carbuff
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2009
- Messages
- 29,783
- Reaction score
- 73,020
She does look very close. Linda Grimm doesn't, at least not to me.
Identified! OH - Hebron, WhtFem 561UFOH, 25-40, behind I-70 truck stop, Apr'90 - Patrice Corley
- Thread starter Snufamonbobball
- Start date
She does look very close. Linda Grimm doesn't, at least not to me.
From the other thread:
So it looks as though the match is not new, but nor has it been followed up. Great job, Mensch, on finding this and re-opening it.
It's definitely worthy of submission and there is nothing that seems to discourage a match other than time/distance (and there are circumstances that make that time/distance much smaller).
This match needs to be investigated properly and followed up unless it turns out that there is an actual rule out already.
So it looks as though the match is not new, but nor has it been followed up. Great job, Mensch, on finding this and re-opening it.
It's definitely worthy of submission and there is nothing that seems to discourage a match other than time/distance (and there are circumstances that make that time/distance much smaller).
This match needs to be investigated properly and followed up unless it turns out that there is an actual rule out already.
I have been dealing with the case manager and she said Linda had not been considered. This case was sent to me about 2 months ago and I started on it last month. Did my usual preliminary checks and information gathering and submitted Linda as a possible to the UID, considering the background, etc. and when I was told Linda had NOT been submitted, I turned in the information I had. What am I missing here? If someone does not think this is a match, then let's discuss it. Why the other thread on the same person without discussion here?
Open forum discussion is new to me. I normally do my work and turn it in. I post a possible, a very good possible given a lot of research and it seems it is not acceptable. If someone sees a potential match, then they should back it up with a report and send it in. The LE investigator spoke with my ME contact a few days ago. That is precisely he is familiar with this case. I am only waiting to hear there is finally a name for this woman who had the most unspeakable treatment in this life so she can rest in peace. Again, if someone is musing on the possibility of a match, lets get on with a discussion and not leave it for months or up to a year. I have found no where here that it was submitted prior to my records on the documented case.
:twocents:
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2009
- Messages
- 8,274
- Reaction score
- 7,540
According to the rules articulated by Cubby, if you start a thread using the "Submitted" or "Possible Match" flags, or if a specific UID and a specific MP are stated in the thread title, the discussion must be limited to that possible match only, and if anyone wishes to discuss a different MP, they must start a new thread (either a general discussion thread for a single UID, or another specific combination of 1 UID and 1 MP)
Since you are still in the 24-hour window, if you revise the thread title to specify only the UID case, and replace the "Submitted" flag with "OH" (i.e. Ohio), then the discussion can go beyond the MP case indicated in your thread title, and we can merge the two threads that were started today.
It is for that reason that I never use the "Possible Match" or "Submitted" flags anymore when starting a thread because it limits the discussion to a single MP.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2009
- Messages
- 8,274
- Reaction score
- 7,540
Gloria Fedyshyn looks like a real good possible. There are a couple of freckles or moles on each cheek of the UID in the postmortem photo that you don't see on Gloria. But (1) Gloria's face is covered heavily with make-up, and (2) we don't know when the photo of Gloria was taken, and freckles and/or moles may have developed in the interim.
Frances Morales looks alot like the recon drawing, but not so much like the PM photo. She has a much different nose, IMO. Her nostrils (alae) have more flare.
Frances Morales looks alot like the recon drawing, but not so much like the PM photo. She has a much different nose, IMO. Her nostrils (alae) have more flare.
Thank you Carl,
I appreciate the feedback as I have two unanswered questions regarding forum in posting in the instruction section that have gone unanswered. I did the best with what I knew at the time. Much appreciated.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2009
- Messages
- 8,274
- Reaction score
- 7,540
Two things that catch my attention on Linda Grimm. (1) Charley Project indicates that Linda had a caesarean scar. There is no indication of a caesarean scar on the UID, although abdominal stretch marks are indicated.
(2) Linda's nose tip seems more delicate. Granted, that is not conclusive because there was a four-year lag and noses do continue to grow throughout life, but IMO the difference goes beyond what I would expect in four years.
(2) Linda's nose tip seems more delicate. Granted, that is not conclusive because there was a four-year lag and noses do continue to grow throughout life, but IMO the difference goes beyond what I would expect in four years.
I hear ya about the C section...boy do I hear ya! This has been a major arguing point with a ME. It does not 'fit' with the MP report.
I will try to be brief but everyone needs to understand that each person envolved in the submission of a case is subjective in their review.
1) If a volunteer, they glance at the pic, say, "Nah, doesn't have the right hair, teeth, eyes, etc". They want the dead and the living to look the same. They don't. They won't. Death is ugly.
2) The LE reviewer will look at it and say, "What was she doing 1200 miles from home and how did she get there and why was she there?" (Who,what,where,why and how). Very deliberate and to the point. They don't want to be bogged down with possibilities.
3) The ME, IF the case ever gets that far will say "LE told me this is not a good match and I can't time up time and expense on a guess"...or a number of other reasons. They want to see what is in the LE report and LE wants to see what the ME had to say about scars, marks and tats. If the ME didn't say it....then it is not true. It is a catch 22.
4) Ideally, the researcher gives everyone a piece of the picture on the UID and the MP case as ONE case, as if both cases were one and the same. It is up to us to give them something to get them moving up the ladder of review. That means getting past the initial look at our case. Give them something that says, "What if I am right"???
I think I have done that in this case, as I do in all my cases and if allowed I would post the superficial markings on this UID's post mortem that got as far as the ME and then to the anthropologist who is getting the appropriate scientific proof to clear this up because no one can be ID'd by superficial marks or a reasonable set of events that brought the MP to his/her place of death. As to the nose, lighting must be considered. (See all of Grimm's photos). Also consider swelling caused by facial trauma. Then consider skin breakdown and the pitting in the onset of decomposition. Some of these markings can be separated out from natural occureing skin blemishes if one is determined enough and works long enough on enlarged and enhanced photos. If markers appear on two or more photos, start making a good argument for the ME, because ultimately they determine which UID gets a closer look.
I might also note here, as I have said before; distance is not a factor in most cases and to determine if it is or not depends on being familiar with both the UID and MP case and all the circumstances that can be found and making one's best logical assessment.
WestCoastLady
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 750
- Reaction score
- 320
snipped and bolded by me
The report says:
Small white mole on right side of bridge of nose. Small brown mole to right of umbilicus. Stretch marks characteristic of childbirth.
So sad there are so many unidentifieds....their families must wonder what happened to them
Your observation of Gloria's facial features are very good!
I think this is an over all facial likeness. It does appear to me without a closer look at the photo, that Gloria has a scar below her L eyebrow which is not apparent on the image of the UID. That would be our viewing right. I say that because some photos have been printed in reverse. I take nothing for granted.
.02cents
carbuff
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2009
- Messages
- 29,783
- Reaction score
- 73,020
snipped and bolded by me
The report says:
Small white mole on right side of bridge of nose. Small brown mole to right of umbilicus. Stretch marks characteristic of childbirth.
So sad there are so many unidentifieds....their families must wonder what happened to them
I meant that there's no mention of whether Frances Morales, the missing woman, had children or not. There's mention of leaving her family, is all.
mortytbusybody
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2009
- Messages
- 24
- Reaction score
- 5
Thank you Carl, that is exactly why I opened another thread for this Doe as both threads I found related to her were specifically created as "possible matches" to Miss Grimm. I hope I didn't offend you in any way, Mensch, I simply wanted to follow the rules of the forum and felt this young woman deserved her own thread for discussion.
No offense taken mortybusybody.Thank you Carl, that is exactly why I opened another thread for this Doe as both threads I found related to her were specifically created as "possible matches" to Miss Grimm. I hope I didn't offend you in any way, Mensch, I simply wanted to follow the rules of the forum and felt this young woman deserved her own thread for discussion.
I just wanted to make it clear this case was submitted and did not understand that might be interpreted as no discussion necessary. The UID definately deserves a review. I must say it is not very helpful to just get a comment that the possible 'looks good' or no, it doesn't look like a match.....What is helpful is to say precisely WHY in either case. It is just as important to say what one sees in the comparison as to what they don't see. This helps hone the facial id skills.
I was out most of the day and missed a call from a contact on this case. I am hoping it won't take long.
ETA.....Carl, I defer to your opinion on teeth. See anything similar in both. I know, there is little in the UID so it had to be enlarged. Also what I found is that in Linda's photos, there seems to be tow missing teeth - one on either side top.
reasypeasy
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2010
- Messages
- 550
- Reaction score
- 133
No offense taken mortybusybody.
What is helpful is to say precisely WHY in either case. It is just as important to say what one sees in the comparison as to what they don't see. This helps hone the facial id skills.
I was out most of the day and missed a call from a contact on this case. I am hoping it won't take long.
ETA.....Carl, I defer to your opinion on teeth. See anything similar in both. I know, there is little in the UID so it had to be enlarged. Also what I found is that in Linda's photos, there seems to be tow missing teeth - one on either side top.
Well I like the matches between the living photos and the post mortem in the curve of her forehead near her temples and the angle that the bones of her eye orbits take as they curve into her nose.
And it doesn't hurt the credibility of the match any that her narrative contains a suspicious looking guy with the means to transport her.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2009
- Messages
- 8,274
- Reaction score
- 7,540
The chart on Jane Doe says that she was missing her #6 (i.e., her upper right lateral incisor) antemortem, and you can see that the tooth is missing. However, that is meaningless for comparison because the tooth could have been lost at any time between when Linda's photos were taken, and Jane Doe's death.
Regarding the possibility that Linda's two upper-lateral-incisors (7 and 10) are missing, I can't be sure. But that was my first impression - that Linda is missing her 7 and 10 and the canines came forward to close the gaps. In the only clear photo of Linda's teeth, the teeth in the 7 and 10 position look more pointed like canines. I'm not a dental expert though, and would not stick my neck out to say outright that they are canines.
In the Jane Doe PM photo, her #10 does not appear pointed, but that may be due to the bottom being obscured by her lower lip. Also, Jane Doe's teeth appear to have been poorly maintained, so some of the differences in their appearance may be the result of decay and plaque.
mortytbusybody
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2009
- Messages
- 24
- Reaction score
- 5
Thank you for your imput regarding Gloria Fedyshyn everyone. I went ahead and sent the possible match into Elizabeth Murray (the contact listed at Namus.) She responded that Gloria looked like a "promising" lead and that she would keep me informed.
I'm really sold on their hairlines, though, I enlarged the two pictures slightly for a better comparison. See how they both have an off-center peak of hair on their right (our left) sides? (keep in mind their heads are tilted in opposite directions)
Hopefully between this submission and the other one for Linda Grimm we will find a name for this young woman soon!
raying:
I'm really sold on their hairlines, though, I enlarged the two pictures slightly for a better comparison. See how they both have an off-center peak of hair on their right (our left) sides? (keep in mind their heads are tilted in opposite directions)
Hopefully between this submission and the other one for Linda Grimm we will find a name for this young woman soon!
raying:Good point, reasypeasy!
Starting at bone structure/facial shape is very important. If that's wrong, then all else is irrelevant. There are only 51 (IIRC) human facial shapes. Then we have variations of those. Everything above the bone is subject to change....daily.
I appreciate the comment on the narrative. That tells me you read the (limited) circumstances of the MP. This is important for obvious and sometimes not so obvious reasons.
:twocents:
Thanks Carl. I can't be sure either, but my first impression was that a tooth on either side (upper) was missing. But prior to that observation I noticed the two front teeth and the slight rounded appearance of the Upper R on both the UID and the MP. None of this means a match, or is even important when taken out of the total appearance of both the UID and the MP. However, it is a reference point.