Aaron Green: The Philadelphia Departure and the Conflicting Vehicle Dates
A study of the March 1994 departure account, a later vehicle discovery, and a date discrepancy that should remain visible.
Abstract
Aaron Green’s NamUs record and Charley Project profile identify a March 20, 1994 Philadelphia disappearance. Both describe a departure from a relative’s residence and a later vehicle discovery on Reed Street, but the vehicle dates do not align. This paper compares those accounts without silently correcting the official narrative or treating a planned visit as a confirmed destination.
The Departure Account
NamUs MP801 gives March 20, 1994 as Date of Last Contact and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania as the location. Its narrative places Green leaving a relative’s residence near the 2500 block of West Page Street at approximately 9:30 p.m. The missing-age field is 28.1
The Charley Project describes the same departure and says Green intended to visit a friend in South Philadelphia and return soon.2 That statement concerns a plan. The reviewed material does not establish that he reached the friend or identify a verified route between the two places.
The Vehicle Discovery
NamUs describes a black 1990 vehicle as an Infinity and says it was located in a vacant lot on Reed Street between 24th and 25th Streets. Its narrative prints the date as 03/29/04.1
The Charley Project calls the vehicle a black 1990 Nissan Infiniti and places its discovery on March 29, nine days after the disappearance. It says accounts differ over whether the car was stripped of parts or vandalized and reports no sign of Green there.2
The Date Cannot Be Silently Repaired
The NamUs narrative’s 03/29/04 differs from the nine-day interval in the Charley Project account of the 1994 disappearance. This paper preserves the literal date in the official narrative and the secondary source’s different chronology. It has not established which entry contains an error.
Neither the spelling variation in the vehicle description nor the matching Reed Street location resolves that date discrepancy. The reviewed materials do not provide a vehicle examination report or a dated recovery document. They also do not establish that the discovery location was where Green went after leaving West Page Street.
Work and the Limits of Geographic Context
The Charley Project says Green worked at TropWorld Casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey.2 That employment detail adds context beyond a list of physical identifiers. It does not establish that he travelled to Atlantic City on the night described or connect his disappearance to his workplace.
The Agency and Record History
NamUs identifies Philadelphia Police Department, 24th District (East Division), and agency case 94-22-14083. Its Date Reported field is blank. The record labels December 12, 2008 as NamUs Case Created and separately displays July 30, 2026 as a reader-level Date Created.1
The Charley Project dates its disappearance-details update to January 7, 2019 and lists NamUs, the Philadelphia Daily News and the Philadelphia Inquirer among its sources.2 The original newspaper reports were not directly reviewed here. A website update date is not another sighting or an independently obtained investigative development.
Sourced Accounts and Questions
The NamUs vehicle narrative prints 03/29/04, while the Charley Project describes a March 29 discovery nine days after the March 20, 1994 disappearance.12 That is an unresolved difference in the published chronology. The shared Reed Street reference does not establish which date is correct.
Can you find a dated police recovery record or an original news report establishing when the vehicle was found? Check the year explicitly and keep a copy of the source reference in your notes. A document tying the date to this recovery would be needed before correcting or selecting either published account.
When you compare the departure and intended visit, can you find a documented observation establishing whether Green reached the planned destination?12 The plan is not proof of arrival, and a vehicle found elsewhere does not by itself establish his route or presence at recovery.
Here’s where you come in: explore these open questions in your own Research File in Almost Solved. Start with MP801 and Philadelphia case 94-22-14083. Trace secondary claims back to their named sources where possible, distinguishing what you have read directly from an account repeated by another publication.
Conclusion
The departure account gives this record a specific time and neighborhood setting. The vehicle discovery adds a second reported place but an unresolved date conflict. A careful chronology keeps those pieces separate: a reported departure, an intended visit, and a vehicle account requiring further documentation. None alone explains Green’s subsequent whereabouts.
Scope and Method
The populated NamUs reader and Charley Project profile were reviewed November 1, 2026. NamUs displayed a temporary processing and service-delay notice. The vehicle-date and wording discrepancy remains unresolved. The secondary profile’s underlying newspaper reports, vehicle records and interviews were not directly obtained. No portrait was reused. This is a source comparison, not a complete investigative history or independent confirmation of present whereabouts.
Prepared with AI assistance. Sources and references checked against the cited public materials. This paper is an original synthesis of the identified public sources; it does not reproduce article bodies, transcripts, or an investigative file.
Footnote References
- National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs). “Missing Person / NamUs #MP801,” Aaron Green. Case-created field December 12, 2008; reader page also displays July 30, 2026. Accessed November 1, 2026.
- The Charley Project. “Aaron Green.” Disappearance details updated January 7, 2019, according to the page update note. Accessed November 1, 2026.