NY NY - Sylvia Lwowski, 22, Staten Island, 6 Sept 1975 - #4

[Jmoose]

It seems to me that everything that might have gone in such a way as to keep Sylvia's disappearance a mystery, has done so. Not one aspect of this case has helped shed some light on what happened to her. This is heartbreaking; none of the possibilities are of any comfort-even the possibility that she left and found a happy life, because her brother and her best friend have to come to terms with the notion that they have no place in her happy life. The other possibilities are unthinkable.

 

[GoingByMyGut]

How bizarre would it be if you found out now, that a classmate of yours disappeared 39 years ago, and you never knew? I would be fascinated, incredulous and appalled to find out after all of this time! I keep wondering how well she knew these students who came to her party. I can't remember if we knew how many students came. She obviously knew them all, from her various activities-but I wonder if they'd be people that she'd be in touch with regularly. I can't imagine that nobody knew about her disappearance-esp. since Eva Lwowski and MMQC went to her sorority. Does anyone think there is any possibility that, in keeping with "no publicity", that they downplayed Sylvia's disappearance by not telling the full story? That it looked like they weren't as worried as they must have been, and that they weren't told at the sorority that she never came home from a date with her fiance? Seems unlikely that they would handle it in that way, but could it be?

BBM1: But remember, by then, her peers had all graduated. Only students younger than her would be there. I imagine she knew some younger than her, but I think the circles probably grew thinner with each year above and below her. JMO.

BBM2: I am not even sure they had a "full story" to tell, save for her not coming home. How much of a story is that? Everyone who heard it could have come to the conclusion that she'd be back from lack of information, as much as from anything they said. Plus, if Eva really believed SL fled -- if she had reason to think this -- she might unintentionally downplay it just to preserve her hope. And who knows how these young people "read" this quiet, intense (how I see her anyway) immigrant woman who was also probably in shock? So I guess I'm saying it could very well be -- but not just bc of "no publicity." Does that make sense?

 

[Pink Panther]

I have a feeling the SI Advance journalist did take a look online and in less than 30 seconds found a whole lot of boilerplate crime drama targeted speculation surrounding her disappearance. -Didn’t take long to make the “back story” known in the comments section either.

Without a named POI, ‘friend’ may have been more correct than “acquaintance” and with no publicity by anyone for 38 years it seems this was the first time any official statement was made publicly. I did not think it made Sylvia look bad at all. But what they left out was telling. If anything, it implied there’s no evidence to open her case, or evidence was produced that backs up the story. -Imo.

The statement made by the DA’s office, “According to a spokesman for District Attorney Daniel Donovan, there was never an investigation by the office at the time of her disappearance "because it was classified as a missing persons case” made LE and (the system) look questionable, (pass the buck, different department), but that is nothing new. And I guess the Assistant DA who was asked to get involved in 1975 was unsuccessful because she was classed as a runaway?

I don’t think the BFF was contacted, nor do I think her brother or girlfriend was asked about the argument by the press. Imo.

In retrospect, had the article stated her name in the headline, and used a more recognizable photograph, it might have been read ‘tuned into’ by more people –drawn to something familiar. The headline could have read: “38 years on, brother of Sylvia Lwowski, Staten Islander who vanished seeks resolution”.

I think this is a huge challenge in the media to grab the reader’s attention–because now we are flooded with news, whereas back in the day people read a couple of newspapers cover to cover.

Unfortunately, the family has never been willing to play a part in the media's portrayal of Sylvia's disappearance. Not then and not now. So, reporting on her story (then and now) is very limited. We (you) have all been here a number of years and have only ever been privy to about 10 cryptic responses from the one person who is assumed to be a family member.

This notwithstanding, a journalist with even a tiny bit of gumption, could have at the very least made mention of the Charlie listing - where reference to the fiancé being the last person to see her alive and his name are clearly listed. The journalist would not have been making any overt implications and would have simply been outlining facts that are publicly available.

I find it sad that even now, after so many decades, (apart from MMBQ) there is no one that is willing to openly share Sylvia's story in a meaningful manner that might actually help to resolve her case.

MOO

 

[GoingByMyGut]

Original post trimmed by me.

This notwithstanding, a journalist with even a tiny bit of gumption, could have at the very least made mention of the Charlie listing - where reference to the fiancé being the last person to see her alive and his name are clearly listed. The journalist would not have been making any overt implications and would have simply been outlining facts that are publicly available.
MOO

Respectfully, that gumption might cost that journalist his or her job. The Charley Project is not an official site. It is a site set up by a volunteer, an advocate for the missing -- like you or I. It is the work of a single, dedicated person, and is not vetted by LE, and thus what you see there are not necessarily "facts." The owner/operator can say anything she pleases, and for that reason a journalist would not send someone to the Charley Project in a case like this. That would be like the journalist sending folks here. Or knocking on the next door neighbor's door and asking what they think. If a journalist was going to send readers to a missing persons site, it would be NamUS, because it's an arm of the U.S. Dept. of Justice. Nothing against the Charley Project -- it's a noble cause and I believe her heart is in the right place. But the only reason you see a "reference to the fiancé being the last person to see her alive," with his name listed, is because it's an unofficial channel. If the Charley Project listing somehow contributed to, or was in sync with, official channels, and the journalist first cited those channels, the CP might be cited, but probably only in relation to search efforts by family and friends, if CP was helping them with that search.

 

[GoingByMyGut]

PP, no -- you should never out a VI on a thread. That relationship is his to divulge and I don't believe he's ever done so on the thread. You should delete your post, IMO. I am not quoting you so that I don't have to delete this one as well.

 

[rosemadderlake]

Unfortunately, the family has never been willing to play a part in the media's portrayal of Sylvia's disappearance. Not then and not now. So, reporting on her story (then and now) is very limited. We (you) have all been here a number of years and have only ever been privy to about 10 cryptic responses from the one person who is assumed to be a family member.

This notwithstanding, a journalist with even a tiny bit of gumption, could have at the very least made mention of the Charlie listing - where reference to the fiancé being the last person to see her alive and his name are clearly listed. The journalist would not have been making any overt implications and would have simply been outlining facts that are publicly available.

I find it sad that even now, after so many decades, (apart from MMBQ) there is no one that is willing to openly share Sylvia's story in a meaningful manner that might actually help to resolve her case.

MOO

Panther- glad to see you are still hanging in with us.

Bbm: It’s true, there are slightly more than a few cryptic posts on this thread. And without MMQC we would not be here at all (imo). This is where the energy burns for the missing. Hopefully the SI Advance article helped break the spell of no publicity? And I hope awareness of her disappearance continues and gets targeted to those who knew her.

Imo -we don’t know if the BFF was the last person to see Sylvia. I don’t think it was about not having gumption with the SI Adv article. With the DA’s office obviously consulted and quoted, I would think DA’s contact would be referenced.

 

[rosemadderlake]

PP, no -- you should never out a VI on a thread. That relationship is his to divulge and I don't believe he's ever done so on the thread. You should delete your post, IMO. I am not quoting you so that I don't have to delete this one as well.

GBMG is right. We have two “verified insiders” on this thread. And AFAIK they have not ID’d themselves.

 

[rosemadderlake]

How bizarre would it be if you found out now, that a classmate of yours disappeared 39 years ago, and you never knew? I would be fascinated, incredulous and appalled to find out after all of this time! I keep wondering how well she knew these students who came to her party. I can't remember if we knew how many students came. She obviously knew them all, from her various activities-but I wonder if they'd be people that she'd be in touch with regularly. I can't imagine that nobody knew about her disappearance-esp. since Eva Lwowski and MMQC went to her sorority. Does anyone think there is any possibility that, in keeping with "no publicity", that they downplayed Sylvia's disappearance by not telling the full story? That it looked like they weren't as worried as they must have been, and that they weren't told at the sorority that she never came home from a date with her fiance? Seems unlikely that they would handle it in that way, but could it be?

Bbm: in the late 90’s I was working on a film – happily assisting on an art house project, we picked up a college professor to record a voiceover. He happened to be the father of someone I went to school with -when I asked about his son, I found out he died of a suicide 10 years earlier –he was 30 something. Completely stunned, a whole bunch of memories came flooding in. He was a great guy. I wrote them down and sent them to his Dad.

Bbm: Yes. IIRC: MMQC said no recognizable faces on sorority floor. Doubt very seriously EL would have said anything other than, Have you seen Sylvia?

 

[rosemadderlake]

I just think she should have said SL was last seen with her fiance, and that he stated that she ran out of the car after an argument. That is the truth, and is backed up by the initial police report. I realize that I am more eager to see pressure put on him than some are, and I would have been thrilled if they'd mentioned him by name, but even if they hadn't, I would have understood. I do think the pressure needs to be applied legally and morally, and I am not in favor of 'accusing' him in the media. But, IMO, to say an acquaintance was not the truth.

Also, I think the fact that the article mentions that she was engaged, and then says she went to the movies with an 'acquaintance' (as opposed to friend, family member, etc) could lead people to think she was seeing someone else.

Odyssey - quoting SI Advance article for clarity. It does not say "she went to the movies with an acquaintance", but in rereading, I can't help but wonder whether there is something to be gleaned from the wording / positioning of events that is outside the box of what we think we know?

ETA: IE. we have seen one police report. could there be another?

On the evening of Sept. 6, Ms. Lwowski left her Great Kills home for the old Island Movie Theater on Richmond Avenue, perhaps to see "Jaws" or "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest," which were the hot films then playing.

A police report filed on Sept. 7, 1975, says Ms. Lwowski was last seen with an acquaintance near the former Kmart Plaza on Richmond Avenue.

http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2013/09/38_years_on_brother_of_staten.html

 

[Jmoose]

Bbm: in the late 90’s I was working on a film – happily assisting on an art house project, we picked up a college professor to record a voiceover. He happened to be the father of someone I went to school with -when I asked about his son, I found out he died of a suicide 10 years earlier –he was 30 something. Completely stunned, a whole bunch of memories came flooding in. He was a great guy. I wrote them down and sent them to his Dad.

Bbm: Yes. IIRC: MMQC said no recognizable faces on sorority floor. Doubt very seriously EL would have said anything other than, Have you seen Sylvia?

Yes-so how might any of her other friends know that Sylvia was missing? I remember MMQC saying that she herself didn't know Sylvia's other friends, and so would have no way of getting in touch with any of those people and spread the word. Nothing appears to have worked in favor of getting that word out. Does it seem at all likely that Mr. Lwowski would have mentioned that his daughter was missing, to anyone he worked with?

 

[Jmoose]

Today, I am having a bit of trouble managing the idea that people just blew her disappearance off-regardless of how it happened. Were people so busy in the 70's, or so unconcerned? I don't think so, and yet, she is gone, just like a puff of smoke, without a trace. No evidence of suicide, murder or willfully walking away. How does this happen-it's not like in Outlander, where she slipped into a time warp-she has to be someplace. My husband says the landfill (I'm sorry, VIs)

 

[Jmoose]

What about the other relatives, on the Lwowski side-I wonder if they knew she was gone. I know we've talked about this before, but it's still bugging me. If they didn't know, why wouldn't they?

 

[GoingByMyGut]

Odyssey - quoting SI Advance article for clarity. It does not say "she went to the movies with an acquaintance", but in rereading, I can't help but wonder whether there is something to be gleaned from the wording / positioning of events that is outside the box of what we think we know?

ETA: IE. we have seen one police report. could there be another?

http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2013/09/38_years_on_brother_of_staten.html

BBM: I would not read too much into this. The strategy to keep from being pulled into incriminating someone whom LE did not view as a suspect, probably after the article was written, would have been to sever any ability to connect the writer's statements to the BF/F. That's what wording those events that way does: It creates an obtuseness that is neither incorrect nor incriminating. I think often that this legal strategy of being "intentionally obtuse" often creates artifacts that seem to suggest things that don't exist. I think it's enough to see it as an artifact of CYA editing.

 

[GoingByMyGut]

Yes-so how might any of her other friends know that Sylvia was missing? I remember MMQC saying that she herself didn't know Sylvia's other friends, and so would have no way of getting in touch with any of those people and spread the word. Nothing appears to have worked in favor of getting that word out. Does it seem at all likely that Mr. Lwowski would have mentioned that his daughter was missing, to anyone he worked with?

To your point earlier, JMoose, about what EL and MMQC said at the dorm, I was just rereading part of Thread 1 and MMQC seems to have indicated that they were all going on the premise that SL had gone away and could come back, if I am reading the statement below correctly. The statement goes to their views on "no publicity," as you suggested in an earlier post. It does not appear from this statement that MMQC had developed her strong suspicion of the BF/F at this early point in the disappearance -- or at least she wasn't voicing it -- JMO.

Thread 1, Post 720, by MMQC (BBM):
"Her mother said she did not want to label SL as unstable or attract undue attention to a possible return. Might hinder her higher education or job prospects if a full blown media attack was forthcoming. At the time I probably agreed. Now, as the saying goes hind sight is 20-20."
​

BBM: She said she didn't know SL's Wagner friends at least. MMQC and SL were only together in elementary school from grades 5-8. Then on to different high schools as well as colleges. However, MMQC did say that they knew many of the same people, and that after the disappearance she contacted mutual friends from their elementary days who might have gone to HS with SL, as well as friends MMQC went to HS with who knew SL, and told them if they knew anything to contact her -- MMQC, that is. She even said she "told them to pass the word back in '75." And that her family did the same.

Thread 2, Post 475, by MMQC (BBM):
"I called everyone I had a number for from grammar/high school and told them to pass the word back in '75. My family also passed it on by word of mouth. To my knowledge it was the only way the word got out. Nothing public."
​

I am not sure that young people take this kind of knowledge with the same kind of alarm that we do later in life. It's possible that they blew it off, as it would have scary to them to take it too seriously.

 

[Jmoose]

BBM: I would not read too much into this. The strategy to keep from being pulled into incriminating someone whom LE did not view as a suspect, probably after the article was written, would have been to sever any ability to connect the writer's statements to the BF/F. That's what wording those events that way does: It creates an obtuseness that is neither incorrect nor incriminating. I think often that this strategy of being "intentionally obtuse" often creates artifacts that seem to suggest things that don't exist. I think it's enough to see it as an artifact of CYA editing.

I wonder why she (the author) didn't mention the reward? That doesn't incriminate anyone in particular, and I know this is information that her brother wants out there. There must be a good reason why it wasn't included in the article.

 

[GoingByMyGut]

I wonder why she (the author) didn't mention the reward? That doesn't incriminate anyone in particular, and I know this is information that her brother wants out there. There must be a good reason why it wasn't included in the article.

Good question. I remember thinking about this recently in some other context and wondering if maybe he decided not to move forward with the reward. Maybe someone talked him out of it? If he had made it concrete, that would have been the ideal place to publicize it, for sure. Off the top of my head, I can't see any reason why the paper wouldn't have included that, if it was worded as asking generally for information about SL's whereabouts or what happened to her. I would think even the DA would have mentioned the reward to the reporter if it had come to pass and was something they wanted to pursue.

 

[Jmoose]

Good question. I remember thinking about this recently in some other context and wondering if maybe he decided not to move forward with the reward. Maybe someone talked him out of it? If he had made it concrete, that would have been the ideal place to publicize it, for sure. Off the top of my head, I can't see any reason why the paper wouldn't have included that, if it was worded as asking generally for information about SL's whereabouts or what happened to her. I would think even the DA would have mentioned the reward to the reporter if it had come to pass and was something they wanted to pursue.

No-he is still totally onboard with the reward ($10k)-but can't get anyone to help him implement. I am sure he mentioned it to the writer when they spoke. I received an email from him recently (last couple of weeks), and he mentioned it again.

 

[GoingByMyGut]

No-he is still totally onboard with the reward ($10k)-but can't get anyone to help him implement. I am sure he mentioned it to the writer when they spoke. I received an email from him recently (last couple of weeks), and he mentioned it again.

Huh. Truly odd. Are there any "rules" out there about this sort of thing? Would the absence of LE's backing/handling of the reward process hold it up? Or can an individual conduct a reward process themselves? I am guessing he wouldn't want to, right? To have all those possibly misplaced calls coming to him ...

BBM: Meaning LE/DA is not interested? Who else has he tried? Who else IS there to try? And why wouldn't the DA support this? Is something more involved in supporting it than publicizing it and handling the calls? ETA: I know that takes $$, but doesn't SL deserve a little effort after all this time?

 

[Jmoose]

Every time you see a reward posted for information in the news, it is attached in some way to some entity related to the local LE-some places even have a fund that contributes, so the family doesn't have to pony up the full amount. I suppose one could do it without the assistance of LE or the DA's office, but how do you get the publicity? And...there are lots of issues for an individual who wants to do this. Of course, he'd have to put it into an escrow account-and he would have to word it just so in a legal sense, so there isn't any possibility of getting sued by somebody who thought they'd be entitled to it. There are a bunch of complications for the individual who wants to do this on their own, and so this is why he hasn't done it. I don't know why they won't help him.

 

[rosemadderlake]

-Seems an individual can post a reward here? I see it is one of the selection options. There are 41 cases from NY. -Something that could be used on a publicity plan?

Find wanted fugitives, missing persons, and unsolved crimes on RewardsTV.net
http://www.rewardstv.net/post-a-reward/


-Just some thoughts: I am assuming her brother keeps in touch with CCS / Det. S and asks for updates, but if he is not satisfied with NYPD which is understandable (and because Sylvia was classed as a run away & missing for so long) there are PI’s listed here:

PINOW

http://www.pinow.com/investigations/missing-persons

“One of the big problems with police-led missing persons searches is simply that the term missing persons is so narrow. Police will only begin looking for a missing child at a specific amount of time after the child was last seen and by that time, it may be too late if the child has been kidnapped by a pedophile or child killer. Police are also reluctant, due to thinning resources, to search for people who voluntarily left home or for those who live on the streets. Even in a police-led missing person search, police will stop looking after a certain amount of time and will declare the case a cold case.

Police do their best with the resources they have, but law enforcement simply is not equipped to deal with the crime rates today. Anyone who wants real answers and fast needs to speak to a private investigator. A professional investigator will start looking for someone as soon as you feel uneasy and will continue to search as long as you are still looking for answers.”

Staten Island, New York Private Investigators
http://www.pinow.com/investigators/new-york/staten-island