I think what the family and all those who believe in the trafficking angle is, Amy was just an average girl. I don’t mean that as an insult, but there was absolutely nothing about her that stood out to make her especially desirable to be trafficked. There would have to be something especially desirable about her to make her captors parade her around and traffick her like they claim. I just don’t see it.

Caucasian woman in her early 20's? That is plenty for international trafficking organizations to be interested.

The family just needs to employ logic, accept the obvious and quit dredging this up. It's another Noreen Gosch situation where there is something in their brains preventing them from seeing clearly.

Sometimes the pain is just too great for families to reach the acceptance stage. It's more comfortable just to stick to denial and keep looking for her. Ironically, this prevents them from healing. I've seen it in real life many times.

Sometimes the pain is just too great for families to reach the acceptance stage. It's more comfortable just to stick to denial and keep looking for her. Ironically, this prevents them from healing. I've seen it in real life many times.

But at what point is their grief more important than an innocent man's peace?

I think what the family and all those who believe in the trafficking angle is, Amy was just an average girl. I don’t mean that as an insult, but there was absolutely nothing about her that stood out to make her especially desirable to be trafficked. There would have to be something especially desirable about her to make her captors parade her around and traffick her like they claim. I just don’t see it.

I didn't know how to put it politely but, erm, same.

Weirdest part of the doc was interviewing the guy next cabin over. Did they think he actually convinced her to jump and try to race the ship to the shore? If so, that's quite a leap.

After having a couple of days to think it over and reading the comments around the internet, I am still 100% convinced she fell overboard. The two biggest pieces of evidence used to point to the "trafficked" theory are 1) The photo of "Jas" and 2) The sailor's eyewitness testimony.

We all know eyewitness testimony is junk as can be seen with "Lil' Miss" and Kari Lynn Nixon sightings in particular but let's give the benefit of the doubt to this guy. His story leads us to believe Amy voluntarily left the ship, yet nobody spotted her leaving the ship, in such an extremely tight window and without 3 people in the same room, including one who is in a light sleep state not noticing. Seems a massive stretch and to my knowledge is the only person that believed she wasn't smuggled off the ship but left voluntarily. This seems even more unbelievable knowing her $$ and passport/ID were not taken assuming she was looking to buy drugs.

As for the photos of Jas, before the reboot the UM website had a few small, text based mysteries posted that don't appear to be there anymore. One of the missing people looked IDENTICAL to my father's right hand man at work to the point I showed both of them the picture and they both asked me where I found the picture of him! Someone even commented on the UM that they spotted him in my area, to which it was easy to see why they would be confused as even the shirts they usually wore lined up. From that point on I never believed in drawing conclusions based on photos as they literally look like identical twins despite being from different countries and never crossing paths.

There is also a case of a missing child from the show that could have passed for me around 10 years old: same haircut, same shirt, same hair color, same "crooked" smile, only difference being a slightly different eye color. No, I was never abducted and never got the chance to call 1-800-876-5353 :lol:

About the only new information I got from this was seeing the tattoo. That's not Taz, that's Dizzy.

But at what point is their grief more important than an innocent man's peace?

I don't know why you quoted me. I never said it was.

I don't know why you quoted me. I never said it was.

Sorry, I was speaking generally and adding with the points you were making. I didn't mean to imply that you were saying the opposite.

This was a very good doc and worth watching. In my humble opinon everything semms to add up she was taken fron the ship against her will. All these witnesses seem too credible for you to draw a conclusion they may have been mistaken. As someone pointed out earlier that white women caucasions in early 20's are prime human trafficing targets. I think one of the biggest clues is over the years that lots of IP addreses linked to Barbados area for family's birthdays and overall holidays. The only question that i ponder is - is she still alive ? I don't believe there hasn't been possible sightings somewhere around 15 years.
Like the FBI agent said these small countries and islands have no interest and desire to cooperate with US athourities.

Re: the PA at 7am

That goes into guests rooms where they'd still be sleeping. For an adult who just isn't in a cabin, as is her right to not be, it would be a massive pain and they'd have been fielding complaints for the wake up all day.


and then the whole "they should have pushed off the dock" thing that the family has long insisted on, they expect a cruise ship to intentionally strand up to potentially 3000 people on shore? What if they're ill, what if they need access to their medication, what if they just want to go "home"? Their expectations have been pretty unreasonable IMO from jump.

It was 7 AM & most of the people were older & likely were in bed before midnight. Doubt there would have been much blowback considering the circumstances of somebody having been missing for an hour & that as it was not an 18-30 party boat. Expecting the ship to lock everybody onboard was totally ludicrous.

Overall it is pretty scary the lack of interest these companies & their staff have about their passengers though, while what the 'entertainment guy' said was pretty much true, the way he said it even all these decades later is appalling & you can see why the Bradleys were angry & felt even more helpless, if that attitude is what they were encountering.

It comes off like hey we got your money & we don't care if your daughter went overboard, or got raped & murdered by somebody. To actually tell them after an hour that they need to look for her for another hour or two, then come back & we will do something is abysmal.

This was a very good doc and worth watching. In my humble opinon everything semms to add up she was taken fron the ship against her will. All these witnesses seem too credible for you to draw a conclusion they may have been mistaken. As someone pointed out earlier that white women caucasions in early 20's are prime human trafficing targets. I think one of the biggest clues is over the years that lots of IP addreses linked to Barbados area for family's birthdays and overall holidays. The only question that i ponder is - is she still alive ? I don't believe there hasn't been possible sightings somewhere around 15 years.
Like the FBI agent said these small countries and islands have no interest and desire to cooperate with US athourities.

None of them are convincing-the military guy who didn't want to get in trouble can't even say if Yellow was a guy he saw in the bar-so worried, but never bothered to just go to a payphone & call the cops without giving his name. There was a lot of publicity on the case in 2001 & no doubt he saw the reward & thought what have I got to lose?

The two scuba guys likely saw a woman, the guys thought they were hitting on her & stared them down. I again question how this wouldn't have been major news in August 1998-five months after she vanished, surely her face & name would have been all over the news & everybody would have been talking about it? Again it comes off more like seeing the story & looking for a reward if they found her in that area.

The woman in the toilet comes off as a total attention seeker as she always has-I never remember he saying that this Amy woman physically assaulted her before, pretty sure previously she said the woman begged her for help.

As for her saying she later looked out of the ship windows sad, but what could she do? Well, you were in a business you just tell them to make a call to the cops, or call yourself. She only reported it in November after the Dr Phil show & no doubt because of all the media around Natalee Holloway leading to Amy's case then coming back into the headlines.

Sorry, but the photofits of two of the three the supposed abductors/captors from the 1998 beach encounter/San Francisco sightings-that one too ridiculous for them to even discuss look like the Boss & his big sidekick out of Samurai Cop-probably the two guys had watched that & just gave them that description.

Of course our source for the website hit are the website owner-the one who has allowed all kinds of total insanity on his site, didn't it even get taken down at one point? Plus the guy who reported the sighting in 1998.

Even if it is true, then there is a more logical reason than Amy has spent 27 years not making any contact with her family-that being somebody there is interested in the case & gets nostalgic around Thanksgiving, Christmas, her birthday etc & logs on for a long time.

I have seen random people do tributes to dead celebrities that involved going to photograph their grave & posting it online, taking a picture of the person from Google images & putting angel wings on it etc to upload to their website, as just a couple of examples-making this look bland.

Well, would you be happy with US law enforcement constantly trampling all over your islands & ruining the one thing you have-the tourism industry for decades on out of date wild goose chases? These places are not rich-why do you think that Antigua was so quick to jump into bed with Allen Stanford?

The cops in these places did investigate-problem is when people are reporting things months or even years after their claimed encounter, it makes it impossible for them.

Let's look at it realistically-there is zero evidence Amy ever left the room via the door. She reported seasickness to her brother after getting back to her room at 3.40, her father says he saw her legs/feet on the balcony at 5.30 & woke again at 6.00 due to hearing a loud noise & then she wasn't there. Isn't the most logical answer that she rushed over to the railings at around 6.00 & in her inebriated state, while about to vomit, she lost her footing, fell overboard & that was the sound the father heard?

Weirdest part of the doc was interviewing the guy next cabin over. Did they think he actually convinced her to jump and try to race the ship to the shore? If so, that's quite a leap.

I am of the belief that to get the Bradley's to co-operate they had to do certain things-hence there being no mention of the Bradley's getting diddled out of a huge sum of money by a conman, or the far-fetched San Francisco sighting that even die-hard supporters of the abduction & sex slave theory scoff at-both of which hurt their stance & the Frank Jones story makes them look like totally gullible, blithering idiots if aired, but both of which could not be in a documentary about the case-seeing they are two of the biggest things & I cannot see any other reason why Netflix would not have covered them.

The guy is a little bit eccentric & somewhat sleazy-like when he says he was watching girls in the disco-just the type of people the tv companies like on shows-like the camp/over the top ship entertainment guy. Not sure if Netflix tracked him down, or Iva steered them towards him, so she could point the finger at him, pretty much painting him as a lust fueled pervert who was harassing her daughter, just like her accusations about the ship crew-especially Yellow etc. Personally wth social media like it is, there is no way in hell any money Netflix offered me would convince me to go on camera & become a target. One thing I noticed & was amazed by is how good Ron looks-now in his seventies, but looks in his fifties.

I think Brad summed it up when he said he prefers not knowing & it being a mystery-their mindset is that they would rather believe Amy has been chained to a wall/paraded around in public being beaten & drugged by her captors & raped by thousands of paying men for 27 years, or has been walking around with amnesia all that time somehow, than facing up to reality.

When they went to a garage & saw a box of tic-tacs they suddenly imagined Amy might have been held there as she liked them. Brad hearing her voice in a car going past & everybody else in the car according to him saying they heard it to, was this his parents or just random friends who went along with it to appease him-that when they followed it of course it was just some old guy on his own.

I am of the belief that to get the Bradley's to co-operate they had to do certain things-hence there being no mention of the Bradley's getting diddled out of a huge sum of money by a conman, or the far-fetched San Francisco sighting that even die-hard supporters of the abduction & sex slave theory scoff at-both of which hurt their stance & the Frank Jones story makes them look like totally gullible, blithering idiots if aired, but both of which could not be in a documentary about the case-seeing they are two of the biggest things & I cannot see any other reason why Netflix would not have covered them.

The guy is a little bit eccentric & somewhat sleazy-like when he says he was watching girls in the disco-just the type of people the tv companies like on shows-like the camp/over the top ship entertainment guy. Not sure if Netflix tracked him down, or Iva steered them towards him, so she could point the finger at him, pretty much painting him as a lust fueled pervert who was harassing her daughter, just like her accusations about the ship crew-especially Yellow etc. Personally wth social media like it is, there is no way in hell any money Netflix offered me would convince me to go on camera & become a target. One thing I noticed & was amazed by is how good Ron looks-now in his seventies, but looks in his fifties.

I think Brad summed it up when he said he prefers not knowing & it being a mystery-their mindset is that they would rather believe Amy has been chained to a wall/paraded around in public being beaten & drugged by her captors & raped by thousands of paying men for 27 years, or has been walking around with amnesia all that time somehow, than facing up to reality.

When they went to a garage & saw a box of tic-tacs they suddenly imagined Amy might have been held there as she liked them. Brad hearing her voice in a car going past & everybody else in the car according to him saying they heard it to, was this his parents or just random friends who went along with it to appease him-that when they followed it of course it was just some old guy on his own.
Brad is complaining the doc left out a lot of information though. I wonder if all this is what he means.

I thought about that too, but I don't know that any of that matters. and I also don't want to completely dismiss the trafficking angle because we do know that it happens more than we care to believe with all types of people. That aside, Amy had a strong relationship with her family if we are led to believe them at face value. The most credible witnesses that morning are her family who saw her on the balcony at 6am. that contradicts the other witnesses who did not really know her. I think that is the key detail in why most of us believe she fell over her balcony. It is a strange situation for her family to be in. in regards to having hope that she is still alive, yet if true she would be living through hell. they have clearly been targeted by cons.

I'm watching the doc now, because someone close to me said, "You have to watch it. I believe she was trafficked."

Even if Amy was "average," that's often enough for human traffickers. A reasonably good looking American girl who they see as vulnerable? Easy pickings. I'm changing my thinking and I'm not convinced she fell overboard. Everything in the documentary, including the daughter of Alister confronting him on the phone and the picture on a prostitution Website authenticated by the FBI as being of Amy, tells me she was trafficked, taken off that ship.

Also, for those that think Amy committed suicide because of her parents' attitudes towards her sexuality, I did not read that with the parents. You have to remember that, as someone said, it was the nineties. Homosexuality was not as widely accepted back then, and her parents were probably worried about the absolute hate she would face from some people.

Here I was thinking that the Satanic Panic-esque "this poor American woman is missing in a different country, so she must have been sex trafficked" nonsense was over, but here it is rearing its ugly head all over again because of Netflix.

Even if Amy was "average," that's often enough for human traffickers. A reasonably good looking American girl who they see as vulnerable? Easy pickings. I'm changing my thinking and I'm not convinced she fell overboard. Everything in the documentary, including the daughter of Alister confronting him on the phone and the picture on a prostitution Website authenticated by the FBI as being of Amy, tells me she was trafficked, taken off that ship.

While it's technically possible that experienced traffickers might attempt something as bold as abducting someone from a cruise ship docked at a small, heavily populated island, the odds of success are incredibly low. The risk-to-reward ratio just doesn't make sense: it's the equivalent of a bank robber trying (and failing) to rob a police station. Amy wasn’t just another young female tourist; she was close to her family, especially her brother, and her absence was noticed immediately. Even if you factor in potential corruption, any trafficker would know her disappearance would trigger an all-out response from her family. Papa/mama bears can be scarier than any law enforcement so why take that risk for someone who is "average" at best? As others have pointed out, the timeline is incredibly tight. Pulling off a kidnapping in front of multiple close-to-awakening witnesses that are capable of fighting back without any physical evidence or credible leads left behind would require extreme luck and precision. It's a cinematic scenario, not a realistic one.

As for the call involving Alister’s daughter—assuming it wasn’t staged—it tells us very little beyond confirming a strained family dynamic. It also suggests he may have a fetish for white women, but that alone doesn't make him a trafficker. Beyond an inconclusive photo (read my recent post about a doppelganger that fooled everyone), and a few cherry-picked, notoriously unreliable eyewitness statements, there isn’t much pointing to human trafficking. And let's not forget: a large (I believe $250K) reward has been out there for years. That’s life changing money, especially in economically struggling regions like Barbados or Aruba, yet nobody credible has stepped forward.

I’m not a psychologist, but I’ve had significant exposure to cases involving suicide and depression. Amy fit many high-risk factors: young age, possible struggles with sexual identity, alcohol or drug use, and unresolved relationship issues. I know in my teenage years in the 90s despite being straight I was mercilessly taunted and bullied for being "gay", mostly because I had interests other than sex and that has a massive and permanent effect on a person. It’s surprising how rarely this possibility was discussed over the years, even though it ticks many boxes and explains how she could have gone over the "high" railing.

There are strong parallels here to the Tiffany Valiante case (covered on Netflix’s version of Unsolved Mysteries), where important counter-evidence was glossed over or omitted to support a more dramatic narrative. The involvement of scam artist Frank Jones, who went so far as to dress someone up to resemble Amy, and the sheer number of dubious sightings of “Amy” living a normal life elsewhere, further muddy the waters. While there is no smoking gun, if this was a criminal trial I would vote without hesitation to "convict" with the evidence presented in the going overboard theory.

I’m not a psychologist, but I’ve had significant exposure to cases involving suicide and depression. Amy fit many high-risk factors: young age, possible struggles with sexual identity, alcohol or drug use, and unresolved relationship issues. I know in my teenage years in the 90s despite being straight I was mercilessly taunted and bullied for being "gay", mostly because I had interests other than sex and that has a massive and permanent effect on a person. It’s surprising how rarely this possibility was discussed over the years, even though it ticks many boxes and explains how she could have gone over the "high" railing.

There are strong parallels here to the Tiffany Valiante case (covered on Netflix’s version of Unsolved Mysteries), where important counter-evidence was glossed over or omitted to support a more dramatic narrative. The involvement of scam artist Frank Jones, who went so far as to dress someone up to resemble Amy, and the sheer number of dubious sightings of “Amy” living a normal life elsewhere, further muddy the waters. While there is no smoking gun, if this was a criminal trial I would vote without hesitation to "convict" with the evidence presented in the going overboard theory.

Thanks for your insightful thoughts, and willingness to share from your personal experience. When I read your post I actually thought more of Sydney West, probably because both involve the possibility of falling/jumping into water...

Sydney's case was profiled on Discovery Id's Disappeared a 2-3 years ago, and some also believe it may have been a suicide....

https://www.reddit.com/r/Disappeared/comments/163aakq/sydney_west/

It's tough in any case where one of the "Best" case scenarios is becoming a victim of sex trafficing when there may be other evidence that points to a person being very depressed.

Here I was thinking that the Satanic Panic-esque "this poor American woman is missing in a different country, so she must have been sex trafficked" nonsense was over, but here it is rearing its ugly head all over again because of Netflix.

It will never end, nor will the belief that eyewitness testimony should be taken as gospel.

I'm watching the doc now, because someone close to me said, "You have to watch it. I believe she was trafficked."

Even if Amy was "average," that's often enough for human traffickers. A reasonably good looking American girl who they see as vulnerable? Easy pickings. I'm changing my thinking and I'm not convinced she fell overboard. Everything in the documentary, including the daughter of Alister confronting him on the phone and the picture on a prostitution Website authenticated by the FBI as being of Amy, tells me she was trafficked, taken off that ship.

Also, for those that think Amy committed suicide because of her parents' attitudes towards her sexuality, I did not read that with the parents. You have to remember that, as someone said, it was the nineties. Homosexuality was not as widely accepted back then, and her parents were probably worried about the absolute hate she would face from some people.
I used to think that she fell overboard, but now after watching the documentary I think that she committed suicide.

The only thing that got my attention from the trafficking standpoint was the photo. the FBI seemed to think that the photo could have been her based on the measurements. the problem that I have is the photo did not look like her and there are no conclusive body markings or evidence that would guarantee it. there are a lot of people that look alike in this world when you put photos by the other. that's another reason why we have to discount eye witness testimony. There was the witness that claims that he saw her tattoo, so in theory that would hold more weight than the photo, but again we are going off of his word. Then you have the navy guy that says he got verbal confirmation about Amy's identity.

My argument against the trafficking angle is that aside from Amy, I have not heard about Americans being kidnapped from cruise ships. Like the Cruise Director points out, there were a lot of protective measures in place and Amy's family amongst others, basically just dismissed that.

The most interesting part of the documentary IMO was Amy's father downplaying Amy's drinking. 7 miller lights is a lot for someone of Amy's stature, and that's the documented amount that they have. who knows if she was bought other drinks. the other intriguing part for me was the letter that Amy sent to her girlfriend. It was clearly an act of desperation from someone who was struggling and looking for help, but perhaps had no outlet. I think Amy was desperate and lived out the fantasy that she put in her letter. Her family struggled with her identity, so I doubt that they could accept Amy leaving on her own accord.

Here I was thinking that the Satanic Panic-esque "this poor American woman is missing in a different country, so she must have been sex trafficked" nonsense was over, but here it is rearing its ugly head all over again because of Netflix.

yeah and that's a good response to the people that think that. I did think the documentary was better than I expected it to be. they presented a lot of different angles to make her disappearance more mysterious that it probably was. even implicating their suite neighbor.

I honestly can't think of a "mystery" I could care less about.

Here I was thinking that the Satanic Panic-esque "this poor American woman is missing in a different country, so she must have been sex trafficked" nonsense was over, but here it is rearing its ugly head all over again because of Netflix.

Can anyone name a single case where it has been proven this happened? Some American kidnapped abroad and sold into sex slavery?

We've got situations where Americans have been killed.. You've got van der Sloot and Natalee Holloway.. But.. There was no sex trafficking involved there, just murder.

I honestly can't think of a "mystery" I could care less about.

The real mystery to me is why, after all these years, so many people still refuse to acknowledge the only plausible explanation. I—and many others—have laid out how virtually every alternative scenario aside from falling or jumping overboard is either impossible or extremely unlikely. Yet there remains a vocal group still convinced she was trafficked and paraded across North America, some even treating her like the "Michael Jordan" of trafficking victims.

The reality is that, based on what we know, a mental health professional would likely assess her as a high suicide risk but until this latest documentary, that possibility was often dismissed outright, sometimes even labeled as "disrespectful" to consider.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: the cases of Amy Bradley and Katherine Korzilius attract an unusual level of willful blindness. It’s fine to have alternative theories or ask tough questions, but the confidence with which some people cling to the most far-fetched ideas is truly baffling.

Baffling indeed!

I used to think that she fell overboard, but now after watching the documentary I think that she committed suicide.


At the end of the day.. Does it really matter which one it was?

I'm sure to her family it does.. But.. If it was suicide.. It seems.. Maybe that's one of those things that's better left a mystery.. So.. The family can think it was an accident. Might be easier on them. I think they're trying to take the 'easy' path now in thinking she was abducted. In a way.. I get Noreen Gosch vibes

And, from a legal standpoint.. It just doesn't matter. I doubt she had a life insurance policy that would exclude suicide. She's dead, either way it was quasi 'by her own hand'.

i'm sure we have cruisers on here.. Don't ships pretty much have cameras all over the place nowadays? So, if this had happened in 'modern' times.. There would be footage of the corridor showing that she never left the cabin and that no one entered the cabin?

At the end of the day.. Does it really matter which one it was?

I'm sure to her family it does.. But.. If it was suicide.. It seems.. Maybe that's one of those things that's better left a mystery.. So.. The family can think it was an accident. Might be easier on them. I think they're trying to take the 'easy' path now in thinking she was abducted. In a way.. I get Noreen Gosch vibes

And, from a legal standpoint.. It just doesn't matter. I doubt she had a life insurance policy that would exclude suicide. She's dead, either way it was quasi 'by her own hand'.

i'm sure we have cruisers on here.. Don't ships pretty much have cameras all over the place nowadays? So, if this had happened in 'modern' times.. There would be footage of the corridor showing that she never left the cabin and that no one entered the cabin?

I'll answer your last question first. Yes I've been on more than 10 cruises and I've found them to be very safe. but I'm also an adult male. public intoxication seems to be the biggest problem on cruises IMO, but most people are chill. modern cruises have invested in more CCTV to overlook balconies for people who jump. and I imagine there are more cameras that are on the ship in general to account for whereabouts of cruisers that are victims of some sort.

As for suicide vs. accident. This is my opinion only, but I do think there is a distinction. I always thought that Amy jumped because she was overly intoxicated, or she fell on accident. I never thought that it was a suicide until I watched the documentary. I think a lot of the comments on suicide in general are misgiven. People have stereotypes and don't take suicide seriously enough because they think it can never happen to someone that they know or love.

I honestly can't think of a "mystery" I could care less about.

I can think of several. but I guess I understand how someone can be turned off by the publicity and the fact that her family refuse to face reality.

Here I was thinking that the Satanic Panic-esque "this poor American woman is missing in a different country, so she must have been sex trafficked" nonsense was over, but here it is rearing its ugly head all over again because of Netflix.

No kidding! It's been 27 years; move on already.

I have never believed the human trafficking reason for her disappearance. I think the combination of her drinking and another bout of sea sickness when she stood up to go in (cigarettes and all in her hand) she got nauseous and ran to the railing. Somehow she lost her footing- maybe the ship changed course or rough water) and she fell overboard. I think she either called out "Dad" or screamed as she went over and this is why he woke up with a start.

I'm watching the doc now, because someone close to me said, "You have to watch it. I believe she was trafficked."

Even if Amy was "average," that's often enough for human traffickers. A reasonably good looking American girl who they see as vulnerable? Easy pickings. I'm changing my thinking and I'm not convinced she fell overboard. Everything in the documentary, including the daughter of Alister confronting him on the phone and the picture on a prostitution Website authenticated by the FBI as being of Amy, tells me she was trafficked, taken off that ship.

Also, for those that think Amy committed suicide because of her parents' attitudes towards her sexuality, I did not read that with the parents. You have to remember that, as someone said, it was the nineties. Homosexuality was not as widely accepted back then, and her parents were probably worried about the absolute hate she would face from some people.

Problem is nobody else went missing on that ship, when you look at the reports of missing women on cruise ships in that era you don't really find much. The vast majority of people going overboard/missing are males.

So they weren't much of a white slave trafficking ring, if they only abducted one woman & she was average in apperance.

Yellow's daughter has clearly been poisoned by her mother & only wants to talk to him about his. You don't think he is fed up of this? For nearly 30 years he has been called a murderer with zero evidence against him-now even his own daughter is trying to frame him for it on camera.

The earth shattering revelation? A guy then in his twenties, in a band flirted with women, probably slept around & had photos of women from his trips.

Wouldn't put any stock in the photo stuff-even 20 years later people are getting banned by stores using facial recognition software & they aren't the people the software says they are. There is some Indian guy swearing he has identified Lord Lucan with it etc.

The Tara Calico photo was looked at by the FBI, Scotland Yard & another-one said it was her, one said it wasn't & one sat on the fence-of course it plainly isn't her.

Suicide is frankly ludicrous-the gay stuff was apparently quite some time before & was over & done with-her parents wouldn't have wanted to take her if they were on the outs.

http://www.cruisejunkie.com/Overboard2.html

I used to think that she fell overboard, but now after watching the documentary I think that she committed suicide.

The only thing that got my attention from the trafficking standpoint was the photo. the FBI seemed to think that the photo could have been her based on the measurements. the problem that I have is the photo did not look like her and there are no conclusive body markings or evidence that would guarantee it. there are a lot of people that look alike in this world when you put photos by the other. that's another reason why we have to discount eye witness testimony. There was the witness that claims that he saw her tattoo, so in theory that would hold more weight than the photo, but again we are going off of his word. Then you have the navy guy that says he got verbal confirmation about Amy's identity.

My argument against the trafficking angle is that aside from Amy, I have not heard about Americans being kidnapped from cruise ships. Like the Cruise Director points out, there were a lot of protective measures in place and Amy's family amongst others, basically just dismissed that.

The most interesting part of the documentary IMO was Amy's father downplaying Amy's drinking. 7 miller lights is a lot for someone of Amy's stature, and that's the documented amount that they have. who knows if she was bought other drinks. the other intriguing part for me was the letter that Amy sent to her girlfriend. It was clearly an act of desperation from someone who was struggling and looking for help, but perhaps had no outlet. I think Amy was desperate and lived out the fantasy that she put in her letter. Her family struggled with her identity, so I doubt that they could accept Amy leaving on her own accord.

I saw the letter as being totally manipulative-cleverly done by sending it in a bottle & using the nautical themes. But clearly it was designed to try to emotionally blackmail her into taking Amy back.

Any impression she gave of taking her own life or harming herself was not serious, but purely for her own personal gain-getting this woman to forgive her & take her back. She now had her own place where she could do as she pleased & was looking forward to everything-so I don't buy she would decide to go on a cruise to kill herself, or wait three days after boarding before she did it.

The logical answer is the most obvious one-as you say she had drunk rather a lot, maybe she had taken some drugs-we will never know of course. Her father saw her feet/legs on the balcony at 5.30 AM, at 6.00 AM he heard a loud noise & she was no longer there.

Almost certainly if she had walked back through the cabin & left the door her father would have heard her in a light sleeping phase. Simply at 6AM or just before she woke up, felt sick-went over to vomit & simly lost her balance & went overboard-that is what her father heard. What else could he have heard really? If it was next door dropping something he would have recognised the sound.

Can anyone name a single case where it has been proven this happened? Some American kidnapped abroad and sold into sex slavery?

We've got situations where Americans have been killed.. You've got van der Sloot and Natalee Holloway.. But.. There was no sex trafficking involved there, just murder.

Never come across one. Sadly it has been all the rage in the me too & QAnon era-as soon as a white woman or child goes missing in the US it is dubbed sex trafficking by social media & sadly the mainstream media as well-when the reality is usually the obvious one-grabbed, sexual assault & murder.

Of course the victims of sexual slavery are nearly always going to be young Eastern European & Hispanic women & rarely are they just snatched off the street-they are lured to jobs-usually in another country, on the pretext of a well paid job, picked up & taken to the place where they are then held.

I can think of several. but I guess I understand how someone can be turned off by the publicity and the fact that her family refuse to face reality.

The reality is we don't know what happened. So what "reality" are they supposed to face????

Problem is nobody else went missing on that ship, when you look at the reports of missing women on cruise ships in that era you don't really find much. The vast majority of people going overboard/missing are males.

So they weren't much of a white slave trafficking ring, if they only abducted one woman & she was average in apperance.

Yellow's daughter has clearly been poisoned by her mother & only wants to talk to him about his. You don't think he is fed up of this? For nearly 30 years he has been called a murderer with zero evidence against him-now even his own daughter is trying to frame him for it on camera.

The earth shattering revelation? A guy then in his twenties, in a band flirted with women, probably slept around & had photos of women from his trips.

Wouldn't put any stock in the photo stuff-even 20 years later people are getting banned by stores using facial recognition software & they aren't the people the software says they are. There is some Indian guy swearing he has identified Lord Lucan with it etc.

The Tara Calico photo was looked at by the FBI, Scotland Yard & another-one said it was her, one said it wasn't & one sat on the fence-of course it plainly isn't her.

Suicide is frankly ludicrous-the gay stuff was apparently quite some time before & was over & done with-her parents wouldn't have wanted to take her if they were on the outs.

http://www.cruisejunkie.com/Overboard2.html

I agree with that last part, since her family seemed accepting.

The reality is we don't know what happened. So what "reality" are they supposed to face????

We don't "know" Donnie Hanson had anything to do with his half-sister's murders but it's pretty damn obvious for anyone with a functioning brain he was at minimum the setup guy and should be serving a life sentence. Few if any regulars here would disagree with me despite the fact we have no "proof".

Even though the Bradleys are proven liars (not just my opinion, a judge literally stated it in 2000) Ron's own testimony, no matter which of his three timelines you use, means that Amy could not have left the room after 4am undetected (those doors are LOUD with the patio door open) unless somehow traffickers managed to slip in (without a key swipe), grab or coerce her, all without 3 adults not noticing anything, in a small room barely bigger than a prison cell, slip back out and then have nobody on the ship see anything, all for someone who was average at best and "old" for a victim. I think it would be more likely that space aliens abducted her.

As for the "ludicrous" suicide theory, I don't want to share any personal stories (know a LOT of people who have had friends/family end themselves) but can tell you that yes, it makes perfect sense and while it is never able to be proven fits all the evidence. To say her family was "accepting" of her homosexuality is a bizarre statement to make when you watch the documentary, see what the brother has posted on social media, and how desperate they are to point out that men were all over her 27 years after the incident!

I almost never make 100% certain statements on any UM case but based on the many, many hours I have sunk into this one it is clear beyond any doubt whatsoever Amy didn't leave the room between 4-6, so by the process of elimination had to have gone over that railing, whether by her hand, an accident or an intentional push.

Totally agree on this one.

We don't "know" Donnie Hanson had anything to do with his half-sister's murders but it's pretty damn obvious for anyone with a functioning brain he was at minimum the setup guy and should be serving a life sentence. Few if any regulars here would disagree with me despite the fact we have no "proof".

Even though the Bradleys are proven liars (not just my opinion, a judge literally stated it in 2000) Ron's own testimony, no matter which of his three timelines you use, means that Amy could not have left the room after 4am undetected (those doors are LOUD with the patio door open) unless somehow traffickers managed to slip in (without a key swipe), grab or coerce her, all without 3 adults not noticing anything, in a small room barely bigger than a prison cell, slip back out and then have nobody on the ship see anything, all for someone who was average at best and "old" for a victim. I think it would be more likely that space aliens abducted her.

As for the "ludicrous" suicide theory, I don't want to share any personal stories (know a LOT of people who have had friends/family end themselves) but can tell you that yes, it makes perfect sense and while it is never able to be proven fits all the evidence. To say her family was "accepting" of her homosexuality is a bizarre statement to make when you watch the documentary, see what the brother has posted on social media, and how desperate they are to point out that men were all over her 27 years after the incident!

I almost never make 100% certain statements on any UM case but based on the many, many hours I have sunk into this one it is clear beyond any doubt whatsoever Amy didn't leave the room between 4-6, so by the process of elimination had to have gone over that railing, whether by her hand, an accident or an intentional push.

Agree to disagree.

Never come across one. Sadly it has been all the rage in the me too & QAnon era-as soon as a white woman or child goes missing in the US it is dubbed sex trafficking by social media & sadly the mainstream media as well-when the reality is usually the obvious one-grabbed, sexual assault & murder.

Of course the victims of sexual slavery are nearly always going to be young Eastern European & Hispanic women & rarely are they just snatched off the street-they are lured to jobs-usually in another country, on the pretext of a well paid job, picked up & taken to the place where they are then held.

This case predates all of that. So, while I get the sentiment.. There was no "Me Too" or QAnon at the time this happened, and ever since it did happen.. The 'abduction' theory has been out there. So.. I can't put the blame on Qanon/me too. Might have ramped it up a bit, but..

I mentioned Noreen Gosch before.. And.. I've given my opinion on her in the past.. I think she's driven herself mentally ill in the years that Johnny has been missing. I think.. Perhaps Amy's parents have gone down a similar road, though, perhaps not to such an extreme.

Did Johnny show up at Noreen's door years ago? Absolutely not. Did SOMEONE show up and in her grief/hope she just believed the person was Johnny? Perhaps.. I tend to lean towards that whole part either being a total figment of her imagination that she truly believes happened or intentionally made up. Not sure which.

I think Amy's parents are.. Deluding themselves a bit. Perhaps because it happened right under their noses. Much easier to blame a nameless, faceless boogyman than realize.. It was (most likely) a tragic accident. Or.. Perhaps even suicide. And.. You were sleeping 15 feet away at the time. No one else blames them.. But.. I think there's just a part of human psychology that most people would feel responsible.

You ever notice how many suicide cases the family just totally refuses to accept it? There's a long, long list of them on UM.


Has anyone heard some crazy theory that all the pictures of Amy on the cruise disappeared? Someone brought that up elsewhere.. I immediately posted pictures of her on the cruise from the videographer's footage.. They said "No, still pictures".. I found those and posted them.. All very easy to find.. That was something I had never heard of, when I asked them for a source for that statement.. they disappeared.

Seems half the theories start from a point of "What can no one disprove?" and then those are thrown out as the solution.

The reality is we don't know what happened. So what "reality" are they supposed to face????

you tell me. I was supporting your post.

I just saw an article on TMZ where the family is saying they're getting leads from places like Scotland.

So now the girl who was trafficked because she was a white woman in the Caribbean is in the land of the white people and still at it ...

smh

To make a sad story even sadder, Amy's brother went on TikTok and posted a video begging Kim Kardashian for help.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/amy-bradleys-family-begs-kim-kardashian-to-help-find-missing-woman-after-27-years/ar-AA1K1nIh

It is truly sad that they can’t admit the simple, sad, truth. Amy went overboard the morning she disappeared. It’s borderline mental illness for the family, following all the wild theories and illusions. A lot of people have, and continue to profit from this family’s misery and misfortune.

To make a sad story even sadder, Amy's brother went on TikTok and posted a video begging Kim Kardashian for help.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/amy-bradleys-family-begs-kim-kardashian-to-help-find-missing-woman-after-27-years/ar-AA1K1nIh

How is Kim Kardashian supposed to find Amy? :confused::rotflmao: Her family really need to stop with all of this nonsense.

To make a sad story even sadder, Amy's brother went on TikTok and posted a video begging Kim Kardashian for help.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/amy-bradleys-family-begs-kim-kardashian-to-help-find-missing-woman-after-27-years/ar-AA1K1nIh


"Brad told TMZ, adding that he hopes she’ll help bring the case to figures like President Donald Trump and even Rihanna."

This is just reading like a celeb hall pass list now.

How is Kim Kardashian supposed to find Amy? :confused::rotflmao: Her family really need to stop with all of this nonsense.

I'm starting to understand why they named him Brad Bradley.

Ridiculous. Someone needs to stop him.

you tell me. I was supporting your post.

And I appreciate it. But the reality is that no one knows what happened to Amy. The family thinks she was trafficked, and so do I. But nobody knows for sure if she was trafficked or she fell overboard or, if, as you said, she committed suicide.

I just saw an article on TMZ where the family is saying they're getting leads from places like Scotland.

So now the girl who was trafficked because she was a white woman in the Caribbean is in the land of the white people and still at it ...

smh

99% chance she fell overboard on the cruise ship in 1998. Zero chance she is in Scotland.

To make a sad story even sadder, Amy's brother went on TikTok and posted a video begging Kim Kardashian for help.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/amy-bradleys-family-begs-kim-kardashian-to-help-find-missing-woman-after-27-years/ar-AA1K1nIh

I think it's obvious that the family never recovered from Amy's disappearance, and are somewhat delusional at this point. Sad story all around.

I think it's obvious that the family never recovered from Amy's disappearance, and are somewhat delusional at this point. Sad story all around.

Welcome to Noreen Goschville.

I just saw an article on TMZ where the family is saying they're getting leads from places like Scotland.

So now the girl who was trafficked because she was a white woman in the Caribbean is in the land of the white people and still at it ...

smh

The show will get all of the cranks, hoaxers, mentally ill, people trying to help the family etc coming out of the woodwork.

"Brad told TMZ, adding that he hopes she’ll help bring the case to figures like President Donald Trump and even Rihanna."

This is just reading like a celeb hall pass list now.

1. I am sure Trump gives a damn about a missing woman.

2. If they believe she was sex trafficked, then not exactly the best figure given his friendship with Epstein, his comments about women, having been found guilty of sexual assault in a civil trial etc.

Brad, if you see this, involving celebrities in a missing persons case (especially the sitting president), is not helping your sister's plight. Leave it to the officials who can actually do something and have the legality to do so. I'm sorry for your family's tremendous grief, but please do not resort to desperation and muddy your sister's legacy.

1. I am sure Trump gives a damn about a missing woman.

2. If they believe she was sex trafficked, then not exactly the best figure given his friendship with Epstein, his comments about women, having been found guilty of sexual assault in a civil trial etc.


Seriously. Just another reason why the Bradleys are a joke. The guy who was at sex trafficking island multiple times will gladly help "save her" ... and I'm Michael Jordan I play for the Chicago Bulls.

This is probably not the time or place for people to espouse their political views.

And I appreciate it. But the reality is that no one knows what happened to Amy. The family thinks she was trafficked, and so do I. But nobody knows for sure if she was trafficked or she fell overboard or, if, as you said, she committed suicide.
I agree. we all have opinions and that's ok.

This is probably not the time or place for people to espouse their political views.

there is some irony with the political stuff regarding this topic, but I agree. best to keep it out of our discussions as to keep it civil.

It is truly sad that they can’t admit the simple, sad, truth. Amy went overboard the morning she disappeared. It’s borderline mental illness for the family, following all the wild theories and illusions. A lot of people have, and continue to profit from this family’s misery and misfortune.

the documentary was eye opening for me. I think Amy's family loved her dearly, that is impossible to deny. But I also think that they did not know how to accept her for who she was. and there is most likely some guilt there. Amy's family seemed reluctant, even in the documentary after so many years have passed, to discuss honest topics like her drinking and her sexuality. that could be dismissed as irrelevant to what happened. But I do think that they are dealing with a lot of internal guilt and they are looking for ways to keep her alive. but it is most likely misguided.

there is some irony with the political stuff regarding this topic, but I agree. best to keep it out of our discussions as to keep it civil.

Can I upvote this 1000 times???

This is probably not the time or place for people to espouse their political views.

If the Bradleys are going to invoke politicians it's fair game.

We've never had qualms before about discussing, positively or negatively, any other public figure involved or referenced by those involved in these cases ... including the victims. This is no different.

If the Bradleys are going to invoke politicians it's fair game.

We've never had qualms before about discussing, positively or negatively, any other public figure involved or referenced by those involved in these cases ... including the victims. This is no different.

Disagree. There is a big difference because politics has become so divisive. I've seen discussions on NextDoor and other forums turn nasty when someone injected politics.

Most people here could probably discuss politics with civility the way we go back and forth about aspects of cases. But there's always the chance that someone takes it too far.

Disagree. There is a big difference because politics has become so divisive. I've seen discussions on NextDoor and other forums turn nasty when someone injected politics.

Most people here could probably discuss politics with civility the way we go back and forth about aspects of cases. But there's always the chance that someone takes it too far.

If Brad is reaching out to political figures and celebrities on social media, I do think it is noteworthy to discuss. It shows his desperation to keep Amy in the news. But I do agree that there are certain people that when their names are brought up, it will indefinitely become a polarizing topic.

If Brad is reaching out to political figures and celebrities on social media, I do think it is noteworthy to discuss. It shows his desperation to keep Amy in the news. But I do agree that there are certain people that when their names are brought up, it will indefinitely become a polarizing topic.

Exactly my point. It is noteworthy that Brad reached out to certain people. But unfortunately he chose people whose very names cause discussion boards to turn into battlegrounds. I don't want that to happen to this forum. I've seen it happen too many times.

Exactly my point. It is noteworthy that Brad reached out to certain people. But unfortunately he chose people whose very names cause discussion boards to turn into battlegrounds. I don't want that to happen to this forum. I've seen it happen too many times.

This- ^^^^^^-right here.

New book to be published in 2026 claims that Amy Bradley committed suicide, because she was struggling with sexuality as she was a lesbian

Its author James Renner says "She had a really rough night. She'd been drinking. She had a very big decision to make when she got home from that cruise ship."

James did meet up with Amy's family as part of his research also, but he has claimed they cut him off when he mentioned her sexuality.

Spokesperson for the Bradley's say "It really had [no] relevance to the case, and they thought it would distract [from] finding Amy."

In response to the statement, James claimed that Amy's family never fully acknowledged that she was gay, and says, "I think that does a disservice to her memory and the partners she left behind."

"Amy identified as gay, not bi, it’s time to honor that. Personally, I think her identity had a lot to do with what happened. Amy had a major decision to make when she got home - be openly gay and reunite with her partner and risk disappointing her conservative family, or continue to live a lie."

https://www.themirror.com/entertainment/amy-bradley-missing-family-book-1333359

I wonder if something happened, a fight with the family about her sexuality, and if they villified her being gay, that caused her to become suicidal. The family never mentioned if there was any friction in the family about Amy being gay. I would think that would matter in her disappearance.

New book to be published in 2026 claims that Amy Bradley committed suicide, because she was struggling with sexuality as she was a lesbian

Its author James Renner says "She had a really rough night. She'd been drinking. She had a very big decision to make when she got home from that cruise ship."

James did meet up with Amy's family as part of his research also, but he has claimed they cut him off when he mentioned her sexuality.

Spokesperson for the Bradley's say "It really had [no] relevance to the case, and they thought it would distract [from] finding Amy."

In response to the statement, James claimed that Amy's family never fully acknowledged that she was gay, and says, "I think that does a disservice to her memory and the partners she left behind."

"Amy identified as gay, not bi, it’s time to honor that. Personally, I think her identity had a lot to do with what happened. Amy had a major decision to make when she got home - be openly gay and reunite with her partner and risk disappointing her conservative family, or continue to live a lie."

https://www.themirror.com/entertainment/amy-bradley-missing-family-book-1333359

I wonder if something happened, a fight with the family about her sexuality, and if they villified her being gay, that caused her to become suicidal. The family never mentioned if there was any friction in the family about Amy being gay. I would think that would matter in her disappearance.

OK, but in that same newspaper there is a story about Amy being terrified of the open ocean:

https://www.themirror.com/entertainment/tv/amy-bradley-overboard-ship-theories-1329829?int_source=nba

I still believe she was trafficked. Sorry, but that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

Seriously. Just another reason why the Bradleys are a joke.

Just the heads-up...

Maybe you should not be calling a family that lost a daughter they loved, a "joke." Losing a daughter under these circumstances will be extremely traumatic for anyone.

OK, but in that same newspaper there is a story about Amy being terrified of the open ocean:

https://www.themirror.com/entertainment/tv/amy-bradley-overboard-ship-theories-1329829?int_source=nba

I still believe she was trafficked. Sorry, but that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

Agree, there is a reason that has always been the leading theory among the serious minded (as opposed to the cruise lines and their lackeys who just want to protect their profit interests).

As to the book, James Renner is not very credible in my mind. His work on other cases has led me to take whatever he puts out with a grain of salt.

I think its admirable that the Bradlys are still pushing for answers, although I fear at this point even an administration interested in helping will be unable to do much given the time that has elapsed. The time for Washington to assist was 1998 when more could have been done.

I've never heard of this case, but i'm going to watch the documentary tonight, maybe i should wait before commenting. but how can you kidnapp and traffic someone on a cruiseship?

So you see a woman, what then? you take her to your cabin, maybe drug her and then how would you get her off the boat without being noticed? theres usually passport control no?

Supressing the fact Amy was a lesbian, a spokesperson for the Bradley family say "It really had [no] relevance to the case, and they thought it would distract [from] finding Amy."

In response to the statement, author James Renner claimed that Amy's family never fully acknowledged that she was gay, and says, "I think that does a disservice to her memory and the partners she left behind."

I agree with Mr. Renner. By being less than honest on who Amy was, and deliberately supressing relevant information

The Bradley family stymied the investigation.

Supressing the fact Amy was a lesbian, a spokesperson for the Bradley family say "It really had [no] relevance to the case, and they thought it would distract [from] finding Amy."

In response to the statement, author James Renner claimed that Amy's family never fully acknowledged that she was gay, and says, "I think that does a disservice to her memory and the partners she left behind."

I agree with Mr. Renner. By being less than honest on who Amy was, and deliberately supressing relevant information

The Bradley family stymied the investigation.


I dunno, are we 100% sure she was a lesbian? and how exactly would it affect her going missing on a cruise ship, unless she killed herself?

I think it can be distracting to focus on something like that, what about the case of sneha anne philip? someone who went missing on 9-11 (well was last seen the night before) she lived right next to the WTC and was a doctor... the most logical and obvious scenario is that she got caught up in the terror attacks somehow.

But then you have a private investigator who claims she was going to gay bars, meeting women....

with a lack of information, it's easy to focus on that and see something else, something that isn't there.

I dunno, are we 100% sure she was a lesbian? and how exactly would it affect her going missing on a cruise ship, unless she killed herself?


There it is. You just answered your own question. If she were, and her parents strongly disapproved, she might have been having suicidal ideations, struggling with her feelings. That information would have been greatly helpful to investigators at the time.

There it is. You just answered your own question. If she were, and her parents strongly disapproved, she might have been having suicidal ideations, struggling with her feelings. That information would have been greatly helpful to investigators at the time.


How would it?

People are making this case a thousand times more complicated than it is.

A cruiseship is a self-contained place, You can't go missing on a cruiseship, either you are on the boat or you're not.

She wasn't, so what's the only way off? well the sea. unless she was capable of teleportation.

so now this leaves us with 3 options:

1. she fell overboard, either by accident or because she was intoxicated.

2. she commited suicide.

3. someone threw her over.

Those 3 scenarios are the only ones possible. because the only way off the boat is the sea.

If the parents would have told the police "Amy is a lesbian" how would that impact the case?

her body would suddenly appear? the police would be able to read amys mind and figure out this inner termoil because she was gay, and then what?

She ended up in the sea one way or another, inventing "she was a lesbian and was fighting inner problems so she killed herself.." is a product of 27 years of endless scenarios. maybe its true, maybe it's not. but it does nothing to help find her body.

How would it?

People are making this case a thousand times more complicated than it is.

A cruiseship is a self-contained place, You can't go missing on a cruiseship, either you are on the boat or you're not.

She wasn't, so what's the only way off? well the sea. unless she was capable of teleportation.

so now this leaves us with 3 options:

1. she fell overboard, either by accident or because she was intoxicated.

2. she commited suicide.

3. someone threw her over.

Those 3 scenarios are the only ones possible. because the only way off the boat is the sea.

If the parents would have told the police "Amy is a lesbian" how would that impact the case?

her body would suddenly appear? the police would be able to read amys mind and figure out this inner termoil because she was gay, and then what?

She ended up in the sea one way or another, inventing "she was a lesbian and was fighting inner problems so she killed herself.." is a product of 27 years of endless scenarios. maybe its true, maybe it's not. but it does nothing to help find her body.

THAT'S MY POINT! She's struggling with her feelings. She's hopeless. There's no way forward. It's not unrealistic to suspect she jumped overboard and committed suicide. That's the end of the investigation. There's no chance of her body being found at sea, especially after all of this time. It could have saved a lot of time and money for the various agencies who spent years investigating her death. It could have ended this whole charade of Amy is still alive. The family could have moved on decades ago.

THAT'S MY POINT! She's struggling with her feelings. She's hopeless. There's no way forward. It's not unrealistic to suspect she jumped overboard and committed suicide. That's the end of the investigation. There's no chance of her body being found at sea, especially after all of this time. It could have saved a lot of time and money for the various agencies who spent years investigating her death. It could have ended this whole charade of Amy is still alive. The family could have moved on decades ago.



but thats not your point, what you're saying makes no sense!

we can't read peoples minds, we don't even know for sure that amy was gay.

so it's an insane stretch for you to say "she was gay, she couldn't cope with it, so she did what rose on the titanic almost did, case closed"

you can't do that! you can't suddenly invent what somebody you've never met is thinking. it's nuts!

if amys parents would have said to LE "amy was gayer than rose o'donnell!" where does that get us!? are the cops going to then say "ahhh now it makes sense, we've never met amy but she was gay and couldn't cope with it, so she ended it all, case closed, have a nice life"

thats insane!!! her sexuality changes nothing. if you go down that road of just making things up, you could claim anything.

i could claim that amy was being stalked by someone she worked up, this guy secretly reserved a cabin on the cruise, came on to her that night and killed her when she rejected him. and the police need to know this so the parents can have peace...

is it true? do i have some basis to say it?! NO! it's nonsense! and theres no difference between that and saying she was gay and couldn't live with it.

i love coming up theories, thats why i'm here, but you can't just invent something, especially about someone you've never met. you need a reason to 1. believe she was gay and 2. couldn't deal with it.

telling the police that amy was gay means nothing. no sane detective would say "ahhh yeah, so she killed herself.. case closed"

I've never heard of this case, but i'm going to watch the documentary tonight, maybe i should wait before commenting. but how can you kidnapp and traffic someone on a cruiseship?

So you see a woman, what then? you take her to your cabin, maybe drug her and then how would you get her off the boat without being noticed? theres usually passport control no?

There are actually a lot of ways.
Keep in mind that this is a very large ship, it has upwards of 2500 people on it.

The ship arrived at Curaçao shortly after she went missing. Passport control in such a place, especially in 1998, was certainly much more lax than the US then or especially now. This was a pre-9/11 world.

Also this is well outside of the US and the norms we are used to. $100 slipped to the right official would likely suffice as a passport.

So you have a line of 2000+ people trying to go through passport control. A man says his girlfriend/wife is hungover/not feeling well, etc. and shows a passport (if even required) and she walks through with him, likely under the influence of some mixture of drugs and alcohol.

There are actually a lot of ways.
Keep in mind that this is a very large ship, it has upwards of 2500 people on it.

The ship arrived at Curaçao shortly after she went missing. Passport control in such a place, especially in 1998, was certainly much more lax than the US then or especially now. This was a pre-9/11 world.

Also this is well outside of the US and the norms we are used to. $100 slipped to the right official would likely suffice as a passport.

So you have a line of 2000+ people trying to go through passport control. A man says his girlfriend/wife is hungover/not feeling well, etc. and shows a passport (if even required) and she walks through with him, likely under the influence of some mixture of drugs and alcohol.


If you going to kidnap someone, doing it on land where it's so much easier and avoid official government controls would be the smart thing to do.

Why run so many risks? why would you drug a woman so much that she can't fight back and then try to pass her off as a weekend as bernies type thing at a passport control?

how do you know who the right corrupt official is who will be bribable for 100 bucks? and not put you in jail for 1. trying to enter another country without a passport and 2. sex trafficking!!??!

things which will get you major jail time. you wouldn't kidnap a woman onboard a cruiseship. it's an insane logic.

you can drive down some deserted roads for a couple of hours at night and get lucky.

i think the idea that shes somewhere out there is a consequence of 27 years of theories and how "she fell in the sea" is just too boring and simple. it's not that interesting..

If you going to kidnap someone, doing it on land where it's so much easier and avoid official government controls would be the smart thing to do.

First, that assumes this was planned well in advance which may well not have been the case.

Second, as I pointed out above, such "government controls" were somewhere between easy to circumvent and so lax as to be meaningless, and thus posed no real barrier.

Third, being on ship has other advantages. It was dark, the perpetrator would have had a private cabin to bring her to, etc.



Why run so many risks? why would you drug a woman so much that she can't fight back and then try to pass her off as a weekend as bernies type thing at a passport control?


I don't see much in the way of risks here. She's drugged and therefore not much of a risk, and passport control (again, if that was even a requirement in that location at that time for passengers of that ship) was likely very easy to clear.

Curaçao isn't like the US where everyone wants in and the government spends a fortune trying to keep some control of it. Its a poor island that used to be an oil refinery. In the 90's people were actively leaving for Holland because it had no jobs. Its not exactly that they are worried about wealthy, mostly American tourists fresh off their cruise ship overstaying their visa to take advantage of the land of milk and honey.



how do you know who the right corrupt official is who will be bribable for 100 bucks? and not put you in jail for 1. trying to enter another country without a passport and 2. sex trafficking!!??!


The right official was likely any of them. Again, this isn't the US. Things work very differently in other parts of the world. Poor economic situation, the strength of the US dollar, etc. would make it even more likely.

Its also very possible that whoever took her on the ship had some contact or was in some organization on the island that had all of that handled on their end anyway.



things which will get you major jail time. you wouldn't kidnap a woman onboard a cruiseship. it's an insane logic.


By that logic no one would ever commit any serious crimes because they could get jail time. Obviously that is not the case. Criminals run all kinds of risks all the time and often get away without any consequence whatsoever.



you can drive down some deserted roads for a couple of hours at night and get lucky.


Deserted roads where? In the US? Then you have to transport this person out of the country. Certainly that happens too, but exiting the US is much more difficult. The cruise ship solves for that, she is already in international waters and outside of American jurisdiction which, unlike tropical island banana republics, might be more of a risk to a criminal enterprise.



i think the idea that shes somewhere out there is a consequence of 27 years of theories and how "she fell in the sea" is just too boring and simple. it's not that interesting..

I think the idea that someone is kidnapped off a cruise ship and trafficked is simply too frightening, disturbing, and unsettling for many people to accept, so they would rather ignore the evidence and pretend she fell off the ship. Its a psychological coping mechanism that humans have which shows up in many other contexts.

First, that assumes this was planned well in advance which may well not have been the case.

Second, as I pointed out above, such "government controls" were somewhere between easy to circumvent and so lax as to be meaningless, and thus posed no real barrier.

Third, being on ship has other advantages. It was dark, the perpetrator would have had a private cabin to bring her to, etc.




I don't see much in the way of risks here. She's drugged and therefore not much of a risk, and passport control (again, if that was even a requirement in that location at that time for passengers of that ship) was likely very easy to clear.

Curaçao isn't like the US where everyone wants in and the government spends a fortune trying to keep some control of it. Its a poor island that used to be an oil refinery. In the 90's people were actively leaving for Holland because it had no jobs. Its not exactly that they are worried about wealthy, mostly American tourists fresh off their cruise ship overstaying their visa to take advantage of the land of milk and honey.




The right official was likely any of them. Again, this isn't the US. Things work very differently in other parts of the world. Poor economic situation, the strength of the US dollar, etc. would make it even more likely.

Its also very possible that whoever took her on the ship had some contact or was in some organization on the island that had all of that handled on their end anyway.




By that logic no one would ever commit any serious crimes because they could get jail time. Obviously that is not the case. Criminals run all kinds of risks all the time and often get away without any consequence whatsoever.




Deserted roads where? In the US? Then you have to transport this person out of the country. Certainly that happens too, but exiting the US is much more difficult. The cruise ship solves for that, she is already in international waters and outside of American jurisdiction which, unlike tropical island banana republics, might be more of a risk to a criminal enterprise.




I think the idea that someone is kidnapped off a cruise ship and trafficked is simply too frightening, disturbing, and unsettling for many people to accept, so they would rather ignore the evidence and pretend she fell off the ship. Its a psychological coping mechanism that humans have which shows up in many other contexts.




It's not that it's too scary to accept, it's that it makes no sense.

You've said it yourself there were 2500 people on that boat, and it's not an open air space, meaning although it's a huge boat, it has limits and confinements. you can't drive away, you can't run away. if you get caught doing something you shouldn't, then you're ****ed! bring a whole level of risk to it.

again, 2500 people would have also got off the boat. nobody would have noticed a man with a girl doing a weekend at bernies and shes so drugged up, so out of it that she can't even speak up and scream help? how would you get her off that boat in that state and not one person noticed?

you're talking about 1998 as if it was 1898! the idea that every single person at the border checks is 100% corrupt and would take 100 bucks to allow you to do a bit of sex trafficking is an insane logic. 1998 wasn't this age of being able to cross borders without ID and not one zero check, while corrupt officials take 100 bucks to allow sex trafficking.

i travelled a lot during the late 90s early 2000s... it was nothing like what you're suggesting.

you say in one sentence "why would it have to be planned?" and then "well you could just throw 100 bucks at someone to let it slide"

thats a huge contradiction, anyone who is randomly kidnapping women on a boat without planning it first is not going to have the kind of mentality where he's believing that a 100 buck bribe is getting him through passport control. that makes no sense.

if you saw a woman that you liked onboard a ship and thought you'll kidnapp her for whatever reason, i'd assume if it wasn't planned, it's your first time, so where do you get the coolness from that 100 bucks and you're home and dry?

To render her so out of it, that she can't even say "help!" you've given her that many drugs... the notion that nobody on the boat, at passport control, anywhere didn't notice her.. is nuts. it's a silly thing to suggest.

she went overboard. how or why, who knows...

how exactly would it affect her going missing on a cruise ship.

Before I begin, let me say I am a gay man, so I am writing this from a gay perspective.

The Bradley family presented a fictionalized portrait of Amy—that of a full-blooded heterosexual woman who was dancing the night away with men. Because the family was steering the investigation that way, they entirely ignored the gay and lesbian faction of the cruise ship. Amy was a lesbian, and she would be hanging out with other lesbians on that ship. Even if these lesbians were not out, we gay people have gaydar. We know who is gay and who is not among a crowd.

I'm not saying that someone gay or lesbian killed or kidnapped Amy. However, the investigation's progress was hindered by diverting attention away from the gay and lesbian individuals on that ship. Maybe Amy confided in a lesbian passenger, maybe someone from the LGBT faction on that ship noticed something, or maybe Amy was involved with another lesbian passenger romantically.

This case underscores why it was irresponsible of the Bradley family not to be transparent about Amy's lesbian sexual orientation. So much valuable investigation time was wasted focusing on the heterosexual passengers, and no time was spent with the community Amy would have bonded with on that ship—the gay faction on the cruise.

I don't think the Bradley family is being honest about what really happened that night, though I don't believe they had anything to do with her disappearance. And I don't believe for a second when Amy's brother says she was dating a man. His identity has remained a mystery. If a man like this truly existed, the family would put him front and center to get more media attention for Amy's story. That is why I don't believe it.

Amy's family screwed up the investigation by supressing the fact she was lesbian.

Before I begin, let me say I am a gay man, so I am writing this from a gay perspective.

The Bradley family presented a fictionalized portrait of Amy—that of a full-blooded heterosexual woman who was dancing the night away with men. Because the family was steering the investigation that way, they entirely ignored the gay and lesbian faction of the cruise ship. Amy was a lesbian, and she would be hanging out with other lesbians on that ship. Even if these lesbians were not out, we gay people have gaydar. We know who is gay and who is not among a crowd.

I'm not saying that someone gay or lesbian killed or kidnapped Amy. However, the investigation's progress was hindered by diverting attention away from the gay and lesbian individuals on that ship. Maybe Amy confided in a lesbian passenger, maybe someone from the LGBT faction on that ship noticed something, or maybe Amy was involved with another lesbian passenger romantically.

This case underscores why it was irresponsible of the Bradley family not to be transparent about Amy's lesbian sexual orientation. So much valuable investigation time was wasted focusing on the heterosexual passengers, and no time was spent with the community Amy would have bonded with on that ship—the gay faction on the cruise.

I don't think the Bradley family is being honest about what really happened that night, though I don't believe they had anything to do with her disappearance. And I don't believe for a second when Amy's brother says she was dating a man. His identity has remained a mystery. If a man like this truly existed, the family would put him front and center to get more media attention for Amy's story. That is why I don't believe it.

Amy's family screwed up the investigation by supressing the fact she was lesbian.

Don't bother wasting your time with that poster. The boy won't listen to reason.

Amy Bradley's ex-girlfriend breaks silence on Netflix doc

Shannon "Kat" Lovelace spoke in Netflix’s AMY BRADLEY IS MISSING about how she had met Amy at Longwood University in 1994. She described how, after a feeling between the pair had ‘started to evolve’, Amy had kissed her, and the two had dated.

Amy’s sexuality, presented by her friends as a core point of friction between her and her family, has not been discussed in any previous coverage of her disappearance.

Kat describes how she had ‘never seen someone as close to their family as Amy was’ and stated that she was Amy’s girlfriend when she came out to her family as a lesbian.

Kat stated they were ‘not happy’, claiming that Amy’s father Ron wrote a three-page letter where he made his feelings on their relationship very clear.

She stated this outlined all the ways he was disappointed, claiming it put strain on their relationship and later causing them to break up after two years.

Kat writes in a substack post

"Amy and I were together for nearly two years. It was young love but also deep, messy, real love. She taught me things I’m still unlearning. Her presence in my life was both a gift and a storm. We had moments that felt like magic and others that still haunt me.

And losing her…

It didn’t just leave a hole. It left a wound that never fully closed."

Before I begin, let me say I am a gay man, so I am writing this from a gay perspective.

The Bradley family presented a fictionalized portrait of Amy—that of a full-blooded heterosexual woman who was dancing the night away with men. Because the family was steering the investigation that way, they entirely ignored the gay and lesbian faction of the cruise ship. Amy was a lesbian, and she would be hanging out with other lesbians on that ship. Even if these lesbians were not out, we gay people have gaydar. We know who is gay and who is not among a crowd.

I'm not saying that someone gay or lesbian killed or kidnapped Amy. However, the investigation's progress was hindered by diverting attention away from the gay and lesbian individuals on that ship. Maybe Amy confided in a lesbian passenger, maybe someone from the LGBT faction on that ship noticed something, or maybe Amy was involved with another lesbian passenger romantically.

This case underscores why it was irresponsible of the Bradley family not to be transparent about Amy's lesbian sexual orientation. So much valuable investigation time was wasted focusing on the heterosexual passengers, and no time was spent with the community Amy would have bonded with on that ship—the gay faction on the cruise.

I don't think the Bradley family is being honest about what really happened that night, though I don't believe they had anything to do with her disappearance. And I don't believe for a second when Amy's brother says she was dating a man. His identity has remained a mystery. If a man like this truly existed, the family would put him front and center to get more media attention for Amy's story. That is why I don't believe it.

Amy's family screwed up the investigation by supressing the fact she was lesbian.



I think you're doing something that has infected modern day crime solving in a social media age. you're allowing your personal bias, experiences and social causes to infectt a case that has zero evidence for anything that you've just said.

And it's very dangerous, it takes us away from reality.

The only video we have of amy is of her dancing with a man on the boat, i don't even know if you're being sarcastic when you mention "gaydar"...

there was a woman on a boat who vanishes, a boat is a self contained enviroment, again unless she teleported to the mainland or her kidnapper managed to drug her and avoid 2500 other guests and sneak her body off the boat then the only logical theory is that she ended up in the water.

this could be an accident, yes it could be suicide or it could be murder.

telling the police that she was a lesbian does nothing to solve this case, it doesn't explain how she ended up going overboard.

to invent that she was having problems with her sexuality and so she killed herself or that killer lesbians with gaydar threw her overboard... hahahaha it's just silly and bizarre.

she ended up in the sea, and although i understood the need that exists nowadays to make it all about being gay, no, it wasn't....

Don't bother wasting your time with that poster. The boy won't listen to reason.

Now I understand what you mean

telling the police that she was a lesbian does nothing to solve this case

How could you identify who Amy was hanging out with on that ship, given that there were 2,500 passengers aside from her family members?

I think the idea that someone is kidnapped off a cruise ship and trafficked is simply too frightening, disturbing, and unsettling for many people to accept, so they would rather ignore the evidence and pretend she fell off the ship. Its a psychological coping mechanism that humans have which shows up in many other contexts.

i'd say the idea that someone was kidnapped off a cruise ship and trafficked just has no evidence to back it up.

Again.. the challenge here. Name one case where it has been proven to have happened.

I can give a fairly long list of times where someone has fallen overboard. In fact, there was, somewhat recently, the case where a grandfather put a baby on the rail, who then fell overboard.. Or was it a window? I dunno..

Plenty of examples of people jumping off the ship as well.

I can't find any cases of anyone ever being abducted off a cruise ship and being sold into sex slavery.

Sex trafficking is the great boogeyman. It does happen. It rarely happens where someone is kidnapped into it. Usually what happens is that the people willingly go to their traffickers and then are stuck.

The idea of people kidnapped off the streets.. I won't say it doesn't happen, but.. Usually, they willingly go with people and wind up being trafficked. You hear about a number of teens in the US who were victims of trafficking.. Many of them ran away from home to the person who trafficked them.

Even easier.. To hell with the trafficking part.. Can anyone find a case where someone was kidnapped from a cruise ship, period?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Rebecca_Coriam anyone think that was a kidnapping?

What about.. Merrian Carver? I think that's her name. She booked a cruise from Seattle to Alaska and disappeared. Didn't tell her family she was going on a cruise.. Disappeared almost immediately. She had threatened suicide in the past. Seems.. Fairly clear.

I don't close the door on other possibilities.. but.. accident or suicide are certainly way at the top of the list. Kidnapped is.. So far down that it barely registers. I put more faith in the idea that her dad pushed her off the balcony than her being kidnapped off the ship. And.. No, I don't believe her dad pushed her off, either.

Just the heads-up...

Maybe you should not be calling a family that lost a daughter they loved, a "joke." Losing a daughter under these circumstances will be extremely traumatic for anyone.

There is a joke in this thread, and it certainly are not the Bradleys.

Seriously. Show some respect, people. It's one thing to question a parent's story when they might be covering something up (Penny Cayedito, for example), but calling anyone who lost a daughter a "joke" is in poor taste at least.

i'd say the idea that someone was kidnapped off a cruise ship and trafficked just has no evidence to back it up.

Again.. the challenge here. Name one case where it has been proven to have happened.

I can give a fairly long list of times where someone has fallen overboard. In fact, there was, somewhat recently, the case where a grandfather put a baby on the rail, who then fell overboard.. Or was it a window? I dunno..

Plenty of examples of people jumping off the ship as well.

I can't find any cases of anyone ever being abducted off a cruise ship and being sold into sex slavery.

Sex trafficking is the great boogeyman. It does happen. It rarely happens where someone is kidnapped into it. Usually what happens is that the people willingly go to their traffickers and then are stuck.

The idea of people kidnapped off the streets.. I won't say it doesn't happen, but.. Usually, they willingly go with people and wind up being trafficked. You hear about a number of teens in the US who were victims of trafficking.. Many of them ran away from home to the person who trafficked them.

Even easier.. To hell with the trafficking part.. Can anyone find a case where someone was kidnapped from a cruise ship, period?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Rebecca_Coriam anyone think that was a kidnapping?

What about.. Merrian Carver? I think that's her name. She booked a cruise from Seattle to Alaska and disappeared. Didn't tell her family she was going on a cruise.. Disappeared almost immediately. She had threatened suicide in the past. Seems.. Fairly clear.

I don't close the door on other possibilities.. but.. accident or suicide are certainly way at the top of the list. Kidnapped is.. So far down that it barely registers. I put more faith in the idea that her dad pushed her off the balcony than her being kidnapped off the ship. And.. No, I don't believe her dad pushed her off, either.





People underestimate how often this happens, i mean there was a case of someone going missing on a cruiseship only a couple of months ago.

they also underestimate that a lot of cruises are all inclusive, and the dangers of limitless alcohol and couple of small barriers between you and sea!

i'm actually a little shocked by some of the comments here! when did everything get so radical and personal?

there are comments about trump and people saying "because i'm gay, i've got some inside loop where i know..."

we have a woman on a cruise who was drinking and dancing at 4am, not youyr typical suicide candidate, but who knows, as for her being kidnapped? how are they getting her off the boat?

some people just dont want to accept the boring scenario, she drank, she fell and shes shark food.

WHOA.

First off, hi! I’m glad everyone has enjoyed the Amy Bradley series on Netflix. I thought it was a good watch.

That being said… slurs or nasty comments about sexual orientation? It’s absolutely against the rules here and will not be permitted. Period.

Any questions? PM me. Otherwise, leave the hate speech somewhere else.

I've never heard of this case, but i'm going to watch the documentary tonight, maybe i should wait before commenting. but how can you kidnapp and traffic someone on a cruiseship?

So…. Have you actually watched it? Or are you just arguing points to be contrary? Help me understand.

So…. Have you actually watched it? Or are you just arguing points to be contrary? Help me understand.

first of all, if someone says "because i'm a gay man, i have more insight about a woman i've never met and how she went missing nearly 30 years ago" me calling out the insanity of something like that isn't "homophobic"

it's laughing at someones stupidity. gay or straight, it's stupid.

it's like me believing i know more about what happened to amelia earhart because she's straight and so am i.

second, i posted that first comment then before replying again had read enough about the case to question the logic of drugging a woman then propping her up like a weekend at bernies infront of maybe 2000 other guests, while going thru passport control and nobody noticed..

first of all, if someone says "because i'm a gay man, i have more insight about a woman i've never met and how she went missing nearly 30 years ago" me calling out the insanity of something like that isn't "homophobic".

It is when you use a slur to further explain that point.

You want to continue to “discuss” this with me? Fine. Go to my DM’s. I will delete future posts regarding this.

EDITED TO ADD: That “ignore” button can be a blessing, folks! IYKYK.

It is when you use a slur to further explain that point.

You want to continue to “discuss” this with me? Fine. Go to my DM’s. I will delete future posts regarding this.

DM me and explain what slur was used...

EDITED TO ADD: That “ignore” button can be a blessing, folks! IYKYK.

Thanks for the tip! I'm going to use it for a certain someone

DM me and explain what slur was used...

You could have just said lesbians.

Google AI Overview

The term "dyke" has multiple meanings. Primarily, it's a slang term used to refer to a lesbian, particularly one who identifies as butch or masculine. Historically, it was used as a derogatory term, but has been reclaimed by some within the LGBTQ+ community as a term of empowerment. Additionally, "dyke" can refer to a geological formation, specifically a sheet of rock that fills a fracture in existing rock. It can also be used as a synonym for "dike," which is an artificial embankment or levee, often made of earth or rock, used to prevent flooding. Finally, "Dyke" is also the name of an unincorporated community in Virginia.

Here's a breakdown of the different meanings:

1. Slang for Lesbian:

Historical Usage:
Originally a derogatory term used by some to insult lesbians, especially those perceived as masculine or androgynous.

Reclamation:
Many lesbians have reclaimed the term "dyke" and use it with pride, sometimes to express assertiveness and strength.

Context is Key:
The use of "dyke" should be approached with sensitivity, as it can still be offensive when used by non-lesbians or in disrespectful contexts.

Is Amy Bradley Alive? Why Her Family Feels Closer Than Ever to Learning What Happened on Cruise Ship (Exclusive) (https://people.com/is-amy-bradley-alive-what-her-family-says-after-netflix-docuseries-11793391)

https://people.com/thmb/UHfbuyhH23izpjPemagWdQbqlXA=/750x0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(449x0:451x2):format(webp)/amy-1-acca2db7becd4a549ff8971a4d7f2e5c.jpg

So.. A few notes from that article..

“People can’t understand the level of hope that we’ve maintained,” says Brad, 48. “We’re still waiting for that call.”

Yeah.. We do understand.. That's why I put you in the same group as Noreen Gosch.

When Ron woke at around 6 a.m., the door to the balcony was partially open, but Amy wasn’t in the cabin. He immediately searched the ship, thinking he’d quickly locate his daughter. But when nothing turned up, the concerned father woke up his wife to tell her the worrisome news: Amy was missing.

So.. that seems.. Odd. Why would you, in that situation, immediately start searching the ship? If this were a 10 year old.. ok.. I get it. But this was a grown woman.. That's.. Probably nothing. It just seems wrong.

From the very beginning, the family never considered it possible that Amy accidentally fell overboard — or jumped to her death by suicide. A recent college graduate, she was about to start a new job and had just moved into a new apartment and gotten a bulldog named Bailey.

Yeah, the thought of that bulldog would have lifted her back onto the ship if she fell overboard.

Fearful that somebody had harmed Amy or was holding her against her will, Ron and Iva requested that the ship be thoroughly searched before any passengers disembarked.

This tells me.. They had that she was abducted in their minds from the get go. Which.. also seems a bit strange.

The Bradley family continues to explore every theory. Since the release of the popular documentary, they say, they have received many new tips and leads on their website

Probably 25 percent of those just being people from 4chan. And not the 'good' people from 4chan.

Brad recently learned via social media that the partitions separating the balconies on the cruise ship can be opened, leading to speculation about whether Breitag, their next-door neighbor, may have allowed a third party access to his cabin to abduct Amy and take her off the ship. (Breitag denies any involvement and insists that the wall between balconies could not be opened.)

That ship has likely undergone a few updates and retrofits.. Wonder if that was the case back in 1998? They sure seem to be pointing the finger at anyone and everyone.

And Douglas remains in the family’s crosshairs. Brad wants him, as well as Breitag, to take a new round of lie detector tests using today’s updated technology. But since Douglas is not a U.S. citizen and is currently living in Grenada, a country in the Caribbean, that is unlikely to happen. Attempts to reach Douglas for comment were unsuccessful.

What updates have there been in lie detector tests? Those things are the same now as they were 50 years ago, aren't they? The difference is the person running them.

While they are working with the FBI, the family also has a dedicated team of investigators who chase down every tip that comes their way. And they keep Amy’s beloved Mazda Miata just as she left it in the hope that she will come back soon.

And that team of investigators has come up with squat in ~30 years. Bet they've gotten some decent money over that time, tho.

Is Amy Bradley Alive? Why Her Family Feels Closer Than Ever to Learning What Happened on Cruise Ship (Exclusive) (https://people.com/is-amy-bradley-alive-what-her-family-says-after-netflix-docuseries-11793391)

https://people.com/thmb/UHfbuyhH23izpjPemagWdQbqlXA=/750x0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(449x0:451x2):format(webp)/amy-1-acca2db7becd4a549ff8971a4d7f2e5c.jpg

Good God! Now she got the cover of People magazine? :doublefacepalm:

Every day there are people who go missing, and a good portion of those people stage their disappearance.

We should not rule out the possibility that Amy voluntarily left her life behind to start a new one. That conflict between her and her family over her sexuality was the breaking point, and Amy felt she had to walk away to be true to herself. To do so, she needed to cut all ties with her past.

The day Amy disappeared, she could have just walked off the cruise ship with the crowd of passengers going sightseeing that day and never returned on purpose.

Although I don’t think she walked away, I do think that her walking away is more likely to have happened than her being trafficked.

That’s a really interesting theory!! I’ve never considered it. While I’m of the camp that believes she fell overboard, I do think that is certainly a plausible possibility as well.

That’s a really interesting theory!! I’ve never considered it. While I’m of the camp that believes she fell overboard, I do think that is certainly a plausible possibility as well.

The fact that the Bradley family keeps pushing this theory that Amy was trafficked shows how much in denial they are about Amy being a lesbian. They wouldn't consider the possibility that Amy was stifled by their disapproval. Thinking, "Amy could never leave us voluntarily, so she must have been kidnapped."

Although I don’t think she walked away, I do think that her walking away is more likely to have happened than her being trafficked.

Agree 👍

Although I don’t think she walked away, I do think that her walking away is more likely to have happened than her being trafficked.

While I totally agree in principal that walking away makes far more sense, if you going to start a new identity and life, Curacao, like most Caribbean countries, is a very small nation (I think around 125K population?) that would be very difficult to hide in or travel from. Wouldn't it have made 100 times more sense to disappear in a large, more LGBT friendly area such as here in Canada or other areas of the US? She could have easily driven nearly anywhere in both countries since she was an adult from a middle class family and had her own car!

While I totally agree in principal that walking away makes far more sense, if you going to start a new identity and life, Curacao, like most Caribbean countries, is a very small nation (I think around 125K population?) that would be very difficult to hide in or travel from. Wouldn't it have made 100 times more sense to disappear in a large, more LGBT friendly area such as here in Canada or other areas of the US? She could have easily driven nearly anywhere in both countries since she was an adult from a middle class family and had her own car!

Not to speak for terrytowel, but I believe it was simply a statement that it was more believable than trafficking. Not that it made any sense.

Those smaller countries also, I mean, treating this SIMPLY as a thought experiment.. It might be easier to 'hide in plain sight' there? Though.. you'd think a white American woman who lived there, not just visiting, would stick out like a sore thumb.

You could say she used that as a 'jumping off point', never intending to remain there.. But, then there's the argument of how she'd leave without her passport (I presume that was still on the ship)

Of course.. The above.. If you go with the trafficking idea.. How did THEY get her off the island?

At a certain point, if becomes like the TV show "24".. At the start, it was entertaining... You just had to suspend disbelief a bit.. As the seasons went on.. Then it just went beyond my ability to suspend disbelief. When you have to jump through so many hoops to get your theory to work..

Not to speak for terrytowel, but I believe it was simply a statement that it was more believable than trafficking. Not that it made any sense.

You could say she used that as a 'jumping off point', never intending to remain there.. But, then there's the argument of how she'd leave without her passport (I presume that was still on the ship) ..

That is exactly what I meant - I just did a quick google search and among the items missing from her cabin was her key card, cigarettes, and license

Back then, before 9/11 a U.S. passport was not required to travel from Curacao to St. Thomas in the U.S. Virgin Islands, as the U.S. Virgin Islands is a U.S. territory. All you needed was a valid government-issued photo ID, such as a driver's license - which was missing from the cabin

Because the Bradley family was convinced Amy was a victim of Human Trafficking, I seriously doubt they looked into this angle of her license being used to travel

While I totally agree in principal that walking away makes far more sense, if you going to start a new identity and life, Curacao, like most Caribbean countries, is a very small nation (I think around 125K population?) that would be very difficult to hide in or travel from. Wouldn't it have made 100 times more sense to disappear in a large, more LGBT friendly area such as here in Canada or other areas of the US? She could have easily driven nearly anywhere in both countries since she was an adult from a middle class family and had her own car!

I absolutely agree with you. Which makes that unlikely as well, making the obvious conclusion that she fell or jumped overboard.

I absolutely agree with you. Which makes that unlikely as well, making the obvious conclusion that she fell or jumped overboard.

But even today as an American citizen, you can fly from Curacao to the United States, with only a Driver's Licence as your ID if you don't have a passport

And Amy's Licence was missing from her room.

She could’ve had her license in her pocket. I often carry mine that way when I don’t want to deal with carrying a purse. Did she need to show her ID as proof of age while drinking on the ship?

She could’ve had her license in her pocket. I often carry mine that way when I don’t want to deal with carrying a purse. Did she need to show her ID as proof of age while drinking on the ship?

I agree with you that the ID missing doesn't prove she left the room. I know some cruises/event locations give you an armband/tickets for drinking so you don't need to constantly show your ID, but she may have kept it in her pocket for convenience anyway.

I rewatched the original UM segment recently and I remember Robert Stack's narration specifically says, "We know she took her cigarettes." But those cigarettes could have been in her pocket, too.

I absolutely agree with you. Which makes that unlikely as well, making the obvious conclusion that she fell or jumped overboard.

False dichotomy fallacy. It makes it unlikely that she voluntarily left, but it certainly does not support the conclusion that she fell overboard, as opposed to being trafficked.

Hello! Wow, it’s been a long time since I logged on. Yes, I still believe Amy went overboard.

Supressing the fact Amy was a lesbian, a spokesperson for the Bradley family say "It really had [no] relevance to the case, and they thought it would distract [from] finding Amy."

In response to the statement, author James Renner claimed that Amy's family never fully acknowledged that she was gay, and says, "I think that does a disservice to her memory and the partners she left behind."

I agree with Mr. Renner. By being less than honest on who Amy was, and deliberately supressing relevant information

The Bradley family stymied the investigation.

Yes, I agree and believe that the Bradley family stymied the investigation by trying to run their own investigations and their own questioning of witnesses.

False dichotomy fallacy. It makes it unlikely that she voluntarily left, but it certainly does not support the conclusion that she fell overboard, as opposed to being trafficked.

One opinion is no more of a fallacy than the other. They are both opinions.

The family's reaction of immediately thinking she was abducted when she wasn't on the balcony is somewhat telling. Your first reaction would be to think she went somewhere on the ship (shop, breakfast, coffee, etc.). The only real reason why you would immediately panic if your 23 year old daughter was gone from the balcony (30 minutes after seeing her sleeping "comfortably") would be because you thought she fell overboard. Outside of a guy dancing with her, there is nothing else that the family has presented that would have made them immediately think she was taken by someone else. It's absurd. You would want the crew to search the waters first. I think deep down maybe her dad knew this (which is why he panicked so early on) but couldn't bring himself to accept or admit that it is what happened.

This.^^^^100%. If I were in the dad’s shoes, my first thought would’ve been a sleepy,” hmmm, I wonder where Amy went?” That he overreacted the way that he did, immediately, is telling.

The family's reaction of immediately thinking she was abducted when she wasn't on the balcony is somewhat telling. Your first reaction would be to think she went somewhere on the ship (shop, breakfast, coffee, etc.). The only real reason why you would immediately panic if your 23 year old daughter was gone from the balcony (30 minutes after seeing her sleeping "comfortably") would be because you thought she fell overboard. Outside of a guy dancing with her, there is nothing else that the family has presented that would have made them immediately think she was taken by someone else. It's absurd. You would want the crew to search the waters first. I think deep down maybe her dad knew this (which is why he panicked so early on) but couldn't bring himself to accept or admit that it is what happened.

I completely agree along with the fact that Ron didn’t care if the return plane crashed because he wanted to be with Amy. They knew. They have always known she fell off the ship and died.

Yes, I agree and believe that the Bradley family stymied the investigation by trying to run their own investigations and their own questioning of witnesses.

I can't see anything where they 'stymied' the investigation.

I'd more put it as they ran their own investigation.. And apparently continue to do so.. It's not interfering or hindering any official investigation.

The family's reaction of immediately thinking she was abducted when she wasn't on the balcony is somewhat telling. Your first reaction would be to think she went somewhere on the ship (shop, breakfast, coffee, etc.). The only real reason why you would immediately panic if your 23 year old daughter was gone from the balcony (30 minutes after seeing her sleeping "comfortably") would be because you thought she fell overboard. Outside of a guy dancing with her, there is nothing else that the family has presented that would have made them immediately think she was taken by someone else. It's absurd. You would want the crew to search the waters first. I think deep down maybe her dad knew this (which is why he panicked so early on) but couldn't bring himself to accept or admit that it is what happened.

Exactly.

And now they'd rather convince themselves that she's a heterosexual 50 year old prostitute than accept that she was a lesbian that accidentally fell overboard. It's absurd.

They did interview several witnesses before the FBI did so yeah, they contaminated the witness reports. This is why a family NEVER interviews possible eyewitnesses because they don’t know how to do it objectively and they lead the witnesses. This is VERY CLEAR in the Chris Fenwick account where Iva was frantic and interviewing the two teenage girls and asking them to think and were they sure they didn’t see anything else etc.

Now one of those teens (now an adult) states that although she originally said she saw Amy and Douglas at 6am, she is unclear about her timeline and it could be as early as 3 am.

So, yeah, the family absolutely stymied the investigation by running their own operation and getting to witnesses before law enforcement officers and the FBI did.


Drew, I completely agree that it’s bonkers they want to believe their daughter is a post menopausal prostitute with children who was raped and tortured daily for 27 years.

Exactly.

And now they'd rather convince themselves that she's a heterosexual 50 year old prostitute than accept that she was a lesbian that accidentally fell overboard. It's absurd.

That is a strawman in the extreme.

Any family would rather their daughter loose her life relatively quickly in a tragic accident than be put through that, hers included.

What you believe however, is not what you want to have happen, unless you are unable to accept reality. What you believe must be based on evidence, even if it points to the worst outcome imaginable. The Bradly's certainly don't want to believe this, but they must because it is what the evidence points to. They would rather believe what the evidence points to, no matter the distress in doing so, than pretend she fell overboard and move on knowing that they basically abandoned her and her case.

Also, I don't think her still working in that sense is really part of the claim, its more that she was trafficked and might still be alive somewhere.

The family's reaction of immediately thinking she was abducted when she wasn't on the balcony is somewhat telling. Your first reaction would be to think she went somewhere on the ship (shop, breakfast, coffee, etc.). The only real reason why you would immediately panic if your 23 year old daughter was gone from the balcony (30 minutes after seeing her sleeping "comfortably") would be because you thought she fell overboard. Outside of a guy dancing with her, there is nothing else that the family has presented that would have made them immediately think she was taken by someone else. It's absurd. You would want the crew to search the waters first. I think deep down maybe her dad knew this (which is why he panicked so early on) but couldn't bring himself to accept or admit that it is what happened.

Good post :thumbsup: On a side note, I can't believe this story is still going strong 27 years later. The Bradleys must have some very strong connections in the media.

That is a strawman in the extreme.

Any family would rather their daughter loose her life relatively quickly in a tragic accident than be put through that, hers included.

What you believe however, is not what you want to have happen, unless you are unable to accept reality. What you believe must be based on evidence, even if it points to the worst outcome imaginable. The Bradly's certainly don't want to believe this, but they must because it is what the evidence points to. They would rather believe what the evidence points to, no matter the distress in doing so, than pretend she fell overboard and move on knowing that they basically abandoned her and her case.

Also, I don't think her still working in that sense is really part of the claim, its more that she was trafficked and might still be alive somewhere.


Except the Bradleys have said they choose to believe this because hope makes them feel better. Even when their hope is at the cost of a black man's peace for 25 years.

And if she's no longer "working in that sense", and thus choosing to still stay away from them intentionally what does that say?

Except the Bradleys have said they choose to believe this because hope makes them feel better. Even when their hope is at the cost of a black man's peace for 25 years.

And if she's no longer "working in that sense", and thus choosing to still stay away from them intentionally what does that say?

So the Bradley family say it gives them more hope that she was kidnapped and Trafficked (as she might still be alive).

Then if she just walked away from her family (as she might still be alive) because no one would accept that she is a lesbian.

Even after two decades nothing has changed with this family

I can’t believe a family is willing to be okay with the idea that their daughter might have been trafficked and endured a living hell all these years just so she will be alive now.

Except the Bradleys have said they choose to believe this because hope makes them feel better. Even when their hope is at the cost of a black man's peace for 25 years.

And if she's no longer "working in that sense", and thus choosing to still stay away from them intentionally what does that say?

Well, according to Noreen Gosch.. It's because the bad people are still out there and will kill the victim if they talk.

You know.. The traffickers are nice people.. They don't want to kill their victim, but, if they talk or show back up, they'd have no choice.

That doesn't exactly make a whole lot of sense, does it?

I can’t believe a family is willing to be okay with the idea that their daughter might have been trafficked and endured a living hell all these years just so she will be alive now.

That's the rational stance but sadly not what Brad said in the Netflix doc.

Except the Bradleys have said they choose to believe this because hope makes them feel better. Even when their hope is at the cost of a black man's peace for 25 years.

Certainly they did not say that in the UM segment. I certainly cannot claim to have seen every interview they ever gave, but that sounds very much like, at best, a quote taken badly out of context.


And if she's no longer "working in that sense", and thus choosing to still stay away from them intentionally what does that say?

In short, the first statement is likely true, that she isn't working in that line any longer, but the conclusion drawn is erroneous.

For starters, it would not be surprising in the slightest if after she was no longer forced to work as a prostitute she was instead forced to do some other unfree labor. A significant amount of trafficking is done for forcing work besides just prostitution.

Second, even if she was freed, which I find less likely, victims of that kind of trafficking suffer such extreme mental and physical effects that returning home is often not on their minds. Feelings of extreme shame, guilt, loss of self, and PTSD can lead them to not feeling worthy of returning home or being unwilling to be seen by their loved ones. This is even more likely when the time passed is measured in years or decades and they have been taken OCONUS. To call it a "choice" not to return in such circumstances is to ignore the realities of how these victims have been impacted by their captivity.

And finally, more to my unfortunate theory in this case, I suspect she has been deceased for some time. Being trafficked, she could easily have been a victim of a homicide, accidental death, or even suicide. From what I have seen, the last reasonably probable evidence of her surfaced in about 2005. That was 20 years ago.

Certainly they did not say that in the UM segment. I certainly cannot claim to have seen every interview they ever gave, but that sounds very much like, at best, a quote taken badly out of context.



In short, the first statement is likely true, that she isn't working in that line any longer, but the conclusion drawn is erroneous.

For starters, it would not be surprising in the slightest if after she was no longer forced to work as a prostitute she was instead forced to do some other unfree labor. A significant amount of trafficking is done for forcing work besides just prostitution.

Second, even if she was freed, which I find less likely, victims of that kind of trafficking suffer such extreme mental and physical effects that returning home is often not on their minds. Feelings of extreme shame, guilt, loss of self, and PTSD can lead them to not feeling worthy of returning home or being unwilling to be seen by their loved ones. This is even more likely when the time passed is measured in years or decades and they have been taken OCONUS. To call it a "choice" not to return in such circumstances is to ignore the realities of how these victims have been impacted by their captivity.

And finally, more to my unfortunate theory in this case, I suspect she has been deceased for some time. Being trafficked, she could easily have been a victim of a homicide, accidental death, or even suicide. From what I have seen, the last reasonably probable evidence of her surfaced in about 2005. That was 20 years ago.

I would sadly not be surprised if that were the case, but one always hopes for a different outcome.

Your statement about the effects of trafficking is on point, and why I reassert my belief that Amy was abducted.

Seven in ten human trafficking victims are women and girls. The Caribbean is a haven for sex trafficking. That's a strong argument in favor of Amy being trafficked in my book.

Second, even if she was freed, which I find less likely, victims of that kind of trafficking suffer such extreme mental and physical effects that returning home is often not on their minds. Feelings of extreme shame, guilt, loss of self, and PTSD can lead them to not feeling worthy of returning home or being unwilling to be seen by their loved ones. This is even more likely when the time passed is measured in years or decades and they have been taken OCONUS. To call it a "choice" not to return in such circumstances is to ignore the realities of how these victims have been impacted by their captivity.


Can you provide links to the documentation on that?

What is the definition of "That kind of trafficking"?

I'm guessing there haven't been too many studies on Americans kidnapped off cruise ships and forced into trafficking.. So, that must be a very obscure study there.

Certainly they did not say that in the UM segment. I certainly cannot claim to have seen every interview they ever gave, but that sounds very much like, at best, a quote taken badly out of context.




Did you watch the Netflix doc?

Did you watch the Netflix doc?

Don't have Netflix, likely won't get it just for this, although I am curious for an update.

Also knowing Netflix...no guarantees this interview wasn't edited in a "Homer Badman" fashion.

Can you provide links to the documentation on that?

What is the definition of "That kind of trafficking"?

I'm guessing there haven't been too many studies on Americans kidnapped off cruise ships and forced into trafficking.. So, that must be a very obscure study there.

Not all knowledge is the product of "studies" (and studies themselves produce both useful knowledge and useless noise). What I've gathered on this has been from other sources, and I'd be surprised if any "study" of this specific study was published. The cruise lines certainly don't want it out there.

As to "That kind of trafficking" we are talking about international sex trafficking, pretty self explanatory.

Brad said in his podcast interview with crime weekly last week that the FBI has always believed Amy never left the cabin.

Is it ok to link to Reddit? Here is the crime weekly podcast thread on Reddit where someone transcribed most of it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AmyBradleyIsMissing/comments/1n3bd8h/brad_bradley_interview_on_crime_weekly/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

Can you provide links to the documentation on that?

What is the definition of "That kind of trafficking"?

I'm guessing there haven't been too many studies on Americans kidnapped off cruise ships and forced into trafficking.. So, that must be a very obscure study there.

There are more statistics on crime happening on cruise ships, and people falling overboard - than people kidnapped and being trafficked

No one has ever been kidnapped off a cruise ship. Not even Any Bradley.

No one has ever been kidnapped off a cruise ship. Not even Any Bradley.

Although nothing verifiable, it's more than likely, just hard to document such events in the Global South.

Although nothing verifiable, it's more than likely, just hard to document such events in the Global South.

But they can document rampant crime aboard a cruise line, they document people falling overboardm in the Global South - and have compiled statistics

Why not kidnappings on a cruise ship in the Global South?

But they can document rampant crime aboard a cruise line, they document people falling overboardm in the Global South - and have compiled statistics

Why not kidnappings on a cruise ship in the Global South?

Exactly!

Why not kidnappings on a cruise ship in the Global South?

I'm not the right person to ask or answer that, but if I had a guess, those in power don't want it to be known because it would expose their complicity in the matter.

I'm not the right person to ask or answer that, but if I had a guess, those in power don't want it to be known because it would expose their complicity in the matter.

You don’t think family members would scream to the press what happened? It’s provable that a person boarded the cruise ship and did not get off the cruise ship.

The obvious answer is because it doesn’t happen.

^^^You're preaching to the choir and missing the mark at the same time.

Whether by suicide, or by accident, Amy Bradley is dead at the bottom of the sea. No amount of wishful thinking that she was taken alive from the ship and kept alive by traffickers all these years, or no amount of money paid to scammers, and no publicity from TV documentaries can change that. This family would rather believe their daughter/sister has been tortured by traffickers all these years than to accept the obvious truth.

There are more statistics on crime happening on cruise ships, and people falling overboard - than people kidnapped and being trafficked

Yes, because those are easy to compile. I learned long ago not to be overawed by anyone who points to "statistics" for a lot of reasons, but one of them being that statistics on the easily measured tend to obscure less easily measured phenomena.

In short, crime on a ship (which is discovered and dealt with by the captain or his delegates) is recorded and something you can compile.

Individuals triggering an overboard alarm are the same, again reportable, and countable.

But individuals that disappear without a trace as a result of being trafficked? What data source exists for such numbers to be compiled? Its not as if there are carefully kept records waiting for someone to sit and crunch with a computer. At best, such cases just get tallied as "missing persons", but to expect statistics on something without a clear data source is to misunderstand how the science works in the first place.

Whether by suicide, or by accident, Amy Bradley is dead at the bottom of the sea. No amount of wishful thinking that she was taken alive from the ship and kept alive by traffickers all these years, or no amount of money paid to scammers, and no publicity from TV documentaries can change that. This family would rather believe their daughter/sister has been tortured by traffickers all these years than to accept the obvious truth.

This pretty much sums it up in one paragraph. The simple truth is that despite a massive reward: $250K for the safe return, $50K just for information on the current location, $25K from the FBI, and reportedly a recent $1 million offer, not a single person has come forward in over 25 years. Not even someone from within the alleged traffickers' own circle.

This isn’t pocket change: it’s life-changing, win-the-lottery money. You’d expect someone, even on the fringes of the trafficking groups, to try cashing in regardless of the risks. Honestly, I’m surprised the authorities and Bradley family aren’t completely overrun with crackpots and scammers trying to claim the reward. In many Caribbean nations, that kind of payout would equal more than a decade’s income!

Whether by suicide, or by accident, Amy Bradley is dead at the bottom of the sea.

Agreed, and after 27 years, it's highly unlikely any trace of her will ever be found. I do wonder how much the waters were searched, but the sea is so vast it's improbable they'll ever find a trace.

The Bradley family desperately wishes this wasn't the case, and I don't blame them for that, but the idea of her being alive for nearly 3 decades in a trafficking situation is absurd and would mean even more suffering for their daughter. This is a tragic case that truly highlights how haunting a missing persons situation can be, when there is no definitive proof of what happened, loved ones may grasp at any straw they see and be a target for numerous scams/conspiracy theories.

Agreed, and after 27 years, it's highly unlikely any trace of her will ever be found. I do wonder how much the waters were searched, but the sea is so vast it's improbable they'll ever find a trace.

I had a recent personal anecdote that can relate to this. Over 4 years ago I was fishing in the lake by the Cottage. Long story short I lost my camera and determined it has to have been lost within 20 feet from shore in shallow water while we were docking the boat. I spend hours searching for it, even using an underwater camera to assist. I gave up until this year when drought conditions dried up the water about 15-20 feet out from the normal shore. Even with no water, I searched and STILL couldn't find it. My wife eventually found it wedged between two rocks about 15 feet out.

In other words, despite a small, clearly defined search area in shallow (less than 2 feet deep in most areas) water, and repeated attempts over 2 different years everyone who looked missing it. On the plus side I was able to retrieve the pictures although the camera itself was obviously toast. Contrast that to a body that could be in a 100km radius from Curacao that would have gone over in the dark and it would have been a miracle to find ANY trace of her, a far cry from the "100% sure" the Curcao police officer was about finding a body.

The family's reaction of immediately thinking she was abducted when she wasn't on the balcony is somewhat telling. Your first reaction would be to think she went somewhere on the ship (shop, breakfast, coffee, etc.). The only real reason why you would immediately panic if your 23 year old daughter was gone from the balcony (30 minutes after seeing her sleeping "comfortably") would be because you thought she fell overboard. Outside of a guy dancing with her, there is nothing else that the family has presented that would have made them immediately think she was taken by someone else. It's absurd. You would want the crew to search the waters first. I think deep down maybe her dad knew this (which is why he panicked so early on) but couldn't bring himself to accept or admit that it is what happened.

Nail on the head. Couldn't agree more

Yes, because those are easy to compile. I learned long ago not to be overawed by anyone who points to "statistics" for a lot of reasons, but one of them being that statistics on the easily measured tend to obscure less easily measured phenomena.

In short, crime on a ship (which is discovered and dealt with by the captain or his delegates) is recorded and something you can compile.

Individuals triggering an overboard alarm are the same, again reportable, and countable.

But individuals that disappear without a trace as a result of being trafficked? What data source exists for such numbers to be compiled? Its not as if there are carefully kept records waiting for someone to sit and crunch with a computer. At best, such cases just get tallied as "missing persons", but to expect statistics on something without a clear data source is to misunderstand how the science works in the first place.

Not to mention that trafficking rings and people associated with them are not known for advertising what they do. They learn to keep their mouths shut.

But individuals that disappear without a trace as a result of being trafficked? What data source exists for such numbers to be compiled? Its not as if there are carefully kept records waiting for someone to sit and crunch with a computer. At best, such cases just get tallied as "missing persons", but to expect statistics on something without a clear data source is to misunderstand how the science works in the first place.

There is no data source for those kidnapped & trafficked off a cruise ship - because there has only been one case that has garnered attention. & that is Amy Bradley - that is the point

Have you heard of anyone else kidnapped off a cruise ship and trafficked?

This pretty much sums it up in one paragraph. The simple truth is that despite a massive reward: $250K for the safe return, $50K just for information on the current location, $25K from the FBI, and reportedly a recent $1 million offer, not a single person has come forward in over 25 years. Not even someone from within the alleged traffickers' own circle.

This isn’t pocket change: it’s life-changing, win-the-lottery money. You’d expect someone, even on the fringes of the trafficking groups, to try cashing in regardless of the risks. Honestly, I’m surprised the authorities and Bradley family aren’t completely overrun with crackpots and scammers trying to claim the reward. In many Caribbean nations, that kind of payout would equal more than a decade’s income!

Didn't they say recently they were getting 'leads' from places like Scotland?

I might argue your statement above. i think they are getting overrun with crackpots.. So much so that they are joining them.

The Bradley family is in DC today for a meeting and have asked for prayers.

I wonder if the FBI is telling them they are closing the case? Maybe meeting with Trump? Idk

Just stumbled onto this site "International Cruise Victims Association - Victims Helping Victims!" chronicling crimes against peope on Cruise Ships. It is divided into six sections

(1) Sexual Assaults (2) Deaths (3) Missing Persons (4) Overboard Incidents (5) Injuries/Illnesses/Bodily Assults (6) Accidents & other Crimes

Notice they do NOT have a section on Human Trafficking

https://internationalcruisevictims.org/

Just stumbled onto this site "International Cruise Victims Association - Victims Helping Victims!" chronicling crimes against peope on Cruise Ships. It is divided into six sections

(1) Sexual Assaults (2) Deaths (3) Missing Persons (4) Overboard Incidents (5) Injuries/Illnesses/Bodily Assults (6) Accidents & other Crimes

Notice they do NOT have a section on Human Trafficking

https://internationalcruisevictims.org/

It could very well be filed under "Other Crimes" and "Missing Persons". Let's just say it's a small percentage (that we know of). Maybe it didn't warrant its own section.

Whether by suicide, or by accident, Amy Bradley is dead at the bottom of the sea. No amount of wishful thinking that she was taken alive from the ship and kept alive by traffickers all these years, or no amount of money paid to scammers, and no publicity from TV documentaries can change that. This family would rather believe their daughter/sister has been tortured by traffickers all these years than to accept the obvious truth.

https://media.tenor.com/-3uerd0wLxsAAAAM/awesome-the-rock.gif

It could very well be filed under "Other Crimes" and "Missing Persons". Let's just say it's a small percentage (that we know of). Maybe it didn't warrant its own section.

Or, you could just go there and read the stories and see.. None of them, other than Amy Bradley, have a 'trafficking' thought to them.

The majority from the missing section are male. OF those that aren't, excluding Bradley..

Ariel Marion, 23, who was confirmed to have gone overboard. That's an.. Odd story. the mother seems to have written it and it seems VERY odd that she seems rather focused on the fact that they made her move from her balcony suite to a room without a balcony and didn't refund her.. Really? You're hung up on that? Also that people from the ship were talking to her, which.. Ok, that part I can see more..

That same night, I was effectively forced to move to another cabin without a balcony, although the original fare was for a cabin with balcony. No refund was offered. The reason given to me for this move, which came despite my protests, was that they considered it risky for me to be in a cabin with a balcony.
​

Weird, right?

Merrian Carver who was 40.. IIRC, this is one that was.. It was most likely a suicide.

Rebecca Coriam, which could be 50/50 between being murdered and a suicide.

Annette Mizner.. No mention of trafficking.

Then there's a couple that had been married for 49 years, both disappeared. Don't think 69 year olds are trafficking material

Same thing on the Accidents/other. One, perhaps, date rape drug story there.. But no trafficking.

Or, you could just go there and read the stories and see.. None of them, other than Amy Bradley, have a 'trafficking' thought to them.

The majority from the missing section are male. OF those that aren't, excluding Bradley..

Ariel Marion, 23, who was confirmed to have gone overboard. That's an.. Odd story. the mother seems to have written it and it seems VERY odd that she seems rather focused on the fact that they made her move from her balcony suite to a room without a balcony and didn't refund her.. Really? You're hung up on that? Also that people from the ship were talking to her, which.. Ok, that part I can see more..



Weird, right?

Merrian Carver who was 40.. IIRC, this is one that was.. It was most likely a suicide.

Rebecca Coriam, which could be 50/50 between being murdered and a suicide.

Annette Mizner.. No mention of trafficking.

Then there's a couple that had been married for 49 years, both disappeared. Don't think 69 year olds are trafficking material

Same thing on the Accidents/other. One, perhaps, date rape drug story there.. But no trafficking.

Okay, so there's no mention of trafficking other than Amy Bradley. I can concede that. But I'm sorry, I still think she was trafficked. Nothing is going to change my mind about that.

Okay, so there's no mention of trafficking other than Amy Bradley. I can concede that. But I'm sorry, I still think she was trafficked. Nothing is going to change my mind about that.

I don't really have a problem with that.. I mean, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

I can respect people who say "Look, there's an awful lot that doesn't agree with this. there's little evidence to back it up.. But, I still think.." Which.. You do now seem to be saying?

Hey.. No problem. It's when you're backing a theory like that and pull out half truths and baseless 'facts' to try to back it up. That's where things get problematic with me.

The main reason I have a problem with that.. you look at MANY cases that are old and unsolved.. People who have those white unicorn theories have some of their made up facts actually BECOME facts because they're picked up by other people and then presented as fact.

Not pointing the finger that you did the above.. Just.. That's the kind of thing that riles me up. There are a number of cases out there where 'internet sleuths' have injected their theories in and had them turn into 'fact'.. Which.. Muddies the waters. In a way.. Philly Karen that is happening now suffers from that.. The woman who took the baseball from the kid down in Miami. The internet has pointed the finger, incorrectly, at three different people at this point, I believe.

I love to debate, civilly, back and forth on a case. I think that's what we're all here for. Now.. Having the old "Kevin Bacon wasn't in Footloose" debate.. Not so much. Look that up on youtube if you're not familiar.

I also try to never say anything definitive. Always stress that something is my thought, my theory, and WHY I came to that conclusion. I don't say that I'm right because.. I don't know, it wouldn't be a mystery if I knew. Just where the evidence leads me. You also never quite know when you're relying on a 'fact' that isn't a fact. that's one reason on older cases that I prefer to rely on contemporary reporting. CrystalDawn is just so excellent at that.. It's one of the reasons I love reading that blog. I have a ton of respect for CD and how those cases are looked at.

I keep bringing this one up, because, it's still rather fresh.. but.. Gene Hackman and his wife. Show me one person who had hantavirus and natural causes on those two. And, we still had bad information there. People had facts about where they were found and all kinds of things that turned out to be wrong. And that case was currently happening I think the last post I had about that over on another forum before the announcement was made was "I have no freaking idea".. Of course, I was convinced it was carbon monoxide before that was ruled out. One person there was just so forceful telling everyone that it was due to pesticides.

If they had been using pesticides, she, at least, might still be alive. What did that person say after the results came out? "I still think it was pesticides". That will also get the old clock ticking for me. They might as well have said "Kevin Bacon wasn't in Footloose"

One person.. the 18 or 19 year old who disappeared out in Utah.. about 2 or 3 years ago. He was a farmer. Remember that case? Someone who has "Visions" came in and was just all over the place (Different forum) about how they saw he was kidnapped and killed by just some random guy that they named. Obviously.. they were astoundingly wrong.. And rather slanderous as well. There's another one that will get me going.

It follows as well, I try to explain why I do NOT agree with someone else's theory, if I don't. I mean, it's not much of a debate to say "You're wrong" now, is it? I don't THINK trafficking is involved here for a number of reasons, which I'm sure I've covered here in the past. Of course.. if you want a win on all this.. I can't tell you that you're wrong. I can tell you I *THINK* you're wrong, but.. Is your theory possible? Yes. Plausible? Probably still yes, but.. Lord.. It's on the border for me.

I don't really have a problem with that.. I mean, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

I can respect people who say "Look, there's an awful lot that doesn't agree with this. there's little evidence to back it up.. But, I still think.." Which.. You do now seem to be saying?

Hey.. No problem. It's when you're backing a theory like that and pull out half truths and baseless 'facts' to try to back it up. That's where things get problematic with me.

The main reason I have a problem with that.. you look at MANY cases that are old and unsolved.. People who have those white unicorn theories have some of their made up facts actually BECOME facts because they're picked up by other people and then presented as fact.

Not pointing the finger that you did the above.. Just.. That's the kind of thing that riles me up. There are a number of cases out there where 'internet sleuths' have injected their theories in and had them turn into 'fact'.. Which.. Muddies the waters. In a way.. Philly Karen that is happening now suffers from that.. The woman who took the baseball from the kid down in Miami. The internet has pointed the finger, incorrectly, at three different people at this point, I believe.

I love to debate, civilly, back and forth on a case. I think that's what we're all here for. Now.. Having the old "Kevin Bacon wasn't in Footloose" debate.. Not so much. Look that up on youtube if you're not familiar.

I also try to never say anything definitive. Always stress that something is my thought, my theory, and WHY I came to that conclusion. I don't say that I'm right because.. I don't know, it wouldn't be a mystery if I knew. Just where the evidence leads me. You also never quite know when you're relying on a 'fact' that isn't a fact. that's one reason on older cases that I prefer to rely on contemporary reporting. CrystalDawn is just so excellent at that.. It's one of the reasons I love reading that blog. I have a ton of respect for CD and how those cases are looked at.

I keep bringing this one up, because, it's still rather fresh.. but.. Gene Hackman and his wife. Show me one person who had hantavirus and natural causes on those two. And, we still had bad information there. People had facts about where they were found and all kinds of things that turned out to be wrong. And that case was currently happening I think the last post I had about that over on another forum before the announcement was made was "I have no freaking idea".. Of course, I was convinced it was carbon monoxide before that was ruled out. One person there was just so forceful telling everyone that it was due to pesticides.

If they had been using pesticides, she, at least, might still be alive. What did that person say after the results came out? "I still think it was pesticides". That will also get the old clock ticking for me. They might as well have said "Kevin Bacon wasn't in Footloose"

One person.. the 18 or 19 year old who disappeared out in Utah.. about 2 or 3 years ago. He was a farmer. Remember that case? Someone who has "Visions" came in and was just all over the place (Different forum) about how they saw he was kidnapped and killed by just some random guy that they named. Obviously.. they were astoundingly wrong.. And rather slanderous as well. There's another one that will get me going.

It follows as well, I try to explain why I do NOT agree with someone else's theory, if I don't. I mean, it's not much of a debate to say "You're wrong" now, is it? I don't THINK trafficking is involved here for a number of reasons, which I'm sure I've covered here in the past. Of course.. if you want a win on all this.. I can't tell you that you're wrong. I can tell you I *THINK* you're wrong, but.. Is your theory possible? Yes. Plausible? Probably still yes, but.. Lord.. It's on the border for me.

I respect CrystalDawn, and your well-thought-out opinion, and that you want respectful, civil debate, and are willing to dig into the facts and look deeper and even consider an alternative view. Something that is sadly lacking in today's world, and certainly on the Internet.

I am in the "there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of evidence that we can agree on to support the trafficking angle, but I still think Amy was trafficked" camp. That's my belief. I'm not going to drop a bunch of half-truths or Internet rumors into the stew.

At the end of the day, we can agree to disagree, and that's okay.

I respect CrystalDawn, and your well-thought-out opinion, and that you want respectful, civil debate, and are willing to dig into the facts and look deeper and even consider an alternative view. Something that is sadly lacking in today's world, and certainly on the Internet.

I am in the "there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of evidence that we can agree on to support the trafficking angle, but I still think Amy was trafficked" camp. That's my belief. I'm not going to drop a bunch of half-truths or Internet rumors into the stew.

At the end of the day, we can agree to disagree, and that's okay.

Yes. Not a problem at all. You know.. There's people out there that think JFK and 9/11 and.. Lord knows how many other things are conspiracies.

And.. There are things about all of them that could be brought up that I'd probably agree with.. Hey.. This doesn't make sense.. This doesn't fit with the 'official' narrative.. Those don't sway me from still believing that the official narratives are.. At the least, mostly correct. I can't say 100% because.. At least with JFK.. The one person who could tell us died a couple of days after JFK did..

Katherine Korzilius is another one. I just can't see there being any time for someone to grab her, take her to the field where her scent was found and then drive off, tossing her out of the car, bashing her skull in the process AND get away without being seen or heard.

I know there's a number of people who feel it could have happened.. Few are willing to say.. "Yes, I know there's a lot that doesn't add up here, but.. "

It's usually more of a "This is what happened"

I can tell you what I *THINK* happened. But.. I wasn't there, either.. No more than I was at the JFK assassination or on the ship with Amy Bradley.

I have a good alibi for JFK, at least.. I wasn't born yet.. Just in case someone gets crazy ideas that one person is responsible for all of those things and then decided to come on here and post about them.. Just to throw them off the trail! lol.

Yes. Not a problem at all. You know.. There's people out there that think JFK and 9/11 and.. Lord knows how many other things are conspiracies.

And.. There are things about all of them that could be brought up that I'd probably agree with.. Hey.. This doesn't make sense.. This doesn't fit with the 'official' narrative.. Those don't sway me from still believing that the official narratives are.. At the least, mostly correct. I can't say 100% because.. At least with JFK.. The one person who could tell us died a couple of days after JFK did..

Katherine Korzilius is another one. I just can't see there being any time for someone to grab her, take her to the field where her scent was found and then drive off, tossing her out of the car, bashing her skull in the process AND get away without being seen or heard.

I know there's a number of people who feel it could have happened.. Few are willing to say.. "Yes, I know there's a lot that doesn't add up here, but.. "

It's usually more of a "This is what happened"

I can tell you what I *THINK* happened. But.. I wasn't there, either.. No more than I was at the JFK assassination or on the ship with Amy Bradley.

I have a good alibi for JFK, at least.. I wasn't born yet.. Just in case someone gets crazy ideas that one person is responsible for all of those things and then decided to come on here and post about them.. Just to throw them off the trail! lol.

Well, I trust your alibi. :)

I saw the Netflix doc. Amy Bradley is Missing over the summer & it just reinforced my strong opinion that AB fell/jumped over the balcony of the cruise ship & drowned. The series did go over some elements I hadn't previously been aware of - that may have explained her state of mind when she was on the cruise.

It's completely understandable why her body was never found - it may have been swept away and/or missed in the search.

I absolutely do not believe she was kidnapped/left the ship after she was last seen by her family on the balcony. There is no evidence that she left the room, and I believe that the subsequent, alleged "eyewitness sightings" (which, in general, are proven to be unreliable in many cases) were all red herrings.

It's unfortunate that the cruise ship employee "Yellow" was caught up in this case, when it's obvious he had nothing to do with this. His treatment here was egregious & unfortunate.

That is a strawman in the extreme.

Any family would rather their daughter loose her life relatively quickly in a tragic accident than be put through that, hers included..

Actually, the vast majority of people would rather hope that their daughter is alive, regardless of the circumstances, then deceased.

Actually, the vast majority of people would rather hope that their daughter is alive, regardless of the circumstances, then deceased.

Yes. How many missing persons cases have we seen on UM where the family keeps hoping year after year and chases every lead, no matter how farfetched? Amy Billig comes to mind. Elizabeth Campbell's parents say, "She'll always be our daughter. We'll never stop looking." Gail Delano's family say in her segment that they don't care if she comes home, they just want to know she is alive somewhere. This is before we learn that she committed suicide.

I saw the Netflix segment as well. It puzzled me. I am not sure it re-inforced anything one way or another for me. I didn't know Amy was a lesbian and was nervous to come out to her parents. That could be a reason to jump over, I guess. But why do it at like 6am? Why wait all night for it? And not just that, your natural instinct is going to be to tread water to stay alive. Unless she had an anvil on her to weigh her down to the bottom of the ocean.

Then there is the daughter of the one suspect Amy was seen with that night. Even she believes her father did it. And she tried to get him to admit it on a private phone call. The sightings of Amy are peculiar because they just seem almost too hard to believe they DIDN'T happen. Especially the one with the woman in the washroom. Was that Amy? Yeah, it could have been. And maybe it was. But that was 2005 or so. I think that Amy might have became a liability to the abductors and she was killed, if it was even her. Because there are no sightings since then.

But why do it at like 6am? Why wait all night for it?

Because they had been partying all night and didn't go to their cabins until 3.30am. Then apparently Amy woke up around 6am and went to the balcony, possibly to have a smoke. She could've made an impulsive decision right at that moment.

And not just that, your natural instinct is going to be to tread water to stay alive.

She could've been knocked out hitting the water, but who says she didn't tread water?

But why do it at like 6am? Why wait all night for it? And not just that, your natural instinct is going to be to tread water to stay alive. Unless she had an anvil on her to weigh her down to the bottom of the ocean.
Honestly, who knows? I have collected many suicide stories of people close to me but just one example was a former friend. She confided that she moved to the city from a farm halfway across the country and how her father killed himself. Long story short, he chatted with her about weekend plans they had, had supper as normal and went out in the barn and blew his brains out an hour later. Assuming Amy jumped, I think any discussions around the "right" time are pointless and suicides are rarely planned out. The Bradley's come across as the type of family who would NEVER accept a suicide ruling even if Amy herself appeared as a ghost and told them all independently.

I also think the sink vs tread argument is equally pointless: it was in the dark, nobody saw her fall and cruise ships are LOUD. If she did fall overboard, the chances of being conscious from a fall that height are are extremely low. She wasn't suspected of being overboard until hours later and search efforts were futile at that stage. She could also have been paralyzed, in shock, been choking or any other reason why no scream was heard. That's not getting into the fact people have jumped from the suspension bridge in my city, are caught on camera and still are never recovered.

Then there is the daughter of the one suspect Amy was seen with that night. Even she believes her father did it. And she tried to get him to admit it on a private phone call.
You can't believe everything you see on TV. There is a good chance this whole thing was staged but either way, Yellow came across even more innocent after I heard that call. He may be a bad father or a "player" but that has nothing to do with the question of whether he is a trafficker or murderer.

The sightings of Amy are peculiar because they just seem almost too hard to believe they DIDN'T happen. Especially the one with the woman in the washroom. Was that Amy? Yeah, it could have been. And maybe it was. But that was 2005 or so. I think that Amy might have became a liability to the abductors and she was killed, if it was even her. Because there are no sightings since then.
Famous missing person cases always attract bad leads from crackpots, scammers, the mentally ill, and people who are well meaning but simply wrong, especially when there is a substantial cash reward and the family has been shown to be rather gullible. None of the reported “sightings” are credible, but the washroom woman stands out as especially unreliable. She has changed her story over time, lifted details from TV shows, and claimed Amy was in a completely different foreign country (in a high visibility tourist area) nearly a decade after she disappeared. Saying “Amy from Virginia” or something similarly vague makes no sense: any real interaction or discreet cry for help would have involved her full name and/or an obvious identifier like flashing her tattoos or saying her home/work address. The story falls apart under basic scrutiny and in my opinion, the eyewitness is either mentally ill or deliberately lying and has zero credibility.

The main reason none of the sightings are believable to me is because "Amy" has no consistency in her behavior, ranging from violent to begging for help to directly asking for directions and even seeming to ignore the eyewitness.

Actually, the vast majority of people would rather hope that their daughter is alive, regardless of the circumstances, then deceased.

You just had to bump this thread... :lol: :smash:

Actually, the vast majority of people would rather hope that their daughter is alive, regardless of the circumstances, then deceased.

No, not "regardless of the circumstances", no family is going to wish a life of sex slavery on their daughter versus a merciful drowning.

However if the evidence says she is alive and in captivity a family is going to do what it takes to find her, even if it would be easier to pretend it didn't happen.

No, not "regardless of the circumstances", no family is going to wish a life of sex slavery on their daughter versus a merciful drowning.


The fact that you would wish death on a family member, rather than to discover them alive years later, regardless of the abuse they endured, says a lot about you.

I love my daughter. It’s why I would wish her dead rather than living as a sex slave.

I love my daughter. It’s why I would wish her dead rather than living as a sex slave.

Same 👍