Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 33
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    El Segundo, California
    Posts
    6,961
    Quote Originally Posted by kpdx View Post
    In the case of Mindi, who looks to be an obvious match, can they not compare dentals..especially since Mindi would of at a min. had records from orthodontist?
    Either they were unable to obtain records from Mindi's orthodontist, or they were unable to locate the orthodontist at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by kpdx View Post
    1st Q: As I understand it, height is based on comparing measurements of specific bones with established height chart. Is this standard practice, or does it vary based on decomp? What is the general practice of ME when determining height?
    Normally, with skeletal remains, they compare the length of the femur (or other available long bone) to a height chart. The standard heights would also depend on the gender and race of the person.

    Quote Originally Posted by kpdx View Post
    2nd Q: A recent doctor visit identified that my own medical records had me at a shorter height than I am (in my 30s, so obviously not a result of a growth spurt). I always assume a margin of error in a MP's height...but how does LE treat it? Are heights self reported by family, or are they based on medical records? Are medical records accessible to LE when investigating MP? Over the years, I have seen rule outs based on a difference of a few inches when otherwise the match looks good....
    I suppose LE uses whatever is available. It could be medical records, or a driver's license, or if nothing else is available, an estimate provided by family.

    I hate to see rule-outs based on height, because I've seen many instances where after a person is identified, the UID height differed from the MP's listed height.


  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to CarlK90245 For This Useful Post:


  3. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    18,373
    How does Namus determine if the strength of the profile or the probability for an ID is high or low? Do they only see if there are dentals, DNA and fingerprints on file?

    For example, this case is marked low probability
    https://identifyus.org/cases/9656 although it seems like a no-brainer because they found a driver's license with a name on it and there is a matching person missing in the area.
    http://www.charleyproject.org/cases/e/eakin_daniel.html

    They only found partial remains so there is not much identifying info in the bones themselves.


  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Donjeta For This Useful Post:


  5. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,230
    I was looking on NamUs and an UID was listed with almost no information. It just had race, date found and where found. No height, weight, age guess- nothing. Does that happen often, or is it a mistake? What do you do about this?
    I was trying to match a missing person up and I felt like a hit a brick wall. Newbie here so I am hoping this question is in the right place.


  6. The Following User Says Thank You to deca For This Useful Post:


  7. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,230
    Quote Originally Posted by deca View Post
    I was looking on NamUs and an UID was listed with almost no information. It just had race, date found and where found. No height, weight, age guess- nothing. Does that happen often, or is it a mistake? What do you do about this?
    I was trying to match a missing person up and I felt like a hit a brick wall. Newbie here so I am hoping this question is in the right place.
    Correction- there was an age estimate- but hard to figure out anything when there is no height/weight, how old bones were etc.


  8. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    El Segundo, California
    Posts
    6,961
    I was watching the National Geographic channel last night, and they were doing a story about the famous National Geographic magazine cover photo of the Afghan Girl with the amazing green eyes, taken at a refugee camp in 1984. For years, the photographer who took that photo had wondered what became of the girl and went great lengths trying to find out what ever became of her. After showing the photo to people all over Pakistan and Afghanistan and encountering numerous false leads, he finally located her, married with children and living in Pakistan.

    To verify that they had located the same woman, they sent her photo to facial recognition experts at the FBI and the NCMEC, and by analyzing the detail in their irises, they verified with over a million-to-one probability that it was the same woman, despite the fact that her eyes seem to have darkened somewhat with age.



    In ruling out one of the false leads, the FBI facial recognition expert mentioned something that I thought to be relevant to our efforts. He said that 99% of the time, a small mole on someone's face will not disappear. It will remain there for life, or grow larger.

    He had originally pointed out a spot on the right side (her right, not ours) of the girl's upper lip, and didn't see a corresponding spot on her older photo. But after looking at other photos taken of the girl at the same time, it turned out to be just a spot of dirt on her face. But you can see other spots on her forehead and below the right corner of her mouth in the "then" photo that match up on her "now" photo.

    So we should keep this in mind when when comparing MP photos to UID postmortem photos. If you see even a tiny mole on the face of the MP that doesn't appear on the UID, you can be reasonably certain that it is a non-match. But you should be certain that it truly is a facial blemish, and not just a speck of dirt.
    Last edited by CarlK90245; 03-14-2012 at 02:03 PM.


  9. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to CarlK90245 For This Useful Post:


  10. #21
    kpdx's Avatar
    kpdx is offline Jane Doe was discovered Aug. 14, 1977 outside of Everett WA
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    PDX, OR
    Posts
    450
    I was reading some info about the large amount of open cases of MPs from the Yakima Indian Reservation and connected murder investigations from 80s-90s. The local newspaper used the Freedom of Information Act to acquire files from the FBI on the victims.

    Given the enormous amount of MPs reported to be in FBI files (39,000 according to LE in Snohomish County http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...t=64324&page=5) which is substantially larger than even those CarlK has diligently compiled, I am wondering if anyone has attempted to file a FOIA request to obtain the list FBI has given LE.

    I'm not well versed in this sort of process, but it seems like there is some kind of precedent.
    'Nothing clears up a case so much as stating it to another person.'

    Sherlock Holmes


  11. The Following User Says Thank You to kpdx For This Useful Post:


  12. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    El Segundo, California
    Posts
    6,961
    I was speaking this morning with a detective who is quite involved with NamUs and CODIS, and he told me something about CODIS that I did not previously know.

    CODIS will not accept DNA profiles on a missing person unless that person is suspected of being a victim of a crime. However, NamUs will accept DNA profiles on all missing persons, as long as there is a MP report on file with a LE agency in the U.S..

    Missing children who are classified as runaways and persons who are believed to have disappeared voluntarily or as a result of an accident are not eligible for CODIS.


  13. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to CarlK90245 For This Useful Post:


  14. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    18,373
    Quote Originally Posted by Donjeta View Post
    How does Namus determine if the strength of the profile or the probability for an ID is high or low? Do they only see if there are dentals, DNA and fingerprints on file?

    For example, this case is marked low probability
    https://identifyus.org/cases/9656 although it seems like a no-brainer because they found a driver's license with a name on it and there is a matching person missing in the area.
    http://www.charleyproject.org/cases/e/eakin_daniel.html

    They only found partial remains so there is not much identifying info in the bones themselves.
    This UID now has a

    Complete mitochondrial DNA profile uploaded to NDIS. A partial (12/14) STR profile was uploaded to NDIS, and a complete LOW COPY STR profile is available at UNT for comparison. CL
    and the probability has been upgraded to medium.

    I don't know what the hold up is, the MP has had DNA tests taken.
    Sample submitted - Tests complete
    https://www.findthemissing.org/en/cases/9668/0/

    Was it not a match?


  15. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    18,373
    Both cases have been removed from Namus now so I guess it just took some time to compare the profiles.


  16. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    El Segundo, California
    Posts
    6,961
    I've been keeping a spreadsheet of all missing persons listed in Charley Project, plus cases in the other sites (NAMPN, DoeNet, and NamUs) that aren't in Charley. The spreadsheet includes basic info (e.g., gender, age, DLC, DOB, height, etc.), and includes about 13,000 names.

    This week, I've added an extra column to include the NamUs MP # for all MP cases from NamUs. I am in the process of reconciling those cases to the casefiles from other sites to determine which cases are in NamUs and not in other sites, and vice-versa.

    In doing so, I've discovered a very troubling problem. There is a very large number of instances where the Dates of Last Contact as indicated in NamUs don't agree with those listed in Charley and the other sites. I would guess that there are DLC discrepancies for about 10-20% of NamUs cases.

    For the more substantial discrepancies of several months or years, I've done further research to see which is correct (if possible). I found a few errors that were made by Meaghan at Charley Project, but for the vast majority of the discrepancies, the error was in NamUs. There is a very surprising number of instances where the MP Report Date was entered as the DLC.

    In most cases where I was able to conclusively prove which site was wrong, I sent out an e-mail to ask them to correct the error. But in cases where the difference was only a week or two, or cases where I couldn't determine who was wrong, I had to let it go, and used the earlier date on my spreadsheet. There are far too many errors to send out an e-mail for every error that I spot.

    So when entering search parameters in the NamUs UID database looking for matches to a specific MP, I suggest that you set your lower date limit for a month or two prior to the MP's Date of Last Contact ("Date LKA").

    ... or if your are entering search parameters in the NamUs MP database looking for a match to a specific UID, you should set the upper date limit for a few months after the UID was estimated to have died.


  17. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to CarlK90245 For This Useful Post:


  18. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,096
    Quote Originally Posted by CarlK90245 View Post
    I've been keeping a spreadsheet of all missing persons listed in Charley Project, plus cases in the other sites (NAMPN, DoeNet, and NamUs) that aren't in Charley. The spreadsheet includes basic info (e.g., gender, age, DLC, DOB, height, etc.), and includes about 13,000 names.

    This week, I've added an extra column to include the NamUs MP # for all MP cases from NamUs. I am in the process of reconciling those cases to the casefiles from other sites to determine which cases are in NamUs and not in other sites, and vice-versa.

    In doing so, I've discovered a very troubling problem. There is a very large number of instances where the Dates of Last Contact as indicated in NamUs don't agree with those listed in Charley and the other sites. I would guess that there are DLC discrepancies for about 10-20% of NamUs cases.

    For the more substantial discrepancies of several months or years, I've done further research to see which is correct (if possible). I found a few errors that were made by Meaghan at Charley Project, but for the vast majority of the discrepancies, the error was in NamUs. There is a very surprising number of instances where the MP Report Date was entered as the DLC.

    In most cases where I was able to conclusively prove which site was wrong, I sent out an e-mail to ask them to correct the error. But in cases where the difference was only a week or two, or cases where I couldn't determine who was wrong, I had to let it go, and used the earlier date on my spreadsheet. There are far too many errors to send out an e-mail for every error that I spot.

    So when entering search parameters in the NamUs UID database looking for matches to a specific MP, I suggest that you set your lower date limit for a month or two prior to the MP's Date of Last Contact ("Date LKA").

    ... or if your are entering search parameters in the NamUs MP database looking for a match to a specific UID, you should set the upper date limit for a few months after the UID was estimated to have died.

    I, too, have noticed discrepancies in the "date last known alive" dates on NamUs, Charley Project and Doe Network. While I attribute some of that to human error in entering the data, I think a lot more of it is because in many cases families, friends, etc. aren't sure when the missing person was last seen.

    I recently read of a woman whose date last known alive was listed as a date after her body was actually recovered.

    So my tip to those of us who routinely search these databases, always question the date last known alive if you find a match that is good otherwise.
    Last edited by CarlK90245; 06-16-2012 at 03:30 PM. Reason: Added Quote box to bring post to current page


  19. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Marilynilpa For This Useful Post:


  20. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    El Segundo, California
    Posts
    6,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Marilynilpa View Post
    I recently read of a woman whose date last known alive was listed as a date after her body was actually recovered.
    I know of at least four instances where the Date LKA was after the date the body was found.

    Paula Beverly Davis
    Identified! OH - Englewood, "Blue Bandanna Girl" WhtFem, 17-25 - Aug'87 - Paula Beverly Davis


    Michelle Yvonne Haggadon
    Identified! SC - Darlington County - WhtFem (112UFSC), 19-35, Aug 2000 - Michelle Yvonne Haggadon


    Samantha Bonnell
    Identified! CA- Montclair - WhtFem - about 17 - Hit by car on Freeway - Sep'05 - Samantha Bonnell


    Heidi Balch
    Identified! NJ - Mercer County - WhtFem 288UFNJ, 18-30, J. Rifkin Victim, Mar'89 - Heidi Balch
    Last edited by KateB; 04-06-2015 at 12:13 AM. Reason: repair url tags.


  21. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CarlK90245 For This Useful Post:


  22. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,459
    I am new to this site. If we think we have a match do we just email the address listed with the file of the deceased? Or should we post on this site and see what others think?


  23. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by danzn16 View Post
    I am new to this site. If we think we have a match do we just email the address listed with the file of the deceased? Or should we post on this site and see what others think?
    I like to bounce it off of others here first to see if I've missed something. Then I'll email the address listed. But please note that you have written them on the thread so another member doesn't send it also.


  24. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    6
    Could an admin/mod please private message me. I would love to add an unidentified person to this forum but its saying I do not have permission and it is definately not already on here. Thank you, nd sorry for posting here just have no idea where else to ask


Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 31
    Last Post: 02-27-2014, 01:44 PM
  2. Facebook groups for the missing and UID
    By rpipergirl in forum Facebook for the Missing
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-28-2010, 01:15 PM
  3. Please vote-Non Profit GA Missing and UID Organization, Need Name.
    By christine2448 in forum Missing Archives
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 06-14-2007, 09:38 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •