U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

75–919 PDF 2012

S. HRG. 112–543 

HELPING LAW ENFORCEMENT FIND MISSING 

CHILDREN 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MARCH 2, 2011 

Serial No. J–112–7 

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman 

HERB KOHL, Wisconsin 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

CHUCK SCHUMER, New York 

DICK DURBIN, Illinois 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut 

CHUCK GRASSLEY, Iowa 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

JON KYL, Arizona 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

BRUCE A. COHEN, Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

KOLAN DAVIS, Republican Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS 

Page 

Grassley, Hon. Chuck, a U.S. Senator from the State of Iowa ............................ 4 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 50 

Klobuchar, Hon. Amy, a U.S. Senator from the State of Minnesota ................... 1 

Leahy, Hon. Patrick J., a U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont, prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 59 

WITNESSES 

Allen, Ernie, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Alexandria, Virginia ............................................. 9 

Keightley, James, Partner, Keightley & Ashner LLP, Washington, DC ............. 10 

Perkins, Kevin L., Assistant Director, Criminal Investigative Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, DC .................................................. 6 

Pirnat, Thea M., Detective, Fairfax County Police, Criminal Investigations 

Bureau, Child Exploitation Unit, Fairfax, Virginia .......................................... 12 

Wetterling, Patty, Co-Founder and Member of the Board of Directors, Jacob 

Wetterling Resource Center, St. Paul, Minnesota ............................................. 7 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 

Responses of Ernie Allen to questions submitted by Senator Blumenthal ......... 21 

Responses of James Keightley to questions submitted by Senator Blumenthal 22 

Responses of Kevin L. Perkins to questions submitted by Senator 

Blumenthal ........................................................................................................... 23 

Responses of Thea M. Pirnat to questions submitted by Senator Blumenthal .. 25 

Responses of Patty Wetterling to questions submitted by Senator Blumenthal 26 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Allen, Ernie, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Alexandria, Virginia, statement and letter ........ 27 

Congress of the United States, Joint Committee on Taxation, Washington, 

DC, letter .............................................................................................................. 37 

Keightley, James, Partner, Keightley & Ashner LLP, Washington, DC, statement ...................................................................................................................... 52 

www.nytimes.com, November 12, 2010, article ..................................................... 60 

Perkins, Kevin L., Assistant Director, Criminal Investigative Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, DC, statement ............................... 64 

Pirnat, Thea M., Detective, Fairfax County Police, Criminal Investigations 

Bureau, Child Exploitation Unit, Fairfax, Virginia, statement ....................... 71 

Wetterling, Patty, Co-Founder and Member of the Board of Directors, Jacob 

Wetterling Resource Center, St. Paul, Minnesota, statement .......................... 76 

(1) 

HELPING LAW ENFORCEMENT FIND MISSING 

CHILDREN 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 2, 2011 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in room 

SD–226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Amy Klobuchar, presiding. 

Present: Senators Klobuchar, Franken, Blumenthal, and Grassley. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR, A U.S. 

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. We are going to call this hearing to 

order. Good morning, everyone, and thank you so much for being 

here. Senator Grassley is going to be joining us. He is just over at 

the Finance Committee hearing. We are also joined by Senator 

Blumenthal, and Senator Franken also was here and hopes to stop 

back. There are a lot of hearings going on at the same time. 

Today’s hearing will examine law enforcement’s efforts to recover 

missing children, and we are going to hear today about law enforcement’s efforts generally in this area. We have a panel that includes both Federal and local law enforcement representatives, but 

I would like to focus especially on the issue of family abductions 

and whether law enforcement has access to all the information that 

they need when it comes to recovering missing children. 

I want to thank Chairman Leahy for generously allowing me to 

chair this full Committee hearing. Both Chairman Leahy and I are 

former prosecutors. He was, as you know, a State’s attorney in 

Vermont, and I was the county attorney in Hennepin County, Minnesota, so we care a lot about law enforcement, and we want to 

make sure that they have all the tools that they need to protect 

public safety and combat crime. I would also add that Senator 

Blumenthal was the attorney general of Connecticut. 

I want to thank Senator Grassley. He recently switched hats 

from being the Ranking Member on the Finance Committee to 

being the Ranking Member on the Judiciary Committee. He is a 

long-time member of both committees, and my staff has been working with his staff for a couple of months on some of the issues that 

we will be talking about in today’s hearing. We are grateful for his 

expertise in both areas. 

Today we are here to talk about the tools law enforcement uses 

to find missing children. This is an issue that probably a lot of us 

2 

think we already know everything about. We read about tragic 

cases of missing children. We learn sometimes of the joyous reunions that some of these children have with their families, and 

even in cases where there is not yet a happy ending, we know that 

law enforcement at the Federal, State, and local levels devote an 

incredible amount of resources to tracking down every possible 

lead. 

I know about this issue mainly from my friend Patty Wetterling, 

who is here today to testify. Patty is a homegrown hero in Minnesota. She has become a tenacious national advocate for children’s 

safety and particularly the plight of missing and abused children 

since her own son, Jacob, was abducted 22 years ago. 

I became interested in holding a hearing on this issue last November when I read a newspaper article about an issue that does 

not always come to mind when we think about missing children: 

the problem of family abductions. The National Center for Missing 

and Exploited Children, which has done so much important good 

work in many different types of missing children cases, has also 

been instrumental in raising awareness about this issue as well. 

According to a Department of Justice study, approximately 

800,000 children are reported missing each year. That number is 

tragically high, but another statistic you might not expect is this: 

200,000 of those cases are the result of family abductions, and approximately 12,000 of those cases last longer than 6 months. We 

might not think of these cases in the same light as we think of 

stranger abductions, but they are just as scary for the family members who are left behind. Those family members are just as frantic 

with worry. 

The newspaper article pointed out that in many of these cases, 

the abductors continue to file Federal tax returns, believe it or not. 

And, indeed, in many of these cases—and this is the shocking 

part—the abductors continue to claim that child as a dependent on 

their Federal tax returns. For the most part, these abductors may 

be upstanding citizens in every other area of their lives, and they 

are not eager to add tax evasion to the list of laws they are otherwise breaking. But this also means that a Federal agency—the 

Government, the Internal Revenue Service—may unwittingly have 

more information about a missing child’s location in its databases 

than law enforcement does. 

A 2007 study by the Treasury Department examined the Social 

Security numbers of 1,700 missing children and the relatives suspected of abducting them. The study showed that more than onethird of those Social Security numbers had been used in tax returns filed after the abductions had taken place, and in half of 

those cases, the tax returns had new addresses for missing children. 

Now, just think about this. At the same time you have a law enforcement agency, local law enforcement, a cop in Maplewood, Minnesota, running around trying to figure out where this child is, the 

IRS in a third of those cases has a Social Security number and in 

a third of those cases actually has the new address. 

Right now it is incredibly difficult and in some cases impossible 

for the Federal Government to share this information with the police. As a general rule, this is good policy. We want to protect the 

3 

privacy of taxpayer information. But if you have abducted a child 

and are otherwise in violation of State or Federal law, you are no 

longer entitled to that privacy. If law enforcement could access the 

names and addresses on these tax returns, they might well be able 

to locate missing children and return them to their parents. 

So I have introduced a bill to do just this: to untie the IRS’ hands 

when it comes to disclosing critical information in missing children 

cases. The legislation is called the Access to Information about 

Missing Children Act, and it allows law enforcement officers working cases of missing children to request information like this from 

Federal agencies like the IRS. This is bipartisan legislation that I 

have introduced with Chairman Leahy and Senator John Cornyn 

of Texas, who serves on this Committee. 

Because this issue involves the IRS, we have also been working 

with the Finance Committee, on which Senator Grassley has 

served for so long, and the Joint Committee on Taxation to make 

sure we allow law enforcement access to relevant information but 

still maintain appropriate safeguards for privacy. 

Joining in this effort are Senators Casey and Enzi, who are also 

very interested in making sure we do everything we can do to help 

families of missing children. This means making sure that this information is not just available to Federal law enforcement. Although the FBI is involved in lots of missing child cases, they are 

almost always working in conjunction with State and local law enforcement, and State and local law enforcement officers are not always allowed access to things like Federal income tax returns. 

My legislation allows Federal law enforcement to get a court 

order for information disclosure on behalf of State and local law enforcement and will work to make that possible in the final bill as 

well. 

This means, of course, that State and Federal law enforcement 

will have to work together. I know when I was Hennepin county 

attorney, we had a great working relationship with the U.S. Attorney’s Office, so I know this can be done. At a time of limited resources, it just defies reality that we would have one branch of the 

Government have information about addresses of missing children 

while we have another, local law enforcement, with very limited resources running around trying to find out where these kids are, in 

the computer. It makes no sense. 

The important thing is that we get this critical information into 

the right hands so we can bring these children home. I am looking 

forward to hearing from all our witnesses about current law enforcement efforts to find missing children of all types—stranger abductions, family abductions, children who are abducted and subsequently victims of trafficking or exploitation—and to having a conversation about how we can ensure that law enforcement has the 

tools they need. 

With that, it is a pleasure to have Ranking Member Grassley 

here back from his important Finance Committee hearing. Senator 

Grassley. 

4 

STATEMENT OF HON. CHUCK GRASSLEY, A U.S. SENATOR 

FROM THE STATE OF IOWA 

Senator GRASSLEY. Thank you, Madam Chairman, for holding 

this very important hearing. More importantly, thank you for your 

personal involvement in this issue. And like you, I have been a 

supporter over the years of many efforts among many Senators to 

apprehend those who abduct children, exploit children, or otherwise harm children. Because many of these crimes involve transport over State lines or use of the Internet, there is a strong need, 

obviously, for the Federal Government. 

In 2006, I was able to include in the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act a version of child protection legislation I previously introduced. The provisions were named for Jetseta Gage, a 

brave 10-year-old girl who was abducted, sexually assaulted, and 

murdered by a repeat sex offender. Jetseta’s bill created mandatory 

minimum sentences for criminals who commit murder, kidnapping, 

and serious bodily harm against children. Today’s hearing will help 

bring into perspective the children, many like Jetseta, who were 

abducted, assaulted, and murdered. Our children deserve to grow 

up in communities free from child predators. 

One of the important points of today’s hearing is to raise public 

awareness of the realities of missing children. Although parents 

rightfully fear that a stranger will abduct their child, that is not 

the common situation. Most abducted children were taken by people they know, often a parent. And much more than is commonly 

realized, these abductions involve force and violence. 

Of course, much of the work in this area is done by State and 

local law enforcement. The Federal Government should assist the 

efforts of State and local government, and I know that at least one 

of the witnesses today has an idea to help improve the situation 

when parents claim conflicting custody orders. 

One idea that will come up today is the use of the IRS data to 

possibly locate missing children. The Finance Committee will ultimately resolve that question. It is often said that if something can 

be done that might possibly rescue one missing child, that ought 

to be done. 

I certainly want to provide all sensible help to law enforcement 

to find missing children. But even well-meaning proposals can implicate other important values that need to be considered. We will 

do our best, and I am pleased that we do have witnesses today who 

will bring insight to the reasons for confidentiality of tax returns 

and the practical realities that might be affected by a change in tax 

confidentiality rules. And, Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to put in the record a letter from the Joint Committee on Taxation on this very subject. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Without objection, that will be included in 

the record. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Thank you very much. 

[The letter appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you, Senator Grassley. 

Senator Blumenthal, if you want to say a few words 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and I want to begin by thanking Senator Klobuchar for being 

such a champion on this issue and adding so much by having this 

5 

hearing, but even more important, through the bill that she has introduced, which I will be very proud to cosponsor, and for the work 

that she is doing in Minnesota. And I thank the folks who are here 

to enlighten us because each of them has really done such tremendous work in this area, and I am very proud to say I have worked 

with Mr. Allen and his work at the National Center for Missing 

and Exploited Children as attorney general, and I know the high 

regard and respect that attorneys general have for him and have 

had for him in the work that we have done on MySpace and 

Facebook and Craigslist and a number of other of the social networking sites. 

I guess I would just say that this kind of reform falls into the 

area of sort of common sense. As Mr. Allen himself said in a New 

York Times article in November of 2010, it is one of those areas 

where you would hope that common sense would prevail. And I 

think that this measure is one of common sense. It makes eminent 

good law enforcement sense that State and Federal investigators 

should be able to share this kind of information, protecting the privacy concerns that legitimately have to be taken into account. We 

know why there are restrictions on the IRS sharing information 

that date from the Watergate days. But those kinds of concerns can 

be surmounted in a process that respects them and the rights of 

individuals whose information may be shared. 

So I look forward to this hearing, and again, my thanks to the 

Chairman for her very good work on this issue. Thank you, Madam 

Chairman. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you very much. 

Now we are going to swear in the witnesses here, so if you could 

stand. Do you affirm that the testimony you are about to give before the Committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 

but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. PERKINS. I do. 

Ms. WETTERLING. I do. 

Mr. ALLEN. I do. 

Mr. KEIGHTLEY. I do. 

Ms. PIRNAT. I do. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you. We are pleased to be joined 

today by, first of all, Kevin Perkins, who is the Assistant Director 

of the Criminal Investigative Division of the FBI and who has been 

in law enforcement for 25 years. You do not look that old. 

Second, we have Patty Wetterling, who co-founded the Jacob 

Wetterling Resource Center in 1990 and who has been an advocate 

for families of missing and exploited children for more than two 

decades. And it is truly an honor to have Patty here from my home 

State. 

We have Ernie Allen, who Senator Blumenthal just commended, 

who is the president and CEO of the National Center for Missing 

and Exploited Children. He is an expert in issues relating to missing and exploited children and has run one of the best respected 

private nonprofit organizations in the country since 1989. 

We also have James Keightley here with us today. He is the 

founder of Keightley & Ashner and a 27-year veteran of the IRS 

General Counsel’s Office. 

6 

And then, finally, we have Detective Thea Pirnat who works in 

the Fairfax County Police Department’s Child Exploitation Unit. 

I thank you, all of you, for arranging your schedules to be with 

us here today on this important topic. Each of you has 5 minutes, 

and we will begin with Assistant Director Perkins. 

STATEMENT OF KEVIN L. PERKINS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, 

CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE DIVISION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF 

INVESTIGATION, WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Mr. PERKINS. Good morning, Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Grassley, and distinguished members of the Committee. I am 

very pleased to be here with you today to discuss the FBI’s efforts 

to combat crimes against children. 

Through our Child Abduction Rapid Deployment Teams, our Innocence Lost National Initiative, the FBI and its partners are 

working to make our world a safer place for our children. 

When every minute counts, the FBI’s Child Abduction Rapid Deployment team, or CARD team, program provides a quick and effective response. 

CARD teams consist of highly trained investigators with significant experience and expertise working non-family child abduction 

matters. These teams are capable of quickly establishing an onsite 

command post to centralize investigative efforts and operations. In 

addition, they bring national and international lead coverage, sophisticated evidence response capacities, and are adept at implementing the FBI’s Child Abduction Response Plan, a best practice, 

to guide investigative efforts. Representatives from the Behavioral 

Analysis Unit provide onsite interview and media strategies to 

round out the investigative effort. 

Over the past 4 years, these teams have deployed 65 times, during which 70 children went missing. Of those 70 children, we were 

able to recover 27 of them alive. Unfortunately, 12 of them remain 

missing to this day. And in those cases where children remain 

missing, the CARD team and our evidence response teams provide 

forensic support for our local law enforcement partners and their 

prosecutors throughout the search for those children. 

In June 2003, to address the growing problem of commercial sex 

trafficking of children within the United States, the FBI joined the 

Department of Justice Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section 

and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children to 

launch the Innocence Lost National Initiative. 

Driven by intelligence and using sophisticated techniques, the 

FBI’s offices focus their resources on disrupting and dismantling 

the criminal enterprises that transport juveniles for the purposes 

of prostitution. Each of the initiative’s 41 task forces and working 

groups throughout the U.S. include Federal, State, and local law 

enforcement agencies working in tandem with the various prosecutors within the United States Attorney’s Offices. To date, operations sponsored by the initiative have resulted in over 600 Federal 

and State convictions and the location and recovery of over 1,300 

children. Investigative efforts have increasingly resulted in substantial sentences for those convicted, including six life sentences 

and numerous others ranging from 25 to 45 years in prison. 

7 

It is important to recognize that we are not alone in our efforts 

to identify victims and bring their abusers to justice. As you know, 

few crimes bring law enforcement together as quickly as an endangered child. Even when the FBI is not the lead investigative agency, we provide significant resources to our State and local partners. 

We stand shoulder to shoulder, working to locate children and 

build cases against their offenders. 

In today’s toolkit, investigators will find cutting-edge forensic 

tools such as DNA, trace evidence, impression evidence, and digital 

forensics. Through globalization, law enforcement also has the ability to quickly share information with partners the world over, and 

our outreach programs play an integral role in prevention. 

However, challenges do remain. For example, each year parents 

unlawfully abduct their own children from the custodial parent, 

leaving the left-behind parent to wonder if their child is safe and 

setting law enforcement into action to find both the abductor and 

the victim. 

The FBI works closely with our State and local law enforcement 

partners in these arduous investigations to expend and exhaust all 

resources necessary to rescue a child. But oftentimes these abductors still elude us. I look forward to continuing discussions with the 

Committee on these challenges and others. 

Today’s FBI remains vigilant in its efforts to remove offenders 

from our communities and to keep our children safe. I appreciate 

the opportunity to discuss those efforts with the Committee, and 

now I am happy to answer any questions you may have. 

Thank you, Senator. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Perkins appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you very much, Mr. Perkins. 

Ms. Wetterling. 

STATEMENT OF PATTY WETTERLING, CO-FOUNDER AND MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, JACOB WETTERLING 

RESOURCE CENTER, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 

Ms. WETTERLING. Good morning, Senator Klobuchar, Senator 

Grassley, Senator Blumenthal, and thank you, all members of the 

Senate Judiciary Committee. I want to thank Senator Klobuchar 

for inviting me to participate today to talk about my experience as 

the mother of a missing child. 

When you have a missing child, you enter a world that no one 

wants to know. Our world fell apart on October 22, 1989, when my 

son Jacob was kidnapped. He was biking home from a convenience 

store with his brother and his friend Aaron when they were confronted by a masked gunman a half a mile from our house. Although I had been a stay-at-home mom, and my husband and I 

knew a lot about things, all kinds of things related to children, we 

knew nothing about how to proceed in this situation. 

The response from law enforcement was phenomenal. The FBI 

headed our search, but worked alongside the Minnesota Bureau of 

Criminal Apprehension, our BCA, the St. Joseph Police Department, the Stearns County Sheriff’s Department, and the Tri-County Major Crimes Unit. As a parent, it was all very confusing. I did 

not understand the different jurisdictions—and I really did not 

8 

care. All I wanted to know was: Are you working together? Are you 

part of the team? 

We had help and support from so many places: other agencies, 

law enforcement from across the State, the National Center for 

Missing and Exploited Children, the National Guard, search dogs, 

horses, helicopters, and Congressional leaders. Minnesota Senators 

David Durenberger and Rudy Boschwitz included Jacob’s photo on 

their mailings to constituents. And even the IRS has circulated Jacob’s and other missing children’s photos in their tax booklets. That 

is the response we need for every missing child. 

After Jacob’s abduction, we started a parent-to-parent mentoring 

program called Team HOPE, and it was there that I met hundreds 

of searching parents—including parents who had lost their child 

through family abduction. I learned that so often these parents do 

not receive quite as much support as those with non-family abductions. I learned about the trauma of children who were parentally 

abducted. Eventually, many of these children grow up and find 

their searching parents, and they can speak painfully of the many 

challenges that they continue to face because of that abduction. 

The bottom line is: You cannot steal children. 

An abducted child has everyone taken from them. They lose their 

other parent and sometimes siblings, their homes, their pets, their 

toys, their friends and relatives, their teachers. Everything familiar 

about their lives is gone. Sometimes they are told their other parent is dead. They live in isolation, in sadness, and in fear. They live 

a lie. 

In both types of abductions, we always have felt that someone 

knows where our children are, and we hope and pray that someday 

that person will come forward, and any additional piece of information that might bring our children home is welcome. 

In the case of family abductions, there is a Government agency 

that may have additional information, and that is the IRS. We 

know that law enforcement needs to work together, and I believe 

that there is a solution to this gap in the search. 

It needs to be fixed. All searching parents want to know that everybody is working together and reinforcing that message that you 

cannot steal children, not your own and not someone else’s. 

I know Senator Klobuchar has introduced the Access to Information about Missing Children Act to help law enforcement get limited taxpayer identity information from the IRS. I am supportive 

of all efforts to give Government agencies the authority they need 

to share information with law enforcement in these cases. I know 

personally how critical it is, the information sharing, between Federal, State, and local law enforcement. 

As a country, we are getting better and better at responding, 

thanks to things like the AMBER Alerts, better training of law enforcement, and we can all thank the National Center for Missing 

and Exploited Children for their steadfast commitment to our children and their high recovery rate of finding children. 

I know that somebody knows something, and I will fight always 

for the world that Jacob believed in. It is a world that knows that 

there are more good people than bad, and that when good people 

pull together, amazing things happen. I am grateful for all of you 

9 

good people pulling together, seeking to address this hole in the 

search for missing children. 

You can have a tremendous impact by ensuring that all agencies 

are able to work together to find our children. Again, we need to 

make a clear statement that you cannot steal children, not your 

own and not someone else’s. 

As Senator Grassley said, if this legislation can save just one 

child and that child is yours, you will know that it is worth it. 

Thank you for inviting me to testify. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Wetterling appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you very much. 

Ernie Allen. 

STATEMENT OF ERNIE ALLEN, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING AND EXPLOITED CHILDREN, ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA 

Mr. ALLEN. Madam Chairman, Senator Grassley, Senator 

Blumenthal: In 2007, the Treasury Department’s Inspector General 

for Tax Administration conducted a study using the National Center’s family abduction cases. The IG analyzed containing Social Security numbers for missing children and alleged abductors to identify new addresses—addresses that were different from where the 

child and the abductor lived at the time of the abduction. 

Senator Klobuchar, as you pointed out, 34 percent of the abductors’ addresses were found by the IG in tax information, and in addition to that, nearly half of the missing children were listed in 

those tax forms. So we found new addresses for 46 percent of the 

missing children in the sample. 

We alerted the FBI so it could request disclosure under 26 U.S.C. 

6103 and recover the children. To our knowledge, the new addresses in the IRS database have never been disclosed. The barrier, as 

you point out, is privacy law. 

Now, let me emphasize, like all of you, that we support strong 

protections against the misuse of confidential taxpayer information. 

Yet there are 22 exceptions in 6103 allowing the IRS to turn over 

information in child support cases, for the repayment of student 

loans, to help Federal agencies determine whether an applicant 

qualifies for benefits, and 19 additional exceptions. Surely missing 

and exploited children warrant such an exception. And the taxpayers in question here are fugitives with felony warrants issued 

for the arrest. 

Current law forbids the IRS from turning over data from tax returns unless a parental abduction is being investigated as a Federal crime and a U.S. district judge orders the information released. But most parental abductions are investigated by State and 

local authorities, and even when the FBI does intervene, requests 

for IRS data are rarely granted. 

The problem is exacerbated by skepticism about parental abductions. The kid is with a parent. How bad can it be? Well, as Patty 

pointed out, it can be pretty bad. These kids suffer real harm, social, emotional harm. And even some judges do not view parental 

abduction as very serious, feeling that it is better suited for family 

court rather than criminal court. Yet these abductions are 

10 

criminalized under Federal law and the laws of every State. Congress recognized the severity of these crimes when it passed the 

Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act of 1980. And I realize that it 

may seem far-fetched, as you pointed out, that an abductor with 

felony warrants would include detailed information about himself 

and his victim on tax returns. Yet the IG’s pilot demonstrates that 

many do just that. 

Let me mention one other scenario briefly in which access to 

such data is essential. Although not typical missing child cases, 

some child pornography victims are missing in that they have not 

told anyone about their abuse, and as a result have little chance 

of being identified and rescued. At the National Center’s Child Victim Identification Program, our analysts review 250,000 images 

and videos each week in the effort to identify and rescue children. 

Most of the victims are abused by a parent or someone who knows 

them. But we believe there are thousands of hidden victims, sexually exploited children who are unknown and will continue to suffer 

until they are located. Access to IRS information is vital in enabling law enforcement to identify and rescue these victims. One 

quick example. 

Our staff recently saw many images of one little girl. In some of 

them a small plaque was visible on the wall with a first name and 

a date. Surmising that this might be the victim’s first name and 

birth date, we alerted Federal law enforcement which served legal 

process on the Social Security administration and obtained addresses of girls born on that date with that same first name. The 

information provided was current as of the date of the Social Security application, but not current in terms of where the child was 

currently living. This required law enforcement to seek current address information. Federal prosecutors sought an ex parte order 

from a judge and obtained up-to-date address information from the 

IRS. As a result, law enforcement identified and rescued the child. 

It worked, but it was complicated and time-consuming. 

Senator Klobuchar, the Treasury IG has confirmed that the IRS 

database contains information that will enable us to find and rescue many more children. We believe that the law should be modified to allow for the disclosure of this information to law enforcement in missing and exploited child cases. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Allen appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you very, very much. 

Mr. Keightley. 

STATEMENT OF JAMES KEIGHTLEY, PARTNER, KEIGHTLEY & 

ASHNER LLP, WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Mr. KEIGHTLEY. Senator Klobuchar, Senator Blumenthal, it is a 

pleasure to be here today. My name is Jim Keightley, and the reason I am here—I am really a pension lawyer by current background and do a great deal of work with defined benefit pension 

plans. I was general counsel at the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation for 10 years. And even there I encountered disclosure 

problems with the Internal Revenue Service, so I have been on 

11 

both sides of this issue, either giving it out or trying to get it from 

the IRS. 

I am not going to read my testimony. I am going to try and go 

through and just hit the highlights of what is going on. 

I think everybody has come to the conclusion that the IRS really 

does not have the authority to cooperate directly and fully in these 

requests. The reason for that, for people who do not know the history, was that in 1976 the Congress took away from the executive 

branch the authority to determine who could receive tax information. And when they did that, they enacted what is now known as 

Code Section 6103. It is probably one of the longest code sections 

in the Internal Revenue Code. When I just printed it out recently, 

it was 26 pages long. 

Originally, it was intended to limit disclosure almost only to the 

Internal Revenue Service. I think that was consciously done to 

build a wall around the Internal Revenue Service, for a number of 

administrative reasons. 

It was intended to be the comprehensive and exclusive disclosure 

provisions. Tax information it covers everything from White House 

disclosures to Congressional committees to the Joint Committee on 

Taxation. It really is quite thorough. 

Its definition of ‘‘tax information’’ is dramatically broad. It includes name and address, all sorts of different little things. It even 

covers investigative disclosures by an agent who goes out and, in 

order to obtain information, an agent has to say who he is investigating, what transaction he is interested in looking at. So it is 

comprehensive. In addition to being the exclusive way to do it, they 

also put in safeguard requirements. 

Finally, just to make sure people took it really seriously, they 

clarified the criminal provisions and ended up putting in civil damage provisions, which did not exist prior to that time. So it was basically limited to tax administration as I say, intentionally. 

Now, there is this policy tension which Congress has had to deal 

with as it has moved through these various provisions with the 

tension between a voluntary tax system where we are coercing and 

forcing people to file tax returns and to whom and when do we give 

tax information out. 

So that is the issue. I am sure Senator Grassley on the Finance 

Committee has had to thrash with that issue in many cases. 

My personal recommendation—and I am fully supportive of the 

idea that some solution has to be figured out here One point I want 

to clarify was why does an abducting parent fill a tax return. Well, 

one, if you do not file a tax return and you are working and you 

have income, the IRS is sooner or later going to get a 1099 or a 

W–2 and they are going to say—Where are you? What are you 

doing? So you are going to get caught. In addition, you get the 

earned income tax credit, you get the dependency deduction. You 

also may have child care deductions. So it is perfectly rational for 

a person who is not a complete Lindbergh-type kidnapper to file a 

tax return and try and get the benefits of the finances for the benefit of the child and whatever unit they are currently -you know, 

they are a family unit—supporting at that time. 

My personal recommendation—and I have not had a chance to 

review all the proposed legislation that has been put out—would be 

12 

to allow a disclosure by the SSA. There is currently a provision for 

the Social Security Administration to disclose to State and local 

child support agencies. It seems to me that locating these people 

is the most important thing, whether they deduct the child or not 

on the return. So there is a provision that allows disclosure for 

child support purposes, but I think that could be expanded. The 

reason I try and keep it tied to the 6103 provision is it also allows 

the recordkeeping and safeguarding provisions that are currently 

in existence in the Social Security situation to be available. 

Now, I guess my bottom line is I think that narrow solution 

should be adequate. It should cover the location of just anybody 

who are people are looking for. And the idea that they did or did 

not deduct them on the tax return is not terribly important to finding the people you are looking for here. And another solution might 

entail a much greater disclosure and intrusion into the confidentiality of tax information. 

So, with that, that is where I am coming out, and it is a pleasure 

to be here. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Keightley appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you very much, Mr. Keightley. 

Ms.Pirnat. 

Ms. PIRNAT. Detective Pirnat. 

STATEMENT OF THEA M. PIRNAT, DETECTIVE, FAIRFAX COUNTY POLICE, CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS BUREAU, CHILD EXPLOITATION UNIT, FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA 

Ms. PIRNAT. Senator Klobuchar and Senator Blumenthal, thank 

you very much for allowing me to be here. I am here obviously because I am local law enforcement, and these are the type of cases 

that I particularly investigate: parental abductions and missing juveniles. And I am fortunate enough to work for a police department 

that has more resources than most. We have over 1,400 sworn officers in addition to patrol and investigative personnel. We have our 

own computer forensics and crime scene units; our own helicopter 

and K–9 unit, complete with bloodhounds; a marine patrol unit and 

even a dive team, just to name a few. 

We are conveniently located just outside of Washington, D.C., 

giving us easy access to multiple Federal law enforcement agencies 

and invaluable resources like the National Center for Missing and 

Exploited Children. This affords us the opportunity to secure convenient and top-notch training and to establish positive multi-agency working relationships. 

Even with all these resources, we still cannot always locate every 

missing child in a timely manner. In some sad cases, we cannot locate them at all. Time is the enemy in cases involving missing and 

abducted children. The longer a child is unaccounted for, the more 

likely that they are being harmed. The most important thing we 

can do is recover these children and as quickly as possible. 

Every detective in my unit dreads the occasional notice we get 

about an unidentified young body being found. We are asked for information on our active missing juvenile cases that may match the 

description of the unknown remains. We all understand the importance of being able to identify the body for what is likely now a 

13 

homicide investigation. However, we never want to be a detective 

whose missing juvenile case is closed in that manner. 

At the end of our shifts, we already wondering if there is another 

phone call we should make, another location we should check, or 

another court order we should write before we head home that 

night. 

We do carry these cases with us on a personal level. I do not 

know any career law enforcement officer that does not have a case 

or perhaps several cases that will haunt them for the rest of their 

lives. That is especially true for investigators that work cases involving crimes against children. There are horrible images I can 

still see, awful sounds I can still hear, and tragic stories I will 

never forget. 

There is no tool that local law enforcement is not willing to learn 

and use if given lawful access. We want to find missing children, 

and we want to find them without any delay. We are too much 

aware of what happens to them when they are not located and not 

located quickly. 

I encourage you to support any and all measures that provide 

local law enforcement with access to information that would help 

us recover our missing and abducted children. 

I am thrilled by the pending bill to allow IRS to release information to local law enforcement on abducted children being claimed 

as dependents and hope that moves forward successfully. That is 

the type of measure that we truly do need. We have a situation 

where we have in parental abductions known victims with known 

offenders and known addresses. I see no reason why we not want 

to identify them and make for happy endings possibly in those 

cases. 

I am encouraging you to continue to find ways to share information that may already be at the Federal level with local law enforcement, such as flight and other travel itineraries. Even though 

we cooperate with Federal agencies, there is sometimes a delay as 

we wait for callbacks and confirmation that our case meets their 

investigative criteria. 

I also encourage you to facilitate methods for local law enforcement and courts to share information with each other, such as implement a nationwide child custody database. Parental abductions—they often continue to debate child custody and they will 

continue to file child custody orders in different jurisdictions which 

essentially muddies the water in our criminal investigation when 

we do make recoveries. 

In closing, I would like to thank you for taking testimony on this 

important issue and your continued leadership and assistance to 

local law enforcement. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Pirnat appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you so much, Detective. 

I also want to put in the record a statement by Senator Leahy, 

which will be included in the record, no objections. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Leahy appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Also the article that was in the New York 

Times November 12, 2010, which I referenced as well as Senator 

14 

Blumenthal, by David Kocieniewski about this issue. A thorough 

report. 

[The article appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. I wanted to start our questions here with 

you, Mr. Perkins, and we talked about, I think, the Federal kidnapping law came about because of the Lindbergh baby kidnapping 

case, that that was a driving force behind the passage of that act, 

which, of course, makes transporting kidnapping victims over State 

lines a Federal offense. I guess my first question was what Mr. 

Keightley referred to, that these cases are not like Lindbergh-like 

cases with strangers. But could you explain how some of these family abductions can be just as plotted out and manipulative and difficult to solve as well as very heart-breaking for the families as any 

other stranger abduction? 

Mr. PERKINS. Yes, Senator. Thanks. Exactly, and I think it goes 

to some of the testimony of Ms. Wetterling talking about any child 

going missing. You are exactly right. It causes tremendous heartache, concern, and tragedy for the family who has lost a child, 

whether it is a stranger abduction or whether it is a parental abduction. There is on many occasions significant advance plotting to 

make this happen. 

You have to begin with the premise initially that the parent taking the child, the case has already been adjudicated in a court and 

custody has been established for specific reasons. So there are reasons why that parent does not have custodial rights at that point 

in time. When that child is taken away, it totally disrupts that 

child’s life, as has been mentioned earlier, and it sets into motion 

a number of different issues for law enforcement. 

In our particular case, the FBI becomes involved in these types 

of investigations more often than not through invitation from State 

and local law enforcement. We can bring to bear a number of forensic techniques, advanced investigative and laboratory processes. We 

also bring in, obviously, the international scope. 

There is a Federal statute that allows us to become involved in 

one of these cases where—I am sorry, ma’am. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Just there are time constraints here. Do 

you know, are a lot of these cases handled by local law enforcement? I am just picturing my own life when I was county attorney 

and you guys got really busy with huge money cases and thefts. I 

mean, are still most of these cases handled on the local level? 

Mr. PERKINS. The vast majority of these cases are initially handled at the State and local level. That is where the 911 call comes 

in when your child goes missing, and that is where the immediate 

call should be. But based upon requests from the State and local 

law enforcement or specific Federal violations where the FBI can 

become involved, we involve ourselves in any missing child where 

there is a potential danger to the child, yes. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. Keightley mentioned this existing part 

of the code. First of all, I was actually kind of surprised that there 

are these 22 exceptions that Mr. Allen discussed for things like student loans. I just do not understand why we would say it is OK 

to have those exceptions for student loans to track them down but 

not for missing children, and that is what bothers me here. But Mr. 

Keightley did raise the issue that there is an exception for child 

15 

support orders, and it would seem to me—do you know what percentage of these families have outstanding child support orders 

where we could use that? I do not quite understand why we would 

not just slightly tweak that to include missing children information 

as opposed to just saying, well, part of them have child support orders so why don’t we use that. 

Mr. PERKINS. I think part of what you just mentioned would be 

an excellent solution to where if we could potentially tweak that 

exception to allow State, local, and Federal law enforcement to 

have access to the address information, and that is really all we 

are looking for here. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. You do not need to see what their taxes are 

or anything. 

Mr. PERKINS. No. We need the latest and greatest and most accurate address for the offender. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. And do you know what percentage would 

have these standing child support obligations? 

Mr. PERKINS. No, ma’am, I do not have that percentage, but I 

could find that for you. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Mr. Allen? Mr. Keightley? 

Mr. KEIGHTLEY. Could I make a comment on that? One of the 

reasons I was pushing toward Social Security, I believe that information would be more quickly available. If you wait for somebody 

to file a tax return, on extension until the IRS puts it all in the 

computer base and all of that, it can be 18 months or more until 

it is really easily available. So one of the advantages I did not mention was with Social Security is that I think it would be more 

quickly available. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Maybe we can do both. 

Mr. Allen. 

Mr. ALLEN. Yes, a couple of points. Our sense is that very few 

of these cases have child support orders. I am not sure we have 

data on that, but the nature of the parental abduction case is that 

research shows that in 80 percent of them, the motivation is anger 

or revenge. In many of these cases, the child is taken before there 

is a custody order. So many of the victim parents, the left-behind 

parents, really do not think their ex-spouse would do that and are 

not prepared to deal with it. 

So, ultimately, I think it is really important that there be a very 

specific exception or some other statutory authorization to deal 

with these unique kinds of cases. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. Very good. My time is up here. I am 

going to turn it over to Senator Grassley. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Keightley, I am going to ask you a question that not only the 

Judiciary Committee but the Finance Committee ought to be very 

interested in your answer. Mr. Allen argues for an exception to the 

Tax Code privacy rules to help locate missing children. He states 

that Congress must examine whether a fugitive’s privacy is more 

important than a child’s safety. Understandably, Mr. Allen’s focus 

is the safety of the child, and I think we all agree with that sort 

of a pronouncement. 

However, it is not just an abductor’s privacy that is at stake. 

There may also be criminal investigations of the abductor. We may 

16 

also set a precedent that may lead to other requests to relax the 

IRS data. There have already been some exceptions, admittedly. In 

addition, I am concerned about a government agency, in this case 

the IRS, being the largest repository of data on individuals. 

So would you, Mr. Keightley, please provide your thoughts on the 

use of IRS data in criminal investigations. Also, what are your 

thoughts on the precedent this sets for other similar uses? 

Mr. KEIGHTLEY. Thank you, Senator Grassley. In my testimony, 

I did try and draw the distinction—and it is true—that there is no 

broad access to State and local criminal investigators. But I do 

think in this case—and I think Senator Klobuchar’s point is correct—that if the Congress has gone so far as to allow access to information for child support, it would seem to me not too big a jump 

to say that the Tax Code should allow access for purposes of locating and providing assistance just in locating. And I also narrowly 

tried to confine my suggestion not to the whole tax return, to say 

all we are doing really is best address information. 

So I understand the tension between tax administration and various disclosures because we force people to file these tax returns. 

We force great amounts of information out of them. And we need 

to strike that balance so that people continue to file and have confidence in the confidentiality provisions. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Just my last question would be to Mr. Allen. 

You have testified today and also before the Sentencing Commission about the harms caused by possession of child pornography. 

Disturbingly to me, the Sentencing Commission and too many Federal judges seem to think that the possession of child pornography 

is not a serious offense that deserves real punishment. Instead, 

they seem to think it involves an offender who suffers from a mental illness that requires treatment. 

So please comment on the accuracy of that view and what Congress should do in light of the weak sentences now being imposed 

for the possession of child pornography. 

Mr. ALLEN. Senator Grassley, a couple of thoughts. 

The Sentencing Commission is currently re-examining guidelines. We are supportive of a re-examination of the guidelines. 

Based on the Booker decision of the Supreme Court a few years 

ago, guidelines are now advisory rather than controlling. Congress 

has not enacted a mandatory minimum sentence for the possession 

of child pornography. More than half of current sentences for the 

possession of child pornography depart below the minimum of the 

guideline. The Justice Department’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section has done an excellent analysis of sentencing patterns. We do not support disparity in sentencing, but the sentences 

for child pornography possession are not more extreme than sentences for contact offenses. 

The issue—and we have been working with the Sentencing Commission on this—is to ensure that criteria for enhancing sentences 

from 10, 12 years ago, like the use of a computer, are re-examined 

because all of this content now involves the use of a computer. 

The answer to your question is we are concerned that there are 

growing numbers of minimal sentences, there are growing numbers 

of judges who are talking about mere possession of child pornography. This is an issue that has nothing to do with free speech. 

17 

These are crime scene photos. These are images of the sexual abuse 

of a child. We think this is a serious crime and it needs to be dealt 

with seriously. 

Senator GRASSLEY. I did not think I would have time for a last 

question, but this involves Federal judges making tax return information available to law enforcement in a parental abduction case 

if requested. Few judges do this. Any of you, could you speak to the 

point, how well do you think the Federal judges have used their 

current authority to order IRS to make tax return information 

available? And what do you think can be done to raise their awareness that so many parental abductions are violent crimes? 

Mr. KEIGHTLEY. I tried to get some information on the case that 

was alluded to in the newspaper article, and I was unable to find 

any detail on it. So I am not sure what the answer to that question 

is, Senator. 

Senator GRASSLEY. OK. Do any of you have an answer? If you 

do not, that is OK. Or if you can supply for an answer in writing, 

that would be OK. 

Ms. WETTERLING. Senator Grassley, I would just like to say that 

addressing this makes the statement that it is illegal to abduct 

children, and so it is a baseline of awareness for everyone out 

there. And I think that judges will be receptive to the opportunity, 

when law enforcement makes the request, that there will be a process for that to be honored in a timely fashion. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Thank you. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. Thank you very much, Senator Grassley. 

Senator Blumenthal. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

I think to give some context to the line of questioning that Senator Grassley has been very correctly and well pursuing, part of the 

problem here is the priority that law enforcement and judges give 

to this crime. I can remember as United States Attorney back in 

the late 1970’s when the FBI and, frankly, Federal prosecutors and 

even local prosecutors gave very little priority to this crime because 

it was regarded as purely a domestic dispute and not really worthy 

of the criminal justice apparatus. So I want to commend both the 

FBI and Detective Pirnat, your office and other local and State offices around the country, for the heightened priority you have given 

it, but at the same time really again pursue the line of questioning 

that has been raised here about maintaining and even enhancing 

the priority. Because even with this information, even knowing 

where the abductor lives and works, there still has to be investigation and there still has to be a prosecution, and that requires resources. 

So my question to Mr. Perkins and Ms. Pirnat is: Do you believe 

that the resources now are sufficient? And do you think they can 

and should be increased? 

Mr. PERKINS. Thank you, Senator, for the very good question on 

these areas. In a time of limited resources, in a time when we are 

struggling with our own budgetary resources to meet the various 

priorities, you are correct, this has risen in its level of priority. 

As the Assistant Director of the Criminal Division I have almost 

50,000 pending criminal investigations across the United States in 

18 

a variety of areas. As a parent, as a parent of two children, nothing 

surpasses for me personally the priority of a child going missing. 

That is my own personal belief on this. But it is also one that is 

shared within the Bureau and within the Department. 

As far as resource, every day we work to get the best and most 

efficient means we can to investigate these cases. The issue at 

hand here today, talking about a more efficient, a quicker way of 

getting information to rescue these children is really the focus of 

what I am working on, trying to get this information in a quicker 

manner, a more efficient way to use the resources that we have. 

Sure, more resources are always better, but my job is to use 

those resources as efficiently as I can and make the best use of 

them, and that is what we are trying to do here today. 

Ms. PIRNAT. I do believe that with limited resources we are doing 

the best we can. Unfortunately, sometimes these cases are getting 

screened out by the first responder because there is a misunderstanding by the officer responding about a parental abduction, 

whether or not it is actually a crime or a civil matter. We constantly do training to make sure we are getting the right information out there. 

When it comes time for prosecution, because of the number of 

cases that are being prosecuted, those are the cases that are getting bumped down. I did have a parental abduction where both the 

grandmother and the father took the children to California. I was 

able to make a successful recovery. And when it came time for 

court, they dropped it down to a misdemeanor for the father, and 

for the grandmother they actually dropped it down to a trespassing, of all things. And I was very disappointed with that outcome. But it is because they prioritize their cases, and those are 

not getting the type of attention I think they should be as far as 

the potential damage to the children. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. And let me ask another question, and, by 

the way, I think this issue is hugely important because the reason, 

the main reason in my view, that the abductor puts this information on a tax return is he does not believe anybody cares. He does 

not believe anybody will follow up on it, even if there is disclosure. 

And he probably assumes there will be because he does not know 

about this 26-page section in the IRS Code. He just kind of thinks 

he is halfway across the country or all the way across the country, 

and no one is going to track him down. And that is why the priority 

given to this serious felony crime has to be maintained and increased 

I am out of time, but I would like to know from all of you what 

information you feel should be provided, whether it is the location 

on the tax return that is given, the employer. What specific information should be disclosable? Because I think that is important, 

and I am not sure that the legislation will go into that detail. But 

I think knowing from you what specific information should be 

disclosable I think would be useful to the Committee. 

Thank you. 

Mr. KEIGHTLEY. I think that is a very important point because, 

as Senator Grassley pointed out, the tension between confidentiality and whatever is needed by the investigators, it should be the 

19 

narrowest access to information that serves their purposes. As I 

said, that needs to be thought through. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. And, Senator Blumenthal, I am going 

to have the witnesses answer that in writing for us because the 

vote has been called, if that is all right with you. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Sure. I expected that would be the case, 

and I thank you in advance for your answers. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. And we will get that information. 

[The questions appear under questions and answers.] 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. It seems clear to me that a lot of the witnesses have pointed to the address information as the key and an 

acknowledgment of these privacy concerns. But I just wanted to 

just finish up here with just a few concluding questions, and that 

would be, first of all of Ms. Wetterling. You know, you have come 

into countless contacts with families who have suffered both 

stranger and family abductions. What do you believe to be the biggest difference between the stranger abduction cases and the family abduction cases? 

Ms. WETTERLING. It is the level of support from community, from 

law enforcement, from Federal agencies. And what is most important to every family is that there is this collective energy that we 

are all holding hands and combing this country to find our child. 

And I think that this is one of the ways that we are closing a gap. 

As we discover holes in the process, we need to fill them. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK, very good. 

Then for our detective there, I thought that was a good example 

that you had of those kinds of cases. But just maybe following up 

on Senator Blumenthal’s question, for someone who is on the front 

line there dealing with those cases, you know, having to have limited resources, what information would be most helpful to have if 

you think there is a family abduction and you cannot find the person? 

Ms. PIRNAT. Well, in addition to the actual addresses, I would 

say the employer information with the employer address and also 

phone numbers and e-mail addresses would be helpful for us because that physical address they provide may not be the most accurate. So anything else that we could have to actually track them 

down would be great. We do not need to know income or anything 

along those lines. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. And how does it feel to hear about the 

study that Mr. Allen worked on that showed that a third of these 

family abductions actually are filing some kind of information and 

half of those actually have updated addresses? 

Ms. PIRNAT. I am not surprised just because of the mentality of 

the parental abductors that they are entitled to the children. So 

that information is out there, and they are continuing to file tax 

returns, and that information could successfully lead to us being 

able to close out our cases. I just see no reason why we would not 

move forward with sharing that so that we can hopefully, like I 

said, reunite some families. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Any closing remarks, Mr. Allen, since you 

have been spending a lot of time on this? 

Mr. ALLEN. I think the only point in addition I would want to 

make in response to Senator Blumenthal’s point is that in a time 

20 

of scarce resources, in a time when numbers are challenged, when 

there are not going to be the numbers of agents or police officers 

that we have had in the past, it is more important than ever that 

the police that are there have the kinds of tools and information 

to find these kids and be able to move quickly. This is just basic 

management that will enable them to maximize the impact of the 

resources we have. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. All right. Well, I want to thank all the witnesses. It has actually been a very helpful hearing, and I thank 

you, Mr. Keightley, for your tax expertise and coming into our 

criminal hearing with that piece of it, and everyone’s willingness 

to acknowledge that we are balancing these privacy concerns with 

the enormous need to solve these cases. And thank you, Patty 

Wetterling, for the passion you bring to this issue. That has motivated me to get involved and stay involved because I truly believe 

there has got to be a way to work this one out. I know it is important to collect those student loans, and right now we are dealing 

with a time in government budgets that we have to do everything. 

But here we have something where there are already exceptions, 

if we could just make some changes to get this information so Mr. 

Perkins and his agents and some of the local people have it. I am 

just so aware of these limitations with some proposals out there 

with cutting 4,000 FBI agents, which I do not think will come to 

fruition. We have got to do everything we can to make this as efficient as possible while still protecting privacy rights. 

So I want to thank you all. The record will remain open for 2 

weeks, and we will be following up with you on this important 

issue and this important bill. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:09 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

[Questions and answers and submissions for the record follow.] 

21 


Insert offset folio 21 here 75919.001
22 


Insert offset folio 22 here 75919.002
23 


Insert offset folio 23 here 75919.003
24 


Insert offset folio 24 here 75919.004
25 


Insert offset folio 25 here 75919.005
26 


Insert offset folio 26 here 75919.006
27 


Insert offset folio 27 here 75919.007
28 


Insert offset folio 28 here 75919.008
29 


Insert offset folio 29 here 75919.009
30 


Insert offset folio 30 here 75919.010
31 


Insert offset folio 31 here 75919.011
32 


Insert offset folio 32 here 75919.012
33 


Insert offset folio 33 here 75919.013
34 


Insert offset folio 34 here 75919.014
35 


Insert offset folio 35 here 75919.015
36 


Insert offset folio 36 here 75919.016
37 


Insert offset folio 37 here 75919.017
38 


Insert offset folio 38 here 75919.018
39 


Insert offset folio 39 here 75919.019
40 


Insert offset folio 40 here 75919.020
41 


Insert offset folio 41 here 75919.021
42 


Insert offset folio 42 here 75919.022
43 


Insert offset folio 43 here 75919.023
44 


Insert offset folio 44 here 75919.024
45 


Insert offset folio 45 here 75919.025
46 


Insert offset folio 46 here 75919.026
47 


Insert offset folio 47 here 75919.027
48 


Insert offset folio 48 here 75919.028
49 


Insert offset folio 49 here 75919.029
50 


Insert offset folio 50 here 75919.030
51 


Insert offset folio 51 here 75919.031
52 


Insert offset folio 52 here 75919.032
53 


Insert offset folio 53 here 75919.033
54 


Insert offset folio 54 here 75919.034
55 


Insert offset folio 55 here 75919.035
56 


Insert offset folio 56 here 75919.036
57 


Insert offset folio 57 here 75919.037
58 


Insert offset folio 58 here 75919.038
59 


Insert offset folio 59 here 75919.039
60 


Insert offset folio 60 here 75919.040
61 


Insert offset folio 61 here 75919.041
62 


Insert offset folio 62 here 75919.042
63 


Insert offset folio 63 here 75919.043
64 


Insert offset folio 64 here 75919.044
65 


Insert offset folio 65 here 75919.045
66 


Insert offset folio 66 here 75919.046
67 


Insert offset folio 67 here 75919.047
68 


Insert offset folio 68 here 75919.048
69 


Insert offset folio 69 here 75919.049
70 


Insert offset folio 70 here 75919.050
71 


Insert offset folio 71 here 75919.051
72 


Insert offset folio 72 here 75919.052
73 


Insert offset folio 73 here 75919.053
74 


Insert offset folio 74 here 75919.054
75 


Insert offset folio 75 here 75919.055
76 


Insert offset folio 76 here 75919.056
77 


Insert offset folio 77 here 75919.057
78 


Insert offset folio 78 here 75919.058
79 

Æ 


Insert offset folio 79 here 75919.059