TX TX - Huntsville, 'Walker County Jane Doe', WhtFem 14-16, 91UFTX, Nov'80 #2 *NAME NOT RELEASED*

[Jdart14]

Thanks! It is really the result of everyone here and elsewhere being persistent and continuing to work so hard getting the word out...all I did is reach out to the right person. Hate to get hopes up but its really exciting to have a new piece of information to work with! Now lets find out some information on Angie!

 

[abbey345]

Thanks! It is really the result of everyone here and elsewhere being persistent and continuing to work so hard getting the word out...all I did is reach out to the right person. Hate to get hopes up but its really exciting to have a new piece of information to work with! Now lets find out some information on Angie!

Thanks for reaching out to this person. Did they volunteer any info on Angie?

 

[TmmEye]

Chenealogy is willing to do a comparison between Angie and Jane Doe

 

[TmmEye]

This is Angie, correct?

 

[Jdart14]

View attachment 163789
This is Angie, correct?

Yes

 

[Jdart14]

Thanks for reaching out to this person. Did they volunteer any info on Angie?

She did not provide any extra information but said that she had some information that she could go back and get from messages. She also said that the other girls had some information that they recalled. Also noted was that none of them had seen or heard from her since leaving the facility.

 

[Jdart14]

Chenealogy is willing to do a comparison between Angie and Jane Doe

That's great....anxious to see what the results are.

 

[abbey345]

I wonder if the investigator in charge of this case is aware of "Angie"? (assuming they are probably correct on her name). Detective Bean I believe is his name.

 

[Jdart14]

I wonder if the investigator in charge of this case is aware of "Angie"? (assuming they are probably correct on her name). Detective Bean I believe is his name.

I am not sure, but I passed the information along to Carl K. I know that he keeps in direct contact with det. Bean. and I didn't want to duplicate any information in case carl already had ahold of it.

 

[Bit of hope]

sorry didn't have time to explain...

So in my digging through the blog on Rebekah girls home I came across a name and facebook link to the profile for the admin of the Rebekah girls home facebook page. Its a closed group for girls who had been there. The admin was there 78-79 as well as several of the members. and in discussion I found out that she had already shared the photo with some of the girls and collectively as a group they had agreed it was Angie Roca. She is in the process of pulling together and talking to the other women about what they remember as far as background information etc...

Great steps! Fingers crossed.

 

[TmmEye]

This is going to make a great set of news for EVERYONE! Although Ms. Rodermund was likely NOT WCJD, we believe Angie Roca, (correct me if I typed her name wrong.) We compared the melanin sample of both women and their AB samples. Both were a match. If this is positive, we are very proud of this!

 

[Bit of hope]

View attachment 163867 View attachment 163865

This is going to make a great set of news for EVERYONE! Although Ms. Rodermund was likely NOT WCJD, we believe Angie Roca, (correct me if I typed her name wrong.) We compared the melanin sample of both women and their AB samples. Both were a match. If this is positive, we are very proud of this!

I'm afraid I do not follow you. Who are 'we' and how would you have obtained a sample from Angie Roca, who isn't even in the "system" as a missing person. Explain the process please.

 

[Mrs. Badcrumble]

View attachment 163867 View attachment 163865

This is going to make a great set of news for EVERYONE! Although Ms. Rodermund was likely NOT WCJD, we believe Angie Roca, (correct me if I typed her name wrong.) We compared the melanin sample of both women and their AB samples. Both were a match. If this is positive, we are very proud of this!

Uhm.. weren't you positively "identifying" MLR as WCJD and getting LE involved for comfirmation of that ID like five minutes ago? And what are your "samples"? Are they these pictures in this thread? Sorry, but for me this just screams junk science. I'll just wait for LE to update the case.

 

[Jdart14]

Uhm.. weren't you positively "identifying" MLR as WCJD and getting LE involved for comfirmation of that ID like five minutes ago? And what are your "samples"? Are they these pictures in this thread? Sorry, but for me this just screams junk science. I'll just wait for LE to update the case.

We all have the same goal in mind want to get there really bad. I don’t think that any time spent is time wasted. We all have our opinions I’m not 100% sold on this particular method. But it’s not intended to identify a person. It’s more to narrow the search. Let’s keep that in mind. And give eachother some support lol. Happy Saturday everyone.

 

[Mrs. Badcrumble]

We all have the same goal in mind want to get there really bad. I don’t think that any time spent is time wasted. We all have our opinions I’m not 100% sold on this particular method. But it’s not intended to identify a person. It’s more to narrow the search. Let’s keep that in mind.

I agree to a certain point, but WS is also supposed to be fact-based. Even say so in ToS. Posting a theory is one thing, but do not make it out to be facts, especially when making such a claim.

 

[Jdart14]

I agree to a certain point, but WS is also supposed to be fact-based. Even say so in ToS. Posting a theory is one thing, but do not make it out to be facts, especially when making such a claim.

I Don’t disagree with that part at all. There is a reason those rules are in place. I personally don’t know that it’s any of our places to make “claims” in the first place. simply support the effort and provide the best information we can to solve the case.

 

[cherrymeg]

Uhm.. weren't you positively "identifying" MLR as WCJD and getting LE involved for comfirmation of that ID like five minutes ago? And what are your "samples"? Are they these pictures in this thread? Sorry, but for me this just screams junk science. I'll just wait for LE to update the case.

I believe the moderators weren't happy when Timmeye didn't share the last theory immediately. She is putting in work and has said several times that it isn't DNA testing or anything that promises an outcome. If it helps narrow down who the UID person can be that's good. It's great that people care and want to help.

It also brings attention to missing women (in this case). I did wonder about posting things like News articles about potential matches and if it is okay to do it on this thread. I don't want to distract from WCJD.

 

[FireOwl9]

I agree to a certain point, but WS is also supposed to be fact-based. Even say so in ToS. Posting a theory is one thing, but do not make it out to be facts, especially when making such a claim.

I think with such topics like this in WS it is also better to use less assertive language like 'definitely' or 'xxxx is her/him' until we get LE confirmation, because content like this needs to be taken seriously.

 

[Paul B.]

I have to agree. Suspicions that WCJD are are a particular girl or woman are not *proof*. I also don't like relying on cruddy VHS screencaps. That's amateur hour at its finest.

 

[Jdart14]

I have to agree. Suspicions that WCJD are are a particular girl or woman are not *proof*. I also don't like relying on cruddy VHS screencaps. That's amateur hour at its finest.

Mmmkayyy...