[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 145 (Monday, October 5, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7113-S7114]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STRENGTHENING MISSING PERSONS DATABASES
Mr. MURPHY. Madam President, I am here on the floor this afternoon to
talk about a young man named Billy Smolinski and a law that Senator
Hoeven and I are introducing on behalf of him, his family, and, quite
literally, the millions of other families throughout the United States
who have had to deal with the trauma, angst, and grief of a loved one
gone missing.
I will begin by telling everyone a little bit about Billy Smolinski.
Billy's parents don't think that he is alive any longer, but they
aren't sure because on August 24, 2004, at the age of 31 Billy went
missing.
Billy was a vibrant young man who lived in Waterbury, CT, along with
his treasured dog. When he didn't respond to calls and communications
from his family over the course of a number of days, his parents--and I
will speak about his mother in particular, Jan Smolinski, who has been
the driving force behind Billy's Law--contacted the Waterbury Police
Department. The Waterbury Police Department is a great police
department, and I have a lot of friends there, but even they will admit
they really screwed up this case from the beginning. They told his
parents that he probably didn't go missing, that he was just running
away from his personal problems. One officer stated that Billy was
probably ``drinking a beer somewhere in Europe.''
The Smolinskis pressed their case over and over, day after day, and
after 2 weeks of asking for help from the police department, the
Smolinskis were finally able get an investigation started, but it went
slowly. DNA samples were submitted and lost. It took 4 years before the
police department ever actually searched his car to see if there was
any information about what happened to Billy.
Billy's case made a lot of news in Connecticut and Waterbury, and
over the course of the last few years, it has taken twists and turns,
but he has never been found. His parents suspect he has been killed,
but law enforcement hasn't made progress on that potential case either.
Over the course of the last 11 years, Billy's parents encountered
obstacle after obstacle when they tried to be helpful and participate
in the investigation and search for Billy Smolinski. They came to me at
that time, as their Member of Congress representing Waterbury, CT, to
discuss ways in which we here in Washington could take down some of the
barriers they faced. What they reluctantly found, as they became a part
of this big national network of families who have had loved ones go
missing, was that their story was not unique.
Their story of finding obstacles at the local police department and
nationally was not unique and unfortunately all too common, as they
tried to figure out what happened to Billy. What they were connected
into was a national network of tens of thousands of individuals who
were searching for a missing loved one--a missing father, mother,
brother or sister.
Nationwide there are as many as 90,000 active missing persons cases
at any given time, and there are some really simple things we can do to
help families who are trying to find their missing loved one. Much of
the attention, rightly, goes to missing children.
Missing children have an entire set of laws built up around them, and
for good reason, our priority lies in finding them. Law enforcement,
within a matter of hours, has to post information about missing
children onto national databases. There are specific campaigns waged on
billboards and media outlets to immediately find missing children. But
our focus on finding missing children shouldn't absolve us from the
responsibility to help families such as the Smolinskis to find missing
adults as well.
Senator Hoeven and I have gotten together on a fairly simple piece of
legislation, and I wish to talk about it today. A companion piece of
legislation is being introduced in the House by my colleague in
Connecticut, Representative Elizabeth Esty, and Congressman Ted Poe of
Texas.
I will explain what this piece of legislation does. At its
foundation, it strengthens the database system that families access to
try to find their missing loved one. Currently, there are two
databases. One is a law enforcement database, which is called NCIC, and
the other one is a public-facing database called NamUs. These two
databases very often aren't talking to each other, and therein lies the
primary problem this bill tries to solve.
Law enforcement uploads all sorts of information onto NCIC, but the
net data often doesn't get transferred over to the database that the
families can access, which is called the NamUs database.
Why is that important?
It is important because families are the supersleuths in cases of
missing persons. Families are the ones who know all of the detailed and
intricate information about the circumstances of a disappearance and
the identification of their loved one.
I don't mean to get too gruesome, but think about this statistic.
There are 40,000 sets of unidentified remains in the country today.
Think about that. There are 40,000 sets of unidentified remains in the
country, but because not all of that information--the detailed
descriptions of those remains--is uploaded onto a database that the
public can see, Billy's body may be out there somewhere, but his
parents can't find him because they don't have access to the
information. Unfortunately, that is the reality and the problem that we
are trying to solve. If you get more information that law enforcement
has onto a public database, the supersleuths--the parents, brothers,
and sisters--will have more access to it. What about information that
law enforcement has about an individual who has gone missing--a report
of someone who has gone missing in California and whose information is
not uploaded onto a database that a family who is looking for that
information in New York may want?
This legislation authorizes NamUs permanently in law and then
requires that the two databases be connected. Law enforcement, rightly,
has a concern that any information that is sensitive to an open case
should remain private, and this legislation allows for the FBI to
determine what information has to remain private as part of NCIC and
what information goes onto the public database. But connecting those
databases will give more information to families such as the Smolinskis
to try and crack these 90,000 cases that are out there today.
The legislation also opens up a relatively modest but important
training program for police, coroners, and medical examiners to make
sure they are using these databases and putting this information
online. The databases don't work if the information is not getting
uploaded. If the data from the coroner's office isn't up on the
database, there is no way a family from across the country can access
it to try to find the final resting place of their loved ones. So this
legislation authorizes a small new program that would provide training
to those medical examiners, coroners, and police departments to try to
make sure that information is getting up on the law enforcement
database, the NCIC. Remember, they put up all the information about
missing kids right away, but as we heard in the case of Billy
Smolinski, they often don't put that information up about missing
adults.
Some of these police departments are tiny. They don't have the
resources to train their personnel on how to do that, and this program
would allow them to get that. In the end, we can crack a lot of these
cases--thousands of these cases--if we are able to simply give tools to
these families so they could participate in the search and tools to law
enforcement so they can talk with each other.
The Smolinskis have not given up. Jan has come down to Congress to
testify on behalf of Billy's Law. She has changed the practices of the
Waterbury Police Department and has even gotten laws passed in Hartford
to make sure
[[Page S7114]]
that other police departments don't make the same mistakes.
She wants to make sure those mistakes aren't repeated across the
country. She thinks about what would have happened if that information
about Billy had been uploaded onto NCIC immediately, the day she
reported it. Maybe Billy was taken to some other State. Maybe the lack
of that information being transmitted that day meant that a break in
the case didn't happen in those early days. She always thinks about
what would have happened if she had access to more information--if the
database that she looks at virtually every day, the NamUs database, had
more information about missing persons and unidentified remains. She
thinks about her ability to solve this case and how it could have
helped the police solve this case if those databases were better or
more up to date.
We hope we are eventually going to solve the case of Billy
Smolinski's disappearance in Connecticut, but we also hope that we can
pass legislation here in both Houses--bipartisan, noncontroversial,
measured, commonsense--that will assure that there are less Jan
Smolinskis in the world going forward.
We passed this in the House, when I was there, with a broad, big
bipartisan vote. This is the first time we introduced it on a
bipartisan basis here in the Senate, and I am hopeful--speaking on
behalf of not just the Smolinski family, but the 90,000 other families
who are grieving for a missing person--we can get this done and get it
done shortly so we can get families and law enforcement the tools they
need to crack more of these cases.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________