this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
314 points (98.5% liked)

News

23367 readers
3095 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A man who was abducted as a six-year-old while playing in a California park in 1951 has been found more than seven decades later thanks to the help of an online ancestry test, old photos and newspaper clippings.

The Bay Area News Group reported on Friday that Luis Armando Albino’s niece in Oakland – with assistance from police, the FBI and the justice department – located her uncle living on the US east coast.

Albino, a father and grandfather, is a retired firefighter and Marine Corps veteran who served in Vietnam, according to his niece, 63-year-old Alida Alequin. She found Albino and reunited him with his California family in June.

On 21 February 1951 a woman lured the six-year-old Albino from the park in West Oakland, where he had been playing with his older brother, and promised him in Spanish that she would buy him candy.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] norimee@lemmy.world 101 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Oakland police acknowledged that Alequin’s efforts “played an integral role in finding her uncle” and that “the outcome of this story is what we strive for”.

That's a really weird statement. Oaklands police strives for no leads and a cold case for 70 years, leaving the mother in uncertainty until her death and then the family finding the missing person themselves?

I mean its great, that he was found well and alive, but if that is what your police strives for... the bar is like underground.

[–] rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com 27 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Aren't police clearance rates for missing persons and murder cases like, in the low single digits? Cops aren't good at this.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 21 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's like 1-2% for pretty much any crime. They're basically there because you need a police report to make an insurance claim.

[–] rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com 14 points 2 months ago

Yeah, I've heard about the same. Roughly 2% even for violent crime. And yet revisiting their budgets is apparently fucking communism.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Cops aren’t good at this.

They're not magically omniscient, if that's what you mean. You've set a really high bar for American cops, who are continually accused of being violent and stupid.

[–] rand_alpha19@moist.catsweat.com 11 points 2 months ago

The bar isn't really that high if you look at how cases that are solved actually got solved (deductive reasoning, forensic analysis, trust from the community including the marginalized, and focused manpower from people who give a fuck).

It's just that the people who want to be cops are more interested in wearing a fancy uniform, using weapons, harassing poor people, and beating their spouses than actually doing real work that involves brain power. Not to mention office politics.

Magic omniscience would probably help though. They should work on that after solving the "violent and stupid" issue. ;)

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago

It's not all that weird when you remember that ACAB.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 17 points 2 months ago (2 children)

On the plus side, the cops didn't murder anyone this time.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

I guess we can be sure the family doesn't own a dog.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

it probably helps that it's the albino family.

[–] Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

keep in mind this case was only solved because the neice did a DNA ancestry test and found a nearest match. If police wanted this data, they either would have needed to ask said family to turn in DNA (which id imagine back then, wasnt a service at this scale) or to give them 100% access to DNA data of every citizen, which I doubt anyone wants.

[–] norimee@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

I'm not criticising that police couldn't find him themselves. My issue is with the statement, that this is an outcome they "strive" for as if finding him after 70 years (SEVENTY) was an ideal outcome in a child abduction case. As if this was the most they aim for.