Cogeadr?

I’m looking at the Cleveland Police Department website and they’ve got this missing guy with schizophrenia and it says he’s taking “cogeadr.”

That’s not a real medication; clearly the word has been misspelled. I have no idea what the correct word is; I tried Googling it and came up with zilch.

I called my own psychiatric clinic to ask and they’re not sure. The secretary said she’d pass the info on to the nurse to look up. Considering how that nurse NEVER calls me back when I have actual medical complaints (like “this new medication you put me on is making me walk like a drunk person, is that normal and will it go away?”), I have a feeling I’m not going to get a call back.

Muttergrumble.

I’m almost sure these are the same person…but…

A NamUs profile that just went up is for Reginald Lovell Garrett. I already had a Reginald Garrett on Charley, courtesy of the CDOJ, so I pulled him up to update his case with the info from the NamUs profile.

However…

Reginald Lovell Garrett on NamUs has the listed date of disappearance as January 1, 1995, and in the “details of disappearance” it says his family doesn’t actually know the date but they believe it was sometime between 1994 and 1996. He is said to have disappeared from Pascagoula, Mississippi, after getting into a car with a white man. The Pascagoula Police Department is investigating.

Reginald Garrett on the Charley Project has a date of disappearance as February 2, 1995, and the place is given as Tulare, California. I have no other details about his disappearance. The Tulare Police Department is investigating.

I’m pretty sure these are the same man. I mean, the names are the same; they’re both black; the listed ages, heights and weights correspond with each other; the date range in Reginald Lovell Garrett’s case fits the date given for Reginald Garrett; Reginald Garrett’s photo closely resembles the three photos of Reginald Lovell Garrett.

I’m just not really sure how to deal with this, though. I mean, where’d he actually disappear from? Is it possible that he disappeared from Mississippi, went to California and then disappeared again from there? This isn’t the only time that’s happened.

Thoughts, anyone?

An idea about APs

I first thought of this issue a few years ago, but I don’t think I’ve discussed it on this blog before. So I thought I’d bring it up and see what y’all think about it.

And a disclaimer: I’m doing my best to write things in a non-offensive way and to make sure my facts are correct, but I don’t know much about the Muslim world at all, so if I mess up, I’m sorry. If I’m wrong about something, feel free to call me out on it.

(Recently, on a chat app my phone, I spoke to a guy who grew up in Saudi Arabia and now lives in the UK. I had never spoken to a Saudi person in my life. I said, “I’ve heard X, Y and Z about Saudi Arabia, are those things true?” He confirmed they were and said I was, for an American, “surprisingly well-informed” about Saudi Arabia. Which is really depressing when you think about it because I don’t know much about the country at all. I can name three cities there: Mecca, Medina, and Jeddah. The first two I know about only because they’re famous in the history of Islam, the third I know about only because I read a novel set there. So it’s not that I am well-informed about Saudi Arabia or Muslim issues at all, it’s just that everyone else knows even less than I do. In a blind world, the one-eyed man is king. But moving right along…)

I have an idea about APs for a very specific subset of people: Muslim girls who were taken by a non-custodial parent and are believed to be now living in a Muslim-majority country where the girls and women generally wear some form of the hijab.

I don’t know much about the hijab, but I know there are different types of covering and in a few countries (like Saudi Arabia) women are legally required to wear them, and in other countries it’s just sort of the done thing, a cultural expectation to dress in this way. But I’m not trying to talk about whether a Muslim girl or woman should or should not wear the hijab. What I’m actually thinking is this:

In the countries I’m talking about, the girls and women will usually wear, at minimum, a scarf on their head, and in most cases the scarf covers most or all of their hair. They’ll wear this pretty much all the time they’re out in public. So why, when the NCMEC makes APs for these girls, do they not show that scarf?

Sarah Molouk Amiri, for example, is believed to be in Iran, where the hijab is required by law and just about every female wears some form of head covering even if it doesn’t completely conceal their hair. My Google image search for “Iranian women” turned up a lot of photos of women in various scarves; many of these women wore scarves that covered most or all of their hair, and also their neck up to the chin. Yet Sarah’s latest AP (done four years ago) shows her wearing no headscarf, and her entire neck and parts of her collarbone were also uncovered in the picture. I find it hard to believe that a woman living in Iran, even a super-modern cosmopolitan city girl, would ever dress that way in public. Wouldn’t it be more helpful to show an AP of Sarah dressed in the clothing worn by the females of the country where she’s supposed to be?

And that’s just one example. There are many family abduction cases where the girls are thought to be living in countries where some form of hijab is commonly worn in public. And the NCMEC, when it makes APs for them, NEVER shows them in Islamic clothing. One time, years ago, do an AP of a missing girl who was supposedly in Pakistan, and it did show her wearing a headscarf, which is what made me suddenly realize that this was an issue. They never made another one like it, and when they updated this particular girl’s AP a few years later, the scarf disappeared.

The obvious counter-argument to the “have them wear a scarf in the picture” is that it’s necessary for the APs to show the girls’ hair and neck etc., so we can better see what they look like. And also that if they added a scarf to the picture, people would be distracted by it and be focusing on the scarf rather than the girl/woman’s face.

But the thing is, if they’re living in a country where the hijab is required by law or where nearly all women wear some form of it, literally no one in public is going to see these girls’ hair and neck and collarbones and what have you. So it doesn’t help show what the girl looks like. As for distracting from the focus on the girl’s face, you could argue that, if, say, an Iranian person was looking at Sarah Amiri’s AP, that person might get distracted by the exposed hair and neck and collarbone.

Anyway… So what do you think of my idea? I’m especially interested in hearing from any Muslims in the audience.

A little help here, again?

[EDIT: Several wonderful angels came through. Thank you so much!]

Twice now I’ve asked you guys for help about this: when I go to the Minnesota state missing persons page and try clicking on any of their PDF posters, I get an error message. I’ve tried my PC, Michael’s PC, my Kindle Fire and my iPhone and get the same stupid error message each time.

Y’all came through and sent me PDFs I can read of the posters, but there are some new ones now. So can you come through again? Pretty please with a cherry on top?

Specifically, I need the ones on the following list. (And yes, I know that many of those on this list are already on Charley; it’s just that I haven’t seen the Minnesota state posters for them, and I want to make sure I don’t miss anything.)

  • Noel Dalluge
  • Theodore Dengerud
  • Kevin Ellsworth
  • Donna Ingersoll
  • John Jacobson
  • Sandra Jacobson
  • Kyle David Jansen
  • Christopher Kerze
  • Daniel Klein
  • David Klein
  • Kenneth Klein
  • Kenneth Scott Kleppen
  • Janet Kramer
  • Hang Lee
  • Daniel Patrick Maleska
  • Victoria Owczynsky
  • Barbara Paciotti
  • April Pease
  • Eric Peterson
  • Sharice Pollard
  • James Tennison
  • William Underhill

MP event in Arizona in November

Stuart Somershoe, a detective with the Phoenix Police Department, sent me a flier about an upcoming missing/unidentified persons event planned for November 5. It will be held at Arizona State University, West Campus, which is in Glendale at the edge of Phoenix, bordering Glendale.

flier.jpg

Det. Somershoe says:

We have had nine (!) resolutions from last year’s event. We opened/re-opened 22 new cases at the event and collected 41 DNA samples. We have had 3 “cold” DNA hits, connecting missing person cases with unidentified remains where previously no association had been made.

We want families to come to this year’s event. Investigators will be on hand to open new missing person reports (no matter how old) and also to collect identifiers like DNA, dental records, and photographs for existing cases.

It doesn’t matter how long the person has been missing (our oldest case from last year’s event was from 1965).

He asked me to spread the info around on social media. I ask that those of my readers who have their own social media accounts do the same.

Fannye Bryant

I came across a mention of a very old MWAB case in an article about an already-existing Charley Project case today: Fannye Bryant, an elderly woman who disappeared from Freehold (I think), New Jersey on July 19, 1976. Various accounts give different ages for her, but according to her Social Security Death Index listing, she was 68. Her former foster son, 22-year-old Jesse Goodwyn, confessed to her murder a few days later and was convicted, but Mrs. Bryant’s body was never found. This court appeals document from 2008, denying him parole, is a good summary of the case.

I’ve found plenty of details about the murder, and I found Mrs. Bryant’s date of birth, but I can’t find a picture or any physical description of her. Which means no casefile.

If any of you could turn up a photograph of her, I would very much appreciate it.

That is all.

What the heck?

I was in the process of drawing up a Make-a-List Monday when I went and checked the NamUs entry for Timothy Scott Parry, and on the “physical” section of his NamUs page, it says he had “Cro-Magnon eyebrows.”

Who on earth put that in? Maybe it’s just me, but I find that pretty offensive, especially given that Timothy was physically and mentally disabled. I would be offended if I was a family member or friend of Timothy’s. His eyebrows don’t even look that strange to me in the pictures, just a bit thicker than usual.

I doubt whoever put that into NamUs was trying to upset anyone. This other picture, included in the NamUs profile, is a scanned copy of a paper flier for Timothy, and it says “Cro-Magnon eyebrows.” My guess is that whoever entered the info into NamUs just copied it without thinking. But I think it should be rephrased.

It reminds me of another MP case profiled on another website, not NamUs, where it said the female MP had a “tramp stamp.” That’s derogatory term for a tattoo on a woman’s lower back. The term, in addition to being offensive, could also be confusing for people, perhaps non-English speakers, who don’t know what a “tramp stamp” means. They should have just said she had a tattoo on her lower back. With Timothy, they could say he has a protruding brow ridge or something that doesn’t sound like they’re making fun of him.

(If you’re wondering, btw, why I sometimes talk on this blog about issues I think NamUs should fix, it’s not to make them look bad. I think NamUs is a great resource, as evidenced by how often I use it for Charley Project research. Rather, it’s because some of the people who volunteer for it don’t like me and have made this abundantly clear, and I’m afraid they wouldn’t listen to me if I emailed them privately about the issue.)