MA - Bella Bond, 2, found dead, Deer Island, Boston Harbor, June 2015 - #2

[LisaB]

Okay, fine. But if you're Law Enforcement trying to identify a little girl, is it honestly helpful to show the girl's underwear to the public??

The underwear (or lack of underwear) will likely play a role in investigating the death. But is it needed to IDENTIFY the child? That's what LE is doing now with the release of the photos....they want to know who this is. The photo rendering, the clothing, and location all should help identify the child. I can't see how knowing what the underwear looks like will provide a name for this girl.

But, yes, details like underwear are significant in a crime investigation. Not so much when asking people, "Do you recognize this girl?"

NOBODY suggested they show a photo of the panties! A DESCRIPTION really would help. Were they size 2 (possibly hers), size 12 (probably NOT hers) or nonexistant? Were they training pants (thick cotton, usually white), Pull-Ups, or covered in Disney characters? Since she was found at a beach, maybe she even had a bathing suit on instead of panties that would ring some bells with someone. My daughter went through a phase where her panties HAD TO HAVE "Esmerelda" (Hunchback of Notre Dame) on them, as did her sneakers, lunchbox, and bookbag, when she we was 4.

 

[LisaB]

But wouldn't that person recognize the child's face? We know what the girl looked like.

I would hope so. But reconstructions are never 100% accurate. Was she missing any baby teeth yet? We don't even know THAT from what we have been shown, and it would be more useful than the panties, but we have to take what we can get.

As posted earlier, lots of people may say "that looks a lot like Fawn Simmons, the girl I babysat last summer" or "If I did not know better, I'd think that was Olivia Stevens who attended preschool with my daughter". If you have not seen a child for 6 months (grandparent of r other relative) she may look different than they remember.

Also, I keep coming back to the idea she had on a blue shirt. They did not say so, but it is the color they chose for the reconstructed girl to wear in her photo.

 

[LisaB]

Jumping in at the end without reading the thread just derails any discussion IMO.

Still we are looking for stains! SMH


MOO

Respectfully, I thought I had read every post in the 77 page Thread 1, and then moved here. I had seen that SHE was a digital creation, but did not know the other items were, and now I wonder why. Probably because there WAS staining of some sort they want to keep under wraps for now.

 

[LisaB]

I am not looking for stains. I apologize if this is a touchy subject. It's important to keep in mind that people are only looking for clues and want to help. In looking at the very large up close images posted on the Suffolk County District attorney's office website (where it is not noted that they are computer generated), I can agree that the leggings were computer generated or perhaps cleaned up for the photos that were released. I can see pixelation and areas of differentiating color. I think it's important to note the blanket photo file is very large in comparison where textures, fuzz, HAIR!, and soiled areas are clearly visible in great detail. Not to mention shadowed areas along the edge of blanket that appear to be from the camera flash. I think we can make our own deductions as to why the leggings might have been computer generated and not the blanket. I am not trying to argue the point, just pointing out my observations. I have worked with photographs and lighting for 13 years in my day job.

Link below and click to enlarge the images.

http://www.suffolkdistrictattorney.com/sketch-photos-released-in-deer-island-toddler-mystery/

Nobody is asking to see a pair of stained panties. That is NOT what this is all about, as you have said.

The website DOES say the blanket is a reconstruction, as are the pants. But the pants were made to look clean and the blanket dirty. I do not mean in the sense of seeing crime-related stains (mud, blood, urine, grass) but just looking a little grubby from being loved. Some kids cling to their blankies and you can't wash them unless they are a. Asleep, and b. Going to sleep long enough to wash it, dry it, and put it back.

 

[debirlfan]

How does a 4-year-old die in her sleep? How common/rare is that?

What if someone gave her Benadryl or the like to make her sleep, and accidentally gave her too much? I could see a scenario where a single mother without a local support structure might give her something so she'd sleep and then go out to work - especially if she was a prostitute or the like.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

They said they did a preliminary autoposy, so it seems like the COD is something where a further analysis is needed.

 

[jillybean51]

Drug overdose - accidental or otherwise.

Also,remember the sisters who died in their sleep,overseas,when a pesticide used to spray a hotel room for bed bugs,killed them?

 

[ohiomom73]

My 2 cents

I have followed these now 2 threads for a while and posted a lot last night. I am seeing some things that I mentioned brought up again and some things that others have mentioned being brought up again. It does get a little distracting but also on the other hand, it proved others have the same question as I did. Minor hiccup in the flow of information, not a huge deal. 100s of posts later, yeah, not a lot of people have time to revisit each and every post.

As far as wanting more information, I get that the first and foremost thing of importance is to give this baby a name. It really probably does not make a difference in IDing her what type of under garments, or not, she was wearing. But given the lack of information that is being put out and the fact that we do consider ourselves websleuths, it is kind of a given that some of us would go to the next step, and that is piecing together whatever happened. I personally can't just sit idly by knowing that somebody knows something. But I understand first things first.

It is a delicate and sensitive situation and understandably emotions are raw. I just try to remember that we are all here for the same thing: to see that justice is done.

Thanks for listening. MOO

 

[Soulmagent]

The geographical setting to the location this little girl was found reminds me of the LI serial killer and the Alantic City serial killings. I dont think I will ever look at a coast line the same. Ever.

 

[mrsu]

Nobody is asking to see a pair of stained panties. That is NOT what this is all about, as you have said.

The website DOES say the blanket is a reconstruction, as are the pants. But the pants were made to look clean and the blanket dirty. I do not mean in the sense of seeing crime-related stains (mud, blood, urine, grass) but just looking a little grubby from being loved. Some kids cling to their blankies and you can't wash them unless they are a. Asleep, and b. Going to sleep long enough to wash it, dry it, and put it back.

I don't see where it says they are a reconstruction on the District attorney website?? It says it is a computer generated image of the girl, nothing about the pants or blanket. You can clearly see what appears to be a white dog/animal short hair on the blanket. And also a longer dark hair. IMO, the blanket is a real image.

http://www.suffolkdistrictattorney.com/sketch-photos-released-in-deer-island-toddler-mystery/

Winthrop Police Chief Terence Delehanty today released a computer-generated composite image of the little girl whose body was found in a trash bag on Deer Island a week ago today in an effort to identify her.

The composite image was created by forensic artists at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children working from multiple photographs of the child’s remains. The child is believed to have been about 4 years old, weighed about 30 pounds, and stood about 3 1/2 feet tall. She had brown eyes and brown hair. The image depicts her as she may have appeared in life.

Authorities also released images depicting two items found with the child’s body. One is a pair of white leggings with black polka dots, size 4T and manufactured by Circo. The other is a black and white zebra-print fleece blanket manufactured by Cannon. Authorities belive the blanket may have been special to the girl.

http://www.suffolkdistrictattorney....land-toddler-mystery/baby-doe-blanket-no-tag/

 

[ohiomom73]

I don't see where it says they are a reconstruction on the District attorney website?? It says it is a computer generated image of the girl, nothing about the pants or blanket. You can clearly see what appears to be a white dog/animal short hair on the blanket. And also a longer dark hair. IMO, the blanket is a real image.

http://www.suffolkdistrictattorney.com/sketch-photos-released-in-deer-island-toddler-mystery/


http://www.suffolkdistrictattorney....land-toddler-mystery/baby-doe-blanket-no-tag/

View attachment 78256

Thank you! I was just getting ready to post something after looking at a page on this case on FB. I have not read anywhere that the images of the blanket and leggings were digital reconstructions or images of items similar to those she was found with. Everything that I have read leads me to believe these are the ACTUAL items, maybe doctored in Photoshop to adjust brightness, contrast, sharpness, remove incriminating stains, whatever. Perhaps the leggings are so clean because she was wrapped in the blanket and dressed in the pants after her death.

 

[ohiomom73]

From the Mass State Police BBM:

"This image depicts what the child may have looked like in life. We are also releasing images of the leggings she was wearing when found, which are white with black polka dots, and of a black and white zebra-stripe blanket found with the child’s body."

 

[mrsu]

Thank you! I was just getting ready to post something after looking at a page on this case on FB. I have not read anywhere that the images of the blanket and leggings were digital reconstructions or images of items similar to those she was found with. Everything that I have read leads me to believe these are the ACTUAL items, maybe doctored in Photoshop to adjust brightness, contrast, sharpness, remove incriminating stains, whatever. Perhaps the leggings are so clean because she was wrapped in the blanket and dressed in the pants after her death.

Someone posted the link to the Missing Kids website where it says they were digital reconstructions. I do believe the pants had some Photoshopping done as there are bright areas where there would logically be shadows, again, based on my profession of 13 years. It appears they upped the contrast of the pants. Nobody will convince me the blanket is a reconstruction.

 

[LisaB]

I don't see where it says they are a reconstruction on the District attorney website?? It says it is a computer generated image of the girl, nothing about the pants or blanket. You can clearly see what appears to be a white dog/animal short hair on the blanket. And also a longer dark hair. IMO, the blanket is a real image.

http://www.suffolkdistrictattorney.com/sketch-photos-released-in-deer-island-toddler-mystery/


http://www.suffolkdistrictattorney....land-toddler-mystery/baby-doe-blanket-no-tag/

View attachment 78256

I totally agree. There is some really BAD Photoshopping on the pants if you zoom in, but the blanket looks grubby (little hands grubby, not crime scene gory). But http://www.missingkids.com/poster/NCMU/1250459/1/screen says we are wrong.

 

[ohiomom73]

Perhaps they meant to say "digitally altered" instead of reconstructed, which means something different altogether. I have also used Photoshop professionally for over a decade. I use it every day in my newspaper job. I stand by my assumption that these are the actual items. Either that or someone in LE had the same items, brought them from home and used them to photograph (unlikely). They are NOT store bought or downloaded from the manufacturer site or anything like that. IMO

 

[Hexe]

I am considering a theory... What if our girl was an accidental victim of a meth lab? The phosphine gas, that is a byproduct of meth production is heavier than air, so it can kill a little kid, especially one playing on the floor, before even the adults would notice that something is wrong. And it wouldn't be anything strange, that the girl's caregivers did not call 911, having a meth lab in their premises.

 

[Lovemymnmnbren]

Thank you LisaB

 

[Hoosier952]

Is it possible that she's not truly local, but whoever left her was originally from the area? Maybe it's a mother and father responsible? The dad wants to get rid of her far away from where they live, but the mother was the one to actually place the body? Maybe a sibling was responsible and the mother can't handle the thought of losing another child? Maybe a grandparent knows and can't handle the thought of losing a grandchild and her own child? Any of those would be possible reasons for no one coming forward.

 

[Lovemymnmnbren]

And for just an FYI I'm open to everyone's theories.. many things can kill us without detection like epileptic seizures, if eyes were decomp'd suffocation could be a reason of death as well. Not many clues have been put out to us really other than computer generated items and little info about her autopsy. Which leads us all,in essence, to writing our own crime story.

 

[tlcya]

Thus far, there is no indication that baby Doe is Lily Abigail Baumann, missing from FL, or that baby Doe died from a lack of vaccinations so posts regarding that theory have been removed as they were derailing the thread.

Please remember, you may not agree with every theory posted. Sometimes scrolling and rolling is the best option. Please do not personalize discussion, it is counterproductive.

Thank you