Luna_Myst
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2009
- Messages
- 145
- Reaction score
- 27
No, they most likely wouldn't be able to tell whether the remains were a child. Even an expert can't tell by just looking. Unless the skeleton was relatively intact, they probably couldn't even tell whether it was a large person or small.
They probably assumed it was one of several hunters, hikers, and mushroom hunters who are missing in that general area.
Didnt they say partial remains were found? So that too would make it harder to discern child or not correct? Depending on what they have? So dont like having to type that, even worse thinking about it. R.I.P. Lindsey Baum.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk