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

[Susikatze]

Exactly. And the 64th and Callowhill house was where JAZ's father lived with his parents. (I looked up the Zarelli name on Ancestry and found the house)

Yeah, the media often confuses stuff or tries to come to their own conclusions in order to attract more viewers.
I treat podcasts and news reports very much with caution. Many things they do get right, of course, too.

 

[GumShoelace]

Bill Fleisher (of the Vidocq Society) had a presentation with Northeast Philadelphia History Network today, it was open to everyone both in-person and on Zoom, did anyone here attend?

I'm curious what he said about Joseph because I'm hearing he may have told some different story about Joseph's living situation than what I believed after listening to the initial presser and Colleen's interview.
?

Here's the YouTube link to the Zoom recording of Fleisher's NEPHN presentation.

 

[Toots1]

I would ask whatever agency handled the adoption that question. I don't think the family knows,and that they are quite shell shocked,and heart broken about this whole tragedy. MOO

I agree that the bio family probably had no idea about the child or adoption. But if the Phila police want to get somewhere, they should start by questioning the Archdiocese of Phila. The bio family stated that the 1st child's adoption was done by a Catholic agency...stands to reason that JAZ adoption was too

 

[fred&edna]

Could someone remind me if the half-siblings (born to MA&JP) were aware of the existence of the children who had been adopted-out (prior to the genealogy researchers in this case contacting them)? I thought they knew but maybe I'm wrong. TIA!

 

[Susikatze]

Could someone remind me if the half-siblings (born to MA&JP) were aware of the existence of the children who had been adopted-out (prior to the genealogy researchers in this case contacting them)? I thought they knew but maybe I'm wrong. TIA!

They were not aware of half siblings. It was all kept hush hush by MA, which i guess was standard back in the day.

 

[Oakie]

The DNA-ID podcast covered this case yesterday and did a good job of it.

Doe ID 'The Boy In The Box' Joseph Augustus Zarelli

According to the hostess of the podcast, all of the surviving relatives of both biological parents claimed no knowledge of JAZ, and were quite surprised to find out about him; and both families are certain that the boy did not live with either biological parent. Although, the woman who sold the hat that was found with the boy did say that Gus Zarelli resembled the man who came in and bought the hat (the customer requested that she custom-make a strap for the hat, so she remembered the transaction). If the boy was kept by the Zarelli family he might have been kept hidden away in a basement or attic. But from the information thus far released, it's hard to claim anything for certain.

 

[fred&edna]

They were not aware of half siblings. It was all kept hush hush by MA, which i guess was standard back in the day.

I thought I remembered some indication (maybe in my own research) they did know about one or both of the previously adopted half-sibs (just not JAZ). I definitely must be wrong. Thank you!

 

[Susikatze]

The DNA-ID podcast covered this case yesterday and did a good job of it.

Doe ID 'The Boy In The Box' Joseph Augustus Zarelli

According to the hostess of the podcast, all of the surviving relatives of both biological parents claimed no knowledge of JAZ, and were quite surprised to find out about him; and both families are certain that the boy did not live with either biological parent. Although, the woman who sold the hat that was found with the boy did say that Gus Zarelli resembled the man who came in and bought the hat (the customer requested that she custom-make a strap for the hat, so she remembered the transaction). If the boy was kept by the Zarelli family he might have been kept hidden away in a basement or attic. But from the information thus far released, it's hard to claim anything for certain.

Where is the info about the hat shop saleswoman from? I never saw it anywhere.

 

[Oakie]

Where is the info about the hat shop saleswoman from? I never saw it anywhere.

It was in the podcast.

 

[Susikatze]

It was in the podcast.

Where did the podcast get it from? First time ive ever heard that.

 

[Susikatze]

It would have been extremely unusual back then if an out of wedlock child was raised by the biological father or his family. I doubt it.

 

[OnlyS]

It would have been extremely unusual back then if an out of wedlock child was raised by the biological father or his family. I doubt it.

It was unusual, but does happen. My grandfather was raised by his paternal family. He was raised by the sisters of his father. It was only when we dug into family history, that we realised neither were his mother.

 

[AliceInPain]

Is this the same podcast that claims his last meal was baked beans?
I haven't listened to it, but that was "info" from the M lady.
The autopsy only showed there was a "brown substance".
Stuff like that makes me sceptical of where the rest of their information come from.
Is the shop woman even alive today to say the customer resembled Zarelli?

 

[Susikatze]

Is this the same podcast that claims his last meal was baked beans?
I haven't listened to it, but that was "info" from the M lady.
The autopsy only showed there was a "brown substance".
Stuff like that makes me sceptical of where the rest of their information come from.
Is the shop woman even alive today to say the customer resembled Zarelli?

I would book it all under what i mentioned above. Podcasts and similar are not always careful with their research and results may vary.
The M theory was long debunked and ive never heard or read anywhere that the buyer of the cap resembled Gus or at least some thorough description, other that it was a blond man in his 30s who bought the cap and wanted it customized.
Gus was never blond as far as I know.

 

[Oakie]

Where did the podcast get it from? First time ive ever heard that.

Although she did not source that item specifically, she did say, toward the beginning of the podcast, that the Philadelphia Inquirer had done "very detailed reporting", or something like that, on the case, so perhaps that was where she found it.

 

[UnlicensedPI]

Is the shop woman even alive today to say the customer resembled Zarelli?

She died in 1974

 

[AliceInPain]

Just listened to the podcast.
Aside from the baked beans error, most of it was just a repeat of already known facts.
Nowhere is it mentioned the shop woman thought the customer resembled Gus Zarelli.
The host towards the end draws the conclusion that since Colleen F. has said Joseph was raised by one of his parents, and Betsy's relative had no idea about Joseph and spoke so well about her, Joseph can not have been raised by Betsy. She then goes on to imply he was raised by Gus, mentioning the handkerchief with the embroidered "G".
Very dull, nothing new, and (imo) a ridiculous conclusion.

 

[Friday Fan]

She died in 1974

Well, there goes that!

I remember she described him as blonde. Gus was never blonde, so I was skeptical....

 

[AgeofAquaruis]

I wonder if he was actually adopted out, or kept at an orphanage. I find it rather curious that no one, not even the Catholic agency ever came forward concerning a precious child that had been in their care. With recent things being uncovered with orphans,and the Catholic church in Ireland I can't help but wonder. How could they not know who the boy in the Box was? Or at least how one day he's with the adoptive parents,and then the next poof he's not. The more I learn the less I trust a big organization that does not like anyone asking questions. MOO

 

[kaen]

I wonder if he was actually adopted out, or kept at an orphanage. I find it rather curious that no one, not even the Catholic agency ever came forward concerning a precious child that had been in their care. With recent things being uncovered with orphans,and the Catholic church in Ireland I can't help but wonder. How could they not know who the boy in the Box was? Or at least how one day he's with the adoptive parents,and then the next poof he's not. The more I learn the less I trust a big organization that does not like anyone asking questions. MOO

I don't find that surprising at all. Secrecy and child abuse have been a part of many institutions that "took care of children" across the world. I hope we can someday find more answers.