likely, given that being caught would be pretty easy since a connection would be easily established, like it was based on phone records. I think everyone is looking in the right direction here. Wonder if a local Tempe car wash may have some video evidence. Just MO.

 

[MissDemeanor]

Jean: Tom, the first call, was it from her cellphone?

Tom: Well, you know what, today we looked and it looks like that 4:23 call was from our dispatch to HER, which means a call might've come in before that and we might've been busy and she left a message for us to call her back, so that call at 4:23 was initiated by our dispatch.

Jean: Sgt Pooley, was her cellphone the one always used to call the cab company?

Pooley: Yeah from the records we have from the phone company, it looks like she was the one who initiated all the phone calls.

What an interesting exchange! So, LE says the 4:23 call was from Adrienne's phone to the cab company; and the cab company says they made the call to her at 4:23 am.

I wonder who's right. LE or the Cab Company.

 

[GGE]

There is no discrepancy. LE says all the calls that came from Adrienne to the cab company were from her cell. She didn't use a payphone or borrow anyone elses like her BFs or anything. She used hers and hers alone for the ones she initiated.

However she didn't initiate the 4:23 call, dispatch did.

 

[MissDemeanor]

I'm missing that GGE. I'm seeing a discrepancy. Am I the only one seeing it?

 

[MissDemeanor]

Look at the exchange I posted again. It looks to me like Sgt Pooley contradicts what the cab company says when he says "Yeah from the records we have from the phone company, it looks like she was the one who initiated all the phone calls."

 

[GGE]

Wait for tomorrow when her official transcript is posted. I missed some words, phrases, exchanges. It was clear when watching it though, promise.

 

[GGE]

Look at the exchange I posted again. It looks to me like Sgt Pooley contradicts what the cab company says when he says "Yeah from the records we have from the phone company, it looks like she was the one who initiated all the phone calls."

I saw it, I'm the one who wrote it. I chose to put the word "her" in caps so you all would catch it. That's my own typing, which I know isn't exact like I posted just above. She asked whether all the calls to the cab company from Adrienne were initiated from HER cell phone or whether she had used someone else's. LE said no, she used her own.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Actually, there is enough of a discrepancy regarding who called who at 4:23am that I mentioned it in a previous post so that Mamacita can update the timeline.

I was shocked that the cabbie's father seemingly discovered the 4:23am discrepancy live on air tonight. I would've thought that he would've gone over that enough times with LE that it would've been perfectly clear during the show.

Now here's something to think about: If she did call this cab company before 4:23 as cabbie-dad said tonight & left a voicemail, perhaps she then called another cab company immediately thereafter to get a 'live' dispatcher?

Maybe there were 2 separate cab companies dispatched for her that night?

I know I would've called another. And I would not have canceled either---I would've hedged my bets, especially if I felt upset, tipsy, and wrecked my car. And my bf won't pick up his phone (and I think he's with someone else, etc, etc,).

And why was the return call to AS from cab company (per cabbie-dad) 3+ minutes long?

Just some random thoughts........moo

 

[Tonto]

Thing is - and don't take this wrong way - I don't think I would care enough about it to go on TV. If this had nothing to do with me, I'd be like "I hope they find her" and maybe put up a flier or two if asked, but other than that I would just go on about my bid'ness.

Like I said, I would certainly be perplexed and curious, due to its proximity to me that night, but not enough to insert myself into the public aspect of any investigation. Especially in what I perceive to be a PR blitz more than anything.

Looking at my post again, I suppose in fairness I should also say that I am an introvert. Some folks like to get involved, and he could just be one of those kinds of folks. As I mentioned earlier, he may not know what occurred but may have his own questions/suspicions regarding someone else. That might make him be a bit more proactive (and even apologetic from a cognitive dissonance standpoint).

 

[WideOpen]

Actually, there is enough of a discrepancy regarding who called who at 4:23am that I mentioned it in a previous post so that Mamacita can update the timeline.

I was shocked that the cabbie's father seemingly discovered the 4:23am discrepancy live on air tonight. I would've thought that he would've gone over that enough times with LE that it would've been perfectly clear during the show.

Now here's something to think about: If she did call this cab company before 4:23 as cabbie-dad said tonight & left a voicemail, perhaps she then called another cab company immediately thereafter to get a 'live' dispatcher?

Maybe there were 2 separate cab companies dispatched for her that night?

I know I would've called another. And I would not have canceled either---I would've hedged my bets, especially if I felt upset, tipsy, and wrecked my car. And my bf won't pick up his phone (and I think he's with someone else, etc, etc,).

And why was the return call to AS from cab company (per cabbie-dad) 3+ minutes long?

Just some random thoughts........moo

I was about to post this same scenario. Very plausible.

This still does not quite explain the 5:06 call saying she would be there in a minute. Needs more thought.

jmo

 

[BobLive]

I will look but I feel certain she was using the same phone all night...it was her phone records that were pulled by LE and the records showed all the calls to him after he left as well as calls to cab, according to LE.

OK, thanks! It would seem that she did get her phone back if calls were made and texts were sent from it . . . just wondering if the BF saw her one last time and gave it back to her after she jumped out of his car at 5th & Mill. For some reason, I thought the last time he saw her was when she exited his car, but then he must have given it back to her somehow if she was the one using it! It's just one of the many issues that are difficult to understand from the limited information that's been released.

 

[cluciano63]

The cab driver very likely knows the internet views him as a suspect...he really has little to gain by going on NG.

 

[MissDemeanor]

Actually, there is enough of a discrepancy regarding who called who at 4:23am that I mentioned it in a previous post so that Mamacita can update the timeline.

I was shocked that the cabbie's father seemingly discovered the 4:23am discrepancy live on air tonight. I would've thought that he would've gone over that enough times with LE that it would've been perfectly clear during the show.

Now here's something to think about: If she did call this cab company before 4:23 as cabbie-dad said tonight & left a voicemail, perhaps she then called another cab company immediately thereafter to get a 'live' dispatcher?

Maybe there were 2 separate cab companies dispatched for her that night?

I know I would've called another. And I would not have canceled either---I would've hedged my bets, especially if I felt upset, tipsy, and wrecked my car. And my bf won't pick up his phone (and I think he's with someone else, etc, etc,).

And why was the return call to AS from cab company (per cabbie-dad) 3+ minutes long?

Just some random thoughts........moo

I was about to post this same scenario. Very plausible.

This still does not quite explain the 5:06 call saying she would be there in a minute. Needs more thought.

jmo

Well, if this were the case, wouldn't LE have a record of a call to another cab company and wouldn't they have interviewed that company too? Why only tell of calls to this cab company if there were calls to another one? I'm trying to get my head straight on this.

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Sadly, I think someone else was using her phone by that time and in texting "I'll be there in a minute" buys the perp the illusion of nothing-out-of-the-ordinary and a bit of time.

But we know the cellphone can't be dusted for prints 'cause it's missing.....

However, I would never write out in full in a text "I'll be there in a minute".

My texts (and many young kids) go more like: "B there in 1 min"


So LE might want to review the "texting linguistics" ( a la the JBR ransom note, in a sense).