Identified! PA - Philadelphia - 'Boy in the Box' - 4UMPA - Feb'57 - Joseph Augustus Zarelli #4

[Rolypolyoly]

I don't think the scar on his chin is relevant to any medical condition. Most likely it's a typical childhood mishap..MOO

I agree, a chin scar is almost like a childhood badge of honour, I can probably name 10 family members instantly with one, myself, my husband and my eldest included!.
I really hope this is why Joseph had one, a sign of misadventure whilst playing, that he had a happy life for most of his short time here in this world, even if the ending was so tragic. I do believe he was loved by his mother.

 

[nhmemorymaker]

Adoption or private fostering is the most likely scenario here.

But since LE stated the block he was living on <modsnip> and also originally stated that JAZ stayed with a parent, there is yet the possibility JAZ stayed with her. She worked in the cinema to make ends meet and met her future husband there. They married and had their own kids. We know nothing about the husband. <modsnip> It would explain why mens clothing was found with JAZ.

I know it is probably not likely since there are surviving siblings that would have probably remembered or heard something (though they were babies). But it is another route and i find it strange that LE dropped so many hints.

JMOO

I keep thinking back to the interview with Colleen Fitzpatrick, the DNA expert. Not just her 'words' indicating that she thought no adoption took place, and that Joseph lived with his mother. It was the way she said it.... so matter-of-factly. Colleen and Misty obviously have more information than any of us....

HOWEVER... some of us are old enough to know how secretive people and family could be back in those days. There were plenty of cases of abuse, and people and neighbors just looked the other way.... parents had the 'right' to do whatever they wanted with their own family.

And another HOWEVER..... whisking children away with no legal official records was certainly more common as well...... <modsnip> I still feel this is a strong probability in this case.........

 

[Daphne1972]

Whatever home Joseph was in, whichever adults lived in the home would bear responsibility for the fact that he was severely malnourished. That isn't a impulsive, reactive action like striking out. It's deliberate withholding of the necessities of life. Look at the extended family that are getting charged in Jasmine and Nicole Snyder's deaths. This link should go directly to a post about an article about one of the accused, a 'grandparent' who claims he's not responsible but obviously knew the girls were starving because he told a third party he tried to sneak the girls crackers. He had the knowledge of the abuse and the freedom to save those girls, and he didn't, and that's why he's facing charges.

GUILTY - PA - Jasmine, 4, & Nicole Snyder, 6, starved to death, Lycoming Co, 10 Sep 2021 *arrests*

Indeed. Malnourished for a year

 

[Daphne1972]

Parents of Philly's 'boy in the box' are finally revealed

The parents of Philadelphia's 'Boy in the Box' have finally been revealed, 65 years after he was found murdered, as a Pennsylvania construction magnate and a 'beautiful, kind and quiet' woman.

www.google.com

An Ohio woman claimed her mother bought the boy from his birth parents in 1954, kept him in the basement of their suburban Philadelphia home, and killed him in a rage.

Authorities found her credible but couldn't corroborate her story - another blind alley

 

[Daphne1972]

Why are they talking about his second wife of 55 years??

Parents of Philly's 'boy in the box' are finally revealed

The parents of Philadelphia's 'Boy in the Box' have finally been revealed, 65 years after he was found murdered, as a Pennsylvania construction magnate and a 'beautiful, kind and quiet' woman.

www.google.com

 

[fred&edna]

I keep thinking back to the interview with Colleen Fitzpatrick, the DNA expert. Not just her 'words' indicating that she thought no adoption took place, and that Joseph lived with his mother. It was the way she said it.... so matter-of-factly. Colleen and Misty obviously have more information than any of us....

HOWEVER... some of us are old enough to know how secretive people and family could be back in those days. There were plenty of cases of abuse, and people and neighbors just looked the other way.... parents had the 'right' to do whatever they wanted with their own family.

And another HOWEVER..... whisking children away with no legal official records was certainly more common as well...... <modsnip> I still feel this is a strong probability in this case.........

ITA

 

[PamCake]

Adoption or private fostering is the most likely scenario here.

But since LE stated the block he was living on <modsnip> and also originally stated that JAZ stayed with a parent, there is yet the possibility JAZ stayed with her. She worked in the cinema to make ends meet and met her future husband there. They married and had their own kids. We know nothing about the husband.<modsnip> It would explain why mens clothing was found with JAZ.

I know it is probably not likely since there are surviving siblings that would have probably remembered or heard something (though they were babies). But it is another route and i find it strange that LE dropped so many hints.

JMOO

I have forgotten the intersection mentioned by the police. Is it near the 61st address of MA in 1956? Can somebody please update me?

 

[Ilex]

I've always thought the box may have been there and had no connection to where he was before he was put in the box. When you look at older pics of that area where he was found, it was a dumping area. Someone may have dumped the box there and whoever killed Joseph may have used the box already there to hide him.

 

[Ilex]

A broken ankle that required surgical intervention would be very noticeable.

Joseph's body was extensively x-rayed and had no previously broken or currently broken bones. It was reported they did this in contemporaneous articles. A missing child they thought he might be had had a broken bone in the past, and they easily excluded him as that child because of this.

I can't think of another reason to have a surgical scar on the ankle. An IV wouldn't leave a surgical scar so it had to be some procedure done. I do believe he had a hernia, that would definitely explain the groin scar. He may have sliced his ankle at some point and needed stitches. Was there any indication if the scar was on the inner or outer ankle?

 

[iamshadow21]

I can't think of another reason to have a surgical scar on the ankle. An IV wouldn't leave a surgical scar so it had to be some procedure done. I do believe he had a hernia, that would definitely explain the groin scar. He may have sliced his ankle at some point and needed stitches. Was there any indication if the scar was on the inner or outer ankle?

Well, whatever it was, it wasn't a broken bone. That's one thing we know for sure. The pathologist in this case was very thorough, and I trust that they would have recognised a prior break, especially one that required surgery.

I don't know where the scar was on the ankle. I don't know if that information exists on the internet. Probably. But the postmortem photographs I can find of his legs are far too low res to show detail such as a scar, especially when I don't even know where on the ankle it is. I also know the photos were colourised and retouched some so that they could be shown to people. The bruising is still visible, but they did not depict the green tinge across his belly from decomp, for example, but chose to colour the skin a uniform tan. I don't know to what degree they touched up the pictures. Even if the scar was on the front of the ankle (the only angle I can find) it may not be visible in the images publicly available.

There is written detail from the physical examination of the child here, if you feel like reading. The site seems to think it was a cutdown scar, as described by others on this thread. There are postmortem photographs of Joseph on the same site, if you want to look, but they are a few clicks away. The only photo of Joseph on the page I'm linking to is the basic reconstruct they did from the postmortem photo of his face, with his eyes reconstructed to look more lifelike.

Case Summary

 

[Magnum P.E.]

Mary Abel has been publicly identified and is deceased so we can discuss her. <modsnip>
She probably had other children, who may be living. I know most of us understand this part, but please please leave them alone and don’t identify them.

 

[summergirl1]

I wonder if any more info ever will be released about this. I'm surprised his parents were even named. I wasn't expecting that. Mary may have kept him though that would have been an unusual choice back then for someone of her age and background especially. <modsnip - no link> Joseph- for being born out of wedlock back then- is unusual for having some of his father's name including last name. I think family members in these types of cases like Mary's family member in the article have sometimes denial that their family member maybe more complicated than they ever knew or involved in things they wouldn't have thought. It's denial too or can be as well as protecting a family member's reputation. Sometimes too, things are dimly known of in families, but not spoken of or directly confronted. Of course, if people weren't even born when something happened their reactions are going to be complicated sometimes. Right now there's definitely a lack of information about what exactly happened to Joseph and there may always be. If Joseph stayed with her then you'd think there would be some photos or evidence he existed. <modsnip - no link> Sometimes the truth about long ago events may never be known. Truth is definitely what anyone should pursue when looking at or involved in cases like this but obviously this kind of stuff can be hard for the family, especially perhaps when it was something before their time and it's a huge surprise. Truth with the living is different than truth with the dead is one thing you might think of when it comes to stuff the answers to which may be lost to time.

 

[HarmonyE.]

i don't think we got absolute clarification on this point.
Martha was discussed in the book written about the case years ago, but I am pretty sure the baked bean part was never clarified.

perhaps someone else remembers more clearly.

Only Martha mentioned baked beans. Joseph's stomach was empty, although a small amount unidentified brown substance was found in his esophagus. This information was not withheld; someone studying the case could have easily come across this detail.

 

[fred&edna]

I thought they found that he had a special kind of dye (from eyedrops) in his eyes at the autopsy?

Yes. I believe it was determined one of his eyes had been treated with some type of drop.

 

[Susikatze]

Mary Abel has been publicly identified and is deceased so we can discuss her. <modsnip>
She probably had other children, who may be living. I know most of us understand this part, but please please leave them alone and don’t identify them.

I agree. Doxxing is the worst thing on earth and super harmful to everyone. There is an increasing number of identified cases where the names are witheld due to fear of family getting doxxed.
The half siblings have zero to do with anything that happened to JAZ. They were babies or not even born yet.

 

[IDK]

I just want to thank everyone who is tirelessly researching Joseph’s case. I don’t have any extra time to research these days and truly appreciate all the updates!

 

[scruffydog]

I have a strong feeling that Joseph wasn't adopted. I think she kept him and raised him and then married her husband. After their baby together was born I would guess stress was high in the home <modsnip>

This is what I am leaning toward as the truth, as well.

 

[scruffydog]

Why are they talking about his second wife of 55 years??

Parents of Philly's 'boy in the box' are finally revealed

The parents of Philadelphia's 'Boy in the Box' have finally been revealed, 65 years after he was found murdered, as a Pennsylvania construction magnate and a 'beautiful, kind and quiet' woman.

www.google.com

I don't see that he was married twice.....just the one time, for 55 years

 

[iamshadow21]

Why are we so attached to the idea that Joseph was disabled in this thread?

Is it because of Martha's story, which Colleen Fitzpatrick herself has said is not linked to Joseph?

Can someone show me somewhere where historic or current LE or others linked to the actual investigation assert this is likely, or even possible?

Because I can't find it. And I fear we're attached to something because of Martha's story that we now know isn't Joseph's story.

And, as far as I can tell, all the pathologist/LE descriptions describe Joseph as beaten, emaciated, and with minor surgical scarring, possibly from infancy, but otherwise, normal.

I know not all disabilities show on the skin or the face. I'm multiply neurodivergent myself. But I do wonder if we're stuck on him being a hidden disabled child because we're looking for some kind of reason or justification, when the reality is, there's no justification for this, and there's every chance Joseph was a neurotypical, nondisabled child that was murdered for no reason at all, like so many of the precious children who have their own threads here on Websleuths.

EDIT: This is in no way cranky or trying to tell others what to post, I am just trying to understand why the 'he was disabled' idea keeps coming back around, when, as far as I can find, there's no evidence to suggest he was.

 

[nhmemorymaker]

Why are we so attached to the idea that Joseph was disabled in this thread?

Is it because of Martha's story, which Colleen Fitzpatrick herself has said is not linked to Joseph?

Can someone show me somewhere where historic or current LE or others linked to the actual investigation assert this is likely, or even possible?

Because I can't find it. And I fear we're attached to something because of Martha's story that we now know isn't Joseph's story.

And, as far as I can tell, all the pathologist/LE descriptions describe Joseph as beaten, emaciated, and with minor surgical scarring, possibly from infancy, but otherwise, normal.

I know not all disabilities show on the skin or the face. I'm multiply neurodivergent myself. But I do wonder if we're stuck on him being a hidden disabled child because we're looking for some kind of reason or justification, when the reality is, there's no justification for this, and there's every chance Joseph was a neurotypical, nondisabled child that was murdered for no reason at all, like so many of the precious children who have their own threads here on Websleuths.

EDIT: This is in no way cranky or trying to tell others what to post, I am just trying to understand why the 'he was disabled' idea keeps coming back around, when, as far as I can find, there's no evidence to suggest he was.

I do feel 'stuck' on this as a strong possibility, but not because of Martha's story...
Back then, kids were outside...even in the cities. People knew who had kids, and saw them here and there........The concept of neighborhood and neighborliness was strong...

I feel strongly that Joseph was hidden.