PART ONE OF A FOUR-PART SERIES
‘where the missing person’s car was parked’
INTRODUCTION:
Criticisms, no more criticisms – with over fifty years in policing and investigations, the last ten years almost solely concentrating on missing persons, I have identified gaps in most cases. However, I am generally not overly critical, why? Because I understand reality and the limitations and pressures in which police work.
I also understand that it is the front-line officer who is usually the target for criticism, which is often double-barrelled, with the full-choke second barrel hit coming from superiors who ironically set the standard of operational resources and training, which are a major contributor in influencing the errors of judgement or investigative gaps highlighted. (I will briefly raise some of the management responsibilities in Part 4 of this series - to come later).
True to the often hectic nature of an emergency call, this is only a brief foray into what is sometimes a journey into a complex and evolving case where a person has been reported missing in a bush or wilderness area.
Ordinarily to cover this subject in its entirety, we would have to discuss a whole range of topics, including communication, investigative senses and sciences, biases, and the depths of analytical thinking. However, this is a very basic briefing only, and the in-depth narrative on those and other related topics will be left for another day.
Also, in order to put this into a realistic perspective, the points and considerations raised here are for ‘The Perfect World’ scenario and we all know that there is no such thing as a ‘Perfect World’. However, the points I do raise, are in the main identified gaps from just one high-profile missing person case. Gaps which have been similarly identified in other cases in many jurisdictions, in many countries, over many years.
PART 1: FIRST RESPONSE – The Gaps in the first 24 hours
CAMEO SCENARIO
A family member is at a trail-head car park and is reporting her husband missing as an overdue hiker. It is late afternoon; the hiker had set out alone for an early morning four-hour hike along a wide and navigable trail in the heavily forested ranges. He was extremely well equipped, with GPS, phone, food, and water.
In this case the call-taker took the basic details and despatched a police unit to attend. (The reporting family member heard a supervisor in the background comment that her husband had got himself lost). Sometime later a uniformed police unit arrived, and a police helicopter was observed overhead.
DESPATCH EMERGENCY CALL CENTRE
The call-taker should have tasked the reporting person to take details/video of any other vehicles/persons in the car park at the time. They should also have been tasked to canvass other hikers/picnickers if present, for details and make notes of all observations. You can only ask. (In one case examined there was a suspect vehicle left parked next to the missing person’s car for four days, which was missed during the initial investigation, and not discovered as a vehicle of interest for twelve years).
A despatch office supervisor should be briefed to ascertain mobile phone tracking options if any, as well as any other operational and investigative support options readily available to first responders.
FIRST RESPONDERS
The first responders should turn on any vehicle cam recorder to record vehicle traffic coming away from the responding destination. There may be a potential witness or person of interest on that recording that is worthy of following up.
Upon arrival at the responding destination the first responders, should where possible conduct a slow 360 degree turn around of the car park, again recording all vehicles, persons and other elements of possible interest before talking to the reporting person.
Upon greeting the reporting person, the first responders should seek full details including identification of all vehicles and persons in the car park known to and identifiable to the reporting person. (This is to avoid any later silent assumption that a vehicle may belong to a family member or to a searcher or to some other person connected to the search operation, when in fact it does not).
NOTIFICATION OF INVESTIGATORS
The relevant investigators should be notified within a reasonable time, preferably when it is determined that a Search and Rescue Operation (SAR) is going to commence. This action is to ensure that the SAR coordinator will have the relevant information needed to commence and to feed and adjust in-field decision making if necessary as the search continues. (Note: this facet of missing person operations will be covered in the next post, titled: INVESTIGATIVE RESPONSE – The Gaps in the first 120 hours.
MEDIA
The decision to make a media release can be tricky. In my opinion it is better to act early and control the media and reap the benefit of any response from a call for public information rather than sit mute and risk losing vital information. (In the scenario case I located a witness some fourteen years after the event, who did not respond to the general media report on the day because there was no call for specific information at the time).
Whatever the decision with media, it must be controlled and conducted by one media savvy supervisor who can give the media what they want at the same time as protecting family and maximising the best operational benefits possible. Remembering, that information-in is always only ever as good as information-out. You are marketing the case, so know your product, and know what information you are looking for and from whom.
SEARCH AND RESCUE OPERATIONS (SAR)
By and large we (www.footprintsinthewilderness.com.au) have found that SAR operations are carried out in a professional responsive manner. It is generally found that SAR operatives are highly trained and dedicated specialists, who evolve with both technology and methodology as additives to their knowledge in the field.
However, what we have discovered, on many occasions, is that there is often an inadequate or no corresponding investigation being conducted in relation to the background or causes and influences of the missing person, subject of the case at hand. Consequently, there is little or inadequate intelligence being fed to the SAR coordinators in relation to the missing person or other aspects relevant to the case. The discovery of this investigative and intelligence gap has been made by us and has been corroborated on many occasions from SAR coordinators as a criticism of the management aspects of the missing person case as opposed to the search operation.
In the subject case, the main focus of the SAR operation was directed towards trails on the car park side of the highway whereas other information that should have been gathered by investigation and analysis was missed which may have directed the intensity of the SAR operation to another area.
FAMILY LIAISON AND SUPPORT
This is a vital area of missing person and search operations that is not given the level of attention that is commensurate to the level of hurt impact and grief that is experienced by the families of the missing.
Police and all responders must realise that this incident is not only a potential loss of life but may result in family members suffering the worst kind of grief imaginable, that of losing a loved one, and never knowing where they are or what really happened to them. Nor having their remains to lay to rest. It is referred to as ambiguous loss.
First responders, police, and searchers all go about their work, and it seems that family are often left standing about watching and often kept in the dark as to what is happening. Appoint someone to liaise with them, to seek information about the missing person, every little detail about their strengths, habits, health. Explain some of the procedure so that they are not critical due to not understanding why things are done or not done. Keep them informed.
CONCLUSION
The main concern in this case, as is the situation with many, is attitude, which is often governed by experiential or assumption bias. This tends to push the majority of all responders into a closed mindset, thinking ‘Silly person has got themselves lost’, when in this particular case the probability is that the missing person is an exception and is likely missing due to human intervention rather than natural misadventure.
First responders must adopt an ‘open mind’ attitude when taking the report that ‘a person is reported missing’, remembering that it is potentially a serious investigation involving the life of another human. Assume nothing and always ask, “What am I looking at here?” To answer that question, analyse the incident environment. Identify the elements and entities within it. Capture the information intelligence and evidence. Protect the witnesses. Secure the scene. Look after the victims (including the family).
Remember, many of these incidents can escalate into a major crime, which they often do. Unfortunately, most tend to do so after they have been mishandled in the first response or early investigative stage. When this happens, it is often too late to play catch up. The scene has been contaminated by the elements, witnesses have dispersed, evidence has been lost, public interest has gone and your case load has moved on to other more current responses and priorities.
All that is left is the criticisms of mishandling, lack of professionalism, and failure to listen to the forever grieving family of the missing, all of which will re-play continuously in the media until the case is resolved, which may be never.
PART 2: NEXT FORTNIGHT – Investigative Response – (The pitfalls in investigative thinking). The Gaps in the first 120 hours.
Note: For presentation options on this series please contact the writer on our website at www.footprintsinthewilderness.com.au
Written by Valentine Smith APM (Co-founder of Footprints in the Wilderness)
Footprintsinthewilderness.com.au – August 2024
Wow Valentine, this project is moving along, well done! I'm so glad you included the importance of family support and open communications. I also appreciate you identifying our experience as that of Ambiguous Loss, with credit to Dr. Pauline Boss. Please know that it is the LOSS we are struggling with, not GRIEF. As Pauline explains, in our situation our grief is "frozen" because we don't know what we are grieving - they may be alive, they may be dead, we just don't know, hence the ambiguity. Once we know, the grief can then kick in. For me, I never really grieved, what I experienced was relief, like the black cloud had lifted; I knew Daniel would want us to…