AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #18

[~n/t~]

Just bumping for the folks who didn't see this last night.

Thanks John for all the local info you are providing.

Thanks for bumping that up but I'm confused. A warrant was issued for JM? :waitasec:

 

[abstr]

Seriously? I think most people know about Arizona's problem with kidnappings due to cartel issues. This is why MY suspicions of a cartel related incident sparked up right away.

I know this is old...I couldn't connect to Websleuths until a few minutes ago since last evening but....and no offense but Lava. I am people and I don't know much about Arizona's problem with kidnappings due to cartel issues.
I am sure I might have missed links and info. Can you help me out?
I hope this doesn't come off as being snarky. I'd really like to know.

 

[abstr]

Please don't jump on me but can anyone sum up what happened overnight? I couldn't connect to Websleuths and thought the site was down but now I see I missed a ton.
I am trying to read but will never catch up without missing stuff.

 

[abstr]

My knowledge is based on fact. However it would just be rumor here.
A Man dated a fellow nurse I know years ago. She had two young boys. :what:

Can you tell us what this means? How many years ago? And how does it relate to this case.....MOO

 

[abstr]

:curses: Just as I suspected.

I shuddered when I learned that SC is a Little League coach.

I don't know what SC is guilty or not guilty of but I have to ask.....
Should we cancel LL? Any man who would dare to coach is bad? Really? MOO.

Edited to add: This has me steaming. We automatically assume a coach is bad? Really? I am steaming about this because it just is not right to me. So many men and women give their time to kids because they remember what it was like to have a coach as a kid....

 

[abstr]

No. There is no age limit on what age you can leave a child unattended. It is deemed the responsibility of the parent to see fit as to how responsible their child is.

Nevermind the fact that children can take babysitting lessons at 12. I was definitely babysitting at that age and younger.

Are you sure of that? I know in my state there is an age, it is young, and then other ages if multiple kids.
Where I live a 14 yo could certainly watch the younger siblings if over toddler age.
And because I am too lazy to look for a link all MOO.
And I don't know what AZ's laws are

 

[~n/t~]

Please don't jump on me but can anyone sum up what happened overnight? I couldn't connect to Websleuths and thought the site was down but now I see I missed a ton.
I am trying to read but will never catch up without missing stuff.

Sorry but still trying to catch up myself and so far it's been one heck of a ride.

Trying to dicepher truth from rumours and speculation is becoming more and more difficult, IMO

 

[white rabbit]

Thanks for bumping that up but I'm confused. A warrant was issued for JM? :waitasec:

as usual, i start the day confused with n/t. lol.

i don't see it either, i'll keep looking back...

 

[white rabbit]

oh here. is this what johnq meant? it's just part of the long case file...snipped by me:

http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/courts/QDPS/Reports/QDPSReport.aspx

12/16/2011 1 5375 MOTION FILED: REVOKE PROBATION
12/30/2011 1 5272 PROCESS: SERVED/PRIVATE SERVR SR SERVED - PROCESS SERVER
1/18/2012 1 6520 CAL: ARRM-PROBATION REVOCATIO

 

[~n/t~]

as usual, i start the day confused with n/t. lol.

i don't see it either, i'll keep looking back...

I made dark roast coffee. We can share a bagel.

 

[~n/t~]

oh here. is this what johnq meant? it's just part of the long case file...snipped by me:

http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/courts/QDPS/Reports/QDPSReport.aspx

12/16/2011 1 5375 MOTION FILED: REVOKE PROBATION
12/30/2011 1 5272 PROCESS: SERVED/PRIVATE SERVR SR SERVED - PROCESS SERVER
1/18/2012 1 6520 CAL: ARRM-PROBATION REVOCATIO

I get a server error when I click on the link. Is this for JM or SC or RC?

 

[white rabbit]

I get a server error when I click on the link. Is this for JM or SC or RC?

JM. it's not new, it's the original case posted.

but there's no address listed so i can't see how we can be sure he was "served" while living at the c's. but what do i know.

thanks for the coffee and bagel. yum.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

Are you sure of that? I know in my state there is an age, it is young, and then other ages if multiple kids.
Where I live a 14 yo could certainly watch the younger siblings if over toddler age.
And because I am too lazy to look for a link all MOO.
And I don't know what AZ's laws are

"What are the guidelines for the age that a child can be left home alone while we are at work?

Arizona's statutes (laws) do not designate an age when a child can be left alone. A parent is responsible for the decisions he or she makes about their children being left alone."

Much more at link (but ultimately no definitive answer): https://www.azdes.gov/main.aspx?menu=154&id=2122

 

[Patty G]

Regarding the CPS issue here's what I think from looking at court records... In December a Warrant was served for JM at the residence and it took 2 attempts to serve the warrant on the first visit to serve the warrant parents maybe were not home at the moment and left with the 14 yo in charge and it was probably for something stupid like the dad was down the street at his mothers or ran to get fast food or something stupid plus it was December they could have been out Christmas shopping and the stupid process server put in for CPS Flag for check-up ... it's AZ and they can be stupid like that... I've heard of dumber reasons for CPS being nosey in Tempe... This most recent issue however it's safe to assume while police were at the home investigating for evidence pertaining to the abduction, thier warrant was not for drugs or paraphernalia and something was found or seen in the search. Since the search warrant was not for drugs and there was no grounds for probable cause to be looking for drug items and it was seen or found in the privacy of thier home that evidence is not usable in court to charge him with a crime BUT it's not something they cant mention to CPS and cause them to look into it. You can't charge someone for things unrelated to your warrant.

Just so I am clear, you have information that a warrant was served for JM at the Celis' home or is this only speculation that the warrant was served at the Celis' home?

If this warrant was served at the Celis' home, please post the information so that we can view it. TIA

 

[Nana]

Can you tell us what this means? How many years ago? And how does it relate to this case.....MOO

Someone can correct me or delete my post but the way I understood what they were saying is SC might have done something to the nurses boys.

 

[~n/t~]

JM. it's not new, it's the original case posted.

but there's no address listed so i can't see how we can be sure he was "served" while living at the c's. but what do i know.

thanks for the coffee and bagel. yum.

Reading back and with the link you provided, I think JQ was speculating on why CPS got involved in December. I don't think it's fact that JM was served at the Celis home nor that the children were left alone.

It's just another theory, I guess.

 

[abstr]

Someone can correct me or delete my post but the way I understood what they were saying is RC might have done something to the nurses boys.

Why the mystery then......I speculated it was against SC...but it like s**t stirring IMO

 

[Patty G]

Someone can correct me or delete my post but the way I understood what they were saying is RC might have does something to the nurses boys.

Actually, the member is not really sure if it is actually SC or not as she hasn't shown a recent photo of SC to her friend.

 

[~n/t~]

Personally, I don't think this case is as complicated as it's being made out to be.

The facts as we know them from the little LE has released during PC's continue to point towards one theory.

There is no cartel, no JM involvement, imo.

Facts as we know them:

Inconsistent statements by the parents in the 911 call.

2 search warrants at the home.

Re interviews separately at the home. Mom, dad and older brother.

CPS involvement in December.

CPS involvement now (after a child goes missing from the home)

Continued searches locally (sewers/washes and landfills)

LE confirms an abduction took place meaning Isabel did not wander off on her own. She was physically taken out of the home.

Entry/exit points still unclear or not confirmed.

I may be missing some but that's all I can think of for now. To me, it's blatantly clear that the focus remains on the family.

:moo:

 

[Lava]

I know this is old...I couldn't connect to Websleuths until a few minutes ago since last evening but....and no offense but Lava. I am people and I don't know much about Arizona's problem with kidnappings due to cartel issues.
I am sure I might have missed links and info. Can you help me out?
I hope this doesn't come off as being snarky. I'd really like to know.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6848672&page=1#.T7jkm8Xa35k

From the FBI: http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/2011-national-gang-threat-assessment

The rugged, rural, and porous area along the nearly 2,000 miles of contiguous US-Mexican territory invites widespread criminal activity, including drug and arms trafficking, alien smuggling, human trafficking, extortion, kidnapping, and public corruption. US-based gangs, MDTOs, and other criminal enterprises in both the United States and Mexico are readily exploiting this fluid region and incur enormous profit by establishing wide-reaching drug networks; assisting in the smuggling drugs, arms, and illegal immigrants; and serving as enforcers for MDTO interests on the US side of the border.

In exchange for a consistent drug supply, US-based gangs smuggle and distribute drugs, collect drug proceeds, launder money, smuggle weapons, commit kidnappings, and serve as lookouts and enforcers on behalf of the MDTOs. MDTOs subsequently profit from increased drug circulation in the United States, while US-based gangs have access to a consistent drug supply which expands their influence, power, and ability to recruit.

Gang-related activity and violence has increased along the Southwest border region, as US-based gangs seek to prove their worth to the drug cartels, compete with other gangs for favor, and act as US-based enforcers for cartels which involves home invasions, robbery, kidnapping, and murder.

It is important to note that so far the cartels are not targeting random people in the US. They usually target people as a way of payback, or debt collection...people who have already been involved either in their drug or gun business. A lot of this is US citizens who are involved with cartels, working for the cartels, for various "perks". THIS is what has sparked rumors that SC celis either has a major drug debt or was involved with Operation Fast and Furious and the cartels have targeted him. Honestly, if he were in a white man in Tucson I would consider the same thing. No one is saying he is an active member of a cartel (which is mostly hispanic), just that he OWES a cartel.