Identified! OH - Troy, Miami Co., 'Buckskin Girl' WhtFem 133UFOH, 15-25, Apr'81 - Marcia King

[Laughing]

I often wonder about some of these rule outs, especially if DNA or dental aren't available and yet the person is ruled out. Makes me wonder what criteria they use sometimes.
Also, I had a question if anyone knows. Can isotopes tell how old a filling is? Man I wish I had been a forensic dentist. That just seems so fascinating to me.

I don't know about isotopes, but dentists know plenty about fillings just by looking at 'em. Two different dentists have correctly identified my oldest filling. I expect that the material used did change over time, and a dentist can at least bracket the age of a filling by the appearance of the material used?

Dental professionals, please chime in here!!!

(I agree on the detail-free rule-outs, Alleykins.)

 

[Alleykins]

Until you mentioned it, Carbuff, I had never dreamed of any of these cases, and sure enough, last night, I dreamed of one. It wasn't about BG, but the MP's name was said clearly in my head. Though I can't recall much of the details, it was associated with a German Shepard dog, particularly its hind quarters because I remember something wrong with it's fur there.

 

[Springrain]

Kind of off topic, but now I'm a bit hesitant on missing people being ruled out through dentals only. The dental records for the missing person could be old. With Peggy Sue Houser, for example, she was ruled out as the unidentified person she actually was, through dentals. That was because the dental records were from when she was 12, and she was 19 on her LKA date. Also, IIRC, it was reported that the UID had never broken any bones--Peggy had broken her wrist. That's the importance of DNA, if Peggy's DNA was never submitted, she would be another NamUs rule-out.

 

[Alleykins]

Spring, I was thinking the same thing about the dental records. Long story short, I submitted a possible match on another case that was ruled out in three days after I contacte them. I'm thinking, okay, that was quick. Her name had been submitted before, like 6 years ago, and maybe it was ruled then and not updated until my email was received and it reminded them of a possible oversight, but before I hit that send button, I checked the rule out list one last time, so I know it wasn't there. If it had been I wouldn't have sent it. Anyway, the MP had never been to the dentist so there were no records. The UID had had fillings and missing teeth, however, the time frame between the disappearance of the MP and the time of death of the UID was like 8-12 years, which means the MP could have had dental work between that time. That's why I was asking if they could tell how old fillings were, lol. If they could date the fillings prior to the disappearance, it would be a rule out for sure, but if they just said, nope, MP has never been to the dentist so this can't be the one, then we have a problem. I wish they would code the rules outs so we would know, something like - D for DNA, T for teeth O for other with an asterisk with an explanation below :laughing:

 

[Springrain]

I wish they would code the rules outs so we would know, something like - D for DNA, T for teeth for other with an asterisk with an explanation below :laughing:

Yes! And I also wish they still had nuclear vs mitochondrial DNA specified, and where the DNA was being held. Up until 'til 2013 they had the dental chart just in plain sight, they have since taken that down, too.

 

[carbuff]

Dental ruleouts can be very quick, very cheap, and very accurate, but like any other technology, it's only as accurate as the information they have to work with. If the missing person's information isn't known, or is wrong, they can't make a match. If the ME made mistakes on the forensic examination or the records weren't kept correctly, they can't make a match. In your case, it could be something as simple as the UID showing signs of orthodontic treatment, which they knew the missing person hadn't had.

 

[Alleykins]

The MP I submitted had had no known dental treatment of any kind at the time of her disappearance, from what I've read. So the only conclusion I could make was that if the rule out was based on dental records, it had to be that the fillings on the UID pre-date the MP's disappearance. That's entirely possible. It's also possible that she was ruled out previously by DNA and the list wasn't updated, as someone had submitted her name years ago.

 

[Roselvr]

Spring, I was thinking the same thing about the dental records. Long story short, I submitted a possible match on another case that was ruled out in three days after I contacte them. I'm thinking, okay, that was quick. Her name had been submitted before, like 6 years ago, and maybe it was ruled then and not updated until my email was received and it reminded them of a possible oversight, but before I hit that send button, I checked the rule out list one last time, so I know it wasn't there. If it had been I wouldn't have sent it. Anyway, the MP had never been to the dentist so there were no records. The UID had had fillings and missing teeth, however, the time frame between the disappearance of the MP and the time of death of the UID was like 8-12 years, which means the MP could have had dental work between that time. That's why I was asking if they could tell how old fillings were, lol. If they could date the fillings prior to the disappearance, it would be a rule out for sure, but if they just said, nope, MP has never been to the dentist so this can't be the one, then we have a problem. I wish they would code the rules outs so we would know, something like - D for DNA, T for teeth O for other with an asterisk with an explanation below :laughing:

They won';t tell you how they were ruled out either because I submitted one to ask. It was MO - St. Louis - Black Female Child Age 8-11 February 28, 1983 I submitted NamUs MP # 9693 Telethia Good and asked how NamUs MP # 5960 Sharaun Cole was ruled out because she is showing as ruled out. Sharaun's DNA is processing still.

have to leave

 

[Springrain]

A commenter on the Who Was Buckskin Girl? gave a link to a short video recorded last year about Buckskin Girl:
http://www.whio.com/videos/news/miami-county-authorities-still-working-on-jane-doe/vDQhjj/

The guy who discovered her body spoke a bit. He said that it was the buckskin jacket that caught his eye, he went out to investigate, and found Buckskin Girl.

Det. Steve Lord also spoke. He brought down a box, which contained her clothing. He took out the buckskin jacket and showed it to the camera, so we could see the width of it. Based on what we know about her weight and height, the jacket looks to me like it might have been a bit large on her, though she may have wanted it that way to conceal her chest. Or I could be wrong, of course.

Bob Sweitzer, a retired detective, said that they expected to identify Buckskin Girl quickly and that he presumes she is not from Miami County.

It is also shown that one of the penciled renditions of Buckskin Girl is still pinned to the wall, a reminder of her.

At 1:27, there is a black-and-white photo of several men in black suits carrying the casket containing her remains. Have never seen that photo before; I am very happy to know that there were people making sure she was not alone while laid to rest. S

She's buried in Troy's Riverside Cemetery--it's quite a lovely cemetery. Her grave is small and reads only "Jane Doe April 22 1981", but in the picture, it is surrounded by bows and bouquets of flowers, a reminder she is not forgotten.

Here's the link to her Find A Grave page: http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=124674061

 

[Springrain]

Something I haven't noticed before: is the writing on the jacket labeling it as evidence? You can see it slightly on the picture of the buckskin jacket on Doe Net, but it is more visible on the video link above at 1:09 to 1:13. It almost looks like it says "Jesse" to me. It's probably just labeling it as evidence, but don't they normally use tags? And it seems like that would be mentioned on the Doe Net/NamUs pages, unless that piece of information was considered private information about the investigation. Did anyone else notice that? Am I reading too much into it (probably?) Newbie here, only been reading about UIDs since Jan. 2015 :blushing:

 

[GreyClay]

Something I haven't noticed before: is the writing on the jacket labeling it as evidence? You can see it slightly on the picture of the buckskin jacket on Doe Net, but it is more visible on the video link above at 1:09 to 1:13. It almost looks like it says "Jesse" to me. It's probably just labeling it as evidence, but don't they normally use tags? And it seems like that would be mentioned on the Doe Net/NamUs pages, unless that piece of information was considered private information about the investigation. Did anyone else notice that? Am I reading too much into it (probably?) Newbie here, only been reading about UIDs since Jan. 2015 :blushing:

The image quality is not great, but maybe someone can work it out:

 

[carbuff]

That does answer one question I had. It appears to be a well-worn garment, though still in good condition.

It could say Jesse (and Jess might sound like Bev), but it looks to me like MIKI. But it could be an M followed by some numbers, which would likely mean it's an evidence label of some sort.

eta: I found Micki Jo West, missing from Missouri in 1979. She was 19. http://www.doenetwork.org/cases/2212dfmo.html Pretty fair facial resemblance, though the photos of West are pretty blurry. Circumstances make her all but impossible though. A serial killer named Irvin pled guilty to murdering her, but her body wasn't found in the field where he said he buried her and where his two other victims were found. http://murderpedia.org/male.I/i/irvin-marvin-lee.htm

 

[catherine.]

Like carbuff, I'm seeing the letters "MIK." Maybe initials? Or the name Mike?

 

[Springrain]

Like carbuff, I'm seeing the letters "MIK." Maybe initials? Or the name Mike?

I like the idea of Mike; it looks possibly like a mens' or uni jacket (to me). Maybe he wrapped her in the jacket after he killed her.

 

[FiveFelines]

You can also see it in this pic from Doe Network. Hard to make out what it says, even with enlarging. It seems odd that LE would label it by writing on it, but even odder that this detail is nowhere in descriptions of BG or her jacket.

 

[catherine.]

I like the idea of Mike; it looks possibly like a mens' or uni jacket (to me). Maybe he wrapped her in the jacket after he killed her.

I thought it might be a men's jacket too. It could be a brother/boyfriend's jacket. When my brother and I were in high school I would wear some of his things or take what didn't fit him. Now he's a foot taller than me, so I can't do that anymore lol.

Edit: I figured I'd edit this than post a new post. From the picture FiveFelines posted it looks like MC28. The rest I can't make out. That seems like a LE tag, but I wouldn't think they would write directly on the evidence.

 

[FiveFelines]

You can also see it in this pic from Doe Network. Hard to make out what it says, even with enlarging. It seems odd that LE would label it by writing on it, but even odder that this detail is nowhere in descriptions of BG or her jacket.

View attachment 91269

ETA: Actually, I looked at it even larger on NamUs, and it looks like it says "MC 282--". I imagine the "MC" is for Miami County.

https://identifyus.org/en/medias/full/4021

 

[FiveFelines]

I thought it might be a men's jacket too. It could be a brother/boyfriend's jacket. When my brother and I were in high school I would wear some of his things or take what didn't fit him. Now he's a foot taller than me, so I can't do that anymore lol.

Edit: I figured I'd edit this than post a new post. From the picture FiveFelines posted it looks like MC28. The rest I can't make out. That seems like a LE tag, but I wouldn't think they would write directly on the evidence.

Yup. We must have been editing at the same time! I think it's a tag by LE. "MC" for Miami County.

 

[Dogface]

I did some very rudimentary editing to see what I could find:

 

[Roselvr]

That does answer one question I had. It appears to be a well-worn garment, though still in good condition.

It could say Jesse (and Jess might sound like Bev), but it looks to me like MIKI. But it could be an M followed by some numbers, which would likely mean it's an evidence label of some sort.

eta: I found Micki Jo West, missing from Missouri in 1979. She was 19. http://www.doenetwork.org/cases/2212dfmo.html Pretty fair facial resemblance, though the photos of West are pretty blurry. Circumstances make her all but impossible though. A serial killer named Irvin pled guilty to murdering her, but her body wasn't found in the field where he said he buried her and where his two other victims were found. http://murderpedia.org/male.I/i/irvin-marvin-lee.htm

There is nothing to compare her to if submitted to NamUs
Charley Project link