Hi. I've had to backtrack and go through 1200+ posts, but I finally am up to speed regarding this case. Wondering about a few things.
1: The location of her murder and the complete absence of leads raises the question of whether she belonged to a group not typically represented in these databases. There have been some mention of Native American origin or belonging to a migrant family (which I feel is unlikely based on the reasons given before) or that she was Canadian. Has there been any cross-referencing to Canadian databases? Any inquest at all to authorities about missing children from up there?
2: Was the waitress account of her meal at the Lima Diner from earlier in the night she was murdered or a whole day before that? If LE believes her last meal was at the Lima Diner, around 9 miles from where her body was found, then the suspect sketch and wood-paneling station wagon become much more important based on the shorter time-frame.
If the Lima Diner tip was a whole 24+ hours prior to her death, it plausible to think that a girl who is a bit of a drifter and familiar with hitching could have met and gotten a meal with one person and within an entire day met someone new and gotten a ride.
That being said, what models of station wagon, let's say within the previous ten years of her murder were able to be bought with wood paneling? Once these makes/models are known, aren't there DMV records within the state that are accessible to link owners to these vehicles?
3: The nature of the murder, being shot in the face, dragged just off road and shot again, while being stood over, doesn't typically align with many serial killer MO's. There were no evidence of a struggle, no indication of sexual assault. It seems rather hasty and poorly thought out. The murder has a personal feel to it. Why make her empty her pockets? She doesn't seem like a typical mark for a robbery. All signs point to the fact that she wasn't wealthy, didn't own anything of real value. I can't help but feel whoever killed this girl made her empty her pockets to not rid her of an identity or steal, but rather ensure she didn't possess something that would tie him/her to the scene. Why do that, unless the murderer and Cali Doe spent time together/were in public together.
4: The evidence of Australian pine found on her seems more and more like a red herring. I read somewhere in this thread that the pollen was found in both her jacket and her trouser pockets. Is this true? If that's the case, then she must have been traveling with the jacket (and not lent it at some point in NY before her murder) for some time. I am also unsure of the ease of cross contamination between articles of clothing. Any experts on that?
5: I know her jacket, ill-fitting and awkward on her, was a promo giveaway at racing events. What year were these jackets manufactured (it was a one time thing)? Knowing the year would determine how likely it was that Cali Doe got the jacket from a thrift shop/borrowed it or actually received the jacket at a racing event prior to her death. Also, if LE had the manufacturer of these jackets, how is it possible that there was no trace of where they were shipped/what company they were shipped to/how they were disseminated. That's just not how businesses are run. Has to be a paper trail somewhere.
Alright, that's all I got at the moment. Thanks for fielding my questions everyone.
