Etan Patz
The six-year-old boy kissed his mother good-bye at 8 a.m. on May 25, 1979, and walked down two flights of steps into the crowded city street. The woman stood on the fire escape balcony, arms folded and patiently watched her son march toward the intersection of Prince and Greene Street.She had just given him a dollar to buy a soda. His school bus stop was located only two blocks west from where he lived. This was the first time her son was allowed to walk the route unassisted. Prince Street is a tree-lined avenue in the SoHo neighborhood of Manhattan, which was undergoing a dramatic change in 1979. Originally an industrial area containing factories, warehouses and businesses, SoHo was being transformed into a trendy, much-desired neighborhood by young, upcoming professionals yearning to escape from the high rents of the Upper East Side. They came into the neighborhood with plenty of money and fresh ideas. They converted old manufacturing lofts into spacious, airy apartments. Broken-down warehouses became successful condominiums while abandoned factories became gourmet delis and trendy cafes.
The little boy with the big smile walked past storefronts carrying his oversized book bag. He glanced behind him to see his mom still watching from the distance. As the boy approached the corner, he turned his head. A wisp of fine brown hair blew into his face. Mother and son exchanged a brief, spontaneous smile. Beyond him, she could see a small group of his classmates waiting for the bus in the distance. She turned and went back upstairs to tend to her other two children. She would never see her son alive again.
The boys name was Etan Patz. Within the next few moments, Etan was stolen off SoHos busy streets. What actually happened to him and to where he was taken, remains a heart-breaking mystery. His fate, as of this writing, is still unknown. The Etan Patz case is the oldest, open missing child case in New York Citys history and probably one of the oldest in the nation. In 2003, suspicion irrevocably settled upon convicted child molester, Jose Antonio Ramos, 60, who is incarcerated in a Pennsylvania prison. In 2002, Etans long-suffering parents declared him legally dead and planned to sue Ramos in civil court. They did this to force him into a courtroom where they can ask Ramos under oath what happened to their son. Each year, on Etans birthday, his father sends a card to Ramos asking him, What did you do to our son?
Child abduction is the equivalent of a nuclear blast to a family. In many ways, having a child abducted and not ever knowing his or her true fate, like the Etan Patz case, is worse than the childs actual death. Etans father, Stanly Patz once wrote, In this crime, there was a beginning, but there is no end. This psychological limbo ensures the parents pain continues indefinitely. But thankfully, there are few cases as tragic as Etans. Most abductions, which this article will address, end with some type of finality. In some cases, it is the beginning of a life of grief to devastated parents.
The Abduction Story: Nismart
Obtaining an accurate and unambiguous picture of the missing child problem in America is difficult. The complexities of the issue are derived from the changing definition of what actually constitutes a missing or abducted child. Missing is a term that is widely used in law enforcement and if a child is missing under virtually any conditions, even if the circumstances are simply a misunderstanding of where the child should be, that incident is counted as a missing child. Parental abductions, which constitute the overwhelming majority of abducted juveniles are, statistically, not as physically harmful to the victim as stranger abductions. Parents in those situations are usually involved in a custodial feud with their spouses. The most serious type of abductions, which are classified as stereotypical kidnappings, are the rarest and, according to available research, the most dangerous. Over 40 percent of these incidents end with the childs death.In an effort to define the missing child problem, the National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway and Throwaway Children, known as NISMART, initiated a massive research project in 1988. A more recent updated survey was conducted in 1999 and is known as NISMART 2. The data discussed in this article will focus on the NISMART 2 project. Sponsored by the Department of Justice and using facts collected in over 16,000 interviews across the United States, NISMART 2 is the most up to date reliable database on missing children available. In compiling the national data, NISMART expanded the collected information to reflect the population as a whole.
There are three major definitions used in the data to describe the varying circumstances of child abduction. The first is called a non-family abduction. NISMART 2 describes this event when a non-family perpetrator takes a child by the use of physical force or threat or detains a child for at least 1 hour in an isolated place without lawful authority. NISMART defines a stereotypical kidnapping when a stranger or slight acquaintance perpetrates a non-family abduction in which the child is detained overnight, transported at least 50 miles, held for ransom, abducted with the intent to keep the child permanently, or killed. A family abduction occurs when in violation of a custody order a member of the childs family takes or fails to return a child and the child is concealed or transported out of State with the intent to prevent contact.
According to the NISMART survey, more than 203,900 children are abducted by a family member in America each year. The majority of these are abducted by one of their parents during a custodial dispute. These types of incidents usually end with the child returned to the rightful parent and the offender charged with custodial-related offenses. About 46 percent were gone for less than a week. About 21 percent were gone for more than a month. Only 6 percent were not returned to the rightful parent. On occasion, the offender can be charged with kidnapping. Parents who abduct their own children are not usually motivated by violence nor do they have profit as a goal. These incidents are driven by hostility between parents with the innocent child caught in the middle.
During the time period studied in the survey, NISMART estimated that 58,200 children were victimized in non-family abductions. This figure is an estimate only and NISMART warns that this number could be exaggerated since it was based on a small sample. In these abductions, 53 percent were committed by persons known to the victim, such as a friend, neighbor or a babysitter. About 75 percent of the perpetrators of non-family abductions are male. The victim most often (81%) was between the ages of 12 and 17 and most often (65%) female. In a finding that conforms with public perception, NISMART found that 71 percent of these abductions occurred outdoors such as the street, park, a car or in a wooded area. Less than 5 percent took place in the victims own home or yard. The motivations for these abductions were a physical or sexual assault in 77 percent of the cases. The duration of the crime was less than 24 hours in 90 percent of the cases and the child was returned alive 99 percent of the time.
The data on stereotypical kidnapping, which is widely reported in the media and the kind that terrifies parents everywhere, is much more disturbing.
Who is the Suspect?
A kidnapping is the type of abduction that is most harmful to the child, both psychologically and physically. Many of these incidents also involve some type of sexual activity. An earlier study that was funded by the Justice Departments Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) confirmed that figure and provided additional insight on the child abduction problem. This survey was conducted in 1997 and examined 600 abduction cases across the nation. Findings were very similar to the NISMART project, though not identical.The OJJDP study concluded that the most typical victim in a child abduction murder was an eleven-year-old white female from a middle class neighborhood. This mirrors the NISMART finding that 69% of the victims were female and 80% were less than 14 years old. The suspect in the case had been arrested for prior offenses against children 53% of the time and the most common crime was sexual in nature. The abductor was usually a white male, single and about 27 years old. They were either unemployed or worked in unskilled jobs, lived alone or with parents. NISMART found that the suspect was less than 29 years old in 67% of the cases.
At the time of the abduction, the offender had a valid reason for being at the scene of the crime. These reasons included a residence near the site, some type of social activity or work related duties. Over 57% of these types of abductions were considered crimes of opportunity. The method of abduction in 65% of the incidents was a sighting, a sudden assault and a quick abduction. In 53% of the incidents, the first contact between victim and suspect took place near the childs home. In 33% of the cases, the contact took place less than 200 feet from the home. NISMART concluded that only 5% of stranger abductions took place in the victims home or yard.
Based on these OJJDP findings, parents would be well advised not to expose their children to danger by associating with people who have a history of deviant or criminal behavior. And if that history includes prior crimes against children, the risk of danger is magnified greatly. In 2002, 14-year-old Elizabeth Smart was abducted at gunpoint from her home in Salt Lake City. After an avalanche of publicity and a search conducted by tens of thousands of police and volunteers, investigators still had no solid leads. It wasnt until Elizabeths own younger sister recalled a workman who visited the Smart home in 2001 that a suspect was developed.
I think I know who he might be, the 10-year-old said to police. On March 12, 2003, almost nine moths after she was abducted, Brian David Mitchell, 49, was arrested and charged with kidnapping. Elizabeth was found in his custody and safely returned to her parents. During her captivity, she was allegedly sexually assaulted several times. Later, it was discovered that her mother, Lois Smart, had picked up Mitchell off the street in downtown Salt Lake City in 2001 and brought him home to do some minor chores. Mitchell had spent several hours raking leaves and repairing the roof. During that time, he also observed Elizabeth who was home at the time.
The Smart kidnapping emphasizes several characteristics that child abductors seem to have in common. First, they most often have a prior visual sighting of the victim and the initial contact is frequently made at or near the home. Secondly, the motivation for the crime is often sexual in nature. The victim is usually a female under 14 and the suspect is an unemployed white male with a criminal record. Though the alleged kidnapper, Brian Mitchell, was 20 years older than the NISMART average, he fit the profile reasonably well. Elizabeth Smart could be considered a very lucky victim. Thats because females her age, who are abducted under similar circumstances, stand a very good chance of being killed.
The Facts
The most reliable research available indicates that there are only 100-130 cases of stranger abductions a year in the United States. These events are most frequently committed by males (86%) who are between the ages of 20 and 39 (57%). Again, the child was taken from an outdoor area in 54% of the cases but in 16% of the cases, the victim was abducted from his own yard or home. In the wider category of non-family abduction, NISMART found that 71% of the victims were taken from an outdoor area. In stereotypical kidnappings, less than 7% were taken from a store or mall. Stranger abduction events are usually committed for sexual purposes (49%) and in over 40% of the cases, the victim was murdered. That is in addition to the 4%, like Etan Patz in New York City, that have never been found.The F.B.I. handled 93 cases of stranger abductions cases in 2001. That figure is actually a decrease from years past, especially during the 1980s when the average per year hovered around 200 incidents a year. Though the victim in most of these cases did not know the suspect, there was previous contact between them prior to the crime. This contact was usually a brief visual observation that took place while the suspect had a legitimate reason for being where he was. Those reasons included work related activities, such as a home delivery, a store clerk, a drive-by, in a park or sporting event. In over 85% of the cases, the child was kept within 50 miles of the abduction location and most frequently (28%), the victim was held in the home of the suspect.
The duration of a kidnapping episode was usually less than 24 hours (90%). Only less than 10% lasted longer than one day. Non-family abductions showed the same patterns though 30% lasted less than even 3 hours. The most dramatic difference between non-family abductions and kidnappings was in the treatment of the victim. In 99% of non-family abductions, the child was returned alive. In kidnappings, a safe return occurred only 57% of the time. Ominously, the child suffered a sexual or physical assault in an astounding 86% of the stereotypical kidnappings. These findings powerfully emphasize the extreme danger of these events and the urgency of police interaction as soon as possible.
Stereotypical kidnapping, in which a child is abducted and either assaulted or held for ransom, is a crime that first appeared in the United States in the late 19th century. During the 1920s, it became entrenched in the public consciousness when a series of child abduction cases terrified parents across the country.
Abduction in America
The word kidnapping is a variation on the term kid nabbing, a practice that originated in England when children were nabbed by entrepreneur pirates who sold them to rich tobacco plantation owners in colonial America. It was not until the second half of the 19th century that professional criminals thought of seizing a human hostage and holding him for ransom, writes crime historian Colin Wilson in True Crime. Kidnapping, which was widespread in Europe and Asia, did not become commonplace in America until the early part of the 20th century. Although, cases of child abduction existed, like the famous Charley Ross case of 1874 in Philadelphia, they were extremely rare. The Ross incident, which presumably ended with the murder of four-year-old Charley (his body was never found), received nationwide publicity and inspired the nations first kidnapping law. Pennsylvania passed legislation, which defined kidnapping and set the penalty at 25 years solitary confinement and a $100,000 fine. But it wasnt until 1924, when two wealthy, privileged college students kidnapped a 14-year-old in Chicago that America awakened to the growing threat of child abduction.
Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb, both sons of millionaires and entrenched in haute society, were brilliant, rich and self-absorbed. Leopold was extremely intelligent and his I.Q. was measured at nearly 200. At 18, he became the youngest graduate of the University of Chicago and he spoke nine languages. His youth was spent in the cradle of wealth and his parents provided for his every need. Nathan had the money to buy virtually anything he desired and not surprisingly became a spoiled egotist, a snob who displayed a condescending attitude to everyone but Richard Loeb, his constant companion and some say, his homosexual lover. Loeb was also a highly intelligent student, well liked with an outgoing personality. Loeb had a passionate interest in crime and deviant behavior. He spent a great deal of his time devising elaborate criminal schemes in which he would outwit the best detectives in the country. He saw himself as a master criminal with a superior intellect who could do anything and get away with it. Leopold and Loeb together planned, what they saw as the perfect crime.
They kidnapped fourteen year old Bobby Franks, also the son of a millionaire, and immediately killed him by stabbing the boy in the back of his head. They disposed of his body by burying it inside a drainage culvert and covering it with hydrochloric acid. The same day, Leopold and Loeb sent a ransom note to the Franks family demanding $10,000 signing the note, George Johnson. Of course, neither Leopold or Loeb needed the money. It was just a ruse to throw off investigators. But the ransom was never delivered. The body of Bobby Franks was quickly found and identified. A massive manhunt began, the largest in Chicagos history, to find the killers of the Franks boy.
Unable to resist the temptation, Loeb, ever the aspiring detective, joined in the manhunt himself. He accompanied police during searches, assisted in answering phones and helped to gather witnesses. He volunteered his own speculation about the crime and offered his opinions on everything from the murder weapon to the type of person who would commit such a horrendous crime. Police grew suspicious of Loeb but said nothing. Investigators then found several pieces of crucial evidence including the murder weapon, a metal chisel. Near the culvert where Bobby Franks was buried, police discovered a single pair of prescription glasses. These glasses were traced to the company that manufactured them the year before. Only three pairs were sold with that type of frame. One pair was sold to Nathan Leopold.
When confronted with this evidence and the typewriter used to write the ransom note, both suspects later confessed. In a sensational trial held in Chicago during the summer of 1924, Leopold and Loeb were found guilty of the murder of Bobby Franks. After an impassioned plea by famed lawyer Clarence Darrow, they were sentenced to 99 years each for the crime. Loeb was later murdered in prison by another inmate who rejected his homosexual advances. Leopold was paroled in 1958 and moved to Puerto Rico. He died there in 1971.
The abduction and murder of Bobby Franks scared the hell out of American parents. It showed that a child could be taken away from the safety of the home and killed for no apparent reason. Leopold and Loeb had committed their crime solely for the purpose of getting away with it and outsmarting the police. It was not a reassuring thought for parents. The Leopold and Loeb case was one of a series of spectacular kidnappings during the 1920s and 1930s that had American families terrified of abductions. Their fears reached almost epidemic proportions in 1927 when a savage child killer mesmerized the City of Los Angeles and dominated the headlines of newspapers across the country.
He was self-absorbed, a college dropout, a man whose life was a litany of failure and rejection. Ironically, he called himself The Fox.
Bobby Franks
Loeb (l) and Leopold
True Crime by Colin Wilson
Brian David Mitchell
Elizabeth Smart
U.S. Department of Justice
Jose Antonio Ramos
Etan Patz
