Read The Last Place You'd Look for Free Online Page B

investigation of known and possible pedophiles: information police hesitate to share with families because the details are often so terrible. Most cops err on the side of caution when it comes to exposing families to such heinous possibilities.
    • Police want to control the investigation. When sharing details, especially unsubstantiated leads, authorities run the risk of interested parties taking more active roles than perhaps they should. Police understand the frustrations of families wishing to see things happen in what can often seem like an agonizing process, but they also don’t want the investigation to grow out of control. There is always a chance information in the wrong hands could turn a bad situation into a tragedy.
    • Police want to hold back certain information. It is standard procedure for police to withhold from release some details concerning the crime in order to help identify the perpetrator. A suspect with knowledge of the aspects of a case that only the guilty party or someone associated with the guilty party could know is that much closer to being convicted in court.
    And that leads to this last point: police want to build a solid case in court. It is hard for families to understand that while officers are searching for their loved one, they must also control a case’s trial integrity. Police have hard-and-fast rules they must play by, and the courts are mostly unforgiving when those rules are broken. Police are also often vilified in the press when they have bungled an investigation, so they’re sensitive in most instances to the possibility of losing a case or key evidence. They have one chance to get it right. There are no do-overs in police work.
    R
    Bill Kruziki knows all of this and he knows it well because he has handled plenty of missing persons cases himself. In his more than thirty-three years in law enforcement, he has had much experience with the investigation and coordination of investigations of missing children and adults. “As a former line officer and . . . law enforcement CEO, I have had to deal with the emotional stress from the families who frantically wanted their loved ones found safe and soon,” Bill says. “As any experienced officer [who has been involved in] this kind of investigation, we have been trained to keep all information ‘close to the vest’ and share very little detail with the media and family. I followed this train of thought for many years until that early morning on Christmas Eve when Matt vanished.”
    Even though Bill understands that police still need to keep some details about the investigation to themselves, in the days since his son vanished and his disappearance turned to tragedy, Bill has become a passionate advocate for making as much information available to the families of the missing as is feasible. He says turning the tables changes the equation on every level.
    “Family members must know that the police are going to be responsive, have empathy, and most importantly . . . not keep information from the family that may help them more readily understand where the investigation is going and what the police are going to do to find their loved one,” he says.
    He wants law enforcement to update the family regarding information gleaned from interviews with persons of interest.
    “Even if the information is basic or of no use, the family needs to hear and know that the police are actively working to resolve this case,” he says.
    Bill points out that in most jurisdictions, missing persons cases receive low priority. An already-stretched-thin blue line must work homicides, robberies, rapes, assaults, and other crimes that count toward their annual Unified Crime Reporting (UCR) statistics, which is a federal accountability program that measures the national and local crime rates. In addition to working criminal cases, police also deal with traffic issues and crime prevention, subjects that resonate with their constituents.
    Although the number of