Merseyside Police have confirmed that remains found on the Sefton coastline in mid-July are those of missing Southport man TJay Waters, bringing to an end a six-month search that drew repeated family appeals and a series of public pleas for information. In a statement issued on Monday, the force said: “We can confirm that the body of a man was sadly found on Southport beach on Sunday, 13 July. Forensic tests have now confirmed that the body is that of TJay Waters, who was reported missing in March. His family have been updated and are being supported at this time.” The confirmation identifies the man discovered on the sands during the summer and closes the question of whether the find was linked to the missing 36-year-old, whose disappearance prompted a sustained effort to trace his movements across Southport and beyond.
Waters was reported missing in early March. In the first formal appeal, published on 17 March, Merseyside Police said they were “increasingly concerned about the welfare of 36-year-old TJay Waters from Southport,” and asked for sightings or information, noting he had last been seen on Eastbank Street in the town centre. The force circulated images, including a still released that week, and urged anyone who might have encountered him after 7 March to come forward. The appeal marked the start of an investigation that, over subsequent weeks, would expand to neighbouring areas as officers tried to verify reported sightings and reconstruct his movements.
A day later, on 18 March, the Lancashire Evening Post reported that a new CCTV image shared by police showed Waters outside Liverpool Lime Street railway station the day before he was last seen. The paper, citing police updates, repeated the last confirmed location as Eastbank Street on Friday 7 March and carried a detailed physical description released as part of the search: around 5ft 9in tall, slim build, with blond hair. The coverage recorded what officers believed he had been wearing at the time—the navy padded jacket, black tracksuit trousers and black trainers with an orange stripe that featured in the initial appeal—as well as the separate line that he might subsequently have been seen in an orange T-shirt, grey tracksuit trousers and white trainers. Those specifics underpinned the wider appeal strategy that followed, with investigators asking residents and businesses to check cameras and report any sightings that matched the description.
As days turned to weeks, Waters’s family made direct appeals for him to get in touch. On 19 April, his mother, Sandra, issued a message through the police and local media, saying: “We just want you to come home TJay and to know that you’re safe. We really miss you. If you’re reading this, please come home.” The quote, carried by community site Stand Up For Southport and reproduced by national outlets, captured the strain his relatives described as they marked each new week without contact. At that point Waters had been missing for more than six weeks and there had been no confirmed sightings beyond the early March timeline publicised by police.
Local coverage amplified the formal appeals. Stand Up For Southport, a site that frequently shares community notices and missing-person appeals in the town, carried updates alongside links to the force’s reporting pages. Social posts in neighbourhood groups circulated the police images and repeated call-outs for dash-cam or doorbell footage. The intent was to widen the net beyond the town centre to transport hubs and routes to and from the coast, in case Waters had travelled by train or on foot after being seen on Eastbank Street. None of those public leads changed the core timeline released by police, and the case remained open into early summer.
The discovery on Southport beach came on Sunday 13 July, according to Merseyside Police, which did not immediately link the find to the March disappearance pending formal analysis. In the absence of identification at the time, officers followed standard procedure, preparing the remains for forensic examination and notifying the local coroner’s office as required. Monday’s announcement confirms that the tests—completed over subsequent weeks—matched the body to Waters. The force did not give further detail about the condition of the remains or the circumstances of death, and said only that family members had been informed and were receiving support.
The police chronology highlights the interval between disappearance and discovery, and then the additional period required to complete testing and confirm identity. Waters was last seen on 7 March, according to the widely circulated appeal, and the remains were found on 13 July; confirmation was issued on 15 September. In missing-person investigations along tidal coastlines, a gap between a body being found and formal identification is not unusual, and the force’s decision to wait for laboratory confirmation before making any public attribution reflects practice adopted to avoid the distress and potential legal complications that can arise from premature announcements. In this case, Merseyside Police repeated only verifiable facts at each stage—first that a man’s body had been found, and later that forensic tests established it was Waters.
From the outset, officers anchored their appeals in the places Waters was known to have visited. Eastbank Street, a busy spine through Southport’s centre, was flagged as his last confirmed location; the image released showing him outside Liverpool Lime Street the day before he went missing suggested he had travelled into or through the city immediately prior to that. Investigators asked anyone in the town centre on the afternoon and evening of 7 March to think back to whether they had seen him, and directed those with footage to submit it through the force’s online portal. Newspapers covering the search noted the cross-border nature of the inquiry, with police saying Waters had links both to Southport and parts of Lancashire.
As the weeks passed, family and friends tried to keep the case in public view. Community pages in and around Southport reposted the police appeals, while comments beneath those posts referenced repeated checks of public spaces and travel routes. The emphasis was on visibility: keeping Waters’s image and description circulating in case a member of the public recognised him. The April message from his mother became the most widely quoted line associated with the appeal, and local outlets returned to it as the case extended into May and June.
Monday’s identification does not, on its own, answer the questions Waters’s relatives have asked since March about where he went after leaving the town centre and what happened to him in the months before his body was found. Merseyside Police did not state whether there were any suspicious circumstances surrounding the death in the announcement confirming the identification. In similar cases, police typically release further detail only when an inquest listing is made or when there are investigative reasons to disclose additional facts. For now, the formal confirmation allows the family to begin making arrangements and, if they choose, to issue their own statement in due course. The force signalled that it would not be commenting further while the family absorbs the news.
The case had attracted regional attention in March and April as officers widened the appeal radius. National and regional outlets periodically compile missing-person notices based on police press rooms and community sources, and Waters’s case appeared in those round-ups during the first month after he vanished. On 18 March, the Lancashire Evening Post piece carried the detail that the CCTV still of Waters at Lime Street had been taken the day before he was last seen and reiterated clothing and physical description; follow-up items in April through Yahoo’s regional desk echoed the mother’s message and the last confirmed movements. Those reports now form the public record of the search phase that preceded the discovery on the sands in July.
In the March appeal, police asked anyone with information to contact 101, message the force’s social media desk @MerPolCC, or use the online form on the Merseyside Police website. That call for information remained live for months as officers assessed each reported sighting. While the service did not provide running totals of incoming tips, the persistent reposting by community pages and friends suggests that the case generated a steady stream of responses even without a confirmed breakthrough.
Southport’s shoreline, which stretches past the pier and dunes toward Ainsdale and Formby, is patrolled by a combination of local officers and coastguard units. In this instance, the discovery reported by police was on Southport beach itself; the force’s announcement did not specify the precise location along the sands. The Sefton coastline’s expansive tidal range, shifting channels and sandbanks often complicate search efforts for missing persons near the water, and police forces in the region commonly coordinate with maritime agencies when appropriate. Merseyside Police’s statement on Monday did not identify any partner agencies involved in the July 13 response, limiting the update to the essentials of the find and the forensic confirmation that followed.
For the family, the identification marks a transition from uncertainty to bereavement. The mother’s April message, in which she told her son “we really miss you” and urged him to come home, became a touchstone during the months of waiting. It will now be read in a different light, as part of a record of appeals that continued until police could confirm what had happened. The force’s note that relatives are being supported is standard in communications of this kind, signalling the involvement of family liaison officers who act as a point of contact as formal processes continue.
The chronology set out publicly by police and local media is straightforward. Waters, 36, was last seen on Eastbank Street on Friday 7 March; a day-earlier image showed him outside Liverpool Lime Street; appeals from March through April brought no verified sightings; on Sunday 13 July, a man’s body was found on Southport beach; on Monday 15 September, Merseyside Police said forensic tests had confirmed the remains were Waters and notified his family. The force has not published further detail about the discovery, nor has it described the circumstances as suspicious or non-suspicious. Those points may be addressed later, depending on the coroner’s listings and any subsequent statements the family wishes to make. For now, the transition in language—from “missing” to “identified”—is the key change, closing the search and beginning the next phase of official process.
Community groups that carried his family’s messages during the search are expected to share the police update so that people who have followed the case are aware of the confirmation. Stand Up For Southport and other local pages previously amplified the mother’s appeal and linked to the force’s reporting portal; those channels, which often serve as informal notice boards for the town, typically play a role in informing residents when a case reaches this point. While social media speculation is a recurring feature of high-profile searches, the material released by police on Monday is confined to verified facts and will likely be the basis for any further reporting until additional information is authorised for release.
Police did not indicate any ongoing risk to the public or make any operational appeals in their identification notice beyond acknowledging the family’s situation. In March and April, officers asked that anyone with information on Waters’s movements contact them; there was no renewed call in the Monday update, reflecting the shift from an active missing-person inquiry to confirmed identification. If further appeals are required—for example, for witnesses who may have been on the beach on 13 July and noticed something material—those would likely be issued as separate notices. None had been published at the time of Monday’s statement.
Waters’s case unfolded in parallel with a number of other missing-person appeals in the region over the past year, but its resolution has particular resonance in Southport because of the volume of local attention it drew in the spring. The combination of a town-centre last sighting, a widely shared family message and the later coastal discovery ensured that residents followed developments closely. The police have provided few details beyond what is necessary to confirm identity and inform relatives, and there is no indication when more information might be released. That will depend on the timetables set by the relevant authorities and on the wishes of Waters’s family as they process the confirmation.
Anyone seeking official updates will find them on the Merseyside Police news portal, which on Monday carried the brief notice confirming the identification. Earlier appeals remain on the site and in local press archives, documenting the timeline from the first “increasingly concerned” message in mid-March, through the April family appeal, to the mid-September confirmation of identity. Those documents now frame the public record of a case that began with a routine missing-from-home notice and ended, six months later, with the acknowledgement that the body found on Southport beach in July belonged to the man whose image residents had seen shared across their feeds in the spring.
