VA - Amy Bradley - missing from cruise ship, Curacao - 1998 #3

[megsto]

Amy Lynn Bradley is still missing

Website dedicated to spreading accurate information regarding the 1998 disappearance of Amy Lynn BradleyLogin

amybradleyismissing.com

Has anyone else seen this post on the Amy is missing site? The admin says new credible info has been received! we haven’t heard anything officially in years I think, so really looking forward to an update!

Also someone earlier in the thread was asking what happened to FindingAmy, the VI

Someone posted under that username on the missing Amy site up til recently in 2023, so long after they stopped posting here. It may not be the same person, but I linked below

Amy Lynn Bradley is still missing

Website dedicated to spreading accurate information regarding the 1998 disappearance of Amy Lynn BradleyCuco's Lounge, Curacao - Amy Lynn Bradley

amybradleyismissing.com

Edit: disregard what I said about the user. the person posting on the missing Amy Bradley forum is FindAmy and the user posting here was FindingAmy.

<modsnip> but the Bradleys seem to completely buy into the sex trafficking theory, and would support everything the poster said. I have always thought she went overboard and was surprised to see the post saying theres new info.

A personal anecdote, and probably why I believe the overboard theory:

About a decade ago my cousin went on a cruise (a Royal Caribbean, actually) with his immediate family and after a night of drinking with the family jumped overboard from the balcony in their room. His mother saw him just as he was going over. The family and other passengers heard him calling for help after he fell but they didn't find him.

By all accounts my cousin was happy until that moment, close to his parents, and there was no conflict, but the video shows him going over clearly on purpose. You never know how people truly feel inside and suicide can be very impulsive.

 

[fridaybaker]

Megsto, thanks for putting up the website and asking for confirmation. I'd really love to believe that it's an "official" site of sorts.

As far as Amy committing suicide or otherwise going overboard, there are just so many issues with this. As to your point about her state of mind, I'll say this: I think many people who commit suicide appear to be happy/content immediately beforehand, so I'll put this in the "neither here 'nor there" category, as evidence neither for, or against, that theory.

There are, however, quite a few pieces of information that make Amy's case stand out: For one, she is still listed on the FBI Missing website as a person suspected to be the victim of foul play. I think that's highly unusual in a case of a person going overboard on a cruiseship. In addition, Interpol also has her listed on their watch list. Both of those items tell me that this is a highly suspicious disappearance.

There are other factors, such as the idea that incredibly few people, percentage-wise, do go overboard from cruise ships, especially where there is absolutely no evidence of it. I did the numbers a while back, and the chances are infinitessimally small.

There are multiple, credible, sightings which, within their grouping, are quite cohesive. They were made by people who have been willing to take polygraphs; to talk to the media/LE; occurred within the area which Amy disappeared -various sites around the Caribbean; included her giving her name and/or a description of her quite unique tattooes by the witness, and were in the early years after her disappearance. Despite there continuing to be, over the years, programs highlighting her disappearance, there haven't been any new, "credible" sightings in many, many years.

There are witnesses on the ship who reported seeing Amy on the morning of her disappearance with "Yellow", who had given her something to drink. He was seen shortly afterward by himself. (The "disco" sighting.) There were two elevators in the disco, the glass, passenger one, and an employee/freight one. In addition, Amy's parents not only noticed that there were some crew members who seemed to have an unusual interest in her, but Amy actually complained about them to her parents. They wanted to take her out to Carlos and Charlies on Aruba. I find that, in and of itself, a bit strange.

Then, the missing photos. As per usual on these cruises, there were photos taken of the passengers, then offered for sale. Amy's were entirely missing, despite the photographer saying that he took many.

I've written here so many times that the most frustrating thing about this disappearance is that people tend to make judgements about it based on tiny pieces of information, rather than on the whole picture. I'm not talking about just here, on Websleuths, but on other forums as well. There are so many posts floating around where posters say things such as "why would someone abduct a person off of a cruise ship?" Wouldn't it be so much easier on land. Why? I think a cruise ship is a perfect place from which to abduct someone: For starters, most people are simply out enjoying themselves with their friends in a place outside of their normal habits and reference points, among total strangers, and many are drinking. Alot. So, what might seem "out of place" to a person in their own haunts, wouldn't necessarily be noticed or questioned on a cruise ship.

Then there are the opportunities offered on a ship which we can only speculate about. I know for sure, though, that the way and manner in which passengers embark/disembark isn't the way in which crew always does, and certainly not the way freight and other cargo does. Is every crate going on (and off!) the ship inspected? If so, at what point(s)?

Then there is legal jurisdiction. Rarely do any of these cruise ships sail under an American Flag, or even a flag of a country in which they generally operate. Added to that, they sail between countries day-to-day. I would think it would be a PERFECT place from which to abduct someone, rather than on land where there isn't the nebulousness of jurisdictional questions.

Then, there is the might of the cruise line itself, with a high-powered, well paid insurance company behind them. Who in this day and age would actually think that they would have the funds to go up against such a billion-dollar industry and it's attack-dog "investigators" and insurance company?

There are those who say that it's contradictory that Amy was "afraid of the water", but went on a cruise, sat out on the balcony, etc. Actually, if one reads waaaaay back in the earlier threads, it was said that she was afraid of heights, and open water. Amy was a trained lifeguard and was not afraid of the water in general. It's hard to imagine, though, that she would accidentally fallen overboard because she was leaning up against the rail, sitting on the balcony rail, throwing up over it, etc. There was a bathroom in the room. I'd imagine a woman afraid of heights and open water would choose the toilet, but that's MOO. Also, although I think the water looks a bit scary from the height of a balcony, she wasn't actually in open water. The ship was very close to land at the time, the harbour was searched. There just wasn't any evidence that she went overboard. Possible, just as most anything is possible. Not probably, in my book.

Sadly, there are the posts ad-nauseum about how Amy doesn't "fit the profile" or some other related argument about her being taken for sex trafficking. No one, that I'm aware of, who is serious about this case thinks that Amy was originally taken to be sex-trafficked, although she quite likely was used for sex -much. The original VI pointed us toward her being used as some sort of "mule", or maybe a "handler" for the targets of who-knows-what kind of trafficking. There are all sorts of trafficking: Baby trafficking, gun trafficking, organ trafficking. All kinds. Probably as many kinds of trafficking as there are human beings. It's also been posited that she was wanted as a "breeder" or a "minder". Considering Amy's friendly, easy manner and sociability, her overall "clean-cut"appearance and "responsible" vibe, I'd say she fit someone looking for a minder. Someone who needed someone to fit-in, maybe. Someone who could give reassurance to a potentially-skittish clientele. Something like that, perhaps. She certainly wouldn't be someone who would kill the kid she was minding.

Anyway, just a few thoughts. MOO, as always.

 

[fridaybaker]

Sorry for the ahem, lengthy, post!

 

[Mica]

Sorry for the ahem, lengthy, post!

Your post was very well stated and on point.

 

[fridaybaker]

Oh my gosh...I hope they finally get some answers!! This has been one of the cases that haunts me!

Justbeachy, I agree. This case is haunting. It always sticks with me.

 

[megsto]

Sorry for the ahem, lengthy, post!

I always appreciate another’s perspective, especially one as well-laid out as yours! We don’t have to agree to appreciate the effort and time people (like yourself!) put into talking to others and connecting the dots.

My question to you, I guess, is why Amy? And if it was Amy, why would she comply?

I completely agree that all types of trafficking occur, and that cruise ships are absolute hotbeds for some types (mostly drugs). This is a well-supported fact. But human trafficking on cruises is generally labor-related “modern slavery” trafficking of people for underpaid or indentured work on ships.

I recognize your argument is that she was explicitly not taken for sex trafficking purposes but to do other types of work/labour for whoever took her. However, what I don’t understand is why Amy would be a good target?

Generally, in forced labor situations, the victim is economically and socially disadvantaged. You see situations like debt-bondage where the victim owes something and is forced to pay back in labor, or a domestic labor situation where a passport has been taken. It's not so much grab a guy off the street and make him chop your wood, it's generally a little more nuanced. Amy had a supportive middle-class American family that she was actively with, it's not the typical profile of someone that could be coerced by unknown criminals.

Amy was always going to be missed. If you are looking for someone to aid you in your illegal activities, be they trafficking in guns, drugs, or humans, why would you choose someone who would draw a lot of attention? If she’s their “nice white girl” to front to border agents or whatever, isn’t it risky that she’s a missing person?

Even if that wasn’t considered, why would Amy, once somehow smuggled off the ship with no one seeing, comply with presumably criminal acts that would be against her sensibilities? What do they have to make her do that?

“We’ll kill your family?” They can’t, the family is in the US and people would notice if something happened to them.

What people seem to be suggesting here is that there is a massive conspiracy so large that if Amy were not to comply with their demands, someone would somehow have the power to target her family and get away with it. Well, there aren’t that many people in this world with that kind of power, so is everyone suggesting that some billionaire or politician is behind this?

I just don’t quite get it. Her being kidnapped for labor of any kind relies on a couple of things that make no sense to me.

For example, for the San Francisco sighting to be real, she would have to be with people powerful enough to move her in and out of the country on false papers or undocumented, which again implies conspiracy. I am willing to believe false papers can get you around various small ports in the caribbean, but I have a harder time believing a missing US citizen was smuggled into the US on false documents.

I absolutely acknowledge that these things happen (large-scale politically organized crime and cover-ups), but I guess I don’t see the connection with Amy other than the fact that IF all sightings were accurate that implies a conspiracy.

What is the evidence for a conspiracy other than the lack of other explanations?

A P.S. because I can't figure out where this fits in to what I said above, but I've never found the crew liking Amy or wanting to hang with her odd. When I've been at resorts in the past, if I am open and friendly, the similar age employees have been friendly back and offered to take us to local spots. I've never been on a cruise, but my experience with resorts tells me this isn't obviously suspicious


P.P.S. I do appreciate your thoughtful post and do not mean to be argumentative, you seem quite knowledgeable about this

 

[Jezel]

Hello all, I've been following Amy's case for a long time and have read many of the threads on here. Something I came across the other day related to the case was interesting: this article from Travel Weekly from 2001, "Cruise line's law firm seeks fine in 'missing person' case," says that "Judge Stuart Simons ruled the Bradleys perpetrated "a fraud on the court" by concealing evidence that witnesses had seen their daughter living freely in Curacao after the disappearance."

Does anyone know anything about this? It seems to indicate that not even Royal Caribbean thought she fell off the ship. Or perhaps that they would never want to admit that if it was their belief.

Also, does anyone have any of the related court documents - the lawsuits or the grand jury testimony? I can't even figure out when the grand jury convened on the case.

I eagerly await the update from amybradleyismissing.com, along with the rest of you, I'm sure.

 

[megsto]

Hello all, I've been following Amy's case for a long time and have read many of the threads on here. Something I came across the other day related to the case was interesting: this article from Travel Weekly from 2001, "Cruise line's law firm seeks fine in 'missing person' case," says that "Judge Stuart Simons ruled the Bradleys perpetrated "a fraud on the court" by concealing evidence that witnesses had seen their daughter living freely in Curacao after the disappearance."

Does anyone know anything about this? It seems to indicate that not even Royal Caribbean thought she fell off the ship. Or perhaps that they would never want to admit that if it was their belief.

Also, does anyone have any of the related court documents - the lawsuits or the grand jury testimony? I can't even figure out when the grand jury convened on the case.

I eagerly await the update from amybradleyismissing.com, along with the rest of you, I'm sure.

The ruling isn’t so much that Royal Caribbean didn’t think she fell off the ship, it’s more that as a defendant royal Caribbean pointed out that the Bradleys cannot simultaneously sue them for wrongful death and insist the sightings of their daughter alive are true.

 

[Jezel]

That makes sense. I guess I was wondering more about the "freely" part. Perhaps it's just slightly misleading wording.

 

[chipwhitley]

It's so interesting to see there is new information in the case! I wonder what it is?

On another note I would love for there to be an "Up and Vanished" type podcast for this case.

 

[Pimlipo]

So is that ‘New Information’ post a troll or something? Or is it a credible website? No news anywhere this week.

 

[fridaybaker]

Megsto, I don't have a lot of time right now to post here, but you make some excellent points.

Overall, I think the biggest is..."why Amy"? I agree here. It is a very odd, singular, thing. For a person being trafficked for slavery or sex or the like, the last characteristic anyone would be seeking is a person with a close family, and especially one present on the cruise. I'm a bit reminded here of the Jennifer Kesse case in Orlando, wherein many posited that she could have been kidnapped for trafficking. (Her parents are very much proponents of this, in my mind because it's so painful to think that she was murdered.) Yet, the first thing I thought of in that case is that Jennifer is the last type of person one would seek to traffic, except, of course, in very unusual circumstances (such as she was simply at the wrong place at the wrong time, etc. Almost anything CAN happen in life, even if it's not probable.) I was in Orlando at the time, and Jennifer's face was plastered EVERYWHERE within a few hours after her disappearance. She had a fairly affluent, close family, a gillion friends, a high-powered, wealthy boss who put up a reward for her, etc. So, I very see the point here about Amy Bradley. Why Amy?

And I suppose I go back to things that perhaps aren't any evidence at all, but things that I find so odd and so singular about Amy's case: The fact that the FBI has always -in the beginning, and all these years later- considered her disappearance as suspicious. The fact that the cruise line fought so hard against the idea that she was kidnapped. The fact that her photos, and only her photos, were missing. The consistencies within the "credible" sightings, both in the years after her disappearnace and on the ship that morning. The fact that there are vast underworkings in this life wherein ordinary people do get swept up in very awful things, such as organ trafficking. The fact that her family did feel that people were watching their house. Does it all sound fantastical? Yes. But we know that these things do happen.

I do disagree that there would be no circumstances under while Amy might "comply" with her kidnappers. What we're talking about here isn't a lone, unorganized, kidnapping. If Amy was kidnapped, it was likely by a group that has people in high places, so to speak. I've read countless cases over the years where people in government have been part of trafficking cells, and I think those cases that come to light are probably the tip of the iceberg. If Amy was told her family would be targeted, why wouldn't she comply? But that's also very simplistic. Obviously, drugs could be involved. Officials in key places paid off. In fact, I've often thought that one of the reasons Amy would have been targeted is the fact that she very likely would comply, based on what she might have been tasked to do. But, fear is a huge motivator. According to the witnesses, she was practivally frightened out of her mind. I can think of many things that might make me comply with a kidnapper. Many. Maybe she's seen torture? Torture will make most anyone do anything.

Again, though, we're talking here about probabilities, and Amy's case is one that just stands out to me as being something incredibly out of the ordinary.

I'm sorry for the long, rambling post. I just dont' have the time right now to lay out my thoughts and "evidence", such as it is (or isn't) well. Perhaps I'll take a stab at something with more clarity (and brevity!) a little bit later.

 

[fridaybaker]

So is that ‘New Information’ post a troll or something? Or is it a credible website? No news anywhere this week.

I sort of thought that wasn't a true/credible statement. There hasn't been anything "new" in Amy's case in so many years. I hate to say it, but I think Amy has long been gone from this world. The sightings that were considered "credible" were all in the first months after she disappeared and, despite there being quite a few interviews and programs featuring Amy's case in subsequent years, there have never been any new sightings. You'd sort of think that the more publicity, the more people see and hear about the case, the more sightings there would be.

Yet, it seems to me to be working just how it would if Amy had been kidnapped: A few sightings over the months after she disappeared, then nothing. Nothing for years and years and years, despite more and more people the world over being made aware of her disappearance.

 

[ChatteringBirds]

About a decade ago my cousin went on a cruise (a Royal Caribbean, actually) with his immediate family and after a night of drinking with the family jumped overboard from the balcony in their room.

I am so sorry for your / your family's loss. Some cases of this happening have even been posted on WS recently. It's so very tragic and unfair, very impulsive. I am not sure the likelihood for Amy's case...

When I've been at resorts in the past, if I am open and friendly, the similar age employees have been friendly back and offered to take us to local spots.

Maybe that is what happened to Amy, and she thought at first it would just be an adventure, but she was mislead? IMO.

 

[Jezel]

So is that ‘New Information’ post a troll or something? Or is it a credible website? No news anywhere this week.

I don't think it's a troll post because it was posted by the admin on amybradleyismissing.com, which appears to be closed to anyone other than the family and close associates. (One of them is FindAmy, a person who could be the same as the FindAmy who used to post here on WS.)

Of course, I have no way to verify any of that.

Does anyone have any more info on the house-watching bit?

 

[fridaybaker]

Megsto, I missed that part about your cousin. I’m sorry for your loss! So, so sad.

 

[megsto]

Thank you Friday and others, I do think of him and by extension Amy quite a lot.

Friday you make good points about what makes this case just feel and look DIFFERENT like the FBIs updates and seeming belief in sightings

Re the forum post, As someone else pointed out that is the family’s site and the admin posted, no one else had privileges and registration is closed. I suppose it could be hacked and it’s a hoax but it’d be a weird site to target

 

[fridaybaker]

Megsto, regarding the forum post: I don't know how those things work. It's a private site, right? I think you are the one who posted the original message here from that site? If so, are you a member or did the Admin post something available to the public?

Sorry for my confusion!

The reason for my question is that I just think there are so many people/sites out there who give out entirely bogus information just for clicks, kicks, or what-have-you. However, it sounds like you think this is a "real" post? Because, if so- if that is a legitimate post on a legitimate Amy Bradley website, that's not only great news, but it's astonishing news, in my opinion! I so hope it's true.

 

[Jezel]

fridaybaker, I know your reply wasn't directed at me, but if I may, here's the site.

If you look at the pinned thread at the top, Dear Amy, you'll see lots of family photos (with and without Amy). There are current photos of her family; I'm not sure where a third party would've obtained those. That's what makes me think the site is legit.

However, there are some dubious posts on the site as well, such as the thread about the "Madeleine McCann connection." (It seems that Amy's name is never actually mentioned in those, and who knows what the poster meant to imply.)

Astonishing, certainly. I can't wait to hear what the update is. I hope we'll find out soon, but I'm beginning to wonder as it's now been almost a week and nothing so far.

megsto, please forgive me for not offering my condolences about your cousin. My jaw hit the floor when I read your post about it. So, so tragic. I am so sorry for your family's loss.

​

 

[BethAnn777]

Has it ever been mentioned if Amy had a significant other prior to going missing?