Deceased/Not Found CA - Sierra LaMar, 15, Morgan Hill, 16 March 2012 #9 *A. Garcia-Torres guilty*

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Regardless of the 'cleared' status of the family, they are not suspects or POIs, they are victims of a crime by the policy of this site - as stated in the opening of each & every one of these threads. Hurling accusations at these poor people is not only in bad taste & inviting flame wars, it's against the TOS.

Please, please don't let this thread turn into another Somer Thompson style debacle.
 
Point taken. I will say sometimes the rules, whether Policy and Procedure or actual (choke) law, can make it very hard for LE do its job. It a fine line they have to walk at times. I know that even if you have total clearance on say NCIC/CCIC and your caught checking into something totally relevant that you should not be checking on you can be sooooooooo raked over the coals. I am just saying, that although they can utilize the data base, it would not stand up if that is not normal Policy and Procedure protocol. I hope this makes sense.
 
On the question of which sheriff is 'correct' about the family being cleared, I think they both are.

The lead detective has said in the past, the family has been cleared. [ referring to Marlene and the father, and 'stepfather.']
But this was said very very early on. So even if they were considered cleared at that point, it was only a cursory clearance, imo. At the onset of the case they are looking quickly at the alibis, and if someone checks in at their office at 7:30 am, or if mom says that her bf left at 6 am, then it is considered clear. They have to do that early on because in the first few days they are looking for a living child and a random abductor as fast as they can.

But as time goes on, it is natural, for them to come back around to the original players. Who saw her last, what time did the family leave? And their alibis are going to be checked out more thoroughly and they may be polygraphed and re-interviewed.

So, imo, both the sheriff's spokesmen were telling the truth, as they knew it.
 
Pensfan said:
Please share a link for that info. Here is a link that states differently:

Employment background checks and legitimate firearms purchases cause citizens to be permanently recorded in the system. For instance, the State of Washington mandates that all applicants seeking employment in an inpatient setting that houses vulnerable minors are fingerprinted and entered into IAFIS as part of their background check in order to determine if the applicant has any record of criminal behavior.

Fingerprints are submitted to the FBI by local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies. These agencies acquire the fingerprints through criminal arrests or from non-criminal sources, such as employment background checks and the US-VISIT program. The FBI then catalogs the fingerprints along with any criminal history linked with the subject. Law enforcement agencies can then request a search in IAFIS to identify crime scene (latent) fingerprints obtained during criminal investigations.

Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have been fingerprinted several times. Once when adopting a child and again when applying to a medical facility where I cared for adult and children patients. Both of these were in different states. Both times I was told that my fingerprints would forever remain on file with the FBI.
Click to expand...

This is what I thought as well.. I know we discussed at length in the Lauren Giddings case where she was killed and dismembered and nothing but her torso left to be found about 10ft from the apt building that she and fellow Mercer law student and recent graduate, Stephen McDaniel had resided at throughout law school.. He has been charged with her brutal murder and early on we were discussing the fact that tho he had no criminal record for which to have his prints in the system.. However in order to prep for taking the bar after graduation they each had to be completely finger printed thus making a record of his prints on file in a/the database..


Still posting via mobile so plz forgive the large number of errors in my posts;)
 
Okay ... Pensfan... when I used to fingerprint people while working in the jail, folks would come to the front window ten times a day. They would bring in one print card, we would then take them down, verify their identification, print them, date the print card, have them sign the card, then we would sign the card. Then they would get given that card to send into CBI for their background for employment. In some cases they returned it to their employer to be mailed in volume with others that were done.

However, When we booked an inmate, We did the cards in triplicate. We had to fill the card out totally, Name, Alias, Ht, Wt, Hair, eyes, etc. We then had to sign it, and have them sign it. If they would not sign we had to put "refused" and then one card went in our file. Two went to CBI. Upon final dispo, we then would have to take additional prints, to put what the final outcome of the charges were. We had to do card in triplicate for each count. There is a large difference as to how prints are handled. IMHO
 
imamaze said:
tdy-120320-sierra-lamar-2p.grid-5x2.jpg


Sierra LaMar, 15, has been missing since Friday, March 16. She left home early that morning to walk to her bus stop for school. Her cell phone was found along a local roadway shortly after, and her purse/bag was also found later.
Facebook page - www.facebook.com/help.find.sierra

The parents and the mother's boyfriend have been cleared. Sleuthing them and speculating about their involvement is off limits.
No arguing, and be respectful of other posters. One opinion is no more valuable than another, and we're each entitled to our own.
Posting links to Twitter accounts and FB pages of individuals other than the victim (and suspect if one is eventually named) is against the rules. Keep in mind that many of Sierra's friends are minors.

Quote:
Social Networks
...social networking pages may only be linked if they are directly related to a case, i.e. the victim or suspect. We don't want to post to someone's mother, brother, employer, milkman, or postal carrier just because they know the main player. We also NEVER link to minor's pages (unless they are the victim).

Rules Etiquette & Information - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Case Map (Thanks, Wondergirl!)
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msa=...934,0.030041&z=14&source=embed&mid=1332261677

Thread #1
Thread #2
Thread #3
Thread #4
Thread #5
Thread #6
Thread #7
Thread #8
Click to expand...

Bumping this for people. Mods have repeatedly stated that sleuthing and/or speculating about the family's involvement (including the boyfriend) is OFF LIMITS.
 
:lurk:

Everything ok in here?

OK.

Please keep being respectful of the presumed victim's family, of one another, and of TOS.

:tyou:
 
MtnDweller said:
That is how the system works, she would have had to access the system and opt in to receive a text or log on to the system real time to check if the child had cut a class.

I believe one of her tweets indicated she cut school one day in January.
Click to expand...

The tweet had a hashtag something like #thingsihaveneverdone; the meaning of the tweet was that she had never cut school for an entire day, in my opinion.

Those types of hashtags are like an invitation to make an entry on a list, which can be viewed in its entirety by searching on the hashtag. In this case, the user's contribution to the "list" was that she had never cut school.
 
Portabella said:
Okay ... Pensfan... when I used to fingerprint people while working in the jail, folks would come to the front window ten times a day. They would bring in one print card, we would then take them down, verify their identification, print them, date the print card, have them sign the card, then we would sign the card. Then they would get given that card to send into CBI for their background for employment. In some cases they returned it to their employer to be mailed in volume with others that were done.

However, When we booked an inmate, We did the cards in triplicate. We had to fill the card out totally, Name, Alias, Ht, Wt, Hair, eyes, etc. We then had to sign it, and have them sign it. If they would not sign we had to put "refused" and then one card went in our file. Two went to CBI. Upon final dispo, we then would have to take additional prints, to put what the final outcome of the charges were. We had to do card in triplicate for each count. There is a large difference as to how prints are handled. IMHO
Click to expand...
bbm
Fascinating! An employer lets a potential employee send in his/her own fingerprints? This is similar to letting parolees with drug convictions bring in urine for their drug screens instead of urinating in a cup on site. (Oh, never mind. This was happening in my county just a few months ago. The employees lost their good paying county jobs, but none are being prosecuted. This is different from Portabella's situation though. These employees had policies stating the urine was to be submitted on site. Sorry...off topic.)
 
kemo said:
A little reality check,
In the US, there are approximately 250,000 children reported missing annually. A frightening number but most of these are "runaways". There are however around 58,000 who are classified as "abducted". This turns out to be a very broad category involving many situations I would not consider "abductions". Only 21 percent were actually reported to the police as "missing". Of these there was one sub-category that really applies to our concerns; the category of "stereotypical kidnapping" which is basically "abduction by force for nefarious purposes by a stranger or slight acquaintance resulting in the child being held overnight or taken over 50 miles away. This occurs about 115 times a year in the US and about 45 of these "events" result in the child’s death.

As there are 70 million children in the US, this occurrence is literally "one in a million". It is extremely rare. Like airplane crashes; we worry about them because they are horrifying, not because they are likely to happen’

http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/documents/nismart2_nonfamily.pdf
Click to expand...

The 115 includes only cases where it can be proven that an abduction occurred (i.e. body found, suspect proven guilty via DNA or a confession). There are many unreported cases. There are also many cases where no one knows what happened. I could literally come up with hundreds of those cases just in the Houston, TX area alone.

Statistics are for books, not to apply to a real-life situation. Even if the statistics were 100% factual. It is all very random, so while one-in-a-million chance, it could happen to ANYONE at ANY TIME.
 
dog.gone.cute said:
RBBM:

:seeya: Just adding my :twocents: and :moo:

JMO ... but Sheriff Smith knew EXACTLY what she was saying when she made that statement ...

The Sheriff made this statement on a national tv show -- Nancy Grace Show -- and although many people dislike Nancy and the way she "treats" her guests, she has a huge audience and a huge following ...

This statement made by the Sheriff came AFTER the Lt.'s statement ... AND ... to my knowledge, is the most recent statement as to whether or not anyONE has been cleared or not ...

JMO ... but this statement made by the Sheriff is going to rule out any and all previous statements by anyone else in the ranks ... Whether anyone agrees with the Sheriff's statement or not, the Sheriff is the TOP LE in the county ... and I would think the Sheriff is going to "call the shots" as she will be the one held liable ...

All JMO and MOO
Click to expand...

Nancy Grace Show
April 6, 2012

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../06/ng.01.html


GRACE: We are back and taking your calls in the search for 15-year- old Sierra Lamar. To Sheriff Laurie Smith, Santa Clara county sheriff.

Sheriff, explain to me what is the issue with the live-in boyfriend?

SMITH: We`ve talked with him. We`re continuing the investigation. Until Sierra`s home safely, we`re not eliminating anybody, and any new information that we get or any new suspicions we get, we will absolutely totally follow up.

..Something I just noticed in the transcript above..... nancy is specifically asking about BF... What a weird response from Sheriff... She said on national tv that They LE are NOT eliminating anyone... Since Nancy question was specifically about BF that would mean clearly that he is not in the clear with LE .. IMO..

ITA with your post...
 
Niner said:
respectfully snipped...


Forgive if this has been discussed, I'm only on page 20 right now... :maddening:

Anyway, I read "somewhere" that the reason for the move was that Sierra was caught drinking at school, I believe, and was suspended, not expelled from school, and that's why the mom & BF moved to MH.

NO?
Click to expand...

That report was from a member at Hinky. The member said her daughter went to school with Sierra at Fremont. It seemed like a credible post to me, and Hinky did not take it down,so it might be accurate.

I do know that if a student is caught on campus either drunk, or with alcohol, even if not drunk, then it is an automatic expulsion. So that part seems correct.

Also, it always seemed weird to me that a student would switch school in October. If you are moving, why not start school in September at your NEW school? It seems an odd way to plan it so it makes more sense to me that it was an unplanned switch of schools.
 
http://www.macrealestate.com/FINGERPRINT.pdf

http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdeprof/download/pdf/fpinfosheet.pdf

I did not mean to upset you Pensfan, its just common practice. We do the prints for free at the Sheriff Dept, however the Police Dept charges. I think that has to do with the fact that Sheriffs are elected into office if you ask me.

It is not the same however as having them bring in urine. Prints cannot be altered on the card. Also if you are not good at rolling prints, they can be rejected by CBI, if they are even smudged they are rejected. Also job backgrounds your not stripping and searching the applicant, so you have to take their word for scars, marks and tattoo's etc. So what is the difference. With inmates we do strip them and go over every part of their body, with our eyes of course, we cannot touch them.

When it comes to U.A's I ran the program not only at the D.O.C. but also at the 252 program at the Community Corrections I later worked at. When taking a U.A. we literally have to use a flashlight and watch the urine enter the cup, much harder on female officers I might add. Also they can tell if its dilute or if they dipped. We check temp on the cup itself. So that too is foolproof as long as your squeamish as inmates can be disgusting when it comes to random U.A.'s.
 
ynotdivein said:
:lurk:

Everything ok in here?

OK.

Please keep being respectful of the presumed victim's family, of one another, and of TOS.

:tyou:
Click to expand...

Question: Is the opening post correct in stating (bolding mine):

The parents and the mother's boyfriend have been cleared. Sleuthing them and speculating about their involvement is off limits.

I had read that the three were not named as POIs, but that is a far different concept from saying they've been cleared. Does anyone have a quote directly from LE stating that all 3 were in fact cleared?

"Clearing" this up might help with all of the confusion, altho the rules and TOS would remain the same.

(admittedly I am way behind on reading plus I've worn-out my scroll button as well, ha)

Thank you!

~jmo~

ETA: This distinction had been raised in the JonBenet Ramsey case so long ago. It's beyond just semantics, imo.
 
JDB said:
Ok I might have misstated my bad. But until we know what the LE has I also suggest lets not get ready to Have Rick locked up or for that matter anyone else in the family. Seems Marlene could have came back after she said she went to work also.
But I don't see anybody doubting her?
Click to expand...


:seeya: No problem about the "misstated" ... I do it sometimes myself ... lol ...

I do wish LE would answer some of the unanswered questions ...

And JMO, but there are a lot of things that raise the "hinky meter" ... If there were some confirmation or answers, I think there would be less "speculation" with respect to Rick and Marlene ...

And again, JMO, while I understand that going on Nancy Grace's Show is "no picnic", Marlene could have easily answered the question about Rick, but she chose not to ... and that right there raised the "hinky meters" ...

If there is nothing to hide, then it should be clear and simple ...

:moo::moo::moo:
 
Wendy101 said:
Nancy Grace Show
April 6, 2012

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../06/ng.01.html


GRACE: We are back and taking your calls in the search for 15-year- old Sierra Lamar. To Sheriff Laurie Smith, Santa Clara county sheriff.

Sheriff, explain to me what is the issue with the live-in boyfriend?

SMITH: We`ve talked with him. We`re continuing the investigation. Until Sierra`s home safely, we`re not eliminating anybody, and any new information that we get or any new suspicions we get, we will absolutely totally follow up.

..Something I just noticed in the transcript above..... nancy is specifically asking about BF... What a weird response from Sheriff... She said on national tv that They LE are NOT eliminating anyone... Since Nancy question was specifically about BF that would mean clearly that he is not in the clear with LE .. IMO..

ITA with your post...
Click to expand...

But once again you have to take everything that Smith says. We are not elminating anyone that would include to me Marlene and Steve IMHO. So I guess now none of them are cleared correct?
 
krkrjx said:
I never checked on my daughter's school attendance until the day came that she gave me reason to check. I checked twice a day after that, mid-morning and again after lunch. Daughter hated me for it but so what. Checking gave me peace of mind and her knowing I was checking made her hesitant to do what she had done that day that was a game changer. But my point is, I never checked until I needed to. I will admit that she could have been missing or murdered had things gone differently on game-changer day. And I will also admit that that possibility stayed with me all through her remaining high school days.

School personnel got to thinking of me as a pest because I called twice a day. But again, so what.
Click to expand...

I understand the interest in watching kids as they go to and from school. However, when parents are home "safe" with their children, there are in-house burglaries that turn ugly, and drive by shootings that kill people, too.
Just something to think about when we are analyzing the need to monitor children going to, from, and at school.:waitasec:

ETA:
krkrjx..I was just using your post to express my thoughts.
I agree with you that children need to be monitored, but they need to be given experiences with parameters where they can practice real life. When wrong choices are made, guidance and closer monitoring can then be enhanced.

ETA: again.... This is probably going to land at a place in this thread where it doesn't seem to "fit the flow". Sorry...I am catching up with the reading!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 86 more.
Total: 1,150 (members: 87, guests: 1,063)

Online statistics

Members online
87
Guests online
1,063
Total visitors
1,150
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,791
Messages
17,958,920
Members
228,607
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top