AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #11

[SilkySifaka]

Does she take dancing lessons, tumbling, etc.? I hate to admit it but I think the baseball park is a good place to investigate and watch. jmo

That is why LE asked for people to come forward with video of the baseball game imo.

I just don't think any of us have seen the intruder but LE has probably spoken with him. I think it is a stranger as in not within the house but someone living in the community who has had ample time to fixate on her. That could include being at ball games, seeing her playing in the street with friends, over at a playmates or just walking to the store.

The problem is if they don't have a record, even fingerprint evidence is worthless until someone is caught.

 

[Thinkzerz]

I know, I said I am NOT comparing the adults in the case...just the situation, child vanishes from home. Also saying it takes more than suspicions to arrest anyone...in Ayla's case, yes they have blood and still can't seem to make a move...JMO

So i wonder why it is that in this case the public knows about the blood found but in Isa case we are hearing nothing about the LE findings?

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

I feel as if LE had any evidence that the parents were involved there would have been an arrest. I don't believe they would have asked border patrol to keep an eye out either. I don't believe they would still be saying they are looking for a live Isa. I think they would detain them as quickly as possible. The border is not far away and they could easily leave the country. Just random thoughts because I really don't know. jmo

Even if there is evidence, they won't arrest unless there is enough evidence to convict. Consider Kyron's stepmother, Sky's mom, Baby Lisa's parents, Ayla's father... all cases where LE actually made statements that evidence pointed to the parent (stepparent, in Kyron's case), but no arrests. :banghead:

 

[mck16]

That is why LE asked for people to come forward with video of the baseball game imo.

I just don't think any of us have seen the intruder but LE has probably spoken with him. I think it is a stranger as in not within the house but someone living in the community who has had ample time to fixate on her. That could include being at ball games, seeing her playing in the street with friends, over at a playmates or just walking to the store.

The problem is if they don't have a record, even fingerprint evidence is worthless until someone is caught.

I agree with your post. jmo

 

[Donjeta]

So i wonder why it is that in this case the public knows about the blood found but in Isa case we are hearing nothing about the LE findings?

Just speculating but I think it may be because Ayla's parents are not together so the different sides of the family have different interests. LE shared some things with the mother and she in turn shared it with us. A lot of Ayla information has become public via the maternal side of the family and they said LE left it up to them if they want the blood information to be known IIRC.
Also, I think the police in Maine seems to be using information as a pressure tactic. Sometimes they'd give a statement to counter it after the paternal family had said something

 

[FrayedKnot]

If "adequate job covering up" means wiping surfaces to remove fingerprints and staging stuff it would take some time and if I was a stranger I would rather just wear gloves and not stay to clean up after myself or tinker with anything any longer than I have to. Someone could wake up.

That was the exact feeling I got from that statement. A stranger abduction would not, IMHO, feature even an "adequate" job of covering up.

And, IMHO, LE worded it that way so it was fairly clear that the family is still in their crosshairs.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Thinkzerz]

Just speculating but I think it may be because Ayla's parents are not together so the different sides of the family have different interests. LE shared some things with the mother and she in turn shared it with us. A lot of Ayla information has become public via the maternal side of the family and they said LE left it up to them if they want the blood information to be known IIRC.
Also, I think the police in Maine seems to be using information as a pressure tactic. Sometimes they'd give a statement to counter it after the paternal family had said something

Oh i see, so the celis's may know what the dog scent picked up etc but they aren't saying as they believe it will upset the investigation JMO

 

[Theforeigner]

http://[link removed]/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981310201

I agree completely on the comments/analysis on Isabel's parents recent interview in this link.

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

Even if there is evidence, they won't arrest unless there is enough evidence to convict. Consider Kyron's stepmother, Sky's mom, Baby Lisa's parents, Ayla's father... all cases where LE actually made statements that evidence pointed to the parent (stepparent, in Kyron's case), but no arrests. :banghead:

In the US don't LE ever put a case to court with just compelling circumstantial evidence and let a jury decide?

A recent case in Scotland (Suzanne Pilley) is one example.

 

[panthera]

So whoever did this, according to LE, covered up and did an adequate job knowing where Le would look for evidence. That is pretty compelling. That also tells me it is not a crazed criminal but a calculated one.

And likely not a novice either, if it was a stranger.



MOO

 

[Crosby87]

To me it sounds like it is not a stranger. A stranger would not need to cover up much, right? Just take the kid and flee.

All he needed to do to cover up is wear a pair of gloves, take her home, keep her locked up and go to work as usual. No worries imo.

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

In the US don't LE ever put a case to court with just compelling circumstantial evidence and let a jury decide?

A recent case in Scotland (Suzanne Pilley) is one example.

Sure, on occasion... and Casey Anthony was acquitted.

 

[SilkySifaka]

That was the exact feeling I got from that statement. A stranger abduction would not, IMHO, feature even an "adequate" job of covering up.

And, IMHO, LE worded it that way so it was fairly clear that the family is still in their crosshairs.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I saw it as the opposite, saying that an intruder did a decent job of covering his tracks, i.e fingerprints etc.

I think if it were the parents, that there would have been evidence of. The cameras around would have caught the car somewhere (i think a car was caught unless the guy lived within walking distance for a six year old). It is one thing not to be able to identify one of a hundred cars but another to miss seeing the specific car you are looking for.

Abductions don't take much covering up, it is the ones who stay and assault that have the problem (dna etc) You need luck but if you have planned it and I agree with the other poster the dogs being let out was either an aborted attempt or a trial run to see if they barked at him and to get them used to his smell, it isn't that hard not to leave evidence.

Get in, use a knife to scare the child into compliance and silence, make her walk out in front of you and go, touching little.

 

[dimples37398]

http://[link removed]/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981310201

I agree completely on the comments/analysis on Isabel's parents recent interview in this link.

Wow, that explains best, exactly how I see things when it comes to Becky and Sergio. I believe the person who wrote that article is spot on. JMO

 

[white rabbit]

BBM

Go back and study the police press conferences. LE (people far more experienced in this field than you or I - that you speak of in your post) were VERY VERY vocal about wanting the parents to come forward and speak to the media. LE seemed not to understand the parents' reluctance to speak out. They made it clear they had NEVER asked the parents to avoid the media.

ITA with your post. but has anyone seen, on any case, where LE all but begs the parents of a missing child to go before the camera, but gives them a laundry list of what they cannot discuss?

per the ann curry and local media interviews, BC and SC answered many of the questions with, paraphrased, "we are not allowed to discuss". why would LE specifically, publicly request their presence in MSM and at the same time say they could not answer any of the following, all relevant and pertinent to the crime at hand?:

- what isabel was wearing (elementary to ANY child abduction)
- the events of friday evening, exactly
- who was at the home (they said no one. so why doesn't LE say the same?)
- who put isabel to bed (it was someone or no one. say so)
- when the parents went to bed (10:30, 12:30, 2, who cares? just say so)
- who heard dogs (we didn't hear dogs or we heard dogs)
- who was awake at 6:30 along with the neighbor
- when did becky wake, shower, and leave (exactly)
- who was at the house at 8:00
- when did uncle/brother/cousin arrive or awaken
- who called 911

in other words, LE wants the family on camera but LE doesn't want the family to answer any questions? there's a problem here...IMO...

 

[mck16]

ITA with your post. but has anyone seen, on any case, where LE all but begs the parents of a missing child to go before the camera, but gives them a laundry list of what they cannot discuss?

per the ann curry and local media interviews, BC and SC answered many of the questions with, paraphrased, "we are not allowed to discuss". why would LE specifically, publicly request their presence in MSM and at the same time say they could not answer any of the following, all relevant and pertinent to the crime at hand?:

- what isabel was wearing (elementary to ANY child abduction)
- the events of friday evening, exactly
- who was at the home (they said no one. so why doesn't LE say the same?)
- who put isabel to bed (it was someone or no one. say so)
- when the parents went to bed (10:30, 12:30, 2, who cares? just say so)
- who heard dogs (we didn't hear dogs or we heard dogs)
- who was awake at 6:30 along with the neighbor
- when did becky wake, shower, and leave (exactly)
- who was at the house at 8:00
- when did uncle/brother/cousin arrive or awaken
- who called 911

in other words, LE wants the family on camera but LE doesn't want the family to answer any questions? there's a problem here...IMO...

I agree but LE won't answer them either. So what's up??

 

[FrayedKnot]

I agree but LE won't answer them either. So what's up??

Because LE believes the family is responsible for Isa's disappearance and doesn't want them to know that. IMHO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

Sure, on occasion... and Casey Anthony was acquitted.

Thanks!

I didn't know the Anthony case was based on circumstantial evidence. I thought there was lots of evidence hence the uproar. (I didn't follow the case much)

Look up the Suzanne Pilley case and see what you think.

 

[Taminator]

I believe LE is slowly and methodically trying to get under the perp's skin. I believe it's a type of person who probably has few "real" friends. Most of his friends probably think he is "off", but not enough to make that connection. The perp probably is waiting for LE to acknowledge his "handiwork", but he is merely being met with "adequate". "Adequate" is not a word that anyone wants to be. Adequate is something like "Ya did ok, but not quite good enough." I would find it condesending if someone told me I did something "adequately". JMO

 

[GutFeeling!]

BBM

Go back and study the police press conferences. LE (people far more experienced in this field than you or I - that you speak of in your post) were VERY VERY vocal about wanting the parents to come forward and speak to the media. LE seemed not to understand the parents' reluctance to speak out. They made it clear they had NEVER asked the parents to avoid the media.

They wanted them to be vocal because they had FBI Behavioral analysts at hand - they too wanted to judge.

I personally think it would have been wise to face the media and cry real tears but I am not them and I am not in their situation. We all handle things differently. As I said, i am sure they will look back and have regrets of not doing things differently, but they have done what they did and if at this stage they think it is right so be it.

Back to the lack of tears, moo of course, but a sobbing parent on TV does nothing except make people feelsorry for them, if they can possible hold it together and explain about their missing child, share a little of her with those concerned it is a lot better than an uncontrollable crying mum that can't say a word and just makes your heart break. There are times when people are in pain that they actually do stop crying if they can - even if that is for 10 minutes. Some, God forbid, may even allow themselves to laugh or at minimum smile when a decent memory pops into their mind.