Saturday, October 6, 2012

Sergio Celis 911 Call Evidence of Scripting

There is linguistic evidence that points to scripting in the 911 call made by Sergio Celis into the disappearance of his daughter, Isabel.  

The lack of urgency on the part of both parents tells us the same thing past tense verbs tell us, and the same thing a cadaver dog hit tells us:

Isabel is dead

"Hello, I want to report a missing person" said, Sergio

 The father of a kidnapped child is not likely to start his call with "hello." 

Note:  this is not expected by anyone in a hurry to get emergency information to an operator. 

The father of a kidnapped child is not likely to refer to her as a "person."

Please note that a "person" is gender neutral and unidentified.  

"I believe she was abducted."

The word "abducted" is conclusionary, as if to explain what should have been a blunt trauma mystery.  Instead, it sounds like a scripted story where he is using language from a television story.  Was she just "missing" or does he wish to communicate an "abduction"?  Note "abduction" and not "kidnapping" by the father.  

He gave a weak assertion with the word "believed":  he would know, for fact, that his daughter was "missing" but not "abducted." 

He is then asked why he believed she was abducted:

"I have no idea."

This is a give away that this call was contrived and rehearsed.  How would he have no idea when it was what he reported?  He expressed his belief in abduction but was unable to give a single reason why (including that she was not there and the window was open)  

It is likely that he was not prepared to answer this question.  He may have thought that his report of her being gone would be enough, and he was not ready for this. 

Even as he was just going with his story he has to tell them that he was just on the other side of the wall watching the Diamond Backs baseball game.  He even reports what he did not hear, signaling something very important for us. Then he says "we woke up" changed to "I woke up", with analysis concluding:  deception indicated.  

 The script continues as planned.  

911 Operator:   Is mom there also? 

S. CELIS: She had just left for work. I just called her, and I told her to get her butt home.

This is a critical point of the script. 

"She had just left for work" has the word, "left", which is point of sensitivity, 70% likely due to rushing, time, traffic, but 30% likely related to missing serious information.  Given the situation of missing child, my bet is that her "leaving" was a critical part of this story, as per agreed between the parents.  

If you are new to Statement Analysis, search the blog for teaching on the word "left" or "departed" when used as a connecting verb between two places.  There is always missing information here. 

"I was in the living room and went to the kitchen" is a very straight forward statement.  But look at the same wording where the subject's mind remains in the living room, where something happened:

"I was in the living room, left the living room, and went into the kitchen."

The point of leaving is sensitive to the subject.  When I interview and hear this, my first question is "were you rushed?" but when the subject says "no" I recognize that there is a story there; each and every time, that the subject has not shared.  It could be anything at all.  I have heard things such as there was an argument in the living room, to assaults.  It is the "leaving" that is sensitive. 

Here in the 911 call, it is critical to Sergio that he report that Becky left. 

Question for Analysis:  Is the 'leaving' critical to Becky?

Is Becky part of this ruse?

911 operator:  Who noticed her gone?

Becky:  "My husband. I went to work this morning at 7AM and, um, I just, and I didn't even come, and check on her.  I should have come and checked on her."  

For Becky, it is important to report that she went to work and give the time.  
Next, note that she reports what she did not do:  "come" and check on her, with "I should have come and..." repeated.  "Come" where?  This call was made from home.  Where was she that she should have come home to check on her?  This confusion in language, along with her extreme nervousness in trying to carry out this ruse, cause her to be confused. 

Becky Celis, a mother with a likely substance abuse issue (Fox News) made sure she quickly (priority) told 911 that she was not home, and when Isabel was reported missing, remained silent, against every maternal instinct created, for 5 days until the media pressured her into crying out to Isabel.  

When she gave her media interview on her "kidnapped" child, the word "kidnap" in any form, did not enter her vocabulary. 

Sergio and Becky Celis have conspired together to cover up whatever it is that has happened to Isabel. 

While talking heads point out the difference in tone between them on the scripted and fake 911 call, it is her own words that give her away. 

It was a priority for Becky Celis to communicate to the 911 operator that she was not home.  

This points to alibi building.

Much is made of his chuckle.  I think it was  a nervous chuckle, a guilty slip that his fake confident tone belies:  he thought to himself that he got away with it.  This is not Statement Analysis, but an opinion only. 

That Isabel is dead, and that the parents know it (she is 'dead' to them, if they gave her away) and that they are, both, withholding information, is Statement Analysis. 

The lack of urgency, the lack of searching and crying out to Isabel, is Behavioral Analysis. 


Ivy said...

The emphasis on Becky having left for work on the part of both Becky and Sergio stuck out to me as well. Also, Sergio seemed focus on his sons' involvement in the searching, their finding the window open, etc. To me this stood out as an attempt to point to witness his "discovery" that his daughter was missing. Reminds me of Billie's elaborate cell phone scheme. Also, I recall something about Drew Peterson scheming to have someone else "discover" his second wife in the tub. With all of this "we found" etc. there's the principle that you often highlight about spreading blame, but it also seems like there's some other force at work, like these people think if someone else notices their staging, no one will suspect they alone are responsible.

Ivy said...

Also, the first time I read the "I have no idea" answer I thought he took the question "why do you think she was abducted" not to mean "what have you seen that makes you think she was abducted" but "what is the reason she was abducted." His answer makes more sense if he is saying he does not know the motives of the kidnapper, but the fact that he would interpret the question this way might be telling as well.

Tania Cadogan said...

Hi ivy.

You are interpreting what you think he meant,


Look only at the words used and analyse those,
If you interpret what you think he meant, you are, in effect, analysing your own statement.

He was asked why he thought she had been abducted.
His reply was to have no idea.

This is very telling.
If you were asked why you thought your child was missing, your first response would be
"They aren't in the house, I can't find them"
You would be panicking, you would be distressed, you would be anything but calm if it were your child.
You would be demanding they get to your house, you would be thinking where they could be.
Your child would be your priority.
You would not be saying i woke up made breakfast, went to wake her up, that would be irrelevant it smacks of alibi building.

You would be shouting down the phone your child is not in their room, they aren't outside, you have family, neighbors all looking, you would be getting friends checked in case they were there.
You would have some idea why they aren't where they are supposed to be.
You would be wondering if they had gone out to play, to meet a friend, gone next door.
Abduction would not be the first thing out your mouth simply because it is so rare.
Unless doors are wide open, windows open and the screen removed or torn open, physical evidence that someone had gotten into your house without waking anyone, any pets, any alarms and taken your child, your first thought would be they are outside.
If you claimed your child had been abducte and were asked why do you think that, you would then reel off what you can see/had seen such as the window was wide open as was the screen, evidence outside the window on grass, doors were open and so on.

In cases like this think how you yourself would react and respond, if you have ever lost a child in the mall or your pet went awol, think how you reacted, what you said.
Your instinctual reaction is what innocent parents do.
Anything that differs from how you would react, what you would say as a parent should be red flagged. It doesn't necessarily mean they are being deceptive, it is that they are acting outside the norms of what would be expected and it should be notedand if you are analysing, looking to see if it is consistent or a one off.

Justme said...

When I first read the 911 operator's question I also took it to mean the REASON someone would abduct her rather than what makes you think she WAS abducted. If they did give her away and then tried to claim an abduction, I would expect him to have their handing off of Isabel to someone else on his mind. In that case he could take the question the first way, claiming not to know WHY someone would take her. Guilty knowledge leaking out? There may be other things in the call that contradict that way of looking at it, but if it stands alone, I think it could be understood either way. At least 2 of us read the question a different way. JMO

Justme said...

If he did understand the question as "Why do you think someone WOULD take her?", and he answered truthfully, he might have said, "Because we owed them money" or "Because we sold her".

Justme said...

Oops, I replied in the wrong spot. The one above should be after the one below. :-/

Anonymous said...

I've read some of the released documents, and I have to disagree with your analogy, Peter.

A dog barked around 2am (most likely time of abduction) and again around 6:30 (could happen while people are busy getting ready for their day and not expecting anything then). The glass was either broken or taken out completely (depends on what you read about who said what...something happened to the window). If it was broken, that would be loud and apparently they didn't have a burglar alarm or it just wasn't set. Or, they had no glass break in that room (typical since this rarly occurs while a family is home, but could nowadays since they enter in broad daylight).

A couple of cars with dark tinted windows was seen in the alley way a couple days prior to Isabel's abduction. Big trash day, not unusual, except that metal pickers usually drive trucks and pile up their finds. The vacant house across the street had been broken into several times, once about a week prior to the abduction.

There is no mention of their dogs barking, just of maybe a German Shepard nearby. Their dogs are small. Had gotten out recently. If they were befreinded by someone, they'd be less likely to bark, even if the owner didn't know the person. Even had they barked, small dogs are skittish and bark often and are often ignored.

The police know what they are dealing with. The bloggers and NGers will not help the situation. They called in profilers, though I found nothing about what they declared. They know what they are dealing with, though.They aren't going to let the feds run the show, and the town is too laid back to let the military police tear it up. They've had enough of the media via the Loughner fiasco.

After spending a million bucks on this one little girl, I doubt they think the family is involved. That close to the border, their funds could be spent doing other things.

And, I beleive they have a group to be "watching" instead of having them "watch" others, which obviously doesn't work.

Anonymous said...

Halft-truths, a lot of truth, and some admissions of guilt:

Get an alarm. Then they'll dismantle it. When they can't, they'll take down the phone line. Get past that;they will, too. Their hardest feat is actually getting someone separated with the only thing they have left.

Skeptical said...

I found this article on the study that Cornell University has done on the speech patterns and language differences they found in the convicted murderers they interviewed. I hope they continue.

Anonymous said...

Here is an example why they have faith in their police and little in the media and their "experts":

Anonymous said...

Because of the window!

He's a goofball. Probably always has been. That doesn't make him guilty.

Anonymous said...

I totally agree with Peter's analysis as well as Hobnob's. It's very clear, no confusion in it at all. Sergio and Becky schemed their script together. Furthermore, Becky isn't making it clear that she was even at home the night before or prior to leaving for work that morning.

Her comment "... I should have COME to check on her..."; come from WHERE, the hallway as she flew by Isabel's bedroom door, the kitchen, OR wherever she spent the previous night? When you read the statement with the view that Becky might not have been at home earlier that morning at all, their statements and the analysis starts to take on an entirely different perspective.

Sergio's comment that he called and told Becky "you need to get your butt home...", why would he need to use those exact words if she had been at home earlier and had just left? Why wouldn't he say something more like "you need to get back here from work right now, Isabel is missing!?" He would have been in a panic if Becky didn't already know Isabel wasn't there and so would she. They both would have been hysterical, but no panic? No hysteria?

Some must not be reading their statements the way I am, beginning with the 911 call and all the way through. They have definitely conspired together to hide something sinister.

Whatever the case may be, no question in my mind that these two are complicent and guilty in Isabel's disappearance and treated her disappearance as if she were dead from the beginning. They could have easily given her off to some drug dealer in exchange for drugs and money and created the dog commotion themselves when Isabel was removed from the house, whether dead or alive. Also, easily could have removed the window screen, etc., but if the cadaver dog made a hit then she's 99.99% likely dead, with little point in speculating that she was given away.

Ref the Maddy McCann disappearance, Haleigh Cummings, baby Ayla and baby Lisa, all had cadaver dog hits; with somewhat similar (though different) scenerios and lying parents even if there had been no additional evidence. Sadly, not much point in searching for a live Isabel, and the parents KNOW this; I'm sorry to say.

Peter, I think you've hit the nail on the head again on this one.

Unknown said...

They both want us to beleive Becky has JUST LEFT ...For work ...Lie..crucial lie..She has not just left for work infact as in a normal morning.There has been much frantic activity ocouring hours before Becky heads out to work.It wasnt the first time one or both of them had left the house that morrning to disspose of there Daughters lifeless corpse and any other incriminateing items of evidence.

Anonymous said...

I don't disagree with the analysis or who is responsible. Sadly, I also believe Isabel is dead at the hands of her parents. The only point Ivy and I were making was that there are two ways to hear the 911 question. Either way he is guilty, but how he answered can be understood two ways too, based on how he heard it. Either, "I don't know why I believe she was abducted" or I don't know why someone would have abducted (taken) her. The example of his "truthful" answer would more likely have been, "because she was dead and they (I, they or a relative maybe) removed her body."

Justme said...

Sorry, forgot to sign the above reply.

shayshay said...

Just a question because its the first i had heard about Becky and drugs and couldnt find anything about it from a google search or from fox news. Anyone know any info on that? It could be key

shayshay said...

Her i was at work coming out so quickly reminds me of Billie Dunns alibi building repeating "i was at work" on her 911 call aswell

Anonymous said...

OT: Amber Alert for a 10-year old girl missing in Colorado. She left for school Friday morning at 8:30 like usual apparently, went to meet friends at a nearby park and they all walk to school together from there. Jessica Ridgeway never made it to the park that morning. The school called her home but her mother who works nightshift slept through the calls and alerted police 8 hrs later when she awoke. The mother is in a custody battle with the father who lives out of state.

If her mom worked the overnight shift, was there anyone home with Jessica all night? I can't seem to find anywhere the media addresses this point. I am wondering if she even left for school at 8:30 really?

Lis said...

You have to really want to believe in them to not see that the call is scripted.

Lis said...

Once in a while I also see questions that could be taken in more than one way in these statements.

My feeling is, even if he thought the operator meant "why do you believe someone would abduct her?" he still raises a red flag by saying he has no idea. If he has jumped to the conclusion she has been abducted, he should have some idea, in response to either way he understood the question.

Lis said...

I don't know, Shayshay, I think I remember hearing Becky had a DUI in the court records, I'm not sure where else that comes from.

Anonymous said...

I remember way back in the beginning, when they started Isa's website, the times listed in the narrative that Becky left for work, arrived, didn't line up with other reports. But the time fit reality..the shift times at the hospital and when people saw mom there. I screen captured it on a laptop here. It's since been brought into line with the story reported to 911. None of the times make sense according to hospital start times and practices..add in the fact the calls are similar, stilted wording, and odd appearances ("we") and behaviors. There will be an arrest one day.

Anonymous said...

The parents speak about Isabel, as she would be in a summer camp being taken care of - instead of missing.
In the brother's 911 call, he started off with a greeting as well
than he told "someone BROKE IN and GRABBED her".
I was wondering why would he think that? Was it because of the window? Wasn't it too early even from him to conclude it was an abduction?

Apple said...

Anon 5:53,
If the 911 operator stated, "hello" or "good afternoon, this is 911" or "cheerio! This is a fine morning here today!" I still would not pause to say "hello" after learning that my child was *missing*. I would be angry and worried and crazy and getting straight to the point- my baby is missing! We need help to find her NOW!!
I disagree.

Forever Curious said...

Evidence of scripting:
911 Operator: Is mom there also?

S. CELIS: She had just left for work. I just called her, and I told her to get her butt home.

The question is asked in the present tense. Is the mom there, as in is she there right now? The normal answer would be no, and maybe throw in I just called her and she's on the way. But what S. does is go to the past tense and talk about not where she is now but where she allegedly was when he allegedly discovered an alleged abduction of a person/child who happens to be his daughter. That is a huge red flag to me.

Anonymous said...

There was talk early on that Becky has a prescription pill problem...apparently children services had been recently involved with the family( before the 'abduction') and if I remember correctly there was an article I read online that linked the two in someone had alerted DHHS to the fact that there was an addicted and possibly neglectful dynamic within the household. If true it opens a lot of potential options as to what ultimately happened to Isabel...none of them good unfortunately. Jen

deb said...

I have no doubt they did it and why they are continuing to get away with it is par for the course but I just want to know how she died- would beckey have really covered up for her husband if she died being sexually abused? I find that really hard to believve- unless he told her it was due to soemthing else. Main question is tho- how could the mom have been ok- by that 911 call- Ok and on board with cover up- which she obviously was. That would mean that she knew isabel's fate days earlier- and that the faux-abduction night had been pre-planned days - at least- in advance. So, I think it rules out accident or unexpected death. The Ramseys were a lot less composed by the time of report and police involvement- making theirs seem more like accident. Becky and husband- were stone cold- which implies- she was "taken away"-and it was expected.

Anonymous said...

TUCSON - Five months since she disappeared from her family's eastside home, there is still no sign of Isabel Celis.

The manhunt for the then 6-year-old has scaled back but a team of investigators is devoted to her case full time.

Prayers,faith in God, and community support is keeping the Celis family going. They gave News 4 a tour of little Isa's redecorated room. Her father Sergio says, "She wanted a purple room, not very dark but I want a purple room."

Her mother Becky says, "She came home and said I want pink and purple polka dots Mom."

Isa's brother is placing the new dresser in his little sister's room. The new bed is filled with religious icons, stuffed animals, and cards. All for the day when Isa returns.

Her father says "I can't wait for her to see it and if she happens to see it on the news, just for her to know what we've done for her that we haven't forgotten her that we're waiting for her."

Her mother added "I know that she's gonna just lose it for that little second and that's what I want to see her face."

It's that vision that's carryied them through these challenging months of not knowing why she's missing.

"It's just one big emotion of sadness, frustration and anger," Becky said. "I know she's out there somewhere. I know it, I know it, I know it. We just have to find her. That's my mother instinct."

Every night the entire Celis family prays the rosary to the Virgin Mary. A gift from their parish priest Father Miguel, and Bishop Gerald Kicanas.

"They said that we can hold onto her until Isabel came home and so we have her there and have a candle burning usually and we have Isa's picture there."

"There isn't a doubt in my mind or in my heart or in my boys' hearts that she is alive and that she will come home, absolutely."

Tucson police tell News 4 there is nothing they can share with the public at this time.

But Isa's family continues to ask for the public's help with information and prayers.