Maricopa Jane Doe 1999 Thread #4

I do have to read part 2 again - but in part 1 - it does state that those other items were located in the emergency lane of the highway - outside of the car.

I do not think they knew her at all before that afternoon. However, I have a difficult time reconciling the fact that she does not seem like a "street level" prostitute, yet she would get into a car with complete strangers and agree to drive 3,000 miles with them. I just can't take everything Alonzo and Lindsey have said at face value.

OTOH - we are just trying to identify our little MJD and not solve a crime. Unfortunately, the only "facts" we have are based on statements made by low-life criminals and tied to her alleged life of prostitution - even though much of the physical evidence says otherwise.

After reading part 1 again, i thought that maybe the bungee cord could have belonged to someone who stopped to help. The floral sheet was placed there by a passer-by who stopped to render aid, maybe the sheet was in their car and the bungee cord was with it?

There is also no mention of anyone removing the necklace, did anyone else notice that? It did say the clothing was removed by emergancey personnel but no mention of the necklace. Could it not have been on MJD?

Auburnmommyof2 said:

There is also no mention of anyone removing the necklace, did anyone else notice that? It did say the clothing was removed by emergancey personnel but no mention of the necklace. Could it not have been on MJD?

Click to expand...

You know, I didn't really think of the necklace being there as odd, but now that I think about it, maybe it is. Is it possible it came off in the "fall" or could it have been something else. Was this the one with the cross and the ring?

Fairy1 said:

You know, I didn't really think of the necklace being there as odd, but now that I think about it, maybe it is. Is it possible it came off in the "fall" or could it have been something else. Was this the one with the cross and the ring?

Click to expand...

It is my understanding that it is the necklace with the cross and the ring.

Auburnmommyof2 said:

There is also no mention of anyone removing the necklace, did anyone else notice that? It did say the clothing was removed by emergancey personnel but no mention of the necklace. Could it not have been on MJD?

Click to expand...

I think the paramedics were probably so worried about trying to save her life they never gave it a thought to write anything down about the necklace. I wonder where MJD's pimp (Kelly Lipsey) went to after he got out of jail? He probably knew her name and where she came from. I also wonder if the policeman made and error when he was referring to Alonzo as William in the police report. It's seems funny that any other time Lindsey spoke of him she refereed to him as Alonzo not William.

Teresa Larson said:

I think the paramedics were probably so worried about trying to save her life they never gave it a thought to write anything down about the necklace. I wonder where MJD's pimp (Kelly Lipsey) went to after he got out of jail? He probably knew her name and where she came from. I also wonder if the policeman made and error when he was referring to Alonzo as William in the police report. It's seems funny that any other time Lindsey spoke of him she refereed to him as Alonzo not William.

Click to expand...

KTL is in the middle of a trial for pandering and receiving money from a prostitute as well as money laundering right now (In Maricopa County). There is a bench warrant issued in the trial for a failure to appear, but I cannot tell who it is for. There are 3-4 defendants and he is one.

The charges regarding the minor appear to be ongoing as well, if you can believe that-there is a probation violation charge associated with that case from 5/13/2008.

please see;
http://www.supreme.state.az.us/publicaccess/notification/partylist.asp?id=

Teresa Larson said:

I think the paramedics were probably so worried about trying to save her life they never gave it a thought to write anything down about the necklace. I wonder where MJD's pimp (Kelly Lipsey) went to after he got out of jail? He probably knew her name and where she came from. I also wonder if the policeman made and error when he was referring to Alonzo as William in the police report. It's seems funny that any other time Lindsey spoke of him she refereed to him as Alonzo not William.

Click to expand...

KTL is MJD's presumptive pimp, I think...it is a fair assumption that has not been proven...

Teresa Larson said:

I think the paramedics were probably so worried about trying to save her life they never gave it a thought to write anything down about the necklace. I wonder where MJD's pimp (Kelly Lipsey) went to after he got out of jail? He probably knew her name and where she came from. I also wonder if the policeman made and error when he was referring to Alonzo as William in the police report. It's seems funny that any other time Lindsey spoke of him she refereed to him as Alonzo not William.

Click to expand...

There is explination on the thread about the Alonzo/William thing, Alonzo is his alias iirc. About the necklace, I just thought it was interesting that it was noted that the closthes were removed but not that the necklace was removed. We've been putting a lot of emphasis on the necklace and ring in IDing MJD and just thought I'd mention it. I still think its probably her's.

Marstan said:

I don't know if you know about this site or not - it is free and you could look up all the alias names this guy used. It is:

http://www.supreme.state.az.us/publicaccess/notification/search.asp?id=

Click to expand...

How do I do that?

fmw63 said:

How do I do that?

Click to expand...

I cannot figure this out either. This is our case number at the same website;
Case Number: S-1100-CR-99025155

You can see that his probation was revoked and a warrant issued for 1999-perhaps some of the more law savvy people can walk me through the case? Looks like the warrant has been reviewed etc and changed to an evidence suppression one?

Hey folks: look what I found on the Maricopa County Sherriff's website of booking photo's:

The DOB listed is 7/28/1979...isn't our boy's 7/28/1972???

http://www.mcso.org/index.php?a=GetModule&mn=Mugshot

here is the booking info:

There is a post above, I will go look for it that has multiple alias names for Alfonzo (first and last names) just type in the name in the blocks, you can assume he is using the same dob and see if there are any other charges against him. I will do it on Alonzo and try to copy and paste here.

fmw63 said:

How do I do that?

Click to expand...

CASE DETAIL http://www.supreme.state.az.us/publicaccess/notification/casedetail.asp?cs_id=ioiogqma&crt_name=Pinal%20County%20Superior
Case Number: S-1100-CR-99025155Case Category: CriminalCase Title: ST VS FERNANDEZCourt: Pinal County SuperiorJudge: THE HON JANNA L VANDERPOOLFiling Date: 02/04/1999Disposition Date: 05/17/1999
Party Name: ALONZO FERNANDEZParty Type: D 1 - DEFNDT/RESPNDTDate of Birth: 07/28/1972Citation: CNONE Count 1: HIT AND RUN DEATH/INJURYDisposition Date: 05/17/1999Disposition: JDGMT GUILTY/RESP SENT IMPOSEDCount 2: POSSESS/USE MARIJUANA < 2#Disposition Date: 05/17/1999Disposition: COURT DISMISSALCount 3: MANSLAUGHTER-RECKLESSDisposition Date: 05/17/1999Disposition: COURT DISMISSAL
Party Name: RESTRICTEDParty Type: D 2 - DEFNDT/RESPNDTDate of Birth:
Party Name: RESTRICTEDParty Type: D 3 - DEFNDT/RESPNDTDate of Birth:
Party Name: RESTRICTEDParty Type: D 4 - DEFNDT/RESPNDTDate of Birth:
Party Name: STATE OF ARIZONAParty Type: P 1 - PLNTIF/PETITNERDate of Birth:
Event DateEvent DescriptionParty1/27/2009 CAL: REVIEW VIOLATION WARRANT 4/24/2008 COMPARISON/COPY FEE PER PAGE D 1 1/22/2008 CAL: REVIEW VIOLATION WARRANT 1/22/2008 ME: SET/CONT REV PROB VIOL WAR D 1 1/8/2008 NTC: SETTING/CONTINUING D 1 1/23/2007 CAL: REVIEW VIOLATION WARRANT 1/23/2007 ME: SET/CONT REV PROB VIOL WAR D 1 1/19/2007 NTC: TRANSFER OF CASE D 1 1/24/2006 CAL: REVIEW VIOLATION WARRANT 1/24/2006 ME: SET/CONT REV PROB VIOL WAR D 1 1/24/2006 CAL: REVIEW BENCH WARRANT 1/9/2006 ME: REASSIGNMENT OF JUDGE D 1 1/25/2005 CAL: REVIEW VIOLATION WARRANT 1/25/2005 ME: SET/CONT REV PROB VIOL WAR D 1 1/27/2004 ME: SET/CONT REV PROB VIOL WAR D 1 1/27/2004 CAL: REVIEW VIOLATION WARRANT 1/22/2003 ME: SET/CONT REV PROB VIOL WAR D 1 1/22/2003 CAL: REVIEW VIOLATION WARRANT 12/17/2002 CAL: REVIEW VIOLATION WARRANT 12/17/2002 ME: SET/CONT REV PROB VIOL WAR D 1 9/17/2002 CAL: REVIEW VIOLATION WARRANT 9/17/2002 ME: SET/CONT REV PROB VIOL WAR D 1 3/19/2002 CAL: REVIEW VIOLATION WARRANT 3/19/2002 ME: SET/CONT REV PROB VIOL WAR D 1 9/18/2001 ME: REVIEW OF WARRANT D 1 9/18/2001 CAL: REVIEW VIOLATION WARRANT 3/13/2001 ME: REVIEW OF WARRANT D 1 9/13/2000 ME: REVIEW OF WARRANT D 1 3/14/2000 ME: REVIEW OF WARRANT D 1 9/17/1999 PET REVOKE PROB & ORD WAR/SUM D 1 9/17/1999 PET REVOKE PROB WARRANT ISS/CR D 1 8/9/1999 SUPV PROBATION-DISPO ONLY D 1 8/9/1999 DIVERSION-DISPO SCREEN ONLY D 1 8/9/1999 JAIL/PRISON-DISPO ONLY D 1 6/30/1999 ORDER GRANT MOT TO WITHDRAW D 1 6/10/1999 MOTION TO WITHDRAW D 1 5/17/1999 JDGMT SUSP SENT/IMPOS TRM PROB D 1 5/17/1999 RELEASE ORDER D 1 5/17/1999 CLERK STAT NTC OF FEL CNVICTN D 1 5/17/1999 NOTICE RIGHT OF REVIEW AFT CNV D 1 5/17/1999 ADULT PROB FEES DECLINING BAL D 1 5/17/1999 SENTENCE OF PROBATION D 1 5/17/1999 ME: ACCPT GLTY PLEA/IMPOS SENT D 1 5/13/1999 PRESENTENCE REPORT D 1 4/19/1999 ME: CHANGE OF PLEA HRG D 1 4/14/1999 PLEA AGREEMENT D 1 4/13/1999 NOTICE OF DISCLOSURE D 1 4/9/1999 ME: ORDER SETTING D 1 3/26/1999 ME: RELEASE HRG D 1 3/26/1999 ME: ORDER CONTINUING D 1 3/12/1999 NOTICE OF HRG D 1 3/12/1999 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION D 1 3/11/1999 NOTICE OF DISCLOSURE D 1 3/11/1999 ORDER OF DISMISSAL/CASE D 1 3/10/1999 RESPONSE TO MOTION D 1 3/9/1999 NOTICE OF CHANGE OF PLEA HRG D 1 3/3/1999 NOTICE OF DISCLOSURE P 1 3/3/1999 DISCOVERY DISCLOSURE P 1 2/26/1999 TRANSCRIPT GRAND JURY PROCDNGS D 1 2/19/1999 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT BY PLTF P 1 2/18/1999 MOTION TO DISMISS P 1 2/16/1999 NOTICE PROSECUTNG ATTY ASSGNMT D 1 2/12/1999 ME: ARRAIGNMENT D 1 2/12/1999 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE D 1 2/10/1999 TRANSMITTAL CERTIFICATE FROM D 1 2/4/1999 ME: GRAND JURY INDICTMENT D 1 2/4/1999 INDICTMENT D 1 1/1/1950 CONTRACT AUDITED D 1
Click here for court contact information.
&#169;2002 Arizona Supreme Court. All Rights Reserved.

Home | New Search | Frequently Asked Questions
CASE DETAIL
Case Number: M-0741-2079216Case Category: CriminalCase Title: St of Az vs DEJONGCourt: Phoenix MunicipalJudge: UNKNOWNFiling Date: 11/18/1998Disposition Date: 07/02/2005
Party Name: LINDSEY D DEJONGParty Type: D 1 - DEFNDT/RESPNDTDate of Birth: 07/30/1980Citation: PCP8917134 Count 1: LOCAL CHARGEDisposition Date: 12/08/1999Disposition: FTA WARRANT ISSUEDCitation: PCP8914519 Count 1: LOCAL CHARGEDisposition Date: 12/08/1999Disposition: FTA WARRANT ISSUEDCitation: PCP8918065 Count 1: LOCAL CHARGEDisposition Date: 12/08/1999Disposition: FTA WARRANT ISSUED

Lindsey has three warrants which may be why she won't talk to anyone. Since they were misdemeanors, they would not extredite anyway and they would no longer be relevant, except maybe to collect the fines.

Marstan said:

Home | New Search | Frequently Asked Questions
CASE DETAIL
Case Number: M-0741-2079216Case Category: CriminalCase Title: St of Az vs DEJONGCourt: Phoenix MunicipalJudge: UNKNOWNFiling Date: 11/18/1998Disposition Date: 07/02/2005
Party Name: LINDSEY D DEJONGParty Type: D 1 - DEFNDT/RESPNDTDate of Birth: 07/30/1980Citation: PCP8917134 Count 1: LOCAL CHARGEDisposition Date: 12/08/1999Disposition: FTA WARRANT ISSUEDCitation: PCP8914519 Count 1: LOCAL CHARGEDisposition Date: 12/08/1999Disposition: FTA WARRANT ISSUEDCitation: PCP8918065 Count 1: LOCAL CHARGEDisposition Date: 12/08/1999Disposition: FTA WARRANT ISSUED

Lindsey has three warrants which may be why she won't talk to anyone. Since they were misdemeanors, they would not extredite anyway and they would no longer be relevant, except maybe to collect the fines.

Click to expand...

FTA= Failure to Appear, is that correct? Thanks for the work Marstan!! Where are Alonzo's aliases?

Marstan said:

Home | New Search | Frequently Asked Questions
CASE DETAIL
Case Number: M-0741-2079216Case Category: CriminalCase Title: St of Az vs DEJONGCourt: Phoenix MunicipalJudge: UNKNOWNFiling Date: 11/18/1998Disposition Date: 07/02/2005
Party Name: LINDSEY D DEJONGParty Type: D 1 - DEFNDT/RESPNDTDate of Birth: 07/30/1980Citation: PCP8917134 Count 1: LOCAL CHARGEDisposition Date: 12/08/1999Disposition: FTA WARRANT ISSUEDCitation: PCP8914519 Count 1: LOCAL CHARGEDisposition Date: 12/08/1999Disposition: FTA WARRANT ISSUEDCitation: PCP8918065 Count 1: LOCAL CHARGEDisposition Date: 12/08/1999Disposition: FTA WARRANT ISSUED

Lindsey has three warrants which may be why she won't talk to anyone. Since they were misdemeanors, they would not extredite anyway and they would no longer be relevant, except maybe to collect the fines.

Click to expand...

Thank you for getting this information to post. I had posted about her FTA but then couldn't find it again on the AZ website.

Does anyone know how the interviews/article went with the reporter Christine was working with? Any info is appreciated.

believe09 said:

FTA= Failure to Appear, is that correct? Thanks for the work Marstan!! Where are Alonzo's aliases?

Click to expand...

I don't know, they were not on the police reports I received. It was posted here some where but I am not sure. Perhaps it was from the Maricopa Web site? anyone?

I'm pretty sure FTA is the abbreviation for fail to appear.

While I, as we all, are looking to ID MJD as the basis of this forum, it appears Alonzo, William or whoever he is, had an extremely light sentance with the initial charges and made out with a plea bargian.

I would hope, LDJ, Alonzo, Kelly -with a rap sheet a mile long- and whomever else are involved in this case would realize just how much may be at stake with this case being reopened as a result of our inquiries attempting to ID MJD. LDJ, imo, has much to lose as a parent. Though, I am quite certain LE will continue to act as if this case is as cold as it was a decade ago until they have anything solid for charges. Not sure I would "bank" on that as a parent. I know I wouldn't.

As believe said, let's let LE take care of their case, and let's focus on MJD's name.