Decomposed Body found in Scurry Co.*3/16/13* - LE identified as being Hailey

[For The Kids]

JMO but I find it odd and troublesome that there were only a few bones found. I realize animals and birds can scavenge and carry sections away, but that many bones missing (or overlooked)?! Over 200 bones were taken from that area by scavengers?! I understand hands and feet together are made up of half the bones in a body and teeth count for many also, but what about the other femur or other larger bones such as the tibia, fibula, pelvis, the humerus, the whole spine and rib cage? If this was a full grown adult you would think the bones would be harder for an animal to carry or drag away. And once there was no flesh on the bones, would an animal actually still be interested in the just the bones?

MOO but I assume this is a child or someone with a small framed for animals to have carried parts far enough away that they would not be found by detectives in their search. The other thought I had...was this person butchered and parts dumped in other areas? From pictures and information posted on SA's fb and YT, his interest in gore movies and his missing work coveralls, I wouldn't be surprised if this happened (butchering). Maybe I am assuming the worst but I just cannot get past so many missing bones. Of course unless the body had been there for decades exposed to the elements and have disintegrated, I don't get the lack of bones found within that vicinity.

I guess I find it hard to believe that if it is Hailey, that is all there is left of her. Such a beautiful little girl. She deserves to be found and laid to rest. Sadly yes I do believe Hailey is gone. :tears:

Swedie one thing to consider. Just because Billie says his work overalls are gone doesn't mean that is true. Billie says a lot of things and most of it is lies.

 

[For The Kids]

I wouldn't put too much stock into what has or more importantly hasn't been said in the media regarding the bones.

Sarx the man who found the bones said the same thing about what bones were found though he could have lied but would he been allowed to if he may be called on to appear in court?

 

[TGIRecovered]

Sarx the man who found the bones said the same thing about what bones were found though he could have lied but would he been allowed to if he may be called on to appear in court?

I believe that the man did find just the scull and femur. That's all he saw. If LE found more; much much more even, they might still chose to confirm just the femur and skull and nothing else. If LE had found the whole thing without a civilian seeing any of it they probably would confirm "human remains" without giving any specifics at all.

It's similar to the advice given to anyone testifying in court: answer the question asked and that's all.

MOO



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kirby]

JMO but I find it odd and troublesome that there were only a few bones found. I realize animals and birds can scavenge and carry sections away, but that many bones missing (or overlooked)?! Over 200 bones were taken from that area by scavengers?! I understand hands and feet together are made up of half the bones in a body and teeth count for many also, but what about the other femur or other larger bones such as the tibia, fibula, pelvis, the humerus, the whole spine and rib cage? If this was a full grown adult you would think the bones would be harder for an animal to carry or drag away. And once there was no flesh on the bones, would an animal actually still be interested in the just the bones?

MOO but I assume this is a child or someone with a small framed for animals to have carried parts far enough away that they would not be found by detectives in their search. The other thought I had...was this person butchered and parts dumped in other areas? From pictures and information posted on SA's fb and YT, his interest in gore movies and his missing work coveralls, I wouldn't be surprised if this happened (butchering). Maybe I am assuming the worst but I just cannot get past so many missing bones. Of course unless the body had been there for decades exposed to the elements and have disintegrated, I don't get the lack of bones found within that vicinity.

I guess I find it hard to believe that if it is Hailey, that is all there is left of her. Such a beautiful little girl. She deserves to be found and laid to rest. Sadly yes I do believe Hailey is gone. :tears:

http://www.rw.ttu.edu/sp_accounts/feral_hog/hog_food_sources.htm


This article states the feral hog will eat bone, hair, hide and teeth. I know this is disgusting, but the following is worse. The hogs are a huge problem for ranchers and some have built traps (kind of like corrals they can't get out of). If one hog dies within the trap, the others will cannibalize it leaving nothing but hooves. The drought has almost totally depleted natural vegetation. I think it's very likely that just a few bones remain

 

[Still_Seek_Answers]

There could be many different reasons for them only finding a few bones. There could be many reasons for most of the things we are seeing here. What bothers me about this UID is what we are not hearing from Hailey's family. I can only speak of how my sisters case is handled......but even now, after 42 years......anytime they find anything they think could even be remotely connected to her case......they notify us almost instantly. I know different cases are handled different ways......I also know they are very careful so they do not tip off the POI.....but what I am not hearing here bothers me.

 

[mkay882]

Sarx the man who found the bones said the same thing about what bones were found though he could have lied but would he been allowed to if he may be called on to appear in court?

Good point Sarx, but I don't think he lied.
IMO, if he saw a few items and then a skull, he likely went immediately to call LE.
He may have seen nothing else.

LE could have/may have dug up much of the skeleton and 'we' not be aware.

 

[sarx]

Good point Sarx, but I don't think he lied.
IMO, if he saw a few items and then a skull, he likely went immediately to call LE.
He may have seen nothing else.

LE could have/may have dug up much of the skeleton and 'we' not be aware.

Oh I don't think he lied at all. I think that is exactly what he found. What LE found over the next several days I think is a much different story.

 

[missgulfsouth]

Then again they most likely had more remains than they possibly have of Hailey .

Well, if I remember correctly most of the remains were in a bag, with many scattered around from animal activity.

 

[ozazure]

It's so frustrating, always with Hailey's case it seems the info put out is untrustworthy. I don't even trust that if this is Hailey they will tell the public.

 

[Tugela]

Interesting, thank you kirby. If teeth remained in the upper jaw, they should be able to get a dental age. A dental age wouldn't make a positive id, but it could rule out whether these remains belong to Hailey.

I think they would need a forensic odontologist to make the determination on dental age and I don't know how long it might take for them to get one to look at the remains. I'm going to guess a month....

Teeth are very good at preserving DNA, if they have those they will get a profile in short order.

 

[Tugela]

I don't know either, but what are the odds of finding two bodies in that big springs- ccity-Snyder triangle. We're talking west Texas, not Chicago - murders are fairly rare

So are people.

How does it compare taking population density into account?

 

[Soulmagent]

I don't know either, but what are the odds of finding two bodies in that big springs- ccity-Snyder triangle. We're talking west Texas, not Chicago - murders are fairly rare

I am pretty sure west texas murders are not even close to rare.


http://www.mywesttexas.com/top_stories/article_f886f8a8-7f45-5fc7-9dc3-ed9160bc1824.html

http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-West-Texas.html

 

[kirby]

So are people.

How does it compare taking population density into account?

Actually less population would mathematically increase the odds that the UID might be Hailey

 

[kirby]

I am pretty sure west texas murders are not even close to rare.


http://www.mywesttexas.com/top_stories/article_f886f8a8-7f45-5fc7-9dc3-ed9160bc1824.html

http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-West-Texas.html

Did you look at the murder stats you provided? Murder is rare. Midlands murder rate has risen in the last year, but they have also experienced a huge influx of people. I live in a w. Texas town of 100,000. We have had 4 murders in the last 5 years. 3 were domestic.

 

[Soulmagent]

Did you look at the murder stats you provided? Murder is rare. Midlands murder rate has risen in the last year, but they have also experienced a huge influx of people. I live in a w. Texas town of 100,000. We have had 4 murders in the last 5 years. 3 were domestic.

I did look at that city and then other west Texas citys. Waco 2011- 11 murders Abilene 2011- also 11

There were 12 murders in 2000 and 10 in 2010 in Lubbock.
For 2011 there was this article.

http://lubbockonline.com/crime-and-courts/2011-10-05/lubbock-ranks-no-6-forbes-list-dangerous-cities

Not saying it is all murder and mayhem just that murder is not rare in west Texas.

 

[Sin]

Did you look at the murder stats you provided? Murder is rare. Midlands murder rate has risen in the last year, but they have also experienced a huge influx of people. I live in a w. Texas town of 100,000. We have had 4 murders in the last 5 years. 3 were domestic.

Now small town Texas is one thing. These were bones. 20-30 years ago was a very different story. Texans have guns. They liked to use them when they think they 'had to'. I'm sure the death/disappearance rates back then were a different story, and a lot of those might not of ever been reported to LE. JMO

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

Not to mention the fact that Midland is 2 hours away from CCity and Waco is about 5 hours away, substantially larger in size and population, comparing these cities to CCity or Snyder is like comparing apples and oranges.

 

[SmoothOperator]

I'm wondering what it was that would lead this man to have a firm opinion on the remains being under 5 years old?

Anyone here familiar with human remains enough to answer what details would the naked eye be able to discern the age of remains from just a couple years old(like under 5years) from the remains being say closer to 10 or more years old?

Because in my layperson's mind I'm thinking once all the skin, tissue, etc is gone and only the bones are left I just am not seeing how one could easily discern that they were under 5 years old vs. being several years older..

TIA to anyone who may be able to shed more light on this particular issue.

 

[Sin]

I'm wondering what it was that would lead this man to have a firm opinion on the remains being under 5 years old?

Anyone here familiar with human remains enough to answer what details would the naked eye be able to discern the age of remains from just a couple years old(like under 5years) from the remains being say closer to 10 or more years old?

Because in my layperson's mind I'm thinking once all the skin, tissue, etc is gone and only the bones are left I just am not seeing how one could easily discern that they were under 5 years old vs. being several years older..

TIA to anyone who may be able to shed more light on this particular issue.

Well I know medicine, and I know children. I'm by no means an expert in remains, but it seems to me the size of the bones. A femur for a three year old would be a lot smaller than that of even a 7 year old. Children grow so fast. My daughter who is three and tall for her age, her leg in that area is near half the size of my 8 year old niece.

 

[Sin]

I decided to investigate this a little. Measuring the thigh to the patella on a taller three year old was 8 inches. She's roughly 3 feet tall. My nieces is 12.5 inches, and is about 4'6". That's a a pretty big difference there and they are only 5 years apart.

ETA: They were asleep so I got a pretty good measurement with no movement.