Found Alive The girl with the purple bell bottoms

Sleuthster · #1 03-11-2010, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julessleuther

Were any of them Rose Cole? There are one or two photos that I wonder if they could be Rose (although, I really think Rose might be alive.)

I actually thought one of them looks like Rose Cole when I was looking at missing kids vs the pictures.

Also,

http://www.doenetwork.org/cases/587ufca.html

one of the girls in the pic had purple bell bottoms and brown hair halfway down her back.
Many of the girls have their shirts tied up like the doe. Also, there is another girl with a brown leather jacket with faux fur collar.

carbuff · #2 03-11-2010, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleuthster

I actually thought one of them looks like Rose Cole when I was looking at missing kids vs the pictures.

Also,

http://www.doenetwork.org/cases/587ufca.html

one of the girls in the pic had purple bell bottoms and brown hair halfway down her back.
Many of the girls have their shirts tied up like the doe. Also, there is another girl with a brown leather jacket with faux fur collar.

You mean this one? Yikes, yeah, even the sketch of the outfit matches. The remote canyon and pulled-down pants also fit. The UID's chin looks a lot stronger, but it's close enough to call in.

Sleuthster · #3 03-11-2010, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carbuff

You mean this one? Yikes, yeah, even the sketch of the outfit matches. The remote canyon and pulled-down pants also fit. The UID's chin looks a lot stronger, but it's close enough to call in.

Yes, thank you.

And the bellbottoms on the girl standing on the street have 2 metal snaps.

momma0f4 · #4 03-11-2010, 07:54 PM

TOTALLY Matches! If even says the pants are purple, in the picture the pants are purple as well! I think this is a match!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by carbuff

You mean this one? Yikes, yeah, even the sketch of the outfit matches. The remote canyon and pulled-down pants also fit. The UID's chin looks a lot stronger, but it's close enough to call in.

Sleuthster · #5 03-11-2010, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by momma0f4

TOTALLY Matches! If even says the pants are purple, in the picture the pants are purple as well! I think this is a match!!!

Yes I am pretty confident. LE should have pic's of the clothes found on the doe to compaire.

dsntslp · #6 03-11-2010, 10:36 PM

LadyL, I agree, that match and purple bell bottoms girl are both outstanding matches.

Cymro · #7 03-12-2010, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carbuff

You mean this one? Yikes, yeah, even the sketch of the outfit matches. The remote canyon and pulled-down pants also fit. The UID's chin looks a lot stronger, but it's close enough to call in.

Date and demographics match very well. Both have knee scars, one on the left knee, one below the right, but these could be mixed up.

Left to right: Alcala unsub, Wilma Rae Vermaas and reconstruction of Jane Doe

Wilma is missing from LA a week before the UID was found. Age 23 and 5'4" at 110 lbs. This has already been discussed

here

and was being compared nearly two years ago, but to date, nothing concrete has been forthcoming.

BethInAK · #8 03-12-2010, 05:50 PM

on the Alcala unsub and Jane Doe Purple Bellbottoms :
the description of the shirt is so on target I about came out of my seat except the sleeve length. The girls shirt is tan, printed with what appears to be rust colored palm trees:

"Tan multi-colored print blouse, with rust colored tree figures, long sleeves with elastic cuffs, worn midriff style, size medium. Labeled "styled in California". No brassier found. Purple bell-bottom trousers with 2 inch wide cuffs, with two metal snaps and zipper in front, labeled "male" made in USA, "

Sleuthster · #9 03-12-2010, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BethInAK

on the Alcala unsub and Jane Doe Purple Bellbottoms :
the description of the shirt is so on target I about came out of my seat except the sleeve length. The girls shirt is tan, printed with what appears to be rust colored palm trees:

"Tan multi-colored print blouse, with rust colored tree figures, long sleeves with elastic cuffs, worn midriff style, size medium. Labeled "styled in California". No brassier found. Purple bell-bottom trousers with 2 inch wide cuffs, with two metal snaps and zipper in front, labeled "male" made in USA, "

I am positive it's her.

JoeFromLB · #10 03-12-2010, 06:08 PM

Beth in AK...looking at the thread on Jane Doe (purple bellbottoms), there is some speculation that it may have been Wilma Ray Vermaas.

LASD Jane Doe Number 25, age 19-23, found 11 April 1976, Los Angeles County, CA - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

http://www.charleyproject.org/cases/...aas_wilma.html

There is some similarity (at least to my eyes) between Vermaas and the woman in the photo you posted from Alcala's collection.

http://www.charleyproject.org/images...maas_wilma.jpg

Cymro · #11 03-12-2010, 06:45 PM

Joe from LB - here's the comparison I posted earlier (slightly lower resolution than the Nancy Grace picture though).

Unsub, Wilma, Doe left to right:

Assuming that this girl, who would now be around 50 years old, doesn't recognize herself and come forward, What we really need is to date the photo from the ink and paper. If that's not possible, we need to try to figure out what the cars are parked behind the shot to put a date on it.

I think what you have is a 1974 Chrysler New Yorker in front (although it could possibly be a Ford LTD) and behind is a 1971-75 Cadillac de Ville (either sedan or coupe). So it seems this photo couldn't have been taken before late 1973 but beyond that, it's not much help.

I just can't get over the clothing description, even allowing for the issue over the length of the sleeves.

Sleuthster · #12 03-12-2010, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cymro

Joe from LB - here's the comparison I posted earlier (slightly lower resolution than the Nancy Grace picture though).

Unsub, Wilma, Doe left to right:

Assuming that this girl, who would now be around 50 years old, doesn't recognize herself and come forward, What we really need is to date the photo from the ink and paper. If that's not possible, we need to try to figure out what the cars are parked behind the shot to put a date on it.

I think what you have is a 1974 Chrysler New Yorker in front (although it could possibly be a Ford LTD) and behind is a 1971-75 Cadillac de Ville (either sedan or coupe). So it seems this photo couldn't have been taken before late 1973 but beyond that, it's not much help.

I just can't get over the clothing description, even allowing for the issue over the length of the sleeves.

When I found this yesterday I was pretty confident that the doe and the girl in the pic are the same. I am not so sure about the doe being Wilma. At first glance they look simular but the cowlick and the who face/jaw structure is different. Nose is different to. Girl in pic has short bridge from eyes to tip of nose and Wilma's is longer.

Cymro · #13 03-12-2010, 06:53 PM

Likewise. There is a lot of similarity though but somehow the look doesn't sit right between Wilma and the girl in the photo. The spacing of the eyebrows is actually pretty similar but the girl in the pic seems to be screwing up her forehead, which makes the gap look narrower than it probably really is. So yeah, I'm torn as to whether it's Wilma or not... I can't bring myself to say that it isn't.

tatertot · #14 03-12-2010, 07:33 PM

Re: the girl with the palm tree shirt and bellbottoms, wouldn't her pants likely have had more than just the two snaps that are visible? There are two snaps showing below her belt but you'd think there would be another snap at the waistband, and it wouldn't make much sense not to have one in between. I would estimate there would be two snaps under the belt in addition to the two lower ones below it.

Cymro · #15 03-12-2010, 07:44 PM

Tatertot,

I thought of that, too. But there are possible explanations - any one of these would suffice:

1. The belt and pants are a set, therefore to keep the belt flush and to keep costs down, no need for visible metal snaps that will be covered by the belt anyway. The Doe's pants had a zipper as well as the snaps so the snaps were likely onliy for show.

2. The cops reported what they saw, i.e., two snaps, in the same way we have when looking at the clothing, and overlooked to mention that the clothing was covered by a belt. Anyone who recognized the clothes would only ever have seen the two snaps unless they either dressed/undressed the victim or did her laundry;

3. Although not reported, the snaps were removed during the attack and, like the victim's jewelry, were taken away as trophies (or maybe the jewelry was to be sold).

Even so it is another small discrepancy. I still don't think it precludes submission.

CarlK90245 · #16 03-12-2010, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tatertot

Re: the girl with the palm tree shirt and bellbottoms, wouldn't her pants likely have had more than just the two snaps that are visible? There are two snaps showing below her belt but you'd think there would be another snap at the waistband, and it wouldn't make much sense not to have one in between. I would estimate there would be two snaps under the belt in addition to the two lower ones below it.

The pants also have a zipper, so I think the snaps are just there for looks. It follows that there is no point in putting ornamental snaps under the belt.

As for the era, I would say this is early to mid 70's. I don't remember anyone that I knew from the late 70's wearing bell bottoms with that much flare in the bells. I remember that the girls were all wearing Dittos. The super-wide bells is more of an early 70's look.

IMO, she definitely is not Wilma. But she very well could be 587UFCA. She doesn't resemble the drawing much, although she does have long hair like the girl in the sketch, but the pants fit to a tee.

The shirt is similar, but probably not the same shirt. I don't think that the description of the long sleeves with elastic cuffs was a mistake.

But on the pants alone, It's still a definite call-in.

ali · #17 03-12-2010, 09:23 PM

Were purple bell bottoms common in the 70s? I was born in 89 so I have no idea what was common back then...Purple pants really arent something I've seen alot of...

CarlK90245 · #18 03-12-2010, 09:24 PM

I just noticed something: Why are all the cars parked on the left side of the street?

Is the photo printed backwards, or is she in a country where they drive on the left side of the street?

Those don't look like the kind of cars that you see anywhere but the USA, so I would suspect that the photo is printed backwards.

amandab · #19 03-12-2010, 09:31 PM

That bell bottom pic blows my margins every time. :/

sealevel · #20 03-12-2010, 10:03 PM

The cars could be parked on the left side because it's a one-way street. They definitely look like typical American cars of the era.

amandab · #21 03-12-2010, 10:14 PM

Thanks for scaling it down, Carl

bluestarzz · #22 03-12-2010, 10:33 PM

those are U. S. land yayte cars.....from the 70's
the photo struck me as totally u.s. from then.
in a city..or course.
bluestarzzz

southlaguy · #23 03-12-2010, 10:46 PM

I don't think it's a one way street. Look at the car in the far background on the top left. It appears to be facing away. The pic might be backwards.

southlaguy · #24 03-12-2010, 10:52 PM

Also, the buttons on her shirt are on the right and go thru holes on the left side of her shirt. I think women's shirts have buttons on the left and go thru holes on the right. All my shirts have buttons on the right. Can any women comment on this?

not_my_kids · #25 03-12-2010, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by southlaguy

Also, the buttons on her shirt are on the right and go thru holes on the left side of her shirt. I think women's shirts have buttons on the left and go thru holes on the right. All my shirts have buttons on the right. Can any women comment on this?

By a quick check of my shirt, you would be correct.