Updates posted at 11:35 p.m. I didn’t have time to write any new cases so I did twenty updated ones. Oh, and a new missing person of the week: Christopher Matthew Kerze, a runaway, missing from Eagan, Minnesota for nearly twenty-three years now.
I have heard that Christopher is still out there and has made some noise, wanting people to close his case and butt out of his life. Well, Christopher, if you ever read this, there’s a very easy way to accomplish this: go to the cops and identify yourself. Then they will close your case. You’re grown up; in fact you’ll be forty in two weeks. The police will not be allowed to tell your parents or anyone else where you’re at. But until they’ve verified who you are and that you’re alive and well, they will continue to look for you.
I do plan to implement the “two missing persons of the week, one for each gender” thing. I just haven’t done it yet.
On February 4, 2003 — a decade ago, plus one day — Sofia Lucerno Juarez vanished from Kennewick, Washington. She appears to have been abducted, but there were no witnesses or anything and it looks like the police aren’t any closer to solving her case than they were the day after she disappeared.
Sofia was four years and 364 days old when she disappeared. Today would be her fifteenth birthday.
She had no father, and her mother died tragically young — just 26 — four years ago. But she’s got at least one half-sibling, and extended family looking for her still.
I hope she comes home this year, one way or another, but I’m not counting on it.
I have no idea when this Executed Today story will appear, since the date of the execution has been lost to history (I did manage to pin down an approximate year, 19 AD), but I just had to share this story with you. I have written an entry about it, with a bit more stuff thrown in about the deportations that followed.
The whole thing is just so crazy, it’s got to be true. Decius Mundus was a Class A Creep, but Paulina–well, darling, I’ve got a bridge to sell you, and also some lovely oceanfront property in Arizona.
“Where did you get your information on the such-and-such case?” Someone asked me today. Um…from the links at the bottom of the page. You know, where it says “Source Information.”
“Are you aware that some of your information is inaccurate?” Um, no. If I had thought any of it was inaccurate I wouldn’t have posted it.
End of email.
Now, I totally don’t mind people informing me of any inaccuracies on Charley. In fact I prefer it. I want the site to be as accurate as possible. But it seems I get a lot of people who write me, tell me such-and-such case has inaccuracies, and then disappear without bothering to go into details.
To top it all, the case they referred to is a particularly sordid one: a missing child, the product of divorced parents, with many terrible accusations flung by both sides of the family against the other side, and the police openly speculating about murder — in other words, just the kind of case to arouse strong emotions in the parties involved.
Perhaps this person will write back with more information. But it would save a lot of time if they had said “Are you aware that some of your information is inaccurate? For example, this, this, and this. Here’s what actually happened…”