True, but this figure refers to the number of reports of missing people, which does not correlate directly with how many people are actually missing or how many don't come back. There aren't 250,000 individuals being abducted and disappearing every year.
- Some people are repeatedly reported missing, as when teenagers in care keep absconding. Each event has to be reported to the police even if staff know where the teenager has probably gone or that they are normally soon back.
- Many people who are reported missing come home safely, e.g. when they've walked out after a family row.
- Some are reported missing in error. They forget to tell someone they're going away for work or whatever.
- Estranged parents sometimes report their children missing if the other parent doesn't bring them back on time.
- Some children are taken away, occasionally abroad, by one parent against wishes of the other, who then might report them missing as they have been removed from legal parental custody.
These people might be perfectly safe at the time they are reported missing and return home. Only a small number don't come back. Of those, some might have decided to start a new life. (Those people can send a message home via several organisations like the Salvation Army.)
All very good points. I looked up some figures on
missingpeople.org.uk which reference a 2004 report (crikey, it sounds recent until I remember it's 2019 already!) and they say that 99% (apparently given as a statistic rather than figuratively) of missing persons reports are "solved within a year". The number of reports is not equal to the number of missing people as some are not reported, and some go missing more than once, but on raw figures, 1% of around 250,000 people is around 2,500 not resolved in a year.
Using the Von Daniken technique, I can now exclude whatever percentage of those I choose on whatever seemingly reasonable pretexts I choose as long as I leave some over... and then use those some I've left over to "prove" that the actual number may be higher. <wink>. That said, the point is that there are plenty that don't become
causes célèbres.
Clearly, the McCanns have worked hard to keep Madeleine's case in the spotlight, as I would if my child were missing. I suspect that the massive public interest is partly fuelled by Madeleine's appearance, and partly by a distaste for the way that the parents have sometimes come across in interviews. There is no manual on how to behave if your child goes missing, but a lot of people need little encouragement to point the finger. No doubt if the McCanns had wept and wailed rather than controlling their emotions, the same people would have criticised them for "over acting" or similar.
I must admit that I was sceptical at first, and far from surprised when they were named as suspects, but the longer it goes on, and the more investigations that draw a blank (police, private investigators, and journalists) the more I feel that they are innocent.