Voluntary missing person or potential crime victim? – the decision-making process

Due to the high numbers of persons reported missing annually in New Zealand investigators tend to adopt a “wait and see” approach before commencing a homicide enquiry.

However, when facts and circumstances indicate a strong possibility of foul play or the disappearance occurs due to a criminal action, investigators will consider the missing person case as potential foul play.

This decision-making process is important as there are serious implications should a homicide investigation be commenced. The availability of appropriate staff is always a serious consideration together with other costs including resources, scientific experts etc.

So how is the decision made?

Firstly, all important information about the missing person will be gathered by the authorities. They will speak to the person making the report, their friends and family, neighbours and employers. They will collect information regarding the persons health/mental status and will review phone/computer data.

It may well be that in the first couple of weeks that land and sea searches will be conducted looking for any evidence as to what may have happened to the person.

In some cases, a “no body” homicide investigation will be commenced, and a large team of investigators will be assigned to the case. This is where the difficulty arises for the authorities who must make this call.

A variety of reasons exist for why people voluntarily disappear including mental illness, depression, substance abuse, credit problems, abusive relationships or marital discord.

From the outset the investigators will focus on these areas profiling the subject.

If no such factors come into question, then a call must be made, voluntary disappearance or victim of a crime? So, what other factors need to be considered?

It needs to be remembered that people falsely report someone missing for various reasons.

Perhaps the person died due to negligent homicide, accidental death, or murder, and the individual responsible for the death wants to create distance (time and space) from the act by establishing an alibi, obstructing justice, or avoiding detection.

Someone creating the illusion of a person voluntarily missing requires extra effort, which experienced investigators could view as an element of staging.

There also needs to be some urgency in the decision-making process because of the need to collect electronic information – cellular data, social media postings, automated searches, surveillance camera footage and video or audio recordings.

This material often has a limited shelf life before becoming lost forever when it is purged and replaced with new data.

So I go back to the first question, voluntary missing person or victim of foul play?  An important call needing to be made early.