IL IL - Paul Fronczak, newborn, Chicago, 1964 + UID Male, 1, NJ, 1965

Discussion in '1960's Missing' started by Marie, Apr 29, 2013.

  1. jjenny

    jjenny Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    31,560
    Likes Received:
    46,084
    Trophy Points:
    113
    ITA. I don't see anything odd in Paula's reaction. She lost a child, then thought she found him. It has been almost 50 years. During this time she believed this was her child, or at least convinced herself this was her child. So to find out this is not her child is upsetting, to say the least.
     


  2. AlwaysShocked

    AlwaysShocked Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,685
    Likes Received:
    739
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Unfortunately, many folks in their 80's begin to develop "senility". This often involves inappropriate emotions such as misplaced anger, a lack of ability to deal with stressful situations, and a tendency to lose the ability feel empathy for others. This could be the case here.

    I hope this man gets a hit through the ancestry dna base! That way he would possibly find some relatives.
     
  3. MadamReporter

    MadamReporter Thin-Ice Skater

    Messages:
    328
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I understand that we all emigrated from somewhere, but if you read my post, it was one of the five or six reasons I think the proximity of Newark Airport and the lack of the FBI being able to link him to any missing boys in the US is important.

    I don't know how downtown Newark was in the '60s, but, in my opinion, it's so random to find a blonde-haired Caucasian child there that it seems not random at all. So being familiar with the area, I thought to myself, "Why downtown Newark? What would be the appeal of downtown Newark?" And then it dawned on me how fast and easy it is to get to the airport from there.
     
    katydid23 likes this.
  4. SheWhoMustNotBeNamed

    SheWhoMustNotBeNamed Former Member

    Messages:
    21,193
    Likes Received:
    729
    Trophy Points:
    0
  5. rosesfromangels

    rosesfromangels Amateur speculations and opinion only

    Messages:
    11,586
    Likes Received:
    55,984
    Trophy Points:
    113
  6. SheWhoMustNotBeNamed

    SheWhoMustNotBeNamed Former Member

    Messages:
    21,193
    Likes Received:
    729
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you guys would like to start a separate thread in the UID forum for our unknown boy, please feel free. Or let me know, and I can move some posts over for you.
     
  7. MidwestMama

    MidwestMama Active Member

    Messages:
    2,323
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    38
  8. MidwestMama

    MidwestMama Active Member

    Messages:
    2,323
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    38
  9. SheWhoMustNotBeNamed

    SheWhoMustNotBeNamed Former Member

    Messages:
    21,193
    Likes Received:
    729
    Trophy Points:
    0
  10. ksprincess

    ksprincess Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    572
    Likes Received:
    1,839
    Trophy Points:
    93
    This case will be on 20/20 this Friday 11/1
     
  11. Blondie in Spokane

    Blondie in Spokane Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,765
    Likes Received:
    11,497
    Trophy Points:
    113
  12. marlalouise

    marlalouise Member

    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    16
    I watched 20/20 tonight and, after seeing the original video of the parents, especially the mother 'plea' for her baby. She didn't seem genuine, she thought that whoever took him must have really wanted a child (not the exact words), but I didn't hear her ask for her baby back. Of course, I know, this was a short clip, but still, she didn't act like a mother who's baby was recently stolen. I don't think the baby made it to be two days old. Mother reminded me so much like Susan Smith. Husband looks like he's hovering, making sure she said the correct thing. And now, it's revealed that they would not submit to DNA to find their "missing" child...really??? Who wouldn't want to know?


    I realize she was in the hospital at the time, but the abductor was there at 9:30 and 1:30? Mom was alone for 20 minutes? I may be wrong though, were there other mothers in the same room? I know in 1964, private rooms probably weren't the norm.
     
  13. JWD

    JWD New Member

    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I haven't seen 20/20 but from reading the news reports linked on here:

    1. The parents have already submitted their DNA willingly. The DNA results is how this whole thing started.
    2. The woman who kidnapped the day-old baby was seen on hospital security video tape leaving the building with the baby and getting into a cab.

    Apologies ahead of time if I misunderstood anything.

    Best,
    JWD
     
  14. PonderingU

    PonderingU New Member

    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I read in one of the old newspaper articles that are posted on PF's FB page, that YES, there was another Mother in the same room.
     
  15. marlalouise

    marlalouise Member

    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    16
    By
    You may be correct, but from what I gathered from 20/20, neither the parents nor the brother would submit DNA for verification (that may have changed) and I didn't realize video cameras were common practice back in 1964. I thought it was a statement from a cab driver who said he picked up a woman from the hospital and she had a newborn. Remember this is before child car seats were used - my mom didn't have one when I was brought home from the hospital - she held me in her arms and my dad drove the car. Chicago is a big city. How did the cab driver know for a fact that it was the Fronczak baby? The newspaper article that I read said that police theorized that she took a cab.

    EDIT: The parents submitted DNA to verify that Paul wasn't their child, but would not submit it again when at least four men came forward thinking that they may be the real Fronzcak child. Why? Wouldn't you want to know what happened to your baby? They knew from the beginning that Paul really wasn't their child.

    Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2
     
  16. marlalouise

    marlalouise Member

    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    16
    But was she in the room during the 20 minutes when the fake nurse took the baby, and the real nurse came to get him? Was the husband in the room?

    I'm playing the devil's advocate, I know, but the video of the parents seemed odd. Like I said, she had the same mannerisms as Susan Smith.

    Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2
     
  17. JWD

    JWD New Member

    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I stand corrected. It was the cab driver's statement, not video tape. There are numerous articles about that. In this one:
    http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1798&dat=19640424&id=ggcdAAAAIBAJ&sjid=7YsEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5794,3504230

    Lee Kelsey, the cabbie, isn't vaguely remembering some random woman. He said she telephoned for a cab, and that he had picked up her near the hospital "3 times within the last month." She told him, "The baby is sick and the doctors at the hospital couldn't take care of it. I'm going to my own doctor." He said she was dressed as a nurse and was too old to have a baby (between 40 and 50). He gave the police a good enough description for them to put the sketch in the paper. A witness came forward that had seen the woman in the area where the cabbie dropped her off. The witness said that she had a baby in a green-and-white receiving blanket and appeared to be waiting on a bus.

    Sounds like she cased the hospital ahead of time, looking for a male newborn, and timed her escape in a cab (the quickest mode of travel if you didn't have a car or didn't want to risk your car tag number being seen by any witnesses) to a bus stop. She may have taken a series of buses or been picked up by a friend or relative.

    These actions are evidence of a premeditated, well-thought out crime. Not a spur-of-the-moment, in the throes of postpartum depression or whatever, mother.

    Judging by the baby-stealing cases I've read about in the past 50 years, the fake nurse wanted a baby desperately, couldn't give birth (or had a baby that died) and was too emotionally unstable to make a good adoption candidate. That or she was part of a baby-snatcher ring that sold babies to couples who weren't good adoption candidates.
    :twocents:
     
    Cherwell likes this.
  18. oceanblue

    oceanblue Active Member

    Messages:
    119
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I'm new to this case. I had seen it mentioned in the Sharon Marshall threads. I remember being bummed that there wasn't more info out there. I was thrilled when this 20/20 ep came up and watched it right away.

    I too am baffled by the parents not wanting to provide their DNA to possibly find Paul 1.0. It's pretty obvious that they knew from the start that Paul 2.0 wasn't their bio son. I guess they finally submitted to the DNA test for Paul 2.0 because they knew he was not going to give up. It makes me sad for all involved that this has caused a rift in their family.

    I didn't find Mrs. F's affect to be at all strange in the video. In fact, her demeanor reminded me very much of my grandmother. Had my gran been in that situation, under so much duress, she would have been a carbon copy of Mrs. F.

    I can't remember the names of the possible Paul 1.0 candidates in the show. The first one profiled though, I think was the best possible match. His features were very much similar to the younger F brother and Mr. F. If I were Paul 2.0, I would be making nice with my family and going on covert ops to get toothbrushes! How the heck can they NOT want to know? That's the one thing that makes me raise an eyebrow somewhat. Is it possible that Mrs. F knew this woman who took the baby? I don't know. I just hope Paul 2.0 (who is insanely handsome btw!) get answers of who he really is.
     
  19. marlalouise

    marlalouise Member

    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    16
    That's what amazes me. I wouldn't care how old I am or how long I've been searching, I would want to know what happened to my baby. And I think everyone here would agree. Unless the mother already knew that none of the men were going to be a match for the DNA, wouldn't she want to know? I think Mrs. F knows what happened to her baby, either by her or her husband's hand, or because she knew who the woman was. She did say something to the effect that maybe the woman who took him really wanted a baby (not her exact words). I know that Paul said he had a great childhood, but I wonder what the situation (financially or emotionally) was at the time of the birth?



    Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2
     
  20. marlalouise

    marlalouise Member

    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Did the other mother in the room witness the abduction?

    Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2
     

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