OR OR - Union Co, Finley Creek Jane Doe, UnsFem 14-25, UP11902, preg, on wooded hillside, Aug'78

[youngsleuth95]

What about the theory that Doe's killer was John Ackroyd if her death was in 1976-1978?

 

[aurycore]

You think this doe can be patricia otto?

 

[Susikatze]

You think this doe can be patricia otto?

Her daughter believes so and there is fairly good evidence supporting it. It is all in this thread. But without a body/useable DNA it is hard to prove.

 

[aurycore]

Her daughter believes so and there is fairly good evidence supporting it. It is all in this thread. But without a body/useable DNA it is hard to prove.

I see.

 

[youngsleuth95]

I don't know how my theory will be received, but could it be that this girl is a possible victim of David Parker Ray named "Sally"? She was described by Ray as a young teenage girl with blonde\light brown hair, which matches our unidentified victim, and Sally was also mentioned to be pregnant. When she went missing, he was asked where she was, but he said she had left him. Could he have kept her for a while and then driven to Oregon? He had plenty of time to do that in his van. Also, Sally went missing in 1969-1970 and was a hippie, which might match Doe's clothing (red pants, lace-up boots, and a flowered shirt). It all fits in with me. Unless it's Patricia Otto, of course (I also think it could be her).

 

[aurycore]

Her daughter believes so and there is fairly good evidence supporting it. It is all in this thread. But without a body/useable DNA it is hard to prove.

I looked on NamUs and apparently she's been ruled out. Her daughter told me that this is an error, and she backed it up with the dental records: Both Patricia and the does teeth match incredibly well and they just ruled her out. I'm not sure why this is, but I'm going to assume that there was insufficient DNA to profile her.

There is a bunch of evidence backing up that this is Patricia, but again, she's been ruled out by NamUs.

 

[Susikatze]

I looked on NamUs and apparently she's been ruled out. Her daughter told me that this is an error, and she backed it up with the dental records: Both Patricia and the does teeth match incredibly well and they just ruled her out. I'm not sure why this is, but I'm going to assume that there was insufficient DNA to profile her.

There is a bunch of evidence backing up that this is Patricia, but again, she's been ruled out by NamUs.

Read the whole thread. There is no body, no DNA. Only old dental records of the autopsy that can be compared to an old xray of Patty. Problem is the old records appear mixed up with another doe case plus the xray is marked with the wrong side. The ruleout is based on that, however Pattys daughter is disputing that since she tried to correct the mistakes.
Pattys daughter also traced down some archived cremains that were badly labeled too but it is possible theyre of the Finley Creek Doe. She sent them to Lakehead but they have not been able to extract any DNA - it is cremains and very tricky, the heat destroys organic components and proteins that carry DNA.
She also had search dogs check the original gravesite. The dogs picked up some smell but no bone fragments or teeth were found. The whole thing is so sad. I hope there will be a breakthrough eventually.

 

[Susikatze]

Major issue is that some states cremated all UID after a certain time period passed. They often also destroyed the whole evidence file, too.

Crying shame

 

[aurycore]

Read the whole thread. There is no body, no DNA. Only old dental records of the autopsy that can be compared to an old xray of Patty. Problem is the old records appear mixed up with another doe case plus the xray is marked with the wrong side. The ruleout is based on that, however Pattys daughter is disputing that since she tried to correct the mistakes.
Pattys daughter also traced down some archived cremains that were badly labeled too but it is possible theyre of the Finley Creek Doe. She sent them to Lakehead but they have not been able to extract any DNA - it is cremains and very tricky, the heat destroys organic components and proteins that carry DNA.
She also had search dogs check the original gravesite. The dogs picked up some smell but no bone fragments or teeth were found. The whole thing is so sad. I hope there will be a breakthrough eventually.

I know its mostly skeletal remains.

Its sad that her case may never be solved.

 

[phantomstrider]

I know its mostly skeletal remains.

Its sad that her case may never be solved.

Yeah cremating an UID and destroying all the evidence is a bad idea. I still don’t know why they decided to do that especially since it significantly reduced the chance she would be identified.

 

[MarziPanda]

Yeah cremating an UID and destroying all the evidence is a bad idea. I still don’t know why they decided to do that especially since it significantly reduced the chance she would be identified.

I guess in an age before DNA, they assumed that if they had the dentals/fingerprints (if a Doe wasn't skeletal), they had everything they needed to compare to missing people in the future - no need for the body anymore. Still wrong though, as the family might not have wanted their loved one to be cremated.

 

[summergirl1]

That happened, sometimes a lot, although cremation in general was not as popular then. Obviously, much of the time it was financial/convenient with Does. It was probably cheaper in general and in cases where potter's fields/designated indigent sections of cemeteries in the area didn't exist or were running out of space, even more convenient and cheaper if there was no donated cemetery plot.

 

[phantomstrider]

That happened, sometimes a lot, although cremation in general was not as popular then. Obviously, much of the time it was financial/convenient with Does. It was probably cheaper in general and in cases where potter's fields/designated indigent sections of cemeteries in the area didn't exist or were running out of space, even more convenient and cheaper if there was no donated cemetery plot.

They could have at least kept a sample of hair or dna before they cremated her though if they were worried about the cost of burial.

 

[iamshadow21]

They could have at least kept a sample of hair or dna before they cremated her though if they were worried about the cost of burial.

In 1978? Nobody had a crystal ball to tell them to do such a thing.

At least she wasn't sent to landfill, something other regions did with their Does, indigent, and unclaimed persons. Now that offends me, deeply. Humans are not garbage.

MOO

 

[phantomstrider]

In 1978? Nobody had a crystal ball to tell them to do such a thing.

At least she wasn't sent to landfill, something other regions did with their Does, indigent, and unclaimed persons. Now that offends me, deeply. Humans are not garbage.

MOO

I’m pretty sure she was cremated in 1990 not 1978. They could have at least kept a sample of her hair for dna if they cremated her in case technology advanced which it did. Plus they destroyed all the case files and evidence in the case which was a very bad idea.

 

[summergirl1]

Missing case files is another issue in cold cases. It's unfortunate when they didn't keep them along with whatever physical evidence they had. Sometimes they get destroyed in natural disasters like floods, which is not anyone's fault, but sometimes no effort was made to salvage what was able to be salvaged or may have been able to be salvaged. Just things I've read about happening in cold case investigations.