Question about Descriptions of Jane/John Does...?

I'm still looking at missing cases on doenetwork and charleyproject, hoping to find a match eventually for a Jane Doe found nearby in 1988. In looking at the descriptions of many of the missing women, I've ruled them out based on certain things like eye color, height, or identifying marks ("our" Jane Doe is reported to have none).

I know this varies, but generally how closely should we go by descriptions of Does? In this particular case, her eye color is described as brown, but wouldn't that be subjective to interpretation (and dependent on how long she was exposed to the elements)? I would hate to think that I'd looked at a description of a missing woman and "ruled her out" because she had a surgical scar or tattoo and Jane Doe isn't noted as having one, or a missing woman is described as having hazel eyes and Jane Doe had brown eyes.

Thanks in advance
Lisa

Lisahas2cats said:

I'm still looking at missing cases on doenetwork and charleyproject, hoping to find a match eventually for a Jane Doe found nearby in 1988. In looking at the descriptions of many of the missing women, I've ruled them out based on certain things like eye color, height, or identifying marks ("our" Jane Doe is reported to have none).

I know this varies, but generally how closely should we go by descriptions of Does? In this particular case, her eye color is described as brown, but wouldn't that be subjective to interpretation (and dependent on how long she was exposed to the elements)? I would hate to think that I'd looked at a description of a missing woman and "ruled her out" because she had a surgical scar or tattoo and Jane Doe isn't noted as having one, or a missing woman is described as having hazel eyes and Jane Doe had brown eyes.

Thanks in advance
Lisa

Click to expand...

Lisa,

Good morning! It's hard to say what is and isn't relevant when scanning registered missing persons reports while trying to identify a Jane/John Doe. A lot depends on the condition of the body when found, stage of decomposition (eye color is often not discernible after exposure to the elements), coroner's time of death in relation to the date a person was believed to go missing, etc. The general vicinity of the area a body is found also provides some useful information. Scars and tattoos are a good screening elements, but not always. People get new tattoos and not everyone knows, especially with women. Also, the age at which the surgical scar was made is also important. A lot of childhood scars fade with age and some folks actually have them removed.

I guess it would help to know more about the circumstances involving the discovery of the Jane/John Doe, what were they wearing, cause of death, signs of a struggle, defensive wounds, coroner's observation of the state of the general health, prior to death, e.g., well nourished, normal weight, healthy teeth and hair, or the opposite. This information could give you a general idea about the life style this person led.

It's all MOO and probably of no help.

barry

Hi
I have a missing sister who came up missing in 1983.May I please ask information about your Jane Doe.Discription,date,county found ect..

suzanne

Hi Suzanne, I PMed you

Looking at the Doe site today, I was truly horrified at the number of people left unaccounted for. Someone must be looking for them! Those seemingly forgotten people must be someone's child, mother, sister, brother, husband, etc.

LE/FBI enter those into a common place to be checked against all the missing reports and also have people comparing them manually to cross-reference dates, stats, and possible connections, don't they?

Hi Lisa from Lisa!!

It's ironic that I found your thread this morning, because I was just thinking about the exact same thing. For instance, I don't know how long following death that the eyes become cloudy, but I would think it doesn't take long for eye color to become abscure - maybe dark green looks like brown...

And, we have cases of children going missing while still growing and maturing. I know we have age progression experts, but so few have been found, I don't think we know if that is an accurate approach.

I know it's expensive, but I think we need to start putting dna profiles of all Does in a bank and the minute someone comes up missing, do dna!!

LisainWV said:

I know it's expensive, but I think we need to start putting dna profiles of all Does in a bank and the minute someone comes up missing, do dna!!

Click to expand...

I'm with ya!!! I was just reading an article yesterday in the Baltimore Examiner about unclaimed bodies...and wondering how hard they really look for next of kin and wondering if some of our missing have turned up as unclaimed bodies. The article mentioned they get up to $2500 per body for research and its sad to think that if they would just enter DNA into a database, that some poor family would be able to stop wondering what happened to their family member.

And hello to you, Lisa

Yes, the eye color issue gets me. There are several missing persons I've seen on Doe and Charley that look promising as a match for "my" Jane Doe, but the eye color is always a non-match.

Lisahas2cats said:

And hello to you, Lisa

Yes, the eye color issue gets me. There are several missing persons I've seen on Doe and Charley that look promising as a match for "my" Jane Doe, but the eye color is always a non-match.

Click to expand...

If only a skeleton is found, I believe the artist uses clues as to the color of the eyes by the forensics determining the heritage of the remains. Eye color in this instance is done purely by guesswork, as far as I know. If they find hair with the remains...it is another clue that is considered. So I believe the eye color on the Does cannot be a true factor unless the body was intact enough to determine the actual color.

I was thinking the same thing, Lisa. I have compared dates, etc. to some of our missing from this area found as JD's in other states and came up with some striking similarities in the reconstructions. It is the reason I asked that question of who IS comparing these manually for LE? I agree a DNA data base is needed for such, but the FBI needs people to actively put these two lists together if they don't do it already to look at the similarities which might be overlooked in a database. I know local LE doesn't have manpower to handle this task as they barely have a couple of people tracking on cold cases anyway. Maybe we need to ask further questions of LE to find the answer to this and in the meantime...be their extra set of eyes online to put 2 + 2 together for them to check out. I find it hard to believe the families of the missing aren't already doing this, but I am sure it would be difficult to look objectively for their missing in this way.

Websleuths could possibly do a lot of good in this area. Maybe we need to cross-reference them, etc. as to dates found, est. time of deaths, missing dates, etc. and see what we find.