The ring could have also belonged to an older relative... This being the case, it is like looking for a needle in a haystack. Where to begin? Who to look for?
It is surely interesting to develop various theories but I HOPE we will get to know their identities and story soon. The rest of it (the ring, the racing T-shirt etc.) will be unveiled and explained, too.
Exactly. That's why I never devote any time to research like that. No matter how logical, a given angle isn't likely to reach even 1% on the probability scale.
This case lacked so many particulars that could have helped, like the KOA sighting involving both Does and not merely a male, or some mention of an accent or lack thereof, or the fruit stand sighting accompanied by greater detail.
Early investigators seemed to drop the ball. The fruit stand sighting is light years more valuable than the KOA anecdote. It was nearby and obviously reported in the immediate time frame. Once that aspect surfaced we should have one local article after another in the following days/weeks after the murders asking for anyone to come forward, who might have spotted the Does at that fruit stand or nearby. But I've seen nothing like that. I've read more than once that the fruit stand eventually closed but it was located on property that the same family continued to own for decades longer. Imagine all that time for investigators to drive over there and ask basic questions. Instead we've got nothing until a relative eventually pops up on social media -- or whatever -- saying it was her mom who saw the Does at the fruit stand.
Forensic genealogy has demonstrated that trying to identify Does is like a parlay. As a sports bettor I am constantly aware of the vast difference between a straight bet and a parlay. In a straight bet you wager on one team. That's it. But a parlay requires involves multiple variables and they all have to fall your way, otherwise you lose.
This is the parlay aspect of trying to match a name with a Doe:
* Person has to be reported missing in the first place. Hardly a given, as we have sadly seen far too often
* Law enforcement has to take the report seriously enough to take a record
* Law enforcement has to be competent and thoughtful enough to maintain and keep track of that record over time...which can be decades
* That record needs to find its way into online sources, and ones accessible by researchers
* The record needs to be detailed and accurate enough to align with logical search criteria toward that Doe
And so forth. Researchers are incredibly dedicated and admirable, but so often simply on the wrong end of a parlay.
That's why a Doe is identified and so often the reaction is...that's great but we've never heard that name
