"I cannot understand at all why he arbitrarily closed the missing-person report. There was nothing to gain. Closing a case does not improve your performance record or reduce your workload," one police official said.
Questions are mounting over the motive of an active-duty police officer in Jeju who has been arrested on charges of falsely closing missing-person cases. Because the officer, identified only as Senior Patrol Officer A, denies the allegations, investigators are left asking why he closed the reports on his own and what he stood to gain.
Falsely Closed and Deleted From the System
Jang Mi-ran, 37, left the lodging where she had been staying long-term at about 10:15 p.m. on May 12. Her boyfriend, who had been staying with her, filed a missing-person report with the 112 emergency line at about 6:43 p.m. on the 15th, three days later. Officer A, who was on night duty at the time, took the report.
Officers from the Hallim police substation under the Jeju Western Police Station met the person who filed the report to hear an account of the situation once it was received. They searched the area around Hallim Port, where Jang's mobile phone had last been located.
About two hours and 30 minutes after taking the report, at around 9:16 p.m., Officer A closed the case, falsely stating that he had reached the person who filed the report and that this person did not want the location disclosed. The officers who had been searching withdrew.
In closing the case, Officer A also deleted Jang's records from the management list of the police missing-persons management system. He is believed to have selected a code for "traffic accident casualty" to carry out the deletion. Deleting records from the system requires selecting a code for a special reason such as an unnatural death or a traffic accident casualty.
At about 6:02 p.m. on the 2nd of last month, while again on duty, Officer A received a report that a man in his 60s was missing and falsely closed it five and a half hours later, at about 11:38 p.m. The man's body was found 55 days after he went missing. Officer A has continued to deny the charges while being questioned in custody.
Nothing to Gain, and Officials Say They Cannot Understand It
So why did Officer A falsely close the missing-person cases? In cases involving missing adults, the person often turns up within a day or two even after a report is filed. Officer A may therefore have assumed Jang would soon reappear and closed the case on his own.
But the questions remain. The family of the missing man in his 60s told police at the time of the report that something might have happened to him. Officer A should have moved quickly to establish the facts.
Moreover, even if a missing person is located, it does not count toward Officer A's performance record, leaving him little to gain. Taking a report also does not add appreciably to an officer's workload. In Jang's case as well, the search was handled by the Hallim substation.
Amid this, suspicions are breeding further suspicions. A police official who asked not to be named said the motive remains a mystery. "Rather than focusing only on what he was trying to gain through the false closures, we should also look at whether he was trying to avoid something," the official said.
