Mexico Unidentified US-Mexico Border Project

[Giuc0]

Released in 2014

Post-sessional report #A/HRC/WGEID/104/1

Mexico

Urgent action

79. On 4 September 2014, the Working Group, following its urgent action procedure, transmitted one case to the Government, concerning Mr. Pablo Roberto Millán Lira, allegedly abducted on 21 August 2014.
Standard procedure

80. The Working Group transmitted two cases to the Government, concerning:
81. Mr. Teodulfo Torres Soriano, allegedly abducted on 24 March 2013, by agents of the Mexican federal police in his residence in Mexico City.
82. Mr. Diego Rogelio Nichol Hernández, allegedly last seen on 8 May 2013, when municipal police officers of Puerto Vallarta were requisitioning him. In accordance with the methods of work of the Working Group, the Government of Canada was also provided with a copy of the case.
Information from the Government

83. On 22 July 2014, the Government responded to an urgent appeal sent jointly with two other special procedures mechanisms on 17 April 2014 concerning the allegations of arbitrary arrest and enforced disappearance of Mr. Marco Antonio Valle Cabañas. In its reply, the Government reported that there was no confirmation that the two persons that had allegedly taken the victim from his residence belonged to the Public Prosecutor’s Office for Special Investigations on Organized Crime (SIEDO) of the Office of the General Prosecutor. The Government also reported on the investigations initiated in relation to the case and on the access to the investigation by Mr. Valle Cabañas’s relatives.
Information from sources

84. The sources provided information on four outstanding cases.
Prompt intervention letter

85. On 14 August 2014, the Working Group transmitted, jointly with another special procedure mechanism, a prompt intervention letter concerning the alleged intimidation and threats against relatives of Mr. Héctor Rangel Ortiz, who disappeared in Queretaro on 10 November 2009.

Post-sessional report #A/HRC/WGEID/103/1

Mexico

Standard procedure

98. The Working Group transmitted one case to the Government of Mexico. The case concerned Mr. Sergio Salgado Nuñez, allegedly abducted on 5 October 2009 by officers of the Jalisco Federal Police.
Urgent appeal

99. On 17 April 2014, the Working Group transmitted, jointly with two other special procedure mechanisms, an urgent appeal to the Government concerning the alleged arbitrary detention and enforced disappearance of Mr.Marco Antonio Valle Cabañas.
General allegation

100. The Working Group received information from credible sources on obstacles encountered in the implementation of the Declaration in Mexico.
101. It is stated that the Truth Commission of the State of Guerrero, created to investigate enforced disappearances during the “dirty war”(1969–1979), was allegedly facing difficulties in performing its work and in accessing the information contained in the National General Archive, and that its members had allegedly been the victims of harassment.
102. By presidential decree of 27 November 2001, documents handed over to the National General Archive ceased to be undisclosed information and were opened up for consultation by anybody. The Ministry of the Interior allegedly transferred all such information from the former Federal Security Directorate and the Policy and Social Research Department, which had been were under the aegis of the Centre for Investigation and National Security (CISEN). The information was added to the 2,920 boxes containing background information from the Secretary of the Interior, withdata from 1918 until the early 1980s.
103. However, the documentation currently available in the National General Archive was allegedly disorganized and incomplete. The National General Archive had allegedly planned to microfilm all the documentation, but that was never done. Also, the body of documentation of the Federal Security Directorate was not made fully available to the general public.
104. Much of the material of the Federal Security Directorate was allegedly misplaced, with changednumbers or filed in unrelated categories. In addition, the research team of the Truth Commission of the State of Guerrero allegedly did not have access to the vault where sensitive material of the former Office of the Special Prosecutor for Past Social and Political Movements (FEMOSPP) is kept. Access was requested but was allegedly denied.
105. Members of the Truth Commission of the State of Guerrero were reportedly not able to find many of the files cited by the National Human Rights Commission regarding the “dirty war”. Some reports from agents and public servants kept in the files had allegedly been lost, destroyed or concealed. Also, the numbering had disappearedfrom the records or had reportedly been cut, off orthe records had been reclassified.
106. The mandate of the Truth Commission of the State of Guerrero expired on 17 April 2014. However, it was agreed to extend its mandate for six months; its final report would be submitted no later than 17 October 2014. To date, the State of Guerrero allegedly had not granted the budget for the extension of the mandate. The Guerrero State Congress reportedly affirmed that it was the State Government which should contribute to the budget. The State Government had not yet responded on the issue.
107. That issue would particularly affect the excavations to find remains. There was uncertainty about which state and federal authorities should be responsible for authorizing and carrying out excavations to exhume bodies in the State of Guerrero. Furthermore, the area to be excavated needed to be protected before the arrival of the rainy season and hurricanes.
108. The former Office of the Special Prosecutor for Past Social and Political Movements and the thenGeneral Coordination Office for Research of the General Prosecutor allegedly accepted the complaints of survivors of disappearance, but then allegedly informed them that the crime of abuse of authority was subject to prescription. In a hearingbefore the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Mexican State reportedly opened upthe possibility of offering compensation in cases not verified by the National Human RightsCommission.
109. The source indicated that several members and staff of the Truth Commission of the State of Guerrero had allegedly received threats or had been the subject of attacks between January and March 2014, including persecution, threatening phone calls and robbery. Such incidents had allegedly not been properly investigated.

Post-sessional document #A/HRC/WGEID/102/1

16.Mexico

Urgent actions

84. On 3 December 2013, the Working Group transmitted one case to the Government of Mexicoconcerning Mr. Daniel Ramos Alfaro, who was allegedly abducted on 2 October 2013 by agents of the Mexican Army in a deserted field near Betania Community, Michoacán.
Standard procedure

85. The Working Group transmitted 12 cases to the Government.
86. The first case concerned Mr. Mario Jorge Tovar Martinez, allegedly abducted on 14 May 2008 by agents of the municipal police of San Nicolas de los Garza, Nuevo León.
87. The second case concerned Mr. Jorge Homero Flores Quintana, allegedly abducted on 22 June 2007 at the home of friends, in Nueva Castilla 3999, colonia residencial Lincoln, Monterrey, by a commando group that violently entered the house.
88. The third case concerned Mr. Miguel Orlando Muñoz Guzmán, allegedly last seen in May 1993 at the 26th Infantry Battalion, in Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua.
89. The fourth, fifth and sixth cases concerned Messrs. Daniel Cabrera Peñaloza, Orlando Rebolledo Téllez and Nicomedes Villa Santana,allegedly abducted on 14 February 2005 by armed civilians of the group Unión Ganadera Regional de Guerrero and then allegedly handed over to the Mexican Army.
90. The seventh case concerned Mr. Marco Antonio Zuñiga Solis, allegedly abducted on 19 June 2007 by agents of the Santa Catarina municipal police.
91. The eighth and ninth cases concerned Messrs. Pedro Enrique Huerta Flores and Javier Alejandro Treviño Pedroza, allegedly last seen on 25 July 2010 leaving the house of the latter, in San Pedro, and heading towards La Huasteca Park, in Santa Catarina, Nuevo León.
92. The tenth and eleventh cases concerned Mr. Roberto Ivan Hernandez Garcia and Ms. Yudith Yesenia Rueda Garcia, allegedly abducted on 11 March 2011 by agents of the Federal and State Police together with at their residence, located in Privada Sotelo 6025, Col. Loma Bonita, Monterrey, Nuevo León.
93. The twelfth case concerned Mr. Geovanni Alexis Barrios Hernández, allegedly abducted from the Super Siete shop of Reynosa, Tamaulipas, located in Av. Lazaro Cardenas, Colonia Anzalduaz on 24 April 2008 by more than 15 armed individuals accompanied by federal and municipal police officers of Tamaulipas.

 

[Giuc0]

Released in 2013

Post-sessional document #A/HRC/WGEID/101/1

22.Mexico

General allegation

86.On 13 September 2013, the Working Group transmitted a general allegation to the Government.

87.The Working Group received information from credible sources concerning reported obstacles encountered in the implementation in Mexico of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.

88.Sources reported that a list allegedly established by the Attorney General’s Office (Procuraduría General de la República) of Mexicohad been released on 20 December 2012, putting the number of missing persons, including persons who had been forcibly disappeared, at 20,851 over the past six years. According to the sources, in February 2013, the Government published sections of the same database, which, at the time of publication of the sections, included 16,121 entries.

89.The sources added that the list may be not complete or precise; some of the missing may have returned to their homes and some families may have never reported disappearances. Additionally, the list as compiled reportedly contains a broad spectrum of cases, making no distinction between those who have been forcibly disappeared and missing persons, victims of common crime such as kidnappings, persons who may have voluntarily absented themselves, and those who were not able to recall their identities. Additionally, persons who subsequently reappeared have not always been removed from the aforementioned list, while many cases of enforced disappearance documented by human rights organizations were not included therein. The sources added that, even with all its problems, the list provided clear evidence that thousands of Mexicans had been forcibly disappeared and that the Government knew about them.

90.According to the sources, the list provides details for each missing or disappeared person, including age, gender, the date and location of disappearance, the clothes they were wearing, their jobs and a few other brief details. The list, recorded in Microsoft Excel columns, was allegedly compiled by the Attorney General’s Office with data submitted by state prosecutors and vetted by the federal Government.

91.The sources added that the list appears to confirm the number of disappearances and problems with the identification process documented by other institutions. They assert that,according to the National Commission on Human Rights, more than 7,000 people killed in Mexico in the past six years lie unidentified in morgue freezers or common graves. The Commission indicated that between 2006 and mid-2011 more than 18,000 Mexicans were reported missing.

92.According to the sources, the Mexican Congress passed a law creating the National Registry of Missing and Disappeared Persons (Registro Nacional de Datos de Personas Extraviadas o Desaparecidas). The law requires the Government to establish a national database, which could be used to help track cases of disappearance. According to the sources, the regulations of such a registry took several months to be adopted and have not yet been fully implemented.

93.The sources also alleged that the list demonstrated the failure of the authorities to apply a clear methodology and procedures to gather reliable nationwide data on reported enforced disappearances. According to the sources, thatfailure undermined the effective investigation of enforced disappearances and the capacity to locate and identify the victims.

94.Finally, the sources indicated that the Government had made a commitment to remove from the list records not relating to ongoing cases of disappearance, although the methodology to be applied remains unclear and no results have been shown.

Post-sessional document #A/HRC/WGEID/100/1

Mexico
Standard procedure
49. The Working Group transmitted 10 cases to the Government under its standard procedure.

50. The first case concerned Mr. Rodrigo Camacho Rodríguez, who on 30 May 2007 was allegedly taken from Colonia Adrián Castrejón, Iguala, Guerrero, to an unknown location by men in judicial police clothing travelling in black vans with tinted windows and no registration plates.
51. The second case concerned Mr. Carlos Enrique Ruiz Núñez, who was allegedly taken from Bernabé de las Casas 2008, between Calle Hilario Martínez and Calle Alfredo Garza Ríos, Monterrey, to an unknown location by four men, on 20 May 2010. Mr. Ruiz Núñez was reportedly later identified in images shown on the news on Televisa México, on 27 July 2010, concerning the transfer of individuals from various federal prisons.
52. The third case concerned Mr. Mario Alberto Coronado Rangel, who was allegedly taken to an unknown location by a group of armed individuals believed to be Ministerial Police officers from Apodaca municipality, on 7 December 2010.
53. The fourth case concerned Mr. Rubén Limón Ramos, who was allegedly arrested on Calle Séptima, Colonia Nazario Ortiz, by the Municipal Police and armed individuals, on 13 March 2011.
54. The fifth case concerned Mr. Luis Mario Casiano Vargas, who was allegedly taken to an unknown location from Secondary School No. 70, Avenida Solidaridad, Colonia Leonardo Rodríguez Alcaine, Acapulco, Guerrero, by individuals believed to be police officers, on 25 March 2011.
55. The sixth and seventh cases concerned Messrs. Honorio Badillo Gómez and Adán Ramos Antonio, who were allegedly last seen with several other individuals aboard vehicles opposite the premises of the Municipal Police in Pesquería, Nuevo León, on 29 May 2011.
56. The eighth case concerned Mr. David Silva García, who was allegedly arrested outside his home and taken to an unknown location by State police agents, on 25 July 2012.
57. The ninth and tenth cases concerned Messrs. Adriel Alonso Ávila Barrios and Adrián Favela Márquez, who were reportedly arrested at the home of Mr. Favela Márquez by individuals believed to be Ministerial Police officers, on 2 October 2012.
Prompt intervention letter
58. On 15 March 2013, the Working Group transmitted a prompt intervention letter, jointly with two other special procedures mechanisms, concerning the alleged acts of harassment and intimidation against Messrs. Carlos Ernesto López and Miguel Flores Leonardo, two collaborators of the Truth Commission for the Investigation of the Human Right Violations During the Dirty War of the Sixties and Seventies in the State of Guerrero.
Information from the Government
59. On 27 March 2013, the Government transmitted a communication in response to a prompt intervention letter sent by the Working Group on 21 December 2012 concerning the alleged theft of information related to reported enforced disappearances from the home of a member of the Guzmán Cruz family in the Tarejero community, Michoacán state. The Government, inter alia, stated that no local or federal ministerial authority was aware of events which could constitute a robbery, and that the General Coordinating Office for Investigations had not received any complaint in relation to the matter, although the National Human Rights Commission had opened a file on it. The Government also stated that an investigation had been opened by the Ministerio Público de la Federación de la Piedad (Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office in Piedad) on 9 January 2013. The Government further stated that, because no complaint had been filed with a state or federal ministerial authority, it had not been possible to adopt measures to guarantee the physical and
A/HRC/WGEID/100/1
9

A/HRC/WGEID/100/1
10
psychological integrity of the Guzmán Cruz family, but that a member of the family had been invited to provide a declaration. Finally, the Government requested that petitioners present formal complaints before the competent ministerial authorities.
60. On 16 April 2013, the Government transmitted a communication in response to a prompt intervention letter sent by the Working Group on 31 January 2012, jointly with two other special procedures mechanisms, concerning alleged acts of harassment and intimidation against family members of Ms. Elena Barajas Mejía. The Government provided information on the investigations undertaken in relation to the alleged enforced disappearance of a member of Ms. Barajas Mejía’s family, as well as in relation to the alleged acts of harassment against Ms. Barajas Mejía and her family. The Government also reported that, in order to safeguard the human rights and the physical and psychological integrity of Ms. Barajas Mejía and her family, the Unidad de Psicología y Atención a Víctimas del Delito (Psychology and Attention to Victims of Crimes Unit) under the Office of the Attorney General of Michoacán state had been put at their disposal, and a greater public security presence had been installed in the areas where the acts of harassment allegedly took place.
Information from sources
61. Sources provided information on 37 outstanding cases. One case was clarified as a result.
Clarification
62. Following the information provided by the sources, the Working Group decided to clarify one case.
Observations
63. The Working Group would like to thank the Government of Mexico for its replies, transmitted on 27 March 2013 and 16 April 2013, to the prompt intervention letters sent on 21 December 2012 and 31 January 2012, respectively. With regard to the reply of 27 March 2013, the Working Group stresses that all involved in the investigation of cases of enforced disappearances should be protected regardless of whether there is a complaint or not. In this respect, the Working Group recalls article 13, paragraph 3, of the Declaration, according to which “steps shall be taken to ensure that all involved in the investigation, including the complainant, counsel, witnesses and those conducting the investigation, are protected against ill-treatment, intimidation or reprisal”.


Post-sessional report #A/HRC/WGEID/99/1

Mexico

Standard procedure

85. The Working Group transmitted nine newlyreported cases to the Government.
86. The first eight cases concerned Messrs. Alberto Vázquez Rodríguez, Esteban Urbina Cisneros, Héctor Rodríguez González, Jorge Valente Ibarra Moreno, Rodolfo Alemán Ramírez, Milton Alvarado Rojas, Alejandro Guadalupe Zamora Vaca, and Luis Felipe Patiño Urbina,who were allegedly last seen on 28 April 2011 on the way from the municipality of Juárez to the municipality of Apodaca, Nuevo León. Messrs. Vázquez Rodríguez and Urbina Cisneros had reportedly been arrested by transit police officers in Juárez on the day of the alleged disappearance. The other individuals reportedly went to the Juárez police premises to collect the alleged detainees and all 11 individuals were on their way back to Apodaca but never arrived at their destination.
87. The ninth case concerned Mr. Jorge Luis López Cantú, who, on 26 October 2011, was allegedly taken to an unknown location by individuals believed to be acting in collaboration with the police.
Prompt intervention letter

88. On 26 November 2012, the Working Group transmitted a prompt intervention letter, jointly with two other special procedures mechanisms, concerning allegations of repeated acts of harassment and intimidation against members of the Comité de Familiares de Detenidos Desaparecidos “Hasta Encontrarlos” (CFDDHE – Committee of Family Members of the Detained and Disappeared “Until They Are Found”).
89. On 21 December 2012, the Working Group transmitted a prompt intervention letter concerning the alleged theft of information related to reported enforced disappearances from the home of a member of the Guzmán Cruz family in the Tarejero community, Michoacán state.
Information from the Government

90. On 6 November 2012, the Government transmitted a communication which could not be processed in time for inclusion in the 2012 annual report (A/HRC/22/45 and Corr.1). The communication concerned a prompt intervention letter sent jointly with three other special procedures mechanisms, concerning allegations of attempted murder against Ms. Norma Esther Andrade on 3 February 2012. Ms. Andrade is the co-founder of Nuestras Hijas de Regreso a Casa (NHRC), an organization which deals with cases of enforced disappearance and abduction of women in Ciudad Juárez. The Government, inter alia, confirmed that Ms. Andrade had been attacked at her home by an unidentified person; indicated that there were some inaccuracies in the reported allegations; and gave details concerning protection measures put in place for Ms. Andrade.
91. On 7 November 2012 and 19 November 2012, the Government transmitted two communications which could not be processed in time for inclusion in the 2012 annual report (A/HRC/22/45 and Corr.1). The communications concerned 10 outstanding cases and one outstanding case respectively and were not considered sufficient to clarify the cases.
92. On 14 January 2013, the Government transmitted a communication concerning a prompt intervention letter sent jointly with two other special procedures mechanisms on 26 November 2012 (see para. 88). The Government inter alia reported that the facts alleged in the prompt intervention letter were not accurate; gave details of a complaint filed by a member of CFDDHE and related action taken by the authorities; commented that other members of CFDDHE had filed no complaints regarding the alleged acts of harassment; and described measures taken to guarantee the rights of the individuals mentioned in the communication.
Observations

93. The Working Group would like to thank the Government of Mexico for its replies to prompt intervention letters transmitted on 3 February and 26 November 2012. In this regard, the Working Group notes the information on the protection measures provided to the victims and encourages the authorities to continue the investigation processes started in relation to the acts of harassment and intimidation against members of organizations of relatives and other non-governmental organizations concerned with disappearances; and to strengthen other preventive measures.

 

[Giuc0]

For the reports with technical issues, I'm going to write to the WGEID to get them.

Before 2013, you may get the names in the annual reports. Sometimes you have them, sometimes you don't.

Meanwhile, as I can't find the list of name provided at the beginning of the thread, can anyone cross-check with the names provided from the post-sessional reports and the data they already have? Thank you

 

[Grungster]

Plenty more that have been updated. PM images have been removed

There was also one for Jose Alvarez Lopez

I’m going to link it, but it read from a car accident in Florence in 2008

 

[Giuc0]

It's ok.
Could you please compare the names not updated with the one I provided in the post-sessional reports, please?

Tackling a language issue giving me a headache right now

 

[Grungster]

The Doe Network: 2331UMAZ

 

[devertere]

I'm too tired to read the whole thread, but I might have a match

The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs)
January 10,2020 “Anatolio Garcia” from Oaxaca, Mexico (photo)

I'm happy to see others are searching to. Migrantes no Identificados "una luz de esperanza"
Facebook

While I can not confirm Anatolio is the guy who carried the ID, I have found a MP "report" for the ID owner.

 

[Grungster]

I emailed Bruce Anderson this MP report, and he has confirmed that they are in contact with Anatollo Garcia's NOK.

 

[devertere]

Oh great, thank you!

 

[Grungster]

We've got an update on the Jose Fernando Case The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs)

There are plenty more that have new photos

 

[snowgoose]

Some cases from Texas:

The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs)

UP59381, mentioned on page 3 of this thread, has a new facial reconstruction uploaded to NamUs on March 29th.

 

[snowgoose]

Two more with new facial reconstructions uploaded to NamUs recently: UP67345 and UP55170.

UP67345 also has some photos of clothing, including a distinctive cap with a spaceship and clouds stenciled on the side:
The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs)

 

[Bit of hope]

I came across this one while searching through California's unidentified at first glance I thought maybe this case was labeled wrong but after reading further into the distinctive features she should be well remembered by family and friends.
**Warning post mortem photo at following link**
The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs)

I came across this missing woman, missing from Pennsylvania. Height is way off but I see a resemblance.

PHILADELPHIA — The missing’s brother is asking for the public’s assistance in locating missing 45 year old Militza Gutierrez out of the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania area.

Militza was last heard from on February 9, 2018.

Militza has been missing since February 9, 2018. Her last known whereabouts were on North Front Street and West Lehigh Avenue in Philadelphia. She was last seen wearing a black jacket, blue jeans, a pink, Philadelphia Eagles’ winter hat, and a green, crochet purse. Militza suffers from mental illness and takes medication daily. She may not know where she is and speaks very little English. She is from Puerto Rico and has been in Philadelphia for only two months prior to her disappearance. Militza has no identification with her.

MILITZA IS DESCRIBED AS:
• GENDER: Female.
• HAIR: Black.
• EYES: Brown.
• HEIGHT: 5 feet 10 inches.
• WEIGHT: 230 pounds.
• OTHER: Militza has a birth mark on her left arm.

 

[victoriarobinson642]

The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs)
Added to NAMUS today
Given the proximity to the border, I wonder if this is a person who tried to cross over via the Rio Grande.

 

[snowgoose]

So, there's a NamUs page for a John Doe who was found in Arizona in 2015, and it was updated fairly recently to add a photo of him alive and a full name he gave to authorities. I won't post the name here for privacy reasons but by searching the name I found a social media profile for a man with the exact same name and very similar appearance who hasn't posted since six months before the body was found.

What should I do here? I live outside the US so I can't contact the Sheriff or medical examiner's offices since they only have phone numbers listed, no email. Is it enough to email the NamUs regional contact and hope they'll follow up on it?

 

[Bit of hope]

So, there's a NamUs page for a John Doe who was found in Arizona in 2015, and it was updated fairly recently to add a photo of him alive and a full name he gave to authorities. I won't post the name here for privacy reasons but by searching the name I found a social media profile for a man with the exact same name and very similar appearance who hasn't posted since six months before the body was found.

What should I do here? I live outside the US so I can't contact the Sheriff or medical examiner's offices since they only have phone numbers listed, no email. Is it enough to email the NamUs regional contact and hope they'll follow up on it?

So sorry, because it really sounds you could bring somebody home. I know the problem, I'm also outside the US. What I mostly do is I send an email to the contact of Namus, on both sides (MP and UID), and ask if they want to put the info through/connect to the involved LE agencies or a coroner. In this case this is going to be complicated I guess.

Are there any 'angels' caring for the immigrants on here who know the way to do this?

 

[snowgoose]

Thanks I've reported possible matches before, but in this case there is no NamUs missing person case for him, just the social media profile. So I'm not sure if that's something the NamUs rep would follow up or if they'd just ignore it as it's not their job.

Well, I went ahead and emailed him anyway; hopefully he will pass it on to the relevant LE agency.

 

[Bit of hope]

Thanks I've reported possible matches before, but in this case there is no NamUs missing person case for him, just the social media profile. So I'm not sure if that's something the NamUs rep would follow up or if they'd just ignore it as it's not their job.

Well, I went ahead and emailed him anyway; hopefully he will pass it on to the relevant LE agency.

What about this email address? He seems to be the Forensic Anthropologist in this case. Not sure this is still accurate but you could try?
bruce.anderson@pima.gov

 

[snowgoose]

Hmm, I'm not sure about emailing the forensic anthropologist since it would really be the sheriff/LE's responsiblity to contact family members to confirm the ID. Maybe I'll wait and see if the NamUs contact replies in the next couple of days...

 

[Bit of hope]

Hmm, I'm not sure about emailing the forensic anthropologist since it would really be the sheriff/LE's responsiblity to contact family members to confirm the ID. Maybe I'll wait and see if the NamUs contact replies in the next couple of days...

Ok with me, but I always look for an entrance, somebody close to the case who has connections to get the ball rolling. My experience is that you just get an automatic reply saying thanks for sending this info. But to be honest, people differ how they handle this...so we just wait and see.