The missing persons prosecutor tells us that he checked the videos where Ricardo appears transporting something on his motorcycle. I found out that my daughter was missing on June 23rd. She lived with her partner Ricardo Reyes Sequera. They told us something about a Facebook page, and we went in and it directly sent us to a WhatsApp message.
We started asking questions, right?, to the virtual advisor. My daughter was a very hard-working person, very attached to her daughter. Wait, come here right now. We’re leaving now . She was 21 years old with many dreams ahead of her, and one of them was to be a lawyer. She lived with her partner.
They had been together for about 4 years. Do you want it? Okay, I’ll send it to you . Here, take this. Well, you have to grab it if you want it. My granddaughter just turned two. Before my granddaughter was born, she was a somewhat sad person, and when my granddaughter was born, she changed completely, right? This, he becomes a mother and protector.
My daughter, like many girls today, I know, is a victim of violence, sometimes by her own partner. He made several attempts, didn’t he? They wanted to separate, but they never could, right? One woman who had been threatened by him said she was afraid he would take my granddaughter away from her. Ricardo called me to tell me that my daughter hadn’t shown up for work since Saturday.
Then I told him that couldn’t be possible. I tell you this because my daughter never missed work, she was always very punctual. I said to him, “Do you know where my daughter is? Tell me where my daughter is.” She says, “No, ma’am.” He says, “I don’t know where his daughter is. And I realized his daughter wasn’t there.
I woke up in the early morning when the baby started crying, saying she wanted to breastfeed. Since Saturday, I had gone to his workplace to ask, but they told me no, that they hadn’t seen her. So he was n’t planning on reporting anything, but he felt pressured. That happened early Friday morning, and continued through Saturday and Sunday.
He didn’t report anything until Monday. Lali is designed for people who aren’t lawyers, who are looking for initial advice and don’t have the financial resources to pay for direct legal counsel. It will give them a broad overview of what needs to be done. The case of Juan Carlos Chino and his family was initially relevant because Tlali directs them directly to call 911.
So, that already alerts Tlali that there’s an important issue that needs to be addressed. If Tlali has already determined that this matter needs or requires the involvement of a person, let’s say, a human being, From a human, he forwarded our phone number to them. He went to see my daughter’s father to tell him that my daughter had gone out partying with her friends.
It’s something else entirely, ma’am. I’m going to look for my daughter-in-law in the underworld. What’s up, Mil? Where did she go? Where are the checkpoints? And that supposedly they were going to let us know on Sunday, but they didn’t tell us anything, because one of their horses had died , that’s why they hadn’t come to tell us.
I tell him, “Well, so they prioritize the death of a horse over telling us that my daughter was missing.” by legal artists. Uh, we are advised by lawyer Yasmín and she accompanies us to the DIF to make a request to have my granddaughter presented. After these summonses left by the DIF, only Ricardo’s parents appear before these municipal authorities, where they present the little girl and at that moment in the municipal authorities it is requested that she remain under the custody of her maternal grandparents. We started to think the worst.
Since my daughter’s partner no longer shows up with my granddaughter, it is her parents who show up with my granddaughter. We began to have doubts as to whether there had been a disappearance. He hasn’t shown his face since then. I’m starting to think and believe that they might have buried my daughter under the horse.
That’s why we needed the prosecutor’s office to conduct a search and a raid , right? On the land that is just two houses away from where my daughter’s partner’s parents live. That’s why they do the search, they dig up the horse and they found nothing. I find it very strange. I told him, “What a coincidence that my daughter disappears and a horse dies.
Something was done to my daughter. The missing persons prosecutor told us that, based on the security camera footage from near my daughter’s house, it didn’t show her having left. We started to fear the worst. They requested additional footage, not just from the 21st, the night of the 21st, but from several days.
They realized that what he had claimed about my daughter leaving was false. The missing persons prosecutor mentioned that he checked the videos where Ricardo is seen transporting something on his motorcycle, and then he arrives at his house next door and says he’s going to the property where the horse was. The prosecutor told us there would be another search.
I think that was on July 31st, but they searched the same place where they had unearthed the horse. They searched, and around 1 or 2 in the afternoon, we saw a van arrive from the traffic light. That’s when I realized something was wrong.” A small bag. And we, well, I imagined the worst. How am I supposed to get my daughter’s body out? I mean, in a little box like that.
They told us yes, they had recovered a body, but they said they were n’t sure it was my daughter’s because of how long she had been buried there , that DNA tests had to be done . After that, they were going to tell us, or confirm, if it was my body, and they told me, “We can’t just tell you like that until we have the results, and those can take anywhere from one to six months.
” And I told them, “I’m not willing to wait that long to find out.” I told the prosecutor—we were sitting there that day— I said, “Prosecutor, look at me, see my desperation. I need you to know what I don’t know.” ” Tell me, please, have some humanity towards me and tell me if she is my daughter, please.” He turned to look at everyone there in the prosecutor’s office and said to me, “I have information that I shouldn’t tell you until we have the results, but I have to tell you this.
” And he said to me, “Indeed, your daughter’s death is not my daughter. The protocol for the investigation of femicides, when it is a violent death, which in this case it clearly was, would have to immediately open an investigation file for the crime of femicide, which in this case did not happen because supposedly there was no determined cause of death.
” However, a violent cause of death was evident. Well, I felt anger. How is this possible? I mean, having all the evidence, we went to the prosecutor’s office in Temisco to make them listen to us. Uh-huh. So that justice would be done for my daughter, right? So that they would pass that off as femicide. Well, they promised us they would support us, but it was just talk until we came to protest on November 13th here on Paseo de la Reforma and closed the avenue.
Mailin’s family protesting or Mailin’s family with access to advice with good support from feminist collectives. It wasn’t suicide, it was femicide, and the dissemination of information through social media by our colleagues has been very important in that today, not only has Mailin been located, but a case has also been opened for the crime of femicide.
The cause of death has already been determined and the case file was subsequently opened. What was the cause? Suffocation. There is already a wanted poster, there is already a person allegedly responsible for committing the crime. Today we are fighting to find the person responsible. In Morelos, the prosecutor’s office cannot locate him.
He took my daughter and I’m not at peace. So hopefully the prosecution will do its job, and those who are hiding him, hopefully they will turn him over. Ricardo is missing. We know nothing about him. We don’t know where he is. He’s a fugitive, he killed my daughter, he left his own daughter without a mother, and if you see him, report him.
Having the advisor with us, right? The legal advisors who are helping us and have helped us have n’t charged us a single penny because we are not the only victims, and there are also victims of the prosecutor’s office, right? From their actions. I don’t know what we would have done if we hadn’t found that path.
Well, my dream with Tlali is that anyone can have access to quality legal advice, to disinterested legal advice. We also know that the authorities are overwhelmed; however, the authorities have an obligation to safeguard women’s right to live free from violence.
QQ4 Bob Dylan and Keith Richards have been close friends for nearly 40 years. The friendship began on a live television program in November of 1986 in the 11 seconds after Bob Dylan called Keith Richards music derivative on camera. Keith Richard’s response to that assessment, one sentence said without anger, without performance, with the specific directness of a man who has nothing to prove and knows it made Bob Dylan laugh.
Then made Bob Dylan go quiet. then made Bob Dylan say two words that people who know Bob Dylan say he almost never said to anyone. This is the story of those 11 seconds and the 40 years that followed them. The program was a live music interview special broadcast on an American network on the evening of November 3rd, 1986. The format was simple.
Two musicians, a host, an hour of conversation about music and the state of it. The producers had assembled the pairing of Bob Dylan and Keith Richards with the specific calculation of television producers who understand that two people with equally strong and potentially incompatible views about what music is and what it should do will produce better television than two people who agree about everything.
The calculation was correct, though not in the way the producers had anticipated. Bob Dylan was 45 years old in November of 1986. Bob Dylan had released Empire Burlesque the previous year and had been on the road for most of the intervening period as part of the True Confessions tour with Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers.
Bob Dylan was in November of 1986 in one of the most prolific and restless phases of a career that had consisted almost entirely of prolific and restless phases. A career that had moved through folk, rock, country, gospel, and back again, that had been declared finished at least six times by the music press, and at each time continued with the serene indifference of a river to the opinions of people standing on its banks.
Bob Dylan had been redefining what music could be. Since 1962, Bob Dylan had invented and reinvented himself so many times that reinvention had become his defining characteristic, not in the superficial sense of a performer changing costumes, but in the deeper sense of a musician who had never allowed his work to settle into a form that could be anticipated or categorized from the outside.
Bob Dylan understood influence and originality and the relationship between them better than almost anyone alive in 1986. Bob Dylan had spent 24 years thinking carefully and specifically about where music came from and where music was going and what it meant that those two things were always in constant conversation with each other.
Keith Richards was 42 years old in November of 1986. Keith Richards had been playing guitar professionally since 1962. Keith Richards had built a career on a foundation of American blues and rhythm and blues. A foundation that Keith Richards had studied with the systematic devotion of someone who understood that the tradition he was building on was not incidental to the music he was making, but essential to it.
that you could not understand what Keith Richards did without understanding where Keith Richards had come from and what Keith Richards had been listening to since he was a teenager in Dartford with American Import Records and a secondhand guitar and no teacher except the recordings themselves. Keith Richards had never pretended otherwise. Keith Richards had in fact spent considerable energy across his career making the lineage explicit, naming the artists, citing the recordings, insisting on the acknowledgement of influence that the mainstream music
industry had a long history of suppressing or ignoring or crediting to the wrong people. If anything, Keith Richards was more transparent about his sources than most musicians of his generation. Keith Richards had always said openly that the Rolling Stones came directly from the blues, that Muddy Waters and Robert Johnson and the specific tradition of the Mississippi Delta were not background influences, but foundational ones.
The music Keith Richards made was in direct and sustained conversation with that tradition, something Keith Richards considered not a limitation, but a responsibility and a form of respect. The interview had been running for 8 minutes when the host asked Bob Dylan about the current state of rock and roll.
Bob Dylan answered with the density and the indirection that characterized Bob Dylan’s responses to direct questions, turning the question over, approaching it from an unexpected angle, finding his way to what he actually thought through a series of observations that moved like a river rather than a road. Bob Dylan was not a straightforward interview subject.
Bob Dylan had been asked about rock and roll in hundreds of interviews across 24 years and had developed the habit of treating the question as an invitation to think out loud rather than a request for a prepared position. The producer Gerald Sherman said afterward that in the first 8 minutes of the interview, he had been slightly anxious, not because anything was going wrong, but because nothing was going anywhere in particular yet.
The interview had the feeling of two conversations happening simultaneously. Bob Dylan’s internal one and the external one visible to the cameras. And Gerald Sherman was not certain in those first eight minutes that the two conversations would converge into something. Bob Dylan talked about influence. Bob Dylan talked about originality.
Bob Dylan talked about the difference between music that absorbed a tradition and transformed it and music that absorbed a tradition and reproduced it. And then Bob Dylan made his assessment. And then Bob Dylan said with the precision of a man making a musical assessment rather than a personal judgment that the Rolling Stones work, and Bob Dylan was specific, naming Keith Richards as the guitarist whose approach he was discussing was derivative in a way that Bob Dylan found limiting.
Bob Dylan said it without hostility. Bob Dylan said it as a technical observation about the relationship between source material and the work that came from it. Bob Dylan said that Keith Richards played the blues the way the blues had already been played, rather than using the blues as a starting point for something that had not yet been played.
Keith Richards had been listening to this with the specific attention Keith Richards gave to things being said about music by people who knew music. Keith Richards did not interrupt. Keith Richards did not shift in his chair or display any of the visible signals of a person preparing a defensive response. Keith Richards listened to Bob Dylan’s complete observation all the way to its conclusion without interrupting and without displaying any visible signal of preparing a response.
Then Keith Richards said one sentence. The sentence was not a rebuttal. The sentence did not defend Keith Richards music or argue for its originality or challenge Bob Dylan’s characterization of what the blues meant in the context of rock and roll. The sentence was something else entirely, something that required a specific kind of confidence to say.
The confidence of a person who has spent long enough thinking about the same things as the person they are talking to that they can locate the exact point where their thinking diverges and say something useful about that point rather than simply defending their own position. The sentence acknowledged everything Bob Dylan had said, the assessment, the distinction Bob Dylan was drawing, the specific musical concern underlying the observation, and then turned it 90°.
Keith Richards took Bob Dylan’s own framework, the one Bob Dylan had used to analyze Keith Richards relationship to the blues tradition, and applied it back to Bob Dylan’s work with the same precision Bob Dylan had used to apply it to Keith Richards. Spare aimed. The sentence asked Bob Dylan something about Bob Dylan’s own music, about the relationship between Bob Dylan’s sources and Bob Dylan’s output that Bob Dylan had not been asked on television before.
The sentence did not attack. The sentence illuminated. Bob Dylan laughed. The laugh was not the polite laugh of someone responding to a joke. The laugh was the involuntary laugh of someone who has been genuinely surprised. The specific kind of surprise that a person of exceptional intelligence experiences when someone else’s intelligence exceeds their expectations.
Bob Dylan laughed for 4 seconds. Then Bob Dylan stopped laughing. Then Bob Dylan was quiet for 3 seconds in the way that Bob Dylan was quiet when Bob Dylan was thinking rather than performing thought. Then Bob Dylan said, “You’re right.” The producer in the booth, a man named Gerald Sherman, who had been working in television for 14 years, said afterward that in 14 years of live television production, he had never heard Bob Dylan say those two words in a public forum.
Gerald Sherman said he had worked with Bob Dylan on two previous occasions and had observed Bob Dylan in numerous other contexts and that you’re right was not a phrase that Bob Dylan deployed easily or often because Bob Dylan had spent 24 years being right about music in ways that other people eventually caught up with. And the experience of being right ahead of everyone else does not generally produce a man who says you’re right readily when someone else makes a point.
The host of the program, a journalist named Patricia Wells, who had been interviewing musicians for 12 years, said afterward that the 11 seconds between Bob Dylan’s assessment and Bob Dylan saying, “You’re right,” were the most extraordinary 11 seconds of television she had been present for. Patricia Wells said that what she witnessed in those 11 seconds was not a debate or a confrontation or a celebrity exchange of competing opinions.
Patricia Wells said what she witnessed was one musician recognizing another musician as an equal, which was in the specific context of Bob Dylan in 1986, not something that happened in public very often. The interview continued for another 42 minutes after those 11 seconds. The conversation between Bob Dylan and Keith Richards in the remaining 42 minutes was described by everyone who watched it as fundamentally different from the first 8 minutes.
The host, Patricia Wells, who had been conducting music interviews for 12 years and understood the difference between the performance of conversation and actual conversation, said that at approximately the 9-minute mark, something shifted in the studio. That the formal interview, architecture dissolved, and what replaced it was something less structured and more genuine.
Bob Dylan and Keith Richards talked about influence and originality and the blues and what it meant to build on a tradition without being consumed by it. They talked about specific recordings and specific musicians with the specificity of two people who had spent their entire adult lives thinking about these things and rarely found another person who had thought about them with equivalent care.
They talked about where music came from and where music was going and whether those two questions were actually one question or two. Patricia Wells said afterward that she had asked approximately four questions in the remaining 42 minutes because Bob Dylan and Keith Richards did not require questions. They required only a room and a camera and the shared understanding that what they were saying together was worth recording carefully.
She said it was the best interview she had ever conducted and that she had conducted the smallest part of it. After the program, Bob Dylan and Keith Richards were in the corridor outside the studio when the host Patricia Wells passed them. Patricia Wells said she did not stop because she did not want to interrupt.
She observed them for approximately 30 seconds from a distance. She said they were talking with the ease of people who had known each other for years rather than people who had met for the first time 2 hours earlier. She said that something had shifted between them during the broadcast that the broadcast had made permanent rather than temporary.
She continued down the corridor and did not look back. She said in her account of that evening that she had decided in that moment not to interrupt the conversation because some conversations are more valuable than any question a journalist might ask and that the conversation she had observed for 30 seconds in the corridor outside the studio was one of them.
She had been a music journalist for 12 years. She recognized the difference. Bob Dylan and Keith Richards have maintained their friendship across four decades. They have appeared together at various events, most significantly at the concert for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1995, where people who were present described them as inseparable for most of the evening, occupying the same corner of the backstage area and talking with the concentrated attention of people who only have a limited amount of time together and intend to use it
well. Bob Dylan has spoken about Keith Richards in interviews with the specific thoughtful care that Bob Dylan reserves for musicians whose work Bob Dylan considers genuinely important rather than merely culturally prominent. Keith Richards has spoken about Bob Dylan in similar terms with the specific respect of someone who recognizes in another person a commitment to music that goes deeper than career.
Neither Bob Dylan nor Keith Richards has made a public statement specifically about how the friendship began or about the November 1986 interview. Bob Dylan has not mentioned the 11 seconds. Keith Richards has not mentioned the sentence. The interview exists in the archive. The 11 seconds are there. The laugh is there. The two words are there.
What is also there for anyone who watches the interview from its beginning and pays attention to the shift that happens at the 9-minute mark is the specific moment when two people who thought they were appearing on a television program discovered they were actually talking to each other. What Keith Richards said in that one sentence has never been officially reported.
The people who were in the studio that evening, Gerald Sherman, Patricia Wells, the floor crew, the two camera operators, the makeup artist who was watching from the side of the set, have described the sentence in consistent terms. They have described its effect. They have described Bob Dylan’s laugh and Bob Dylan’s silence and Bob Dylan’s two words.
They have not repeated the sentence itself in the specific understanding that the sentence was said between two musicians on a television program and that its power resided in the specific context of that exchange and would not survive removal from it intact. What can be said is this. Keith Richards said something to Bob Dylan about Bob Dylan’s music that used Bob Dylan’s own observation about Keith Richards as its starting point and arrived somewhere that Bob Dylan had not anticipated.
Keith Richards turned Bob Dylan’s assessment 90° and showed Bob Dylan something about the music they had both spent their lives making that Bob Dylan recognized immediately as true. And Bob Dylan said, “You’re right.” Two words said by Bob Dylan in public on live television in 1986 to Keith Richards in response to a single sentence Keith Richards had said about music.
Two words that Gerald Sherman, who had worked with Bob Dylan on two previous occasions, said he had never heard Bob Dylan say in a public forum. Two words that Patricia Wells, who had been interviewing musicians for 12 years, said were the most significant two words she had heard in those 12 years. Not because of their content, but because of who said them and what it cost to say them and what it meant that Keith Richards had produced them in 11 seconds from a conversation that began with Bob Dylan calling Keith Richards’s music derivative. And Keith Richards and
Bob Dylan have been close friends for nearly 40 years. The sentence did its work in 11 seconds on the evening of November 3rd, 1986. The work has been ongoing ever since. If this story moved you, subscribe and leave a comment below. Have you ever said something to someone that turned a potential disagreement into an unexpected and lasting connection? Tell us about it in the comments below.
Share this with someone who needs to be reminded that the right sentence said at the right moment can completely change the entire direction of a relationship. Ring the notification bell for more untold stories about the extraordinary human beings behind music’s greatest legends.
Disclaimer : This content may be created by AI for entertainment purposes. Any resemblance to real persons, events, or places is coincidental.
