Every day in this city, at least a dozen people are reported to the police as missing.
It could be an Alzheimer’s patient who wandered away from their home, a teenager who didn’t come home last night or a drug-addicted resident of a single-room-occupancy hotel who vanished a couple of days ago.
Chances are police will find them.
In the past six years, the Vancouver police’s missing persons unit has located “99.9 per cent” of people who were reported missing, according to Det. Const. Raymond Payette of the six-person team.
“It doesn’t mean we always find them alive,” Payette said in a recent presentation to the Vancouver Police Board. “Sometimes, it’s a sad ending.”
To avoid those tragedies, the missing persons unit created a top 10 list of people who have a history of going missing. As Payette explained, the more times a person disappears, the more likely he or she will experience harm.
The 10 people identified by police are all female, ranging from teenagers to women in their 20s. All have been or are in some form of government care, all have substance abuse issues and the majority are mentally ill. So far this year, the top 10 list has generated 225 missing person reports.
“Doing the math, it looks like it will be 250 to 260 by the end of the year,” said Payette, who emphasized the importance of officers reaching out to community organizations, including mental health agencies and sex trade advocacy groups, to find those who go missing. Solidifying strong relationships with low-income hotels, group homes and other housing providers are also keys to their success, he added.
But what worries Payette is those relationships with their community partners could sour as a result of new regulations the provincial government will implement in September 2016. The “safe and well check” regulation will require police to check on every person gone missing who is found. That means no more confirmations over the phone.
With 4,380 missing person files projected this year and 4,600 next year, Payette told the police board that checking on every person they locate is “in some ways, the largest challenge we’re going to face in the next year.”
Although police routinely check on found people — particularly those considered high-risk like those on the top 10 list — officers will rely on a check over the phone to cancel a missing person’s report.
Even with high-risk missing persons, police don’t always attend a residence. That’s because a person could have a warrant for their arrest on a minor charge such as shoplifting. That warrant would require police to take that person into custody when, really, officers are more concerned about a person’s safety.
“We, in the unit, have developed a system where if she’s wanted on a theft under warrant — which is not a big-time warrant — and she comes back, we will get called,” Payette said. “But we don’t go there because if we go there and meet her, we’re put in a position of we know there’s a warrant, we’re going to have to arrest her, which puts that supportive housing unit in a situation of ‘you got me arrested.’”
Payette warned that situation could lead to housing providers failing to contact police when a person is found, meaning police would continue to work the case as if the person were still missing.
“But this is my biggest fear — they won’t call her in at all [when she goes missing]. And in the Downtown Eastside, if we get back into a situation where supportive housing units aren’t calling them in as missing because they’re worried we’re going to arrest them when they come back, that’s something we don’t want to go back to.”
Janice Abbott, the CEO of Atira Women’s Resource Society, manages a variety of low-income housing in the Downtown Eastside, including a women’s-only building near Oppenheimer Park that generates a half-dozen missing person’s reports per week.
Abbott said Atira’s policy dictates that staff search for the person 24 hours after reported missing. That search includes calling emergency contacts, checking with hospitals, determining whether the person was arrested and talking to other agencies in the neighbourhood.
“We try very hard to find them before we file a missing person’s report, and when we do, it’s obviously because we’re afraid for their safety — and a warrant for a theft under [$1,000] isn’t going to prevent us from making a missing person’s report,” Abbott said.
She said the government’s new regulation to have police check on every missing person found, particularly at a supportive housing site, seems unnecessary unless police have reason to visit. A supportive housing site is a building where tenants can access health care and other needs related to addiction and mental health.
“The staff has no interest in lying about a woman coming back,” Abbott said. “Our paramount concern is a woman’s safety and that’s what will drive us — not worrying about anything else.”
The Courier requested an interview with Attorney-General Suzanne Anton to discuss the new regulation but was instead emailed statements attributed to the Ministry of Justice and the government’s director of police services, Clayton Pecknold.
Pecknold pointed out the regulation was developed in response to recommendations from the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry. Face-to-face confirmation of identity is also recommended by the National Centre for Missing Persons and Unidentified Remains, he said.
“Ultimately, missing person investigations, particularly ones involving vulnerable people, are a high risk area of policing and it was determined that face-to-face confirmation of identity and well-being will be standard,” Pecknold wrote.
The statement from the Ministry of Justice said police, including the VPD, were thoroughly consulted in the creation of the standards. The “safe and well check” can be performed by any member of a police force, the statement said.
When the Courier asked via email whose job it is to ensure police will check on every found missing person, the ministry said its staff will “monitor through an inspection process and make recommendations to address compliance as required. It is the expectation of the ministry that police and police boards will adhere to binding policing standards.”
Although Payette understands the intent of the regulation, he offered this scenario: A 15-year-old boy is reported missing by his parents, only to show up much later at home. His parents give the kid a talking to, call police and they cancel the missing person’s report.
“We trusted them enough to make the missing person report,” he said. “We have no information that there’s any problems in the family. He comes back, we cancel the missing person report. With the legislative change, we’re going to have to attend there to make sure that he’s back home. I’ll be honest, a 15-year-old youth coming back like that, that is not going to be a priority one call for us.”
Meanwhile, as the city’s population continues to grow, Payette predicts an increase of missing persons next year and the year after that. People will go missing across the city for a variety of reasons. Vancouver’s aging population and the associated brain impairments that come with age will continue to be a factor.
“I’m not complaining and I’m not upset by the fact that we’re having more people reported as missing,” he said. “I think, in the end, that’s good. More people are aware and they should report. But I don’t think [the statistics] are going to drop.”
@Howellings
