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

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!!!

So CPS being comprised of human beings with feelings and empathy, couldn't have allowed him to have a supervised visit with his boys on Father's Day??? Since this was not a court order, just a mutal agreement, then why would there be such strict rules? Even CPS workers sometimes are known to have a heart.

SapphireSteel said:

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.

:moo:

Click to expand...

BBM and we don't even know if that was related to the Celis family directly, or someone else.

I think I would volunteer to stay away for a month or two rather than have my child go in to foster care - but that's me.

GutFeeling! said:

BBM and we don't even know if that was related to the Celis family directly, or someone else.

I think I would volunteer to stay away for a month or two rather than have my child go in to foster care - but that's me.

Click to expand...

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.

SapphireSteel said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

elmomom said:

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.

Click to expand...

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

Jules71 said:

Maybe auto correct changed a misspelled "messing" to "leasing". IDK just a guess.

Click to expand...

Or maybe-just maybe they have a "leased" apartment,home or something there?
just a guess

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

luvmydogs said:

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!!!

Click to expand...

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. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raOS1L302DA

SapphireSteel said:

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.

:moo:

Click to expand...

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.

GrainneDhu said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

SapphireSteel said:

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.

:moo:

Click to expand...

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).

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?

It's raining! May Isa be found. Keep on raining. The forecast tonight was positive. Ahhh, the sound of rain.

Dr. Know? said:

It's raining! May Isa be found. Keep on raining. The forecast tonight was positive. Ahhh, the sound of rain.

Click to expand...

Oh the rain coming down on a warm summer night is so peaceful!:raincloud:
May some sins be uncovered by this rain and leave some answers tomorrow for little Isa!:rose:

Oh, and for all of us that live here in these United States.....

:happy4th:

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

:fireworks2:

Dr. Know? said:

It's raining! May Isa be found. Keep on raining. The forecast tonight was positive. Ahhh, the sound of rain.

Click to expand...

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.

Dr. Know? said:

It's raining! May Isa be found. Keep on raining. The forecast tonight was positive. Ahhh, the sound of rain.

Click to expand...

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 :usa:, I hope you have a safe and happy celebration with family and friends :fireworks: :happy4th:

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.

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?

Click to expand...

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.