VA - Amy Bradley, 23, Petersburg, 24 March 1998 - #2 - ***READ FIRST POST***

[Jersey*Girl]

Looking at the video a little closer, I do see some inconsistencies. Amy's eyes appear to be a little more widely-set. With the right-eyes, nose, and mouth aligned, the left eye appears to drift outward when the overlay switches to Amy. There is a very slight difference in camera angles that may account in-part for that difference, but I don't think the difference in camera angles is substantial enough to explain the apparent difference in pupillary distance.

Also, the ears appear to be quite different.

Here's the link again:
http://youtu.be/Q-GaKZsHN3Q

Carl, thank you again. I keep going back & forth whether I believe it's her or not. However here's something to think about: If that picture wasn't proven to be Amy, then that would explain why the FBI & Interpol haven't shared the data of where that picture originated. Then again, if these authorities knew it wasn't Amy & held that bit of info from the Bradleys, well that'd be kinda odd to say the least... I'm up in the air. We did this in that CMA pic & I was absolutely positive it was her & as it turned out I was 100% wrong - it wasn't her, it was a chick that loves . So, is this Amy or not? From my understanding nobody has verified they're absolutely certain it's her. The closest I've seen anyone saying they're certain is on the Dr Phil show where it was said it very well could be and that several FBI / professional people looked at the comparisons...

Ok, back to my date night with 2 of my rotten sons...

 

[neesaki]

Looking at the video a little closer, I do see some inconsistencies. Amy's eyes appear to be a little more widely-set. With the right-eyes, nose, and mouth aligned, the left eye appears to drift outward when the overlay switches to Amy. There is a very slight difference in camera angles that may account in-part for that difference, but I don't think the difference in camera angles is substantial enough to explain the apparent difference in pupillary distance.

Also, the ears appear to be quite different.

Here's the link again:
http://youtu.be/Q-GaKZsHN3Q

Wow,this is awesome. And confirms my belief even more that it is Amy. Same facial shape, same lips, same eyes, same nose. The only difference seems to be slight which is due to age, and that she's not smiling in the later photo so her lips are down turned slightly. The appearance that the ears are different is due to the very different hairstyles, very short versus long, and the way the hair covers and disguises the shape of the ears. Notice how in the photo w/ long hair, how it goes back behind the ears thus softening the edges and perhaps giving the illusion the ears are slightly smaller than in the earlier photo. Long hairstyles also completely change the appearance of the lines and angles of a person's face. I used to have long hair and I looked totally different when I look at photos of myself. Thanks for this link.

 

[neesaki]

so how did the scientologist know she was missing if the search over the water didn't start until after the cruise ship left to continue the cruise?

That's a very good question. I personally have not seen any proof that they are not involved and have suspicions that they could possibly be involved. But I will respect the rules as laid down by the mods. and not discuss it further.

 

[JaimeSommers]

Exactly, the whole entire article is a must read. I just wish we had the true exact date this story ran...

Part III: April 28, 1999

http://m.styleweekly.com/richmond/part-iii/Content?oid=1383740

 

[neesaki]

I don't recall hearing that Y was one of the handlers but I may have missed that. He did take a polygraph test and it was inconclusive so there was no reason to take him into custody or anything else. He was contacted by the Television show (may have been Vanished) to give information and declined but then complained about how he was portrayed.

As for pictures of the other, specifically AZ and his wife, I don't know that there is an actual photo of AZ, the only picture we had of his wife was an older picture that FA found/supplied.
'
I suspect there aren't photo's etc of these people because there are no credible links associating them with Amy's disappearence, the only connection we have is the website Amy's picture was found on and the owner of that AAV place stated that Amy definitely wasn't someone there and he had no idea how her picture got there.

Yellow was identified by witnesses as the last person seen with Amy on the cruise ship that morning she vanished.

IIRC, Yellow was also identified as one of the handlers on the beach that was seen with Amy by the scuba diver. I will have to go back and find that info.
An inconclusive polygraph and his behavior afterwards is enough in itself to raise red flags for me, let alone him being identified as the last person to be seen with Amy that morning she went missing.

I personally can't understand why this man wasn't taken into custody, except for the fact that the FBI really has little power, if I understand correctly, no jurisdiction. Concerning this, I welcome anyone's input and correction as I could certainly be wrong. TIA

 

[neesaki]

March 24, 1998: Amy Lynn Bradley Disappears from the Royal Caribbean Rhapsody of the Seas

IV. The Sightings

a. August 1998: Porto Marie, Curacao
In August of 1998 (six months after Amy disappeared) a Canadian engineer named David Carmichael was diving with a friend at the beach in Porto Marie, Curacao. Carmichael was organizing his equipment on the beach when he noticed a woman and two men walking toward him. He described the woman as having a horrified expression on her face, appearing frightened. When Carmichael began to respond to her, one of the men accompanying the woman ran between them. Carmichael reported that the man gave him a threatening look.

Later, Carmichael and his friend were on the deck of an outdoor bar, sitting close to Amy and the two "handlers." Carmichael had full view of tattoos and other distinguishing things about Amy, though he did not know at that time who she was.

When he returned to Canada, Carmichael saw Amy featured on a program. He immediately contacted the Bradley family and the FBI, providing specific details that helped identify the woman as Amy. Carmichael has passed polygraphs and willingly participated in interviews.

Though Royal Caribbean later sent their attorneys to his home in an attempt to intimidate him, Carmichael has absolutely maintained that one of the men he saw with Amy that day was Alister "Yellow" Douglas.

View attachment 26416

Ah, here ya go. Thanks Jaime.

 

[danzn16]

Wow,this is awesome. And confirms my belief even more that it is Amy. Same facial shape, same lips, same eyes, same nose. The only difference seems to be slight which is due to age, and that she's not smiling in the later photo so her lips are down turned slightly. The appearance that the ears are different is due to the very different hairstyles, very short versus long, and the way the hair covers and disguises the shape of the ears. Notice how in the photo w/ long hair, how it goes back behind the ears thus softening the edges and perhaps giving the illusion the ears are slightly smaller than in the earlier photo. Long hairstyles also completely change the appearance of the lines and angles of a person's face. I used to have long hair and I looked totally different when I look at photos of myself. Thanks for this link.

This is from Thread 1: [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8301331&postcount=594"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - SPOTLIGHT CASE VA - Amy Bradley, 23, Petersburg, 24 March 1998[/ame].

This picture is what 1st got me really questioning this photo. Although I do believe it is more than likely Amy I also know on Dr. Phil and Vanished they said they were unable to verify that it was Amy but that an expert believed that it was likely that it was. Her ear here seems to look much different. In the middle picture it is more narrow, the lobe is of less width than the one on the right. The ala of the nose (the widest part) appears to be a different shape to me. The brows appear to arch differently, however this could be due to make up. I don't like to discuss other aspects of the face as that changes with age and weight. But the nose, brows, and ears do not change and they appear different to me, whether it be the quality of the photo the angle or what I do not know.

 

[JaimeSommers]

Ah, here ya go. Thanks Jaime.

Welcome.

 

[neesaki]

Maybe Amy and her handlers were not actually supposed to be in San Fran that day.

Perhaps there were issues with the boat they were on. Would that be possible?

Either way, I suppose she would have required ID to pass through into the US at Customs.

What is the possibility that there are no point of entry records for Amy, her handlers and their possible pseudonyms in San Fran on or around April 18, 2003, because they were ALREADY in the U.S.?

JMO

Maybe Amy was in SF because she wanted to be. Perhaps it was a reward, a small "freedom" she had earned. Her handlers went there for who knows what... and certainly they had to be ever present and wouldn't let her out of their sight, but it would still be like a vacation after being cooped up in some compound or in some high walled, fenced off estate doing who knows what on some tiny island for 24/7. Just a thought ....

 

[Teche]

Looking at the difference in the ear shapes could possibly be explained narrowing of the lobes with the aging process and the multiple piercings and the tugging by the weight of large earrings.

 

[Sapphire]

Few people frequent such roving Adult Vacation spots such as Playa El Agua on the Isla de Margarita. Our information was that when American undercover agents infiltrated this roving playground, they were told that the girl in the pictures was unavailable and off-island ... on many occasions.

This Caribbean-Venezuelan sex vacation company is under surveillance. They have offices on Margarita Island, Caracas and Canada (Ontario, I think). The girl in the photos was said to be on Curacao.

According to Dr. Phil's forensic experts, Amy's parents and our opinion, the girl in the photos is Amy Bradley.

With Aloha,

Harry


http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2005/11/hyscience_dr_ph.php

 

[Tabs1]

The person who was posting on this thread was a verified insider on the case and said that the San Fran sighting was absolutely legit. Take that for what it is worth.

I disagree about tattoos not being proof. One tattoo...yeah, maybe someone else out there had the same tattoo in the same place. Amy had FOUR tattoos. I realize they might not all be visible, but even have two of the same tattoos in the same places on her body would be proof, in my opinion. The odds of two similar-looking people having the same tattoos in the same places are very slim.

I appreciate that a verified insider stated that this sighting was 'legit'. However, without knowing how the sighting was actually 'verified', it doesn't make sense to me. Just my subjective, personal opinion

I agree that it's unlikely two similar looking women would have the same tattoos in the same places. However, it's also fair to say that eye witness testimony is not always reliable (assuming that this is how the San Fran sighting was verified).

As someone else mentioned it would be really interesting to know if there was any surveillance footage of this sighting.

 

[danzn16]

Looking at the difference in the ear shapes could possibly be explained narrowing of the lobes with the aging process and the multiple piercings and the tugging by the weight of large earrings.

She was taken in 1998 and these pictures were put on the web in 2002. Usually it takes decades for lengthening of earlobes and her ear lobe would be longer if this was the case. This is also usually do to decrease in collagen due to the aging process usually seen in older women. Amy was still a very young woman in 2002, and even still today. Good thinking though!

 

[neesaki]

From Part III Amy Interrupted

The Bradleys are adamant that Amy didn't jump. She wasn't suicidal and she wasn't stupid, they say, and she was afraid of the ocean. As for any shoes being left in the room or on the balcony, Amy packed at least 10 pair, they say, and they're not sure which are missing.
http://www.styleweekly.com/richmond/part-iii/Content?oid=1383740

:waitasec: So why is it that we keep hearing that Amy wasn't wearing any shoes. Sounds to me like they aren't certain which shoes are even missing or not missing, or if she was or wasn't wearing shoes. Seems a little questionable to me that she would've left the room without something on her feet.

 

[neesaki]

Unless she was fed narcotics...

Very possible, imo. From what I have read, that is one thing these sex traffickers do to keep their captives under their control. Then they get dependent on the drugs and thus are dependent on their captors. I truly don't know after a while, if these poor girls and women even want to be found if they are totally dependent on drugs. Especially if they also believe that their families could be in danger as well.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more it concerns me that Amy's life could be more endangered given the high profile nature of her case, and the information that has been so widely released such as on the Dr. Phil show, even on the Vanished show. I have actually found myself holding my breath when I stop and think about the serious and fragile nature of Amy's situation ... :no: I'm just not totally sure as to what is safe and what is not safe to discuss anymore.

 

[neesaki]

2002?

Four years after her disappearance so her hair definately could have grown long in that time period

Humidity can change the hair texture
her hair did not appear "stick" straight in the cruise pics so it may have gotten curly and frizzy as it grew

Drugs also cause changes in hair texture.

Also, remember how long Casey Anthony's hair grew in just 3 years?

 

[Chorley8]

Very possible, imo. From what I have read, that is one thing these sex traffickers do to keep their captives under their control. Then they get dependent on the drugs and thus are dependent on their captors. I truly don't know after a while, if these poor girls and women even want to be found if they are totally dependent on drugs. Especially if they also believe that their families could be in danger as well.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more it concerns me that Amy's life could be more endangered given the high profile nature of her case, and the information that has been so widely released such as on the Dr. Phil show, even on the Vanished show. I have actually found myself holding my breath when I stop and think about the serious and fragile nature of Amy's situation ... :no:

Superb post I think a lot of us here are missing that possible equation of 1. concern for their family and then 2. forced addiction.

I think you are right as well we have to weigh our comments against the possibility of danger to the victim and even to others in this case and others. Really something to think about. There is an unrelated case I am interested in where against all opinion I am not sure the victim is really deceased. And it really makes you think even if you were right maybe it would be better to say nothing. Again, excellent post.

 

[ChateauMarmont]

After some posts in the last two weeks or so , I've done some digging ... I feel there are many things to look at besides some info presented on here.

I think this may be worth sleuthing

http://web.archive.org/web/20071226...se_Code=CA&pCase_Loc=01&id=AAAA8tAAHAAAPq8AAE

 

[neesaki]

I have never heard this before or seen it posted here. Did I just miss it?

"A witness claims to have seen her taken off the ship against her will later, according to a lawsuit filed by her parents".

Cosmopolitan features story of Amy Bradley
A Cautionary Tale
BY RICHARD FOSTER
http://www.styleweekly.com/richmond/cosmopolitan-features-story-of-amy-bradley/Content?oid=1387319

 

[Bree0372]

In Part 3 of the StyleWeekly article, I thought these things were interesting:
http://www.styleweekly.com/richmond/part-iii/Content?oid=1383740

The Bradleys and their lawyers angrily deny that Ron or Brad had anything to do with it, and steadfastly claim that Royal Caribbean acted negligently. In court, Hall says, they intend to produce evidence showing that a Royal Caribbean crew member was missing on another vessel months before Amy's disappearance and the response was entirely different. All the stops were pulled out to find the missing woman though she, too, hasn't been found, Hall says.

I guess it makes a difference when it's one of their own as to how far they will go to find someone. :banghead: I wonder what her name is and if she's ever been found...by now.

"She had her driver's license in her pocket and it could have conceivably been used to clear her through U.S. Customs in San Juan, but the exit records at U.S. Customs for Rhapsody of the Seas passengers for March 28th are missing, according to the Bradley lawyers, who tried to get them through a federal Freedom of Information Act request."

Is that just too convenient or is it just me?

I did see that the Captain of the ships name is Captain Kjetil Gjerstad. He is from Norway. I hope that it's okay to link to someones Flickr account. If not, please remove. A pic of the Captain: [ame="http://www.flickr.com/photos/21591624@N00/4924743961/"]Captain Kjetil Gjerstad | Flickr - Photo Sharing![/ame]

ETA: My picture shows up as a black box, but if you click on the box, it takes you to his photo.

Here's a comment made on a message board about the same Captain:
[ame="http://cruiseforums.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=715919"]What can you tell me about Capt Kjetil Gjerstad[Cpt on LOTS!]? - Cruise Critic Message Boards[/ame]

We had Gjerstad on Vision at Christmas in 2006 and he was invisible, never saw him mingling witht the pax. No humor in his announcements. I asked him when we got our formal pic taken with him if he had ever been on Rhapsody of the Seas and he said no. But according to the above Behind the Name Tag info, he supervised her construction!! I didn't like him, but that's just me

Wasn't Amy and her family on the Rhapsody of the Seas? If so, I wonder why he would deny being on the ship? :waitasec:

ETA2: He is now onboard the Liberty OTS - Capt Kjetil Gjerstad (started rotation 10-29-11)
ETA3: Another thread on the cruise board shows: Liberty OTS - Capt Kjetil Gjerstad (started rotation 2-27-12)