This case was one I'd heard about a few years ago on YT.

Turns out, there was a rash of disappearances of Black and Latino toddlers from inner city NY neighborhoods.

This episode was emotionally brutal and sad and makes me wonder what the heck was really going on?

My instincts tell me these kids were taken and likely sold to families wanting their own child or sold to sick pedophiles.

Way too similar to the Atlanta Child Murders.

The thing about this case is that there's never been any solid clues as to who took them (unlike other abduction cases during the original UM run). They could have been raised by their abductors or somebody affiliated with the abductors and were raised under different names, if they're still alive. In New York City, it is so easy to blend in with the large crowd and make an escape out to the rest of the country. So they could be anywhere.

I am halfway through the episode and came in here to start a topic. So glad you all are discussing this.

I have notoriously posted how I would not watch the reboot but the preview of this episode when Netflix opens sucked me in.

This is such an emotional rollercoaster. I cannot imagine what these mothers have gone through for over 30 years. When Shane's mother broke down in the park OMG.

You can see how heavy this has weighed on both mothers they looks so TIRED and HURT.

I hope someone took these kids and raised them and did not harm them, but I think we all know better.

I bet whoever stole the kids were living in that projects in Harlem.

I am skeptical about little black boys being SOLD to people who just want a kid. Especially because of the AGE. People who buy babies want SMALL handheld babies. (Sorry for the caps it is a habit I am not yelling I do this for emphasis). These boys were toddlers. Sadly they probably have no memory of their natural mothers. They could remember the kidnapping if it was traumatic though.

Whoever took these boys was a pedophile. They should go back and see who were sex offenders living in that building. It probably wouldn't help because a lot of them hide in plain sight. Probably the boyfriend of one of the tenants and they weren't on the lease.

I hope this exposure opens up a flood of leads on this case. I hope both mothers have their DNA on Ancestry and other sites.

Wow I don't have kids but I could not imagine the pain and guilt. WOW.

I am halfway through the episode and came in here to start a topic. So glad you all are discussing this.

I have notoriously posted how I would not watch the reboot but the preview of this episode when Netflix opens sucked me in.

This is such an emotional rollercoaster. I cannot imagine what these mothers have gone through for over 30 years. When Shane's mother broke down in the park OMG.

You can see how heavy this has weighed on both mothers they looks so TIRED and HURT.

I hope someone took these kids and raised them and did not harm them, but I think we all know better.

I bet whoever stole the kids were living in that projects in Harlem.

I am skeptical about little black boys being SOLD to people who just want a kid. Especially because of the AGE. People who buy babies want SMALL handheld babies. (Sorry for the caps it is a habit I am not yelling I do this for emphasis). These boys were toddlers. Sadly they probably have no memory of their natural mothers. They could remember the kidnapping if it was traumatic though.

Whoever took these boys was a pedophile. They should go back and see who were sex offenders living in that building. It probably wouldn't help because a lot of them hide in plain sight. Probably the boyfriend of one of the tenants and they weren't on the lease.

I hope this exposure opens up a flood of leads on this case. I hope both mothers have their DNA on Ancestry and other sites.

Wow I don't have kids but I could not imagine the pain and guilt. WOW.


Georgia Tann took toddlers. Not saying it's not a pedophile but taking small children who are still impressionable enough that they could forget their original parents does happen.

I hope someone took these kids and raised them and did not harm them, but I think we all know better.

I bet whoever stole the kids were living in that projects in Harlem.

I am skeptical about little black boys being SOLD to people who just want a kid. Especially because of the AGE. People who buy babies want SMALL handheld babies. (Sorry for the caps it is a habit I am not yelling I do this for emphasis). These boys were toddlers. Sadly they probably have no memory of their natural mothers. They could remember the kidnapping if it was traumatic though.

I lived in NYC for a few years and spent time in the Harlem neighborhood where the abductions took place and I can tell you from lived experience that most people in those areas knows everybody else in the area.

At the time it was 99% Black and Latino and there would have been no way for anyone white or Asian to grab those kids without raising suspicion. It would be like a Black guy walking onto a playground in Beverly Hills and walking out with a white or Persian kid - it's highly unlikely.

Therefore someone from the community is responsible for these abductions. The thing that makes me believe that the kids were taken to be sold or given to someone for nefarious purposes is because of the police dog's scent trail that led to the subway station down the street from the project buildings.

Once that kid was on the subway, they could have ended up anywhere in the greater NYC metro area which includes Connecticut, New Jersey, northeastern Pennsylvania and Massachusetts in a matter of minutes or hours depending on the destination. If they were driving, then there's no telling where they may have gone within an hour or two.

You also have to consider the access to interstate buses, Amtrak, ferries, seaports and airports in NYC. If someone had an escape plan in place, they could get out of NYC quickly with no trace.

It was the late 1980s in NYC at the height of the crack cocaine epidemic. While there was still a sense of community in those affected neighborhoods, there were also a lot of folks who were desperate and mentally-compromised. I wouldn't be shocked if a crackhead hatched a plot to steal a kid to support their habit, especially if more than one of these people worked together to secure an escape route with the kids.

Whoever took these boys was a pedophile. They should go back and see who were sex offenders living in that building. It probably wouldn't help because a lot of them hide in plain sight. Probably the boyfriend of one of the tenants and they weren't on the lease.

I hope this exposure opens up a flood of leads on this case. I hope both mothers have their DNA on Ancestry and other sites.


You're not wrong about that. There's a massive population of uncounted or unregistered sex offenders living in poor inner-city communities who prey upon those children and few care because of the racial and economic demographics. I dealt with this while working in the NYC Dept of Ed.

Many students survived sexual assault from folks in their communities and this isn't discussed often in mainstream media.

My gut feeling tells me that the kids were sold by a crackhead or an unscrupulous individual who wanted to cash in on the fact they knew one of the mothers was an addict who wasn't always hovering over their kid.

I'm not sure the second case is the same individual, but likely a similar circumstance.

Either way, it's truly horrific and sad that this happened. I hope justice is found someday or - better - the kids are found alive.

CBW

I wonder if someone didn't think they were "saving" the kids from the projects. I guess crazy suburban colonialism is easier for me to swallow than stolen by pedophiles because at least the kid ends up mostly ok like Carlina White. (Not that her kidnapping wasn't terrible, but its a lot easier to stomach than some of the other alternatives.)

Recently saw this UM episode. These are extremely sad cases. I don't remember hearing about these specific abductions back in the late '80's - but I've never lived in NYC.

Re: the second case presented in the segment (with the mother who was in her 30's when she had the baby), I strongly suspect that the two older kids who asked to play with her son @ the playground - were in on the abduction. I.e., it unfortunately seems like they were being "used" by adults (that the mother wasn't aware of) who were orchestrating the whole thing. Just my opinion, however.

It's definitely horrible that these two kids were taken. But, hopefully they were taken by people who wanted to raise them as their own. That being said, unfortunately I doubt that's what happened here.

As with all of these new episodes, this was very well produced.

Re: the second case presented in the segment (with the mother who was in her 30's before she had the baby), I strongly suspect that the two older kids who asked to play with her son @ the playground - were in on the abduction. I.e., it unfortunately seems like they were being "used" by adults (that the mother wasn't aware of) who were orchestrating the whole thing. Just my opinion, however.

Right, it just seems way too coincidental. Even the child's mom was suspicious of the other kids from the get-go. Why would some random school-age kids want to play with a small toddler?

In anything I've ever read about this case, it always mentions those other kids and their parents were cleared (as was the man on the park bench), but...no specifics, such as "they had solid alibis." Just "they were cleared." I understand the police aren't obligated to say why, but the whole thing just seems so sketchy that you wonder if they were genuinely cleared or just hastily cleared due to 1970s police work, if that makes any sense.

Given the time period in which these happened (early - late 80s generally), you could make the case for almost anything - they were sold to settle drug debts, to make "snuff" films (ala Rachael Runyan), or just abused & murdered.

I am reminded though of the old school case of Laurence Harding Jr (https://unsolvedmysteries.fandom.com/wiki/Laurence_Harding_Jr.). With no evidence (that we know of) of any of them being killed and no bodies ever being recovered (again, no bodies that we know of....), my first inclination is to say that they're still alive, just with no clue as to their real identities.

I knew about these kidnappings prior to Unsolved Mysteries, so I was confused as to why they left the following information out of the segment.

* Both Shane and Christopher were last seen playing with the same brother/sister that Shane's mother had said asked to play with Shane.

* The man who was talking with Shane's mother was brushed off in the segment, but apparently he was talking about crime (https://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/30/grace.coldcase.walker/index.html) in the area and talked about kidnappings and that "things happen to children". He had shown Shane's mother a bunch of scars he got while fighting.

* Shane's mother took the two kids playing with Shane to the police station and they were questioned extensively. I don't know what came of the questioning, but I would assume very little since they let them go and nothing was ever gleaned from the questioning.

* Christopher's family members took polygraph tests and the results were inconclusive. (https://www.newspapers.com/clip/33976624/daily-news/)

* Shane's father also took a polygraph test and the results were inconclusive.

* Shane's mother took a life insurance policy out on Shane shortly before he went missing. This aroused suspicions with the police. She says she took it out because they were traveling by plane to Florida. The authorities eventually ruled her out as being a suspect, but as of 1997 the police (https://morbidology.com/the-disappearance-of-shane-walker-christopher-dansby/) were still being publicly "suspicious" of Shane's mother.

I know it sounds weird, but there was something about these cases that makes me think that they are unrelated. IMO, Shane Walker was taken by someone wanting to raise a child who could not. I believe he is still alive. Christopher Dansby, IMO, seems like a case of foul play. A 7 year old boy says he saw Christopher walking with an adult African American male with dreadlocks "later in the day" of his disappearance. I have no idea why Unsolved Mysteries didn't include this tidbit or the sketch that the police drew of this man.

* Both Shane and Christopher were last seen playing with the same brother/sister that Shane's mother had said asked to play with Shane.

According to this article, the detail about the same brother and sister being at the scene of both abductions is not in any of the original police reports and is a piece of false information which has spread throughout the years. Terri Dunn Meurer apparently confirmed this in an interview...
https://screenrant.com/unsolved-mysteries-stolen-children-theory-left-out-why/

IMO, I actually think that article is pretty unfair about blaming the Charley Project for this. As you can see here, the Associated Press mentioned that the same two kids were at both scenes back in 1989 and this press release was subsequently published in dozens of newspapers.

According to this article, the detail about the same brother and sister being at the scene of both abductions is not in any of the original police reports and is a piece of false information which has spread throughout the years. Terri Dunn Meurer apparently confirmed this in an interview...
https://screenrant.com/unsolved-mysteries-stolen-children-theory-left-out-why/

IMO, I actually think that article is pretty unfair about blaming the Charley Project for this. As you can see here, the Associated Press mentioned that the same two kids were at both scenes back in 1989 and this press release was subsequently published in dozens of newspapers.

From that article:

Though a compelling suggestion - which has nothing to back it up online on the Charley Project page for Shane Walker where the theory was inspired - it would be irresponsible to potentially offer something as evidence that had been independently verified.

Yet you have found and produced an AP article showing the connection, and I came up with a CNN article from 2009 (https://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/30/grace.coldcase.walker/index.html) which also says that they were last seen with the same brother and sister. Isn't it possible that this same brother and sister were merely at the park playing at the same time that Christopher went missing but may not have interacted with him, and that is why it was mentioned? Seems like a bizarre detail for AP to just throw out there if it wasn't true.

Yet you have found and produced an AP article showing the connection, and I came up with a CNN article from 2009 (https://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/30/grace.coldcase.walker/index.html) which also says that they were last seen with the same brother and sister. Isn't it possible that this same brother and sister were merely at the park playing at the same time that Christopher went missing but may not have interacted with him, and that is why it was mentioned? Seems like a bizarre detail for AP to just throw out there if it wasn't true.

This would make sense to me. I think that detail has been shared too many times throughout the years to be completely false, so it's possible the two kids were present both times, but only interacted with Shane.

This would make sense to me. I think that detail has been shared too many times throughout the years to be completely false, so it's possible the two kids were present both times, but only interacted with Shane.

I found the full AP article here (https://apnews.com/article/4a42d9406d202c523d3e731f434e4553). Here's an interesting tidbit from two different NYC adoption agencies:

The disappearances also have led investigators back to their files: They’ve reopened the cases of two other infants kidnapped in the area in the last two years. One theory they have is that Christopher and Shane were taken as part of a conspiracy to steal or sell babies.

But the heads of two private adoption agencies in the city, which place large numbers of black children with adoptive parents, discounted that thought.

″It’s hard to imagine,″ said Elaine Rosenfeld, executive director of the Louise Wise Services. ″There is a black market for white babies, but for black babies, I don’t think so.″

Catherine Unsino, director of the adoption department at Spence-Chapin, said: ″I have not heard of kidnapping any children of that age to satisfy the wishes of adoptive couples ... I can’t picture the end result (of a kidnapping) being adoption.″

Granted, we know this is not true now, because of the case of Carlina White. However, I do find it interesting that they scoffed at the idea of some illegal black market ring. I too find this to be unlikely.

The reason why I don't believe these cases are connected (unless both mothers sold their children to the same person, which I find nearly impossible) is that the perpetrator could have went to a myriad of other playgrounds to kidnap children. It would make no sense for him to go to the same one only 3 months apart. I will say the life insurance taken out for Shane is definitely suspicious. His mother tried collecting it just 7 weeks after his disappearance. Despite this, I do not believe she had anything to do with Shane's disappearance. She actually took the 2 children he was playing with immediately to the police station. That, IMO, is something a legitimately frightened and grieving mother would do in that situation.

Also, I think Terri Dunn Meurer just might be wrong (https://www.nytimes.com/1989/08/16/nyregion/detectives-discover-6-similarities-in-disappearances-of-2-toddlers.html):

In fact, Chief Fenrich said at a news conference at the 13th Precinct on East 21st Street, ''We really have nothing to go on and just have to dig, dig, dig.''

Besides the playground, Chief Fenrich cited these similarities surrounding the childrens' disappearances:

* They vanished from the same area of the playground.

* They vanished on the same day of the week, a Thursday.

* They vanished about the same time of day, 7 P.M. in the case of the Dansby child and 5 P.M. in the case of the Walker child.

* They vanished while playing with the same playmates, a 5-year-old boy and a 10-year-old girl, both of whom have been extensively questioned by the police.

* They lived in the same building at 41 West 112th Street in the King Towers.

A cursory search found me these articles. I'm amazed that the author of that screenrant piece couldn't have found these.

Given the time period in which these happened (early - late 80s generally), you could make the case for almost anything - they were sold to settle drug debts, to make "snuff" films (ala Rachael Runyan), or just abused & murdered.

I am reminded though of the old school case of Laurence Harding Jr (https://unsolvedmysteries.fandom.com/wiki/Laurence_Harding_Jr.). With no evidence (that we know of) of any of them being killed and no bodies ever being recovered (again, no bodies that we know of....), my first inclination is to say that they're still alive, just with no clue as to their real identities.

The Laurence Harding case is so sad because that man probably had no idea he was adopted let alone stolen from his mother. The train story was far fetched but I really hope it happened like that and he was loved and cared for.

My aunt lost two of her children in the 1960s. She let a lady babysit them because her husband was out of town sick and she had to get to him. When she returned the lady had moved and didn't leave a forwarding address. My aunt went on to have 6 more children but she never did track down her kids. Somehow one of her other children did track down one of them but by then it was too late he had been murdered. The other one disappeared without a trace.

This kind of goes off onto another topic, but I was surprised to see Ke'Shawn Vanderhorst on the roll-call of missing children at the end of this episode. Everybody in Philly knows what happened to him: his mother sold him to a total stranger for $500, and used the money to buy crack. Then she lied to her sister (Ke'Shawn's aunt) and said that child services had taken him. The sister didn't believe her, and filed a missing person's report. Nobody's seen Ke'Shawn since.

Not that this is what happened to Shane or Christopher, but remember, this was the 1980s. Drugs made people do insane things.

This kind of goes off onto another topic, but I was surprised to see Ke'Shawn Vanderhorst on the roll-call of missing children at the end of this episode. Everybody in Philly knows what happened to him: his mother sold him to a total stranger for $500, and used the money to buy crack. Then she lied to her sister (Ke'Shawn's aunt) and said that child services had taken him. The sister didn't believe her, and filed a missing person's report. Nobody's seen Ke'Shawn since.

Not that this is what happened to Shane or Christopher, but remember, this was the 1980s. Drugs made people do insane things.

Somewhat related, does anyone have the names of all the kids in the roll call at the end of this segment?

Sure, I have them:

Andre Bryant
Cherie Barnes
Amber Nichole Crum
Corey Edkin
Desiree Carroll
Ke'Shaun Vanderhorst
Aaron Anderson
Chris Abeyta

Andre Bryant is especially interesting, because he vanished just three months before Christopher Dansby from another part of NYC. His relatives think he was kidnapped as part of a baby adoption ring.

Sure, I have them:

Andre Bryant
Cherie Barnes
Amber Nichole Crum
Corey Edkin
Desiree Carroll
Ke'Shaun Vanderhorst
Aaron Anderson
Chris Abeyta

Andre Bryant is especially interesting, because he vanished just three months before Christopher Dansby from another part of NYC. His relatives think he was kidnapped as part of a baby adoption ring.
Thank you! I really appreciate it.

Although tragic cases, I didn’t think the episode offered much. The ending list was a nice touch.