744 users online (81 members and 663 guests)  


Websleuths News


Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vegas Baby.
    Posts
    175

    TX - Live Oak Co, WhtFem UP4626, 24-34, on creek bank, DVF glasses, Nov'80

    both 80s cases... discrepancies in dates, but considering they were so far back, we know dates sometimes get flubbed, I figured it wouldn't hurt. Thanks for your opinions! Sorry I'm not very good with the attachments...

    Missing:
    DOROTHY RICHARDSON
    https://www.findthemissing.org/en/cases/23173/0/


    UID: https://identifyus.org/en/cases/4626
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    84
    I was looking around on doe network today and saw this MP and after reading her info (wore large framed glasses) she reminded me of this UID that I read about some time ago.

    Missing-
    http://www.doenetwork.org/cases/892dfca.html

    Unidentified-
    http://www.doenetwork.org/cases/88uftx.html


    What do you think? Everything is pretty close, and the date is 9 months instead of a year between last seen and body found.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vegas Baby.
    Posts
    175
    Good find, I would try to locate this UID's NAMUS page [www.identifyus.org] and see if the missing person is listed as a ruleout.
    Also see if the NAMUS missing page [www.findthemissing.org] has a profile for her; theoretically if they both have DNA entered, and both are in the NAMUS system, they would be automatically ruled out as a match [although personally I don't know how much I trust the accuracy of that system, it's supposed to be automatic.]

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by malaika View Post
    Good find, I would try to locate this UID's NAMUS page [www.identifyus.org] and see if the missing person is listed as a ruleout.
    Also see if the NAMUS missing page [www.findthemissing.org] has a profile for her; theoretically if they both have DNA entered, and both are in the NAMUS system, they would be automatically ruled out as a match [although personally I don't know how much I trust the accuracy of that system, it's supposed to be automatic.]

    Namus doesn't have any rule outs for this UID, and says there is no fingerprints, DNA, or dentals, but on the doe network its says both have dentals.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    228
    Here is the UID's Namus page. No ruleouts listed and it states that no DNA or dentals are currently available.

    https://www.identifyus.org/en/cases/4626

    The Doe Network page, however, says dentals are available.

    Denise's Namus page states that dentals are entered and available.

    https://www.findthemissing.org/en/cases/29728/1533

    It doesn't appear they've been compared and this would not be an automatic ruleout without DNA available for the UID. However, since it appears both have dentals available (if Doe Network is correct), they should be easily comparable. You should call this in.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by taramarie View Post
    Here is the UID's Namus page. No ruleouts listed and it states that no DNA or dentals are currently available.

    https://www.identifyus.org/en/cases/4626

    The Doe Network page, however, says dentals are available.

    Denise's Namus page states that dentals are entered and available.

    https://www.findthemissing.org/en/cases/29728/1533

    It doesn't appear they've been compared and this would not be an automatic ruleout without DNA available for the UID. However, since it appears both have dentals available (if Doe Network is correct), they should be easily comparable. You should call this in.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I've never submitted anything. Any ideas where to start?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    228

    TX - Live Oak Co, WhtFem UP4626, 24-34, on creek bank, DVF glasses, Nov'80

    Yes! Not hard, just intimidating the first time. Some contacts are more receptive than others. Follow up if you don't hear back. Here are screenshots of the contacts for both the UID and Denise. I always contact both because I hope at least one of them will be interested. When you call, make sure you have all relevant information in front of you - case numbers, identifiers available (in this case both have dentals), and why you think this is a good match. In UID's case, you can email all of this to Michael Nance with a side by side comparison of all vitals to make your case. If you have to leave a VM for Denise's contact, make sure you leave your contact information and all case numbers.

    Good luck!

    If anyone else has any advice, please chime in!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    84
    Thanks for your help. I'll see what I can do. Might take me a few days to get everything together, but I'll try.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    84
    Submitted Denise Dorfman today. Hopefully I did everything ok. I followed the guidelines that I read on the sticky notes. Yikes. 😬

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    84
    Denise Dorfman has been excluded for this UID.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    139
    Quote Originally Posted by Peppered_peach View Post
    Denise Dorfman has been excluded for this UID.
    At least you got a response and answer very quickly.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    18,098
    Good for you for submitting your first attempt. But hopefully not the last!
    Opinions expressed are strictly my own (who else would they belong to???)

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    84
    Nope I'm gonna keep going. One question though. If both parties are in Namus, and have dentals, are the dentals ran against each other automatically, or is that just fingerprints and DNA?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    18,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Peppered_peach View Post
    Nope I'm gonna keep going. One question though. If both parties are in Namus, and have dentals, are the dentals ran against each other automatically, or is that just fingerprints and DNA?
    They do compare dentals and will flag some for hand comparison, but generally no, there aren't automatic dental ruleouts.

    Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk
    Opinions expressed are strictly my own (who else would they belong to???)

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    106
    how about Patty Lisa McDaniel?

    http://www.doenetwork.org/cases/3731dffl.html
    https://www.findthemissing.org/en/cases/34730/0/

    The age is under and the height is off but if you look in NamUs it states 54 to 56 inches for both sisters. I wonder if it should be 5'4" to 5'6" for them both. That height seems a little more realistic for their weight and for the one pic where they are standing. I cant seem to figure out a side by side but if anyone can do it that would be great.

    The glasses scare me



Similar Threads

  1. CA CA - Desert Hot Springs, WhtFem 551UFCA, 40-55, Prescription Glasses, Feb'97
    By future criminologist in forum The Unidentified
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 09-25-2017, 10:50 PM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-30-2017, 08:14 PM
  3. Replies: 97
    Last Post: 08-03-2016, 05:48 AM
  4. Replies: 75
    Last Post: 05-18-2016, 05:18 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-21-2011, 01:08 AM

Tags for this Thread