TX - Longview, WhtFem (UP 9863), 41-50, Suicide - Assumed Identity, Dec'10

[Magnum P.E.]

JW's DNA is on file in NamUS as well as dental records.

Longview DNA is also on file. So I am guessing that they are not a match although a lot of things line up.

Hmmmm. FLEK's DNA is on file, but JW's is listed as "Sample submitted-Tests complete". I am not sure what that means, if she is in the system or not. If she is in there it should not be missed. Sounds like JW has relatives who submitted DNA.

Dentals could be checked in seconds. We could know if we are barking up the wrong tree and then go find other trees to bark up until we find the right one. JW's dentals are available and entered but FLEK's dentals are not available. And the comment box where they are supposed to explain that is empty. :banghead:

 

[mmmmallorym]

Anyone else think it odd that she was ever compared to Parley Pate? That's the only person NAMUS has as ruled out. They look nothing alike to me.

 

[jenstar]

JW's DNA is on file in NamUS as well as dental records.

Longview DNA is also on file. So I am guessing that they are not a match although a lot of things line up.

I guess the least we can do is ask and see if they'll put her on the rule out list.

 

[Beamie]

Her nose doesn't looked crooked in the new picture. Shall we asume she wasn't born that way? And that's the oldest picture?

 

[ClaireNC]

(respectively snipped)
Interesting that on NamUS (she is NamUS #4925) there is a note saying that the circumstances are not public viewable. I have never seen that note before for circumstances, only photos. Anyone know why they would say that?

I did notice that. It is odd. Could she be in witness protection?

I mean this picture, that sweater looks like a uniform of some sort

I remember having a shirt like that in the early 1990's. That green/blue color was popular. I distinctly remember that my exMIL gave it to me as a birthday present, it came with a solid pair of shorts the same green/blue color. I never wore the outfit. It was sold at a large national woman's clothing chain retailer, similar to Fashion Bug.

JW's DNA is on file in NamUS as well as dental records.

Longview DNA is also on file. So I am guessing that they are not a match although a lot of things line up. I guess someone can submit so they can manually check.

IMO Just because the DNA for both is on file, does not mean it was compared. Somebody should report it.

Anyone else think it odd that she was ever compared to Parley Pate? That's the only person NAMUS has as ruled out. They look nothing alike to me.

I had the same reaction when i saw the rule out on Parley Pate.

I agree that JW seems like a much better match.

 

[kdsmith21]

If she was Native American I wonder if there is a chance she came from a reservation. From what I have read, it can be a pretty brutal life. I really know next to nothing but that thought just popped into my head.

she looks way too fair skinned to me to be Indian or Mexican...jmo she is very fair skin and doesn't even look like she can tan if she wanted to...

 

[deca]

The NamUs system computer database automatically scans and checks for matching DNA. If all other indicators seem to match but the DNA does not, you can request a manual comparison to make sure that there wasn't some mistake.
---

I am sure an advocate of Parley Pate's (like a family member, for example) requested the comparison and that is why she is on the rule-out- not because some investigator thought it was a close possibility compared to other MPs out there.

----

Witnesses and their families typically get new identities with authentic documentation. Housing, subsistence for basic living expenses and medical care are provided to the witnesses. Job training and employment assistance may also be provided.

From the U.S. Marshals page http://www.usmarshals.gov/witsec/


Longview didn't have authentic documentation. She stole someone's identity. On top of that the Marshal's keep track of them after they go off with their new identity. So I don't think they would have let this issue float around. Because of these facts, I doubt she was in WITSEC.

MOO:twocents:

 

[kdsmith21]

When you click on the document link here; https://identifyus.org/en/medias/download/17149 and then after opening and viewing go to "file" and click on that, at the bottom where there is a list of attached documents to this PDF file, it says " death_certificate_issued_3-18-1967[1]" and other files, but that one date struck me as a clue to the date of death for the real LEK. Searching ancestry.com for LEK's first name and that date of death or March 1967, there is someone (actually several someones) but not with "K" as a last name!
Searching for missing persons with a date of birth in 1969, here are the females I came up with; http://www.charleyproject.org/cases/c/calico_tara.html < went missing 1988 and could've been forced into *advertiser censored* or something degrading, wouldn't want that coming up or scared the kidnappers would find her. And the other similar looking MP is http://www.nampn.org/cases/berens_lori.html in which another sleuther has already mentioned on this thread!
So, LEK must've obtained the SS# with a birth certificate and then added a few years to the actual birthdate of the real "L" that is probably closer to LEK's real year of birth!
Whew! Time consuming and mind blowing, for sure!
ETA: When a person dies and is sent to the funeral home, the first thing the coordinator does is issues a death certificate based on the SS# so that creditors, etc. can be given a copy, actually one must be issued before burial, so that's when it was probably discovered about the assumed identity!

I found one link so far to allow you to search by date of death (3/18/67) and there are only 11 people listed, all males and none are juvenilles...

 

[kdsmith21]

I don't know if this is posted, but I found a website that gave a partial SS# that LER was using when she died... it says issued in 1988 in Texas and it was 458-99-XXXX it does not gived the last 4.. I don't know if this sheds any light at all, but thought I would post it for what it is worth...
So I am guessing the juvenille whose identity was stolen had this number or she just used the name and date of birth of the juvenille who had no SS# and she applied for one in 1988?

 

[jenstar]

From what I gathered in an earlier post she'd used two different ssn's and combined them. (IIRC)

 

[ClaireNC]

The NamUs system computer database automatically scans and checks for matching DNA. If all other indicators seem to match but the DNA does not, you can request a manual comparison to make sure that there wasn't some mistake.
---

I am sure an advocate of Parley Pate's (like a family member, for example) requested the comparison and that is why she is on the rule-out- not because some investigator thought it was a close possibility compared to other MPs out there.

----
From the U.S. Marshals page http://www.usmarshals.gov/witsec/


Longview didn't have authentic documentation. She stole someone's identity. On top of that the Marshal's keep track of them after they go off with their new identity. So I don't think they would have let this issue float around. Because of these facts, I doubt she was in WITSEC.

MOO:twocents:

Thanks for the info about how NamUs works as far as automatically scanning for database matches. Good information to know.

I agree that it was probably some advocate for Parley Pate that led to her being ruled out.

My comment about witness protection was referring to JW, not the Longview unidentified. The comment about further information not viewable to the public is in JW's NameUs. I tried to go back and clarify my statement, but missed the window for editing. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[kdsmith21]

I don't know if this is posted, but I found a website that gave a partial SS# that LER was using when she died... it says issued in 1988 in Texas and it was 458-99-XXXX it does not gived the last 4.. I don't know if this sheds any light at all, but thought I would post it for what it is worth...
So I am guessing the juvenille whose identity was stolen had this number or she just used the name and date of birth of the juvenille who had no SS# and she applied for one in 1988?

So, her story was truth or not: she moved to Dallas in 1987 , born 7/18/1969, she would have been about 18. If the file name on idenitfyus a previous post listed for date of death was 3/18/67 (I am assuming dod for the juvenille from Oregon or where?)

that would make the deceased juvenille born anywhere from 1949 to March 1967 when they passed away (and still be under 18)... ... just thinking out loud...

 

[ClaireNC]

I found one link so far to allow you to search by date of death (3/18/67) and there are only 11 people listed, all males and none are juvenilles...

The comment you quoted about the 3/18/67 date is misinformation. That date is not tied to this case. It was simply another file that the poster had on their computer and had last opened using the Adobe Reader application.

 

[Magnum P.E.]

If we work on the theory that JW left her former life willingly and became FLEK, she got the information on LEK from somewhere. Since JW attended Tempe HS and FLEK claimed Scottsdale (next to Tempe) as her home, it might be a reasonable endeavor to see if there is a LEK who died as a child buried in that area. Did one of us do that already?

I am not entirely convinced that that is what happened - from the three pix of FLEK and the one available of JW, their ears seem to be shaped differently. It is still a good avenue, the best one we have at this time.

If they ruled Parley Pate out, then maybe if someone calls this in they will run the comparison on JW. I thought they were run automatically.

 

[webrocket]

I do not think that this woman was in the witness protection program. first of all, there are very few people who are in it and second, if the feds were going to give someone a new identity, they would have done it correctly and not made up a bogus SS#.

 

[ClaireNC]

I do not think that this woman was in the witness protection program. first of all, there are very few people who are in it and second, if the feds were going to give someone a new identity, they would have done it correctly and not made up a bogus SS#.

Oh no! I was speculating that JW might be in witness protection not FLEK. There is a odd note in JW's NamUs file that says additional information available that is not available to her public. I am so sorry to cause confusion.

Here is JW's NamUs: https://www.findthemissing.org/en/cases/4925/2/

Here is the Longview Unidentified, that are calling FLEK's, NamUs: https://identifyus.org/en/cases/9863

 

[Magnum P.E.]

If JW was in the witness protection program, then what did she testify to? I have never heard of a case she was involved in. Also, I never heard of someone in the wtp who was then put into NamUS. Local LE puts them in and someone would know. It COULD explain the lack of info about her case and the cryptic NamUS note, though.
If FLEK was JW, then her paper trail would have held up under scrutiny. The Feds have no need to do the paper chase.

 

[mmmmallorym]

I knew someone that seemed completely normal and after his death we learned he had been living under an assumed name and was in the witness protection program. He was not entered in Namus & no deal like any of this went on.

 

[ClaireNC]

Let's not sidetrack the discussion of FLEK, the unidentified woman from Longview, TX with all this discussion of JW. I created a new thread for Jennifer Wictor, here: AZ Jennifer Wictor, 20, Tempe, AZ 3/10/1988 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

 

[jenstar]

I don't know if this is posted, but I found a website that gave a partial SS# that LER was using when she died... it says issued in 1988 in Texas and it was 458-99-XXXX it does not gived the last 4.. I don't know if this sheds any light at all, but thought I would post it for what it is worth...
So I am guessing the juvenille whose identity was stolen had this number or she just used the name and date of birth of the juvenille who had no SS# and she applied for one in 1988?

If we can find out what date she applied for the ssn that would be helpful, kdsmith. According to ancestry.com it's just (TX 1988).

As far as JW; if she were already ruled out via DNA, I'd like to see it officially "ruled out" before dismissing it. It was discussed earlier on in the thread (pgs 6-8 IIRC) but not really followed up on. No one really thought of plastic surgery. Re-shaping of the ears and nose can be done fairly easily. When I'd done a "photo overlay" the eye/ear/mouth spacing seem to match. Which is pretty concrete as far as skeletal structure; because you really can't change those with age (given that JW was 18) or surgery. JMHO