FL FL - Miami, BlkMale 1327UMFL, 21-35, GSW, gynecomastia, Jun'91

New Posts

Spurser

Spurser

Inquire Within
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
887
Reaction score
28
I have always thought that this could be a possible match. The UID had Gynecomastia and there is no mention of that for the MP. However, those closest to Michael may not have known about it. Not something guys talk about. The case report says Michael borrowed money in June '91 and vanished, so the July '91 date of disappearance is not accurate. Height is off, but perhaps the family didn't know his real height. 5'3" and 5'6" would be considered below average height for men. The resemblance is striking. Imagine the MP with his head shaved.


http://www.doenetwork.org/cases/1327umfl.html

http://www.doenetwork.org/cases/1245dmla.html
 

Attachments

  • 1327UMFL.jpg
    1327UMFL.jpg
    8.6 KB · Views: 44
  • MAGrant.jpg
    MAGrant.jpg
    10.7 KB · Views: 44
They do look alike. Michael has a tattoo on his arm but there is no mention of one on this John Doe. It seems like it would be easy enough to rule out by contacting the M.E. to see if J.D. had a tattoo... As we all know, the profiles are not always accurate...
 
Irrespective of any personal details provided, you must remember that many of these missing person and IUD cases have not yet been matched because details in one/other/both cases are wrong.

I've made a few matches over the years (none here yet!) and every match I've made has been made based more on visuals than details.

I inverted one of the pictures (because I'm sure one of them have been inverted) and overlaid them. The eyebrows are much darker on Michael but size/shape/place are a match - as are most of the facial features with the exception of the top lip and that one ear - but we don't know how much of the IUD has been photoshopped.

If it were my find, I'd submit it.
 
I seriously doubt this UID is Grant. the ME examined the deceased and noted the issue with his left breast, I'm sure they would have noticed a tattoo and none are noted on the deceased.
 
Just my observations and opinion:

Having been found so soon (less than a day prior) it would seem there was more to work with as far as facial characteristics in presenting the UID for viewing. If there is a lot of photo shop I don't see it.

The ears would cause me to keep looking. The UID has more of an attached earlobe visible even in a frontal image. Maybe they arent entirely attached, but there is enough difference in his ears and those of Grant who seems to have detached earlobes.

I agree with (not so)DippyBlonder, more matches have been, are and will always be made by the human eye and fact checking numerous agency reports; not the politically motivated data base and centralized DNA lab in Texas. I am afraid NAMUS will prove to be a waste of grant funds with time running out for many families. So sad for the victim's families who may not live out their lives to know what happened to their missing loved one.

Don't give up and never get discouraged! Human eyes and the ability to interpret research information is the best hope for the missing.

I will take a closer look at the photos tonight.
 
I wish there was a more recent photo for Michael. The one shown looks to be from a highschool dance from the 70's. Does anyone know how to change his hairstyle in the photo. My kids have an app on their phones that does that but I don't know how to.

I also agree with everyone who said that often the info is incorrect in these cases. I find mistakes all the time. It so aggrivating bc one simple mistake can cause LE to not look any further.
 
I also tried to find a post mortem photo for the UID since he was found within 24 hours, but I couldn't.
 
Spurser said:
I wish there was a more recent photo for Michael. The one shown looks to be from a highschool dance from the 70's. Does anyone know how to change his hairstyle in the photo. My kids have an app on their phones that does that but I don't know how to.

I also agree with everyone who said that often the info is incorrect in these cases. I find mistakes all the time. It so aggrivating bc one simple mistake can cause LE to not look any further.
Click to expand...

Idealy (for me) is to find a postmortem photo because once the photo shop begins and all the versions of that image hit the public I would rather work from demographics and circumstances.

As to photos of your possible match, the basic facebook, twitter classmates, geneology are helpful to track friends and family who may have a web page dedicated to the missing or have the photo among personal photo accounts. I have found different photos by searching for any and all news articles possible regarding the missing. I maintain the premise there is always someone somewhere who knows the missing person and that is how I keep plugging along.
Good day to everyone!
 
I'm not techy at all with all these apps. I just copy and paste both photos into a word document and then try and resize them so the heads are as close to being the same size as possible. Then I print it off on cheap thin paper and cut each photo out. Then I hold them over each other against a window so I can see both images lol!

You can see really quickly if it isn't the right person. Try it with a couple of people that look really similar and you'll see. It works for me :-D

DP
 
are the dates wrong? UID was found on June 15 1991, but Michael didn't go missing until July 7th 1991.

ETA: oh, I see now that Michael borrowed money from his mom in June of 1991. I wonder how they came up with the july 7th date...

They don't look too much alike to me. Having an ex boyfriend who looks almost identical to Michael, when I see the UID's pic I say no way. Michael's nose is thicker and the ears are different.
 
The shirt says "roaches lose the battle" in Spanish. Combat is the name of an insecticide. He may have obtained the shirt at a thrift store.
 
Bumping this up. I never forgot about this case ��
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 184 more.
Total: 1,654 (members: 185, guests: 1,469)

Online statistics

Members online
185
Guests online
1,469
Total visitors
1,654
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,775
Messages
17,958,673
Members
228,604
Latest member
leannamj
Back
Top