Ernie Allen Testifies Before U.S. Congress, Admits to Four Hundred Cases of Missing Child Fraud

Ernie Allen Testifies Before U.S. Congress, Admits to Four Hundred Cases of Missing Child Fraud

Dateline: Washington, DC, 2 December 2009

Mr. Ernie Allen, President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (USA) and its wholly owned affiliate, the International Centre for Missing and Exploited Children, dropped a bombshell today before the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission of the United States Congress.

But don't expect to see it on the Commission's official web site any time soon; it appears that their web site hasn't been updated since April of 2009. How much do Congressman James P. McGovern and Congressman Frank R. Wolf, co-Chairmen of the Commission, really care about securing human rights when they cannot even be bothered to ensure that their own Commission's web site is updated?

No matter: the written testimony of Mr. Ernie Allen was courteously uploaded to the web by Congressman Chris Smith. For the time being it can also be found at the American Center's web site as well as at the web site of its "international" subsidiary.

After presenting the usual boilerplate about the American organisations and missing children, Mr. Allen shares some current statistics deriving from his corporate database, in order to "help illustrate the scope of the problem of international child abduction". According to Mr. Allen:

NCMEC is currently working cases involving 1,214 children who were abducted by a non-custodial parent from the United States to a foreign country. The majority of these children were taken to the following countries: Mexico (533 children); Japan (54 children); India (32 children); Egypt (30 children); the United Kingdom (24 children); and Canada (23 children).

These are interesting statistics, and not just because they exist at all. They are interesting because they demonstrate that the American Center's database contains information that is not exposed to the public through their search engine. While there is a field (called abductedCountry) that is supposed to indicate the "possible location" of a "missing" child in a particular country, our search today for all children possibly in Mexico returned a measley twenty-two (22) records, for the United Kingdom one (1) record, and for all three of Romania, Bulgaria and Greece no records whatsoever. Notably we have verified the location of children advertised as "missing" by the American organisations in all four of the above mentioned European Member States. None of these children were identified in the results of our search of the American database as even possibly located in their actual countries of residence!

Now consider Mexico. It is possible that Mr. Allen was being literal in stating that 533 children "were taken to" Mexico, while only 22 are possibly now located there. Logically this would imply that Mexico would have to be primarily a transit country for these children, with only a fraction of them (~5%) likely to remain there following their removal from the United States. It seems unlikely, but it could happen. Does it, though?

Our concern isn't addressed, but let us courteously suspend our disbelief while we continue to parse Mr. Allen's statement. He starts making recommendations to the Tom Lantos Commission on page 5 of his testimony. The first four recommendations are vacuous generalities that can be pithly abbreviated to "everyone should do a better job". Then comes the bombshell, which we quote in full:

Finally, I believe we should amend the federal definition of ‘missing child’ that was established by the Missing Children’s Assistance Act of 1984 and codified at 42 U.S.C. §5772. In parental abduction cases, law enforcement may be hesitant to classify the child as ‘missing’ since the child does not technically fit within the current federal definition of ‘missing child’: a child whose whereabouts are unknown to the child’s legal custodian. Parental abduction cases are unique -- the left-behind parent may know the exact whereabouts of the ‘missing’ child but is unable to bring the child home. This problem can be solved by adding the description “or who was removed from the control of such individual's legal custodian in violation of law or judicial order” to the federal definition of ‘missing child.’ This not only reinforces law enforcement’s jurisdiction over these criminal cases, it also ensures that they will be given the same resources and support as non-family abductions. In addition, clarifying the definition of ‘missing child’ to include family-abducted children ensures that law enforcement will enter these cases into the FBI’s National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database. NCIC entry of these children is critical to ensuring that law enforcement resources are dedicated to these abductions. Approximately one-third of NCMEC’s current international abductions have not been entered into NCIC.

This official testimony appears to contain the first ever admission by any representative of the American center that a full one-third of its current cases are probable if not certain cases of missing child fraud.

That is four hundred (400) children being falsely advertised by the American center, right now, as though they were "missing".

Thanks to the efforts of the members of our committee, Mr. Allen sees the writing on the wall, but he hasn't yet gotten the message. The real issue is not that law enforcement is "hesitant" to classify a child as "missing" when the child's whereabouts are in fact known. It's that capable law enforcement officers know better than to lie to the very public whose diligence is needed to find genuinely missing children.

Mr. Allen is personally raking in nearly one million U.S. Dollars ($1.000.000,00) annually courtesy of the United States taxpayer. On the basis of his Center's missing children statistics, Congress rewarded the American Center with a huge budget that must be the envy of every NGO on the planet, without any oversight or preconditions. Yet, were it not for the pressure being placed on Mr. Allen by members of this committee, in both civil and criminal proceedings, the American public and the world community would still be entirely unaware that they were being misled.

The December 2, 2009 testimony of Mr. Ernie Allen before the Tom Lantos Commission demonstrates that the American organisations are hiding from the public their real knowledge about the children they advertise as "missing". Mr. Allen's recommendation to modify the federal definition of ‘missing child’ is self-serving and does nothing for the little victims of missing child fraud.

We continue to call on our colleagues in the United States and their international supporters to respect the fundamental right of these children to a safe and private childhood.

http://www.ncmec.eu/page.php?Id=45


Gerry McCann, father of missing 4-year-old U.K. toddler Madeleine McCann, left, talks with Ernie Allen, director of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children

Good find Schnuffel, especially the photo of Gerry and Ernie Allen.!!

What is "missing child fraud"?

A: The publication of a false claim that a child's whereabouts are unknown to all sources of authority. It includes cases where a child is known live with a parent in one country, where the location of that child is known to the authorities of the country where the child is located, but has not been communicated or has not been communicated with precision to outside authorities or to the other parent. Naturally it also includes cases where a parent falsely claims that a child has been kidnapped.

http://www.ncmec.eu/page.php?Id=18#q2

Schnuffel wrote:What is "missing child fraud"?

A: The publication of a false claim that a child's whereabouts are unknown to all sources of authority. It includes cases where a child is known live with a parent in one country, where the location of that child is known to the authorities of the country where the child is located, but has not been communicated or has not been communicated with precision to outside authorities or to the other parent. Naturally it also includes cases where a parent falsely claims that a child has been kidnapped.

http://www.ncmec.eu/page.php?Id=18#q2

You have to wonder why Gerry went to the U.S. in the first place, if I remember rightly he met the couple whose
Daughter went missing and the Husband was villified in the Press, but the Daughter showed up later. Wasn"t she a bit older that Madeleine anyway?

Luanne Uttley, Jacob and Halle Bobo - We Are Not Missing

RESPONSE FROM THE NCMEC

Below is the response that I received from the NCMEC but first I would like to point out a few bits of information that have come to light recently.

Here is a link for an article in the St Petersburg Times regarding the Salaries of this "non profit" organization. You will be amazed at the 1.3 million dollar salary, compensation and benefits that the CEO Ernie Allen earned over the last year. You the taxpayer are paying for this while they continue to perpetrate Missing Child Fraud in over 400 of their cases. (as admitted by Mr Allen in this link http://ncmec.eu/page.php?Id=45 In these 400 cases, the location of the children are known to the accuser, the NCMEC and the authorities in both countries but the NCMEC is still advertising them as missing with no known location. This fraud is taking valuable time and resources away from GENUINELY missing children by giving ex spouses with an ax to grind a platform to do so.

How many "missing posters" will you look at now and wonder if you are being conned???

Take a look and see what you think...

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/is-salary-too-high-for-chief-of-powerful-center-for-missing-kids/1067463?postCode=201

After my interview with the BBC I was in contact with Lady Catherine Meyer of PACT. Several e mails were exchanged and she contacted the NCMEC on my behalf, putting me in direct contact with the NCMEC. My first e mail explaining my situation went out on September 22, 2009 with no response. I resent the original e mail on October 2, 2009 and received this reply on October 6, 2009 :

Ms. Uttley,

I received your emails regarding Jacob and Halle Bobo, and the related communication from Lady Catherine Meyer.

The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children created a missing child poster based upon two distinct criteria:

1) Law Enforcement’s formal report that the children are missing

and

2) the issuance of a felony criminal warrant for your arrest.

Both criteria remain active today, therefore our policy requires that the missing child poster remain on our website. I would encourage you to communicate directly with the Clark County Sheriff’s Office in Arkansas (870) 246-2222 to resolve the underlying basis for our poster.

Please don’t hesitate to contact me if I can be of any further assistance.

Thank you,

Preston Findlay
Counsel, Missing Children’s Division
National Center for Missing & Exploited Children
(703) 837-6012
PFindlay@NCMEC.ORG,

As you can see from the response, the NCMEC criteria for information to be displayed on their web site requires proof of a warrant against the other person and a police report. How this warrant and police report are obtained is clearly not an issue to them which in itself is surely something that needs to be addressed. As my case shows a warrant and a police report can be fradulently obtained resulting in non abducted children's information being displayed on their site. I find it difficult to believe now being in possession of this information that I am the only case whereby the NCMEC has been used by unscrupulous individuals.

In conclusion, my details and my children's details remain on the NCMEC site for the foreseeable future or until they address this obvious flaw in their criteria.

Here is my Response:
Dear Mr Findlay,

Thank you for your reply. It is unfortunate that you only require a police report and a warrant in order for information to be included on NCMEC. As I have shown on my web site www.wearenotmissing.com warrants and police reports can be fraudulently obtained. I understand that because of your criteria that your hands are a bit tied on this matter but my case will show that with only a small amount of investigation that myself and my children's information should not be on your web site or on posters. After reviewing my site management tool it shows that only a very small portion of my web site was looked at by an ISP in Alexandria, Virginia and none of my legal documents were clicked on. Surely in a matter as serious as this, a bit more investigation should take place in order to keep innocent people's information from ever reaching the Internet and displayed on posters around the country.

It is a very sad day indeed that unscrupulous people feel the need to lie and are empowered by the courts and organizations such as yours when it is clear that their only goal is vicious attack on another individual. It is even sadder when targeting that individual they are permitted and encouraged to use the images of innocent children to accomplish that goal.

A guilty person who actually abducted their children would not be contacting you and giving you all their personal information. If I had actually abducted my own children I would stay well hidden from everyone.

Contacting anyone in Clark County would be an exercise in futility as I have proved after $40,000 has already been spent on next to nothing. Money that would have been better spent on two children who deserve much better than this.

Even though Mr Bobo seems to get everywhere with is half truths and lies, I will do whatever I can to get justice for my children and make sure that they know that I have fought my hardest for them. I will always give them the truth and as they already know truth doesn't always win but it builds character in them and a clear conscience whether or not the powers that be care to acknowledge it.

Sincerely,

Luanne Uttley

http://www.wearenotmissing.com/responsefromthencmec.htm

Panda wrote:You have to wonder why Gerry went to the U.S. in the first place, if I remember rightly he met the couple whose
Daughter went missing and the Husband was villified in the Press, but the Daughter showed up later. Wasn"t she a bit older that Madeleine anyway?

Oh well, of course if your daughter disappears on holiday in Portugal you head off to the US - stands to reason. Why? Um ... the best experts are there, better legislation, etc. But how does that help find Madeleine? Um ... er ...

There's quite a bit about Gerry Goes to Washington here -

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id209.html

It doesn't sound as though the American interviewers were quite as compliant (or doting) as their British counterparts. Poor Gerry, criticised by those awful Yanks.

PS Nothing to do with the US trip, but on the same page at McCannfiles there are a few extracts from Kate's diary, including these gems about how she feels -

'I'm trying to be positive. I need to be because I need to believe that you’re going to come back to me, so I can go back to being truly happy.'

'Words cannot describe how I feel about you nor how restless, tormented, alone, sad and incomplete I feel.'

Me, me, me ...

Dimsie wrote:

Panda wrote:You have to wonder why Gerry went to the U.S. in the first place, if I remember rightly he met the couple whose
Daughter went missing and the Husband was villified in the Press, but the Daughter showed up later. Wasn"t she a bit older that Madeleine anyway?

Oh well, of course if your daughter disappears on holiday in Portugal you head off to the US - stands to reason. Why? Um ... the best experts are there, better legislation, etc. But how does that help find Madeleine? Um ... er ...

There's quite a bit about Gerry Goes to Washington here -

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id209.html

It doesn't sound as though the American interviewers were quite as compliant (or doting) as their British counterparts. Poor Gerry, criticised by those awful Yanks.

PS Nothing to do with the US trip, but on the same page at McCannfiles there are a few extracts from Kate's diary, including these gems about how she feels -

'I'm trying to be positive. I need to be because I need to believe that you’re going to come back to me, so I can go back to being truly happy.'

'Words cannot describe how I feel about you nor how restless, tormented, alone, sad and incomplete I feel.'

Me, me, me ...

Kate sounds more like she's appealing to a lover than lamenting the loss of a child.

I found it very strange that Allen took such a big interest in Maddie when she went missing in Portugal....

I wonder if anyone saw this link? The heading is quite funny.

http://www.gawkk.com/gerry-mccann-and-ernie-allen-at-doj/discuss

Americas Most Wanted posted this video over 2 years ago
Gerry McCann And Ernie Allen At DOJ

Schnuffel wrote:

Ernie Allen Testifies Before U.S. Congress, Admits to Four Hundred Cases of Missing Child Fraud

Dateline: Washington, DC, 2 December 2009

Mr. Ernie Allen, President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (USA) and its wholly owned affiliate, the International Centre for Missing and Exploited Children, dropped a bombshell today before the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission of the United States Congress.

But don't expect to see it on the Commission's official web site any time soon; it appears that their web site hasn't been updated since April of 2009. How much do Congressman James P. McGovern and Congressman Frank R. Wolf, co-Chairmen of the Commission, really care about securing human rights when they cannot even be bothered to ensure that their own Commission's web site is updated?

No matter: the written testimony of Mr. Ernie Allen was courteously uploaded to the web by Congressman Chris Smith. For the time being it can also be found at the American Center's web site as well as at the web site of its "international" subsidiary.

After presenting the usual boilerplate about the American organisations and missing children, Mr. Allen shares some current statistics deriving from his corporate database, in order to "help illustrate the scope of the problem of international child abduction". According to Mr. Allen:

NCMEC is currently working cases involving 1,214 children who were abducted by a non-custodial parent from the United States to a foreign country. The majority of these children were taken to the following countries: Mexico (533 children); Japan (54 children); India (32 children); Egypt (30 children); the United Kingdom (24 children); and Canada (23 children).

These are interesting statistics, and not just because they exist at all. They are interesting because they demonstrate that the American Center's database contains information that is not exposed to the public through their search engine. While there is a field (called abductedCountry) that is supposed to indicate the "possible location" of a "missing" child in a particular country, our search today for all children possibly in Mexico returned a measley twenty-two (22) records, for the United Kingdom one (1) record, and for all three of Romania, Bulgaria and Greece no records whatsoever. Notably we have verified the location of children advertised as "missing" by the American organisations in all four of the above mentioned European Member States. None of these children were identified in the results of our search of the American database as even possibly located in their actual countries of residence!

Now consider Mexico. It is possible that Mr. Allen was being literal in stating that 533 children "were taken to" Mexico, while only 22 are possibly now located there. Logically this would imply that Mexico would have to be primarily a transit country for these children, with only a fraction of them (~5%) likely to remain there following their removal from the United States. It seems unlikely, but it could happen. Does it, though?

Our concern isn't addressed, but let us courteously suspend our disbelief while we continue to parse Mr. Allen's statement. He starts making recommendations to the Tom Lantos Commission on page 5 of his testimony. The first four recommendations are vacuous generalities that can be pithly abbreviated to "everyone should do a better job". Then comes the bombshell, which we quote in full:

Finally, I believe we should amend the federal definition of ‘missing child’ that was established by the Missing Children’s Assistance Act of 1984 and codified at 42 U.S.C. §5772. In parental abduction cases, law enforcement may be hesitant to classify the child as ‘missing’ since the child does not technically fit within the current federal definition of ‘missing child’: a child whose whereabouts are unknown to the child’s legal custodian. Parental abduction cases are unique -- the left-behind parent may know the exact whereabouts of the ‘missing’ child but is unable to bring the child home. This problem can be solved by adding the description “or who was removed from the control of such individual's legal custodian in violation of law or judicial order” to the federal definition of ‘missing child.’ This not only reinforces law enforcement’s jurisdiction over these criminal cases, it also ensures that they will be given the same resources and support as non-family abductions. In addition, clarifying the definition of ‘missing child’ to include family-abducted children ensures that law enforcement will enter these cases into the FBI’s National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database. NCIC entry of these children is critical to ensuring that law enforcement resources are dedicated to these abductions. Approximately one-third of NCMEC’s current international abductions have not been entered into NCIC.

This official testimony appears to contain the first ever admission by any representative of the American center that a full one-third of its current cases are probable if not certain cases of missing child fraud.

That is four hundred (400) children being falsely advertised by the American center, right now, as though they were "missing".

Thanks to the efforts of the members of our committee, Mr. Allen sees the writing on the wall, but he hasn't yet gotten the message. The real issue is not that law enforcement is "hesitant" to classify a child as "missing" when the child's whereabouts are in fact known. It's that capable law enforcement officers know better than to lie to the very public whose diligence is needed to find genuinely missing children.

Mr. Allen is personally raking in nearly one million U.S. Dollars ($1.000.000,00) annually courtesy of the United States taxpayer. On the basis of his Center's missing children statistics, Congress rewarded the American Center with a huge budget that must be the envy of every NGO on the planet, without any oversight or preconditions. Yet, were it not for the pressure being placed on Mr. Allen by members of this committee, in both civil and criminal proceedings, the American public and the world community would still be entirely unaware that they were being misled.

The December 2, 2009 testimony of Mr. Ernie Allen before the Tom Lantos Commission demonstrates that the American organisations are hiding from the public their real knowledge about the children they advertise as "missing". Mr. Allen's recommendation to modify the federal definition of ‘missing child’ is self-serving and does nothing for the little victims of missing child fraud.

We continue to call on our colleagues in the United States and their international supporters to respect the fundamental right of these children to a safe and private childhood.

http://www.ncmec.eu/page.php?Id=45


Gerry McCann, father of missing 4-year-old U.K. toddler Madeleine McCann, left, talks with Ernie Allen, director of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children

I find Gerry McCann's posture and body language quite interesting in that photo. As someone who cultivates association with people he perceives as having some power and authority, he looks quite meek in that photo, facing Ernie Allen. He's a control freak and faced with someone he feels has authority, he becomes meek and almost submissive, but only, I'd say, when that power and authority might be on his side.