CA CA - Tujunga, Hisp/AsianFem 440UFCA, 14-24, wig & St Christopher medallion, Aug'94

[MarziPanda]

It's a little odd that they're saying she's 133lbs but are also saying she has a 'considerably heavy build' and that she 'had a larger build that was considerably heavy for her size'. I'm finding that kind of hard to visualise. 133lbs isn't heavy for someone 5'3-5'6, is it? Do they mean she was particularly curvy? Didn't hold her weight in the 'right places'? It just jumps out as an odd and confusing way to phrase her body type.

What a shame that there's insufficient DNA for profiling. I wonder if they've tried extracting more recently with more advanced techniques. It would be useful to know her ethnicity for sure.

 

[Bit of hope]

It's a little odd that they're saying she's 133lbs but are also saying she has a 'considerably heavy build' and that she 'had a larger build that was considerably heavy for her size'. I'm finding that kind of hard to visualise. 133lbs isn't heavy for someone 5'3-5'6, is it? Do they mean she was particularly curvy? Didn't hold her weight in the 'right places'? It just jumps out as an odd and confusing way to phrase her body type.

What a shame that there's insufficient DNA for profiling. I wonder if they've tried extracting more recently with more advanced techniques. It would be useful to know her ethnicity for sure.

I agree, a little odd how they put it. Personally I think they mean overweighted for her approx. age and height en most certain if she was on the younger range of the age and 5'1'.

 

[Sleuth91]

It's a little odd that they're saying she's 133lbs but are also saying she has a 'considerably heavy build' and that she 'had a larger build that was considerably heavy for her size'. I'm finding that kind of hard to visualise. 133lbs isn't heavy for someone 5'3-5'6, is it? Do they mean she was particularly curvy? Didn't hold her weight in the 'right places'? It just jumps out as an odd and confusing way to phrase her body type.

What a shame that there's insufficient DNA for profiling. I wonder if they've tried extracting more recently with more advanced techniques. It would be useful to know her ethnicity for sure.

I found that phrasing odd as well. I wouldn't consider 133 lbs "considerably heavy" for someone who is between 5'3 and 5'6. Like bit of hope commented below...maybe they were considering her being on the younger end of the proposed age range.

I don't know what the protocol for funerals for unidentified decedents was back in 1994, but now LA County cremates unidentified decedents and if the cremains are not claimed within 3 years, they are buried in a mass grave. I read an article about it the other day. I'll have to find it and post the link here. I'm hoping that she was buried so that she could be exhumed and have her DNA extracted for profiling, but according to the article I read, cremations are much cheaper than burials, and since the state pays for it, I imagine she was cremated.

 

[Sleuth91]

https://graphics.latimes.com/unclaimed-dead-2012/

A more recent article: LA County buries its unclaimed dead in ceremony that shows ‘they still matter to us’

 

[Sleuth91]

Just found an LA Times article from 1994 that mentions our Jane Doe. It also mentions the protocol for unidentified decedents at that time. Cremation after 1 month in morgue, some exceptions are made. See article. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-10-06-me-46979-story.html?_amp=true

 

[Sleuth91]

UPDATE: I spoke with NamUs through email this morning about uploading our Jane Doe's photos to her NamUs page.

NamUs is contacting the agency that entered the case into the NamUs database (I assume police dept or coroner's office in LA County) to get permission to upload the photos.

I found something else pertaining to the case today: In The Matter Of Jane Doe #41 (94-06715), Decedent

 

[Bit of hope]

UPDATE: I spoke with NamUs through email this morning about uploading our Jane Doe's photos to her NamUs page.

NamUs is contacting the agency that entered the case into the NamUs database (I assume police dept or coroner's office in LA County) to get permission to upload the photos.

I found something else pertaining to the case today: In The Matter Of Jane Doe #41 (94-06715), Decedent

I'm not sure what the document means. What is it? The Petitioner seems to be
https://health.usnews.com/doctors/lakshmanan-sathyavagiswaran-418906
but not understanding the document I can't figure out what he has to do with this Jane Doe. The name is Tamil btw....is he advocating for a Tamil family? Can you help out?

 

[Sleuth91]

I'm not sure what the document means. What is it? The Petitioner seems to be
https://health.usnews.com/doctors/lakshmanan-sathyavagiswaran-418906
but not understanding the document I can't figure out what he has to do with this Jane Doe. The name is Tamil btw....is he advocating for a Tamil family? Can you help out?

I googled the her assigned case number for the Medical Examiner / Coroner's Office, and that page came up in the Google results.

Our Jane Doe is referred to as Jane Doe 41 in an article from the Los Angeles Times from 1994. Dr. Lakshmanan was the Medical Examiner in Los Angeles at the time our Jane Doe was discovered. In 2001, he filed for an “order establishing fact of death” for our Jane Doe.

I’m not sure (someone please correct me if I’m wrong,) but I think an "order establishing fact of death" is done when a death certificate isn't completed in a timely manner after the person died.

 

[Bit of hope]

I googled the her assigned case number for the Medical Examiner / Coroner's Office, and that page came up in the Google results.

Our Jane Doe is referred to as Jane Doe 41 in an article from the Los Angeles Times from 1994. Dr. Lakshmanan was the Medical Examiner in Los Angeles at the time our Jane Doe was discovered. In 2001, he filed for an “order establishing fact of death” for our Jane Doe.

I’m not sure (someone please correct me if I’m wrong,) but I think an "order establishing fact of death" is done when a death certificate isn't completed in a timely manner after the person died.

That makes sense. Thanks. I guess it's a court decision about her being officially death or something the like, to make sure she goes on record.

Death

• BMD-003 Petition to Establish Fact, Date and Time of Death
• BMD-003A Declaration in Support of Petition to Establish Fact, Date and Time of Death
• VS-109 Order Establishing Fact of Death (not a court form)
• Pamphlet Re: Court Order Delayed Registration of Death
  

 

[Sleuth91]

bump

 

[Sleuth91]

Update: Got in touch with LA Coroner's office today. They uploaded her photos and corrected some of the info on her NamUs page! The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs)

 

[Bit of hope]

Update: Got in touch with LA Coroner's office today. They uploaded her photos and corrected some of the info on her NamUs page! The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs)

That's a good thing but I'm still a bit confused about her race. How should we "read" the info from other sources about her possibly being Asian or from the Philippines, or a mixture of this? Not exclude the latter, I guess.

If I'm correct Namus changed the height from 5'3 - 5'6 to 5'2 - 5'5. Still 133 lbs. Did they add the bra, cub A? I can't remember seeing that before somewhere. She is mentioned as White / Caucasian, Hispanic / Latino. The other things aren't changed or added (shoes for instance not mentioned) or did I missed something?

I was still wondering about her "looks" called "a larger build that was considerably heavy for her size". This somehow doesn't match up with her clothes size (small, medium) or her bra size (A) Maybe the below calculation give us a better idea... .....I don't know.

According to this calculator Your result

If she was:
- between 14 - 17 /5'2 /133 lbs; the weight of this young woman is higher than average.

I'm not going to do the calculation all over again but if you were Asian or Asian American at 14 yrs you would be heavily
overweighted. "What can safely be said, though, is that the weight of this young woman is much higher than average. A visit to the doctor is recommended". At 15 years it would be higher than average.

- between 18 - 24 / 5'2 / 133 lbs; The weight is at a level that should be good for your health. By classification of the WHO, she is "normal weight".

- 14 or 15 / 5'3 /133 lbs; the weight of this young woman is higher than average.

- 16 - 17 /5'3 /133 lbs; What can safely be said, though, is that the weight of this young woman is within an average range.

- between 18 - 24 / 5'3/ 133 lbs; The weight is at a level that should be good for your health. By classification of the WHO, she is "normal weight".

- 14 /5'4 /133 lbs; the weight of this young woman is higher than average.

- between 15 -17 /5'4 /133 lbs; What can safely be said, though, is that the weight of this young woman is within an average range.

- between 18 - 24 /5'4 /133 lbs The weight is at a level that should be good for your health. By classification of the WHO, she is "normal weight". (with 21 - 22- 23 -24 years optimal weight)

- between 14 - 24 /5'5 /133 lbs; the weight of this young woman is within an average range. (with 18-19-20-21-22-23-24 years optimal weight)

Her breast size (cub A) is small, her slacks are small and blouse medium.....

I highlighted the strongest possibilities.

 

[Sleuth91]

Her height was actually listed in NamUs as (5'4, measured) before the Coroner's office changed it yesterday to (5'2 - 5'5, estimated). NCMEC lists her as 5'6, Doe Network lists her as 5'3 - 5'6.

I think it's important to remember that with unidentified decedents, heights and weights are often estimated. It's frustrating when it varies from website to website, but I'm trusting what the LA County Coroner's office added to the NamUs profile yesterday since the Coroner's office is the one with our Jane Doe's actual files.

The "white bra, A cup" was there before her profile was edited yesterday.

Here is what I can remember that changed when the page was updated yesterday:
1. Photos added. There were no photos before yesterday.
2. Location found changed from "Los Angeles" to "Sunland-Tujunga"
3. NCMEC # added
4. Age range changed from "17-24" to "14-24"
5. Added the brand name of the wig.

Just wanted to note that I'm very excited that the case was updated in NamUs yesterday. The fact that they not only added her photos (which is what my original email had been about), but that they updated other information too, shows me that they want her information to be accurate no matter how old the case is.

 

[Bit of hope]

Her height was actually listed in NamUs as (5'4, measured) before the Coroner's office changed it yesterday to (5'2 - 5'5, estimated). NCMEC lists her as 5'6, Doe Network lists her as 5'3 - 5'6.

I think it's important to remember that with unidentified decedents, heights and weights are often estimated. It's frustrating when it varies from website to website, but I'm trusting what the LA County Coroner's office added to the NamUs profile yesterday since the Coroner's office is the one with our Jane Doe's actual files.

The "white bra, A cup" was there before her profile was edited yesterday.

Here is what I can remember that changed when the page was updated yesterday:
1. Photos added. There were no photos before yesterday.
2. Location found changed from "Los Angeles" to "Sunland-Tujunga"
3. NCMEC # added
4. Age range changed from "17-24" to "14-24"
5. Added the brand name of the wig.

Just wanted to note that I'm very excited that the case was updated in NamUs yesterday. The fact that they not only added her photos (which is what my original email had been about), but that they updated other information too, shows me that they want her information to be accurate no matter how old the case is.

Thank you for the summery. I'm happy too that LE is taking this case serious (as they should with every case) and wanting the stats to be accurate. Can you elaborate on the info I posted about age and weight, a bit over weighted....I think she was at the younger site of the range....college student? (speculation) but I still can't figure out why a girl would wear a wig at such a young age.

 

[Sleuth91]

Based on what you posted above, it sounds like she may have been on the heavier side, especially if she was on the younger end of the spectrum.

I have wondered about the wig as well. It seems strange to me that a girl that young would be wearing a wig unless she had problems with hair loss, and she had medium-length black hair pulled back in a ponytail under the wig.

 

[Sleuth91]

So I have some small updates.

I've been corresponding with the Los Angeles County Coroner's office and I submitted two possible matches for this Jane Doe.

Unfortunately, DNA is unavailable for our Jane Doe. Only her dental charts and fingerprints are available.

The two missing women I submitted as possible matches had DNA available, but no dental charts or fingerprints. So, a comparison could not be made between each missing person and Jane Doe.

Does anyone know how accurate the info is that is posted on the "identifiers" section on missing persons' profiles on Doe Network? One of the potential matches said that dental records were available, but when I reached out to LA County Coroner's office, they said the potential match did not have dental records available. Who updates the Doe Network profiles? Is it volunteers?

 

[Bit of hope]

So I have some small updates.

I've been corresponding with the Los Angeles County Coroner's office and I submitted two possible matches for this Jane Doe.

Unfortunately, DNA is unavailable for our Jane Doe. Only her dental charts and fingerprints are available.

The two missing women I submitted as possible matches had DNA available, but no dental charts or fingerprints. So, a comparison could not be made between each missing person and Jane Doe.

Does anyone know how accurate the info is that is posted on the "identifiers" section on missing persons' profiles on Doe Network? One of the potential matches said that dental records were available, but when I reached out to LA County Coroner's office, they said the potential match did not have dental records available. Who updates the Doe Network profiles? Is it volunteers?

Thank you for doing that. What a bummer that matches are impossible to make. Would you like to share the possible matches you presented, preventing others to submit over and over again. The Doe Network is run by volunteers. Contacts for California content are:

California (Southern) Area Director: Bernadette McLaren at bernadettemclaren(at)doenetwork.org
Researcher: Sheri Tor
California (Northern) Area Director: Deborah Tate at deborahtate(at)doenetwork.org
Researcher: Elaine Palmer

 

[Bit of hope]

I did take a second look at the ruled out women. If there is no DNA (insufficient) for Lila Doe how did they rule out Donnis Redman. According to Donnis's Doe Network file there are no dentals, no fingerprints available but there is DNA.

 

[Sleuth91]

Thanks for posting that contact info for Doe Network.

Lurline Bergeron was the first match I submitted. I submitted it basically off of what I saw as a resemblance between a photo of Lurline and an early sketch of Jane Doe.

Darlene Tucker was the second match I submitted. I submitted it based on the fact that she and Jane Doe both have a scar above their right eyebrow (Darlene's is listed as 1" and Jane Doe's is listed as 3/4"), they both have a gap between their front teeth, their noses are shaped similarly, Darlene is within Jane Doe's height range, and Darlene is close to the same weight as Jane Doe. Darlene ran away from home in 1983, but there were confirmed sightings of her in 1985 and 1987.

The only things that don't add up are that Darlene would have been 3 years out of the age range at the time of Jane Doe's death, Darlene is white and Jane Doe is believed to have been Hispanic, Filipina, white or admixed. Darlene had dark brown hair and green eyes and Jane Doe had black hair and brown eyes.

EDIT: I will add all my links to articles about Lurline and Darlene and side by side comparisons of each girl with Jane Doe later today. I'll need to do that from my computer.

 

[Sleuth91]

I did take a second look at the ruled out women. If there is no DNA (insufficient) for Lila Doe how did they rule out Donnis Redman. According to Donnis's Doe Network file there are no dentals, no fingerprints available but there is DNA.

I'm not sure how they would have ruled Donnis out. Good catch!