The Building and the Reported Departure

NamUs MP122862 says Brixey was last seen on September 20, 2015 at an abandoned building scheduled for demolition at 26th Street and Adams Avenue in Ogden, Utah.¹ The short narrative does not identify an observer or time.

An earlier Utah BCI summary says a complainant described Brixey working with his father at the building. It reports that officers were told of a planned after-hours return with a friend to collect metal and copper, and were told the friend said Brixey left alone.² That is the agency’s indirect account of what it was told. The original statement, its date, and any recording are not supplied.

The state summary also describes a search that did not locate him and later demolition and replacement of the building.² It does not give dates or a complete search log. These statements do not establish what happened to Brixey after the reported departure.

Descriptions That Need Source Labels

NamUs lists brown hair and eyes, 6 feet 2 inches, 190 pounds, and tattoos on both shoulders.¹ The earlier BCI page’s structured fields agree with that height and weight, while its narrative gives 6 feet 1 inch and approximately 150–170 pounds.² The publication itself therefore contains differing measurements; neither set establishes when he was measured.

Ogden’s municipal listing gives a birth date of September 24, 1978 and a last-seen date of September 20, 2015.³ Those dates imply age 36. NamUs displays a missing age of 37; the earlier state summary gives 36.^1,2 The discrepancy is retained as a record issue, not a conflict between witnesses.

Separating the Disappearance from Record Creation

NamUs lists May 28, 2024 both as its case-creation date and as the agency reporting date, and gives May 7, 2026 as the webpage’s creation date.¹ The reviewed material does not explain the reporting field’s relationship to the 2015 disappearance. It cannot establish that no report existed before 2024.

The municipal listing and NamUs both use Ogden case 2015-31499.^1,3 That identifier helps match the entries; it is not a substitute for the original report or a complete chronology.

Sourced Accounts and Questions

Here’s where you come in: keep the building reference, the attributed departure account, and the later record dates as separate entries in a Research File in Almost Solved. Preserve who is speaking at each stage.

Can you find the original account behind the reported departure? A dated statement or attributable agency explanation could show precisely what the friend reported observing. The earlier public summary alone cannot turn that indirect account into a sworn statement, establish a route, or support an accusation.²

As you compare the search and demolition references, what dated documentation could establish their order? Search logs and demolition records could clarify the sequence; the state summary supplies no full chronology.²

What agency clarification could help you understand the 2024 reporting field? An explanation tied to case 2015-31499 would resolve more than assuming the database date marks the first notification.¹