AZ AZ- Ann Caldwell, 18, Tucson, Pima County, March 13, 1956

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
I don't think NamUs ever deletes submissions, they just stay restricted.

I tried reaching out to people who knew her brother. These are people who might have known if she was still missing, but wouldn't have known her before she went missing. No one responded to me.
Does Ann have any surviving nieces or nephews? Obviously I don't want you to identify them, just curious.
 
Palm Springs Desert Sun (April 30, 1957)
ann.png
Idk if this has been posted but this article says her mother "won" on the TV show. They spent 20 years worth of savings looking for her.
"We have a home in Tucson and Mr Caldwell has a ranch out from there-we did go back and forth a lot-maybe she didn't feel too settled... I don't know. i just don't know"
 
@SimsGuy67 - did you say you’d entered Ann into Namus awhile back? If so, did they ever respond?

Just curious because I just happened across a thread from a few years ago where someone said the’d entered a person, then got an email the next day saying it had been deleted because the case was “either a duplicate or unverifiable”.
 
@SimsGuy67 - did you say you’d entered Ann into Namus awhile back? If so, did they ever respond?

Just curious because I just happened across a thread from a few years ago where someone said the’d entered a person, then got an email the next day saying it had been deleted because the case was “either a duplicate or unverifiable”.
No, this has gone for every MP I've tried entering in NamUs, even those confirmed to still be missing. They were just restricted and never touched again.
 
The very fact of her never even being mentioned in obits for the brother and father suggests that her family wrote her off - and the only thing I can think of that would prompt that response is that she left voluntarily and maybe made no bones about coming back. I base that opinion on the fact that LE say they found her and were going to let her go back home of her own volition, something it appears she chose not to do.

I'd like to think that she lived her life on her own terms and may still be alive, anonymously.
 
I base that opinion on the fact that LE say they found her and were going to let her go back home of her own volition, something it appears she chose not to do.
Where do they say that?
The last mention of Ann iirc is an 1960s article where police are wondering if an UID is Ann. It was later identified as someone else. Shouldn't this mean Ann is still missing?
Imo whether or not Ann left voluntarily and lived her life elsewhere or had something happen to her she is still a missing person and should be in the databases.
 
Where do they say that?
The last mention of Ann iirc is an 1960s article where police are wondering if an UID is Ann. It was later identified as someone else. Shouldn't this mean Ann is still missing?
Imo whether or not Ann left voluntarily and lived her life elsewhere or had something happen to her she is still a missing person and should be in the databases.
The article saying police had "found" her was published in 1957, three years before the last article detailing her disappearance, which yes, compared her to a UID, later ID'd as Yolanda Gomez. The article shows the police hadn't closed her case after the Plainview development.
I also use quotes when I say "found," because from reading the article, it was never stated police made contact with her. It's quoted as saying "Miller (Warrant Officer) said the girl had not been picked up as yet."
Either way, her fate after 1957 still remains unknown, and the seeming lack of contact in 1959 and 1960 is not a good sign.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
137
Guests online
2,640
Total visitors
2,777

Forum statistics

Threads
601,267
Messages
18,121,592
Members
230,996
Latest member
unnamedTV
Back
Top