NJ NJ - East Orange, WhtFem ~17, UP1621, partial skeleton @ demolition site, Sep'01

[Bit of hope]

Because if the DNA is the same, then it's the same person. Still a Jane Doe, of course, but with more of a complete set of bones.

This is really awful btw.

Ah, I see. The remains could belong to one and the same person.

 

[Bit of hope]

To be blunt - dismemberment and partial remains. Peaches was dismembered and only part of her was found. This Doe's remains are also incomplete.

I don't think there is any possibility of this being related to Peaches. She was Black. There has also been DNA done for Peaches, and we know this, because she was linked by DNA to Toddler Doe, her little girl. Peaches is also estimated to be 20-30, so older than this Doe.

MOO

Thank you for explaining. I understand now. Early in the morning here

 

[snarast]

Ah, I see. The remains could belong to one and the same person.

Yeah - or a relative. Peaches has been established to have one daughter who was murdered and buried some distance away from her.

EDIT: well, it's a long shot considering iamshadow21's insights above.

 

[AllieKat]

I think I don't understand this remark. Help me out. Do you think this is relevant considering this specific date.



Thank you for searching. I think I don't understand this. How can you rule out one Jane Doe against another Jane Doe?

There was some discussion on previous pages about the date being important. IMHO I would presume that with how close NY is to NJ the police were extra busy, it was by no means a "slow" news day, but I was really just answering the question that's when the remains were found per NamUS listing.

This particular Jane Doe is categorized as partial remains. Thats why I mentioned ruling out another Jane Doe--also partial remains. Sorry for being confusing, I get passionate and over think/ talk too much.

I think it's important though, that there are OTHER remains that COULD be this Jane Doe and its just a puzzle that hasn't been put together you know?

Also to compare two Jane Does or sets of remains scientists or forensic anthropologists would complete DNA analysis, comparison of dental records, and these other tests (here's an interesting article I found on forensic anthropology)

 

[AllieKat]

Yeah - or a relative. Peaches has been established to have one daughter who was murdered and buried some distance away from her.

EDIT: well, it's a long shot considering iamshadow21's insights above.

To be blunt - dismemberment and partial remains. Peaches was dismembered and only part of her was found. This Doe's remains are also incomplete.

I don't think there is any possibility of this being related to Peaches. She was Black. There has also been DNA done for Peaches, and we know this, because she was linked by DNA to Toddler Doe, her little girl. Peaches is also estimated to be 20-30, so older than this Doe.

MOO

Thank you for explaining this. I didn't know that about Peaches, thank you for sharing and helping to connect more dots. Do you think it is possible this JD could be a LISK victim or no?

 

[Bit of hope]

There was some discussion on previous pages about the date being important. IMHO I would presume that with how close NY is to NJ the police were extra busy, it was by no means a "slow" news day, but I was really just answering the question that's when the remains were found per NamUS listing.

This particular Jane Doe is categorized as partial remains. Thats why I mentioned ruling out another Jane Doe--also partial remains. Sorry for being confusing, I get passionate and over think/ talk too much.

I think it's important though, that there are OTHER remains that COULD be this Jane Doe and its just a puzzle that hasn't been put together you know?

Also to compare two Jane Does or sets of remains scientists or forensic anthropologists would complete DNA analysis, comparison of dental records, and these other tests (here's an interesting article I found on forensic anthropology)

Thank you for opening my eyes for the possibility there could be other parts of this same woman/girl elsewhere. I feel LE dropped the ball a bit on this UID, because of the lack/incompleteness of the information. To be honest I don't have a lot of confidence at the moment they are doing everything to identify this woman/girl. Also the police force seemed to have been struggling with their own internal problems in 2001 and might have been distracted. My thought is if there is DNA put into CODIS it would be automatically compared to other remains (with DNA) found and ruled out. That doesn't mean they put all of them in Namus for the public to see.

 

[iamshadow21]

Thank you for explaining this. I didn't know that about Peaches, thank you for sharing and helping to connect more dots. Do you think it is possible this JD could be a LISK victim or no?

I don't really know the geography of the area, so whether she is realistic as a potential LISK victim, I don't know. Also, I don't know if this victim was partial because of something like dismemberment, or because of the demolition. It's possible she was left on the site intact, but the demolition disturbed her remains and only some were found. Others may have been carted away with the rubble.

MOO

 

[summergirl1]

It appears that these remains were found many years after the building on the site ( it appears to have been an apartment building) was gone. And yes, the rest of the remains could have been long gone with the rubble years earlier. I wonder how deep these remains were found buried? They do have DNA on this Doe. That's an important step as I've come across remains from 2004 that don't. Genetic genealogy obviously comes to mind.

 

[AllieKat]

I don't really know the geography of the area, so whether she is realistic as a potential LISK victim, I don't know. Also, I don't know if this victim was partial because of something like dismemberment, or because of the demolition. It's possible she was left on the site intact, but the demolition disturbed her remains and only some were found. Others may have been carted away with the rubble.

MOO

It appears that these remains were found many years after the building on the site ( it appears to have been an apartment building) was gone. And yes, the rest of the remains could have been long gone with the rubble years earlier. I wonder how deep these remains were found buried? They do have DNA on this Doe. That's an important step as I've come across remains from 2004 that don't. Genetic genealogy obviously comes to mind.

Tl/dr: state police records indicate she was born between 1961-1981, age 17-22, the only remains indicated that were found was the victims skull.

According to state police information at the following New Jersey State Police - Unidentified Persons - Essex County"

“On September 11, 2001, a skull was found at a demolition site at 227 Park Avenue, East Orange, Essex County, New Jersey.”

The record indicates

OTHER INFO	The age of the victim is determined to be at least 17-22 years of age at the time of death but the time since death is unknown.​
MISC.	Full x-rays and dental records are available for comparison.​

Edited to delete html code

 

[snarast]

so 1978-2001 is the range when her untimely death occurred. That makes this a tad harder.

 

[Bit of hope]

It appears that these remains were found many years after the building on the site ( it appears to have been an apartment building) was gone. And yes, the rest of the remains could have been long gone with the rubble years earlier. I wonder how deep these remains were found buried? They do have DNA on this Doe. That's an important step as I've come across remains from 2004 that don't. Genetic genealogy obviously comes to mind.

For convenience.
From #1 from the time identifiers could be seen in Namus.
DNA: Sample submitted-Tests complete

 

[pol100gk]

For those asking about the area, the site is close to two major highways - the Garden State Parkway and I 280. Literally less than a mile from either. 280 more or less connects to the tunnels into Manhattan. East Orange is about 12 miles from Manhattan as the crow flies. And, with regards to the remains listed as 'white', East Orange is not a 'white' area.
Without being gruesome, but it could also be that there was a complete set of remains but that the remains got disturbed during earlier demolition, without anyone noticing. That would be a different scenario than dismemberment.

 

[AllieKat]

so 1978-2001 is the range when her untimely death occurred. That makes this a tad harder.

very much so! I was going to create a separate thread for facts / links / state by state missing people who may possibly match (not many so far) does this sound like something helpful or nah?

MOO I just can’t stop thinking about her circumstances. Overall to be so young go missing, and possibly not be reported missing…. .

 

[ifindedout]

dbm

 

[ifindedout]

Thanks, interesting site. Is it possible to mark 263 N. Grove ST on this map? Sorry, for again nagging about the info. Sure they must have seen if this are historical remains (0-2001), so already in the ground when the first buildings were constructed. If the body was buried after demolition is it safe to say she was buried there somewhere between 1987/88 up to 2001, when she was found?

BBM
Glad to oblige. I've outlined it in magenta, my go-to color for outlining and drawing stuff on maps.
BTW, I just realized the demolished apartment building should be 262, not 263 which is one of several frame single-family homes across the street.

 

[Bit of hope]

BBM
Glad to oblige. I've outlined it in magenta, my go-to color for outlining and drawing stuff on maps.
BTW, I just realized the demolished apartment building should be 262, not 263 which is one of several frame single-family homes across the street.
View attachment 461282

Thank you for doing this @ifindedout! You can also see the two big traffic arteries @pol100gk is talking about, I believe?

 

[ifindedout]

Thank you for doing this @ifindedout! You can also see the two big traffic arteries @pol100gk is talking about, I believe?

Park Avenue is running diagonally from left to right at the top of the picture, and the intersection of Grove and Park is visible, though not all corners of it.

 

[summergirl1]

I wonder if this apartment building was vacant for awhile in the ten years or so before it was demolished. It probably was at least some of the time. If so, it would have given someone an opportunity to bury this victim's remains in the basement or something, depending on what type of floor it had. Just a thought that occured to me. Or they could have buried the victim close to the building, out of easy range of sight of the two next door apartment buildings. I do think it would definitely have been easier to bury the victim there when there was a vacant building there than if it was just a bare lot.

There couldn't have been that many trees because it was a fairly large apartment building. Nowadays, there are some younger to medium sized trees at the very end of the lot, which is shady, it appears. Maybe there were more trees there at one time, but space for trees was obviously limited there.

 

[AllieKat]

The way location is reported by LE makes where the remains were found a bit more confusing. See below, @ifindedout was 227 formerly 262 park ave or is 262 the back lot of the demolished building? Just want to be be sure I’m understanding correctly thanks!

BBM
Glad to oblige. I've outlined it in magenta, my go-to color for outlining and drawing stuff on maps.
BTW, I just realized the demolished apartment building should be 262, not 263 which is one of several frame single-family homes across the street.
View attachment 461282

 

[ifindedout]

The way location is reported by LE makes where the remains were found a bit more confusing. See below, @ifindedout was 227 formerly 262 park ave or is 262 the back lot of the demolished building? Just want to be be sure I’m understanding correctly thanks!

262 N. Grove St. is the demolished property that is now a vacant lot used for parking, probably for 227 and 254 (see below).
To the north of "262" is 227 Park Ave. which, true to its name, fronts on Park. I doubt that it ever had another number (MOO).

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.com

To the south of 262 is 254 N. Grove St.

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.com

And the aerial with the numbers added to all three buildings:

BTW, the color aerials of 1979 and 1984 show that 262 was made of yellow brick like 254, not red brick like 227.
Hope this helps!