https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Sneha_Anne_Philip

Sneha Anne Philip disappeared on 9/10/2001. Her husband for whatever reason tried very hard to make sure she was recorded as having died in the attacks. Police digging into the case discovered her habit of frequenting lesbian bars, but her husband had an explanation:

Philip's husband, brother and family dispute much of what the police say and their interpretations of the documentary evidence. She was fired from Cabrini not because of alcoholism but because she had been a "whistleblower" who complained about racial and sexual bias (the hospital later told a reporter it had no evidence of any formal complaints by her). Lieberman says that while his wife frequented lesbian bars, it was because she did not want a repeat of the situation that had happened with her coworker. She never had sex with the women she went home with, he claims, and they would often merely listen to music, sleep or paint. One time, in fact, she came home covered with paint after going home with an artist. Her drinking was a temporary phase to ease her through the depression she was experiencing after being fired by Cabrini, and would stop once her life got back to normal, as he believed it was doing.

The court judgement is also pretty funny:

As to the GAL's implicitly value-laden assertion that the decedent "frequented bars (including several bars which cater to women customers) and spent the night with individuals she met there," which individuals "tended to be strangers rather than persons with whom she developed relationships," here too the evidence completely failed to establish that the decedent engaged in conduct endangering her safety. The unacknowledged implication of the GAL's assertion in this regard, namely, that the decedent recklessly engaged in extramarital sexual relations{**50 AD3d at 86} with dangerous strangers she met in bars, is not a conclusion permitted by the evidence. Petitioner did acknowledge being upset when his wife did not tell him where she was spending the night, and that it was "a point in our relationship that we were trying to work out." But, his testimony was somewhat oblique as to specifics on the subject of his wife's nights away; he explained, "it was never a question if we were ever unfaithful to each other. . . . It was always a question of being independent people, living together, trying to have independent lives and being together." Notably, the GAL never asked petitioner to clarify exactly what occurred. But regardless of whether petitioner was completely forthright in his testimony regarding his wife's nights out, there is no question that they had a happy marriage, and, importantly, there was no evidence that his wife's nights out involved any risky behavior.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160126212035/http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2008/2008_00630.htm