MN Red Wing and Old Frontenac - Baby Boy and Baby Girl Doe. He was found Dec'03, and she was Nov'99

Discussion in 'The Unidentified' started by NYCGenealogist, Jan 15, 2019.

  1. NYCGenealogist

    NYCGenealogist New Member

    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    3
    This case bothers me a great deal, and has had little to no attention here- I've only found a side mention of it in a very old post about a similar, unrelated case in the same area.

    On November 4, 1999, fishermen discovered the body of a newborn baby girl was found near the docks on the shore of the Mississippi River in the town of Red Wing, Minnesota. Her umbilical cord was still attached and she was wrapped in a white towel, which was still floating in the river. She had been born alive, and dumped in the river about a week before she was found.

    [​IMG]

    As we all know, dumped babies are sadly not unusual. The police tried to find the mother- at first dozens of tips were coming in, but no one matched the crime. They had either never been pregnant, or their alibis checked out. The others were exonerated by DNA.

    The case went cold. A family who had lost a child "adopted" the baby girl and gave her a burial. People forgot and time went on.

    Then, on the afternoon of December 7, 2003, teenaged girls on a church hike in Frontenac, a town near Red Wing, discover the body of a baby boy floating just off the shore of Lake Pepin. The police are called. Detective Pat Thompson said later:

    “In both cases we have the victims, apparently both dumped in the water. No witnesses and little, if any, physical evidence. Based on the facts we had at the time the second baby was discovered, we believed we had two separate cases. At least that’s what we thought.”
    The only clue to the boy's identity is a blue towel found at the crime scene. He was, at the most, two weeks old.

    [​IMG]

    DNA is run, in the hopes that the police will get a lead. And a match appears- to the baby discovered in 1999. According to the DNA, the two infants share a mother.

    There are no leads on who this woman is. Personally, I think that she will just keep doing this again and again. Psychologists on the case characterize her as impulsive, in denial, and possibly suffering from postpartum psychosis.

    The boy was buried beside his sister by the same family. Another, unrelated, infant found in similar circumstances in 2007 was also buried with them.

    News link: The river of secrets around one mother and two floating Minnesota babies | City Pages

    Her NAMUS entry: Unidentified Person Case
    His NAMUS entry: Unidentified Person Case
     
  2. Owutatangledweb

    Owutatangledweb Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,025
    Likes Received:
    2,234
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So so sad. I wonder if the woman who did this has any living children. So hard to fathom the circumstances under which someone could do this.
     
    Jim_M and Elizabeth Lavenza like this.
  3. NYCGenealogist

    NYCGenealogist New Member

    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    3
    I have a few theories.

    1. That she did this on her own, either due to postpartum psychosis (as suggested in the article) or another mental illness. The infants' postmortems didn't indicate any maternal drug use.

    2. That she is being held captive by someone who is impregnating her. In this case, there would have to be more than one man involved as the children didn't share a paternal match.

    In either situation, my deep fear is that these two are only the babies that have been found- that more were thrown into the water in other locations, or swept away.
     
    cvaldez1975, silverjug and Jim_M like this.
  4. fidgeypie

    fidgeypie Member

    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Oh my gosh how sad. Poor children. Following this thread. I guess they don't know if the children shared the same father?
     
  5. NYCGenealogist

    NYCGenealogist New Member

    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    3
    The two do not share the same father. And neither father was related to the shared mother.
     
  6. NYCGenealogist

    NYCGenealogist New Member

    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    3
    BLANK - never mind
     
  7. meanmaryjean

    meanmaryjean Verified RN (Pediatrics Specialty)

    Messages:
    2,629
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Postpartum psychosis is highly unlikely as the female was newly born (cord still attached). Rarely, does PPS begin in the first few days after birth. Usual onset is in the first few weeks (2-6)
    As much as I would like to be sympathetic, the fact remains that not once but TWICE the same woman gave birth and threw her child in the river, murdering them.
     
  8. NYCGenealogist

    NYCGenealogist New Member

    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    3
    This was my impression as well- I was only saying that because the doctor quoted in the article mentioned it.

    So either we're dealing with someone who is quite literally just dumping babies, or a situation where a woman is being held captive and used as a sex slave/being pimped out.

    I spoke to someone from the area and he explained that there isn't a homeless population there- it's a very, very small town and rural area. He also said that a local theory was that both babies were tossed in on the Wisconsin side of the river and washed ashore in Red Wing/Old Frontenac.

    The fact that the boy stayed alive longer sort of indicates to me that it was the mother doing this- maybe she regretted the first one, tried to keep the second, and then changed her mind? But then why not take advantage of safe haven laws?
     
    meanmaryjean likes this.
  9. RememberingRyan

    RememberingRyan Member

    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    13
    While this obviously happened at least twice and may have happened more than that, I don't think that two cases from 15 and 19 years ago is reason to believe that this person is currently continuing this pattern.
     
  10. fidgeypie

    fidgeypie Member

    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gotcha thanks.
     
  11. NYCGenealogist

    NYCGenealogist New Member

    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Yes, but if the woman is being held captive, she still could be being victimized. And even if she isn't, knowing who did this isn't minor.

    Just because it happened 15, 19 years ago doesn't mean it doesn't matter.
     
  12. fidgeypie

    fidgeypie Member

    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I've just seen a reddit post that links four babies found.
     
  13. NYCGenealogist

    NYCGenealogist New Member

    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Yes; the two more recent babies aren't related genetically, and both bodies were abandoned differently.
     
  14. Owutatangledweb

    Owutatangledweb Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,025
    Likes Received:
    2,234
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Those same two things also crossed my mind.
     
  15. fidgeypie

    fidgeypie Member

    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Yes that's very true
     

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