CA CA - Ventura Co, UnsFem UP16747, UnkAge, infant body in open field, Sep'78

Romulus

Ivan
Joined
Aug 9, 2015
Messages
3,185
Reaction score
4,401
Website
meettomy.site
Namus UP 16747

https://www.identifyus.org/en/cases/16747

Unidentified Infant Body/Remains (Unsure Female)

Found September 1, 1978 in Ventura County, CA
Body Condition: Recognizable face
Probable year of death: to

Vital Statistics
Estimated age: Unknown Age (Infant)

Approximate Height: 16 estimate
Approximate Weight: 6 estimate
Hair Color: Blond/Strawberry

Eye Color:
Blue
Scars and marks:
nothing

Clothing & Accessories
Clothing: nothing

Jewerly: nothing

Footwear: nothing

Accessories: nothing

Identifiers
Fingerprints: Fingerprint information is not available
Dentals: Dental information / charting is not available
DNA:
Sample submitted - tests complete

Case History
:
Decedent's body was found in Thousand Oaks in a grassy area
 
I am curious about whether this has been discussed in conjunction with this Jane Doe. Most likely the timing of discovery and close proximity is just coincidence, but if they are connected, then I'd imagine identifying one could identify both. Too bad neither has a PMI listed.
 
I am curious about whether this has been discussed in conjunction with this Jane Doe. Most likely the timing of discovery and close proximity is just coincidence, but if they are connected, then I'd imagine identifying one could identify both. Too bad neither has a PMI listed.
Very interesting! Coincidence? Maybe. I'd inquire to the agency in charge to determine if they have considered a connection.
 
I am curious about whether this has been discussed in conjunction with this Jane Doe. Most likely the timing of discovery and close proximity is just coincidence, but if they are connected, then I'd imagine identifying one could identify both. Too bad neither has a PMI listed.
I think the baby was found quickly - it was September, and they have hair and eye colour both listed for this little one, in addition to 'recognisable face'. The woman, they know hair colour, but not eye colour. That could mean she had damage to her face, or she was out there long enough for postmortem changes or animals to make it impossible to determine eye colour. They have an estimated weight for the woman that makes sense and all parts found, so I'm guessing she was still fleshed. So, they could be connected based on the little we can see. If the woman or child was listed as skeletal or partial while the other was not, it would be less likely there would be a connection.
 
My only major hang up here is, while they were both found in thousand oaks, I don't have any sense of how close together they actually were. The woman's namus page says she was found "in the Santa Monica mountains," the baby's says "in Thousand Oaks in a grassy area." Those things  sound like pretty different places. But maybe not.

Anyway, I'll send an email to the investigating agencies today and see if that goes anywhere.
 
My only major hang up here is, while they were both found in thousand oaks, I don't have any sense of how close together they actually were. The woman's namus page says she was found "in the Santa Monica mountains," the baby's says "in Thousand Oaks in a grassy area." Those things  sound like pretty different places. But maybe not.

Anyway, I'll send an email to the investigating agencies today and see if that goes anywhere.
If violence against several members of a family is involved, sometimes people aren't found together. Myoung Hwa Cho and Bobby Whitt were found at different times, in different states. So were Karlie Stevenson-Pearce and Khandalyce Pearce. I'm not saying they are for sure connected, just that them being found apart doesn't mean they're for sure not. Sometimes people are put in different places to confuse police and exploit juristictional blindness - city vs county police, state vs federal, one state zoning vs another. Just putting someone over a county line can cause a disconnect in information that if it flowed and was freely shared might indicate a murder is part of a series, a bigger crime, or connected in some way to a certain suspect. This is a massive problem now, but was far, far more profound in the seventies. Just look at the free reign so many serial killers had just by moving their killing zone a few miles away, or how many missing have been IDed in recent years through DNA and found to be a Doe from literally a town or two over, sitting in a grave marked 'unknown' for decades. It wasn't that people weren't looking. It's that there was no way to connect a crime, a body, a suspect with something that happened or was found only a stone's throw away. That's why things like VICAP, CODIS, etc. are so, so important, and why DNA is changing the game for Does like our babygirl, here. Back then, they really had no way of IDing her without someone coming forward. But now, there's a good chance we'll identify her family, possibly even find her name, if she had one. And that's wonderful.
 
Last edited:
Super interesting. I think it's quite possibly the two are connected.
 
Based on the height/weight it sounds like this baby was a newborn, so if the woman was her mother she died very soon after giving birth. I assume it would be possible to tell if she had recently given birth, unless there was significant trauma/decomposition. It's also possible that she's not the biological mother but the cases are still connected somehow. I feel like it's most likely just a coincidince but I feel like it's something that should be considered just in case.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
187
Guests online
2,308
Total visitors
2,495

Forum statistics

Threads
589,962
Messages
17,928,403
Members
228,020
Latest member
DazzelleShafer
Back
Top