Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

French Police End Missing Persons Searches, Suggest Using Facebook

timothy posted about a year ago | from the hire-a-stalker dept.

Social Networks 95

itwbennett writes "According to an announcement on a French government website, police have stopped current searches for missing adults and will not accept new search requests. 'Such 'searches in the interests of the family' were conducted under an administrative procedure almost a century old, introduced to help families separated during the upheavals of World War I to find missing relatives,' according to the French Ministry of the Interior. In a letter to police chiefs announcing the changes, the Ministry advised them to instead 'direct people towards social networks on the Internet, which offer interesting possibilities.'"

cancel ×

95 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Yet another... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802711)

Yet another French vi... I mean defeat!

So once again... (5, Funny)

DigitalReverend (901909) | about a year ago | (#43802719)

the French surrender.

Re:So once again... (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#43802773)

the French surrender.

Sacrebleu!

You beat me to it.

Re:So once again... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802887)

Nothing to see here. The French procedure does not correspond to that used in the US. Searches for children or persons who are clearly in danger continue.

Re:So once again... (1)

hedwards (940851) | about a year ago | (#43803829)

Not really, there's a presumption that if somebody's been missing for more than a given amount of time that they're in danger, unless there's evidence to the contrary. Having a police report also means that if they're spotted by police that the police will likely make contact.

Facebook is something to augment efforts to locate somebody, not to replace the work of police officers. By the time you've determined that somebody isn't in danger, you've probably already located them anyways.

And yes, FB is probably a good start, but not everybody uses FB and it doesn't come with any particular powers as far as investigation goes.

Re:So once again... (3, Insightful)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#43804107)

Not really, there's a presumption that if somebody's been missing for more than a given amount of time that they're in danger, unless there's evidence to the contrary.

Then it's a bad presumption. Most people go missing because they want to. You've got to look for children, senile people and people with mental health issues, because they may not have the capacity for making a rational choice to leave, and the chances of them coming to harm are higher. But adults who get out of contact with their families. In most cases it's because they don't like them, or have some issue they'd rather get away from.

Re:So once again... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43804295)

Not really, there's a presumption that if somebody's been missing for more than a given amount of time that they're in danger, unless there's evidence to the contrary.

Then it's a bad presumption. Most people go missing because they want to.

Or because a guy in a fancy car offered them a cool modeling job overseas...

Re:So once again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43804589)

Well, that's just Darwin in action. Nothing unnatural about it.

Re:So once again... (1)

hedwards (940851) | about a year ago | (#43805011)

It's not a bad presumption at all.

What precisely do you tell the families of people who wind up being found chopped to bits and buried in somebody's basement, that there wasn't sufficient evidence to take it seriously? There's no reason why the police need to report back where it is that they find these people, but they do have a responsibility to look into such things in case something has happened.

Plus, how do you know that somebody doesn't have unknown mental health issues? There's a lot more people out there with mental health diagnoses than you seem to realize and without access to those records you wouldn't necessarily know. Most of the time when people commit suicide, the do so when they seem to be on the uptick, rather than at the bottom.

Re:So once again... (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#43806167)

What precisely do you tell the families of people who...

Sound policy is not made from the category of question "What precisely do you tell the families of people who..."

You can't investigate every possible crime that might have happened although no one has any evidence to say it did.

If you did you'd have to find something to tell the people who's actual reported crime wasn't investigated properly, because the police were too busy wasting time chasing someone who chose to leave home without explaining.

Plus, how do you know that somebody doesn't have unknown mental health issues?

Again, you can make policy based on "How do you know that somebody doesn't..."

Most people that disappear do so because they choose to, and it would be wrong to pursue them. And if there's foul play, there's likely to be something indicating that.

What do you tell the families of that small minority between? You'd say "I'm sorry for your loss." You can't save everyone. People die.

Re:So once again... (3, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#43806711)

And if there's foul play, there's likely to be something indicating that.

Yeah, like the person is missing!

In fact, the standard followed by most jurisdictions is: the absence of any indication of intent to disappear is in fact evidence of either an accident or foul play.

Police make at least an effort to find people that simply disappear (after a suitable waiting period), and at least interview friends and workmates etc for changes in behavior, look at credit card usage, and request cell records, before throwing in the towel. (The effort is actually much larger if its a missing woman than if it is a man.) Its not an unreasonable level of effort, nor does it take a great deal of resources. (Some of this stuff is automated these days).

Most people who CHOOSE go missing end up defrauding someone out of some amount of money. Unpaid rent, unpaid credit card bills, saddling a spouse with a huge debt, etc. Its not a victimless choice.

Re:So once again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43808923)

So? It's not a matter for the police.

Re:So once again... (1)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#43809011)

Fraud is against the law in all 50 states. It is definitely a matter for the police.

Re:So once again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43810573)

Et tout le 76 département français. But that is not what is being discussed here at all.

Re:So once again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43804241)

Not really, there's a presumption that if somebody's been missing for more than a given amount of time that they're in danger, unless there's evidence to the contrary.

Well, that's one worldview. There are others. Perhaps adults can disappear if they choose. Or, FTFA: "Il s'agit le plus souvent de demandes motivées par la recherche de débiteurs d'aliments."

People were abusing the administrative procedure to reunite families to turn the government into debt collectors.

Re:So once again... (1)

hedwards (940851) | about a year ago | (#43805041)

It's a world view that we value human life. There's no reason why the police need to report back on where they found the individual. Just reporting back that they were found safe and sound ought to be sufficient.

Without actually doing the search you have no way of knowing what happened.

And BTW, I don't speak or read French, so quoting TFA in French isn't going to help you make your case.

Re:So once again... (1)

Kreigaffe (765218) | about a year ago | (#43805951)

actually AFAIK that's exactly what happens here in the states, if someone goes 'missing' of their own free will, are reported missing, and then are found by police. the cops'll ask them if things are fine, more or less, and if the person's desire was to lose all contact.. the police will say that the person was found, and is fine, and nothing else.

Re:So once again... (1)

gagol (583737) | about a year ago | (#43807491)

Google translate exist for a reason, you can even translate the whole page. It is not perfect but a good approximation.

Re:So once again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43810527)

And BTW, I don't speak or read French, so quoting TFA in French isn't going to help you make your case.

Then there's this handy sentence right after the one in French which repeats it in English. Woah.

And you're trying to discuss something that you can't read, and about a country and culture (whose administration in all aspects of life makes the IRS seem straightforward) you clearly have no grasp of.

To make up an American analogy, the police department of Toledo decided to move the mailboxes two feet closer to the door to their offices. Discuss. That is how crazy the entire /. discussion is.

Re:So once again... (2)

Picass0 (147474) | about a year ago | (#43802961)

"You'll be suprised you're doing the French Mistake! Voila!"

Re:So once again... (2)

DigitalReverend (901909) | about a year ago | (#43803225)

Excuse me while I whip this out.

Re:So once again... (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about a year ago | (#43804745)

AHHHHH!!!!

Re:So once again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43805089)

And American journalism.

Re:So once again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43806731)

How quickly people forget that the French are why the USA isn't a British colony today.

Re:So once again... (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#43807263)

This is such a weird meme. We (the British) has our arses kicked and had to flee on a bunch of fishing boats we cobbled together, leaving all our valuable shit on the beech while the French covered our retreat. It was only after we buggered off and left them that they surrendered.

Simple fact is our military was a bad joke at the time. If Hitler had carried on over the channel we would have quickly been defeated. It was only his mistake in assuming that a naval led invasion would have failed without first winning an air war. Even then we only won in the air due to large part to the poor shape of the German airforce which never really had much chance to begin with.

Don't get me wrong, there were a lot of brave men fighting at the time, but the reality is we were just as "bad" as the French, if not more so.

HELP!!! (-1, Troll)

The123king (2395060) | about a year ago | (#43802721)

"My 9 year old daughter has been missing for the last fortnight!!!" "Have you checked facebook?"

Re:HELP!!! (5, Informative)

spongebue (925835) | about a year ago | (#43802777)

As the description of this says, this applies to adults. I'll admit I didn't RTFA, but I assume that means nothing will change with regards to children.

Re:HELP!!! (1)

Zemran (3101) | about a year ago | (#43803081)

Please, this is /. we know that no one reads the article.

Re:HELP!!! (3, Interesting)

Frontier Owner (2616587) | about a year ago | (#43803567)

I thought we used /. so we didn't have to read the article. someone posts a story, a brief exert and we move on.

Re:HELP!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43803297)

So, taxpaying adults are shit out of luck, while the all-around drains on government that are children get special treatment? What the hell?

Re:HELP!!! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43803361)

So, taxpaying adults are shit out of luck, while the all-around drains on government that are children get special treatment? What the hell?

Do you frequently get lost?

Re:HELP!!! (4, Insightful)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about a year ago | (#43803511)

So, taxpaying adults are shit out of luck

Unlike children, adults have a right to disappear and start a new life somewhere else. Unless there is a reasonable suspicion that a law has been broken, the police should not be spending tax dollars to find people that don't want to be found.

Re:HELP!!! (1, Insightful)

AuMatar (183847) | about a year ago | (#43803785)

They can also be kidnapped, in an accident, or killed. They can also disappear to avoid debts and other obligations, rather than just wanting a new life. Stopping searching entirely sounds like a really bad idea. For those who did just want a new life, the cops don't have to tell anyone they found them.

Re:HELP!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43804367)

Did you miss " Unless there is a reasonable suspicion that a law has been broken"

Re:HELP!!! (1)

PoolOfThought (1492445) | about a year ago | (#43807207)

If it's an adult and there is no indication of a crime AGAINST the missing person, then the correct solution is a Private Investigator. Not the police. The police should be focusing their efforts on stopping actual crimes and responding to actual events... not highly improbable events with no evidence to back up that the event even occurred.

Also, if the issue is debt / other obligations then that's yet another case that you should use a Private Investigator to find them. The fact that someone owes YOU money doesn't mean EVERYONE ELSE should pay for the search. There's a pretty good chance that in most cases more resources will be spent to find the person that what than they even owed to start with - especially if it's the police doing the searching.

If the cops can find "missing person" because they're just hiding out (rather than foul play) then so can a private investigator. If the PI cant, then its unlikely the police officer will.

Now, if they're skipping bond or breaking some other existing judgement that is a criminal offense (rather than a civil one) then there's at least a case of asking the police to get involved. They'd be investigating and stopping an actual criminal offense.

Other than that... if you wanna know where a missing adult is then spend your own dime to find 'em. It'll be done more efficiently and more thoroughly with the added benefit of letting the cops worry about what they're actually supposed to be doing.

All of this assumes there's not circumstances that indicate foul play. If there are, then the search should be underway. Also, while one person being missing is relatively unlikely it becomes much more unlikely to be "no big deal" when several people have been reported missing (becoming even more unlikely with each additional one). Obviously that should be looked into as a likely criminal event simply because of how unlikely the events are as a collection.

Re:HELP!!! (1)

hobarrera (2008506) | about a year ago | (#43827321)

If it's an adult and there is no indication of a crime AGAINST the missing person, then the correct solution is a Private Investigator. Not the police. The police should be focusing their efforts on stopping actual crimes and responding to actual events... not highly improbable events with no evidence to back up that the event even occurred.

Well, you know, when women are kidnapped and sold as sex slaves, there's usually no indication of a crime. The only indication is that they're suddenly missing.

Also, if the issue is debt / other obligations then that's yet another case that you should use a Private Investigator to find them. The fact that someone owes YOU money doesn't mean EVERYONE ELSE should pay for the search. There's a pretty good chance that in most cases more resources will be spent to find the person that what than they even owed to start with - especially if it's the police doing the searching.

So, if someone steals from me, the police shouldn't do anything either, right? I mean, he stole from ME, why should everyone else pay for me to get my stuff back?

Re:HELP!!! (1)

tfmachad (1386141) | about a year ago | (#43805007)

the police should not be spending tax dollars to find people that don't want to be found.

Or Euros, for that matter.

Re:HELP!!! (1)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#43806853)

Unlike children, adults have a right to disappear and start a new life somewhere else.

Sort of depends on how many bills and debts they are skipping out on, doesn't it?

I doubt anyone other than a single migrant worker can simply disappear without someone else holding a bag of rent bills, electric bills, child support, or some such.
Disappearance is seldom a victimless event.

Re:HELP!!! (1)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about a year ago | (#43808281)

Unlike children, adults have a right to disappear and start a new life somewhere else.

Sort of depends on how many bills and debts they are skipping out on, doesn't it?

No it doesn't. The police are not private debt collectors. If you extend credit to a deadbeat, that is your problem.

rent bills

Whenever I have rented, I was required to pay a deposit + first and last month's rent. So if I skip out, I lose my deposit.

electric bills

In America it is common to be billed for electricity. But I have lived in other countries where it is pre-paid, and that worked fine.

child support, or some such.

Skipping out on court ordered child support is a crime, so it is reasonable for the police to get involved in that case.

Re:HELP!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43804847)

In case you hadn't realized it. Society is for the creation and rearing of our young. It plays directly into our basic instincts.

Re:HELP!!! (4, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | about a year ago | (#43803781)

His children example was used for shockvalue, but the point is still the same - for the most part, if someone dissappears without a trace, foul play is involved. They MIGHT have just decided to skip town, but most people don't. Lets say its not your 9 year old daughter. Lets say your 23 year old daughter never comes home from work. I'd like to hear something besides "Check Facebook" from the local authorities.

Re:HELP!!! (0)

Eunuchswear (210685) | about a year ago | (#43804753)

for the most part, if someone dissappears without a trace, foul play is involved.

This is your uninformed opinion.

The actual facts are that the majority of requests in recent years were just searches for people skipping out on alimony payments.

Re:HELP!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43805421)

In which case, one would assume a law is being broken by not following your court decreed payments? So why wouldn't the polic elook into it?

Re:HELP!!! (1)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#43806921)

Exactly.

Disappearing to skip out on child support payments (as well as other debts and bills) is a big issue.

And probably those who defend the "right" to disappear and start over somewhere else 1) are male, 2) have personal involvement in such issues, and 3) think that saddling their Ex with huge bills "servers her right".

Intentionally disappearing is almost always a method to defraud someone else.

Re:HELP!!! (1)

G00F (241765) | about a year ago | (#43806067)

Here in Utah, Susan Powel disappeared w/o any trace . . .
Nina Reiser disappeared with almost no traces
at least 1 of those Cleveland women found was an adult with next to no traces of foul play

People don't just disappear with out a reason.

The cops are doing this because its a lot of work that shows little results. IE, they feel it's a waste of time.

Re:HELP!!! (1)

radarskiy (2874255) | about a year ago | (#43806353)

The point is still irrelevant, since they are not stopping investigations of sudden disappearances.

Re:HELP!!! (2)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year ago | (#43802785)

Sure, if your 9 year old daughter is a missing adult, they won't be looking for her any time soon. What a snag!

Re:HELP!!! (3, Informative)

boylinux (775361) | about a year ago | (#43802871)

As per the article. Searches will continue for minors, and for those who disappear in worrying circumstances -- for example those with suicidal intent, or victims of a crime -- as they are conducted under a different procedure.

Re:HELP!!! (1)

ganjadude (952775) | about a year ago | (#43803203)

so... when you report your missing person, you always say they may be suicidal and voila! they will look for your missing person!

problem sovled

Re:HELP!!! (5, Insightful)

bws111 (1216812) | about a year ago | (#43803319)

The problem seems to be in the phrase 'missing person', which I guess is a translation thing. When people hear 'missing person', they think of someone who has suddenly disappeared - didn't come home from work, etc. Those cases they will still investigate, of course. What they are no longer doing is helping to find a person you have lost contact with (and I can't imagine their are many police forces in the world that would help with that under normal circumstances).

Re:HELP!!! (1)

hedwards (940851) | about a year ago | (#43803867)

That makes far more sense. I think the summary could have done a better job in explaining that.

I'm surprised that they did look for people that were missing in that fashion. Then again, after 2 world wars, I can see why they would have done so in the past. Although it does seem like a bit of a risk for stalkers.

Re:HELP!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43807017)

Although it does seem like a bit of a risk for stalkers.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but are you implying that stalkers would use the police to help them find their victim if the victim has managed to vanish from their sights? If so, I think it's a ridiculous concern. Don't you think that if a stalking victim goes to the police and says "I think somebody, maybe my former lover, is stalking me" they would immediately say "yes, we have it on record that we helped such and such find you" and in that case it would be pretty damn good proof that such and such is guilty. In other cases stalking can be harder to prove - how can you prove that someone is stalking you if all you can prove is that you have noticed your stalker in the same place as you are with unusual frequency. Pretty hard to argue that it's not a coincidence if you live in the same area or the stalker has any other plausible reason to be there. Then it's just coincidence. But if the police have helped someone find you and you accuse them of stalking you now that proves beyond any doubt that the stalker had the intention of finding you.

Re:HELP!!! (1)

manu0601 (2221348) | about a year ago | (#43809103)

The problem seems to be in the phrase 'missing person', which I guess is a translation thing

I am a native french speaker, and I have readen the letter from ministry of interior to police chiefs. The document does not tell about missing persons, or any term that could be translated that way. It only deals with recherches dans l'intérêt des familles, which one could translate into "searches for the family interest".

The original document organizing the procedure is about personne recherchée "researched person", and Personne disparue, which you could translate into "missing person", or "person that has disapeared".

And stolen things (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802753)

Should be looked for on ebay.

Re:And stolen things (0)

Sez Zero (586611) | about a year ago | (#43803653)

Or craigslist.fr?

Just the begining (1)

Cornwallis (1188489) | about a year ago | (#43802851)

I'm sure cops everywhere will continue to "outsource" their roles in the wake of diminishing budgets. (Although this does sound like a headline from The Onion.)

Re:Just the begining (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about a year ago | (#43804445)

I'm sure cops everywhere will continue to "outsource" their roles in the wake of diminishing budgets. (Although this does sound like a headline from The Onion.)

In related news:
French police end burglary investigations, citing no difference between thieves and beggars besides politeness.
Cutbacks end inquiry into Suicides after being labeled "dying early", which is not technically a crime.
Current Homicide investigations will be completed, but no new murders are allowed under French Law.
Police Stations continue to operate with funds fully dedicated to ensuring the success of France's Pastry Industry.

Sensationalist summary (5, Informative)

200_success (623160) | about a year ago | (#43802863)

The summary is missing the important qualifier "... unless the person may be in danger". So, apparent abductions and unexplained disappearances would still get police assistance like you would expect.

Re:Sensationalist summary (4, Informative)

advid.net (595837) | about a year ago | (#43802953)

Yes, translation is:

Allows you to search for a missing person, your family, to renew relations with her. Does not apply to missing persons in alarming conditions suspicious or criminal.

So this kind of search is no longer available with the state help.
Ok... Is it really worth a story on /. ?

Re:Sensationalist summary (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43803041)

Only if you leave out the important details and get people worked up over nothing. You know, standard operating procedure here.

Re:Sensationalist summary (1)

hedwards (940851) | about a year ago | (#43803893)

The problem is that the translation was wrong. As you put it, it's a non-story, but as the summary puts it, it's something very strange and backwards minded. But yeah, if it's just getting people back in touch that have lost contact, as in grown apart or moved away, that's not something that the police should be dealing with.

It's the sudden unexplained disappearances that they will continue to investigate that they should be investigating.

Re:Sensationalist summary (2)

JeanCroix (99825) | about a year ago | (#43803011)

So, apparent abductions and unexplained disappearances would still get police assistance like you would expect.

But how can they know if it's a cleverly done abduction or not? So if you're a meticulous kidnapper, it's open season on adults in France now?

Re:Sensationalist summary (2)

Zemran (3101) | about a year ago | (#43803107)

...starts dusting off the passport and packing some clothes and chloroform

Re:Sensationalist summary (4, Funny)

Nadaka (224565) | about a year ago | (#43803305)

remember to keep it under 3oz or you might not get through airport security.

Re:Sensationalist summary (3)

bws111 (1216812) | about a year ago | (#43803551)

Simple. If the person went missing today (or very recently) they will do a normal 'missing person' investigation. If it is 'I wonder were cousin Pierre is, last I heard he was moving up north', they won't.

Re:Sensationalist summary (1)

cheesybagel (670288) | about a year ago | (#43806945)

Is it too much to consider that if that person could be found on Facebook you most likely wouldn't bother going to the police at all?

Re:Sensationalist summary (1)

bws111 (1216812) | about a year ago | (#43807129)

According to another poster, that is exactly what happened. Almost nobody used the police for that anymore. The few who did use the police probably could have found the person themselves if they tried at all. This announcement is just officially ending that service, along with a reminder that there are effective tools for doing this work yourself.

Re:Sensationalist summary (5, Informative)

ColdCat (2586245) | about a year ago | (#43803215)

It change almost nothing.
This law was to find your family members after long lost of contacts (years). It was to help family member reconnect after end of WW1 WW2 and after the end of colonisation in Asia and Africa. The administration do the research find the person, the ask him/her if he want to reconnect with you and if he/she wants give you the address. It's stopped because fewer and fewer people use it in the last decade.

If someone is missing, police still do the research.
If Someone need to be found to pay kids pension, to helps his/her parents, for fraud or taxes evasion, or even for some kind of family Inheritance there are others laws.

Maybe Badly Worded (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802883)

A fugitive in flight is a deliberately missing person. I assume that they would hunt a man who killed a couple of guards while escaping prison.
              Then there is this nasty inference. If they are willing to hunt for horrid creeps but unwilling to hunt for wholesome citizens what value system does that reflect?
              As we move closer to total surveillance as a normal mode of living the French seem to want to swim against the stream. They will turn about and go with the flow either before or after they reach exhaustion.

Incorrect (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43802937)

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recherche_dans_l'int%C3%A9r%C3%AAt_des_familles [wikipedia.org]

It is not when somebody disappear in suspicious circumstance, it is when somebody is gone without leaving address to contact in NON SUSPICIOUS circumstance.

They suggest hiring Liam Neeson (4, Funny)

Picass0 (147474) | about a year ago | (#43802941)

He has a very particular set of skills.

Re:They suggest hiring Liam Neeson (2)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | about a year ago | (#43803337)

Acting is not uncommon, even if particular.

Re:They suggest hiring Liam Neeson (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43803907)

I don't think you got the joke. Watch movie "Taken" sometimes.

Re:They suggest hiring Liam Neeson (1)

Java Pimp (98454) | about a year ago | (#43805401)

like nunchuck skills, bowhunting skills, computer hacking skills...

Wow..... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43803135)

This is a new low for France, the bane of the EU...

oh fuck you (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43803149)

do your fucking job.

Re:oh fuck you (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43803399)

Feel free to make a list of other countries where the police will continue to find people for you just because you are related to them and can't be bothered to look them up in any other way.

Go ahead. I'll wait.

Status Update... (4, Funny)

thestudio_bob (894258) | about a year ago | (#43803231)

Status update: Kidnapped

Re:Status Update... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43803499)

Anonymous Coward's Relationship Status has changed to Stockholm syndrome...

Re:Status Update... (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about a year ago | (#43804703)

Status update: Kidnapped

Cutbacks cause French Police to raise the 'ransom' bar. "Demanding large sums of money does not mean your babysitter is a kidnapper", says spokesman for the Assemblée Nationale, who is also campaigning to keep their monthly salary from falling below 7,043.69 euros (USD 10,389.49), "Anything less and there will be hell to pay!"

Misleading summary... (2)

Guru80 (1579277) | about a year ago | (#43803271)

..on /.?!? Unbelievable!! (only if you haven't ever been on /.) What we have here, ladies and gentlemen, is a typical non-story sensationalized by a partial summery to leave out the key information to in order to get the comments section worked up over nothing. Shouldn't editors at least check the story to ensure the summary isn't intentionally devoid of the facts?

Re:Misleading summary... (1)

fredrated (639554) | about a year ago | (#43803589)

Killjoy.

Re:Misleading summary... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43804303)

It was posted by timothy, that should have been a clue to simply ignore the story. I don't know how he keeps his job. I guess he gives really good head.

I will still help find these people... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43803761)

and by the way I am PREMIUM dancer.

Problems with missing people searches on facebook (2)

kasperd (592156) | about a year ago | (#43804089)

There are many problems with searches for missing people using facebook. The most important problem is the lack of a trustworthy source. I would never take part in such a search, if the source is a person, I don't know. If you want me to take it serious, then link to the police' official page on the search. If the police doesn't want to put up such a page, then don't expect my participation.

Harm can be done by spreading such a search on facebook, if it isn't legitimate.
  1. The person may already have been found, in which case you are just spamming. And you are decreasing the value of what could otherwise have been a useful communication channel.
  2. The person may never have been missing in the first place, and the entire search is nothing but harassment.
  3. The person may be hiding from abusive relatives, and you may inadvertently lead those abusive relatives directly to the victim.

Re:Problems with missing people searches on facebo (1)

slashmojo (818930) | about a year ago | (#43807053)

The general idea I think is that the police would post it on their official facebook page, assuming french police have one. I've (unfortunately) had experience with exactly this.. being on facebook didn't work though and the person is still missing. I found that most people just don't pay attention to such things, there are just too many faces in the crowds we all walk through every day.

About this (0)

jonfr (888673) | about a year ago | (#43804113)

This is stupid, since dead bodies normally don't call or go on Facebook. If the missing person is dead, you won't find here body unless you search for it, if you find it to start with.

Sometimes missing people are never found at all.

Re:About this (1)

cellocgw (617879) | about a year ago | (#43804359)

This is stupid, since dead bodies normally don't call or go on Facebook.

You jest, but I still get birthday auto-notices from FB for friends who died years ago. Unless you have a relative w/ access to your FB account, it's apparently impossible to delete the account, or even change the owner's status to "Dead. Stop wishing the corpse happy birthday."

Re:About this (1)

Kaenneth (82978) | about a year ago | (#43806189)

I don't think they would mind being un-friended.

FP TROOLKORE (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43804821)

so that their I 7hought it was my

Makes senses (1)

houbou (1097327) | about a year ago | (#43806003)

As an adult, you have the right to privacy. Long as you aren't being illegal, you don't wish to be found, that's your business. And the french aren't talking about kids anyways. There's nothing wrong with that announcement.

Pretty please, do read the actual announcement (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43806405)

What has been suppressed here is only the RIF procedure (Recherche dans l'Interet des Familles, lit. Research in the Interest of Relatives). With this procedure, one could ask the state to search for a *long lost* relative, provided he gave proof of being in the same family (birth certificate, marital contract etc...).

It has *nothing* to do with distress calls like "My husband didn't come home last night after work and no one has seen him since yesterday afternoon".
Those are still handeled by the police just as they have always been. Whether you are a children or an adult does not matter. Any suspicious disappearance reported to the police will be acted upon. The procedure that has been axed (the RIF one) is rather the kind of search you would want a private detective agency to carry. Yes, in France these kind of search could be done by the state (with taxpayer money). I say good riddance.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recherche_dans_l'int%C3%A9r%C3%AAt_des_familles

Onion cross-post to Slashdot (1)

Baby Duck (176251) | about a year ago | (#43807227)

I could have sworn I accidentally visited The Onion when I saw the headline.

Bof (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about a year ago | (#43807347)

They won't only suggest you try "fassbeurk".

They'll also stick out their bottom lip and do that palms up shrug thing.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>