CA CA- Los Angeles, WhtMale, 20-30, UP4169, burned beyond recognition. May 1986.

cheemsg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2022
Messages
1,781
Reaction score
4,229
  • #1
I'm still dredging up the depths of the Los Angeles cases and I'm getting to the ones that really have no info.

This man is apparently known as 'John Doe 110'. He was 5'3 and 105 pounds. All parts were recovered, but his body was burnt beyond recognisability. The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs)

3198UMCA He actually has a Doe Network page. That's quite blank as well.

Does anyone have any reports on fires in L.A. in May 1986 that could be to do with his death?
 
Last edited:
  • #2
  • #3
  • #4
@cheemsg, where did you read the victim was known as "John Doe 110"? I ask because I googled it and found this: Los Angeles County Medical Examiner-Coroner

Clearly not the same John Doe... Just curious to know if MEs repeat names/numbers.
Namus page description says John Doe 110
It might be some kind of NamUs mix-up. The lack of information in the L.A. NamUs pages makes me wonder if some are duplicates or logged in by mistake or something.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
I'm still dredging up the depths of the Los Angeles cases and I'm getting to the ones that really have no info.

This man is apparently known as 'John Doe 110'. He was 5'3 and 105 pounds. All parts were recovered, but his body was burnt beyond recognisability. The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs)

3198UMCA He actually has a Doe Network page. That's quite blank as well.

Does anyone have any reports on fires in L.A. in May 1986 that could be to do with his death?
I could be from a fire, like in a building, or in a car. Or it could have been a deliberate burning to conceal identity. Whatever it was, it sounds like it did a number on him, poor guy.

The thing with the teeth on the Doenetwork - does that mean he has eight teeth, nine charred, or only teeth eight and nine (numbered) remain? Because if it's the latter, dentals are going to be tough. And since teeth is where a lot of the DNA lives, if they even have remains for this guy left, it might be hard getting a sample for testing.

I know it wouldn't be pretty, but I wonder if they photographed this Doe. A recon, if the skull was intact enough, might be his best bet.

For now, we know, he's 5'3", 110lb. So, on the shorter side. Small, or young? They're guessing 20-30, which I imagine they estimated based on growth plates, if his teeth were messed up. But if the bones were as much a mess as the teeth, maybe he could be younger? Or a small guy. They've pegged him as white. So, how many 5'3", 110lb white guys are there out there? I'm guessing a lot more than I'd imagine. I wonder if he was from short stock, or had poor nutrition, or had an illness of some kind that stunted his growth.

Sorry, this is a ramble of borderline incoherence. Just thinking 'out loud'.
 
  • #6
I could be from a fire, like in a building, or in a car. Or it could have been a deliberate burning to conceal identity. Whatever it was, it sounds like it did a number on him, poor guy.

The thing with the teeth on the Doenetwork - does that mean he has eight teeth, nine charred, or only teeth eight and nine (numbered) remain? Because if it's the latter, dentals are going to be tough. And since teeth is where a lot of the DNA lives, if they even have remains for this guy left, it might be hard getting a sample for testing.

I know it wouldn't be pretty, but I wonder if they photographed this Doe. A recon, if the skull was intact enough, might be his best bet.

For now, we know, he's 5'3", 110lb. So, on the shorter side. Small, or young? They're guessing 20-30, which I imagine they estimated based on growth plates, if his teeth were messed up. But if the bones were as much a mess as the teeth, maybe he could be younger? Or a small guy. They've pegged him as white. So, how many 5'3", 110lb white guys are there out there? I'm guessing a lot more than I'd imagine. I wonder if he was from short stock, or had poor nutrition, or had an illness of some kind that stunted his growth.

Sorry, this is a ramble of borderline incoherence. Just thinking 'out loud'.
Yeah, I find this one really strange. I'm not sure I quite trust the details we have. If he was burnt to this point, how could they tell for sure he was white or 20 to 30 years old? We've seen them be way off the mark with things like that. I'm hoping their estimations come from actual DNA or something other than guesswork.
 
  • #7
Yeah, I find this one really strange. I'm not sure I quite trust the details we have. If he was burnt to this point, how could they tell for sure he was white or 20 to 30 years old? We've seen them be way off the mark with things like that. I'm hoping their estimations come from actual DNA or something other than guesswork.
Perhaps unburned skin remained, say, on his extremities? But then, you'd imagine they could have taken prints. Perhaps the skin on his back was unmarked, and the fire affected his front. But maybe enough skin remained somewhere that indicated he was probably white.

Or maybe they relied on skull morphology, like they had to before DNA came onto the scene. In which case, they maybe couldn't pick up on an admixture that didn't show up on his face. Bill Bass had a decedent he used for years as a teaching tool. The decedent was black, but his skull looked 'too white', so the man wasn't IDed for a very long time, even though, if I recall correctly, he was an elderly person missing from a nursing home very close to where his skeletal remains were found. Skull morphology was better than nothing, but there's a reason we don't rely on it anymore.
 
  • #8
I'm still dredging up the depths of the Los Angeles cases and I'm getting to the ones that really have no info.

This man is apparently known as 'John Doe 110'. He was 5'3 and 105 pounds. All parts were recovered, but his body was burnt beyond recognisability. The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs)

3198UMCA He actually has a Doe Network page. That's quite blank as well.

Does anyone have any reports on fires in L.A. in May 1986 that could be to do with his death?
Rbbm.
This (end of April) fire caught my attention, fwiw..
''Hundreds of L.A. firefighters fought the devastating fire.at downtown’s Central Library on April 29, 1986. Thousands of people contributed to the Save the Books campaign afterward. Millions heard the news that the library was burning and then that it was caused by arson. But more than three decades later, only Orlean was asking who did it and why, and wondering whether anyone today should care. In a reverse “Fahrenheit 451,” Orlean took a fire and turned it into a book.''
 
  • #9
Rbbm.
This (end of April) fire caught my attention, fwiw..
''Hundreds of L.A. firefighters fought the devastating fire.at downtown’s Central Library on April 29, 1986. Thousands of people contributed to the Save the Books campaign afterward. Millions heard the news that the library was burning and then that it was caused by arson. But more than three decades later, only Orlean was asking who did it and why, and wondering whether anyone today should care. In a reverse “Fahrenheit 451,” Orlean took a fire and turned it into a book.''
I saw that too but couldn't find a report that said any bodies were found.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
116
Guests online
1,626
Total visitors
1,742

Forum statistics

Threads
632,451
Messages
18,626,956
Members
243,159
Latest member
Tank0228
Back
Top