Low cost brand new custom PC systems from £200.

Rennie Mackintosh Gifts

This handbook is concerned with the search for ‘lost’ persons. Historically we have included ‘lost’ persons within ‘missing’ person enquiries but this doesn’t always bring about the desired response.

We must first differentiate between a ‘lost’ person and a ‘missing’ person before we can begin to apply the search theory/philosophy correctly and efficiently.

A ‘lost’ person can be defined as one who is:

            “lost, overdue, injured or despondent

  as opposed

  to a person who is missing by their

  own choice or action”

Lost – the literal meaning according to the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) is ‘ strayed or separated from it’s owner’ and ‘become unable to find or follow’

This fits nicely with the ‘lost’ person definition. Take, for example, a very young child who has wandered off from his parents in the countryside. – this could be a person deemed to have strayed or separated from his parents, or when strayed is now unable to find or follow his way to his parents.

If a parent were able to find their child properly then they would not, of course, be lost.

The same definition fits an elderly person or someone suffering from a mental disorder such as Dementia of the Alzheimer’s type, (DAT). Such a person can and often does wander off and become confused and therefore lost.

In fact, the young child or the Alzheimer’s sufferer is the ‘classic’ lost person and to whom we can effectively apply the concept to.

Overdue – The OED meaning is, not surprisingly, ‘not arrived by the due time’.

An example here would be a group of ramblers/walkers in an area such as Dartmoor. They were due to be collected at a certain time and place but have failed to turn up. In these circumstances it would not be unreasonable to assume the group have become lost.

Despondent – ‘In low spirits’ ( OED )

A despondent can be described as someone who is depressed and one who may, in the terms we are talking about, be inclined towards self-harm or suicide. Although they are missing by their own actions the behaviour of such persons are well documented from similar incidents and as such are ‘predictable’ to a major degree. Therefore the search theory contained within this handbook caters equally well for this category of person.

What is NOT a lost person then?

We have identified how to define a ‘lost’ person so perhaps the next step is to identify what is NOT a lost person. These should be described as ‘missing’ persons. The concept of differentiating between lost and missing persons is not easy for some as, already mentioned, we have always treated them alike. As the understanding and knowledge of the concept grows the prospective search manager will be more able and at ease to treat each case separately and according to their own needs.

Of course, the police will still react to all reports, whether missing or lost, it is merely the method and urgency which will differ.

An example of a missing person may be a 16 year old female, staying with her boyfriend overnight against the wishes of her parents. The parents may report the girl as a missing person but she is not lost.

Likewise, a teenager missing from local authority care, one who is a regular runaway, is not lost. They are missing by their own actions and although the matter must still be investigated according to Force Policy and Procedures, the lost person search concept does not apply at all. Such reports are not uncommon and a considerable amount of police time and resources can be expended trying to locate them.

Recognise the concept…………

If we classify someone as being ‘lost’ then we will know that the methods required to find them are different to that for a missing person.

Where this concept applies a full-scale immediate response may be required.

This urgency factor cannot be dismissed or disregarded. Later in this handbook survivability statistics will be discussed and presented. If a search is delayed too long we may be putting lives at risk.

If, for example, a 90 year old Alzheimer’s sufferer is reported lost or missing at 1800hrs and no search is instigated until the following morning then in the middle of winter that person will almost certainly not survive the night. Unfortunately a search is not always commenced as urgently as this handbook will urge should be done. A variety of reasons may be given for delaying a search ranging from ‘too expensive to call out the right resources’ to ‘hoping the person will turn up’. This is a matter of fact and is not meant to be a criticism of past searches. The aim here is to improve our search capability thereby saving lives. In the vast majority of cases it is simply a matter of failing to recognise the urgency factor and not understanding that there is a ‘system’ to find such persons.

We must be able to recognise immediately whether the concept of lost person searching applies – speed WILL save lives – statistics prove this to be the case. Unfortunately, the same statistics will show us that delays will cost lives.

It is therefore imperative that all reports of lost and missing persons are assessed quickly and professionally by a suitably trained person. It is incumbent upon the organisation to ensure that suitably trained persons are in such a position as to be able to identify the opportunities to implement this search theory at the earliest moment.

Criminal Searches for Missing Person

Before continuing, we must mention searches for persons reported as missing in cases where criminal activity is suspected.

The probability method of searching is not relevant to the searching for persons missing as a result of criminal activity. All searching depends on analysing, to some extent, the behaviour of the subject, whether a missing person or a criminal. For a missing person we would put ourselves, as a search manager, in the shoes of the subject to try and work out where the subject has gone and hence where we should look, backed up by the databases.

Where criminal activity is suspected we would need to put ourselves in the shoes of the criminal to find out how the criminal has acted. There are databases for that too, the ‘catchem’ database. However, the two sets of databases are in no way related. So if we suspect criminal activity, we are looking at a crime search, NOT a lost person search.

In the early stages of some enquiries it may not be obvious a crime has been committed so a lost person search would be commenced at the same time as a criminal investigation begins. An example of such a scenario would be in the early stages following a report of missing children, who have, it is subsequently discovered, been abducted.

 Lost Person Searching is Unique…………

Every lost person search will involve:

What is this Concept/Theory/System?

Simply – “ by analysing the behaviour of persons lost in similar circumstances in the past we can make certain predictions about their future behaviour “

GENERALITIES NOT ABSOLUTES

This theory has been recognised and implemented in the United States and Canada for over 30 years. They have a vast amount of experience and statistics to demonstrate how people have behaved in the past and more importantly, how they may react in the future.

Some police forces and search organisations in the UK have been taught these principles for the last 10 years but the rate of take-up has been slow, particularly within the police service. The more we take this concept on board the more accurate will our own statistics become.

The statistics we use ( we will go into these in some detail later ) are mainly those compiled from case studies from across the Atlantic, but even so, they are remarkably consistent and accurate in our own environment.

Sceptics

There will, of course, be sceptics. Someone will always cite a case which falls outside the ‘system’ or statistics. Remember, no-one has ever said that everything will be cosily packaged within the concept explained here……the terms generalities not absolutes must be borne in mind. Anyone can find a case or two outside the system if they look hard enough but they won’t find many!

Without delving too far ahead we can clarify some of this with an example. It matters not what example or ‘category’ of lost person we are dealing with for the purpose of this illustration.

If subject A becomes lost and we can profile that person accurately and as a result of that profiling we can use our statistical database to say that in 94% of previous similar cases the subject was found within 1.2 miles of the point last seen (PLS). We can then go on to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy that subject A will be found in 94% of FUTURE cases within that same 1.2 miles of point last seen. Remember, we will be using databases containing 30 years experience and statistics which tell us where to look for that person.

If we want the best chance of finding subject A then we need look no further than 1.2 miles from PLS. Of course, in 6% of cases the subject was found outside of that 1.2 miles, so we must expect some cases to fall outside that distance now. But we are looking at a probability method of searching. In this case we have a 94% probability/chance of finding the lost subject within that 1.2 miles. It seems sensible, therefore, to concentrate whatever resources are available in that smaller area initially. We are always looking to maximise our chances of finding the subject – the most PROBABLE place to look.

The databases go much further than simple distances the subject may have travelled. Survivability has been mentioned but they include how the subject may be found, eg helicopter, hasty search, dogs and even where they may be found, eg uphill or downhill from PLS or whether a subject will stay on a path or head for a prominent point.

All this will be described in much greater detail later in this handbook.

For now it is hoped you have seen the value of using probability theory based on statistical databases.

“we are looking for a subject in the most probable area using the most likely resource to find that subject”

If we do this we stand a far greater chance of early success.

Keep an open mind if you are still sceptical. Once the relevance of the concept is recognised the rest will fall into place.

The following statistics are available from the Mountain Rescue Council (MRC). They are based on 1730 cases and provide some information on the possible duration of searches. These figures will be repeated in other places to reinforce the effort which will be involved.

These figures have some bearing on forward planning as will be seen as the handbook progresses.

DISCLAIMER

This site, whilst created from the perspective of a police officer, is a personal work. It does not necessarily represent the views or policy of Devon and Cornwall Constabulary.

The contents of this site are written in good faith, however the author can accept no responsibility for any loss, harm or damage howsoever caused by the use of content from this site.

You may copy and re-distribute content from this site provided the above disclaimer clearly accompanies any copy. The content of this site is the copyright of Michael H Rose and any copies or distribution of the contents must be accompanied with the copyright details and acknowledgement of the author