CA CA - Michael Negrete: UCLA, 18, Los Angeles, 10 Dec 1999 - Missing from dorm

[UCLAEigenguy]

Originally Posted by deca

"2000 Gov. Gray Davis announces the creation of the California NanoSystems Institute, a partnership of UCLA and UC Santa Barbara, and one of three California Institutes for Science and Innovation.
After three years of construction, UCLA Housing opens the doors to DeNeve Plaza, its newest addition to the northwest campus student housing community."
Above from http://alumni.ucla.edu/share/ucla-history/timeline.aspx


This says that DeNeve was being built from 1997-2000 so that was also under construction.

I can't find the article now, but an LA Times article from 2001 spoke about the case and they said that they searched construction sites.

I'd hope they used the dogs around constructions sites as well. It sounds like DeNeve was the only building on the Hill that was under construction.

[Rose_Red]

Originally Posted by KurtieB

Thanks for your previous response. You make some interesting points. Maybe he was tricked.
As far as people suggesting he left on his own: it seems to arise from the fact that there don't seem to be any other viable theories.

The reason people believe that Michael Negrete left on his own accord was because it was apparently reported that he was captured walking out the dorm alone at 4:30 AM by front desk cameras. This was accompanied by witnesses that reported a young man with his description being seen leaving the dorm rooms alone at approximately the same time. He did not appear to be distressed when this happened.

To me, this is the piece of information is what makes the case strange. I wonder why would a young man leave his dorm room without his keys or wallet. He was also not dressed appropriately for a December morning wearing his slippers, shorts, and a short-sleeved shirt.

The only thing I can think of is that he may have left to smoke a cigarette, but I don't think it was reported that he was a smoker. Someone mentioned he may have wanted to buy something from a vending machine, but he would probably take his wallet if this were true. He could have left the dorm to visit another friend, but I would think that an online conversation or call record would have been found to contact a friend he was going to visit. The last is possibly the best possibility and it is possible he encountered someone on his way out.

I still think about Michael's case. RIP Michael Negrete.

[UCLAEigenguy]

Originally Posted by Rose_Red

To me, this is the piece of information is what makes the case strange. I wonder why would a young man leave his dorm room without his keys or wallet. He was also not dressed appropriately for a December morning wearing his slippers, shorts, and a short-sleeved shirt.

The only thing I can think of is that he may have left to smoke a cigarette, but I don't think it was reported that he was a smoker. Someone mentioned he may have wanted to buy something from a vending machine, but he would probably take his wallet if this were true. He could have left the dorm to visit another friend, but I would think that an online conversation or call record would have been found to contact a friend he was going to visit. The last is possibly the best possibility and it is possible he encountered someone on his way out.

I still think about Michael's case. RIP Michael Negrete.

AFAIK, there were no vending machines outside of Dykstra Hall in 1999, they would have been inside as with most other residence halls at UCLA. The area was under construction at the time so I am not entirely sure where the exit was. In 2002, the Dykstra Hall entrance was rerouted directly to the lobby of DeNeve Plaza which does have vending machines outside of Dykstra proper. IF Dykstra Hall did empty into DeNeve in 1999 (it is questionable), then it would make perfect sense to be dressed the way he was since it was entirely indoors, but before construction began, the entrance/exit for Dykstra was outside I believe.

His attire, to me, is consistent with not expecting to be gone long and an impulsive decision (something routine, like a cigarette, vending machine, or visit with a friend nearby). My theory is that he left his keys by accident, tried to get in some other way, and something happened resulting in his death.

The key is his computer communication. I feel that part of the investigation was botched. I strongly believe that is where the solution to this case is. Either he met someone, or had some type of accident. There is no way this is random, and it is unlikely he left on his own accord.

[88keys]

Could the weird scent trail have been caused by someone dragging a body? On another board, I heard that it was kind of zig-zagging, and way off of the sidewalk. Maybe someone was carrying or dragging him and was trying to stay in dark areas where they wouldn't be seen.

I just don't know what to think...this is so bizarre. I find it highly unlikely that he was abducted at random from a college dorm. Even though their security measures are usually a joke (they're supposed to check ID's, but a lot of them don't), I still can't imagine someone thinking that would be a great place to abduct a random stranger at 4:30 in the morning. There are a lot of better places which offer much less risk of being caught.

To me, the key is the shoes. Can anyone confirm for sure if he was wearing shoes or not? And if he was, were they flip-flops or were they house shoes/slippers? Also, how cold is it in early December in LA? I can't imagine it gets that cold (but I'm from the Midwest, so my idea of cold is probably different).

[Rose_Red]

Originally Posted by 88keys

Could the weird scent trail have been caused by someone dragging a body? On another board, I heard that it was kind of zig-zagging, and way off of the sidewalk. Maybe someone was carrying or dragging him and was trying to stay in dark areas where they wouldn't be seen.

I think it is possible, but not probable. The distance from the dorm and where dog scent ended was nearly a mile, about a 16 minute walking distance (according to Google Maps). That is pretty far to drag a body down in a public arena that has a high population, why not just leave the body and run? I think they should have used cadaver dogs as well as dogs to follow his scent. They may have, but I don't know the details on that.

To me, the key is the shoes. Can anyone confirm for sure if he was wearing shoes or not? And if he was, were they flip-flops or were they house shoes/slippers? Also, how cold is it in early December in LA? I can't imagine it gets that cold (but I'm from the Midwest, so my idea of cold is probably different).

His only pair of shoes were left in his dorm. It is speculated that he was wearing some type of slippers (or a type of shoe one would wear indoors). On December 10th, 1999, the closest available weather station to Los Angeles, CA (LOS ANGELES DOWNTOWN USC CAMP, CA), reported the following conditions:
High Temp: 63F
Low Temp: 46F
Average Temp: 54.5F
Dewpoint: 39.3F
Wind Speed: 2.7 Knots

You may not think this is cold, but this is about as cold as it gets in Southern California (I believe Michael Negrete was from San Diego).

Why do you think this is key? By the way, I believe witnesses said somebody matching his description walked out through the front door alone around 4:30AM. Also, I've read other people mention reports about the front desk camera capturing him on video leaving the dorm by himself around 4:30AM, but I have not seen the news reports myself.

[88keys]

Originally Posted by Rose_Red

Why do you think this is key? By the way, I believe witnesses said somebody matching his description walked out through the front door alone around 4:30AM. Also, I've read other people mention reports about the front desk camera capturing him on video leaving the dorm by himself around 4:30AM, but I have not seen the news reports myself.

Thank you for that info, especially the temperature. Maybe "key" wasn't the right word, but the shoes kept bugging me.

To me, if he were barefoot, or even wearing slippers, he clearly didn't plan to go far. Maybe I'm thinking like a woman and not a man, but I know I would put on slippers for a quick trip outside, like to grab the mail or take out the trash or something. Even in the winter, I might only wear flip flops, if I'm just going out for a few seconds.

If I were going farther, like walking down the street, I would put on real shoes. I don't really think Michael left for a hook-up; surely he would have put on actual shoes. I guess he could have been lured away or forced away, but I think the odds of someone being on the prowl for an anonymous victim at a college dorm at 4:00am just seem really really slim. Is the UCLA campus off by itself, where most of the traffic would be from people actually coming and going to the university? Or is it the middle of town, where people drive through it on their way to other places? Is it easily accessible to the general public?

My gut says some kind of accident. That does beg the question of where the body is, though. I wish we could see exactly what the construction zone outside the dorm looked like. Maybe he fell down a hole or something.

[Rose_Red]

Originally Posted by 88keys

Is the UCLA campus off by itself, where most of the traffic would be from people actually coming and going to the university? Or is it the middle of town, where people drive through it on their way to other places? Is it easily accessible to the general public?

It is in the middle of town. There are many people that pass by the university on their way to another location. Traffic around the school is usually heavy, and a lot of it is not from actual students. There are also a lot of shops around the school and other places of business people visit.

The construction accident is a popular theory, and I could believe it, but why was he going outside at that hour to begin with is what I am wondering. I would think that the dogs would be put to work searching the construction area and so would the search groups that were formed, since it is such a popular theory. Some people mention a cover up by UCLA if this did indeed happen, but that is hard for ME to believe.

[Essbee]

It is in the "middle of town", but I disagree somewhat. I don't think that people drive thru the campus proper (where the dorms are) unless they want to go onto campus.

[UCLAEigenguy]

Originally Posted by 88keys

Could the weird scent trail have been caused by someone dragging a body? On another board, I heard that it was kind of zig-zagging, and way off of the sidewalk. Maybe someone was carrying or dragging him and was trying to stay in dark areas where they wouldn't be seen.

That is what it might imply. I feel like that would be so risky for a suspect to do that, but it makes sense. Also, the trail was entirely uphill. The scent trail has been pretty much invalidated unfortunately. The zigzag would be consistent with trying to hide, and going uphill may have been easier to conceal than going directly to Gayley Dr which may have more student traffic compared to Sunset which would likely be deserted.

Originally Posted by 88keys

To me, the key is the shoes. Can anyone confirm for sure if he was wearing shoes or not? And if he was, were they flip-flops or were they house shoes/slippers? Also, how cold is it in early December in LA? I can't imagine it gets that cold (but I'm from the Midwest, so my idea of cold is probably different).

I believe I read somewhere that they were close-toed shoes that were slip on, so kind of like a slipper but more of a shoe.

Originally Posted by Rose_Red

I think it is possible, but not probable. The distance from the dorm and where dog scent ended was nearly a mile, about a 16 minute walking distance (according to Google Maps). That is pretty far to drag a body down in a public arena that has a high population, why not just leave the body and run? I think they should have used cadaver dogs as well as dogs to follow his scent. They may have, but I don't know the details on that.

The trail taken would not have necessarily been "public". It went through a small wooded area and areas that would have been dark and deserted at that time.

Originally Posted by Rose_Red

His only pair of shoes were left in his dorm. It is speculated that he was wearing some type of slippers (or a type of shoe one would wear indoors). On December 10th, 1999, the closest available weather station to Los Angeles, CA (LOS ANGELES DOWNTOWN USC CAMP, CA), reported the following conditions:
High Temp: 63F
Low Temp: 46F
Average Temp: 54.5F
Dewpoint: 39.3F
Wind Speed: 2.7 Knots

You may not think this is cold, but this is about as cold as it gets in Southern California (I believe Michael Negrete was from San Diego).

To me, the weather and the choice of shoes suggests again that he did not mean to be gone long. Besides, even when it is "freezing" outside, I still wear shorts, and a light shirt.

Originally Posted by 88keys

My gut says some kind of accident. That does beg the question of where the body is, though. I wish we could see exactly what the construction zone outside the dorm looked like. Maybe he fell down a hole or something.

This would help immensely. I haven't been able to locate pics of Dykstra Hall during this time. He could have been hit by a drunk driver on a campus street and dumped, or the scent trail could be correct (ending at Sunset/Bellagio) and he could have been hit by a car there and dumped. To me, it seems unlikely, but stranger things have happened.

Originally Posted by Rose_Red

It is in the middle of town. There are many people that pass by the university on their way to another location. Traffic around the school is usually heavy, and a lot of it is not from actual students. There are also a lot of shops around the school and other places of business people visit.

Not at 4:30am. I have left campus a few times around that time and the campus is very eery and still. There is nobody out. There are no cars on the street. It is hard to believe that there is ever any silence in LA and UCLA, but it was downright scary at that time. It is unlikely that once he left the dorm anyone saw him. Inside is a different story due to finals.

Originally Posted by Rose_Red

The construction accident is a popular theory, and I could believe it, but why was he going outside at that hour to begin with is what I am wondering. I would think that the dogs would be put to work searching the construction area and so would the search groups that were formed, since it is such a popular theory. Some people mention a cover up by UCLA if this did indeed happen, but that is hard for ME to believe.

It would have likely involved the game he was playing. At least one other person on his floor was playing the same game. Unless he was meeting someone and trying to hide it, I think it was related to the game. There has been no info on what the game was, or who was playing it unfortunately. He could have left not realizing how late it was to meet a fellow player, or visiting another night owl. The dogs did search the construction area and found nothing, but I don't put much stock into the dogs... look at the scent trail theory being dismissed. If there was a coverup, it probably wasn't on UCLA's end. Nobody may have noticed anything strange if say a hole collapsed on him.

Originally Posted by Essbee

It is in the "middle of town", but I disagree somewhat. I don't think that people drive thru the campus proper (where the dorms are) unless they want to go onto campus.

Correct, and the city itself is dead at that time of the morning.

[helpful]

I remember seeing Michael's case on Unsolved Mysteries. So strange and scary.

I'm not that long out of college. I attended a university in one of the highest-crime areas in the US, and the area around campus was much more dangerous than the part of LA where UCLA is located. I would have thought NOTHING of wandering around campus alone for no real reason late at night. Sometimes, I just needed some fresh air or a break from studying. On a few occasions, I'd feel like a snack but the vending machines in my dorm didn't have anything I liked, so I'd need to go elsewhere. I often would leave wearing clothing that wasn't warm enough for lengthy excursions, and I almost NEVER brought a wallet or my room keys. We didn't have security cameras, either, so wandering around after dark was really not a good idea.

I also lived in Los Angeles previously and the Westwood area (where UCLA is) is totally different than the rest of the city. I always thought that the campus feels really removed from Los Angeles proper. Perhaps it's this feeling of isolation that made Michael feel okay about walking around late at night.

I'm not sure what the keyed entry technology was like at UCLA in the early 90s, but at my school in the mid 00s, you couldn't use your key card to enter any dorms other than the one you resided in after 12:30 AM. If such a policy existed at UCLA at the time, that would limit places Michael might have been going.

[UCLAEigenguy]

The UCLA campus is very safe but since the dorm area was so wooded back then I wouldn't think to walk by myself that late, but maybe he did that.

I think the dorms used standard keys back then, which were replaced with computerized keys and student id access shortly after. At least that is what articles suggest. They never mention tracing his student id or room key.

[neverletgo]

Bumping for Mike . . . it's coming up on 13 years since he disappeared. Where is Mike Negrete?

[deca]

Originally Posted by UCLAEigenguy

The UCLA campus is very safe but since the dorm area was so wooded back then I wouldn't think to walk by myself that late, but maybe he did that.

I think the dorms used standard keys back then, which were replaced with computerized keys and student id access shortly after. At least that is what articles suggest. They never mention tracing his student id or room key.

I was attending school and living in Westwood in 99 and 2000. Some of my opinions/observations:

-I think my friend who lived in the dorms around that time had a card to access at least the main building. Not sure if ALL the dorms had them at that point, though.

-At 4:30 it is pretty quiet, like some others have posted- but about 5 am it starts perking back up. My roomies would get up and run to the student fitness center around that time. Also- around finals week- certain areas (some of the libraries) would be open 24 hours. Perhaps the coffee places as well?

-Around these years there was some crime in the area. There was a serial rapist on the loose, as well as the infamous "Panty Snatcher". There were also rumors of muggings, etc. It didn't seem to fase most of the male student body, though. I agree with UCLAEigenguy that in general the campus was pretty safe.

-Although UCLA is in the middle of a city, the dorms are somewhat isolated. If he wanted food, Westwood is a good walk away (10-15 min I would say). I am not sure if any closer student store type places were open at that time.

-The dorms are in a wooded type area but it is a groomed wooded area with a regular landscaping area. So if MN was in that area, he would have been found.

I have two theories (maybe 3)- in no order
1. accident wherein he falls into some construction pit or the like and is undiscovered.
2. he won a bet from or wanted to talk to another gamer. Something bad happens with this person.
3. He took off owing to the stress of attending school. I doubt this one.

[Rilke]

Bumping for Michael.

[DrDMike]

Supposedly the police are investigating his case as a homicide.

[Tink56]

Originally Posted by Julessleuther

Does anyone know what Micheal's major at UCLA was? I found a guy with the same name, who looks very similar to him, but it states that he went to MIT. I do not want to put the link up for this guy yet, but the resemblance is freaky.

Michael's major was music. He was an very accomplished trumpet player. There was talk at one time that a stroke is a possibility for someone who plays this instrument a great deal.

It make no sense.

My thoughts and concern, as always, for his family. A resolution is the only thing the desire, IMO.

[deca]

I wonder why they are investigating this as a homicide and if they have any leads? It was always portrayed to the public as if he vanished into thin air.
Right around this time (maybe the next year?) another student went missing from the other side of campus near sorority row. A week or more later it was found that the student had some sort of nervous breakdown and walked away, not telling anyone. IIRC. Not saying Michael did this at all- just saying that the media kind of portrayed Mike's case the same way.