Identified! TX - Huntsville, 'Walker County Jane Doe', WhtFem 14-16, 91UFTX, Nov'80 Sherry Ann Jarvis

[Vital Forces]

LucyOso,

I didn't say anyone's particular post was not helpful.

I said the particular attitude, which I have described in detail, and which I've seen in many places, is not helpful.

I will leave it at that and will not discuss this any further in this thread.

 

[Peppered_peach]

I must be the exception because I'm suspicious of everything that just doesn't seem or look right. Normal, everyday things not so much, but like the old lady who walks by my house everyday then one day turns down the tote road across the street, I wrote down the date in case she turned up missing cuz that wasn't usual for her.

I guess I’m right there with you. I mean I’m not always looking for something suspicious in every second of everyday, but if I read or hear about something that happened and I was around that area at that time, I try to remember anything about it that could help. Which is where I was going with this whole thing.

 

[carbuff]

Others have already explained that a big rig pulled over on the side of a highway isn't unusual.

We also have to remember that no one knew a crime was being committed at the time. The average person is not on the lookout for suspicious activities every moment of their lives. I've seen such expectations in other cases and it isn't realistic or helpful.

Accidental post that Tapatalk doesn't want to let me delete.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

 

[turbo_sloth]

Interesting article from The Atlantic called, "Solving a Murder Mystery With Ancestry Websites". It made me think of Walker County Jane Doe: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/08/jane-doe-murder-ancestry/536916/

Apparently a teenage girl was murdered in Washington state in 1977 and while they were able to capture the girl's killer, police have never been able to identify the victim. The only thing the killer knew about the victim was that she said she lived in a trailer with two guys near the lake where the murder took place.

Excerpt from the article:
"But after so many dead ends, investigators might have found a way to finally close the case. Jane Doe’s DNA has so far failed to identify her, but perhaps it can be used to identify a family member instead. As genetic testing has become more accessible and popular, the Snohomish County sheriff’s office is cautiously optimistic that a parent, a sibling, a cousin—some relative of Jane Doe—has explored websites like Ancestry.com to learn more about their family tree. If someone has wondered enough about their heritage to submit a DNA sample to one of these genealogy databases, there could be a genetic crumb trail that leads to Jane Doe’s identity."

Would be nice to think that since they likely have Jane Doe's DNA police might be able to determine her identify through relatives that might have submitted their DNA to genealogy websites. That and if there was DNA collected from the bite mark on Jane Doe's shoulder it might also help point police in the direction of her killer.

 

[sunnynz]

Interesting article from The Atlantic called, "Solving a Murder Mystery With Ancestry Websites". It made me think of Walker County Jane Doe: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/08/jane-doe-murder-ancestry/536916/

Apparently a teenage girl was murdered in Washington state in 1977 and while they were able to capture the girl's killer, police have never been able to identify the victim. The only thing the killer knew about the victim was that she said she lived in a trailer with two guys near the lake where the murder took place.

Excerpt from the article:
"But after so many dead ends, investigators might have found a way to finally close the case. Jane Doe’s DNA has so far failed to identify her, but perhaps it can be used to identify a family member instead. As genetic testing has become more accessible and popular, the Snohomish County sheriff’s office is cautiously optimistic that a parent, a sibling, a cousin—some relative of Jane Doe—has explored websites like Ancestry.com to learn more about their family tree. If someone has wondered enough about their heritage to submit a DNA sample to one of these genealogy databases, there could be a genetic crumb trail that leads to Jane Doe’s identity."

Would be nice to think that since they likely have Jane Doe's DNA police might be able to determine her identify through relatives that might have submitted their DNA to genealogy websites. That and if there was DNA collected from the bite mark on Jane Doe's shoulder it might also help point police in the direction of her killer.

Do LE match UID DNA against sites like ancestry? The article above implies that they do but I always though they didn't.

 

[Triss]

I read somewhere that they don't, but I might be wrong.

 

[Alleykins]

I don't think they use ancestry DNA searches as par for the course. Carbuff can explain it better, hopefully she'll weigh in. It has to do with privacy laws and those sites not wanting authorities to use them for criminal purposes as well.

 

[carbuff]

Basically it violates the constitution's unreasonable search and seizure clause. The people in the ancestry database didn't give their permission to have their information used like that, so LE has to have probable cause and get a warrant to search. Many judges refuse to grant such warrants for a "maybe somebody is in there" search. (It's called a "fishing expedition.") Such searches haven't been terribly productive anyway; there are an astonishing number of secret adoptions, concealed affairs, and black sheep scrambling most people's family tree. Advocates of searching tend to underestimate the trauma and drama of having something like that sprung on you.

As Alleykins mentioned, state privacy laws and company policies also enter into it.

In this case, I think a professional ancestry researcher might be useful. They can do things that LE.



Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

 

[Alleykins]

Basically it violates the constitution's unreasonable search and seizure clause. The people in the ancestry database didn't give their permission to have their information used like that, so LE has to have probable cause and get a warrant to search. Many judges refuse to grant such warrants for a "maybe somebody is in there" search. (It's called a "fishing expedition.") Such searches haven't been terribly productive anyway; there are an astonishing number of secret adoptions, concealed affairs, and black sheep scrambling most people's family tree. Advocates of searching tend to underestimate the trauma and drama of having something like that sprung on you.

As Alleykins mentioned, state privacy laws and company policies also enter into it.

In this case, I think a professional ancestry researcher might be useful. They can do things that LE.
Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

Thanks, Carbuff! I think I will copy and paste this as a quote attributed to you on different threads whenever this comes up.

 

[Vital Forces]

Something I've wondered is who was keeping this case in the public mind before the Internet age? The case was mentioned in the 1990 book Forensic Art and Illustration. Other than that, where else was it discussed for all those years? Her case has never appeared on America's Most Wanted, Unsolved Mysteries, Dateline or any other crime program.

The people of Huntsville probably knew about her, but who else? Has her case been receiving continuous attention since 1980, or was it "rediscovered" after websites such as one came to be?

I realize I could ask this of any old case, but I'm wondering specifically about this one.

 

[Alleykins]

Something I've wondered is who was keeping this case in the public mind before the Internet age? The case was mentioned in the 1990 book Forensic Art and Illustration. Other than that, where else was it discussed for all those years? Her case has never appeared on America's Most Wanted, Unsolved Mysteries, Dateline or any other crime program.

The people of Huntsville probably knew about her, but who else? Has her case been receiving continuous attention since 1980, or was it "rediscovered" after websites such as one came to be?

I realize I could ask this of any old case, but I'm wondering specifically about this one.

I wonder if NCMEC did. They predate the internet.

 

[sunnynz]

Something I've wondered is who was keeping this case in the public mind before the Internet age? The case was mentioned in the 1990 book Forensic Art and Illustration. Other than that, where else was it discussed for all those years? Her case has never appeared on America's Most Wanted, Unsolved Mysteries, Dateline or any other crime program.

The people of Huntsville probably knew about her, but who else? Has her case been receiving continuous attention since 1980, or was it "rediscovered" after websites such as one came to be?

I realize I could ask this of any old case, but I'm wondering specifically about this one.

Interesting question, I'm keen to know the answer too.

 

[sunnynz]

Basically it violates the constitution's unreasonable search and seizure clause. The people in the ancestry database didn't give their permission to have their information used like that, so LE has to have probable cause and get a warrant to search. Many judges refuse to grant such warrants for a "maybe somebody is in there" search. (It's called a "fishing expedition.") Such searches haven't been terribly productive anyway; there are an astonishing number of secret adoptions, concealed affairs, and black sheep scrambling most people's family tree. Advocates of searching tend to underestimate the trauma and drama of having something like that sprung on you.

As Alleykins mentioned, state privacy laws and company policies also enter into it.

In this case, I think a professional ancestry researcher might be useful. They can do things that LE.



Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

Thanks, that makes total sense. So in the WA case referenced in the article above, the Snohomish County sheriff’s office must have somehow got a warrant to do it, sounds as though they are using Ancestry etc as an avenue of investigation.

 

[Alleykins]

Thanks, that makes total sense. So in the WA case referenced in the article above, the Snohomish County sheriff’s office must have somehow got a warrant to do it, sounds as though they are using Ancestry etc as an avenue of investigation.

I can see where it might be allowed in the Snohomish case because the killer was already convicted of her murder, any results wouldn't be used for a criminal case because it was already concluded. I think he recently passed away, too.

 

[carbuff]

Thanks, that makes total sense. So in the WA case referenced in the article above, the Snohomish County sheriff’s office must have somehow got a warrant to do it, sounds as though they are using Ancestry etc as an avenue of investigation.

Yes, or they could be talking about making a familial comparison to one or more of the state offender databases. Some states allow it and others don't. That's how they caught California's Grim Sleeper serial killer; one of his relatives was in jail and turned up as a match.


Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

 

[carbuff]

Something I've wondered is who was keeping this case in the public mind before the Internet age? The case was mentioned in the 1990 book Forensic Art and Illustration. Other than that, where else was it discussed for all those years? Her case has never appeared on America's Most Wanted, Unsolved Mysteries, Dateline or any other crime program.

The people of Huntsville probably knew about her, but who else? Has her case been receiving continuous attention since 1980, or was it "rediscovered" after websites such as one came to be?

I realize I could ask this of any old case, but I'm wondering specifically about this one.

I had never heard of the case before I joined Websleuths.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

 

[LucyOso]

When I look at articles such as this, I wonder how many times something similar occurred but was never noticed. A family quietly identifying then burying a rebellious child due to stigma. I often wonder, as we see sometimes, that many of our older UID victims are being looked for because of misidentification or family thinks they are dead. There have been a few cases where it turns out 10, 20, 25 + years down the road an identification was incorrect. What are your thoughts?

https://news.google.com/newspapers?...29NAAAAIBAJ&sjid=BPsDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5525,6101857

 

[Owutatangledweb]

When I look at articles such as this, I wonder how many times something similar occurred but was never noticed. A family quietly identifying then burying a rebellious child due to stigma. I often wonder, as we see sometimes, that many of our older UID victims are being looked for because of misidentification or family thinks they are dead. There have been a few cases where it turns out 10, 20, 25 + years down the road an identification was incorrect. What are your thoughts?

https://news.google.com/newspapers?...29NAAAAIBAJ&sjid=BPsDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5525,6101857

Incredible!

 

[Alleykins]

Yes, or they could be talking about making a familial comparison to one or more of the state offender databases. Some states allow it and others don't. That's how they caught California's Grim Sleeper serial killer; one of his relatives was in jail and turned up as a match.
Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

It appears that's also how they ID'd the Pemiscot John Doe, too, iirc. His brother's DNA was run through CODIS for a criminal matter and it hit upon the unidentified remains.

 

[carbuff]

When I look at articles such as this, I wonder how many times something similar occurred but was never noticed. A family quietly identifying then burying a rebellious child due to stigma. I often wonder, as we see sometimes, that many of our older UID victims are being looked for because of misidentification or family thinks they are dead. There have been a few cases where it turns out 10, 20, 25 + years down the road an identification was incorrect. What are your thoughts?

https://news.google.com/newspapers?...29NAAAAIBAJ&sjid=BPsDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5525,6101857

Mistakes like that are probably rare, but that's not the only one I remember reading about. It happens. Yes, I think that might explain some of our cases where it seems like nobody is looking.

I think the most common cause for people not looking for a lost relative is simply lack of knowledge--either they don't know how to look, or if they are looking, they don't know about a particular case that might be their loved one. And there's also, sadly, probably a lot of people who just don't care. Not all people have families, and not all families are good.

And I think there are probably several cases where the family knows their loved one is our jane or john doe but because of stigma or poverty have not acknowledged the deceased person. The Delaware woman who died after an abortion comes to mind, or several of the young gay men murdered by serial killers in the 70's.