Identified! PA - Delaware Co, Ridley Creek State Park, WhtFem 25-45, UP14642, rings w/initials, Jan'16 - Name Withheld

[heartgoesout]

Was she excluded?

 

[Alleykins]

Was she excluded?

They won't tell us anymore. I don't think she has been ruled out, unless they compared her dental (to be entered later) and fingerprints (available elsewhere), and they may not have been conclusive or it may be still pending if those records weren't forth coming. It appears to me it would be a manual rule out and should appear on her rule out list if she is excluded. Her DNA is still pending.
Here's her NamUs page

 

[Alleykins]

http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/new...now_this_woman_her_rem.html#incart_river_home

From the article noted above, there are new facial reconstructions and isotope results for her:

Isotope analysis indicate the woman was born and lived in the Northeast Region of the United States, with a strong probability she came from Pennsylvania or an adjacent state, troopers said.

 

[Carly921]

I live in delco, about 5 miles from RCSP... they had this case on the news tonight, I wonder why they would ask for help and then not tell us if someone is ruled out... go figure

 

[Alleykins]

I live in delco, about 5 miles from RCSP... they had this case on the news tonight, I wonder why they would ask for help and then not tell us if someone is ruled out... go figure

Privacy reasons, I guess. In Christina's case, she could still be pending comparison because her DNA isn't completed in the system yet. They may not have had access to her dental record and fingerprints, they don't appear to be in NCIS or AFIS, according to NamUs. Or, they could have been compared and it was inconclusive and they're waiting for DNA. Or she could have been ruled out and they just haven't updated NamUs yet.

I'm thinking if she had been compared by one of those two biometrics and was excluded, she WOULD appear on the rule out list (eventually) because it would have been a manual comparison, and they only put those on the rule out lists in NamUs.

Sometimes, it takes forever, though.

 

[heartgoesout]

There are exclusions on the actual thread. Have to check if she’s on there as tips have been pretty good.

 

[heartgoesout]

There are exclusions on the actual thread. Have to check if she’s on there as tips have been pretty good.

I'm confusing myself, this is the original thread. d'uh

 

[heartgoesout]

The photos I sent have been added, she added a description to most of them.

NamUs Case # 14642 has had changes made. You can view the case by clicking the url below

URL: https://identifyus.org/cases/14642

The following fields have been changed:
Image added

________________
Exclusions -The following 9 people have been ruled out as being this decedent:
First Name Last Name Year of Birth State LKA
Jennifer Cahill-Shadle 1966 Pennsylvania
Danielle Day 1972 New Jersey
Amanda DeGuio 1990 Pennsylvania
Tamera Kingery 1977 South Carolina
Dawn Mozino 1965 Pennsylvania
Chelsea Ricker 1988 New Jersey
Melissa Rodriguez 1982 Pennsylvania
Melissa Rodriguez 1982 Pennsylvania
Kortne Stouffer 1991 Pennsylvania

Bumping the exclusions

 

[Gardener1850]

http://6abc.com/police-seek-to-id-woman-found-dead-in-delco-state-park/3143524/

 

[sunnynz]

So just to be clear, is the consensus that this woman died within the previous four months of being discovered? We're not looking at older cases?

 

[Alleykins]

So just to be clear, is the consensus that this woman died within the previous four months of being discovered? We're not looking at older cases?

I'm looking at all cases prior to the date of discovery that would fit the age range and physical description at the TOD. Maybe I'm wrong in interpreting it this way, but I've always looked at the postmortem interval as the time the remains were autopsied/examined, which they don't necessarily have to do at the time of discovery. I've never taken postmortem interval as the estimated time of death, because the field listed above it "probable year of death" in NamUs which I figured they'd use if they had it. I could be wrong on this, this is just my take on it. That's one reason why I look at older cases than the discovery date. The other reason is some folks go missing but don't necessarily meet their demise at the time they disappear.

 

[janewall]

http://6abc.com/police-seek-to-id-woman-found-dead-in-delco-state-park/3143524/

The artist sketches resemble Toni Sharpless, missing after a night out in Gladwyne PA August 23 2009.

 

[heartgoesout]

Her sister comments on FB dental records are not a match for Toni Lee Sharpless.

 

[heartgoesout]

I didn’t notice before but the center and right pictures rings seem to be a matching set. Does anyone remember if the origin of the rings was found out?

 

[Alleykins]

I see a resemblance to Toni, too, but I would hope the DNA profiles would have hit, since they both appear to be in CODIS. You could always double check with NamUs, but I'm sure she would have been automatically ruled out & therefore not listed.

OT: The reconstruction reminds me of Frances McDormand.

 

[janewall]

Her sister comments on FB dental records are not a match for Toni Lee Sharpless.

Thank you for noting that, heartgoesout. I hadn't thought to check her sister's FB about the pictures released this week. Good catch.

 

[Deleted member 278]

Can someone rename this to read "Middletown Township"? It's confusing because there is a town in PA called Middletown.

 

[heartgoesout]

The discovery was at Ridley Creek State Park. And that's what media titles anything related to the case.
If someone where to google for information I'd think they'd start with Ridley Creek State Park.
Maybe a Mod can change it to Ridley Creek State Park, Delaware County, PA

Ridley Creek State Park is a 2,606-acre Pennsylvania state park in Edgmont, Middletown and Upper Providence Townships, Delaware County, Pennsylvania in the United States. Wikipedia

 

[Roselvr]

I see a resemblance to Toni, too, but I would hope the DNA profiles would have hit, since they both appear to be in CODIS. You could always double check with NamUs, but I'm sure she would have been automatically ruled out & therefore not listed.

OT: The reconstruction reminds me of Frances McDormand.

Good question on whether the DNA would have hit in CODIS. It's happened before where it didn't because according to Todd Matthews, the DNA may not have been at a level to be compared but it's possible that's changed since Margo was identified. Here is her WS thread - NM - Pagosa Springs, WhtFem 55UFNM, 25-35, Sep'82 *Margaret Walden*

This is the original thread with her BF; it's just like Jimmy and Kim
CO - Pagosa Springs, WhtMale 1282UMCO, 20-28,"Lazy B" TShirt, Oct'82, Stewart Simmons

Here are a few posts from her thread -

What am I missing? Both say DNA Sample submitted - Tests complete. This isn't a case I've followed so am unsure
Margaret Walden NamUs DNA Sample submitted - Tests complete
NamUs UP # 5326 DNA Sample submitted - Tests complete

http://www.pagosasun.com/second-victim-in-1982-double-homicide-identified/

Nearly 32 years after her body was found washed up on an island in the San Juan River, the female victim of a 1982 double homicide was positively identified as Margaret Ann Walden earlier this week — the week she would have turned 72.

Coincidentally, Walden’s body was also rediscovered on Wednesday — after years in an unmarked grave in an Espanola, N.M. church cemetery and several previous attempts to locate her body in the same cemetery.

Thanks! I'm still scratching my head as both NamUs profiles are online!
I have to wonder why NamUs did not make the match?

edit - According to the newest article; (if I am reading it right) it sounds like NM held Jane Doe's sample but refused to test against Margo's relatives....

Wow, the stats were off on this one. Like, really really off.

Estimated age: 25 - 35 years old
Margaret's age: 39

Estimated height: 5'2
Margaret's height: 5'10
(For the record, the last biggest height discrepancy in a WS match was 4 inches. That was in two different cases: Robert Donlick and Troy Kozkowski. Margaret's case was twice that.)

Estimated hair color: Brown
Margaret's hair color: Blonde

UP's medical history: Hysterectomy. No mention of any other surgery
Margaret's medical history: Mastectomy + bullet wound scar on chest. No mention of hysterectomy

When I look for PMs, I allow for three inches discrepancy in the estimated height and three years off the age range (if the person's estimated age is 40 - 50, I'll go 37 - 53). There's no way I would have hit on her; I would have ruled her out immediately just based on the height, and with the hair color + age difference to back it up. Actually, I'll go a step further and say I don't think LE would have even considered Margaret if it weren't for the jewelry that was on her, and the fact that she had run away with a sailor (which Stewart Simmons was).

Makes you wonder how many matches have been missed because of errors like that.

I have an answer. This goes to show that we can't assume DNA processed & complete means that NamUs holds them or ever that they were run through the same system. It just means that someone has the DNA on file.

The person I spoke to from NamUs said that one sample (Margo's family) was at CalDOJ lab and the other (Margo as JD) was at FBI. They do not know outside of UNT if they were at the level to be compared nationally.

 

[sunnynz]

Good question on whether the DNA would have hit in CODIS. It's happened before where it didn't because according to Todd Matthews, the DNA may not have been at a level to be compared but it's possible that's changed since Margo was identified. Here is her WS thread - NM - Pagosa Springs, WhtFem 55UFNM, 25-35, Sep'82 *Margaret Walden*

This is the original thread with her BF; it's just like Jimmy and Kim
CO - Pagosa Springs, WhtMale 1282UMCO, 20-28,"Lazy B" TShirt, Oct'82, Stewart Simmons

Here are a few posts from her thread -

I’ve always understood not to submit matches who both have DNA tests completed in namus and have been told as much by Dustin Driscoll. You’re saying that’s not the case?