MN MN - Amy Pagnac, 13, Osseo, 5 Aug 1989

I've read every post on this thread. I didn't see anything mentioned about checking out the local sex offenders.
Good question. However, this case happened in 1989. Megan's law wasn't passed until 1994. Minnesota began registering sex offenders in 1991. So there would be no way for the family or anyone helping them to know who the offenders in the area were. It is hard to say if the local police had an internal list or not, but AFAIK, no Maple Grove Police are participating in this thread.
 
I've come to the conclusion that this was a "crime of opportunity." I believe Amy was either abducted by a random stranger or by someone she knew that happened to see her alone at the gas station.

Age-Progession Picture Of Woman Missing For 22 Years

Here's another article..does anyone know if her stepfather, who last seen her, if he was ever cleared?
Amy doesn't have a stepfather. Marshall is Amy's legal father. The last public statement by police is that they have no suspects, and the family is cooperating. I don't know how common it is for police to make public statements that they have "cleared" someone in an open case. I can't recall any times I have heard that myself.
 
I've read every post on this thread. I didn't see anything mentioned about checking out the local sex offenders.
That is not surprising since this case happened in 1989. Minnesota didn't start registering sex offenders until 1991 and Megan's law wasn't in place until 1994. Don't know if some local police departments kept track of their local offenders, but it is easy for people to move into and out of jurisdictions.

The thing to remember here is that there is very little information coming out of the Maple Grove pd regarding this case. There is probably a LOT that they have done that they have not mentioned...<modsnip - discussing other members is not allowed>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Found this obituary for Marshall Middens’s father. Marshall is the husband of Amy’s mom.


In the obituary, it says that Amy proceeded the grandfather in death. Interesting because Susan, Amy’s mom, says she believes Amy is alive.

<modsnip: No personalizing> I know that Marshall and Susan didn’t have to approve the obituary prior to publication.

Also <modsnip> I said Susan’s husband not Amy’s dad.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That is not surprising since this case happened in 1989. Minnesota didn't start registering sex offenders until 1991 and Megan's law wasn't in place until 1994. Don't know if some local police departments kept track of their local offenders, but it is easy for people to move into and out of jurisdictions.

The thing to remember here is that there is very little information coming out of the Maple Grove pd regarding this case. There is probably a LOT that they have done that they have not mentioned...<modsnip - discussing other members is not allowed>
True that sex offenders weren't registered at that time; however, I suspect the police would be aware of most of them.

I suspect Amy was seen by either someone she knew or someone random who saw her alone in the car and took advantage of the opportunity. If she knew the person, she might have gone with them willingly. Depending on how and where the car was parked, another car might have pulled alongside and a passenger could have pulled her from one car to the other in seconds without anyone noticing.
 
I did a search on Namus and found two female UIDs from the same county that Amy went missing from.



Both are partial female skeletal remains, and therefore there is very little to go on. Is anyone able to see whether there is DNA for these UIDs and for Amy on Namus?
 
I did a search on Namus and found two female UIDs from the same county that Amy went missing from.



Both are partial female skeletal remains, and therefore there is very little to go on. Is anyone able to see whether there is DNA for these UIDs and for Amy on Namus?
Amy has DNA, according to Doe Network.
Since the two cases you posted aren't in Doe Network, and NamUs doesn't show us the DNA status anymore, the only way to really find out is to submit them to NamUs as a potential match. Or log in to see if she's been ruled out, if you haven't done that already.
 
Amy has DNA, according to Doe Network.
Since the two cases you posted aren't in Doe Network, and NamUs doesn't show us the DNA status anymore, the only way to really find out is to submit them to NamUs as a potential match. Or log in to see if she's been ruled out, if you haven't done that already.
Thank you. Unfortunately I cannot check this as I do not have a NAMUS account, because I am not in the US.

If she hasn’t been already ruled out, I am happy to submit the potential match if that’s possible to do without having a log in?
 
ADMIN NOTE

Stop the back and forth bickering about real father or legal father.

As long as a terminology is not offensive and members know who a poster is referring to, that's what matters, not the semantics of how others might address the distinction.
 
True that sex offenders weren't registered at that time; however, I suspect the police would be aware of most of them.

I suspect Amy was seen by either someone she knew or someone random who saw her alone in the car and took advantage of the opportunity. If she knew the person, she might have gone with them willingly. Depending on how and where the car was parked, another car might have pulled alongside and a passenger could have pulled her from one car to the other in seconds without anyone noticing.
I would hope that they would be aware of some, for sure. But probably not of every person with a record moving in to and out of the area the way they would be these days.

Your list of possibilities are completely believable. A lot of the time, people are so focused on what they are doing, they don't really notice a lot of what is going on around them. And a teenager moving from one car to another, especially if they knew the people they initially joined would probably not attract a lot of attention.
There is no reason to assume that her leaving the gas station with another person would attract attention. She may have encountered danger later on.
 
Did they ever establish exactly how long he was in the bathroom? Time is relative, so a short time or a couple minutes to one person, can seem like forever to another. My mom and sister were notorious for downplaying how long they took to do something, claiming "I'll only be five minutes" or "I'll only be a moment", and it would turn into a half hour or more (not saying this is what happened to Amy). For example, my sister would insist on taking the family car when it wasn't her turn, saying she was only running to the store, indicating a quick trip, to justify infringing on when I was supposed to have it. Then she'd be gone for HOURS and put hundreds of miles on the car, running the roads. When she came back, she claimed she wasn't gone "that long."
Earlier in this thread, a poster stating they were Amy's mother addressed this with:
Usually men do use the restrooms a lot faster than women; even men that washed their hands well usually are a little bit faster. But you know sometimes one has to do more than urination.
 
Sorry, can you name or describe this cop. Most officers who worked on the case were professionals who wouldn't disclose information about an active case to a random person at Panera, even during retirement.
Did they really work on the case? Were they a cop? Detective? I know one who gave me the creepy feels, who may have let things slip to try and get something, but otherwise I can't see many working on the case talking about this generally.
I agree. It doesn't seem likely that a cop would give information on an active case to a random person at Panera. However, I was once talking to a BCA employee at a conference and mentioned Amy's case. The BCA employee's face softened considerably, and they said "That family has been treated so badly."
They wouldn't elaborate, but I knew exactly what they meant.
 
Found this obituary for Marshall Middens’s father. Marshall is the husband of Amy’s mom.


In the obituary, it says that Amy proceeded the grandfather in death. Interesting because Susan, Amy’s mom, says she believes Amy is alive.

<modsnip: No personalizing> I know that Marshall and Susan didn’t have to approve the obituary prior to publication.

Also <modsnip> I said Susan’s husband not Amy’s dad.
If the extended family wants to believe differently than Amy's mother and father, they have that right.
 
@Renu (Verified insider - Amy Sue Pagnac case) was last seen: Dec 11, 2015

@sguru26 (Amy's sister, never verified) was last seen: Feb 27, 2013

@spagnac (Amy's mother, never verified) was last seen: Aug 23, 2015

ETA: I had just spent the wee hours of this morning going back over this thread. These, along with another member (Whisper2112 was last seen: Jun 15, 2017) were the only people who purported to have insider knowledge. Whisper seemed to be an avid supporter of the family, though not claiming to be related in any fashion. Perplexing.
Avid supporter of the facts and finding Amy. People only interpret suggestions they don't like to be bias. I just feel like when one theory has had nearly 40 years of attention and it has produced nothing, maybe it's time to look at another theory.
 
Amy doesn't have a stepfather. Marshall is Amy's legal father. The last public statement by police is that they have no suspects, and the family is cooperating. I don't know how common it is for police to make public statements that they have "cleared" someone in an open case. I can't recall any times I have heard that myself.
If you go back in this particular thread the family hasn't been cleared ( this was stated by Amy's sister)
Also It's know that Marshall wasn't/isn't Amy's biological father.
Amy's mother has never revealed who Amy's Bio father was.
The MGPD has only focused on their two properties.. that speaks volumes.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
207
Guests online
4,219
Total visitors
4,426

Forum statistics

Threads
593,261
Messages
17,983,355
Members
229,064
Latest member
Champ86
Back
Top