CA CA - San Bernardino, WhtFem UP2589, 13-18, protruding incisors, Mar'87

Discussion in 'The Unidentified' started by CarlK90245, Feb 28, 2011.

  1. CarlK90245

    CarlK90245 UID Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    7,939
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    NamUs UP # 2589 https://identifyus.org/cases/2589

    No Image Available

    Unidentified White Female
    * The victim was found on March 09, 1987 in a City Creek ravine near San Bernadino CA.

    Distinguishing Characteristics
    Age: 13 to 18
    Height: 62 inches (5'2"), Estimated
    Clothing: Blue checked shirt, slip-on tennis shoes.
    Dental: Fillings in 1, 3, 14, 15, 18, 30, and 31. Upper two incisors are distinctive because they are higher in the gum line and protrude outward, quite visible.

    B]Case History[/B]
    * Skeletal remains found scattered in a remote ravine northeast of San Bernardino. Identity can only be established by dental X-rays or DNA.
     
  2. Loading...


  3. CarlK90245

    CarlK90245 UID Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    7,939
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I've been looking at Elizabeth Ann Miller as a possible to this UID.

    http://www.charleyproject.org/cases/m/miller_elizabeth.html
    http://www.doenetwork.org/cases/69dfco.html

    [​IMG][​IMG]

    Aside from the fact that her height, age, and timeline are consistent, her upper front incisors fit the description of being "higher in the gumline and protruding outward".

    Regarding DNA, it appears on the face that both are in CODIS. However, according to DoeNet, Elizabeth's CODIS profile is based on mtDNA, and according to NamUs, the UID's profile is based on nucDNA (and mtDNA is unchecked). As I understand it, the two DNA types are incompatible for purposes of comparison.

    I sent an e-mail to David Van Norman to verify whether my understanding is correct. (and if it is, to request that he compare the two cases)
     
  4. CarlK90245

    CarlK90245 UID Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    7,939
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    And Bang! Just like that, I get a response.

    (My questions were (1) Is it a correct assumption that If only a mtDNA sample is available for a missing person, and only a nucDNA sample was available for the unidentified decedent, CODIS would not be able to identify the match? -- and (2) If only one sample of familial nucDNA is available to compare to the nucDNA of the UID, is there a significant risk of a false negative?)

     
  5. webrocket

    webrocket New Member

    Messages:
    3,537
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I guess that is a definitive response to what some of us have surmised regarding the two types of DNA. so for future reference, if there are inconsistent types of DNA on file between a MP and a UID, then they are NOT rule outs by default.

    thanks for that inquiry and double thanks for the prompt and professional response!
     
  6. CarlK90245

    CarlK90245 UID Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    7,939
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Not just that, but also that it calls into question many presumed rule-outs based on nucDNA from a single FRS.
     
  7. webrocket

    webrocket New Member

    Messages:
    3,537
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
  8. CarlK90245

    CarlK90245 UID Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    7,939
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I'd say that's a good possible. I'd say she's worth a look.
     
  9. webrocket

    webrocket New Member

    Messages:
    3,537
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I was going to compose an email to Mr. Van Norman and then realized a sad reality. as per the case history of the UID, identity can only be established by DNA or dentals. They have nucDNA for the UID but no mtDNA for her.

    Theresa's profile says neither dental x-rays nor DNA exists. if I understand the DNA business, if they had mtDNA for the UID, they could compare that to mtDNA for any female relative of a missing person? nucDNA is peculiar to the person.

    any thoughts Carl?
     
  10. dsntslp

    dsntslp New Member

    Messages:
    2,622
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't know the answer but I sure would like to find a MP site or flyer that explains it all in laymans terms so it could be distributed to the families of MP's and LE, as well as to understand it better myself.
     
  11. CarlK90245

    CarlK90245 UID Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    7,939
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I'd go ahead and send him the e-mail anyway. NamUs isn't always accurate with respect to which identifiers they have and which ones they don't.

    And to clarify your comment about mtDNA, it's not "any female relative". It's any relative (male or female) connected in the family tree by a continuous chain of females.

    For example, it could be your mother's-mother's-mother's-daughter's-daughter's-son (i.e., your third cousin, twice removed), as long as there are no males in between.

    Simpler examples include a sibling (with the same mother) or a maternal aunt or uncle (as long as the mother and the aunt/uncle have the same mother),
     
  12. Claudette

    Claudette Alouette, je te plumerai

    Messages:
    1,614
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In 50 years websleuthers will look back on these cases and say "if only they had our technology!" just like when I am on the cold cases....sigh....
     
  13. webrocket

    webrocket New Member

    Messages:
    3,537
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    did you ever submit Theresa Bier Carl? she's not on the rule out list.
     
  14. CarlK90245

    CarlK90245 UID Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    7,939
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    No, I didn't.
     
  15. Essbee

    Essbee Active Member

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I just read the above posts and did another search on Theresa Bier. Check out this Charley Project profile.

    http://www.charleyproject.org/cases/b/bier_theresa.html

    At age 16, she was last seen camping with a 43 year old man.
    "Welch eventually stated that Bier had been forcibly taken by Bigfoot."

    !!!!!
    I would love to see this one torn apart by Nancy Grace et al.
     
  16. webrocket

    webrocket New Member

    Messages:
    3,537
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I thought the distance sounded too far but per Mapquest, it is 5 1/2 hours drive between Bass Lake and San Bernardino. Welch reappeared a few days later per Charley Project so there is a window of opportunity there.
     
  17. rainwater

    rainwater New Member

    Messages:
    695
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bumping this.
     
  18. JusticeWillBeServed

    JusticeWillBeServed Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,519
    Likes Received:
    453
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The year listed as Theresa Bier's disappearance on NamUs is incorrect. Every other source reports it as June 1, 1987.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice