AMBER ALERT NJ - Dulce Mariá Alavez, 5, abducted at Bridgeton City Park, Cumberland County, 16 Sept 2019 #5

[JerzeyGirl]

i dont agree! i live here, check this out, 511nj.org go down to the maps part, it shows all cameras private or not i believe, this person was smart, they wouldn't go a way with heavy surveillance cameras via buildings, plenty of back ways and plenty of other routes to go besides bridges to sneak her out, even having her laying down and covered in the back if he had gone through cameras

I also think he actually took her on a canoe down the river a ways thats why there's no scent past the water, they haven't mentioned this publicly but in front of my house is a lake, on the other side of that lake they found an abandoned truck/van with Virginia tags and said it was from a person of interest, it was not red like they claimed, not a single camera back there, i think she was swapped out car wise there, ironically the lake back there and the river they searched are very close to each other but dont touch at one point, it would only have to be a walk across the st down the rd from where the dogs sniffed (MOO)

And, 11 miles away, a woman snapped a photo of a parked red van with a mattress inside, near some woods. Was it the one police are looking for?

“I called the FBI, which took so long, but to get through to somebody that would be able to investigate. It could be an innocent thing, but it’s a tip. Every tip is important,” explained the volunteer.

Search for Dulce Maria Alavez enters third week

Could this be another vehicle she was swapped from?

 

[Beekarina]

To be clear, I have never blamed anyone. Only noticing similarities in clothing, appearance, and so on at different times as we have seen this case become even more confusing.

I almost exclusively follow long cold cases here, but Dulce's age and her obvious joy of life got me. I hope those responsible are found soon.

 

[JerzeyGirl]

I know local speculation (and what the NYPD officer said) is mom but I just don't see it. I don't think she could keep this up without being caught for this long. They've gone through her cell phone. I'm sure through her financials. I don't understand it. She had two kids with her including an 8 year old. Unless she set her own daughter up to be kidnapped but where's the money. I can only assume someone would do it for money especially if they aren't raising their own kid. Dulce was not a burden on Noema's life. She was being raised by her grandmother and I'm almost positive Noema did not pay child support. And why only Dulce? Why not Manuel?

 

[Beekarina]

Are we even allowed to speculate generically why people might do things like that? Current cases forums seem to be handled differently. I think we can?

Could a person do such a thing because they owe a debt? Not for financial gain exactly, but to settle a balance? Or could a person be involved with others who are involved with trafficking and want to please them?

You would THINK the authorities would figure these things out, but people might have ways to hide some of their activities and contacts. Maybe They don't use phones to make arrangements?

 

[MsBetsy]

I don't know if I want to listen to that podcast. While having NG involved with Dulce's case helps keep the story going in the news - and that's a good thing - I have a problem with her fact-checking.

She got things wrong in Lucas' case and both she and her guest got the facts really wrong in another case - I can't remember which one but boy was I pissed. Why she continues to do this is beyond my understanding.

Rant and rave all you want but for Pete's sake keep the story straight! MOO.

She sensationalizes everything and she doesn't seem to fact check at all.
She said Mollie Tibbets was running through a cornfield when she went missing. Imo

 

[CSIDreamer]

This is so frustrating!

Where is this baby girl?

 

[rosesfromangels]

She sensationalizes everything and she doesn't seem to fact check at all.
She said Mollie Tibbets was running through a cornfield when she went missing. Imo

The podcast validated my amateur speculations and opinion. Let us hope there will be a conclusion to this case vs. an open question mark.

amateur opinion and speculation

 

[SeattleStew]

Anyone else notice that a lot of the photos on Google Earth that had been posted of Bridgeton City Park are disappeared? I went back to look at them after the new sketch of a possible witness was released, and now they're gone. In particular the one with orange shoes.

 

[cass523]

"Searchers will hit the streets Sunday in a new effort to locate a 5-year-old Bridgeton girl who has been missing for more than a month.

This search, organized by private investigator Will Rackley, will begin at 9 a.m. and the group will meet at the spot where Dulce was reported missing.
Rackley, who lives in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, said he has worked as a private investigator for about a decade. He heard about Dulce’s story in the news and wanted to lend a hand."

New community search planned for missing 5-year-old Dulce Alavez this weekend

 

[cass523]

Woman tried to lure child into minivan outside elementary school, cops say

 

[Asme27]

Anyone else notice that a lot of the photos on Google Earth that had been posted of Bridgeton City Park are disappeared? I went back to look at them after the new sketch of a possible witness was released, and now they're gone. In particular the one with orange shoes.

I think there are a LOT of people sending in the easily available park pictures and ice cream surveillance videos to the police. LE doesn’t need those kinds of pictures (they want ones from locals that were in the area at the time that aren’t out in the public). They probably have thousands and thousands of those exact pictures sent in to them hundreds, if not thousands of times a day. It’s probably wasting a lot of their time sifting through the exact same images from different people. Between that and all the “visions” people are submitting- It could be they tried to get the pics removed so people weren’t sending in the exact same pictures from the internet and wasting their time in finding her?

 

[cass523]

I don't know if I want to listen to that podcast. While having NG involved with Dulce's case helps keep the story going in the news - and that's a good thing - I have a problem with her fact-checking.

She got things wrong in Lucas' case and both she and her guest got the facts really wrong in another case - I can't remember which one but boy was I pissed. Why she continues to do this is beyond my understanding.

Rant and rave all you want but for Pete's sake keep the story straight! MOO.

Yes, I remember NG having some facts wrong in some cases, but in this case at the start she did not believe mom had anything to do with this, but she did say she parked too far from where the kids were playing.

This podcast, NG said to her guests, "I am not saying the mom is involved in this. You are analyzing this in a completely different vein. I am just wondering if we are attacking the mom because we need to attack somebody and we don't know which way to go with it or are some of the guests right?"

A few are weighing in on just the facts of the case. They don't believe the mother. they don't believe Dulce was ever in the park.

I am posting parts of the podcast if you did not listen to it. Their opinions based on the facts

Psychologist; Sheryl McCollum: "There are concerns about mom saying the little boy's ice cream fell on the floor instead of saying the ground. Because mom used the word floor and not ground when the ice cream fell, was there a situation that caused the ice cream to actually fall on the floor, but it was inside their house or on the floorboards in the car. It sounds like they were inside not outside, this concerns me. They were outside, she should have said ground.

Everything that comes out of this woman's mouth, I want to believe her, I can't. She is not giving me any reason to believe her.

You don't know what she is wearing, you never use her name, you never asked for help, she parked far away.The best witness is a crying 3 yr-old and some child that describes "somebody" The police do not even believe she was there. Said mom has given no reasons to believe her.

The video of her getting ice cream is the last time we have Dulce on film. That is it. Nobody else at the park took a picture, has a video of her, nobody on a camera or on a surveillance camera has her. They can't verify she was ever at that park. Nothing about the fact pattern or timeline makes any sense to them"

John Cardillo, Former NYPD: "I am not sure that child was ever in that park. We live in a surveillance state right now. With all the ring and surveillance cameras in homes, businesses today, you really can't go anywhere without some surveillance camera capturing something. I have suspicions that the kid ever made it to the park itself."

He then goes on to talk about legal behavior and criminal behavior with the people at the park and witnesses.

Kathleen Murphy, North Carolina Family attorney: "They also talk about the 8 yr-old sister who was apparently with this mother and I have not heard anything that this 8 yr-old is saying and whether they were actually at this parking lot, whether the kids were actually with them. But it is concerning to me that nothing, nothing has come from this mother, that has been helpful."

They want her to take a polygraph.

Crime Stories with Nancy Grace 10/11

Edits grammar corrections

 

[ProtectChildren]

"Searchers will hit the streets Sunday in a new effort to locate a 5-year-old Bridgeton girl who has been missing for more than a month.

This search, organized by private investigator Will Rackley, will begin at 9 a.m. and the group will meet at the spot where Dulce was reported missing.
Rackley, who lives in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, said he has worked as a private investigator for about a decade. He heard about Dulce’s story in the news and wanted to lend a hand."

New community search planned for missing 5-year-old Dulce Alavez this weekend

There was a lot of rain yesterday and flooding this week in general in the area. Things were dry for so long, probably before she went missing. Perhaps if there was anything tucked away or hidden, this storm would wash it out last night/today with the winds and rain.

Maybe a search will find something new. I know someone asked if it could be confirmed if the entire park had been searched and I do not think anyone would be able to claim that because it is a very natural area with water ways, paths, and growth that ebbs and flows with weather and seasons, but I hope every area has been searched.

I've personally felt this to be a sacred ground now that a child has been taken, and cannot find it within myself to go there. I don't know, I don't object to the pics and of course support searching, but for me I cannot go there during this unknowing time.

 

[Kuyluc2764]

Yes, I remember NG having some facts wrong in some cases, but in this case at the start she did not believe mom had anything to do with this, but she did say she parked too far from where the kids were playing.

This podcast, NG said to her guests, "I am not saying the mom is involved in this. You are analyzing this in a completely different vein. I am just wondering if we are attacking the mom because we need to attack somebody and we don't know which way to go with it or are some of the guests right?"

A few are weighing in on just the facts of the case. They don't believe the mother. they don't believe Dulce was ever in the park.

I am posting parts of the podcast if you did not listen to it. Their opinions based on the facts

Psychologist; Sheryl McCollum: "There are concerns about mom saying the little boy's ice cream fell on the floor instead of saying the ground. Because mom used the word floor and not ground when the ice cream fell, was there a situation that caused the ice cream to actually fall on the floor, but it was inside their house or on the floorboards in the car. It sounds like they were inside not outside, this concerns me. They were outside, she should have said ground.

Everything that comes out of this woman's mouth, I want to believe her, I can't. She is not giving me any reason to believe her.

You don't know what she is wearing, you never use her name, you never asked for help, she parked far away.The best witness is a crying 3 yr-old and some child that describes "somebody" The police do not even believe she was there. Said mom has given no reasons to believe her.

The video of her getting ice cream is the last time we have Dulce on film. That is it. Nobody else at the park took a picture, has a video of her, nobody on a camera or on a surveillance camera has her. They can't verify she was ever at that park. Nothing about the fact pattern or timeline makes any sense to them"

John Cardillo, Former NYPD: "I am not sure that child was ever in that park. We live in a surveillance state right now. With all the ring and surveillance cameras in homes, businesses today, you really can't go anywhere without some surveillance camera capturing something. I have suspicions that the kid ever made it to the park itself."

He then goes on to talk about legal behavior and criminal behavior with the people at the park and witnesses.

Kathleen Murphy, North Carolina Family attorney: "They also talk about the 8 yr-old sister who was apparently with this mother and I have not heard anything that this 8 yr-old is saying and whether they were actually at this parking lot, whether the kids were actually with them. But it is concerning to me that nothing, nothing has come from this mother, that has been helpful."

They want her to take a polygraph.

Crime Stories with Nancy Grace 10/11

Edits grammar corrections

English is my first language. I only learned to speak spanish after living in Mexico for a few years. So it has been about 14 years that I have been speaking spanish. We speak so much spanish in my house that sometimes I forget english words if I am saying something fast. I have used the word floor for ground many times. As a matter of fact I told my 5 year old just 2 days ago to pick his toys from the ground and we were inside.

One of my in laws used to make me laugh because she called my toes fingers. I always thought she was making fun of me but couldn't understand why because my toes are not really that long. Come to find out, in spanish, fingers and toes are called dedos. So when she was referring to toes she called them fingers. So as an example, someone who doesn't speak the english language 100% might say "I want to put nail polish on my fingers" and an english speaker would automatically assume they meant hands. The same goes for floor and ground. Probably a weak example, I am no good at examples. Funny thing, my in law, after years of correcting her, she now calls toes "finger toes". She just can't let go of the fingers.

As for the kids not being at the park, articles have been shared that say witnesses did see the kids at the park.

I have only heard rumors about a polygraph test. I wonder if that is something that has actually been reported or if that person is getting their info from SM?

 

[MsBetsy]

The podcast validated my amateur speculations and opinion. Let us hope there will be a conclusion to this case vs. an open question mark.

amateur opinion and speculation

I don't think the podcast gave us any credible information.

Nancy Grace doesn't understand why anyone would abduct a cute little girl in pigtails?

I find that hard to believe.

She claims there was a DRASTIC change of information about the people who were seen with Dulce at the park?

How so? The mother mentioned both the black man and the hispanic man. What is the drastic change?

How was that the mothers fault? All she was doing was reporting what the witnesses at the basketball courts told her.

It was not she who changed her story, which was implied in the Podcast.

And the former cop who claimed she was lying compared her to Polly Klauses mother who knew exactly what she was wearing and was able to give more details about it.

That's what they are claiming is evidence that she was lying? Was her mother a nineteen year old who didn't have custody of her children?
I doubt she dressed her child in the morning before she went to school.

Polly Klauses mom knew what she wore to bed that night. It's really not a fair comparison, since her mother lived with her, whereas Dulce's mom did not.

I don't consider Nancy Grace credible at all.

Imo

 

[cass523]

That's so irresponsible of a former police officer to put the blame on the mother. Has he researched the case at all?
I see nothing in common in this case to the Polly Klaus case.
What examples does he give?
The mother has never been named a POI, nor has LE ever indicated that she was.
He is basing his opinion off of the 911 call?
What is his theory? That she arranged for her daughter to be abducted? And then what?

The comparison to the Klaus, sorry, I spelled it wrong in my post. thank you for letting me know

The comparison to the Klaus case he made was to the fact pattern of this case. He said Polly's parents knew every detail about their child. The clothing she had on that morning and every minute detail they would know if asked.

He gave an example that Mark would have known how his daughter's hair was parted that morning and if her bangs hung to the right or to the left. The material of Polly's clothing. He was trying to make a point on how parents would know these details and Dulce's mom could not remember what clothing Dulce was wearing that day.

In the frame of mind Noema was in, the panic of the situation, I get it.

Their theories they said are based only on the facts they know of this case, and the hundreds of cases he has reviewed in the past. You are correct, Mom has not been a POI

 

[MsBetsy]

Yes, I remember NG having some facts wrong in some cases, but in this case at the start she did not believe mom had anything to do with this, but she did say she parked too far from where the kids were playing.

This podcast, NG said to her guests, "I am not saying the mom is involved in this. You are analyzing this in a completely different vein. I am just wondering if we are attacking the mom because we need to attack somebody and we don't know which way to go with it or are some of the guests right?"

A few are weighing in on just the facts of the case. They don't believe the mother. they don't believe Dulce was ever in the park.

I am posting parts of the podcast if you did not listen to it. Their opinions based on the facts

Psychologist; Sheryl McCollum: "There are concerns about mom saying the little boy's ice cream fell on the floor instead of saying the ground. Because mom used the word floor and not ground when the ice cream fell, was there a situation that caused the ice cream to actually fall on the floor, but it was inside their house or on the floorboards in the car. It sounds like they were inside not outside, this concerns me. They were outside, she should have said ground.

Everything that comes out of this woman's mouth, I want to believe her, I can't. She is not giving me any reason to believe her.

You don't know what she is wearing, you never use her name, you never asked for help, she parked far away.The best witness is a crying 3 yr-old and some child that describes "somebody" The police do not even believe she was there. Said mom has given no reasons to believe her.

The video of her getting ice cream is the last time we have Dulce on film. That is it. Nobody else at the park took a picture, has a video of her, nobody on a camera or on a surveillance camera has her. They can't verify she was ever at that park. Nothing about the fact pattern or timeline makes any sense to them"

John Cardillo, Former NYPD: "I am not sure that child was ever in that park. We live in a surveillance state right now. With all the ring and surveillance cameras in homes, businesses today, you really can't go anywhere without some surveillance camera capturing something. I have suspicions that the kid ever made it to the park itself."

He then goes on to talk about legal behavior and criminal behavior with the people at the park and witnesses.

Kathleen Murphy, North Carolina Family attorney: "They also talk about the 8 yr-old sister who was apparently with this mother and I have not heard anything that this 8 yr-old is saying and whether they were actually at this parking lot, whether the kids were actually with them. But it is concerning to me that nothing, nothing has come from this mother, that has been helpful."

They want her to take a polygraph.

Crime Stories with Nancy Grace 10/11

Edits grammar corrections

Wow. Is the psychologist an idiot? Does she not realize that by floor the mother meant the ground? Does she not realize the mothers first language is Spanish and that does not have to mean that there is some underlying meaning that the child really dropped her icecream on the floor or the car or a home?

She should have said ground? Even English speaking people mix up the two.

What a narrow-minded idiot.
What are this persons credentials?

Who says the police can't even verify she was there?

I've never heard anything like that reported.

Imo

 

[MsBetsy]

The comparison to the Klaus, sorry, I spelled it wrong in my post. thank you for letting me know

The comparison to the Klaus case he made was to the fact pattern of this case. He said Polly's parents knew every detail about their child. The clothing she had on that morning and every minute detail they would know if asked.

He gave an example that Mark would have known how his daughter's hair was parted that morning and if her bangs hung to the right or to the left. The material of Polly's clothing. He was trying to make a point on how parents would know these details and Dulce's mom could not remember what clothing Dulce was wearing that day.

In the frame of mind Noema was in, the panic of the situation, I get it.

Their theories they said are based only on the facts they know of this case, and the hundreds of cases he has reviewed in the past. You are correct, Mom has not been a POI

Yes, it's obvious they know nothing about the case, as they did not take into account that this mother did not have custody of her child and did not live with her.

In the Klauss case weren't the parents the sole guardians and didn't the child live with them?

Was the mother nineteen and pregnant?

It is a weak argument to claim Dulces mother is responsible because she couldn't remember what she was wearing.

We have already discussed that we as parents can't always say what our kids are wearing on any given day.

To claim that is evidence that the mother is involved is irresponsible and ignorant.

Imo

 

[JerzeyGirl]

When English isn't your first language you don't always use the "correct" words. My DH is Central American he says "get down from the car" instead of "get out of the car." He uses floor instead of ground. It's normal.

The Klaas parents raised their daughter. Polly live with her mom. Noema is more like a sister to her daughter. She didn't even live with her. She picked her up and took her to the park. She probably didn't think much of what Dulce was wearing for an afternoon at the park.

It's been reported numerous times that people at the park confirm that Dulce was there with Manuel.

 

[TristanP]

Why Polly Klaas? Her mother wasn't involved.

I assume he meant the parents’ responses and actions in comparison to each other, not the cases themselves