CA CA - San Francisco, WhtFem 353UFCA, 20-40, under Golden Gate Bridge, Apr'91

I think it looks like a good match besides the age difference, which could be off.
 
The looks are very similar, but Lillian would have only been 18 in 1991, that's a far cry from 30. Could they be that far off in age? I don't know?
 
I think it looks like a good match too. I've seen cases where the age was further off than that so I wouldn't worry too much about the age difference.
 
Can't hurt to submit it. I wonder what the circumstances are around Jane Doe? How do they know she jumped off the G.G. bridge? Was there a witness? I wish there was more information.
If Lillian doesn't match, I found this woman and thought maybe her husband or someone associated with him had something to do with seeing our JD jump off the bridge? http://charleyproject.org/cases/r/racz_ann.html
 
The estimated age is 30 Lillian would have only been like 17.
 
Can't hurt to submit it. I wonder what the circumstances are around Jane Doe? How do they know she jumped off the G.G. bridge? Was there a witness? I wish there was more information.
If Lillian doesn't match, I found this woman and thought maybe her husband or someone associated with him had something to do with seeing our JD jump off the bridge? http://charleyproject.org/cases/r/racz_ann.html

No, I don't think so. The UID had no scars or tattoos, this womn had a long scar all the way from her navel to her pelvic are. Also, I think the age is too far off and don't see her dressing like that. Unfortunately I think the women was a victim of foul play.
 
http://doenetwork.org/cases/353ufca.html

http://www.doenetwork.org/cases/882dfca.html

Composite and photo look really similar, all demos match up, and Lillian seemed to have a similar fashion sense...and was an endangered runaway.

What do you think?

In my opinion, Lillian Estrada looks eerily similar and before i saw her date of birth, I thought she looked at least 25 years in that photo. That could be the case with this Jane, she appears to be older. Sometimes the dentals don't give a true age!
Here is a side by side of Lillian and this UID, for comparison
 

Attachments

  • Lillian Estrada compared to JD 353UFCA .jpg
    Lillian Estrada compared to JD 353UFCA .jpg
    19 KB · Views: 114
They should be able to tell the approximate age from the degree of fusion in the bones in the skull. At least well enough to tell the difference between a 17 year old and a 30 year old anyway.
 
To me, the nose, lower lip and left ear look very similar on each person. It could be that there was a typo along the way some place and it was supposed to be "20" instead of "30". I would go ahead and submit it.
 
I think they look quite similar.

I am not sure how much damage a body sustains when one jumps off a bridge, is it possible that it's hard to determine age given the circumstances?
 
I think this is Jane Doe's Namus page since the place and date and the case number match but it is not helpful, they haven't entered any information in there and it says her age is 0 to 0 years.

Here is the link in case they get around to filling in the information one of these days.
https://identifyus.org/cases/5932
 
The Namus age estimate is 20-40 now and there are dentals.
 
Estrada is still not on the Rule-Outs list...I like her as a match
 
Yes, per Namus, "Subject was witnessed to be falling in mid air beneath the Golden Gate Bridge and then hit the ground." Which I suppose leaves open the possibility she was pushed.

She has DNA and dentals.

The only ruleout listed is Patricia Schmidt.
 
The victim was wearing three sweaters which leads me to believe she may be a traveler, or runaway. How warm is it in San Fran in April?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
99
Guests online
799
Total visitors
898

Forum statistics

Threads
589,927
Messages
17,927,755
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top