Andrew James Torii: The Gardena Record and the Public Appeal
A note, an expected return and separate date labels.
Abstract
NamUs MP22544 places Andrew James Torii’s last contact in Gardena, California, on November 29, 2010, and describes a note about returning the following day.1
The Home and Note Account
Its narrative gives a departure window between 1 and 6 a.m. and says Andrew left his car, wallet and phone behind. The note reportedly described staying at a friend’s.1
The Gardena Police entry carries reference 10-7408 and a report-date field of July 26, 2015. That field does not establish when the family first contacted police.1
The California Profile
California’s Department of Justice profile uses November 29 as Date Last Seen and identifies the same Gardena reference, 10-7408. The matching identifier connects that profile to the registry entry.2
Its clothing and tattoo descriptions are identifying details. The profile does not supply a departure witness, a meeting location or evidence that the intended visit occurred.2
The Dated Public Appeal
A December 20, 2010 post on Angry Asian Man was already circulating an appeal for Andrew. It linked California’s official missing-person entry and a public appeal, and repeated the expected November 30 return.3
The post distinguished items reportedly left at home from items believed taken. This was a published appeal, rather than an independently verified inventory. A planned overnight stay described in a note needs corroboration before it becomes a confirmed movement in a timeline.3
Sourced Accounts and Questions
Here’s where you come in. Can you find the original report before treating the 2015 agency field as the first missing-person report?1
Can you match a new notice by the police reference before incorporating its details into your timeline?2
Can you separate the date of the December appeal from a documented observation, and trace its note account back to the original document?3
Keep the dated sources and your unanswered questions in a Research File in Almost Solved. Record what each source establishes and which document could clarify it. A family’s reported expectations and an administrative field should keep their separate meanings.
The Limits of the Public Record
The two government entries align on the contact date and police reference. Both are public summaries; neither reproduces a complete investigative timeline. Agreement on identifying fields does not fill the gaps between reported events.2
Scope and Method
The original note, initial police report and witness interviews were not inspected.
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
- NamUs MP22544, reviewed November 2, 2026.
- California DOJ, Torii profile, Gardena reference 10-7408; reviewed November 2026.
- Angry Asian Man, Torii public appeal, December 20, 2010.