Page 5 of 98 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 15 55 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 1465
  1. #61
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,178
    Quote Originally Posted by liz b. View Post
    Can I ask : what weird neighbor was out looking for Isabel ? TIA
    NMCD PDF 3 page 17
    "My own eyes are not enough for me, I will see through the eyes of others." ~C.S. Lewis


  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to OtherEyes For This Useful Post:


  3. #62
    BetteDavisEyes's Avatar
    BetteDavisEyes is online now "Fasten your seatbelts. It's going to be a bumpy night."
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    15,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeleine74 View Post
    LE is not going to release documents that are the core part of their case so far. They would want to retain that information and preserve it for later prosecution. The documents they've released show they've done a lot of work and it gives the public lots to chew on and mull over, but the core of the case, when and if it eventually goes to litigation, won't be these particular documents.

    Of course LE knows more than they are saying and knows more than the sleuthiest sleuthers who ever sleuthed. They are running the investigation...they have access to everything and everyone. The documents may represent 3% to 5% of all that's been generated by the investigation.

    LE is not going to tell the public the inner details of their investigation. There may be hints and some general indicators, but until the case is litigated or unless there's a leak or a news conference, we the public will not be privy to that inner core info.
    ITA, and that is how it should be.


  4. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to BetteDavisEyes For This Useful Post:


  5. #63
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    7,444
    I guess I'm surprised when people are surprised they aren't told the inner parts of criminal investigations. When has LE ever released all the information during their investigation, if they didn't have to? And why would they? What value would it be to them? Their job is to build a case that can go to the DA.

    Can't recall a single time that LE has told the public before a case is litigated, laid it all out and said, "Here's everything we have. Here are all the documents, here's all the evidence, here's a list of all the people we suspect, etc." (*not counting FL Sunshine Laws).

    It doesn't happen in other cases and it's not going to happen in the Isa case either. If there's something important, LE is not going to disclose it until or unless they need to.


  6. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Madeleine74 For This Useful Post:


  7. #64
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    7,758
    Quote Originally Posted by OtherEyes View Post
    NMCD PDF 3 page 17
    TY, but I cannot open the links...


  8. #65
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    7,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeleine74 View Post
    I guess I'm surprised when people are surprised they aren't told the inner parts of criminal investigations. When has LE ever released all the information during their investigation, if they didn't have to?

    Can't recall a single time that LE has told the public before a case is litigated, laid it all out and said, "Here's everything we have. Here are all the documents, here's all the evidence, here's a list of all the people we suspect, etc." (*not counting FL Sunshine Laws).

    It doesn't happen in other cases and it's not going to happen in the Isa case either. If there's something important, LE is not going to disclose it until or unless they need to.
    ITA. Although,if LE does allow the contents of the search warrants to be released, there might be a lot to be learned. The investigation would only be apparent at trial...if that ever happens...MOO


  9. The Following User Says Thank You to liz b. For This Useful Post:


  10. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    7,444
    Quote Originally Posted by liz b. View Post
    ITA. Although,if LE does allow the contents of the search warrants to be released, there might be a lot to be learned. The investigation would only be apparent at trial...if that ever happens...MOO
    Even with that, if search warrants are unsealed, the public will learn what LE was looking for, and they may get a good idea of what was seized, but as for the results of what was seized, i.e the forensic examination, lab test results, etc., that will not be disclosed until the case is litigated in court.

    I've followed cases where LE took lots of items to have them examined and tested and most of the items ended up having no evidential value, which the public only discovered during the trial. Just because an item is seized doesn't mean it will have evidence on it.

    We, the public, will not know the details of the case until a trial. That's just how it is.


  11. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Madeleine74 For This Useful Post:


  12. #67
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,347
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeleine74 View Post
    Even with that, if search warrants are unsealed, the public will learn what LE was looking for, and they may get a good idea of what was seized, but as for the results of what was seized, i.e the forensic examination, lab test results, etc., that will not be disclosed until the case is litigated in court.

    I've followed cases where LE took lots of items to have them examined and tested and most of the items ended up having no evidential value, which the public only discovered during the trial. Just because an item is seized doesn't mean it will have evidence on it.

    We, the public, will not know the details of the case until a trial. That's just how it is.
    The way this is going I won't be holding my breath on that. Or maybe I just need more coffee ...
    ^^^^ everything up there is Moo

    I Still Call Australia Home


  13. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to GutFeeling! For This Useful Post:


  14. #68
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    653
    In the interview with KGUN several days ago where the chief makes a plea for someone to call Crimeline and "just tell what you know," it seemed like he was talking to specific people, almost as if he believes that certain people know what happened and may want to unburden themselves.

    If so, this also supports an non-stranger abduction, because I just imagine LE appealing to a random stranger/RSO in tht way.

    I really, really think that LE believes that the Celis' extended family may be involved, or have knowledge of what happened. Perhaps he is appealing to those people?


  15. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Lark2 For This Useful Post:


  16. #69
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    1,219
    Quote Originally Posted by liz b. View Post
    ITA. Although,if LE does allow the contents of the search warrants to be released, there might be a lot to be learned. The investigation would only be apparent at trial...if that ever happens...MOO
    I am hoping they keep all the search warrant stuff to themselves. While I want to know what is in them I also feel that the best way to get justice for Isa in the end is keeping them sealed. If they open them to the public and this truly is an abduction case then it will only give the real criminal a chance to get rid of certain things that s/he knows the police are looking for.


  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ladylub For This Useful Post:


  18. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by liz b. View Post
    TY, but I cannot open the links...
    Try the links here marked alternate links. They have worked for others who can't see the PDF links. Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - AZ Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 Media & Document Dump (No Discussion)
    Last edited by KateB; 04-29-2015 at 09:28 PM. Reason: repair url tag.



  19. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to A_News_Junkie For This Useful Post:


  20. #71
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    7,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeleine74 View Post
    Even with that, if search warrants are unsealed, the public will learn what LE was looking for, and they may get a good idea of what was seized, but as for the results of what was seized, i.e the forensic examination, lab test results, etc., that will not be disclosed until the case is litigated in court.

    I've followed cases where LE took lots of items to have them examined and tested and most of the items ended up having no evidential value, which the public only discovered during the trial. Just because an item is seized doesn't mean it will have evidence on it.

    We, the public, will not know the details of the case until a trial. That's just how it is.
    I agree somewhat. With the caveat that the contents of a warrant can often indicate the direction of an investigation at a particular point in time. I was a little dismayed when LE said "there's what we know,and there's what we can prove in court " paraphrasing,but that's the gist...

    JMO
    Last edited by liz b.; 05-30-2012 at 11:30 AM.


  21. The Following User Says Thank You to liz b. For This Useful Post:


  22. #72
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    7,444
    Quote Originally Posted by liz b. View Post
    I was a little dismayed hen LE said "there's what we know,and there's what we can prove in court " paraphrasing,but that's the gist...
    That's a candid and valid remark by police. When it comes to litigating a case in court, it's all about proof or providing enough evidence (circumstantial and direct) where an inference can be logically made pointing to guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the standard that must be met and most DA's will not take a case until they have enough evidence to be able to feel confident of presenting a case to a jury.

    Police can 'know' various things, or 'sense' various things, but without the evidence to prove it, it doesn't go anywhere, legally.


  23. The Following User Says Thank You to Madeleine74 For This Useful Post:


  24. #73
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Eastern U.S.
    Posts
    2,974
    Quote Originally Posted by Spice-Nine View Post
    I agree and have a few thoughts (theories) about this that include information gleaned from the recently released LE docs (I have not painstakingly researched all docs as many here have gratefully done). Specifically, many have expressed interest in "maglighting" guy NMc who lives with his gf close to the Celis home. It is also reported by a relative of JM that JM resided with the SC/RC family for approximately 6 months. If NMc is approximately 35, not too big a difference in age exists between JM and NMc. I wonder if while living as neighbors, the two men forged an acquaintance or friendship. Could there be some level of collaboration between the two?
    With that said, IMO it's more likely NMc is a well intentioned, possibly, too eager guy who took it upon himself to search tunnels for a missing child. Living in such close proximity to the Celis', it is possible NMc learned of Isabel being missing when her family initially searched for her in the neighborhood.
    The use of two vehicles (the Jetta and the other, was it a hatchback?) may be attributed to something as simple as where each car was parked at his home and in which car it was easiest to leave. LE watched him when he returned to the Jetta, possibly returning home. Maybe gf was waiting with breakfast prepared, something they agreed upon when he left their home. Once engaged with LE, he may have remembered he was due home hence, his sudden exit. Also, LE reported the gf was headed to work which could explain NMc needing to return the Jetta to gf. Later, when NMc was noted by LE to be in the other vehicle, he was then in his own car.
    JM on the other hand, is glaringly absent from the LE reports. Especially when one considers the detail provided about other family members, their cell phone screen shot photos and the search warrant served on their truck.There has been speculation here that the reported December visit by CPS to the Celis' home might somehow be linked to JM's stay with the Celis family. There are also the rumors of JM's income being associated with illegal activities, his maybe owing money to the "wrong" people and the possibility of consequences exerted against JM for illegal involvement.
    I wonder if speculation of a retaliation aspect to Isabel being taken from her home is one in which JM exerts retaliation against SC. The reported "hoax" phone call saying SC borrowed $170K from a physician employer might be a misrepresentation or half-truth put out there by JM to assure criminal acquaintances he could pay his debt. JM might be very angry with this family not coming through for him.
    All this is only my opinion.
    I am not sure this is correct. I believe it has NOT been clarified if any (or which) relative(s) stayed with the family.

    The thing I find odd about the car is this...

    If he was checking the storm drains from Celis' neighborhood to where LE saw him approach the car, how did the car get there? Did he drive down, only to walk back up and then maglight through the drains back to the car? Why take the car at all if you plan to walk the entire "round trip" anyway? Why did he take the car to the end of his search route before he went (walked?) to the beginning and worked his way back to the car?
    My posts are strictly MY opinion under circumstances when many points of view need to be considered. I apologize in advance to anyone whose potential involvement is contemplated in error, or who may be offended because I do not see eye to eye with them on all matters related to this case. I hope our differences can be set aside as we unite in the search for this victim or the perpetrator of this crime. Your opinions and insights are just as valuable as mine.

    Make a difference. Read my story in the CAPER - Citizens Against Pedophile's Early Release Forum
    or visit http://noparole4pedophile.weebly.com/ for background on the case of Donald Scott Brunstetter, including photos, supporting documents, a blog, educational information, and resources/sources of help if you find yourself or a loved on in a similar situation.


  25. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to LisaB For This Useful Post:


  26. #74
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    9,382
    Quote Originally Posted by Spice-Nine View Post
    I agree and have a few thoughts (theories) about this that include information gleaned from the recently released LE docs (I have not painstakingly researched all docs as many here have gratefully done). Specifically, many have expressed interest in "maglighting" guy NMc who lives with his gf close to the Celis home. It is also reported by a relative of JM that JM resided with the SC/RC family for approximately 6 months. If NMc is approximately 35, not too big a difference in age exists between JM and NMc. I wonder if while living as neighbors, the two men forged an acquaintance or friendship. Could there be some level of collaboration between the two?
    With that said, IMO it's more likely NMc is a well intentioned, possibly, too eager guy who took it upon himself to search tunnels for a missing child. Living in such close proximity to the Celis', it is possible NMc learned of Isabel being missing when her family initially searched for her in the neighborhood.
    The use of two vehicles (the Jetta and the other, was it a hatchback?) may be attributed to something as simple as where each car was parked at his home and in which car it was easiest to leave. LE watched him when he returned to the Jetta, possibly returning home. Maybe gf was waiting with breakfast prepared, something they agreed upon when he left their home. Once engaged with LE, he may have remembered he was due home hence, his sudden exit. Also, LE reported the gf was headed to work which could explain NMc needing to return the Jetta to gf. Later, when NMc was noted by LE to be in the other vehicle, he was then in his own car.
    JM on the other hand, is glaringly absent from the LE reports. Especially when one considers the detail provided about other family members, their cell phone screen shot photos and the search warrant served on their truck.There has been speculation here that the reported December visit by CPS to the Celis' home might somehow be linked to JM's stay with the Celis family. There are also the rumors of JM's income being associated with illegal activities, his maybe owing money to the "wrong" people and the possibility of consequences exerted against JM for illegal involvement.
    I wonder if speculation of a retaliation aspect to Isabel being taken from her home is one in which JM exerts retaliation against SC. The reported "hoax" phone call saying SC borrowed $170K from a physician employer might be a misrepresentation or half-truth put out there by JM to assure criminal acquaintances he could pay his debt. JM might be very angry with this family not coming through for him.
    All this is only my opinion.
    Nice to hear your thoughts on all this. You know, honestly, the McMaglighter stuff could have happened just as you say. He may also have known JM - was thinking at first that's how he knew early that Isa was missing. But he couldn't have unless JM called him as JM didn't seem to be around enough to be in the police reports. Yeah, that's seems strange.

    BBM - I feel that whole phone booth caller imposter has some half truth also. Could be as you say. I had to wonder if it was JM's niece (in the file dump) at first since she boldly told LE about him owing money, possibly dealing drugs, etc.


  27. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to time For This Useful Post:


  28. #75
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    313
    For the last few days since the documents have come about I took a step back for a few days and just started looking at the case from fresh. I read through the entire case several times and did quite a bit of research. I re-listened to the 911 tapes, reviewed all the video documentation I could find in the raw formats. I managed to find addresses to fill in where they had been redacted and was able to piece a great deal of things together by doing so. When you just randomly just pick something out and look just at that one thing without comparing everything else it is quite simple to draw a quick conclusion. In listening to the SC 911 call again and listening not so much to what he is saying but listening to his breath and trying to visualize his demeanor in comparison to his other interviews. I can hear in his voice a sense of being baffled, frustrated and concerned yet in shock and disbelief that this is happening. ( at first when these tapes were released I was pretty quick to point my finger and railroad in his direction because he sounded so calm ) I am taking into consideration that he works in a surgical environment, he understands while this might be an urgent situation however in order for the operator to take the information in an accurate manner that he needs to have a sense of patience. In regards to the first interview with press in the hotel, he is worn down, tired, frustrated and most likely has not gotten much sleep in the past week between holding his family together, dealing with police and having press bothering them. Keep in mind, his little girl is missing at this point for a week... How much sleep would you have had with your baby girl missing for a week? In their first public address statement yes he does sound kind of hinky on the surface however again, consider the stress factor. BC as well, she is under a great deal of stress, lacking sleep and most likely afraid for her little girl. Yes when these materials were first presented to us, looking at it for the first time I was eager to hang them both. After reading the entirety of the documents and cross referencing all the statements provided I am finding it difficult to find them involved. However in looking at the extended family I do not rule out the possibility of one of the uncle’s JM or RR having some sort of connection BUT there is very little information outside of hearsay which would implicate them by themselves and if they are involved I believe it would be a 3rd party who committed this crime in retaliation against JM mistaking the home as his from prior involvement with the residence due to some sort of drug debt but since the only sorts of connections you can make with that angle for now is hearsay I moved on to other persons of interest.

    After personally ruling the family out I found another person of interest from the apartment interviews (JG) [PDF 6 pg62] was this guy whose mother said he had not been home in 3 days. I did some homework on him and found he was booked into custody on the 20th and released on the morning of the 24th so that totally gets him off the hook.

    So now my attention turns to another guy NMcD who sparked my attention starting with what’s documented in PDF 3 pg17 where an officer finds his green Jetta GLS parked near Wilshire Park and runs it’s plates to learn it is registered to a NMcD, resident of E. 12th St . The Officer informs the incident commander, a redacted portion of the conversation appears in the report. This occurs at 10:15AM. Between 10:15 and 10:35, the officer observes NMcD emerge from the South end of the Park field, carrying a large maglite. McD crosses through the middle of the field and when he reaches his vehicle, the officer approaches and NMcD confirms that is his vehicle and tells him he had heard about the missing girl and was out searching tunnels and washes to the north and south where he found nothing. NMcD then “abruptly” informs the officer he must leave to go home and EAT BREAKFAST and leaves the area in his vehicle. The officer informs ALL radio contact assigned of his exchange with the subject then there is are orders to record all vehicles, including taking images of all vehicles currently parked on E. 12th st . By 10:45AM all are instructed to stop, log plate and driver info and request consent search every vehicle coming in or out of the area. A resident of S. Essex St who likely observed the exchange between NMcD and the officer, asked him what all the police presence in the neighborhood was about. Then the resident informed the officer that a man matching NMcD’s description was sitting on an electrical box located behind his residence earlier that morning from approximately 9AM-9:30AM at which time he told him to leave. By 11AM, as security was requested by another officer at 11:23AM, a wash no more than 50 yards from where McD entered the south end of the park yielded a sheet, bed skirt, and a bag of clothes that were processed at the scene and taken into evidence. A warrant was secured hours later at the McD home on E. 12th St. Taken into evidence was a shoeprint on landscaping “fabric” from the backyard. Shoeprints were now collected on 3 other surface areas, as well as photos of other items of interest such as a shotgun, handgun, pellet rifle, a cell phone, white tshirt, camcorder, a nylon strap, a computer cpu, blue shorts and a yellow sleeveless shirt and photo’s of the in’s and out’s of both vehicles. [ note: during the servicing of this warrant the Jetta plates are AZ 842 PMV and in another officers report the tag is recorded as 842 PMU California ]. From what I can gather as of yet NMcD is a prime suspect at least in my eyes due to his demeanor and the evidence collected from his residence. [ NMcD pdf mentionings (a few) PDF 3 page 17 and 18 PDF 3 Page 24 PDF 3 page 66 PDF 4 Page 4 PDF 5 page 2 PDF 5 page 8 PDF 5 page 9 PDF 5 page 31 PDF 5 page 58/59 PDF 5 Pg 59 ]
    Of Course there maybe another suspect out there but as of the moment I am still looking for another person in the information available to really break down.
    Here are some really helpful links for performing your own research and filling in the blanks of redactions and making connections to other things. Dig in and have fun.

    http://maps.tucsonaz.gov/stormwater/
    http://gis.pima.gov/maps/landbase/parsrch.htm
    http://www.library.pima.gov/research...licrecords.php
    http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/publ...aselookup.aspx
    http://gis.pima.gov/maps/rwrd/
    http://www.pimasheriff.org/prevention/crime-maps/



Page 5 of 98 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 15 55 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1036
    Last Post: 06-22-2012, 09:24 PM
  2. Replies: 836
    Last Post: 05-29-2012, 09:02 PM
  3. Replies: 1278
    Last Post: 05-19-2012, 03:00 PM
  4. AZ AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #12
    By bessie in forum 2010's Missing
    Replies: 1624
    Last Post: 05-12-2012, 10:23 PM
  5. AZ AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - # 8
    By KaylynnCouture in forum 2010's Missing
    Replies: 1013
    Last Post: 05-01-2012, 08:49 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •