Amy Billig

[jets4life]

Originally Posted by Allierain

Your comment reminded me of the Ohio prostitute murders. Michael Berens made the comment that (paraphrasing) a missing prostitute wouldn’t be pursued like a missing housewife. Some have called his comment cold, and it is, but it’s not because he is a cold person. It’s cold because it’s the truth. He’s absolutely right and I think some people don’t like hearing it. Deny it or not, victims are negatively judged constantly. That’s why even to this day women are still afraid to come forward after being raped.

Some Police departments in the past considered missing/murdered prostitutes/drug addicts as "NHI" cases.

"No Humans Involved."

[Rayroy]

I just read what everyone has said here, and I'm thinking a few things based on that, my experience with human behavior, and my gut.

First, I really hope there is an afterlife and Amy and her parents are reunited and her mother finally knows what happened and is at peace.

The UK story has to be false. You need a passport to go to any other country and at one time you needed to apply for visas, even as Americans. How do bikers take a broad to another country without a passport and if they can smuggle her, why risk it?

Appendix scars are fairly common. My cousin told me all three of her kids had to get their appendixes removed. It was either a guess or someone told him. Wasn't there also a time where they were removing healthy appendixes to prevent possible deaths from a ruptured appendix?

Hearing the mother, and likely the bikers seeing the house, they figured she had money to spare and that she viewed them as "lower" class and figured they will take the "uppety" white High life New York broad for whatever they can, and did. They probably were just as disgusted with her and she was of them. They were different worlds that neither liked or understood each other. The best con is when you string your mark along always just missing their target, so they get hooked and keep trying. It's an ego thing being so close not wanting to give up, just try a little harder, you don't stop to think you're being scammed. Think about a gambler at a slot machine thinking any moment it will pay out because they think they're close. They're not.

Why do you guys believe Paul really got hurt at the bar? Was it because he said he was hurt? Always assume someone is a liar until you can verify what they said is true. He did not meet up with Amy's mother again after that. He figured he got what he could out of her or his cronies told him not to go any further so they can stay under the radar. That bar scene was false if it actually happened. The confession was a lie by the girlfriend. That's obvious.

I think part of Amy's mother's pursuit was for the attention she got as well. Call me crass for saying it if you want. I don't doubt she wanted to find her daughter, but the victim's attention she got may have done something for her too.

My gut tells me she died as a result of hitchhiking. She was picked up by a white male or 2 between the ages of 18 and 40. The driver may have been an acquaintance or someone she knew and said he would drop her off at her father's place. As they were getting close, the car passes the location and she says it's her father's place, why won't he stop maybe he hits her then. He turns the car around to go back to where he wants to do whatever it is he wants at his place or another place. He likely was attracted to her and it was on his mind and when he saw her that day, something kicked in. Maybe while they're going back either he thought she was trying to photograph him and he threw the camera out her side window, or she did it either by accident or on purpose so people know she was there. If the camera was found on the other side of the road, that could be why it was on that side and not the side she was standing initially. I think she was murdered within an hour to 48 hours after she got in the car and was thrown in the swamp which accidentally made what the biker "confession" turn out to be true.

I think the Hank guy may have known her and had a strong attraction for her and after she went missing, he got obsessed. Maybe she told him her mother would never allow her with an older guy, so he took it out on the mother because in his mind had she been with him, she wouldn't be missing. Maybe it was a sexual thing for him too doing that to the mother that he got aroused by putting her through that in a sadist way. If all that about him is true, there has to be something seriously wrong with you to make calls like that to a missing woman's mother.

One thing that makes me wonder is her brother doesn't seem to be that into it like the mother. It could be there is information about her we don't know, something the mother didn't want to admit or accept. Maybe the brother knows something. Maybe there was a lot of arguing about her hitch hiking and he is thinking that it could be a non-biker, but the mother got obsessed believing it was a biker. We don't have all the facts. If the killer was a guy in his 30s, then he is very likely dead now.

[jets4life]

I think the Hank guy may have known her and had a strong attraction for her and after she went missing, he got obsessed. Maybe she told him her mother would never allow her with an older guy, so he took it out on the mother because in his mind had she been with him, she wouldn't be missing. Maybe it was a sexual thing for him too doing that to the mother that he got aroused by putting her through that in a sadist way. If all that about him is true, there has to be something seriously wrong with you to make calls like that to a missing woman's mother.

It's fairly simple. Henry Blair was a sociopath, who got off on the suffering of vulnerable people. Thank God he was caught around 1995, as he had been harassing the Billig's for 20 years. At the trial, his family and colleagues defended him, as he had a good work record. However, hen he took the stand, it became clear that this man was deeply disturbed, actually blaming Billig's mother for his actions. I think he spent a couple of years in jail, and never recovered after his reputation was ruined, as well as becoming a social pariah. He died in 2006 a decade later.

PS...her mother did not know he even existed, until after Amy went missing.

One thing that makes me wonder is her brother doesn't seem to be that into it like the mother. It could be there is information about her we don't know, something the mother didn't want to admit or accept. Maybe the brother knows something. Maybe there was a lot of arguing about her hitch hiking and he is thinking that it could be a non-biker, but the mother got obsessed believing it was a biker. We don't have all the facts. If the killer was a guy in his 30s, then he is very likely dead now.

I doubt it. I think the brother may have been more grounded in reality, and accepted the fact that his sister was likely dead, and was able to heal quicker. Parents, especially mothers, will hold onto any faint hope their child was alive, regardless of the source.

[WishfulDreamer]

Originally Posted by jets4life

I doubt it. I think the brother may have been more grounded in reality, and accepted the fact that his sister was likely dead, and was able to heal quicker. Parents, especially mothers, will hold onto any faint hope their child was alive, regardless of the source.

I'm pretty sure it is cut out of the FilmRise version, but in the original segment, you see Amy's brother and mother walking with the brother's wife and at least one of their children. They mention that Amy's father had died the year before. Susan (Amy's mother) mentions that if she can't find Amy in her lifetime, she wants Josh (Amy's brother) to continue the search.

I am sure Josh does want his sister found, but Amy's disappearance also caused a lot of distress in his own life. I believe he really wanted to (and still wants to) focus on his family and not uproot his own life to dedicate all his time to searching for Amy. She's almost certainly dead and while of course upsetting, he probably has long since accepted this.

Reading the book Susan co-authored with Greg Aunapu, you can see that Josh was still very much in the picture toward the end of Susan's life and supporting his mother even if he did not dedicate his life toward the search.

[jets4life]

Originally Posted by WishfulDreamer

I'm pretty sure it is cut out of the FilmRise version, but in the original segment, you see Amy's brother and mother walking with the brother's wife and at least one of their children. They mention that Amy's father had died the year before. Susan (Amy's mother) mentions that if she can't find Amy in her lifetime, she wants Josh (Amy's brother) to continue the search.

The segment aired in 1994, so a lot has changed since then. At the time, the harassing phone calls were not mentioned. Additionally, the family eventually accepted that Amy was dead, and in 1998, held a private memorial service for her, with friends and family.

Sadly, in 2005, Amy's mother Susan died at age 80. Josh and the remainder of the family have moved on, although before Susan died in 2002, they did dedicate the "Amy Billig Meditation Garden" for her, in Coconut Grove.

Amy has been missing for 52 years. If alive, she would be 69.

[MediaHoarder]

Originally Posted by jets4life

I doubt it. I think the brother may have been more grounded in reality, and accepted the fact that his sister was likely dead, and was able to heal quicker. Parents, especially mothers, will hold onto any faint hope their child was alive, regardless of the source.

I take the converse interpretation.

Parents are much more likely to have a level of dedication and devotion that will sustain them through a life consuming search for the truth.

Siblings are more likely to want to prioritize their own lives and be unwilling to dedicate their life to finding someone in the way that a parent would.

There are of course exceptions, but its common in these cases for siblings, who likely realize that their parents are right deep down, to see a likely futile search as a barrier to the rest of their life and thus adjust their beliefs about what happened to remove that barrier.

[WishfulDreamer]

Originally Posted by jets4life

The segment aired in 1994, so a lot has changed since then. At the time, the harassing phone calls were not mentioned. Additionally, the family eventually accepted that Amy was dead, and in 1998, held a private memorial service for her, with friends and family.

Sadly, in 2005, Amy's mother Susan died at age 80. Josh and the remainder of the family have moved on, although before Susan died in 2002, they did dedicate the "Amy Billig Meditation Garden" for her, in Coconut Grove.

Amy has been missing for 52 years. If alive, she would be 69.

Yes, I'm aware of all this. I think that Susan knew her daughter was dead after a few years, but getting these leads would make her wonder and she felt she just had to chase them because of the tiny chance her daughter could still be out there. And of course, that made her the target of many con artists and harassers. I have to wonder if she asked UM not to talk about Henry Blair or if UM decided not to because the segment was so long already and he was almost certainly a hoaxster.

It's really a shame the family never got closure. Finding Amy's remains would at least have brought them something. A deathbed confession from a guy who lied repeatedly before and fleeced the Billigs of money (and also cost money to receive, by the way. The confessor's girlfriend was paid for it.) wasn't enough.

[jets4life]

Originally Posted by WishfulDreamer

It's really a shame the family never got closure. Finding Amy's remains would at least have brought them something. A deathbed confession from a guy who lied repeatedly before and fleeced the Billigs of money (and also cost money to receive, by the way. The confessor's girlfriend was paid for it.) wasn't enough.

Are you sure that you are thinking of the right person. I know the guy who allegedly had his legs broken was the main culprit in fleecing the Billings. I did not think the other biker bothered Amy's family for money...at least initially.

[tvscript124]

Originally Posted by MediaHoarder

I take the converse interpretation.

Parents are much more likely to have a level of dedication and devotion that will sustain them through a life consuming search for the truth.

Siblings are more likely to want to prioritize their own lives and be unwilling to dedicate their life to finding someone in the way that a parent would.

There are of course exceptions, but its common in these cases for siblings, who likely realize that their parents are right deep down, to see a likely futile search as a barrier to the rest of their life and thus adjust their beliefs about what happened to remove that barrier.

If something happened to a sibling of mine, I would move heaven and earth to get justice.

[WishfulDreamer]

Originally Posted by jets4life

Are you sure that you are thinking of the right person. I know the guy who allegedly had his legs broken was the main culprit in fleecing the Billings. I did not think the other biker bothered Amy's family for money...at least initially.

Same guy, Paul Branch. He repeatedly took money from Susan Billig claiming he needed it to travel and find Amy. She paid for his food, hotel rooms, gas, etc. She met with him multiple times and he always had some sort of excuse as to why he couldn't get a hold of who had her. He lied to the Billigs many, many times in addition to the investigators who questioned him.

Interestingly enough, the encounter where his legs were broken is never brought up in the book. But the book does describe her meeting with him and getting on his motorcycle to speak with him as well as meeting him on other occasions. It's an infuriating read, but I absolutely recommend it so you can see the lengths Susan went to. She really left no stone unturned.

Bottom line, Branch has no credibility.

[jets4life]

Originally Posted by WishfulDreamer

Same guy, Paul Branch. He repeatedly took money from Susan Billig claiming he needed it to travel and find Amy. She paid for his food, hotel rooms, gas, etc. She met with him multiple times and he always had some sort of excuse as to why he couldn't get a hold of who had her. He lied to the Billigs many, many times in addition to the investigators who questioned him.

Interestingly enough, the encounter where his legs were broken is never brought up in the book. But the book does describe her meeting with him and getting on his motorcycle to speak with him as well as meeting him on other occasions. It's an infuriating read, but I absolutely recommend it so you can see the lengths Susan went to. She really left no stone unturned.

Bottom line, Branch has no credibility.

Regardless of who spoke out among the bikers, the evidence points towards foul play. The fact that her camera was discovered a 3 hour drive north of Miami, off a turnpike, and the fact that there have been no credible sightings of AMy since the date she vanished, leads me to believe she was killed 24-48 hours upon her kidnapping.

The story of being abducted, raped and killed at a biker party seems most likely, especially if they threw her in a swamp in the Florida everglades, would make sure her body was never found. However, there is always the possibility that a lone male who was not a biker could have abducted and killed her as well.

The fact is, that from what I have read, I would think her getting into a vehicle of a loan male, something would have come up in the past 50 years. For all the smoke and mirrors that the bikers have subjected investigators and the family to, the fact is that there was a group of bikers that was seen around the same time Amy was hitchhiking, and around the same location.

I wish I could read more about this case, or at least have access to Police files, but my gut instinct leads me to believe she was indeed abducted by bikers.

[jets4life]

Originally Posted by WishfulDreamer

Same guy, Paul Branch. He repeatedly took money from Susan Billig claiming he needed it to travel and find Amy. She paid for his food, hotel rooms, gas, etc. She met with him multiple times and he always had some sort of excuse as to why he couldn't get a hold of who had her. He lied to the Billigs many, many times in addition to the investigators who questioned him.

Interestingly enough, the encounter where his legs were broken is never brought up in the book. But the book does describe her meeting with him and getting on his motorcycle to speak with him as well as meeting him on other occasions. It's an infuriating read, but I absolutely recommend it so you can see the lengths Susan went to. She really left no stone unturned.

Bottom line, Branch has no credibility.

I just read some facts about the case, and it was a different man, who strung along Amy's mother. His name was David (not Paul Branch), and he claimed he could return Amy to her. He was the guy that had his legs supposedly broken in Oklahoma in the late 70s. Incidentally, Branch was questioned along with several other bikers in the area in 1974, but denied any knowledge regarding Amy's whereabouts to Susan and the Police.

Incidentally, Amy wrote about a man named "Hank" in her journal in 1974, as she had somehow befriended him, as he wanted Amy to accompany him to South America, where he was going to be posted for his job at the time. "Hank" was the nickname of Henry Blair, the harassing caller of over 20 years. Incidentally, he was arrested at his job as a customs officer. It was discovered that he indeed went to South America in the mid 70s, as part of his job posting.

In spite of this, Blair denied any involvement. However, the odds of Amy exchanging contact with a "Hank" that happened to work as a customs agent, and being invited to go to South America with him, (investigators later discovered Blair did indeed work in South America), to have absolutely no involvement in her disappearance, only to harass the family for 20 years, seems highly unlikely.

I would assume Police conducted an intensive investigation of Henry Blair, and found no evidence linking him to her disappearance, but stranger things have happened.

[WishfulDreamer]

Originally Posted by jets4life

Regardless of who spoke out among the bikers, the evidence points towards foul play. The fact that her camera was discovered a 3 hour drive north of Miami, off a turnpike, and the fact that there have been no credible sightings of AMy since the date she vanished, leads me to believe she was killed 24-48 hours upon her kidnapping.

The story of being abducted, raped and killed at a biker party seems most likely, especially if they threw her in a swamp in the Florida everglades, would make sure her body was never found. However, there is always the possibility that a lone male who was not a biker could have abducted and killed her as well.

The fact is, that from what I have read, I would think her getting into a vehicle of a loan male, something would have come up in the past 50 years. For all the smoke and mirrors that the bikers have subjected investigators and the family to, the fact is that there was a group of bikers that was seen around the same time Amy was hitchhiking, and around the same location.

I wish I could read more about this case, or at least have access to Police files, but my gut instinct leads me to believe she was indeed abducted by bikers.

I think Amy was abducted and killed as well, whether by bikers or not. I do not believe she was the girl known as "Mute" seen with bikers, and I don't think she was alive for long after her abduction. It was probably very quick, and her camera was tossed out of the car by the perpetrator after he disposed of her.

As for Paul Branch, he may not have been the one who had his legs broken, but he did many of the activities depicted in the segment by the same man, and he took money, brought Susan to his home on a motorcycle, and strung her along for ages with many false leads. I don't think he was credible at all, and I don't think he knew anything about the crime itself. It was all a ploy to get money.

Henry Blair could have been responsible, but there's just so little evidence besides the diary entry and the potential match in the roll of film to his vehicle. It's a real shame.

Unless Amy was found and remains unidentified, I think it's pretty much hopeless any trace of her will be found due to the Florida climate. But I hope I'm wrong.

[jets4life]

Originally Posted by WishfulDreamer

I think Amy was abducted and killed as well, whether by bikers or not. I do not believe she was the girl known as "Mute" seen with bikers,

The whole "mute" thing is just UM sensationalist garbage. Like tons of other cases UM profiled, ratings dictated what they did and did not show. See the Anthonette Cayedito case as a prime example.

As for Paul Branch, he may not have been the one who had his legs broken, but he did many of the activities depicted in the segment by the same man,

Again, the best way to research the case, is to ignore everything on the UM segment, and disregard it completely. When I was a kid, it was my favorite show, and I believed what was televised word-for-word. However 15 years ago, I learned that the producers of the show would compromise facts, in place of what generated ratings.

Amy being led around by bikers for 20 years, and even ending up in the UK in 1992, made for great ratings. The actuall evidence of the case did not.

[WishfulDreamer]

Originally Posted by jets4life

The whole "mute" thing is just UM sensationalist garbage. Like tons of other cases UM profiled, ratings dictated what they did and did not show. See the Anthonette Cayedito case as a prime example.



Again, the best way to research the case, is to ignore everything on the UM segment, and disregard it completely. When I was a kid, it was my favorite show, and I believed what was televised word-for-word. However 15 years ago, I learned that the producers of the show would compromise facts, in place of what generated ratings.

Amy being led around by bikers for 20 years, and even ending up in the UK in 1992, made for great ratings. The actuall evidence of the case did not.

I remember as a kid thinking that the vegetarian soup part sounded so convincing, only to realize that even if the convenience store worker was telling the truth, it wasn't the lead that it seemed. Reminds me of the eyewitness testimony of people who were "absolutely certain" they saw someone who had actually been dead the whole time. It made for great, compelling television.

It is true that Susan Billig got many "leads" like this from people on her odyssey to find her daughter. Some may have been from well-meaning people; others were obvious con artists.

UM did cherry pick a lot of things for this case, didn't include a lot of other facts, and did what they could for the ratings. You would think that the Glasser boys extortion and Henry Blair's calls would have made for better sensationalism, but it's possible that Susan asked them not to talk about those.

Not this case, but a UM exclusion I find pretty glaring is whenever there is a "suicide v. murder" case, they often omit that the gun belonged to the victim. So to be clear, I'm agreeing with you that UM isn't the credible source we may all have thought it to be when younger. I still love reading all the articles I can find on various cases to see what information was omitted/what was wrongly depicted.