CO CO - Gilpin Co., WhtFem, 25-30, burned, off Hwy 119, overbite, Sep'52

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
There is a find a grave entry for her. I can't believe I'm seeing this for the first time. The investigators told me that they didn't know where she was buried and yet she has a headstone. I feel so stupid! Going to see what I can do to have them exhume her for DNA samples.

Find a grave
 
There is a find a grave entry for her. I can't believe I'm seeing this for the first time. The investigators told me that they didn't know where she was buried and yet she has a headstone. I feel so stupid! Going to see what I can do to have them exhume her for DNA samples.

Find a grave
Sadly, there is no headstone, nor an entry for her burial. I just went to FindAGrave and it says, "Unable to locate where victim was buried, Dory Hill was chosen to facilitate entry on findagrave, as it is the closest to where she was found." It's odd (and confusing) that someone did that, as anyone can list a memorial on FindAGrave and simply state "unknown."
 
Sadly, there is no headstone, nor an entry for her burial. I just went to FindAGrave and it says, "Unable to locate where victim was buried, Dory Hill was chosen to facilitate entry on findagrave, as it is the closest to where she was found." It's odd (and confusing) that someone did that, as anyone can list a memorial on FindAGrave and simply state "unknown."
Well thats bull****. I emailed the coroner anyway. Blackhawk is a small area, and it's unlikely that she was cremated. I bet she probably *is* in Dory Hill, just in an unmarked grave. Even if it wasn't Dory Hill, there are only 13 cemeteries in Gilpin County.
 
I just spent an hour on the phone with the Gilpin County Coroner and here is the information I obtained, mods please delete if not allowed.
- Jane Doe's skeletal remains were dumped in the Lowry Landfill (without Gilpin County's knowledge or consent) in the mid-late 80's, they are not in a cemetery
- The only way to identify Jane Doe is a picture of her living wearing the same necklace; according to a jeweler it is a very unique piece.
- He believes that she is a missing woman from Mason City, Iowa who is no longer listed in NAMUS (for reasons unknown), but I found her on the Iowa Missing Persons database here; Lillian Eileen (Huff) Demaris.
- This case will never have a positive ID, just a presumptive ID.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2022-12-29 at 10.55.36 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2022-12-29 at 10.55.36 AM.png
    180.9 KB · Views: 13
Thank you for discussing this case with the coroner. I'm not surprised that the Jane Doe's remains were dumped in a landfill, but I find it so very very sad. This woman deserves the "presumptive ID."
 
I just spent an hour on the phone with the Gilpin County Coroner and here is the information I obtained, mods please delete if not allowed.
- Jane Doe's skeletal remains were dumped in the Lowry Landfill (without Gilpin County's knowledge or consent) in the mid-late 80's, they are not in a cemetery
- The only way to identify Jane Doe is a picture of her living wearing the same necklace; according to a jeweler it is a very unique piece.
- He believes that she is a missing woman from Mason City, Iowa who is no longer listed in NAMUS (for reasons unknown), but I found her on the Iowa Missing Persons database here; Lillian Eileen (Huff) Demaris.
- This case will never have a positive ID, just a presumptive ID.
How infuriating! :mad: Thank you for taking time to find out the fate of Maria Doe’s remains.

I found Lillian’s WS thread, and it turns out Maria has already been suggested as a match to her.

 
While looking through FBI bulletins for missing people, I found a much more cleared up photo of that... interesting clay reconstruction. It's still not great but It's much better than the grainy photo we had to work with before.
1083UFCO1_LARGE.jpg
Prye Case.jpg
 
While looking through FBI bulletins for missing people, I found a much more cleared up photo of that... interesting clay reconstruction. It's still not great but It's much better than the grainy photo we had to work with before.
1083UFCO1_LARGE.jpg
View attachment 445358
oh lord, "interesting" is right. I was caught off-guard by that image while scrolling down the page and instinctively laughed, and now I feel like a terrible person.

(honestly, in a "Sensory homunculus" type aspect where it's emphasizing features people may remember, it's not a bad sculpture! Caricature is a good way to jostle people's memories to start putting the shapes of a face into place. Just.... this looks goofy.)
 
oh lord, "interesting" is right. I was caught off-guard by that image while scrolling down the page and instinctively laughed, and now I feel like a terrible person.

(honestly, in a "Sensory homunculus" type aspect where it's emphasizing features people may remember, it's not a bad sculpture! Caricature is a good way to jostle people's memories to start putting the shapes of a face into place. Just.... this looks goofy.)
Don't worry! Laughing at it just because it's a bit strange doesn't make you a bad person at all! They also very likely did amplify her overbite to be even more prominent to spark a memory.

Someone on the wiki was able to figure out that the bad quality photo and this newly discovered photo are not one in the same. They are photographed at different angles. They also may be different reconstructions. The new photo has a much broader head shape, though the bad quality photo may have just been compressed.
 
I compressed the higher quality image to try and confirm that it's the same image, just compressed. My tests seem to suggest I was right.

Here's the original high quality image for reference.
Prye Case.jpg


Tests of Compressing the High Quality Image:
Side-by-side:
1083UFCO1_LARGE.jpg - LibreOffice Draw 21_11_2023 23_11_15.png
Overlay:
Pyre Comparison 2.png

This also means we've been using a compressed and inaccurate image of the bust until I found the new one.

There are some minor inconsistencies, and I believe there's two factors at play.
1. I didn't perfectly compress the image, it could easily have been compressed a bit bigger or smaller.
2. I theorize this was taken from a newspaper, hence the low quality and compression. The image being boxed in would provide the extra area of the image on the bottom.

I can now say with almost certainty, it's the same picture.
 
I emailed NamUs and they've immediately added the higher quality image to her page. They're also checking with the coroner to see if the info on the bulletin is accurate or not, as Doe Network's sources state she was 5'7, but the bulletin states she was 5'4.

I also emailed Doe Network and they're also planning on adding it, but they needed to forward it to the web hosts to update it. Expect to see it on her page in the coming days/weeks.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
145
Guests online
1,616
Total visitors
1,761

Forum statistics

Threads
605,516
Messages
18,188,249
Members
233,413
Latest member
Salty7
Back
Top