Identified! MS - Pascagoula, WhtFem Child 45UFMS "Delta Dawn", 1-3, Dog River @I-10, Dec'82 - Alisha Heinrich

[Still_Seek_Answers]

I do find the truckers reaction or lack of reaction to be odd myself. Even in this day and time there is still a certain creed if you will, that the knights of the highway lend a hand when something is out of place or they see someone in need. The thing that makes me wonder about his statement is he claims to have seen a body in that water, while you can see a lot from that far up in a seat over the highway, his attention to the road would have created a hazard to the public had he taken the time to look long enough to give the details he gave. Something just stinks about the story to me and that is just my opinion. He could have been being honest and legit, but something does not sit right.

The chances of the driver being alive today to be able to be interviewed again (if one could locate him) would be slim as the average lifespan for a long haul trucker is only in the early to mid sixties, and that is if he took care of himself fairly well. Lots of drivers make bad health choices that shorten their lifespans. People were not as "health" aware back then as they are now.

Exactly my point. He made no attempt to give assistance and he just told them what he saw and then drove away. I just find his use of terminology odd.....I'd have stopped.....but even if he did not stop.....how did he know it was a body in the water.....and not a live person who had accidentally fallen in?

 

[lregey]

Hi everybody, I have been following this case for some time and it seems there are alot more questions than what there are of answers. I, myself, have a few of my own.

The truck driver reported two different versions of what he had seen in the water. To the police he reported seeing a body in the water, and to the attendant at the truck stop he reported seeing a body dressed in plaid shirt and blue jeans in the marsh. This raises many questions for me.

Also, in consideration of the fuel line, I would have to ask about the dangers that may be imposed to the vehicle, driver and any passerby with fuel leakage and heated brake systems? Does anyone know if there is possible risk of explosion? I guess I am wondering this because in a regular, everyday vehicle, it would seem likely that leaking gas lines would in the very least start a fire. So I am not sure how it would affect big rigs.

 

[Still_Seek_Answers]

It appears that this article gives information that was not released when the baby Doe was found. The child had apparently not eaten all day long.

The grave digger drove west on interstate 10 through a chilly December drizzle. He slowed, peering at a figure laboring along the roadside. He wasn't the only one to spot her. CB radio channels were abuzz that night—Friday the third—with truckers’ reports of a woman carrying what looked like a barefoot, coatless toddler in her arms, walking near the truck scales at the Alabama-Mississippi line. The grave digger felt sorry for her. But in Pascagoula, Mississippi, in 1982, a black man simply didn’t invite a white woman into his vehicle, no matter how miserable the weather. Within days, a small body in a tiny casket would be buried under a donated, nameless stone, and the memory of that night would haunt him. - See more at: http://www.tufts.edu/alumni/magazine/summer2014/features/singing-river.html#sthash.9PrL0GPy.dpuf

Lynn Reuss is taunted by vivid dreams: in them, the woman is a runaway who, without her family’s knowledge, gives birth. She is fleeing something or someone, maybe an abusive partner. “Virgil said that the baby was partially smothered, possibly from being held too tightly. Maybe the mother thought her baby was dead” and, panicked, threw her over the bridge. “Did you know that the child had no food in her stomach, but appeared to be cared for? Another reason why I think the mom fled—no money, no blanket, no shoes or socks on the child, no coat or hat. If she had these things, they were lost somewhere along the way.” - See more at: http://www.tufts.edu/alumni/magazine/summer2014/features/singing-river.html#sthash.DnZiddn9.dpuf

 

[carbuff]

Hi everybody, I have been following this case for some time and it seems there are alot more questions than what there are of answers. I, myself, have a few of my own.

The truck driver reported two different versions of what he had seen in the water. To the police he reported seeing a body in the water, and to the attendant at the truck stop he reported seeing a body dressed in plaid shirt and blue jeans in the marsh. This raises many questions for me.

Also, in consideration of the fuel line, I would have to ask about the dangers that may be imposed to the vehicle, driver and any passerby with fuel leakage and heated brake systems? Does anyone know if there is possible risk of explosion? I guess I am wondering this because in a regular, everyday vehicle, it would seem likely that leaking gas lines would in the very least start a fire. So I am not sure how it would affect big rigs.

He might have said word for word the same thing in both places and the attendant paraphrased it one way while LE paraphrased it another. And the statements are filtered through a reporter, too. It's like a game of gossip.

Or maybe he wasn't thinking of how every possible hidden meaning would be dissected from his statements. They both say essentially the same thing.

 

[lregey]

Given the fact that it was cold, storming and dark out, it would make a person wonder why a mom would be travelling on a dark road all alone, with only the baby in her in arms. Could she have been prostituting, I wouldn't imagine so, not with a small child. I am just having a hard time in understanding how the baby appeared healthy and well taken care of (her clothes I had read, were bought from a special clothing store), and all of a sudden appear without proper clothing for the weather conditions and without any food? I am wondering if the mom and baby are from out of state?

 

[carbuff]

Given the fact that it was cold, storming and dark out, it would make a person wonder why a mom would be travelling on a dark road all alone, with only the baby in her in arms. Could she have been prostituting, I wouldn't imagine so, not with a small child. I am just having a hard time in understanding how the baby appeared healthy and well taken care of (her clothes I had read, were bought from a special clothing store), and all of a sudden appear without proper clothing for the weather conditions and without any food? I am wondering if the mom and baby are from out of state?

Running away from serious danger would seem to be the most logical explanation.

 

[traacker13]

As a mother, I cannot even fathom this. If this was also the only thing she had left in her life why would she let her go? One would think she would be holding on to her with everything she had. And even if she had accidentally died I can't imagine why she would throw her daughter into the river. The more I read the more I think about this the more desperate this woman seems and the more it seems to me that she was trying to commit suicide and her daughter unfortunately he went with her.

 

[Still_Seek_Answers]

I do agree she seemed desperate, but I think she was desperate from trying to get away from someone. I think if she had committed suicide, she'd have been there with the baby. The baby was found in a swampy marshy area....so where is the mother?

 

[Meryl12]

The story reads as though the mother was desperate, maybe so frantic and desperate she could not think logically.
http://doenetwork.org/cases/45ufms.html She does seem to be prostituting when she would not let anyone help her. She seems to be afraid of strangers, and would not get in to any vehicle that stopped and tried to help her. In the end she commited suicide. My guess would be domestic violence, to be that desperate she must have been afraid for her life and for the life of her daughter, it reads as though her mind collapsed, like a sort of mental break. Heartbreaking.

 

[traacker13]

I thought the original article had mention of the body of a woman seen in the river but it was never found after the person who initially reported it??

 

[carbuff]

I thought the original article had mention of the body of a woman seen in the river but it was never found after the person who initially reported it??

It's not clear whether it was the same woman or whether she was dead. I presume missing or faulty record-keeping is to blame.

 

[lregey]

If I was stranded on a highway with a small baby in arms, I would not want a ride from a stranger either. I am leaning towards the possibility that she did not get there on her own and something happened for her to be walking along the highway in the cold and rain with a small child. We know that the baby was not dressed for this type of weather, she was clothed for warmer temperatures. Which I why I am thinking that she came from a warmer state. Perhaps she could have been walking to the truck stop waiting for that same person to pick her up.

 

[Meryl12]

If I was stranded on a highway with a small baby in arms, I would not want a ride from a stranger either. I am leaning towards the possibility that she did not get there on her own and something happened for her to be walking along the highway in the cold and rain with a small child. We know that the baby was not dressed for this type of weather, she was clothed for warmer temperatures. Which I why I am thinking that she came from a warmer state. Perhaps she could have been walking to the truck stop waiting for that same person to pick her up.

That is definitely how this reads, my theory is that she was in an extremely violent situaltion and that someone helped her to escape. She must have come from a warmer climate as the child was not dressed for the type of weather. (She must have not wanted to look as though she was about to escape).
Whatever the reason she was walking down the Interstate the only thing that could have happened must have been that the person she was running away from must have been following and beat her then threw her and the child in killing them both.
I think she was running away, and who-ever she was running away from caught up with her and killed her and the child. Just my opinion.

 

[EmiLove832]

But the woman's body was never found, right? I get confused with this case.

I do think the running from someone theory could very well be. Maybe that someone caught up to her and threw the baby into the water as punishment for running. She could've been to fearful to claim her child after what happened?

 

[Still_Seek_Answers]

Yes, the woman's body was never found and the baby was actually found miles away under a different bridge than the one the trucker claimed to have saw the body in the water from. I think, (and someone please correct me if I am wrong) but I think the trucker was the only person to ever report seeing the woman's body in the water? Also his story changed drastically when the reporter from the above article tracked him down years later? That raises suspicion with me, as the truth never changes.

It also makes me wonder if Riddle was telling the truth when he confessed to helping someone bury the mothers body, and him being the one that threw this baby from the bridge? Yes, I agree that people's minds can snap and make them do desperate things that they would normally never dream of doing, but this scenario as written, just does not ring true to me. (JMHO)

If I had to make a off the cuff assessment, or even a guess as to what really happened here, my guess would be this. The mother of this child is a runaway whose family never knew she had been pregnant or given birth. She was trapped in an abusive situation, maybe even with a trucker, and that night she got out of a vehicle to escape him. Naturally, she was feeling frightened so she was not going to get into a vehicle with anybody else. She most probably was feeling very desperate.I think the person she was running from caught up with her. I think he killed the mother, and Riddle helped him bury her. I think either Riddle, or the man Baby Momma Doe was running from threw that poor baby over the bridge. I think it was done for 2 reasons. One being to get rid of a baby he did not want, and who could tie him to the murder if the mothers body was ever found, and I think the baby being tossed from the bridge was a deliberate attempt to keep people from actually searching for the body of the mother. As long as people believed the body in the water story, then they would look no place else. I think it was done this way because to many people would have been able to tie the mother to her killer.(JMO)

Personally, I'd do a search for Jane Doe's found after this date. Then I'd sort them by criteria such as the ones who are noted to have given birth, and the ones found in shallow graves. Then I'd separate them out by location and that is where I'd start my search for Baby Momma Doe.

 

[shadowdancer]

Personally I think that the simplest explanations tend to be the most likely.

I think she was in an abusive relationship. He (as most abusive men do) cut her off from all of her support networks, such as family, friends etc. Therefore, they knew nothing about her or her life at that point. They hadn't heard from her in years and had no idea that she had a baby.

She managed to escape from him, or maybe they had an argument in the car and he threw her and the child out and drove off. Then one of the following scenarios occured -

1) She was very vulnerable, out alone at night with a small child and nobody to turn to. She would have been the perfect target for any passing murderers/rapists etc.

2) She would have been in total despair and may have decided to do a murder/suicide, as she thought it preferable to going back to her abusive partner.

3) Maybe the partner came after her and killed them both in a rage OR he threw the child into the river as a 'punishment' to the mother to show that he is the one who controls the situation and to make sure that she never disobeys him again.

 

[carbuff]

What if she dove over the bridge with the baby in a desperate attempt to try to escape the murderer? I'm not sure which way the river flows, whether that would even be possible, and I haven't been able to find whether it's tidal at that point.

Riddle's story strikes me as false, too, though it might be designed to protect someone.

Truth might not change, but memories do.

 

[traacker13]

Yes, the woman's body was never found and the baby was actually found miles away under a different bridge than the one the trucker claimed to have saw the body in the water from. I think, (and someone please correct me if I am wrong) but I think the trucker was the only person to ever report seeing the woman's body in the water? Also his story changed drastically when the reporter from the above article tracked him down years later? That raises suspicion with me, as the truth never changes.

It also makes me wonder if Riddle was telling the truth when he confessed to helping someone bury the mothers body, and him being the one that threw this baby from the bridge? Yes, I agree that people's minds can snap and make them do desperate things that they would normally never dream of doing, but this scenario as written, just does not ring true to me. (JMHO)

If I had to make a off the cuff assessment, or even a guess as to what really happened here, my guess would be this. The mother of this child is a runaway whose family never knew she had been pregnant or given birth. She was trapped in an abusive situation, maybe even with a trucker, and that night she got out of a vehicle to escape him. Naturally, she was feeling frightened so she was not going to get into a vehicle with anybody else. She most probably was feeling very desperate.I think the person she was running from caught up with her. I think he killed the mother, and Riddle helped him bury her. I think either Riddle, or the man Baby Momma Doe was running from threw that poor baby over the bridge. I think it was done for 2 reasons. One being to get rid of a baby he did not want, and who could tie him to the murder if the mothers body was ever found, and I think the baby being tossed from the bridge was a deliberate attempt to keep people from actually searching for the body of the mother. As long as people believed the body in the water story, then they would look no place else. I think it was done this way because to many people would have been able to tie the mother to her killer.(JMO)

Personally, I'd do a search for Jane Doe's found after this date. Then I'd sort them by criteria such as the ones who are noted to have given birth, and the ones found in shallow graves. Then I'd separate them out by location and that is where I'd start my search for Baby Momma Doe.

that seems to make a lot of sense to me - this is such a sad, sad case. I doubt they'll ever find who did this or who this is (although I hope beyond hope they do) I just think it's unlikely given the circumstances and likelihood that the child was probably never either known about or part of a family where the mother and child were being abused consistently without anyone's knowledge...

 

[Still_Seek_Answers]

What if she dove over the bridge with the baby in a desperate attempt to try to escape the murderer? I'm not sure which way the river flows, whether that would even be possible, and I haven't been able to find whether it's tidal at that point.

Riddle's story strikes me as false, too, though it might be designed to protect someone.

Truth might not change, but memories do.

Yes, memories do change.....but I would think seeing a body in the river would be a traumatic enough memory to at least keep it consistent. This is JMHO but the story even told back then, makes no sense in my opinion. As I mentioned in a earlier post my dad drove truck for several years, and I have a brother who drives truck. Even back then truckers had this network among themselves. I just can't imagine him not pulling that truck over and getting LE there before he left the scene. Instead he drives to a truck stop and then calls in to report it. In my mind, that just makes no sense whatsoever. Then he can't be bothered until after he delivers his load? I am also still bothered by his description of what he saw.

It was sunrise, he was driving over a bridge, so he is in a moving vehicle and having to pay attention to the road, yet he focused in enough to tell that she was wearing a plaid shirt? Granted, I have never spotted a body while driving over a bridge, but I would think it would be hard to be that definite about what you saw. He did not say he saw something he thought might be a body.....he said he saw a body and she was wearing a plaid shirt.....sorry, but I just find that odd. I find all the parts of his story odd.

 

[carbuff]

I wonder if while he was driving he saw a pile of clothes off the bridge, and then when he stopped he heard about the woman and realized he might have seen her body.

As the years go by, and a person revisits the event in their head, they tweak it. Maybe they make themselves more sure than they were, or more heroic, or push a detail here or there to make it sound more exciting, or to make the narrative more coherent. In this case he might be emphasizing the parts that say, "I didn't have anything to do with it, I just saw something and reported it."

I'm not sure the discrepancies aren't just differences in phrasing by someone who's not usually precise with language.

A practiced liar would not make those kinds of inconsistent statements. Ordinary people do.