Found Deceased CA - Jolissa Fuentes, 22, Selma, 7 Aug 2022

[JnRyan]

Anyway, I think one of the most frustrating things about them being vauge is that even things given as "fact" can be interpreted in different ways intentionally so. Using the presser and what the family tells us in the AWP interviews tells us that Jolissa "came back into town" according to LE but we wouldn't know if that meant back into Selma from going east on Nebraska or back into Sanger from Avocado Lake if we hadn't been paying attention. Both the family and LE says back into town. However, from the presser:
●She left AMPM heading westbound on Nebraska she came back through Avocado or Pine Flats toward the Sanger area so she obviously came back to town, correct? (A family member asks) (LE looks for confirmation to answer) yes, yes she did and she was by herself in the video that we see.
●There was no phone call made to say why she came back into town? Cannot get into specific phone calls that may or may not have been placed and to whom that's part of the active investigation

Given this line of questioning, we are able to confirm that she came back into town *after* AL/PF and Sanger. He didn't ask if she came back into town after turning on Nebraska, but rather after Sanger. This isn't rumor, it's critical thinking skill applied.

The family gives the time frame of 5:30-8AM based on cell data from LE but because they're withholding when and where she was seen on CCTV again, we cannot confirm the former as fact even through it was presented as such. All 3 of those sources confirm the same thing, but becasue we do not have the whole picture we cannot say certain things without inferring others and that is no longer fact even if based on it. We can quote the presser and family interviews all we want but if no one goes to watch them for context, they aren't going to be helpful to anyone, mods included.

Good points. This is why when we conducted interviews during an audit, we (1) tried to do it with at least 2 auditors - in case there was something that didn't seem clear on the spot, and (2) we informed the person(s) being interviewed that we might be back with follow-up questions. And we frequently had follow-up questions. In this case here, follow-up questions could have clarified matters somewhat.

One of the items I question is LE stating they have 'her' on video coming back into town. Most of us on here that have seen cases where a toll booth video or another video showing a vehicle have LE stating they can confirm it is the vehicle, BUT they can't tell who is driving. Tiffany Daniels (Pensacola), Elaine Park (Los Angeles) and Jessica Heeringa (Norton Shores MI) were all missing and LE had video but couldn't ID the driver. How is it LE can ID the driver of Jolissa's car as her? Or did they see the car on video with a single occupant and assumed it was her?

 

[airyberry]

Good points. This is why when we conducted interviews during an audit, we (1) tried to do it with at least 2 auditors - in case there was something that didn't seem clear on the spot, and (2) we informed the person(s) being interviewed that we might be back with follow-up questions. And we frequently had follow-up questions. In this case here, follow-up questions could have clarified matters somewhat.

One of the items I question is LE stating they have 'her' on video coming back into town. Most of us on here that have seen cases where a toll booth video or another video showing a vehicle have LE stating they can confirm it is the vehicle, BUT they can't tell who is driving. Tiffany Daniels (Pensacola), Elaine Park (Los Angeles) and Jessica Heeringa (Norton Shores MI) were all missing and LE had video but couldn't ID the driver. How is it LE can ID the driver of Jolissa's car as her? Or did they see the car on video with a single occupant and assumed it was her?

It's a very good policy because that clarity is vital. Her coming back in to town after presumably smoking in Avocado Lake would greatly change the timeline and possible theories. We can presume things and draw conclusions, but until LE gives us that second CCTV footage and clarifies as a fact Jolissa's timeline, we have no way of knowing exaclty what the truth is.

That is also a very good point because they clarify that they have Jolissa driving alone in this footage. How are they sure? Did she get out again somewhere like in the AMPM footage and based on her driving away claim it's her and alone or are her windows perhaps rolled down? Her back 2 windows are tinted, how are they sure no one was in the back? Less likely but maybe Jolissa took a video of herself driving and they recovered it on her phone. Maybe she went through a drive thru and paid cash. Either way, it would be strange to vehemently confirm she was alone in her car driving without having concrete proof of that.

 

[chomper]

Imo. For the police to say absolutely nothing means they got something. I believe selma pd will solve this case sooner or later. I'm sure (hopefully) they have their suspects and are just trying to gather more evidence. Sometimes its easier to find the offenders then it is to find the victims.

 

[NoahWill]

After reading this whole thread I’m extremely confused at the timeline. So she left the convenience store around 4 and turned in a direction opposite of pine flat/avocado lake. If she went straight there with the fastest route possible it would still take 53 mins to pine flat. She went the wrong direction and apparently didn’t drive on highways so that could explain why it took her about 70-80 mins. This is if we infer that she called her sister around when she got to wherever she was going (either lake possibly?). Where I’m confused is the fact that she had to have been seen back in town a lot closer to 8 am rather than between 5-8. If she got to the closest lake (pine flat, 53 mins from the am/pm) when she called at around 530, smoked, chilled for a while. Even if she left the lake by 6 am (why would she if she drove all that way) she still wouldn’t be back in town (Selma) until ATLEAST 7 (probably even later because she didn’t take the fastest routes)

With all of that being said, the part that I’m confused about is why the focus is on rural land when she was already seen back in town at some point ? Am I missing something?

 

[SpicyFruit]

After reading this whole thread I’m extremely confused at the timeline. So she left the convenience store around 4 and turned in a direction opposite of pine flat/avocado lake. If she went straight there with the fastest route possible it would still take 53 mins to pine flat. She went the wrong direction and apparently didn’t drive on highways so that could explain why it took her about 70-80 mins. This is if we infer that she called her sister around when she got to wherever she was going (either lake possibly?). Where I’m confused is the fact that she had to have been seen back in town a lot closer to 8 am rather than between 5-8. If she got to the closest lake (pine flat, 53 mins from the am/pm) when she called at around 530, smoked, chilled for a while. Even if she left the lake by 6 am (why would she if she drove all that way) she still wouldn’t be back in town (Selma) until ATLEAST 7 (probably even later because she didn’t take the fastest routes)

With all of that being said, the part that I’m confused about is why the focus is on rural land when she was already seen back in town at some point ? Am I missing something?

It seemed like Family started searching the lake areas as soon as they were provided the phone ping information. The only word that she was seen or that her car was seen coming back into town was through one press conference from Selma PD. Selma PD never actually told the family about the second CCTV and I have never heard it come from them again. They have barely spoke at all. LE themselves even searched the lake area from what the family said I believe in the AWP video. So I think once the family searched the lake area, they started searching more rural areas that they knew of like abandoned land and orchards/fields not being worked. They had confirmed a lot of the places they looked themselves however, they made that private not long into the case and the only way to get that now is to private message them.

The family has been asking Selma PD to release more information on that CCTV of her coming back into town, but no such luck.

 

[airyberry]

Imo. For the police to say absolutely nothing means they got something. I believe selma pd will solve this case sooner or later. I'm sure (hopefully) they have their suspects and are just trying to gather more evidence. Sometimes its easier to find the offenders then it is to find the victims.

After reading this whole thread I’m extremely confused at the timeline. So she left the convenience store around 4 and turned in a direction opposite of pine flat/avocado lake. If she went straight there with the fastest route possible it would still take 53 mins to pine flat. She went the wrong direction and apparently didn’t drive on highways so that could explain why it took her about 70-80 mins. This is if we infer that she called her sister around when she got to wherever she was going (either lake possibly?). Where I’m confused is the fact that she had to have been seen back in town a lot closer to 8 am rather than between 5-8. If she got to the closest lake (pine flat, 53 mins from the am/pm) when she called at around 530, smoked, chilled for a while. Even if she left the lake by 6 am (why would she if she drove all that way) she still wouldn’t be back in town (Selma) until ATLEAST 7 (probably even later because she didn’t take the fastest routes)

With all of that being said, the part that I’m confused about is why the focus is on rural land when she was already seen back in town at some point ? Am I missing something?

Selma PD has been so vague and elusive. We don't even know for sure what they meant about her route, "back into town" because they are so intentionally vague about it. They very well could mean going back east into Selma from going west at first or literally back into town into Sanger from her smoke. Because they won't give anyone a time or location for the second CCTV sighting, either option is equally viable because her phone was still pinging between 5:30-8 AM. Which also makes me think they know something more and revealing that would be too telling to her timeline and what could have happened. Given the wording and follow up question one would be lead to believe she made it back, however, because we do not have the CCTV evidence to confirm that and PD is super vague with wording, we are left with 2 timelines neither of which we have the context to fully confirm at the moment. It sucks and is super confusing.

If they suspect someone close to her, it would make sense why they do not want her family to share that information with those people. That CCTV timing or location could give out too much and if they do have suspects they're watching it could cause problems with the investigation.

 

[SpicyFruit]

Jolissa Fuentes: Reward increased to $20,000 for missing woman | Fingerlakes1.com

Jolissa Fuentes, a 22-year-old missing woman from California, still hasn't been found. The reward has been increased to $20,000.

www.fingerlakes1.com

Still no new leads being mentioned. Nothing from Selma PD.

 

[khsullivan]

^^snipped by me^^
My first time watching it, I didn't think she was under the influence, but maybe exhausted? Which can definitely mimic being under the influence especially if she had been up all day the prior day and then this is now 4am, and we know she was at a friend's party, then stopped off at grandma's prior to this video.

However I just went back to watch again and had another thought- the way she flings the door open, it almost looks like she is annoyed/angry/irritated. I don't know why it looks that way to me, but just the way she does it, kind of stands back, and then resigns herself to getting in the car. It was my gut reaction looking at it today.

I wonder if the store clerk was able to give any information as to her mental state, or at least if she seemed irritated, upset, tipsy, or otherwise altered in any way. Of course, hard for that person to know since they didn't know her one way or the other.

I know from experience that lack of sleep can resemble intoxication. I also thought she may have been aggravated when she swung her car door open and it was accidental and it kind of startled her and threw her off balance. Her mom, aunt and cousin had said she had gotten into an argument earlier that night with a friend or family member at the get together when talking to Adventures With Purpose. She may have been asked about that person by the clerk at the gas station or something reminded her of the argument. The family appears to be so close I just can't see her disappearing on her own. An accident or foul play has to be the culprit.

 

[charminglane]

Welcome, New Member @khsullivan!!
Thanks for being here for Jolissa.

 

[Fibi559]

No that is not correct. Family didn’t know of ping until later. I will pull all the documentation and write out the timeline in a bit.

What is this? Has anyone seen these pictures? Why has this information been hush hush.

 

[Stunned]

Wow, still missing.....

 

[katydid23]

Selma PD has been so vague and elusive. We don't even know for sure what they meant about her route, "back into town" because they are so intentionally vague about it. They very well could mean going back east into Selma from going west at first or literally back into town into Sanger from her smoke. Because they won't give anyone a time or location for the second CCTV sighting, either option is equally viable because her phone was still pinging between 5:30-8 AM. Which also makes me think they know something more and revealing that would be too telling to her timeline and what could have happened. Given the wording and follow up question one would be lead to believe she made it back, however, because we do not have the CCTV evidence to confirm that and PD is super vague with wording, we are left with 2 timelines neither of which we have the context to fully confirm at the moment. It sucks and is super confusing.

If they suspect someone close to her, it would make sense why they do not want her family to share that information with those people. That CCTV timing or location could give out too much and if they do have suspects they're watching it could cause problems with the investigation.

Before learning about the vague timestamp of her return to town, I had assumed she was attacked or abducted sometime in the wee hours of the morning, around 4:30 to 5 or so.

But hearing that she returned to town, closer to sunrise---that throws me for a loop. Who was going to target her in the morning, in town? It seems less likely, imo.

Now I am back to wondering about her driving off a road into water somewhere...

 

[enigmaticmind]

can anyone help change the saturation with this photo? i swear i think there was someone in the car with her. my laptop picked it up while i had the night light on it (windows 10 dimming feature) and when i turned the night light off, it went away. you can see a clear distinction of where she is going in the store, and out. i enlarged them and put pointers.

if anything, remove all the blue and try to replace it with red? i think we will see if she had anyone in the passenger and the backseat this way

 

[enigmaticmind]

View attachment 371728

looks like the cameras picked up a face. i used a thermal filter off of lunapic.
the car has not moved at all, so the lighting shouldnt have been refracting off of the windshield that way unless there was somebody inside the car. hopefully someone can use this info to help bring her home.

ill keep messing with filters online to see what else i get.. if i get anything new, ill post it.

 

[Knox]

Before learning about the vague timestamp of her return to town, I had assumed she was attacked or abducted sometime in the wee hours of the morning, around 4:30 to 5 or so.

But hearing that she returned to town, closer to sunrise---that throws me for a loop. Who was going to target her in the morning, in town? It seems less likely, imo.

Now I am back to wondering about her driving off a road into water somewhere...

How do we know it was Jolissa and not just her car that returned to town?

 

[airyberry]

Before learning about the vague timestamp of her return to town, I had assumed she was attacked or abducted sometime in the wee hours of the morning, around 4:30 to 5 or so.

But hearing that she returned to town, closer to sunrise---that throws me for a loop. Who was going to target her in the morning, in town? It seems less likely, imo.

Now I am back to wondering about her driving off a road into water somewhere...

I think the 5:25AM phone call is one big key to this all. Most of us assumed that it was an emergency, that she was calling because at that point she was in trouble and needed help. I think this is what caused most of us to overlook those details from the presser, we assumed she was in trouble then and the CCTV was just her being seen along her route she took to the place where she was in danger. However, if we take those phone calls as just "I need to talk to my sister because I'm upset" while smoking at a destination she actually made it to, then we open up to the timeline that "back into town" means she made it back into town from AL PF smoke spot. As well as, "my sister wasn't available so I found someone else to vent to". Both of these timelines are still possible because they told us her phone was still active between 5:30-8AM, but we will not know for sure exactly which it is until LE clarifies specifically or gives us the CCTV.

What really led me to look deeper into this and examine it under a microscope is, why would LE guard that second CCTV if it was just her being seen along the way? Why would seeing her driving from Selma to Sanger be so important, why would the time and location of that be so guarded if it didn't reveal something major? This is why I personally lean more toward her actually making it back, however, because there's nothing to solidify either timeline I personally very much go back and forth still. It very well could also still be an accident and due to the terrain and vast amount of land, she hasn't been located. If LE clarifies that she made it back, the likelihood of this being an accident SERIOUSLY diminishes and perhaps they are choosing to be vague to hide that they know more than they're letting on. Many times they will close in on a suspect and after they have a concrete case will focus on getting them to give up the location of the body. I'm not saying this is the case, but it's something that's crossed my mind while trying to understand their actions.

There's a lot to ponder in this case, and very little concrete fact. Makes it very difficult, but I'm genuinely hoping they have something and are watching someone rather than this just being a cold case.

 

[Bit of hope]

View attachment 371734
View attachment 371737View attachment 371738


looks like the cameras picked up a face. i used a thermal filter off of lunapic.
the car has not moved at all, so the lighting shouldnt have been refracting off of the windshield that way unless there was somebody inside the car. hopefully someone can use this info to help bring her home.

ill keep messing with filters online to see what else i get.. if i get anything new, ill post it.

I'm not good at this, but I don't see another person.

 

[enigmaticmind]

I'm looking at the CCTV footage frames from the news clip. The video was very very dark. I had to up it by a couple levels to actually see something. imagine this being like an ultrasound, ok?


Now, focus on where i drew the arrows, from the left side to right. The left part is of her leaving to get the cigar, the right side to her coming back to the car and leaving.

now, i noticed a slight increase in light (usually would shift if the car is moved.. would not be there for any other reason unless the car was moved or someone is inside of it.


now, focus.
leaving:

coming back:

i raised the brightness:

It looks like somebody is moving their hat or putting their hand next to their face. this is showing from the passenger side of the vehicle.

I think I found out who was with her last from this.

Personally, if she doesnt smoke at all *the family would be able to tell us this* she probably was with a male (they usually smoke cigarellos) and this guy must be white/light skinned *the light would NOT bounce back that much from a dark CCTV camera*

I'm not good at this, but I don't see another person.

Here is where i believe the forehead / hat / hand is. Again - this is impossible to be "nothing", because if it was, it wouldnt be shaped like the side of a persons face

 

[katydid23]

How do we know it was Jolissa and not just her car that returned to town?

I guess we don't. Imo, it seemed that LE was implying that it was her that was seen returning to town. But I don't know that for sure.

 

[airyberry]

I'm not good at this, but I don't see another person.

I don't either tbh, she has tints on her back 2 windows specifically as well so if someone was there we wouldn't be able to tell anyway. You would need the actual CCTV file to eliminate glare from secondanry recording as well.

Jolissa lives 2 minutes away from the AMPM, and the location of the party is only a block from where she lives. IF and BIG IF she had someone with her, they would most likely have come from the party, not want to be seen with Jolissa as they would have sat in the passenger seat otherwise, as well as known they were going to hurt Jolissa beforehand. Or, Jolissa wasn't supposed to be seen with this person and they took that precaution together.

Either way, the gas station has many cameras and angles. If someone was in that car, the police would know. They probably have a head on windshield view to prove/disprove this.