Lady Stardust
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2009
- Messages
- 154
- Reaction score
- 72
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Kelly Dae Wilson would be my first option. Nobody ever answered future criminologist's question. Does anyone know if she has been submitted or ruled out?
http://www.charleyproject.org/cases/w/wilson_kelly.html
Ms. Dunn:
As we just discussed, I have been looking for possible matches to your unidentified female decedent found on June 15, 1993 in Douglas County, Colorado (Case Number: 9304194; 93-068).
http://www.doenetwork.org/cases/154ufco.html
I found the case of Kelly Dae Wilson of Gilmer, TX (DOB 18-May-1974).
http://www.charleyproject.org/cases/w/wilson_kelly.html
I believe that Ms. Wilson is a strong possible match to this case for the following reasons:
• Age: Her age at the date of the unidentified decedent’s death (19) is within the decedent’s estimated age (i.e., 13 to 20).
• Height: Her height (5’7” is within an inch of the decedent’s measured height (5’8”
• Hair: Like the decedent, she had shoulder length blonde hair.
• Louisiana Connection: According to the findcarrie website (http://findcarrie.conforums.com/index.cgi?board=missingchildren&action=display&num=1094842637
• ), Kelly D Wilson was born in Nachitoches, LA, and was in the process of moving back to Louisiana when she disappeared. The Doe Network profile on the unidentified decedent indicates that she may have been a runaway from Louisiana.
• Facial Analysis: Using photo editing software, I traced the facial features of the facial reconstruction of the decedent, and transferred the trace lines over to the photo of Kelly D Wilson. The trace matched virtually spot-on with the exception of her left cheek. Then, using MS Excel (which has the feature of making photo objects transparent as they are being dragged over a spreadsheet), I overlaid the two photos over one another. The eyes, nose, teeth, and chin overlaid perfectly from one photo to the next (See the attached Kelly D Wilson Comparison.jpg file)
I ask that you look into this possible match, and let me know the results.
future criminologist,
I called Patricia Dunn's office for an update on this case. She wasn't in the office, but her assistant said that they have ordered dental records, and I will receive a call tomorrow from Patricia regarding where they are in the process.
I just checked NamUs again, and I see that she has already entered a few names (although it looks like there are more that are yet to be entered).
What cracks me up though is that the names of the people who they have looked at include the following (keep in mind that this UID was found in 1993, and had been dead for about 3 days when found):
Evelyn Hartley - missing since 1953
Catherine Sjoberg - missing since 1974
Debra Spickler - missing since 1968
Cherry Greenman - missing since 1976
Debra Pscholka - missing since 1971
Margaret Holst - missing since 1977
Debora Lowe - missing since 1972
Maybe it's family members who have heard that it's skeletal remains without knowing what the postmortem interval is.
But if it's the NamUs system that suggests these possible matches, it seems that the matching algorithm needs a little work.
We have seen cases resolved and identified 20 + years after the person goes missing. Why are these submissions out of the realm of possibility? Just curious.
I understood the calculation. I just wondered if you or anyone else skips by a person because the time line seems 'unlikely'? There are run-aways who are never reported. There are missing who are not endangered but get reported that way because it is the only way a report will be taken or has been by some departments. So if a run away left home 30 + years ago it is conceivable they could die today and be identified today - or next week.The woman was estimated to have died three days before she was found in 1993, and was estimated to be in her teens or early 20's. That would seem to make someone missing for 40 years very unlikely.
I already noted in my earlier comment that if it was family members, they might not know all of the circumstances.
But if it is a NamUs algorithm, it should have all of the info available, and be able to come up with possibles that are more likely.