9/17/05 Applause, Applause
Please read Mark Holmberg's article about the "haves and the have nots" when it comes to resources expended towards missing person's cases.
His example is a missing 18 year old girl. It sounds as if she is most likely living a hard life on the streets. Her family has no money, period.
The examples I gave in my Media Challenge post are girls who are 17, or were under-age at the time they disappeared. I wanted it to be apples to apples, as you cannot activate an Amber Alert on anyone 18 or older.
By the way, I emailed my letter to the Virginia Amber Alert people.
I want to know what to tell parents of a missing child when they ask why the Amber Alert can't be done for their loved one when it fits the new criteria that came into place with Taylor's case.
The new criteria appears to be as follows, according to media interviews with authorities:
*Is a juvenille
*Is gone for a period of time (10 days was long enough in this case)
*No credible leads as to the child's whereabouts
*Authorities want to cast a wider net of awareness to find the child
That would make the cases that I highlighted two posts ago eligible, wouldn't it? Shouldn't it? I wonder if the last of the new criteria is the clincher.
They found Taylor's car close to her campus with Ohio license plates affixed to it. If you're out there, Taylor, and you just wanted to get away for whatever reason, please make that one phone call. Make it for your family, whose heart is breaking, and make it so that the goose chase can end and these resources can be used for someone who truly needs it. If harm has come to you, then may authorities find the person(s) responsible (and you) and bring them to justice, and may your family be given the strength to carry on.
Thank you, Mark, for speaking out.