I agree. Why would LE carry a recorder around to interview witnesses? The only time I've seen recordings is when a person is taken in for questioning as a possible person of interest or suspect in a case.
I have a hard time believing this is a huge conspiracy by LE to frame the parents. As a matter of fact the documents only validate that LE is looking at every single piece of evidence and following up on leads. This dude changed his story for some of the reasons posted here. He had no idea his statement would go public.:moo:
Above BBM. This is not at all what was being indicated in Mark's stating LE's DID NOT record their discussions. (please note that the entirety of this post is not just directed at the post above, but several of the posts discussing this particular issue that are not accurate of the details that are being reported regarding Tronzinger and his concern of being incorrectly quoted in the docs) .. Tronzinger is not at all indicating that LE should have been recording their "chance meeting" in the restaurant(which I'll clarify this point as well in a moment).. He is speaking of the FORMAL INTERVIEW THEY THEY, AS IN LE REQUESTED TO HAVE WITH HIM(note that in the docs it incorrectly states that Tronzinger contacted and strongly requested to meet with LE)
.. As well as their first contact was only a "chance meeting" in a restaurant where LE let him know that they were interested in speaking with him(not the other way around as was INCORRECTLY stated)
You will see from the snipped quote below(with link attached at the bottom to full article) that as I'd said he never made mention, nor even alluded to LE having needed to record their contact in a restaurant.. Much different(and IMO therefor much more sensical) is that Tronzinger states that he was concerned that not only did LE NOT record his formal interview(again that LE had requested).. But nor did the officer/detective even bother to take down any notes whatsoever throughout or at any point in the formal interview that LE had with Tronzinger.. IMO and with obvious good reason for his being concerned that there was no record(audio, nor written) of their discussions and his statements made to LE due to the fact that whomever it was that filled out the evidentiary sheet of their formal interview with Tronzinger did so with extreme error, misquotes, and altogether incorrect statements as well as the circumstance regarding how it was that they had even come to interviewing the coach.. LE incorrectly stating that Tronzinger sought LE out and was adamant about having a formal interview with LE stating he had "pertinent information directly about Isa's case"(as you'll see in snipped quote below that is 100% false along with many other points and statements made by LE in the doc)
As far as the issue of recording in general when detectives are conducting formal interviews with subjects in and/or around an abduction/homicide case(as was mentioned in above post as well as in a couple of posts upthread that THIS WAS NOT AT ALL SOP to record these type formal interviews with LE).. I could not disagree more.. In fact it absolutely IS SOP TO RECORD THESE TYPE FORMAL INTERVIEWS and interestingly enough the proof that this LE did in fact record(audio and written note) many other formal interviews with subjects in and around this abduction case of Isabel Celis(as is noted in several different docs in the recent doc dump.. the reports even make note to refer to audio recording of the interview with the various other subjects)..
So, IMO not only does Tronzinger have every right to be concerned and to have come forward to make known these great errors and incorrect statements as well as false/incorrect circumstance surrounding their even had the formal interviews to begin with.. But so, too does he point out these detectives having failed to even record(in any capacity audio or written) the discussions of their formal interview.. IMO its extremely negligent procedure, or lack there of... Especially in going with what is LE statement in the docs that this individual purposefully sought out LE with anxious need in informing these detectives of such "pertinent information" related to the case.. That alone, if indeed were a true fact that this coach purposefully sought out detectives and specifically told them ahead of time(prior to the actual formal interview) that he had very pertinent information to share with LE about the case.. If that were factual IMO you damn well better believe that these investigators would have made damn sure that there was a by the book legally, clear, crisp, and of its complete entirety the discussions in this formal interview with Tronzinger that contained such pertinent information.. Without a single doubt that is an issue I am quite certain of.. It's LE's not having done so that IMO lends even more credence to exactly what Mr. Tronzinger has come forward stating publicly, is indeed the ACTUAL factual truth..
-That truth being that he, Tronzinger did not ever have any information to share with LE, certainly NOT pertinent information..
-That he did not in any way, shape, or form seek out LE requesting to meet with them to give them this "pertinent information".
-That he did not ever state that he knew Sergio really well, but rather had only met him a little over a hand full of times, EVER!
-And that he certainly did NOT state to detectives that "something didn't seem right about what was going on and alluded that he believed that the father was involved in some way.".. Much differently was that when speaking about the specific issue of the possibility of Isa having "run away" that his opinion was that notion did not seem right as a valid possibility..
WRT there being some "huge conspiracy with LE framing the parents" that's a new one on me as its certainly never entered my mind and I've yet to see anyone else claiming such either.. So IMO that's not even a topic up for discussion..
But as far as Mark Tronzinger goes and what he is obviously upset about(and IMO with VERY GOOD REASON) I know a few see this as possibly just back peddling in an attempt to cover up and not have the Celis' mad/upset/hurt.. I will say that upon my first reading the article below that I looked at it from all the various angles and did very much consider the back peddling at that point, as did I again consider IT when a few others made mention of that possibility in their posts.. My honest opinion on it is that is just not the case here(not that the back peddling is far fetched or impossible) but just that I personally do not believe that to be the situation..Mark Tronzinger is not even close with Sergio, much less the Celis family and has met him only a handful of times.. That statement right there is easily verifiable.. Meaning if that weren't true and he actually knew the Celis family well, especially Sergio that his stating this in a public news article he would IMMEDIATELY BE CALLED OUT ON HIS LYING OR MISLEADING the facts.. Clearly he is not at all close with Sergio just as he states that he is not.. He is not in a tight knit circle of friends with the Celis' and that not only IMO proves that in all likelihood he wouldn't have a clue as to any pertinent info about the case, even IF there was some.. And furthermore there would be no loss of friendship as he obviously is nothing more than just what he states himself to be and that simply is that he is parent whose child plays ball on the same team as one or more of the Celis children.. He's not back peddling anything because IMO this man never has been in any position whatsoever that would yield his having access and knowledge to details of Sergio Celis home life, life at work, social life amongst friends(the important individuals such as co-workers and employers speak in extremely high regard of Sergio Celis.. Have nothing negative whatsoever in even the slightest to say, but rather speak in detail of his character and their multiple years of working aside him daily.. Those are people who have the access and knowledge of Sergio Celis.. But somehow their extremely positive and NON-DAMNING testimonies are overlooked,disregarded, and definitely NOT discussed) ..but back to Mark.. He is in no way anything more than a sheer acquaintance to Sergio Celis who upon being in a restaurant for the chance circumstance of seeing/speaking with detectives.. And the detectives the requesting to formally interview him later that same day.. To which he obviously, without hesitation complied.. Those detectives upon seeing Mark at that restaurant KNEW RIGHT THEN&THERE WHAT, IF ANY WAS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MARK AND SERGIO.. And Mark made perfectly clear that his only connection to Sergio Celis was the fact that their children played on a same little league team and nothing more..
The question is asked what would be LE motive for stating total mistruths, combined with a severe twisting of this mans words onto the formal interview sheet that eventually was released publicly???
And for that I do not know.. None of us do and can only speculate.. I tend to not view LE through the lens of nefarious/dirty/crooked, but rather that in a case of this magnitude with the outlandish amount of ppl interviewed, spoken to, and investigated and the sheer volume of info and details that they are told.. Well .. IMO it becomes apparent just exactly why such protocol and procedure such as recording any/all formal interviews, be it audio recording, or hand written, short hand.. The point being some type of recording of these discussions is SOP for very good reason.. And IMO right here we see up close and personal what exactly that reason is re: Mark Tronzinger having been formally interviewed , LE NEGLIGENTLY NOT RECORDING THAT INTERVIEW IN ANY CAPACITY WHATSOEVER.. Results in this man's words being absolutely Inaccurately stated on record in police documents that absolutely one day could be of some type evidentiary, court entered documentation to be used at a trial.. IMO there just is no excuse for this type negligence.. IMO no conspiracy here.. Nope.. Just good ol' fashioned laziness..negligence therefor creating a very real issue of which would have been easily avoided had they chosen to record in some capacity these discussions with Mark Tronzinger..jmo.
Below is snipped quote from Mark Tronzinger's interview with media with link to the full article at the bottom:
He say he believes the police report comes from two encounters he had with detectives.
One, a chance meeting in a restaurant where he mentioned his son and Isabel Celis played on the same baseball team.
Tronziger says detectives then asked if they could formally interview him later that day.
The police report states, Tronziger said he "knows him well," referring to Sergio Celis.
Tronziger says he would not have said that.
"The report went on to say that I knew Sergio very well. I didn't know Sergio very well. I knew Sergio strictly through coaching of my baseball team. I maybe met him seven or eight times, if that."
Particularly troubling to Tronziger is the statement in the report: "Mark went on to say that something didn't seem right about what was going on and alluded that he believed that the father was involved in some way."
"Absolutely not true. That's another misquote," Tronziger says.
"We were talking in the context of Isabel running away from home or if there was some kind of foul play, and so my remarks were simply centered around I thought it would be odd that the little girl would run away," Tronziger says.
"To take that statement and morph it into a specific comment on a specific person, is simply not how it transpired," he adds.
Even the words exchanged during the chance meeting in the restaurant have Tronziger wondering.
The police report states, "Mark made it very clear that he wanted to talk to a detective about the case and that he might have some pertinent information."
I asked Tronziger, "Did you say you might have some pertinent information?"
Tronziger answered, "Absolutely not."
"Again, I don't know where that came from because I was told that they wanted to interview me," he says.
Tronziger says what he found interesting happened during the formal interview.
"The interview was never recorded. The officer who was interviewing me...he didn't write anything down. So it's very possible he went back and he started writing in what he thought he heard during that interview, but what he wrote simply was not what was said," Tronziger says.
Posting via mobile as well as via tablet so plz forgive all typos.. Btwn the sucky touch keyboard and the obsessive auto-correct it's a big ol' mess :crazy: