Page 14 of 45 FirstFirst ... 456789101112131415161718192021222324 ... LastLast
Results 326 to 350 of 1104

Thread: AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #24

  1. #326
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    6,156
    Quote Originally Posted by elmomom View Post
    First let me correct something, once again. It was not a non-contact ORDER. It is a non-contact agreement Legally that is a very different thing to speak of.

    A voluntary no-contact agreement is the first step in the legal path to stop a parent from accessing his children. If he fails to make/keep this agreement, the next step is for CPS to obtain a non-contact ORDER via legal channels. These documents both have the same intent, which is to keep the parent from having any contact with the child...one is just a step further down the legal path than the other.

    Second, what you say does not make much sense to me. If SC didn't agree to voluntarily go along with the conditions he was given, CPS would have to remove the children to foster care through a court order.

    If SC didn't agree to this voluntarily, the next step is a court hearing to obtain a no-contact order. The children are not going anywhere UNLESS CPS also wish to obtain a no-contact order or place other restrictions on RC. SC and RC at this point, are two separate entities, in the view of CPS. RC is safe to be around the kids, SC is not.

    Even if RC is not involved. CPS cannot force a couple to live separately

    They certainly can not, but they can obtain a no-contact ORDER and arrest whoever breaks it, and/or apply to add RC to it if she breaks her part in the voluntary agreement. The couple may live together, but NOT with the children.

    , and cannot force a couple to divorce.

    Erm...no one said they could?

    Unless SC voluntarily agreed to remove himself the only way to separate him from the children by legal force would be to remove the children from both parents.

    As you can see if you follow steps 1-4 above, this is not accurate.

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


  3. #327
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Always in the heart of Kentucky!
    Posts
    1,325
    Quote Originally Posted by Jules71 View Post
    Maybe auto correct changed a misspelled "messing" to "leasing". IDK just a guess.
    Or maybe-just maybe they have a "leased" apartment,home or something there?
    just a guess
    Destiny Renee Brewer-November 2,1999-June 28, 2010. Destiny -I love and miss you, tiny dancer!!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtIje...feature=fvwrel

  4. #328
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,538
    Follow up on the bones found in May at the drive-in in Tucson. They had been there for several years.

    Police investigating bones found at drive-in as homicide

    A forensic examination determined the manner of death as a homicide, and that the bones are from a white male, between 45 and 60 years old with red hair and possibly a red beard.

    http://www.kgun9.com/news/local/161295655.html

  5. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Dr. Know? For This Useful Post:


  6. #329
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    590
    Quote Originally Posted by luvmydogs View Post
    I'm hoping that when the monsoons hit here in Tucson, that the rains bring flooding, and that it unearth any "secrets" buried in the washes.

    Please, please rain flood our washes!!!
    Should be soon. You are due for rain, as are we, tonight or tomorrow! We've had a good-sized haboob a few weeks ago too. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raOS1L302DA"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raOS1L302DA[/ame]

  7. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Azcrabcakes For This Useful Post:


  8. #330
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    5,159
    Quote Originally Posted by SapphireSteel View Post
    I'm damn sure I wouldn't agree to a voluntary no-contact order, but then I never had anything to hide. I would go to court in a heartbeat to keep seeing my kids.

    There was prior CPS involvement with this family, late last year. Something in the milk aint clean.

    The deal is often "either you agree to this voluntarily or we will take your kids right now and place them in foster care until after the hearing. The hearing will be scheduled in X number of business days, not counting weekends or holidays."

    Such offers, oddly enough, are often made on Fridays or the day before a holiday. This means that even if the law says "three days" if such an offer had been made to someone last Friday in my state, the hearing would be held next Thursday (Saturday, Sunday and the Fourth of July holiday don't count). For children under around 6-8 years old, a week is virtually an eternity, more time than they can really imagine.

    If the family was already in crisis and the children are already upset and feeling insecure, and it's a choice between the kids staying with one parent or going to foster care... well, I can see why innocent parents go for the agreement.

    As for "prior CPS involvement" I would also fall into that category. When my husband and I met, he had a 16 year old from his first marriage. My stepson had been through some terrible things before his father won full custody from his mother and was one angry, acting out kid despite 14 years in therapy. After we married, my stepson started refusing to go to therapy and was generally angry at house rules like "no illegal drugs."

    So he discovered that he could cause a lot of trouble for us by reporting us to CPS. The first time he reported us, the allegation was that we were starving him. CPS came, we showed them the fridge and cabinets full of healthy, nutritious foods, we gave them permission to check my stepson's medical records (which showed his weight was normal for a 17 year old his size) and closed the investigation as "unfounded."

    The next time my stepson reported us, he was more explicit in his allegations: we were not keeping soda, potato chips and pastries in the house. So CPS came out again, viewed the kitchen full of healthful foods, I explained that as a diabetic, I cannot eat such foods and it's easier if they are not in the house, showed them the containers of pre-cut veggies and fruits, the healthy dips, the yogurt, the cheese and other healthy snacks, etc. I also showed them the weekly menu lists where we each signed up for what we wanted a couple nights a week and pointed out that my stepson got what he wanted for dinner at least 3 times a week and he generally ate voraciously at every single meal (it was downright frightening for me to see how a teenage boy can eat). The investigation was closed as "unfounded."

    Apparently it is not considered child abuse to withhold junk food from a teenager. <eyes rolling>

    My stepson continued to report us and we continued to be investigated for the better part of a year. Every single investigation was closed as "unfounded."

    Finally CPS told my stepson that if he made one more unfounded allegation against us, they would report him to the police. That finally put a stop to that merry little dance.

    But in my state, anyone who has been reported to CPS goes on the list for ten years along with the results of the investigation.

    Even though every single investigation was closed as "unfounded" I am sure that had we been thrust into the public eye for some reason, there would be plenty of people who would cluck and say "all those investigations, they must have been doing something wrong."

    My stepson finally grew up (which involved more than one stay in jail) and has long since apologised for his behaviour back then. Now he's a parent and his little girl is one spirited, headstrong kid. <snicker>

    My point, somewhere back there, is that just because someone has been investigated, even many times, doesn't mean that they had done anything wrong besides making someone angry.

  9. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to GrainneDhu For This Useful Post:


  10. #331
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    6,156
    Quote Originally Posted by GrainneDhu View Post
    The deal is often "either you agree to this voluntarily or we will take your kids right now and place them in foster care until after the hearing. The hearing will be scheduled in X number of business days, not counting weekends or holidays."

    Such offers, oddly enough, are often made on Fridays or the day before a holiday. This means that even if the law says "three days" if such an offer had been made to someone last Friday in my state, the hearing would be held next Thursday (Saturday, Sunday and the Fourth of July holiday don't count). For children under around 6-8 years old, a week is virtually an eternity, more time than they can really imagine.

    If the family was already in crisis and the children are already upset and feeling insecure,

    Then every attempt is made to help them and keep them together - not impose a "no contact" condition as a whim. There has to be a compelling reason to further fracture an already traumatised family.


    and it's a choice between the kids staying with one parent or going to foster care... well, I can see why innocent parents go for the agreement.

    As for "prior CPS involvement" I would also fall into that category. When my husband and I met, he had a 16 year old from his first marriage. My stepson had been through some terrible things before his father won full custody from his mother and was one angry, acting out kid despite 14 years in therapy. After we married, my stepson started refusing to go to therapy and was generally angry at house rules like "no illegal drugs."

    So he discovered that he could cause a lot of trouble for us by reporting us to CPS.

    We do not know who reported them the first time, but they have now been reported by LE. It is at a much higher level of involvement than a troublemaking stepchild reporting false abuse.

    The first time he reported us, the allegation was that we were starving him. CPS came, we showed them the fridge and cabinets full of healthy, nutritious foods, we gave them permission to check my stepson's medical records (which showed his weight was normal for a 17 year old his size) and closed the investigation as "unfounded."

    The next time my stepson reported us, he was more explicit in his allegations: we were not keeping soda, potato chips and pastries in the house. So CPS came out again, viewed the kitchen full of healthful foods, I explained that as a diabetic, I cannot eat such foods and it's easier if they are not in the house, showed them the containers of pre-cut veggies and fruits, the healthy dips, the yogurt, the cheese and other healthy snacks, etc. I also showed them the weekly menu lists where we each signed up for what we wanted a couple nights a week and pointed out that my stepson got what he wanted for dinner at least 3 times a week and he generally ate voraciously at every single meal (it was downright frightening for me to see how a teenage boy can eat). The investigation was closed as "unfounded."

    Apparently it is not considered child abuse to withhold junk food from a teenager. <eyes rolling>

    My stepson continued to report us and we continued to be investigated for the better part of a year. Every single investigation was closed as "unfounded."

    Finally CPS told my stepson that if he made one more unfounded allegation against us, they would report him to the police. That finally put a stop to that merry little dance.

    But in my state, anyone who has been reported to CPS goes on the list for ten years along with the results of the investigation.

    Even though every single investigation was closed as "unfounded" I am sure that had we been thrust into the public eye for some reason, there would be plenty of people who would cluck and say "all those investigations, they must have been doing something wrong."

    My stepson finally grew up (which involved more than one stay in jail) and has long since apologised for his behaviour back then. Now he's a parent and his little girl is one spirited, headstrong kid. <snicker>

    My point, somewhere back there, is that just because someone has been investigated, even many times, doesn't mean that they had done anything wrong besides making someone angry.
    None of your reports ended up in any sort of order, indeed further action because they were found to be baseless. This is not the case here. LE reported them, CPS acted - and quickly.

    I do not know who who reported them the first time (that we know about) but I have also seen a screen dump of a document showing one Rebecca Celis being reported by CPS for child abuse/endangerment, back in 2003 and 2004 - I have no way of knowing if it was the same RC however.

    Also, your child didn't go missing...which in itself is yet another red flag that something was very seriously amiss in that house, in retrospect.

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


  12. #332
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    TV/Pima Co., AZ
    Posts
    1,150
    Quote Originally Posted by SapphireSteel View Post
    I'm damn sure I wouldn't agree to a voluntary no-contact order, but then I never had anything to hide. I would go to court in a heartbeat to keep seeing my kids.

    There was prior CPS involvement with this family, late last year. Something in the milk aint clean.

    I'm the same way. I don't back down easily.

    But again I will say... CPS will seek to place the children with other family members LONG before foster placement. Both RC and SC have substantial family in the area. So this whole foster placement is nearly moot.

    (just jumping off you here).

  13. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to pieper4 For This Useful Post:


  14. #333
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,538
    I think the seperation is much more serious than we know at the moment. jmo

    Mom was said to have custody and was living with a family member. Monitor?

  15. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Dr. Know? For This Useful Post:


  16. #334
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,538
    It's raining! May Isa be found. Keep on raining. The forecast tonight was positive. Ahhh, the sound of rain.

  17. The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to Dr. Know? For This Useful Post:


  18. #335
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Know? View Post
    It's raining! May Isa be found. Keep on raining. The forecast tonight was positive. Ahhh, the sound of rain.
    Oh the rain coming down on a warm summer night is so peaceful!
    May some sins be uncovered by this rain and leave some answers tomorrow for little Isa!
    "My own eyes are not enough for me, I will see through the eyes of others." ~C.S. Lewis

  19. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to OtherEyes For This Useful Post:


  20. #336
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,168
    Oh, and for all of us that live here in these United States.....



    Have a great and safe day with the family and a wonderful evening watching the night sky with the beautiful colors!
    USA! USA! USA!

    "My own eyes are not enough for me, I will see through the eyes of others." ~C.S. Lewis

  21. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to OtherEyes For This Useful Post:


  22. #337
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    TV/Pima Co., AZ
    Posts
    1,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Know? View Post
    It's raining! May Isa be found. Keep on raining. The forecast tonight was positive. Ahhh, the sound of rain.
    Amen! Not a gully-washer here, but enough to assure all the plants will live to see another day AND drop the temps to a level that I have my doors/windows opened wide for the first time in a month. Hallelujah! :-)

    Maybe this is will be a harbinger of change for this case.

  23. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to pieper4 For This Useful Post:


  24. #338
    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
    12,752
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Know? View Post
    It's raining! May Isa be found. Keep on raining. The forecast tonight was positive. Ahhh, the sound of rain.
    We finally had much-needed rain in southeastern lower Michigan the past two days. Sadly, heavy downpours, high winds, and lightning strikes caused a lot of damage even though gardens and lawns welcomed the downpours. One of my sisters is without power as are many folks in metro-Detroit. There are widely-scattered storms in today's forecast, but it's bright and sunny right now. Hopefully, we can get our holiday gathering in before the rains come.

    However you are spending the 4th of July , I hope you have a safe and happy celebration with family and friends

  25. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to BetteDavisEyes For This Useful Post:


  26. #339
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NWLA
    Posts
    4,699
    Can someone please link to where it was reported in MSM that if SC did not agree to this "voluntary" arrangement that both boys would be put into foster care away from BOTH parents?

    I don't recall having seen that stated from a MSM source, but, Lord knows I don't recall a lot of things!

    All I remember reading was that it was an agreement between SC and CPS.

  27. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to FrayedKnot For This Useful Post:


  28. #340
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    6,301
    Can someone please link to where it was reported in MSM that if SC did not agree to this "voluntary" arrangement that both boys would be put into foster care away from BOTH parents?
    There is no MSM report about this. It is an opinion from some who have dealt with or had some experience with CPS in their lives, not based on knowledge of the Isa case, specifically.

  29. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Madeleine74 For This Useful Post:


  30. #341
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    5,239
    So the kids are not in foster care? Where is this little girl, another child just goes missing and not found.
    Your Dream must be greater than your fear!

  31. #342
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,347
    Quote Originally Posted by SapphireSteel View Post
    The children were not going to be put in foster care, as RC was not involved in whatever issue the non-contact order was about, and she was deemed custodial parent.

    The non-contact order was against SC only, and the only repercussions for him refusing it would be that CPS would apply to the courts to force him. Either way, the children would remain with RC as she would remain custodial parent.
    Make a bet? lol Yes they would have IF RC didn't take them and agree to the voluntary thing. Been there done it and I am sorry if I seem to question every post of yours but it is simply not true.
    ^^^^ everything up there is Moo

    I Still Call Australia Home

  32. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to GutFeeling! For This Useful Post:


  33. #343
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,347
    Quote Originally Posted by elmomom View Post
    First let me correct something, once again. It was not a non-contact ORDER. It is a non-contact agreement Legally that is a very different thing to speak of.
    Second, what you say does not make much sense to me. If SC didn't agree to voluntarily go along with the conditions he was given, CPS would have to remove the children to foster care through a court order. Even if RC is not involved. CPS cannot force a couple to live separately, and cannot force a couple to divorce. Unless SC voluntarily agreed to remove himself the only way to separate him from the children by legal force would be to remove the children from both parents.
    I just had to actually write Thank You .... clicking a button wasn't enough
    ^^^^ everything up there is Moo

    I Still Call Australia Home

  34. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GutFeeling! For This Useful Post:


  35. #344
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    6,156
    Quote Originally Posted by GutFeeling! View Post
    Make a bet? lol Yes they would have IF RC didn't take them and agree to the voluntary thing. Been there done it and I am sorry if I seem to question every post of yours but it is simply not true.
    Thats ok, you're entitled to your opinion too!

    I know things happen, all the time, that aren't supposed to happen in regards to CPS etc...and it sounds like you've been the victim of one of these times...I'm sorry you had to go through that, it would suck.

    This, however, is different IMO. I bet CPS weren't directly alerted by LE, in your case.

    This has come out of an investigation of a missing child, and the only inference we can take is that there is some sort of abuse issue which has been uncovered in the course of finding Isa.

    The entire difference here, IMO, is that LE REPORTED SC TO CPS. Lotsa caps in that sentence...but it wasn't an interfering neighbour, a disgruntled child...it was the Police who reported SC.

    Further...your baby didn't vanish. What I mean by this, is this case is going to get a LOT of public scrutiny and attention. The departments concerned will be having their most senior people liaise to handle this one, simply because of the media involved. It will be done RIGHT, and not mishandled by some novice, or someone who's simply not very good at their job.

    For these reasons, I think that personal experience with CPS, while horrible and unfair at the time, really can't be compared to what is going down here.


  36. The Following User Says Thank You to SapphireSteel For This Useful Post:


  37. #345
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NWLA
    Posts
    4,699
    Quote Originally Posted by GutFeeling! View Post
    Make a bet? lol Yes they would have IF RC didn't take them and agree to the voluntary thing. Been there done it and I am sorry if I seem to question every post of yours but it is simply not true.
    Okay- I am confused again! I just asked where this had been reported and was told it hadn't been but I am seeing it posted over and over as FACT, not opinion. Doh!!!!

    So is this just your opinion of the situation based on your own experiences, or do you have a link or is this insider info leaked by CPS?

    If there is a link stating as fact (not opinion) that SC had no option but to agree to this separation or CPS would have ripped the boys out of the home and refused to return them, without having to prove anything in court, can someone please post it? . TIA

  38. #346
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NWLA
    Posts
    4,699
    Quote Originally Posted by elmomom View Post
    First let me correct something, once again. It was not a non-contact ORDER. It is a non-contact agreement Legally that is a very different thing to speak of.
    Second, what you say does not make much sense to me. If SC didn't agree to voluntarily go along with the conditions he was given, CPS would have to remove the children to foster care through a court order. Even if RC is not involved. CPS cannot force a couple to live separately, and cannot force a couple to divorce. Unless SC voluntarily agreed to remove himself the only way to separate him from the children by legal force would be to remove the children from both parents.
    Again, then HOW is this voluntary? I agree that SC really had no choice, but I also believe he isn't being unfairly targeted.

    Sounds more like there is something very very wrong in that family for CPS to rip apart a family who has just suffered the loss of a child......MOO but I cannot fathom why CPS would do this to a family who is innocent of any wrongdoing just to be hateful.

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


  40. #347
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NWLA
    Posts
    4,699
    Just to clarify; I, too, think that CPS was going to take those boys if SC did not agree to the arrangement.

    Calling it "voluntary" is like calling labor pains "discomfort"......It just ain't true.

    And while I do believe CPS gave SC an ultimatum, I do not believe it was done without a darn good reason. MOO

  41. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to FrayedKnot For This Useful Post:


  42. #348
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,805
    AZLawyer gave some good info about this, the "voluntary" arrangement (which isn't so voluntary) and stated it is usually for 90 days. I will try and find the post.
    Evil don't look like anything...

  43. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Shelby2 For This Useful Post:


  44. #349
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,805
    Also there is a difference between an agreement and an order. He agreed because he knew the boys would be taken otherwise and it would lead to an order.
    Evil don't look like anything...

  45. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Shelby2 For This Useful Post:


  46. #350
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,805
    "A "voluntary" as we call it in the AZ foster care system is not unusual at all, and is often a good idea for the parents because during the term of the agreement (90 days normally) the time does not count toward the deadline for the parents to shape up or lose their kids.

    That said, the usual reason for a "voluntary" is that CPS has visited the home and told the parents, "Look, you can sign a voluntary or we can take the kids. Your call." (Once in a while there are other reasons, like the parents have just become homeless and want their kids to be safe for 90 days while they get jobs and housing.)"-AZLawyer

    Here is the page the discussion was on

    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...=172284&page=2

    ETA AZLawyer is a verified attorney.
    Last edited by Shelby2; 07-04-2012 at 09:18 PM.
    Evil don't look like anything...

  47. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Shelby2 For This Useful Post:


Page 14 of 45 FirstFirst ... 456789101112131415161718192021222324 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. AZ AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #21
    By Salem in forum Missing Forum Discussion
    Replies: 836
    Last Post: 05-29-2012, 09:02 PM
  2. AZ AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #16
    By Salem in forum Missing Forum Discussion
    Replies: 939
    Last Post: 05-17-2012, 09:58 PM
  3. AZ AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #9
    By KaylynnCouture in forum Missing Forum Discussion
    Replies: 1191
    Last Post: 05-03-2012, 12:39 AM
  4. AZ AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #6
    By KaylynnCouture in forum Missing Forum Discussion
    Replies: 887
    Last Post: 04-27-2012, 10:55 PM
  5. AZ AZ - Isabel Mercedes Celis, 6, Tucson, 20 April 2012 - #1
    By KaylynnCouture in forum Missing Forum Discussion
    Replies: 592
    Last Post: 04-23-2012, 02:56 PM

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
  •