Match! AR - Little Rock, WhtMale UP5813, 45-75, Under I430 Overpass, 25 Sep'00- Bobby Wayne Burr

New Posts

Case is officially closed:

Located & Identified Persons

Bobby Wayne Burr (NamUs MP case #9810)
Missing Since:January 1, 2000
Missing From: Little Rock, Arkansas
Found: September 25, 2000 in Little Rock (NamUs UID case #5813).
Match submitted by: "Creepedout" in 2017 and submitted to Law Enforcement by the Doe Network.
Confirmed :In 2019
Click to expand...
 
Great job, Creepedout! Keep up the good work. I'm happy that Mr. Burr is no longer a John Doe. May he rest in peace.
 
creepedout said:
Can't find where I read it, but I believe his brother reported him missing. Don't know the brother's name though, or if he is still alive.
Click to expand...
Actually my dad j
carbuff said:
Poor guy. I hope he has family wanting him, whoever he is.
Click to expand...
He does I'm his niece and I've missed him since that day. I'll never forget the day he went missing. I've waited since that day to hopefully see him again.
 
creepedout said:
Burr is not listed among the ruleouts. I'd like opinions on this one; if others agree, I believe it should be submitted. DNA is listed as on file for both.
Click to expand...

I've often wondered about NamUs automatically cross-checking DNA of MPs and UIDs. If I understand correctly both DNA profiles were in NamUs but they weren't compared until you submitted the cases as a possible match. Correct? If so, then I suppose we shouldn't assume two profiles have been automatically excluded yet not listed as exclusions. Am I on the right track here?
 
Brigette burr said:
Thank you. Bobby is my uncle.
Click to expand...

Welcome to Websleuths, Brigette! Hopefully you've gotten some comfort and relief by finally being able to solve the "where is he?" part of having lost him. The not knowing must be the hardest part to deal with for the loved ones. I can't imagine the anguish you and others must have felt. My condolences to you.
 
YaYa_521 said:
I've often wondered about NamUs automatically cross-checking DNA of MPs and UIDs. If I understand correctly both DNA profiles were in NamUs but they weren't compared until you submitted the cases as a possible match. Correct? If so, then I suppose we shouldn't assume two profiles have been automatically excluded yet not listed as exclusions. Am I on the right track here?
Click to expand...

Years back I wrote a couple posts about this, which I have linked below. Warning: they are out of date and grossly oversimplified.

post #1: IL - IL - Mascoutah, BlkFem Skeletal 327UFIL, 20-40, SK victim, off I-64, Jan'02

post #2: IL - IL - Mascoutah, BlkFem Skeletal 327UFIL, 20-40, SK victim, off I-64, Jan'02

I believe the core takeaways are still true:
  • NamUs is not the same as CODIS ("Combined DNA Index System"). DNA profiles are stored and searched in CODIS. An investigator may choose to tell NamUs that the MP's or UID's DNA profile is already available in CODIS or elsewhere. Investigators making new entries in NamUs are supposed to submit DNA profiles to CODIS if available.
  • DNA profiles "flow upward" according to each jurisdiction's own practices. A DNA profile available in a local city database might not be in the state database. A DNA profile in a state database might not be in the national database.
  • Even if DNA profiles for both MP and UID are in the same databases, there may not be a "hit." Matches and associations depend on the types of DNA used, the sources, and the completeness of the profiles.
In other words, don't assume anything.
 
zinc said:
Years back I wrote a couple posts about this, which I have linked below. Warning: they are out of date and grossly oversimplified.

post #1: IL - IL - Mascoutah, BlkFem Skeletal 327UFIL, 20-40, SK victim, off I-64, Jan'02

post #2: IL - IL - Mascoutah, BlkFem Skeletal 327UFIL, 20-40, SK victim, off I-64, Jan'02

I believe the core takeaways are still true:
  • NamUs is not the same as CODIS ("Combined DNA Index System"). DNA profiles are stored and searched in CODIS. An investigator may choose to tell NamUs that the MP's or UID's DNA profile is already available in CODIS or elsewhere. Investigators making new entries in NamUs are supposed to submit DNA profiles to CODIS if available.
  • DNA profiles "flow upward" according to each jurisdiction's own practices. A DNA profile available in a local city database might not be in the state database. A DNA profile in a state database might not be in the national database.
  • Even if DNA profiles for both MP and UID are in the same databases, there may not be a "hit." Matches and associations depend on the types of DNA used, the sources, and the completeness of the profiles.
In other words, don't assume anything.
Click to expand...
Awesome info. Tyvm!
 
zinc said:
Years back I wrote a couple posts about this, which I have linked below. Warning: they are out of date and grossly oversimplified.

post #1: IL - IL - Mascoutah, BlkFem Skeletal 327UFIL, 20-40, SK victim, off I-64, Jan'02

post #2: IL - IL - Mascoutah, BlkFem Skeletal 327UFIL, 20-40, SK victim, off I-64, Jan'02

I believe the core takeaways are still true:
  • NamUs is not the same as CODIS ("Combined DNA Index System"). DNA profiles are stored and searched in CODIS. An investigator may choose to tell NamUs that the MP's or UID's DNA profile is already available in CODIS or elsewhere. Investigators making new entries in NamUs are supposed to submit DNA profiles to CODIS if available.
  • DNA profiles "flow upward" according to each jurisdiction's own practices. A DNA profile available in a local city database might not be in the state database. A DNA profile in a state database might not be in the national database.
  • Even if DNA profiles for both MP and UID are in the same databases, there may not be a "hit." Matches and associations depend on the types of DNA used, the sources, and the completeness of the profiles.
In other words, don't assume anything.
Click to expand...
@Bit of hope Iirc you recently asked about DNA availability and whether they were automatically compared. Zinc's excellent explanations here and in the threads linked above might help with clarification.

ETA - @zinc Again, ty for this explanation!
 
zinc said:
Years back I wrote a couple posts about this, which I have linked below. Warning: they are out of date and grossly oversimplified.

post #1: IL - IL - Mascoutah, BlkFem Skeletal 327UFIL, 20-40, SK victim, off I-64, Jan'02

post #2: IL - IL - Mascoutah, BlkFem Skeletal 327UFIL, 20-40, SK victim, off I-64, Jan'02

I believe the core takeaways are still true:
  • NamUs is not the same as CODIS ("Combined DNA Index System"). DNA profiles are stored and searched in CODIS. An investigator may choose to tell NamUs that the MP's or UID's DNA profile is already available in CODIS or elsewhere. Investigators making new entries in NamUs are supposed to submit DNA profiles to CODIS if available.
  • DNA profiles "flow upward" according to each jurisdiction's own practices. A DNA profile available in a local city database might not be in the state database. A DNA profile in a state database might not be in the national database.
  • Even if DNA profiles for both MP and UID are in the same databases, there may not be a "hit." Matches and associations depend on the types of DNA used, the sources, and the completeness of the profiles.
In other words, don't assume anything.
Click to expand...

Also a comparison won't be made if certain other parameters don't match. For instance if the MP's last seen date is after the UID's found date, it won't be compared.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 53 more.
Total: 1,166 (members: 54, guests: 1,112)

Online statistics

Members online
54
Guests online
1,112
Total visitors
1,166
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,788
Messages
17,958,882
Members
228,607
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top