I understand your frustration. I think there is a brutal truth about how the community (not websleuths, but the public) responds to cases of missing people. They prefer a certain type of victim to rally their sympathies. In some ways, Christina fits that type: She is pretty, with some college education, she is not homeless or mentally ill, she has never lost contact with her family, and she does not have a criminal record. If I am incorrect in any of the above, please correct me.
In one way only does she deviate from the sort of person the public prefers to identify with: She had a boyfriend (maybe a circle of friends) who used illegal drugs (and in the case of the bf, maybe sold them). In order to gain sympathy for Christina, this was hardly something that her family would choose to see emphasized. Why? Because sometimes the brutal fact is that if the public doesn't care the police do not care. In terms of public service, almost everything is driven by funding and political agendas. The right publicity drives those agendas. Would you not be adamant in trying to secure the attention of law enforcement to find your missing child?
In criminal law, defense attorney putting the victim on trial to raise a smoke screen of confusion for the jury and perhaps secure a not guilty verdict is as old as trials themselves.
So much depends this: The victim needs to be sympathetic.
I think you can read between the lines here. I am trying to be polite.
