Deceased/Not Found PA - Anna Maciejewska, 43, Chester County, 10 April 2017

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is it possible that Anna took the second week off from work sick because she was afraid to face someone? Is it possible she was being threatened?

A week off for a trip that never happened, a second week off "sick" and then dropped off the face of the earth. Nope..this sets off all sorts of alarm bells. Being home for two weeks and going out to dinner in public seems to steer me more towards work than home.

In this scenario, she would be left with two choices, not go back (quit or the obvious) or go back and face one or more individuals there was an issue with. What would make an individual so frightened that they would leave a spouse and child behind to avoid going back to work?

These are all good questions and I'd be inclined to agree IF we heard more from those from her home instead of from her work, as opposed to vice versa. MOO
 
Medical information can be released to Law Enforcement, but no information can be released to an individual or family member without patient consent.
---------------
When does the Privacy Rule allow covered entities to disclose protected health information to law enforcement officials?

Answer: To respond to a request for PHI for purposes of identifying or locating a suspect, fugitive, material witness or missing person; but the covered entity must limit disclosures of PHI to name and address, date and place of birth, social security number, ABO blood type and rh factor, type of injury, date and time of treatment, date and time of death, and a description of distinguishing physical characteristics. Other information related to the individual’s DNA, dental records, body fluid or tissue typing, samples, or analysis cannot be disclosed under this provision, but may be disclosed in response to a court order, warrant, or written administrative request (45 CFR 164.512(f)(2)).

https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-profe...close-to-law-enforcement-officials/index.html

Thank you for this information, it is a very interesting read.

I did not mean the HIPAA rules though, which are self-evident - this one is like "lying on the behalf of the patient" rather than not sharing his/her medical information. If somebody calls me and requests information about this patient, instead of telling him that I'm not able to share this information because of its confidential nature, I am required to tell that this patient is not treated at the hospital - when, in fact, he is. If the patient sets up a code word, then those people who mention this code word when calling will be able to communicate with the patient. They still don't receive any medical information from us, but we admit that we in fact have the person they are looking for. It is a rare practice, and people usually don't know about it, so they just call in and get the general answer that we do not treat a patient with this name.

What I don't know is how this practice interferes with police investigation. And if this practice does exist in the US at all. If it does, it is a chance for Anna, even if as luthersmama said, 90 days is a long time.
 
She didn't go it to dinner in public during those two weeks, though. I find it hard to imagine she would maintain zero contact with anyone from the 29th to the 10th if she weren't actually missing that whole time.
 
What is the reason Anna's mom was delayed two days, and unable to speak with Anna on April 8?
 
I recall that someone from YMCA remembered something about Anna after seeing a poster with her picture. Does anybody know details? Thanks
 
I recall that someone from YMCA remembered something about Anna after seeing a poster with her picture. Does anybody know details? Thanks

I wish I did. There are four Y facilities that she could have gone to. When I saw that, I wondered whether the witness had seen an argument or something.
 
That is one of the four I thought of. Pretty close to her office and it has a nifty outdoor water park. It is also VERY close to the condo.
 
Was she possibly living in the condo part of the time?
 
Things aren't adding up here. Is LE aware of all these little tidbits?
 
Things aren't adding up here. Is LE aware of all these little tidbits?

I would assume that if what we are discussing is being reported to LE, then they should be aware. At least I hope so.
 
I would assume that if what we are discussing is being reported to LE, then they should be aware. At least I hope so.
How can we know what we are discussing is being reported to LE, or read by them?
 
Hi Everyone,

ActuaryDK is now a verified insider in Anna's case.

Please continue to treat ActuaryDK with respect.

Remember ActuaryDK does not need to provide links to their posts and it's up to you whether to believe what ActuaryDK posts or not.

Thank you
 
I wonder what the young child has to say about the time period from the 28th until Anna (according to her husband) ran from the house (forget the date). Presumable he (son) would have seen her at some point. No?
 
I wonder what the young child has to say about the time period from the 28th until Anna (according to her husband) ran from the house (forget the date). Presumable he (son) would have seen her at some point. No?

Since husband is only communicating through a lawyer, would LE even be able to talk to the son? I can't imagine any lawyer would allow that to happen. Do children have to have a parent/legal guardian present to speak with LE? Or can there be some type of temporary guardian appointed in a case where the child could potentially be a witness?

I'm completely clueless where rights and laws fall when it comes to children.
 
He's 4-5. He won't have a concept of time and interviewing him now to extract that information would be moot. He might, however, remember other valuable bits of information.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
109
Guests online
3,436
Total visitors
3,545

Forum statistics

Threads
592,294
Messages
17,966,764
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top