Identified! Mystery couple murdered in South Carolina, 1976 - #7 Pam Buckley & James P Freund

[Betty P]

Well I don't gamble. It's not like I got money on this or something. I work too hard for my money. If I keep my money in my pocket then I break even everytime. I like those odds.
As far as being wrong goes, I don't mind being wrong. I don't mind it one bit. I'm not here for pride, ego, being held in high regards or any other such thing as that. I'm here simply because I enjoy it and I like to help keep an old case alive and talked about. After all, aren't we all just amateur web sleuthers? I don't know how long you have to be a web sleuther to not be considered an amateur anymore. I don't think I've ever heard of one.
Anyways, we have a term around here for what you are talking about. We call it "going down a rabbit hole" and if it was not for all of us that are not afraid to go down a rabbit hole just think how boring this place would be.

I agree, T rex. I've followed a lot of cases here over the years and all I can say is, I'm glad its a hobby and not a job. With my record, I'd be out of work. Fortunately, I learn something new with every case I follow. These UID's seem especially difficult. LE usually is sharing everything they know about the person, so its a mystery to them, too.

 

[retrometro]

For the record, I think it's fine if posters here have different theories about this case that don't agree with each other. We all hope that Jock and Jane will one day be positively identified. I see the fact that people can discuss different ideas (or "go down rabbit holes") as a benefit of threads like these, not a bug. There are some possibilities that I personally think are unlikely, but if other posters want to pursue them, that's great.

At the same time, I completely understand why Tricia and the staff moderators have specific rules in place limiting the types of external content and speculation allowed. It would be terrible if Websleuths caused unnecessary distreess to innocent people wrongly subject to speculation, or if Websleuths got sued for doing so.

 

[musicaljoke]

Lucie Gelinas is described as having a scar from liver surgery. She had surgery. Canada's Missing | Case details
"Wearing and features"

UID is described as "no surgical scars", word for word. So, she has not had surgery per 189UFSC
I quote word for word:
Bold + underlined + italics by me.
The absence of surgical scars is described. They didn't leave it blank.


So, UID had not had a surgery while MP had undergone surgery for her liver. We don't know when, but it's written in her file that she had liver surgery before going missing.
In those days, liver surgery were not like nowadays, by coelioscopy. You had to rip open.

See why Lucie Gelinas is a blatant rule-out for our couple now?

A scar from liver surgery and no scar are two very different descriptions, and are likely a rule out. However, I have also seen that descriptions can be wrong, especially after many years have gone by, or when the original reports were unreadible, or lost, and possibly if the description was poorly translated from French.

Liver surgery for a woman so young is not likely something that would be forgotten or mistaken. Do we know if the original autopsy reports are still available? If someone is working on memory alone, then they could easily recall that, "awh yeah, one of them had a surgery scar, like an appendectomy scar. I think it was the man". Where in fact it was a liver surgery scar on the young woman.

Errors of that nature could make it impossible the identify the victims because they would be ruled out based on false information. So while it's not likely that this couple is our French Canadian pair, I will be assured of a proper rule out when the DNA results make that certain.

In the meantime, they linger in the back of my mind.

 

[folieadeuxnola]

For the record, I think it's fine if posters here have different theories about this case that don't agree with each other. We all hope that Jock and Jane will one day be positively identified. I see the fact that people can discuss different ideas (or "go down rabbit holes") as a benefit of threads like these, not a bug. There are some possibilities that I personally think are unlikely, but if other posters want to pursue them, that's great.

At the same time, I completely understand why Tricia and the staff moderators have specific rules in place limiting the types of external content and speculation allowed. It would be terrible if Websleuths caused unnecessary distreess to innocent people wrongly subject to speculation, or if Websleuths got sued for doing so.

I agree, T rex. I've followed a lot of cases here over the years and all I can say is, I'm glad its a hobby and not a job. With my record, I'd be out of work. Fortunately, I learn something new with every case I follow. These UID's seem especially difficult. LE usually is sharing everything they know about the person, so its a mystery to them, too.

Both well said posts!!!!

 

[Awsi Dooger]

For the record, I think it's fine if posters here have different theories about this case that don't agree with each other. We all hope that Jock and Jane will one day be positively identified. I see the fact that people can discuss different ideas (or "go down rabbit holes") as a benefit of threads like these, not a bug. There are some possibilities that I personally think are unlikely, but if other posters want to pursue them, that's great.

At the same time, I completely understand why Tricia and the staff moderators have specific rules in place limiting the types of external content and speculation allowed. It would be terrible if Websleuths caused unnecessary distreess to innocent people wrongly subject to speculation, or if Websleuths got sued for doing so.

I agree with your second paragraph in particular. I get disgusted at other sites that allow and seemingly encourage online vigilantes. The Delphi case is overrun with that disgraceful tendency. Entire forums and pages with basically nothing else. That type basically knows to stay away from Websleuths. But when it does happen in the Delphi case it is shut down quickly.

The other day I apparently had a post removed here that I didn't even realize was within a string of objectionable posts. To be frank, the rabbit hole theories don't interest me at all, on this case or any other case, so I always fast forward to locate the point of escape. But I saw reference to whether or not Queen Elizabeth attended the 1976 Montreal Olympics. I remembered she absolutely did, and officially opened those Games. I was shocked when I didn't see my post in the subsequent scroll, until I realized it must have been part of a deleted string.

I'll never know what that detour was.

The gambling reference had nothing to do with gambling. It was merely borrowing my background to emphasize that the permutations are stacked against the researcher. For example, what percentage of identified Does are even within the system as a missing person, or runaway, or whatever? Has anyone charted that? I don't know if it's 30% or 80%. As a math type I definitely would have to know that type of thing beforehand.

I would also need to know how many Does/crime victims found within the United States were actually from a different country. That seems to be a minuscule number compared to how frequently it is speculated. This case has some apparent logic in that direction but so often it is summoned out of seemingly nowhere.

 

[Giuc0]

A scar from liver surgery and no scar are two very different descriptions, and are likely a rule out.

The key point is surgical scar. They described as "no surgery scar", not "no scar".
Which is very different.

The DN page doesn't say that she has no scar. They say that she has no scar due to surgery.
Which is very different.

However, I have also seen that descriptions can be wrong, especially after many years have gone by, or when the original reports were unreadible, or lost, and possibly if the description was poorly translated from French.

True. Let me have a look at the French version.

Liver surgery for a woman so young is not likely something that would be forgotten or mistaken. Do we know if the original autopsy reports are still available? If someone is working on memory alone, then they could easily recall that, "awh yeah, one of them had a surgery scar, like an appendectomy scar. I think it was the man". Where in fact it was a liver surgery scar on the young woman.

I wish I could agree!
However, appendicitis scar is very different of a liver surgery scar.

Errors of that nature could make it impossible the identify the victims because they would be ruled out based on false information. So while it's not likely that this couple is our French Canadian pair, I will be assured of a proper rule out when the DNA results make that certain.

I partially agree with you.
Where I disagree with you is that a liver surgery scar is not only bigger, but also, it's located higher than an appendicectomy scar.

In the meantime, they linger in the back of my mind.

Scars are very different. I added the links with a warning because they are quite graphic.


Warning: surgery scars graphic photos
Surgical scar - Stock Image - M332/0198
Liver surgery scar

Appendicitis surgical scar Femme montrant sur l'estomac avec une : photo de stock (modifier maintenant) 1454076311

 

[Giuc0]

For Lucie Gelinas, the French report says.
"Abdomen, Chirurgie du foie".
Screenshot is the Canadian database in French.

The thing is that Jane Doe has no surgical scar, while Lucie Gelinas has a liver surgery scar.

I can't see why a ME can confuse a liver surgery scar with an appendicitis scar. As I showed in the links, they are completely different scars.


If Jane Doe had a liver surgery scar, it'd been as obvious as your nose on your face.

 

[Ozoner]

For example, what percentage of identified Does are even within the system as a missing person, or runaway, or whatever? Has anyone charted that? I don't know if it's 30% or 80%. As a math type I definitely would have to know that type of thing beforehand.

No one knows, but we've seen quite a few Does who were eventually identified who had never been reported missing. In the case of the Grateful Doe, for instance, his mother tried to report him missing, but the authorities refused to take a report because the mother didn't know what jurisdiction he was in when he disappeared. A situation like that is very likely with these Does.

 

[musicaljoke]

The key point is surgical scar. They described as "no surgery scar", not "no scar".
Which is very different.

The DN page doesn't say that she has no scar. They say that she has no scar due to surgery.
Which is very different.


True. Let me have a look at the French version.


I wish I could agree!
However, appendicitis scar is very different of a liver surgery scar.


I partially agree with you.
Where I disagree with you is that a liver surgery scar is not only bigger, but also, it's located higher than an appendicectomy scar.


Scars are very different. I added the links with a warning because they are quite graphic.


Warning: surgery scars graphic photos
Surgical scar - Stock Image - M332/0198
Liver surgery scar

Appendicitis surgical scar Femme montrant sur l'estomac avec une : photo de stock (modifier maintenant) 1454076311

All that is true in a perfect system. What I was writing about is when the system is not perfect. As in when someone is trying to remember a description that was lost, when there is a translation problem, or when the original report is unreadable.

I imagine that the original report was hand written. At some time over the years, that report was either filed away, or transferred to a digital format. Based on our local records, many reports from the 70s were simply tossed away when the information was transferred to computerized systems. There is a real, though probably slight chance that an error was made. Therefore, a DNA check is warranted. imo.

 

[kittenmoon]

This is all very exciting. Appreciate the detailed discussion here on the recent developments. It’s a waiting situation in a way, but I do love reading the various perspectives on the admixture charts.

(Edited for spelling)

 

[Tighthead]

No one knows, but we've seen quite a few Does who were eventually identified who had never been reported missing. In the case of the Grateful Doe, for instance, his mother tried to report him missing, but the authorities refused to take a report because the mother didn't know what jurisdiction he was in when he disappeared. A situation like that is very likely with these Does.

The Rainbow Falls Doe in Colorado is stunning. Same state, should have been easy to connect. Family reported her missing but the report never went far.

 

[Laughing]

The woman many of us know as FLEK was not reported missing AFAIK:

Lori Ruff Identified as Kimberly McLean of PA

 

[Giuc0]

All that is true in a perfect system. What I was writing about is when the system is not perfect. As in when someone is trying to remember a description that was lost, when there is a translation problem, or when the original report is unreadable.

I imagine that the original report was hand written. At some time over the years, that report was either filed away, or transferred to a digital format. Based on our local records, many reports from the 70s were simply tossed away when the information was transferred to computerized systems. There is a real, though probably slight chance that an error was made. Therefore, a DNA check is warranted. imo.

In such case, I really suggest you to get the report from the ME. Because between the time difference and the different bureaucracy, I feel uncomfortable +++++ to call in SC.

Hope you are not offended by my request.

IMO, it's the only way to ascertain if your hypothesis is right or if we must go back to the drawing board.
Here, it's 3:08pm while in NY, it's 9:08am.

Unless they have an email, therefore, I can try by email.

What do you prefer?

 

[Chantal]

So I understand I can't publish a class photo of 1966, from a Montreal's rich kids college? .One student with olive skin and dark eyebrows stucks out from the white students..? I guess this student must have been around 16 years old in 1966, it fits the profile.
Please advise

I have emailed the association of graduates from this prestigious school regarding the olive skin student I've spotted in a class photo.

They replied with a name and to my surprise it fits JPF!!! What are the chances??

I am looking in old newspapers for more info about his family.
But eventually, I would like some assistance if someone more experienced is interested to help me.

 

[dotr]

I have emailed the association of graduates from this prestigious school regarding the olive skin student I've spotted in a class photo.

They replied with a name and to my surprise it fits JPF!!! What are the chances??

I am looking in old newspapers for more info about his family.
But eventually, I would like some assistance if someone more experienced is interested to help me.

Would the prestigious school be a French private school or an English one like LCC?

 

[Chantal]

Would the prestigious school be a French private school or an English one like LCC?

a private French school with catholic priests teachers

 

[Lexiintoronto]

Just for reference:
“
(Birth) Records dating from 1900 are in the custody of the under-noted office:

Directeur de l'état civil
2535, boulevard Laurier
Sainte-Foy, QC
G1V 5C5”

Quebec - Library and Archives Canada


A general index for marriages and deaths that occurred in the province of Quebec between 1926 and 1994 was prepared by the Société de généalogie de Québec. It is available on CD-ROM and can be consulted in many genealogical societies and libraries.

ETA: If you have a possible last name, and if his father was a doctor, you can search here:
Physician directory - Search form

(Click the box for ex-members to be included in the search.)

 

[Chantal]

ETA: If you have a possible last name, and if his father was a doctor, you can search here:
Physician directory - Search form

(Click the box for ex-members to be included in the search.)

there is one doctor but his birth year is in 1937, but I'll keep looking, there are other kind of doctors.

 

[ntt1]

there is one doctor but his birth year is in 1937, but I'll keep looking, there are other kind of doctors.

If you message me I could do some looking. I have a lot of experience with researching Canadian records, etc.

 

[folieadeuxnola]

Update ...

Doe Upload.xlsx