WASHINGTON--When Janice Smolinski first told the police that her son was missing, they dismissed it as a voluntary runaway case.
After all, Billy Smolinski was a 31-year-old man living in Waterbury, a 6-foot-tall tow-truck driver who owned a small house and German shepherd. The local police didn't think there was anything suspicious about his August 2004 disappearance.
For Smolinski, that was the first of many walls she hit in a years-long search for her son--an effort that has now stretched to Washington, as she and her husband, Bill Smolinski, push for federal legislation to beef up the way law enforcement officials handle missing-persons cases.
Last week, Rep. Chris Murphy, D-5th District, introduced a bill that would provide more funding for the National Missing and Unidentified Persons System and would connect that database with the FBI's national crime database. Connecticut Sens. Joseph Lieberman, an independent, and Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, have sponsored the same proposal in the Senate.
Smolinski and other victims' rights advocates say it would go a long way toward fixing problems that stymie families and law enforcement alike as they try to solve missing persons cases, particularly those involving adults that don't get much media or police attention. A similar bill sailed through the House last year on a voice vote.
But it's been more controversial in the Senate, where Sen. Tom Coburn, a Republican from Oklahoma, blocked the bill from coming to a vote last year. Coburn objected first and foremost to the bill's price tag, which the Congressional Budget Office put at $46 million over four years, but which Coburn says could go higher. Among other things, Murphy's initial version of the bill called for giving the Department of Justice an extra $2.4 million annually, over the next five years, to maintain public databases containing records relating to cases involving missing persons and unidentified human remains.
Coburn also raised concerns that the bill--by mandating that the FBI's National Crime Center Information (NCIC) database share information with the National Missing Persons' system--requires "the sharing of personally identifiable information between government databases." He said that's a particular concern because the National Missing and Unidentified Persons System, also known as NamUs, is publicly accessible and can sometimes include inaccurate information.
The NamUs database has two separate pieces-one on missing persons and one on unidentified remains. Coburn noted that while the public can't input information into unidentified remains section, they can do so in the missing persons part.
"There is no way to guarantee the consistency or accuracy of publicly entered information," Coburn wrote in a letter last year to the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, outlining his reasons for blocking the bill. "The ability of NamUs and NCIC to share information via this legislation magnifies these concerns."
Smolinski began pushing for the federal legislation several years ago, after suffering through a "nightmare plaguing the world of the missing and the unidentified dead." She described her family's saga in testimony before a House Judiciary subcommittee last January.
It began on Aug. 24, 2004, when they realized Billy had disappeared. After the mandatory three-day waiting period, they filed a missing persons report and expected the police to launch an "aggressive investigation."
When the police classified the case a voluntary runaway, the Smolinskis hired a private investigator. And they discovered, through their own digging and Freedom of Information Act requests, that the police had filed inaccurate reports about Billy's case and lost seven DNA samples, among other lapses.
Janice Smolinski believes her son was murdered, and she says the police's inattention has left them in limbo and the case unsolved. "To this day, the only person who has been arrest in this case is me," Smolinski told the House panel last winter. "When we tried to hang missing person flyers on telephone poles in Woodbridge, the police arrested me." (The police did not bring charges.)
Waterbury's police department strengthened its handling of missing persons' cases in the wake of the Smolinski case. And state lawmakers in Hartford passed a law in 2007 calling for a more uniform approach to such cases, among other changes.
Now, Smolinski's crusade in Washington has caught on with other families who have missing relatives and who say they, too, have run into one stumbling block after another.
There are an estimated 100,000 active missing persons cases nationally, according to the Justice Department. One key problem, experts and advocates say, is connecting information about missing persons with data on unidentified remains.
Murphy said that although law enforcement officials find more than 4,000 unidentified human remains every year, medical examiners and coroners often don't have the resources to enter all the information about those bodies into the national database. He pointed to a survey from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in which 80 percent of coroners' offices said they rarely or never used the national unidentified remains database. In addition, law enforcement officials don't always know about that resource, or fail use it even if they do.
Murphy also said there's a "myriad of unconnected federal, state, local and nonprofit databases," so a missing-person report may be filed in one system and an unidentified remains report entered into another, with no ability to cross-check for connections.
He said his bill addresses these problems by strengthening NamUs, allowing law enforcement to connect it with the FBI's national crime information database, and providing enhanced funding for the Justice Department to maintain NamUs as the centralized system for all such cases.
The bill would also provide competitive grants to coroners, medical examiners, and law enforcement agencies to foster more and better reporting of missing persons and unidentified remains cases. The funds could also be used for training police and others on how to use the databases and how to improve their handling of missing persons' cases.
Kristina Rose, deputy director at the federal Office of Justice Programs, testified in favor of the legislation last year. She said the proposal would "encourage and facilitate the sharing of information from disparate systems critical to the resolution of missing persons and unidentified decedent cases."
Some victims' advocates have championed the legislation and last year urged Coburn to drop his "hold" on the bill, a procedural measure used to block a vote.
"It will close a lot of cases--a lot of long-term missing child cases--and that provides closure for families," said Carolyn Atwell-Davis director of legislative affairs for the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. "It's another tool that law enforcement can have and that's important."
But Coburn has said that Congress needs to hold serious hearings into the current system, to make sure this bill doesn't create duplicative programs and waste federal dollars.
"While there's no question that law enforcement should endeavor to quickly locate missing persons and return them to their families, the federal government is already making efforts to facilitate this process," he said in his letter. He said Murphy's bill, "while well-intentioned," may add a new layer of waste and excessive spending to Washington's federal books.
Kristen Bossi, a spokeswoman for Murphy, said his office changed the proposal this year to address some of Coburn's concerns. They shaved the bill's $46 million price tag by about $10 million, she said, although the Congressional Budget Office has yet to provide an official cost estimate. And they changed the grant program from one that involves only federal funding to one that requires local matching dollars. In addition, they bill now includes a provision allowing law enforcement officials to override inaccurate information in the system.
A spokesman for Coburn did not respond to questions about the new version of the bill, so it's unclear whether he will let it go through this time around. In addition, since Republicans control the House, the legislation may run into new hurdles in that chamber.
Smolinski says the legislative battle won't impact her son's case, which is now 6 1/2 years old. But she said she hopes the changes can make a difference for other families who have missing relatives.
"If it can happen to my son, it could happen to anyone," she said. "I'm very hopeful that it will go through this time."
I am sorry that Ms. Smolinski does not know what happened to her son. Perhaps he simply wanted to leave, and she is controlling, or likes drama.
Let's consider how this law will actually be used.
I will wager that a number of people leave simply because staying appears no different than being dead already. Perhaps they can't find work, the spouse is insufferable, can't keep up appearances and need a do-over, can't dump the house - whatever. This law, when enacted, will allow harridans all over the world to enlist public servants - state, local and Federal police
Read MoreJane, I would like to address a few of your comments. First, this bill is designed for those who are considered missing persons and not those who choose to run off from their present living status. The statistics show that nearly 80% of missing adults are located deceased or have clear indications of foul play and their bodies never recovered. Insinuating that Mrs. Smolinski may be making statements out of "drama" is quite disrespectful given the circumstances that her son's case has already clearly been deemed as suspicious in nature and not one of wanting to "vamoose" across the
Read MoreTo "Jane Smith",
I would first like to know if you have ever had a loved one disappear? Have you ever searched for a loved one?
I am quite certain your answer will be NO, well I have.
NOONE has the "right" to vamoose, in your terms. When doing such thing, the missing person is leaving a family behind. My nephew was 21 when he went for a walk...to never return alive. Found DEAD on the side of a highway, hit and run, probably by someone with as much regard to human life as you have...little to none.
To Janice
Read MoreJane, you are really living in the dark. My son is also missing and presumed a victim of a homicide. I was very close to my son and have not heard from him since 7/30/07. He left all his belongings behind, including his dog who he never went anywhere without. This "DRAMA" as you put it, no one needs. I doubt that you lay awake nights wondering what happened to your child. Otherwise you would not have been so insensitive with your comments about Jan. By the grace of God, may you you
Read More"Simply wanted to leave." You really know nothing about this case or the world of the missing do you? The sad thing is if Billy Smolinski had never been reported missing and his remains were found you would be pointing fingers at the family for not filing report. In the world of the missing the families and loved ones of the missing are in the UNKNOWN .... they do not know what has happened in most cases. In Billy's case all things point to who he was murdered.
Sane people do not vacate their lives.
Read MoreI don't know what we would do without Jan Smolinski in this fight for us. Us being the families of missing children. I know I can't take up the fight. After 13 years of waiting to bring my son home to, at least, give him the respect of a funeral with family surrounding him one last time, getting up in the morning is a fight. Lifting the fork to my mouth is a fight. Planting a flower is a fight. Cooking a meal is a fight. Do you understand JANE SMITH? I
Read MoreI am here to address a serious problem we have in this country, there will be Jane's that pop their head in occasionally to try and disrupt, her words are echoes of the problems that plague our nation.
Have we become a disposable society? I would not even like to dwell on that fact, but reality is we need to get a handle on this situation. People are being gunned down in the streets, children are taught to be afraid to talk with strangers. Parents are worried for their child's safety and rightfully so. We have become like
Read MoreTrying to take emotion out of this discussion, I believe the Senator has some legitimate concerns.
"Coburn objected first and foremost to the bill's price tag, which the Congressional Budget Office put at $46 million over four years, but which Coburn says could go higher. Among other things, Murphy's initial version of the bill called for giving the Department of Justice an extra $2.4 million annually, over the next five years, to maintain public databases containing records relating to cases involving missing persons and unidentified human remains."
What happened to the million dollar price tag this bill first declared
In our country's infancy stage we had some honorable people who knew right from wrong, family and community being the core of our structure including a deep Faith and trust in God. Where are we going and what have we become? I know there are good honorable people today, thay are trying to ensure a better tomorrow.
Does not our National anthem, dollars and coins say "in God we trust". A wise man recently said " You will know when there is a difference being made because someone will come in and try to stop the good
Correction to a number given above.
To prevent "double dipping" the bill stipulates that NamUs can receive no more than 2.4 million dollars per year
in federal funds through the funds authorized in Billy's Law or any other federal law.
Correction to a number given above.
To prevent "double dipping" the bill stipulates that NamUs can receive no more than 2.4 million dollars per year
in federal funds through the funds authorized in Billy's Law or any other federal law.
Namus is not a public or federally owned database. It is privately owned. A moneymaker perhaps for someone?
Even taking your figures, Janice, 2.4 million over five years does not equal 46 million dollars. Why are we being asked to provide financial incentives to Law Enforcement and Medical Examiners to just do what it is their job to do in the first place? We are watching one city after another have to curtail the police and fire departments already. If we really have 46 million dollars to spare, let's use it for Law Enforcement SALARIES
Read MoreBy the way, we still have people in this country who are "honorable people who knew right from wrong, family and community being the core of our structure including a deep Faith and trust in God". Just because we may disagree about priorities for spending taxpayer money doesn't mean I'm not an honorable person who knows right from wrong. If you are seeking supporters, you would likely get more of them with a little honey and kindness and not condescension.
Please read carefully too. I never said we needed to take compassion out of this discussion, just "emotion". If
The Department of Justice says that it takes 1.3 million dollars a year to maintain a database. So why does Billy's Law ask for 2.4 million?
http://www.ctmirror.org/sites/default/files/documents/Billy%27s%20Bill%2...
I agree with Jane. People have the right to walk out of their lives. It falls under the right to privacy.
I have had a close relative disappear. They reconnected with the family a few years later. He was living in Africa. We didn't freak out, we accepted that he walked out of his life and may or may not return. It was his right.
As for 80% found dead, I doubt that very much. You want to find large communities of missing persons? Check out your local homeless shelter.
"If the state does not change its demographic trajectory, it faces a bleak future."
A Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis report, "Recovery Stirring, But Will Connecticut be Too Old to Compete?"
Get the latest headlines right to your mobile
Visit m.ctmirror.org on your mobile device
FOLLOW US ON: 
CT Mirror is now well into its 3rd year. Since our launch on Jan. 25, 2010, we've published more than 4,000 stories and had 3.5 million web visits.
From the start, our goal has been to offer readers information on Connecticut policies and politics - and the personalities behind both - to help residents make the best decisions possible about their lives and those of their families.
PROUD SPONSOR
CT JOBLESS RATE
January 2011: 9.3%
February 2011: 9.2%
March 2011: 9.1%
April 2011: 9.0%
May 2011: 8.9%
June 2011: 8.9%
July 2011: 8.9%
August 2011: 8.8%
September 2011: 8.6%
October 2011: 8.5%
November 2011: 8.3%
December 2011: 8.1%
January 2012: 8.0%
February 2012: 7.8%
March 2012: 7.7%
April 2012: 7.7%
PROUD SPONSOR
Printer-friendly version
Send to a friend