Results 1 to 12 of 12
02-28-2009, 03:57 PM #1
CA - 29 Palms, WhtFem (UP 1222), 15-35, Shallow Grave at a Mining Claim, Dec'70
It maybe a long shot, but because there are few details about the MP, wondering if some of the information on her might be slightly off. I like the two as a match because of a). the timeline b). the hair c). dental plates d) age
The Doe Network:
Case File 1409DFWA
Jeanette Rose Miller
Missing since September 16, 1970 from Arlington, Snohomish County, Washington.
Classification: Endangered Missing
* Date Of Birth: September 14, 1953
* Age at Time of Disappearance: 17 years old
* Height and Weight at Time of Disappearance: 5'1"; 115 lbs.
* Distinguishing Characteristics: White female. Long brown hair; brown eyes.
* Clothing: A long sleeve white blouse, a white/yellow/blue and black plaid skirt with a gold chain belt, and dark blue shoes.
* Dentals: Available, three tooth dental plate on the upper left side.
Circumstances of Disappearance
Miller was last seen on 16 September 1970, on the Lincoln Bridge in Arlington.
Unidentified White Female
* The victim was discovered on December 28, 1970 in San Bernardino County, California
* Estimated Date of Death: Up to 6 months prior
* Skeletal Remains
* Estimated age: 15-35 years old
* Approximate Height and Weight: 5'2"
* Distinguishing Characteristics: Long, red/auburn hair, with dark roots.
* Dentals: Available, partial dental plate on the upper left side.
* DNA: Pending
The victim was located as fragmented skeletal remains scattered on the surface near a shallow grave at a mining claim near the desert city of Twenty-Nine Palms.
What do others think? I am sort of new to this, but after almost a year of looking at UIDs and MPs from 1960s-1990s I have never felt this good about a possible match.
Last edited by CarlK90245; 03-21-2013 at 08:38 PM.
02-28-2009, 04:14 PM #2Registered User
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
Definitely a possibility although the information is quite limited. What makes this stand out is the dental plate - which could make it an easy rule out. Time frame matches, the description does although Jeanette's photo is quite poor.
Cons are that there is not that much data and so the description could (apart from the plate) apply to a lot of missing women, and there is a 1,000 mile difference in location. Neither of those is a rule out by any means - just a good reason why she would not have been identified for these past 38 years.
Unless more information can be found elsewhere I'd say that this should be submitted to Doe.
The Following User Says Thank You to Cymro For This Useful Post:
02-28-2009, 04:20 PM #3
you know, I like it too - the dental plate and the timeline work very well. And a kid who took off from Snohomish County Washington might certainly end up in California.-Beth In Alaska
The Following User Says Thank You to BethInAK For This Useful Post:
02-28-2009, 04:26 PM #4
I like this match as well.
What limited information is available, certainly does match. Perhaps if it is submitted, and it is not a match, it will influence authorities to add more details to the report on the unidentified woman.
I say it is a win-win outcome whether it is a match or not. Definitely submit it!
The Following User Says Thank You to Brains & NoBull For This Useful Post:
02-28-2009, 04:48 PM #5
new to the forum...how do i go about submitting?
02-28-2009, 05:12 PM #6Former Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2007
kpdx - Good Work! I think this is an excellent possibility. If I were going to submit, I would call both agencies listed. Explain that you were sleuthing and found a possible match. Point out the dental plate and the hair characteristics.
Get the name of the person you speak with and their email, if possible. Then follow up by sending an email to each contact with links to the doenetwork info and this thread. And then we wait to see what happens. I generally follow up once a month to see if any progress is made.
Hope that helps and again, GOOD WORK!
PS - I usually explain that I am with Lighting the Way Home, which is a sub-forum here on WS
The Following User Says Thank You to Salem For This Useful Post:
03-02-2009, 01:01 PM #7
News from the ME in CA
I received this response this morning...very fast and very nice!
"This is the fourth “hit” for comparison of these two cases. This division’s forensic odontologist has compared the “available” dental information (Snohomish appears to have lost the dental X-rays) for the missing person, and believes that this deserves a closer look, which is of course impossible because the record is lost.
Snohomish submitted the sister’s reference DNA to CHI, which is supposedly in CODIS. Jane Doe, who was buried in 1971 at County Cemetery, is scheduled for exhumation (#5 on the list), and DNA samples from the body will be submitted to California Department of Justice, Missing Persons DNA Program, and the profile will then be uploaded to CODIS, which will start comparing against all missing person cases (including Miller’s).
So, hopefully we will have a comparison one way or the other between four months and a year."
The Following User Says Thank You to kpdx For This Useful Post:
03-04-2009, 10:38 PM #8
Quick correction on my last post...the very kind Detective in Snohomish County states "Jeanette’s dental records were never obtained from the dentist and he is no longer in practice, so the records were lost when we went looking for them. Jeanette had no fingerprints on file" but her DNA is now in available, which is obviously the best possible scenario for making a match.
I will keep everyone updated once they have exhumed the UID and more info is available.
In the meantime, keep a look out for other possible matches to Jeanette!
02-13-2011, 09:28 AM #9
02-15-2011, 12:17 AM #10
Last I heard from LE they were waiting on DNA results...so no rule out yet. Unfortunately, (as we all know) RL is not like CSI and the results take a long time...but I will keep you posted when I hear one way or another.'Nothing clears up a case so much as stating it to another person.'
02-15-2011, 08:24 AM #11Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Northeast USA
Having said all that, per Namus, Jeanette Miller does NOT have a DNA sample on file:
so whether Jeanette's DNA exists or not, there can be no match unless it is entered into someone's database.
The Following User Says Thank You to webrocket For This Useful Post:
07-19-2012, 06:53 AM #12Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Northeast USA
this UID is in Namus and they have only nucDNA for her so if the DNA sample from Jeannette is mtDNA there is no way to match them.
By shadowangel in forum The UnidentifiedReplies: 11Last Post: 01-23-2016, 05:38 PM
By assaf1981 in forum The UnidentifiedReplies: 15Last Post: 06-22-2015, 09:09 AM
By masnitram in forum The UnidentifiedReplies: 36Last Post: 01-28-2015, 08:08 PM
By Kymistry35 in forum The UnidentifiedReplies: 22Last Post: 12-16-2014, 12:01 AM
By audrey77 in forum Identified!Replies: 48Last Post: 09-17-2012, 12:59 AM