Friday, September 14, 2018

Kiera Bergman: Domestic Homicide in Analysis

Hat tip John:

After Kiera Bergman disappeared from their shared residence on Aug. 4, her boyfriend went on television to beg for her safe return.
“Kiera, if you can hear me,  please come back,” Jon Christopher Clark, 23, said into the camera five days after the 19-year-old Phoenix woman vanished, reports local TV news station KSAZ.
Note the presupposition that she ran away on her own will. This does not necessary indicate guilt; but belief. This leads to:
Why do you believe that?
In "domestic homicide" we look for one specific element: 
The subject's verbalized perception of the communication between them. 
This is a good example to learn from. 
What do we look for?

Clark said the two had argued the last time he saw her. 

“I’m sorry. I know that me not having a job was a really big issue. I did get a job, I start on Monday. Just come back. I’m not going to ask any questions. I’m not going to make assumptions. Just please come back, Kiera.
"I'm sorry" does not conclude guilt.  It does, however, find its way into a guilty subject's language, for whatever reason, under what ever context.  We always note it. It is an indicator of possible guilt.  Often used politely, an in depth interview of a factually innocent person will often find one who is guilty of something; including impoliteness in general. Highly empathetic social people use it in disruptions, or with failure to hear another. They later confess to feeling guilty for "not listening, not returning his call, ignoring her text..." and so on. Note it always. 
"I'm sorry?", Casey Anthony said to the 911 operator, as if, "I did not hear you." 
Next, note the Rule of the Negative; what he tells us did not happen, or would not happen:
a.  "me not having a job"
b. "I'm not going to ask any questions"
c. "I'm not going to make assumptions."
From these, we must consider ongoing Domestic Violence.  Remember, in a D/V relationship, it is not the violence that controls; it is the ongoing threat of violence as the victim stays with the perpetrator. 
Here he shows his dominance or authority over her. He is giving himself away by attempting to show how magnanimous he is.  It is conditional: if she comes back, he will stop interrogating her. While playing 
"the good guy" he is subtly shifting the blame away from self, and in a sense, upon the victim.  She could not understand how hard it is to find a job (in a record setting booming economy). She did not have enough patience; if she only waited a bit longer. 
In the sense, it is an insult (obtaining a job) as a form of revenge.  
We look for humiliation as the trigger to act upon the final violence

“We believed from the beginning he was involved, but without any information we didn’t want to put him out there as a bad person without knowing some facts,” Bergman’s father, Chris Bragg, told Phoenix TV news station KNXV.
The victim’s mother, Kiersten Bragg, told the outlet: “I was relieved, and in a way, I’m happy. I pray that the situation opens up a lot of especially young women’s eyes to the dangers that are out there and that you think twice before you get involved with certain people.”
Mother's concern is not for daughter (maternal instinct) but for other parents' daughters.  Strong human empathy noted. 
“I would hate to have to see other parents go through this,” she said. “It’s the worst feeling in the world.”
Clark, who moved from California to the Phoenix area with Bergman, has been in custody since August 17, after a search of his car allegedly turned up forged documents and the personal information of several individuals, which police say were unrelated to Bergman’s case. According to the Phoenix police statement, he is charged with aggravated identity theft and forgery in addition to the charges in Bergman’s death. 
 Clark’s girlfriend disappeared on his birthday, he said in a video interview posted by the Arizona Republic.
At their residence on that Saturday, “we chilled,” he told reporters days after her disappearance.
A chilling word in context. (Leakage) 
Note the focus, even as he attempts to sound like the good guy, turns back to himself; his condition. This is made even more sensitive with his need to explain why she was trying to keep him in good spirits. 
 “She’s trying to keep me in good spirits ’cause it’s my birthday, but I was kind of sad ’cause we weren’t really doing anything. And then we just started getting into a little bickering and arguing, and then she got upset and then she left.”
Analysts could look at the above and know what happened by the color their eyes interpret first. 
The word "but" tells us: he was in a bad mood. 
The word "we" shows unity. 
He is is telling the truth. Follow the pronouns.  He is working from experiential memory: 
She tried to keep him in good spirits produced unity. ("we")
She honored his birthday, which kept them unified  ("we")
But once a "little bickering" (minimization) began, it was no longer "we" but "she."
The word "just" is a dependent word.  He is telling the truth with his pronouns and with this word. The dependent word "just" is comparing what he just said ("a little bickering") with something else: something so powerful that it destroyed the unity of "we" for him. 
"She got upset."
It was her fault in his verbalized perception of reality. 
She "left" is to distinctly withhold information right at this point of the argument that escalated.  

She did not "honor him" enough (doing "nothing") on his birthday and this was all too much.  No job, doing "nothing" and his birthday...Note the heavy focus on self is narcissistic like. 
Note the "magnanimous" posture. 
Note the Rule of the Negative.
Note how he could only say these things if he had previously practiced them.
Note the shift of blame. 
After he did not hear from Bergman on Sunday and then she did not show up to her job on Monday, he said he was in contact with a friend of hers and urged a missing-person’s report to be filed, he said.
“Since I am her boyfriend, and I was the last one to be with her … her mom mainly just really wants to blame me for everything. I had nothing to do with anything that’s going on. I love Kiera with all my heart. I want her to come home. Please come home, Kiera. I love you.”

He begins with the Hina Clause of explaining "why" someone else blames him. 
Then he tells us he was the last one to be with her. 
If she ran away, this is knowledge that he would not possess.
If he killed her, he would possess this knowledge. It belies the "come home" message (incongruence) in his statement.

If you wish to study Deception Detection, host a seminar, or have your department (or Human Resources) trained, visit www.hyattanalysis.com


New camera, new editing and new videos to follow   

45 comments:

Anonymous said...

This isn't current news, but I just recently discovered your blog and I was wondering if you take requests. This is a statement by Coach Sean Miller about allegations of paying college basketball recruits for the U of Arizona




SHARE THIS ›
Facebook
Twitter
Email
BREAKING
Hurricane Florence wreaks havoc as it makes landfall in North Carolina

Read the full transcript of Arizona Coach Sean Miller's statement today
The Arizona Republic Mar 1, 2018
Facebook
Twitter
Email
Print
Save
Sean Miller held a media session that lasted almost 4 ½ minutes on Thursday at the McKale Center in Tucson.

Miller wore a red University of Arizona shirt and sat alone at a table in front a live camera, where he spoke about the accusations against him and the Wildcats' basketball program. Miller read from a sheet of paper and did not take any questions.

The full transcript of Sean Miller's remarks:



Good afternoon.

Let me begin by saying that I regret all the negative attention that has been focused on our program and the difficult position that this has created for President Robbins, Dave Heeke and the Arizona family and especially our players and their families.

I appreciate all the support I've received during this difficult time. Thank you to everybody.

While I have done nothing wrong, I am responsible for our men's basketball program and I am sickened that we are in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons. Contrary to what has been written this past week, we do our very best to run a clean program at the University of Arizona. I have done that since the first day I stepped on this campus. Compliance with NCAA rules is extremely important to us and we work hard to create, maintain and monitor a culture of compliance within our program.

I have never knowingly violated NCAA rules while serving as head coach of this great program. I have never paid a recruit or prospect or their family or representative to come to Arizona. I never have and I never will. I have never arranged or directed payment or improper benefits to a recruit or prospect or family or representative and I never will.

I also understand that there is an ongoing federal investigation and because of this I cannot do anything that might compromise the integrity of this investigation.

However, on this point, I cannot remain silent in light of media reports that have impugned the reputation of me and the university and sullied the name of a tremendous young man, Deandre Ayton.

Let me be very very clear: I have never discussed with Christian Dawkins paying Deandre Ayton to attend the University of Arizona. In fact, I never even met or spoke to Christian Dawkins until after Deandre publicly announced he was coming to our school. Any reporting to the contrary is inaccurate, false and defamatory.

I'm outraged by the media statements have been made and the acceptance by many that these statements were true. There was no such conversation. These statements have damaged me, my family, the university, Deandre Ayton and his incredible family.

The only attempted corrections by the original source of the media statements are still inaccurate and completely false.

I also want you to know that the one time someone suggested to me paying a player to come to the University of Arizona I did not agree to it. It never happened and that player did not come to the University of Arizona. Out of respect for this ongoing investigation and the privacy of the student-athlete and his family, I'm not going to share further details concerning this matter.

I appreciate more than anyone can realize Dr. Robbins and the university carefully considering this matter and acting upon facts. I have been completely open and transparent and I look forward to coaching this outstanding team as we seek to capture the Pac-12 regular-season championship this week.

I now intend to turn my focus to basketball and our players and this team. I once again want to express my thanks to all of those who supported me and this now completes my statement on this matter.

John mcgowan said...

Next, note the Rule of the Negative; what he tells us did not happen, or would not happen:
a. "me not having a job"
b. "I'm not going to ask any questions"
c. "I'm not going to make assumptions."
From these, we must consider ongoing Domestic Violence.

...

Slain Teen and Alleged Killer Had History of Domestic Disputes

Snips:

NBC 7 has obtained a copy of Phoenix police’s case against Clark.

The document lists a history of domestic disputes that left bruises on Kiera Bergman’s body. It also documents a possibility of a pregnancy; a farewell letter typed out on the defendant’s phone and evidence of Kiera’s phone hitting the same WiFi router as the defendant’s, days after she had been reported missing.

efore she died, Kiera told a witness Clark would restrain her when they fought by placing one hand against her upper chest and throat, the document says.

Police say Clark typed out Instagram posts and letters, such as a farewell letter, on his phone in the Notes section.

In one such note, he wrote: “So to all Kiera’s family that still wants to look at me negatively, you better have this same energy when Kiera comes home because we will spend the rest of our lives together and I will never forget the way you’re treating me.”

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/california/Missing-Teen-and-Alleged-Killer-Had-History-of-Domestic-Disputes-493104841.html

Matilda said...

OT: Brett Kavanaugh on anonymous abuse allegation:

"I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

Shouldn't he have said "that" instead of "this" to show distance from the allegation?

Amyl Nitrite said...

Matilda, I was about to post this too!! I think it is a reliable denial. I think “this” is used because those allegations personally attacked his character and he holds that close to his vest. Just my interpretation. “I did not do this” sounds good to me and I believe him. Amy I wrong?

Anonymous said...

Matilda said...
OT: Brett Kavanaugh on anonymous abuse allegation:

"I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

Shouldn't he have said "that" instead of "this" to show distance from the allegation?

"I"- First person singular'
"Did Not"not" - Past tense
Specific allegation - not addressed.

Unreliable Denial.

Matilda said...

I hope you are right; I am far from an expert. It is possible that the closeness implied by "this" is because it is so personal. Hopefully Peter will weigh in.

I was also wondering why he needed to say "back in high school". Is he attempting to minimize the seriousness of the allegation even while denying it?

frommindtomatter said...

I don`t know the context or story. If talking about something in the past the actual event would be distant so “that” would be appropriate but by using “this” they bring this thing closer to themselves.

The allegation is now I presume so it is close to him.

Allegations are usually made without any proof so he basically is denying something without proof. He is not saying he didn't do what is alleged.

Adrian.

Anonymous said...

The Reliable Denial exists of three components:

I. The pronoun "I"
II The past tense verb "did not" or "didn't"
III The allegation specifically answered.

The Reliable Denial consists of three components. Where there are less than three, or more than three, the denial is deemed: Unreliable.

http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2014/09/law-enforcement-and-reliable-denial.html

Lucia D said...

Peter, could you comment on his use of the present tense, even though he was speaking from experiential memory? “She’s trying to” That switching from present to past tense is confusing to me for analysis. Thanks!

Anonymous said...

Does Judge Kavanaugh deny committing sexual assault in the early 80s?
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/14/politics/kavanaugh-letter-assault-supreme-court/index.html

frommindtomatter said...

“Just” started getting into a “little” bickering and arguing.

I see “just” and “little” in the sentence being used to minimise what’s happening. I could imagine there were more than “just” words used in this dispute.

“and “then” she got upset and “then” she left”.

Two uses of the word “then” in the sentence mark two points in time. She didn’t simply get upset and leave. I could imagine after the first use of “then” she was killed and prepared to be disposed of, and the second “then” marks the time she did leave. Unfortunately she wasn`t alive when she left.

Adrian.

frommindtomatter said...

Lucia D

This might help you. Present tense language can be an indication the speaker is not using experiential memory as a source of their words.

In this instance the speaker needs a reason for why his girlfriend left. We should entertain he is giving us this present tense language because he is making up a scenario which led to the argument. The argument was probably for a reason he does not want to disclose as it is sensitive to him. For all we know she may have been accusing him of cheating on her or something similar which would not paint him in a good light.

We should also consider the speaker may talk like this normally. We would need to analyse more statements from him to understand his personal use of language.

That’s my take on it.

Adrian.

habundia said...

'She's trying to'......it reminds me of my past with DA when the abused is avoiding confrontations, especially on special days, when liquor often is consumed and the littlest thing can cause an inferno.

habundia said...

It could also be she complaining to him about not having a job (on his birthday) which triggered humiliation

John mcgowan said...

"And then" / 'then"

Temporal Lacunae a skip in time = missing information, often critical

MsGvious said...

Heartbreaking.

“She’s trying to keep me in good spirits ’cause it’s my birthday, but I was kind of sad ’cause we weren’t really doing anything. And then we just started getting into a little bickering and arguing, and then she got upset and then she left.”

'good spirits' - (1) alcohol (2) angel i.e. she's dead.

"it’s my birthday, but I was kind of sad ’cause we weren’t really doing anything"
My birthday / I sad because - he doesn't take responsibility for his birthday mood or party plans, he's a victim
We weren't - he expected Kiera to make plans, not himself or his family & friends

"we just started getting into a little bickering and arguing"
Who was bickering / arguing? Kiera was 'trying to keep him in good spirits' while he was 'kind of sad'

Kiera makes an effort for Jon. Her energy is wasted. He's not satisfied with her company, she's not enough, she can't please him. He doesn't want her, he wants what he can't have. It's her fault he doesn't have it.

Peter Hyatt said...

Matilda said...
OT: Brett Kavanaugh on anonymous abuse allegation:

"I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

Shouldn't he have said "that" instead of "this" to show distance from the allegation?
September 14, 2018 at 12:14 PM


If an allegation is as remote as this and detail not given, an analyst is likely to say "this is not reliable."

This does not mean deception.

It is something that in depth training brings great accuracy.

The judge does not appear to have a psychological "connection" to this allegation. It appears as a stunt, but I always like to hear an allegation presented in a clear manner. It allows the subject to "look at it and respond in detail."

This is not what Diane Feinstein has done.

My guess is that the allegation is a fabrication.

My fear is that it has become acceptable to use. We have, indeed, received "change" in America.

Leftism is not about a specific cause, ethic, or moral. It is, psychologically, about control. This is why we hear projected guilt of "tolerance" from the most intolerant.

It is also why "apology" does not work. It is not about the issue.

Mental illness and compassion?

Deception has a cost.

A man thinks he is a woman. Instead of obtaining treatment, he is exploited by politicians. Professionals are fearful for their license (or worse) should they treat him. Instead, he is celebrated.

This is to celebrate a 40% suicide rate.

If you don't agree, you will suffer consequence. In California, laws are passed to "protect" while in reality, they continue the control.

A suicide rate of 40% is not compassion; it is cruelty. Pretending a man is a woman is not compassionate. A government (Justin Trudeau) mandating speech is tyranny.

It is all about control. Look at each and every issue. Control, not freedom. Group think, and indoctrination in schools, no confrontation with free thought, scrutiny or doubt. Just conformity or else.

This is a historical path to armed conflict.

Peter

Anonymous said...

"And then we just started getting into a little bickering and arguing, and then she got upset and then she left.”

Synonyms for "upset" are i.a.: knock down, wound, slay, murder (www.thesaurus.com)

Synonyms for "left" (leave) are i.a.: be no more, cease to exist, come to naught, die (www.thesaurus.com)

valyriew said...

So he’s telling the truth and it’s a fabrication? What happened to the statement analysis principles?

Willow said...

Could the perpetrator murder mainly from the basis of his thinking? Nothing more deep in it.
He has tested it's effective. He continues what works for him.
His life style is drifting, finding out for how long he can live off someone else's means and person before it ends.
His goal is short term win, dominance, obedience.
Are there more victims in the past of this perpetrator?

Anonymous said...

Left = Died

Anonymous said...

“Kiera, if you can hear me, please come back"

Contrapositive: You won't/can't come back if you can't hear me (because you are dead).

John mcgowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John mcgowan said...

Isabel Celis and Maribel Gonzales: Charges filed in murders

According to ABC15 sources, charges have been filed against 36-year-old Christopher Clements for homicide in both cases.

Clements is currently in custody in Maricopa County jail on multiple fraud and burglary charges according to online court records....

https://www.abc15.com/news/region-central-southern-az/tucson/charges-filed-in-murders-of-isabel-celis-and-maribel-gonzales

M said...

Thanks John for posting update about Isabel Celis.


I wonder if the fact that English was not the first language of the father might have influenced SA here, as when he said she had clear eyes, a Spanish-derived term for light-colored eyes. And if cultural background affects what one is expected to talk about, like the "girly girl" type references, since this type of thing, physical beauty, femininity is so important for Latinos especially in referencing females.

Anonymous said...

OTHER:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/09/15/man-indicted-on-murder-charges-in-kidnapping-and-deaths-two-young-arizona-girls.html

Mike Dammann said...

" I had nothing to do with anything that’s going on."
He avoids being specific in his denial. He doesn't commit to having nothing to do with her disappearance. He doubles down on "nothing" with "anything" removing himself even further from making a specific commitment. This indicates also potentially guilty knowledge of something he isn't accused of yet.

Alex Dumas said...

"I’m not going to ask any questions. I’m not going to make assumptions."

He's not going to do these things because........ she's dead?

Buckley said...

Interesting

lynda said...

In light of Kavanaugh's accuser going public and being identified as a Christine Blasey Ford, a Professor at Palo Alto, I am anxious to see the SA.

Her psychiatrist's notes from years ago, when she spoke of the attack in therapy have also been released.This was years before Kavanaugh was even on the radar to be a justice.

If what she says is true (and right now I have a tendency to believe it is) he is a rapist. I don't care if he was a teenager, or drunk, or whatever. He held a woman down, covered her mouth, and tried to rape her. Being a teen has NOTHING to do with how "distant" it is, or that it was the foolishness of being a teen. I knew plenty of teen boys, drunk, and they NEVER did what he is accused of.

If he did this..he does NOT belong on the SC. It's not a right or left thing for God's sake.

tania cadogan said...

Off topic

A New York woman admitted she fabricated her story to police claiming a group of teens shouted “Trump 2016” at her and left the note “Go Home” after slashing her tires, police said.

Adwoa Lewis, 19, was arrested and charged with making a false punishable written statement following an “extensive investigation” into her claims she made earlier this month, Nassau County police said Saturday.

Lewis provided a written statement to detectives saying four teenagers confronted her on Sept. 1 around 11:15 p.m. while she was driving on Jackson Street on Long Island. She said the teens yelled “Trump 2016!” and told her she didn’t belong here.

“She further claimed she parked her car in front of her house and when she woke up, she found a slashed tire and a note on her car that stated ‘Go Home,’” police said in a news release.

Authorities launched an investigation into the possible hate crime and found the confrontation Lewis detailed never occurred.

She later admitted to police that she had written the note and placed it on her own car.

Lewis was arrested Friday and released on an appearance ticket. She is expected to appear in court on Sept. 24.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/09/16/story-teens-shouting-trump-2016-leaving-go-home-note-all-lies-woman-admits.html

Alex said...

"I thought he might inadvertently kill me," said Ford, who works as a research psychologist in California. "He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing."

"Inadvertently" kill me and "trying" to attack me.

Ford claimed she was able to escape to a bathroom and then outside of the house when Judge jumped into the fray and sent everyone in the room "tumbling."

Earlier in her statement she said it was Kavanaugh, Judge and her in the room. Instead of saying "everyone", wouldn't a better choice of wording be him.

Alex

tania cadogan said...

Off topic

A man was indicted in the kidnapping and killing of two young Arizona girls who went missing in 2012 and 2014.

Christopher Matthew Clements, 36, was indicted a day earlier by a grand jury on murder and kidnapping charges in the deaths of Isabel Celis, 6, and Maribel Gonzales, 13. Clements was being held at the Maricopa County Jail “on unrelated charges,” KOLD reported.

Celis went missing from her Tucson home in April 2012, and her body was discovered in rural southern Arizona in March 2017.

Gonzales’ body was discovered in June 2014 in the Avra Valley community near Tucson.

Authorities did not immediately say what prompted Clements’ arrest but said he provided information in 2017 that led to the discovery of Celis’ remains.

Records showed Clements had a few addresses in Tucson between 2007 and 2012. One of the addresses included an apartment about 2 miles from Celis’ home, KVOA reported.

KOLD reported Clements was slated to be extradited to Tucson from the Maricopa County Jail.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/09/15/man-indicted-on-murder-charges-in-kidnapping-and-deaths-two-young-arizona-girls.html


I wonder what evidence they have to link him to the Isabel Celis murder?

Peter's analysis of the 911 call
http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2012/10/sergio-celis-statement-analysis-of.html

Peter's post after Isabel went missing
http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2012/10/sergio-celis-statement-analysis-of.html

And from Karyn Gough Thursday, September 13, 2012
http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2012/09/isabel-celis-comprehensive-analysis.html

Peter's post after Isabel's remains were found
http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2017/10/sergio-celis-father-of-murdered-isabel.html

tania cadogan said...

cont.

Both parents took polygraphs and likely failed since LE refused to make the findings public and the parents refused to say the result either.
Had they passed then the parents would in all probabilty been shouting it from the rooftops.
Silence from LE and the parents in this case cannot be a good sign.
If they were innocent then LE and the parents would have announced it, to clear the parents and to encourage the public to think if they had seen anything suspicious or if someone the knew was acting strangely.

We do know sergio was banned from seeing his sons for 2 weeks which could be indicative of issues in the household.

If he is guilty of her homicide, i wonder what could explain her father's giggling during the 911 call and other unexpected language and behavior during the call and subsequent interviews?
How did he manage to get her out the house?
Given cadaverine was detected in the house, why did he remove her body from the house rather than leave in situ?
Why would he risk staying in the house for a minimum 90 mins, long enough to leave detectable cadaverine?
Did he leave and then return?
If he did, why?

Cadaver dogs apparently reacted to the presence of cadaverine which means that unless someone had died in the house previously, that Isabel had lain dead in the house for at least 90 mins before removal as cadaver dogs can detect the smell of cadaverine a minimum of 90 mins, long before the smell becomes detectable by human noses (and again in warmer climates it could possible be even sooner)
What abductor would abduct a corpse from a house?
He may have removed the actual body which would make solving the case slightly harder as in detecting manner of death and also possible traces of DNA or other evidence,they then have the more difficult problem of disposing of a corpse without being seen,to an area where said corpse may not be found easily or immediately.
The problem then increases not only the likelihood of being caught with said corpse, the problem also of spreading blood, hair,fibers or other body fluids in the vehicle used to transport said corpse, leaving ones own DNA, hairs fibers from clothing, coverings used to conceal said corpse and fibers and other materials from the vehicle.
It would be far easier and allows for a quick escape to leave the corpse in situ, also dead bodies are literally a dead weight and a real pain to move around from say a bed to a trolley and that takes 2 of you or,depending on their size(and yours) maybe more.
If he killed Isabel why remove her corpse from the house risking being caught due to staying longer and trying to carry a dead weight from the house and immediate area without being caught, especially with dogs in the house.
Isabel's remains were not found by happenstance which begs the question who told the police where she was?
Was is in person?
Was it via a phone call or other method?
Was it from a named person or anonymous?

Habundia Awareness said...

"I did get a job, I start on Monday."

Did he had this interview for a job planned before her disappearance? Or did he arranged for it after she disappeared? I think (not based on facts) that most people don't think about 'getting back to work' (go on interview to apply for a job) when their loved one is missing, unless there is reason to make 'go back to work' more important ('the good guy') then trying to find out what happened with their loved one (because they already know)

“I was relieved, and in a way, I’m happy. I pray that the situation opens up a lot of especially young women’s eyes to the dangers that are out there and that you think twice before you get involved with certain people.”

Why do I think this wording is strange for a mother? Why would you be 'in a way happy', while your child is missing and while you are aware that your child was 'involved with certain people' that you think 'especially young women' need to be aware of ('open up their eyes for)?
Why does this mean 'strong human empathy noted'?

"And then we just started getting into a little bickering and arguing, and then she got upset and then she left.”

And then (3x) (missing information).....what happened between 'not doing anything' and 'started getting into a little bickering and arguing'? What happened to cause her to 'get upset'? What happened before she 'left'?

Buckley said...

Tania- News reports said a scent (search and rescue) dog and a cadaver dog were in the house and one hit on something. I can’t find an article where LE confirms it was the cadaver dog which hit.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-arizona-missing-girls-20180916-story.html

“Magnus and other officials held a news conference to announce the indictment. But they declined to answer questions from reporters and did not disclose how the girls died or what prompted authorities to investigate Clements in the killings, except to say that the FBI in 2017 learned Clements might have information about the death of Celis.

He then provided information to authorities that led to the discovery of Celis' remains, Magnus said. Investigators later discovered additional pieces of evidence, but they did not describe Saturday what they had found.”

tania cadogan said...

Thanks Buckley xx

Saint Theresa said...

Off topic

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6174177/Woman-charged-degree-assault-purposefully-projecting-bowels-cop.html

I’m surprised she didn’t say 3 trump supporting teens, lol. But it’s not always 3, by rule I believe. Such a cry for attention and exposes her racism. Yes. Poc can And are very racist. As a matter of fact I think if there was a way to do an honest poll More poc would be racist than the brainwashed, indoctrinated white would be racist.

Foolsfeedonfolly said...

"I’m not going to ask any questions. I’m not going to make assumptions."

Both of these are true statements. He's not going to ask any questions-he has no need to. He knows what happened, where, how, and why. He's not going to make any assumptions-he doesn't need to assume anything because he knows the facts.

elf said...

I just don't know about this suspect. Plauaible I guess but what about Isabel parents?

Hey Jude said...

Elf - the analyses are still good, and the murder charges don't make the Celis parents any more believable than they ever have been.

I listened to all their 911 calls and interviews yesterday - they left me wondering if Sergio Celis ever had a soul, and if Rebecca Celis lost or sold hers. I' think it will turn out that there is some connection between the accused and the family.

I was struck by how full of doors Rebecca Celis' language is in some interviews.

Willow said...

@Habundia

"Did he had this interview for a job planned before her disappearance? Or did he arranged for it after she disappeared?"

What proof do we have he's got a job? Instead, we do have proof of him being capable of lying.
He may know that he does not have a job, and nevertheless he says he has. He needs that sentence as a tool.

The topic of him as unemployed is for him of top priority.

Perhaps his unempoyment was one of the points with the victim in their last discussion, too.

The perpetrator knows he has intentionally lived with the victim parasitically. The result was a little bickering and she left and he says he wants her back.

How can he get her back? It's not possible in physical reality, but he does not need to have her back for real.
He needs to win the argument about his unmployment.
Now that she is silent, he gets to say the last word.
"I did get a job. I start on Monday."

If anyone thinks of directing any flak toward him, about anything, think again. "I did get a job."

There is always leakage in what a perpetrator-personality says:

He does not yet have in his possession that which he is advertizing about.
He wants us to trust in good faith in his word about something that he is going to do in the future.
Today is not Monday yet. Nevertheless a predator wants to capitalize on his word today.
He is entitled to be credited now for something that he has not yet fulfilled.



Peter Hyatt said...

Isabel Celis case: stay tuned!

Lettice said...

Cute girl. What was she doing with that hideous beast, who looks like he loves isis?

tania cadogan said...


Saint Theresa said...

Off topic

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6174177/Woman-charged-degree-assault-purposefully-projecting-bowels-cop.html

I’m surprised she didn’t say 3 trump supporting teens, lol. But it’s not always 3, by rule I believe. Such a cry for attention and exposes her racism. Yes. Poc can And are very racist. As a matter of fact I think if there was a way to do an honest poll More poc would be racist than the brainwashed, indoctrinated white would be racist.


Sadly people of color are notoriously racist against their own kind.
Light skinned are extremely racist racist against those who are darker skinned.
They regard the darker skinned to be stupid, uneducated, lesser people.
This can be seen clearly in South Africa where skin lightening creams are sold everywhere and lighter skinned people get higher paying jobs and are seen as more professional whilst darker skinned are seen in the lowest paying jobs, cleaners, porters.
Even in America, the lighter skinned mock the darker skinned seeing them as nobodies and even as slave stock, this going back to those freshly brought in from Africa being very dark and only good for fieldwork whilst those with lighter skins worked in the household.
Dark equaled stupid, light equaled smart.

We see skin lightening in celebrities Beyonce, Rhianna, heck even Mel B seems to have gotten seriously lightened and when picked up claims are made it is lighting or blamed on the media.
White seems to be the new black.

Even in India we see their gods and goddesses aren't even brown they are light skinned or even blue.
Why are people ashamed to be their natural color?