AMBER ALERT NJ - Dulce Mariá Alavez, 5, abducted at Bridgeton City Park, Cumberland County, 16 Sept 2019 #2

Status
Not open for further replies.
I posted a quote earlier from an article that quoted a woman saying she had seen Dulce at the park the Friday prior.
Was it a regular thing? Did Dolce or the mom mention to anyone that they were going to be there again Monday? Did the mom stay behind in the car the previous visit(s)? Does she always park in that same spot where the kids can't always be in view? Does she always stay in the car,
discuss homework with the other child, or play on her phone or is distracted in some other way? If it's a pattern, someone could have easily noted that and planned.

Suggs, who works with the Vineland Youth Advocate Program, said she brings her kids to the park regularly, and saw Dulce playing there last Friday.
Search for Dulce Maria Alavez, missing 5-year-old New Jersey girl, continues as family pleads for help
 
Yeah, I don't even think it's a minivan, and LE did not say it was a minivan either.

So frustrating. A van is a big long rectangular shape and they all look the same. Like something a handy man or a painter would use. To me a mini van is an SUV and can be shaped differently.

I wish we knew which it was.
We probably will know soon, but respectfully a minivan is not an SUV . Jmo
 
Do we have any details that LE has actually confirmed?

All I can see, is they are passing on what they gathered from witness accounts.

Have they stated anything tangible they have found from the investigation? Aside from the store CCTV.

The park seemed busy and well travelled. If it happened in such a short period of time, I would wonder how anyone would have observed, and recalled the approximate 10 minutes or less this happened, especially a day later.

I'm no expert but nothing seemed out of the ordinary, with what someone might assume a kidnapping would look like, screaming, crying, fighting. At least it has not been included in what we know. Also possible they assumed it was screaming kid not wanting to leave the park.

I am just pointing out that witness statements may actually be inaccurate, not intentionally, but they were trying their best to help. And we may actually have nothing to go on in the first place. I believe the police response was about an hour later, at which point, other witnesses may have left and people who were there may not actually have been witnesses at all.

The information we get is constantly changing and evolving, leading me to believe they don't know what they have gathered is valuable and/or related. They're trying to bring forth the most common witness statements and combine them into one, while eliminating things that don't seem relevant.

If they had more specific, corroborating witness reports, we would have that information as well. Could be why they continued searching the park for days, even tho witnesses said they left the scene, their information, nor investigation, was not strong enough to discount that she remained there. Jmo.

Also note that we have a picture of a vehicle, from the news broadcast and we're speculating on it's exact make and model. Kind of sums up my post.

I'm worried that LE has not come up with any leads to move in the right direction on this case. Imoo.
 
I'm no expert but nothing seemed out of the ordinary, with what someone might assume a kidnapping would look like, screaming, crying, fighting. At least it has not been included in what we know. Also possible they assumed it was screaming kid not wanting to leave the park.

Common assumption about kidnappings but not always the case. People don't always need to threaten or grab children, anything that would make a scene really, to abduct them. There's a clip from a TV show that pops up in this thread where an experiment was performed to see whether children will walk away with strangers who try to lure them. IIRC 7 out of 10 of the kids followed the stranger compliantly and without a fuss. "I have some candy/toys/games for you", "could you help me find my lost puppy?", "I'm a friend of _insert relative_, they need me to pick you up", "want to play a game?", plenty of these tricks still work.

Then there's the whole other possibility that she already knew the abductor.
 
Common assumption about kidnappings but not always the case. People don't always need to threaten or grab children, anything that would make a scene really, to abduct them. There's a clip from a TV show that pops up in this thread where an experiment was performed to see whether children will walk away with strangers who try to lure them. IIRC 7 out of 10 of the kids followed the stranger compliantly and without a fuss. "I have some candy/toys/games for you", "could you help me find my lost puppy?", "I'm a friend of _insert relative_, they need me to pick you up", "want to play a game?", plenty of these tricks still work.

Then there's the whole other possibility that she already knew the abductor.
Seems with short time frame here (assuming the red car is the car) there wouldn't be enough time for a chat.
 
Are the Spanish words for van, minivan and SUV different words? Could be a translation thing ...

Each nationality can use different words for certain things. I’m Puerto Rican and what I say for van is different than what my Central American husband says.

I would assume they would have a translator and show the witness pictures to get more of an idea. Not just go by van.
 
Common assumption about kidnappings but not always the case. People don't always need to threaten or grab children, anything that would make a scene really, to abduct them. There's a clip from a TV show that pops up in this thread where an experiment was performed to see whether children will walk away with strangers who try to lure them. IIRC 7 out of 10 of the kids followed the stranger compliantly and without a fuss. "I have some candy/toys/games for you", "could you help me find my lost puppy?", "I'm a friend of _insert relative_, they need me to pick you up", "want to play a game?", plenty of these tricks still work.

Then there's the whole other possibility that she already knew the abductor.

That's why I pointed out that nothing out of the ordinary was observed. I clearly stated 3 scenarios where it wouldn't have been note worthy to observe. My point being how could the witnesses recall anything if no attention was being drawn to the alleged kidnapping?
 
I posted a quote earlier from an article that quoted a woman saying she had seen Dulce at the park the Friday prior.
Was it a regular thing? Did Dolce or the mom mention to anyone that they were going to be there again Monday? Did the mom stay behind in the car the previous visit(s)? Does she always park in that same spot where the kids can't always be in view? Does she always stay in the car,
discuss homework with the other child, or play on her phone or is distracted in some other way? If it's a pattern, someone could have easily noted that and planned.


Search for Dulce Maria Alavez, missing 5-year-old New Jersey girl, continues as family pleads for help

I would not be surprised if it was everyday or every other day. The park where I walk my dog, I see the same families, same children almost every day. Running around, playing basketball. I think it is the thing to do after school. Free fun for the whole family.
 
IMO, great beginning tip, lucky video capture in the timeline. I can only think of two scenarios to get her to be led so quickly. One, Dulce was groomed over a time period. Two, abductor scared her into shock. IMO going with number two, as brother's ice cream was knocked to the ground. Also wondering if tipster was young. Young children say "van" learning phonics in school. They dont say SUV. As an adult, I also think "van", never SUV. I think because I always drove minivans, never an SUV. My married daughter always corrects me. She drives an SUV. So glad they have this video. So glad. I will be looking at every SUV on my drive. And, wow, that's a red SUV, no mistaking that color, not maroon for sure to me. Would look maroon to my colorblind son but never to me. Window could appear tinted if the sun going down hits it at an angle IMO.
 
The description is completely off except for the color. Red van with tinted windows and sliding doors versus compact red SUV without tinted windows or sliding doors. So clearly the rest of the witness description can't be considered reliable if you ask me. Assuming of course the red SUV is connected to the case.
 
The description is completely off except for the color. Red van with tinted windows and sliding doors versus compact red SUV without tinted windows or sliding doors. So clearly the rest of the witness description can't be considered reliable if you ask me. Assuming of course the red SUV is connected to the case.
Yes, and I find it odd that LE has said nothing about this video - the reporter specifically said the person who took it turned it over to police. So if LE thought it was a viable piece of information why did they not release the video asking if the driver recognized their SUV or if anyone else saw the SUV that day to please contact LE?

We often see LE release photos of vehicles in cases, sometimes even taken from stock photos. Surely someone in LE could identify the make and model. So why the hush on this one? I'll say it again: Either LE knows something they're not sharing - and it could be as simple as they have identified a possible suspect who drove the SUV/van and are gathering evidence - or they're not convinced the red van/SUV/minivan story is accurate. MOO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
55
Guests online
4,051
Total visitors
4,106

Forum statistics

Threads
592,621
Messages
17,972,056
Members
228,845
Latest member
butiwantedthatname
Back
Top