Mystery couple murdered in South Carolina, 1976 - #4

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oxygen isotope analysis of dental enamel can assist in determining a persons place of origin.

Tooth enamel stores a chemical record of their owners’ childhood living environment, such as local climate and geology.

Nearly all of the oxygen that goes into the formation of tooth and bone comes from the water we drink and virtually all the water we drink is ultimately derived from precipitation as rain or snow......:Banane49:
 
You can forget the teeth on our Jock Doe, Mystery. Sumter convienently lost them. Oh boy, yeah, they're just chomping at the bit to solve this, losing evidence here, there, and the next place.
:mad:
 
Hey, great to have you aboard, believe09. Yeah, this case just gets more interesting all the time.

I see you used to post on this case, so welcome back instead.
 
To answer the questions, Dr Schwarcz has already been contacted about the SC case, and the possibility of him doing work on it, so he's familiar. He's also seen the press in Canada about it. As I wrote before, he does not do the work for free- and I don't begrudge him that either, he is a professional and this is what he does. Isotope analysis can be done both on bones and teeth, so in this case the bones would need to be looked at, unless the county wants to pay for another exhumation, which would be doubtful.

I have been told by the detective assigned to this case that he is retiring in April and that all inquiries on the case are being handled by the new coroner. Why? I have no idea and I did not inquire further as I don't feel it is appropriate to ask why this has been decided.

ALL the bone samples taken in June 2007 were sent to the lab in Texas for DNA. So *if* they were to embark on the isotope analysis route- they would have to wait to get the bones back from Texas first.

With states being so strapped for cash these days, it is questionable whether the expense involved in this analysis would be easy to justify at this point. (IMHO)

That's all I know.

ETA: I think it's important to add that Sumter County did not lose the John Doe's dentals. A forensic dentist who was asked to study them did.
 
To answer the questions, Dr Schwarcz has already been contacted about the SC case, and the possibility of him doing work on it, so he's familiar. He's also seen the press in Canada about it. As I wrote before, he does not do the work for free- and I don't begrudge him that either, he is a professional and this is what he does. Isotope analysis can be done both on bones and teeth, so in this case the bones would need to be looked at, unless the county wants to pay for another exhumation, which would be doubtful.

I have been told by the detective assigned to this case that he is retiring in April and that all inquiries on the case are being handled by the new coroner. Why? I have no idea and I did not inquire further as I don't feel it is appropriate to ask why this has been decided.

ALL the bone samples taken in June 2007 were sent to the lab in Texas for DNA. So *if* they were to embark on the isotope analysis route- they would have to wait to get the bones back from Texas first.

With states being so strapped for cash these days, it is questionable whether the expense involved in this analysis would be easy to justify at this point. (IMHO)

That's all I know.

ETA: I think it's important to add that Sumter County did not lose the John Doe's dentals. A forensic dentist who was asked to study them did.

Well who would be expecting Dr. Schwarcz to do the work for free? The state of South Carolina?

I don't think it matters who lost the teeth. If LE ran a tight ship, they'd have asked for the teeth back within a reasonable amount of time so it looks like they're still on the hook for this since keeping track of evidence is their responsibility.

Your statement is the first I've heard that the bones were sent to Texas. Can you back that statement up with a source that we can see in print?

Last I heard the bones went to the state lab where they didn't have the capability to extract dna from old bones. I believe Verna Moore's statement was that it might be another 31 years before the couple was identified.

If you knew Dr. Schwarcz had already been contacted on this case, why didn't you speak up? Are you the one who contacted him?

I'm sorry if I sound abrupt, but it doesn't get a case solved or even a portion of it solved if Websleuthers withhold information from other Websleuthers. Makes me think you have ties to this case, and a different motive for posting from the majority here!
 
http://www.dna.gov/

Click on the link to Identifying Persons and Victims.

The DOJ has an initiative to participate in collecting and storing DNA and MtDNA for missing persons. The tab is picked up by the DOJ-the agencies simply pay to ship the samples. Any missing person/UID case is eligible. Law enforcement contacts the program, kits are sent or there is an option to have bones sent.

The Center for Human Identification is at the University of Texas.
~Snip~
Under the DNA Initiative, there are two sources that can assist jurisdictions with analysis of unidentified remains and reference samples.
DNA Identity Laboratory Project: DNA Testing of Unidentified Remains.

The University of North Texas Health Science Center is coordinating with medical examiners' offices, coroners' offices, the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the National Center for Missing Adults, and law enforcement agencies to identify, collect, and perform DNA analysis on unidentified remains and reference samples.
Sample Analysis Through the FBI's National Missing Persons DNA Database Program. The President's DNA Initiative provides funding to the FBI for the analysis of degraded and old biological samples through the National Missing Persons DNA Database Program. The program was established to identify missing and unidentified persons using the National DNA Index System of the FBI's Combined DNA Index System (CODIS). The Missing Persons Database contains two parts into which missing and unidentified persons DNA profiles and Biological Relatives of Missing Persons and Unidentified Human Remains can be entered.
~snip~
 
justthinkin, I speak to Mrs. Moore on a weekly basis, and she is the person who told me the bones were sent to the University of Texas lab.

And yes, I do have ties to this case, my tie is to Mrs Moore and if she has asked me to retain a confidence, then I've respected her wishes and done so.

I don't really understand the hostility here. If my comments are unwelcome, I can certainly stop posting in this thread altogether.
 
believe09, Very Enlightening and interesting.

The partner agencies of the DNA Initiative are working to help ensure that DNA forensic technology is used to its full potential to identify missing persons by providing:

Analysis of Remains and Biological Samples
Training and Assistance
DNA Reference Kits
Educational Materials for Families
Research, Development, and Testing
Funding for Crime Laboratories
See also Publications on Missing Persons Cases.

Next Section: Analysis of Remains and Biological Samples
 
You can forget the teeth on our Jock Doe, Mystery. Sumter convienently lost them. Oh boy, yeah, they're just chomping at the bit to solve this, losing evidence here, there, and the next place.
:mad:..

justthinkin, Who was responsible for allowing this evidence to be lost, the coroner or LE?

How long was the forensic dentist allowed to keep the evidence, before he carelessly lost it?

Who has the X-rays, measurements and report from the dentist examination on Jocks teeth?

Why was the forensic dentist sent every tooth in Jocks mouth? :waitasec:
 
justthinkin, I speak to Mrs. Moore on a weekly basis, and she is the person who told me the bones were sent to the University of Texas lab.

And yes, I do have ties to this case, my tie is to Mrs Moore and if she has asked me to retain a confidence, then I've respected her wishes and done so.

I don't really understand the hostility here. If my comments are unwelcome, I can certainly stop posting in this thread altogether.

From almost the inception, posters at Websleuths have questioned whether there was a cover up on this case.

You do realize that not only was Ms. Moore the deputy coroner at the time, but that she was also a reporter for The Item.

IMHO, Maybe you should ask yourself if you should believe everything Ms. Moore says--just sayin.

It's not that your comments are unwelcome. At times, it seems most of what you have to offer is excuses as to why something can't be done or negative vibes on ideas collected here.

We're not here to keep secrets with the former coroner. It's time every known fact was exposed in this case. The likely perp/s are dead.
 
justthinkin, Who was responsible for allowing this evidence to be lost, the coroner or LE?

How long was the forensic dentist allowed to keep the evidence, before he carelessly lost it?

Who has the X-rays, measurements and report from the dentist examination on Jocks teeth?

Why was the forensic dentist sent every tooth in Jocks mouth? :waitasec:

All good questions that I, too, would like answers to!
 
justthinkin, I'm sorry you feel the way you do. You are entitled to your opinions. I happen to have a great deal of respect for Mrs. Moore, and the many years of service she gave to the citizens of Sumter. I am not sure if you are implying that she is corrupt in some way, but if that's the case, I could not disagree more. I am also of the opinion that it is not a good idea to slag officials on a public website, because they may be reading. And as a result, may be that much less inclined to follow up on any leads produced online that come their way.

I must also respectfully disagree with your assertion that members should be obligated to post about what LE or others involved in a case may share with them-- especially when it's an open investigation. I would venture to speculate that there have been many hardworking folks at WS that were asked by LE NOT to divulge certain facts online that could compromise the case-- until they had time to investigate further. If discretion is asked of me by someone, then I do my best to respect that, in all aspects of my life.

Regardless, I think that most everything I've posted has already been discussed in previous threads and also in the various press about the case. I notice that you've been here a short time so maybe you have not had time to read the other threads on this case? (Not sure?) What I do know is that there is not some vast conspiracy to intentionally withhold information.

Best Regards.
 
I have to agree with rmf. Unfortunately, we often go 'round and 'round here. Often this helps with coming up with more possibilities and is an understandable way to solve a case. But with 3 different threads on the general case, I sometimes get the feeling that posters haven't read entirely through before asking questions or positing theories. This is understandable, but it isn't rmf's job to check the thread daily to answer quetions that have already been answered previously.

In regards to not believing everything Mrs. Moore says, who else are we supposed to believe? She was the coroner. She worked on those bodies. She has been working on this case all of these years, very possibly using her journalism sources and skills to help find their identities. I think if we have one source, she's one of the very best. Especially since there's a possibility, however slight, that this crime has either been covered up or in the very least, swept under the rug.

With that being said, I would also like to remind everyone that some of us still live here in SC so please try to watch your wording when making accusations and talking about the state, the politics, etc.

And lastly:

I don't think it matters who lost the teeth. If LE ran a tight ship, they'd have asked for the teeth back within a reasonable amount of time so it looks like they're still on the hook for this since keeping track of evidence is their responsibility.

The man died. The dentist did not throw out the teeth. He died and his wife, while in mourning, donated all of his teeth to a university. This is from what I understand. She wasn't aware that they were from an ongoing investigation. The university disposed of them. SC LE is expecting their teeth back and don't realize the dentist has passed away. When they discover this, it's already too late. It was an accident, and one we have to deal with. I find the above statement contradictory: it doesn't matter who lost the teeth, but it's still LE's fault.
 
justthinkin I was going to tell you the same thing, you need to take some time to read ALL the previous threads in this case. Otherwise, it's like you jumped into the middle of a conversation and just started talking. Most of what is being discussed now, has been discussed before. As an investigator, even an "online" investigator, you are being irresponsible if you don't investigate ALL facts available, which includes every bit of publication on the case you're working on.

Thank you rmf for all you do. Those comments were completely off base and undeserved. And youshouldveknown, that was a very good reply. I haven't always agreed with everything you've said, but you were completely right on this one.
 
Guys,
I feel justthinkin has the right to ask any question and post any theory they may have on this old murder case, any time they feel like it.

Let's not overlook 'we' spend our valuable time here because we want to see these 2 young people identified and sent to their families..

Could someone please explain to me how asking questions about a double murder, that occurred in 1976, insult the good people of S.C. in 2009?

rmf, Your remark to justhinkin QUOTE:
I would venture to speculate that there have been many hardworking folks at WS that were asked by LE NOT to divulge certain facts online that could compromise the case--

end of quote:

There's a big difference in a 30 yr. old cold case, how could any facts 'compromise this case'?
After all these years, most everyone is dead, the odds are, the more facts that are known could finally solve this case!!:...

Yes, everyone has the right to ask questions and investigate all aspects of this case. They also have a right to post theories that they believe in. But I totally agree with youshouldveknown, rmf and shadetreepi that many of the answers are in threads 1 and 2. Those threads need to be combed through thoroughly. Much of the information one is looking for is on those threads. I went through and read parts of threads 1 and 2 last night. One of the big differences I saw between those threads and this thread is that all the posters were respectful of each other and all their opinions

We need to remember that our primary focus should be on identifying this couple. There's a wealth of information and anyone interested in this case needs to start at the beginning of thread 1 and read it through, then go to thread 2 before coming to this one. I know it's a lot to sift through but it needs to be done.
 
I have read through most of the 3 threads on this case. I've seen plenty, enough to know to question the sources when the story keeps changing, rather than to keep clinging to the sources.

As far as what happened to the teeth, they were according to an article in earlier thread on this case turned over to a forensic dentist in 1976. So when did the man die 1980 or 1990 or 2000? How many years were the teeth left with the dentist? What was the name of the dentist?

You betcha it's LE's fault. Someone there was in charge of keeping track of evidence.

I'm not accusing anyone in particular of doing anything, but I think when a cover up is a good possibility, that everyone who has had anything to do with the case has to be held in question to a certain extent. It's par for the course.

The crime scene photos are hinky, and most of the photos in this case have either been retouched or the facial features botched. If any of the 4 of you would care to offer your explanations or how you satisfy the questions these things should raise in your minds, I'm more than happy to listen. I'm open minded. I value input.

In addition, I'd like to hear your explanation for how someone shot in the back of the head with a .357 still has an intact face. I'm sure you noticed the mess the girl's chest area was in. I don't know which load the shooter was using, but it's a good bet he didn't switch to a smaller grained bullets when he shot them in the head.

How does the male victim go from having kinky hair in the crime scene photo to straight hair in the morgue photo?

Don't these things elicit strong questions in your minds? They do in mine.
 
The crime scene photos are hinky, and most of the photos in this case have either been retouched or the facial features botched. If any of the 4 of you would care to offer your explanations or how you satisfy the questions these things should raise in your minds, I'm more than happy to listen. I'm open minded. I value input.

In addition, I'd like to hear your explanation for how someone shot in the back of the head with a .357 still has an intact face. I'm sure you noticed the mess the girl's chest area was in. I don't know which load the shooter was using, but it's a good bet he didn't switch to a smaller grained bullets when he shot them in the head.

How does the male victim go from having kinky hair in the crime scene photo to straight hair in the morgue photo?

Don't these things elicit strong questions in your minds? They do in mine.

Respectfully snipped and my bolds.....

About the hair, when I'm looking at both photographs, honestly his hair in the crime scene photo doesn't look kinky to me. It just looks like it is all back away from his face. Maybe being up against the grass makes it look kinky. But in the morgue it is all combed down. I may be missing something but I just can't see where it looks kinky, like a different texture, in the crime scene photo as opposed to the morgue photo.

As to where they were shot, I didn't think they were shot in the head. From what I read last night again, I thought it said back, chest and throat. Maybe I'm getting my cases mixed up.

At any rate, I am posting on another case that has taken up a lot of my time so I'm going to be away from this one for a while. I'll start reading on here again towards the end of the week.

I did submit this case to Dateline a short time ago and actually got the chance to e-mail the guy who responded. He took a look at it and said it was "too old" to be featured on Dateline. I haven't heard back from America's Most Wanted or 48 Hours so I may contact them again when I get done working on the other case I'm involved with on here.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong.
From what I've read, it seems both Jane and Jock were first shot once in the back, from behind...with a .357 mag. pistol.

Then the killer shoots them twice from the front, once in the chest and once in the neck... definitely an over kill, imo...:put em up:
 
Thanks for responding Cambria. What I was going by on the hair is what I see as apparent bushiness. I have straight hair myself & straight hair just doesn't have the body to it that bushy or kinky hair can produce. Guy's hair looks bushy, imo, but you did make me take an even closer look, and I can see where you might think otherwise. I find differing opinions to be helpful! It is something I will keep in mind from now on.

Yes, there were early reports that the victims had been shot in the back of the head, and this was repeated when the bodies were exhumed. Those pictures with the neck shots look like they might be sketches rather than actual photos. Again, my opinion. Obviously neither victim would need a shot to the neck if they'd been shot in the head with a .357. The converse is true as well.

I'm sorry to hear Dateline thought the case was too old. Hope you have better luck with one of the other shows.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
160
Guests online
2,080
Total visitors
2,240

Forum statistics

Threads
590,043
Messages
17,929,276
Members
228,044
Latest member
Bosie
Back
Top