They notified both Stacey's family and Lisa's family.
But I am noticing in the media, they are giving a lot of emphasis toward Stacey's case and a kind of "or it could be the case of Lisa Stebic." Often reporters know more than what they can print. Like they may have been told off the record that it looked like it might be Stacey, but there wasn't enough info to be sure. And media will usually tell it this way without the conjecture. But they will give the conjecture the preference.
Here is what I am wondering. The coroners words are pretty standard for when they cannot offer a COD or an id. The autopsy is inconclusive. He tells what remains they do have, and they have more than what we were led to believe. He doesn't give away other specific findings.
The arms, head, and lower legs are missing. Either an animal with very specifics dietary preferences. Or coincidence that only the identifible parts dropped off, or someone removed identifiable parts. I am wondering if perhaps there were non fatal knife marks in the ribcage area also. Like might occur if a person was attempting to remove implants? That more than anything would point more toward Stacey than Lisa. And just the fact that there are non fatal appearing marks could indicate that the implants were removed to prevent id. There are other things that might have been found also, it wouldn't have to be the implants. Long hair maybe trapped in the waistband of the jeans or underwear would point toward Stacey. Evidence of an old broken bone, a known previous injury could point to a particular person without being conclusive. Or the absence of a known old injury that the other one had.
So even though the coroner says inconclusive, it doesn't mean they didn't learn anything at the scene or in the autopsy.
Here's hoping they can get that evidence admitted.
