08-01-2008, 09:40 AM #1Registered User
- Join Date
- May 2007
- Off the grid, LOL.
UT - Grand Co., Partial skull found in Bryson Canyon, Jul'08
ODD case, this one.
Last edited by CarlK90245; 04-04-2013 at 07:49 PM.There is always HOPE!!!
08-01-2008, 02:04 PM #2
Maybe they were very old bones and removed for purposes of study? Or curiosity? Or plain stupidity!
The article doesn't make it sound like a recent death or suspicions of foul play are in play.......except for removing the bones without permission!
08-01-2008, 05:56 PM #3
Did you see what someone posted??
"The bones may belong to a Colorado mother of three who has been missing for a year and allegedly had a secret life as an online escort."
08-01-2008, 06:19 PM #4
What was that woman's name? I know we have discussed that case here. Anyone remember?
08-01-2008, 06:46 PM #5
08-01-2008, 06:51 PM #6
I believe this is the story on KSL he was referring to.
Bones found along the Utah-Colorado border have given Colorado investigators hope they will finally be able to solve the case of a young mother who has been missing for more than a year.
It also states that the remains were found along the Utah-Colorado line, which would explain the initial headline of them being 'moved'.
08-01-2008, 07:58 PM #7Former Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
There was a case not to long ago where an older man had found a skull thinking it was a Native American relic. He kept it (like an idiot) until his friend told him about a killer dumping a body close to the area where he found the skull. Turned out to belong to a young teenage boy.
I hope whoever moved the bones did it out of concern not greed or gore factor.
08-01-2008, 08:03 PM #8
Thank you Vask. I wonder why they think it is her? Hair, maybe?
08-01-2008, 08:21 PM #9
There is no hair as it's a piece of a skull bone. I'm thinking just from the fact it wasn't found far from Colorado (along the Utah border). Could just be sheer hope, and the case may have been the freshest one on everybodies brains in that area.
08-01-2008, 10:39 PM #10
I read that the bone was a fragment. I can kind of see it being moved. When they found it, most likely they would have all looked at it. There could have been a disagreement over whether or not it was human. They could have kept it to show someone else to see if it was human or not.
02-03-2011, 05:01 PM #11
Most of the links are gone.
This still works. http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=3906176
According to this discussion they couldn't get DNA of the bone and someone thinks it's older than the Paige Birgfeld case.
It's not in DN or Namus.
By Romulus in forum The UnidentifiedReplies: 0Last Post: 02-09-2016, 07:23 PM
By CarlK90245 in forum The UnidentifiedReplies: 3Last Post: 06-10-2015, 09:30 PM
By taramarie in forum Identified!Replies: 2Last Post: 10-03-2013, 11:55 PM
By marion in forum The UnidentifiedReplies: 2Last Post: 02-22-2011, 10:47 PM
By Ms Suzanne in forum The UnidentifiedReplies: 0Last Post: 05-29-2007, 12:37 PM