Match! NY - Caledonia, WhtFem 1UFNY, 13-19, Turquoise Necklace, Nov'79 *Tammy Alexander*

[traacker13]

I've updated it to something more generic for the time being. I do agree on the reconstruction but I don't want to post one or the other so I'll just leave it more informational.

 

[carbuff]

I was out on Block Island (RI) over the weekend -- a place locals go for beach weekends, not many outside tourists -- and I swear I saw a dozen girls who could have been Cali, and one who looked like Cali if she had lived and had three kids and some grandkids. It was really kind of freaky, especially since I hadn't really thought about her much for several weeks. But it reminded me that while she might have been from the southwest or had ties there, I've always thought she was more or less local -- New York, New England, maybe southern Ontario. Caledonia is only about an hour and a half from the Canadian border.

p.s. I can see how all the reconstructions might represent the same person. There are some sharp differences but there's also a lot of overlap.

 

[Still_Seek_Answers]

Tracker13, Burgess has not mentioned any genetic disorders that are apparent in Cali. I do agree her face has some very distinctive features.

 

[Still_Seek_Answers]

I have made several attempts to obtain additional postmortems of Cali. Burgess always sends me the same full facial postmortem that we already have. I do agree that the newest NCMEC composite of Cali looks the less like her than any photo we have used to date. It shows none of her features and as you pointed out, it looks like a generic image that is being used on several of the cases now. Burgess wanted us to use it because her postmortems have yielded no results in the 35 years they have tried using it.

While I know he gunshot to the head would have broken some of her facial bones and distorted some of her features, such as the bridge of her nose, I feel the NCMEC composite is the most inaccurate view of her that is out there. That is why I always circulate her postmortem photo's with it. I always also note that it is only a composite and not an actual representation of her appearance. I also circulate the the recon you did of Cali with it.

I feel any composite that does not include her rather unusual nose, her chin, and the distinctive bone structure on her face is doing her a huge injustice and I do not believe they will ever get her identified. I also dislike the age regressed photo's, as they depict her as way younger than her actual age, and mislead people into thinking her a small child.

I prefer to circulate the recon that Carl did, and her postmortems....specifically the side view that has not been touched up....I also use the frontal postmortem, even though the right side of her face is photo-shopped in.....and I include the newest NCMEC composite, only because Burgess requested me to.

 

[CarlK90245]

What bothers me most in the new recon is her mouth, and her rounded jawline. Her lips aren't that full and her teeth don't project that much. And her jawline is well-defined and angular.

I think that the one postmortem with her head turned to the side gives the best idea of how she probably looked in life, and provides the best look at her upturned but pointy nose.

 

[Roselvr]

What bothers me most in the new recon is her mouth, and her rounded jawline. Her lips aren't that full and her teeth don't project that much. And her jawline is well-defined and angular.

I think that the one postmortem with her head turned to the side gives the best idea of how she probably looked in life, and provides the best look at her upturned but pointy nose.

I agree it's the best image we have of her and it's why I use it as her profile pic on the FB page

 

[DrDMike]

I agree it's the best image we have of her and it's why I use it as her profile pic on the FB page

Wasn't she shot in the head? I imagine that her face would be swollen and disfigured. Her old recons reminded me of someone who had dental surgery 24 hours ago. Also, are her autopsy photos recons? I've seen a lot of them and none actually show any bullet wounds.

 

[Roselvr]

Wasn't she shot in the head? I imagine that her face would be swollen and disfigured. Her old recons reminded me of someone who had dental surgery 24 hours ago. Also, are her autopsy photos recons? I've seen a lot of them and none actually show any bullet wounds.

Carl can answer it better then me; from memory it was the right eyebrow area that was photo shopped

 

[BaxterDE42]

Update. Call back that Eileen Hynson DNA has been ordered for comparison to Cali. This poor girl's face has been displayed all over the Internet. I hope this puts her case and all speculation to rest.

 

[Roselvr]

Update. Call back that Eileen Hynson DNA has been ordered for comparison to Cali. This poor girl's face has been displayed all over the Internet. I hope this puts her case and all speculation to rest.

Can someone check my rule out list in the group files please? Pretty sure little lulu had her ruled out on dentals last yr

 

[BaxterDE42]

She was ruled out ... fingerprints. Stay persistant! That rule out had no human intervention as many of these cases that are considered "ruled out".
Just wanted to add as others have pointed out here, the computer is not always right. Also who says that a "case reviewer" who lookks at the photo comparisons you all send in is more knowledgable than you. They take a look, decide it doesn't look like the UP and move on. We are all driven by our own perspective. So please don't take the reviewer or the data base as gospel. I don't mean to sound preachy because most of you already know this. But for the ones newer to this kind of research, just wanted to say don't give up even if someone says "no way"!

 

[rainwater]

Link to Eileen Hynson to compare.....http://www.nampn.org/cases/hynson_eileen.html

 

[CarlK90245]

Carl can answer it better then me; from memory it was the right eyebrow area that was photo shopped

Yes, the first gunshot wound was just above the inside end of her right eyebrow

 

[CarlK90245]

She was ruled outlllfingerprints. Stay persistant! That rule out had no human intervention as many of these cases that are considered "ruled out".

Just yesterday, I sent an e-mail to the RA regarding two UP casefiles that appeared to be duplicates. The RA wrote back saying that they did appear to be duplicates; however, the fingerprint classifications differed on the two files. He indicated that he would look into it and close one of the UP files.

So that underscores Baxter's point. Data entry isn't always accurate, and it follows that any rule-outs on inaccurately entered data are obviously inaccurate rule-outs.

 

[BaxterDE42]

It is the "heart" I see here that keeps me optimistic these cases have a good chance of being resolved. No one here is interested in building the largest forum (analagous to data base) and compete for the mose case files here. It is about finding the missing and identifying those who have been thrown away like garbage. It is about the disagreements, arguments (friendly) and rethinking our own perspectives. When a piece of the puzzle doesn't fit, you keep looking to determine if it is relevant and work to connect the dots when that piece is missing. When it doesn't fit, we just keep working with what we have.

Thank you CarlK, I think it is so important for everyone to keep in mind we should not accept any information as fact...even DNA tests as I gave example above.

Thank you for clearing the duplicate!! Fine example of the human factor!

 

[Roselvr]

She was ruled out ... fingerprints. Stay persistant! That rule out had no human intervention as many of these cases that are considered "ruled out".
Just wanted to add as others have pointed out here, the computer is not always right. Also who says that a "case reviewer" who lookks at the photo comparisons you all send in is more knowledgable than you. They take a look, decide it doesn't look like the UP and move on. We are all driven by our own perspective. So please don't take the reviewer or the data base as gospel. I don't mean to sound preachy because most of you already know this. But for the ones newer to this kind of research, just wanted to say don't give up even if someone says "no way"!

You're correct; she was ruled out via finger prints.
You have to remember that we are all on the same team here. We all want to give Cali her name back. If you feel that the print they used may not have been hers or whatever & want someone looked at again; we're going to say call it in; we're not going to discourage it. Same with the "DNA being there is ruled out by default". We do not know where anyone's DNA is.

Back when she was originally submitted; Little Lulu; myself & a few others researched her. There was a FB group run by family; I just looked it is not listed so they possibly made it secret. I did not feel that she ran away; I feel she was taken but has not been found yet. I also feel she's too old to be Cali as she was 19 when she went missing in 76. These are my personal opinions.

Let us know when they're done checking the DNA so that I can add notes to my file.

 

[BaxterDE42]

Will do Roselvr. I certainly was not refering to this group when pointing out how readidly people dismiss a tip or submission based on their cursury glance at a photo without taking time to understand the case someone took the time to call in. People have set me cases where they called in a tip and one person who said they are on a review board said "thanks but I can tell this is not the person". End of conversation. I think this is why I get so obsessive about teling others to do lots of research and "sell" their idea. Sorry if I was not clear. It is obvious this forum is a team effort.

I have 4 other cases that are very questionalbe in the rule out process. I am on a team of 5 other researchers and each one of them have at least 2. When you get the opportunity browse some of the recon photos and you might get a clearer picture of just some of the issues.

The website that did Cali's latest recon concerns me because I believe it was reversed. Different perspectives...okay. but reversing, especially with visible dental issues is problematic. When they do the age regressions or progressions, it is common for them to reverse the photo to give another "pose" for the differing age. Problem is, if a person has a defect on one side, it is preserved in print - that defect is on the other side. This is where many rule outs are generated, especially with dentals and face markings. 'Nuff said on that....
Be well all, I am off for a vacation.

 

[traacker13]

I wish there was a clearer photo of Teresa Marie Byers. I apologize if she's been mentioned but I noticed that she has the same upturned nose like Cali doe. Does anyone know how we could go about finding a better photo of her?

 

[CarlK90245]

Does anyone know how we could go about finding a better photo of her?

She is supposedly from Kilgore Texas, but she wasn't in any of the 1977, 78, or 79 yearbooks from the only high school in Kilgore (i.e., Kilgore High School). And there aren't even any girls named Teresa in the KHS class of 79. One girl named "Theresa" is clearly not Teresa Byers.

 

[FiveFelines]

She is supposedly from Kilgore Texas, but she wasn't in any of the 1977, 78, or 79 yearbooks from the only high school in Kilgore (i.e., Kilgore High School). And there aren't even any girls named Teresa in the KHS class of 79. One girl named "Theresa" is clearly not Teresa Byers.

There's an interesting tidbit about Teresa at the end of this article, which might explain why she isn't in the yearbooks. The article (which is about two of her siblings reuniting after one was adopted out of foster care) mentions that she is still missing and that the other siblings' last name is Wolfert.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/1997/mar/28/brother-sister-reunited-after-25-lost-years/