The decades old murder case of the “Boy in a Box” remains unsolved after police used new DNA technology on a tooth removed last week Friday. Police exhumed the body from a potter’s field in hopes to solve the murder that dates back to 1957.
The boy was first found by a muskrat trapper in a wooded area in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, but the trapper did not report his findings to police. A college student was the first to report the boy, and after the police investigation, the boy was buried in a potter’s field.
The boy, who was 3 to 7-years-old, had been beaten and had died from blunt force trauma according to the medical examiner. The name, “Boy in a Box”, was derived from the boy being found wrapped in a flannel blanket and placed in a cardboard box.
…show more content…
Police used DNA extracted from the boy’s teeth enamel to try and solve the case.
They were not able to find anything from the use of the DNA. The boy’s identity is still unknown and the story has been the subject of the T.V. shows “America’s Most Wanted” and “Cold Case.”. The boy was reburied at “Ivy Hill Cemetery” in Philadelphia.
The murder case that has been shown on the T.V. shows “America’s Most Wanted and “Cold Case” was reopened, but DNA technology fields no leads. Police exhumed the body from a potter’s field, but the decades old case remains wide open.
The “Boy in a Box” was found in 1957 by a muskrat trapper, but it was not till a college student found the boy that the police were notified. The boy was found wrapped in a flannel blanket and placed in a cardboard box in a wooded area in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Police were never able to identify the boy, who was 3 to 7-years-old at the time of his murder, so the case became known as the “Boy in a Box.”
The boy, according to the medical examiner, died from being beaten and was found to have blunt force trauma. After police were unable to identify the boy or his killer, they buried him in a potter’s
field. Last week Friday, police exhumed the body in hopes that new DNA technology would be able to tell who the boy was. Enamel, that was extracted from the boy’s tooth, was unable to solve the mystery. The police reburied the boy at “Ivy Hill Cemetery” in Philadelphia.
According to the Innocence Project (2006), “On September 17, 2001, Chad wrote the Innocence Project in New York, which, in 2003, enlisted pro bono counsel from Holland & Knight to file a motion for DNA testing on Tina’s fingernail scrapings.” The state had tested the DNA that was under Tina’s nail from the first case but at that time it was inadequate and could not be tested. It was not until now that we have the technology capable enough to test it. In June 2004, the test came back negative to matching both Jeremey and Chain Heins but did come from an unknown male. The state argued that it was not enough to overturn the conviction so Chad’s attorney asked the state to do some further testing and to compare the DNA from under the fingernails to the hairs that was found on Tina’s body. It was in 2005 that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement confirmed that there was a match between the DNA under Tina’s nail and the pubic hair. According to LaForgia (2006), “this particular type of DNA, the report stated, was found in only about 8 percent of Caucasian American men.” During this process there was a new piece of evidence that Chad’s attorney had learned about during the appeals process, a fingerprint. There were some accusations that the prosecutors never disclosed this information about this third fingerprint and if they did it was too late. The jurors did not even know about this fingerprint and if they did this could have changed the whole case. This fingerprint was found on several objects that included the smoke detector, a piece of glass, and the bathroom sink. It was soon discovered that this fingerprint matched with the DNA found on the bedsheets that Tina was on. This was finally enough evidence to help Chad Heins become exonerated in
This is a case about Antonio Beaver. Antonio was innocent, yet still went to prison. His story was that there was unnamed lady that was walking to her car and got stabbed by a gangster. The police officer selected three men, and Antonio Beaver made it a match due to A gap in his teeth and A hat he had on and sent later that year to prison. Antonio Beaver was charged to prison April 17, 1997. 400 years ago Eyewitness Misidentication was a commonly seen in courts, and it today’s society it’s still ongoing.
found behind the guest house was proven by DNA testing to have O.J.'s blood and
Stated by John Ramsey, “As I was walking through the basement, I opened the door to a room, and knew immediately that I’d found her because there was a white blanket- her eyes were closed, I feared the worse but yet- I’d found her” (Bardesley, and Bellamy). On December 26, 1996, one of the most famous, unsolved murders took place in Boulder, Colorado (Christopher). The murder caused many events including accusations, interrogations, false claims, and examining of evidence. The case also caused the Ramsey family to go through a hard time. The murder of JonBenet Ramsey was very shocking and caused a huge investigation that is yet unsolved.
Casey Anthony was accused of killing her two-year-old daughter Caylee, but because of lack of evidence, Anthony was convicted not guilty. John Cloud, from Time magazine, implies, “And yet virtually no one doubts that Anthony was involved in her child’s death. In fact, her lawyer admits that Anthony know how her daughter’s body would be disposed of” (“Few Doubt That Casey Anthony Was Involved in Her Child’s Death. But Fascination With Her Case Has Made It The First Major Murder Trial Of The Social-Media Age”). They found Caylee’s corpse duct taped by Casey’s parent’s house, in Orlando, Florida. The only evidence they found was in the family Pontiac Sunfire. The stench of decomposing flesh overpowered the trunk of the family’s car. “Why did Anthony let 30 days pass between the time Caylee went missing and the day police were notified?” questioned Tresniowski, “And how could she so blithely dan...
could not bring himself to kill a innocent little boy so he gave him to a
Two detectives were assigned to the case: Harry Hanson and Finis Brown. [2] When they and the police arrived at the crime scene, it was already swarming with people, gawkers and reporters. The entire situation was out of hand and crowded, everyone trampling all over any hopes for good evidence. [2] One thing they did report finding was a nearby cement block with watery blood on it, tire tracks and a heel print on the ground. There was dew under the body so they knew it had been set there just after 2 a.m. when temperatures dropped to 38 degrees.
The sad story is still mostly a mystery because of the ongoing investigation, and both the police and autopsy report were withheld from the public. What is known, is that a nineteen-year-old freshman at The College of New Jersey (TCNJ) named John Fiocco Jr. was reported missing from his dormitory on March 25th 2006 after drinking. Police reported finding blood (that was later identified as belonging to Fiocco) around a dumpster outside of his dormitory. It was never made clear if it had any connection to the trash chute above, but his body was recovered at the Bucks County landfill in Pennsylvania. (Landfill Isn't About Fiocco)
The boy’s body, terribly battered, with a bullet hole in the head and a cotton-gin fan affixed to the neck with barbed wire, was found three days later in the Tallahatchie River.... ... middle of paper ... ... Works Cited Baldwin, James.
Andrews.”(crimefeed.com) But how could that boy be Michael Henley? That little boy that went missing camping at the family's campground in Zunis Mountain, New Mexico. “In 1990 detectives found little Michael Henleys dead a few miles from the families campground. They indicated that he passed from dehydration and starvation, no foul play.”(crimefeed.com) Investigators are now very confused, the boy they thought was missing is now dead. When investigators started asking for leads of who that boy could be anyone now, some person unidentified sent in a picture of a boy with black markings over his mouth and the boy looked exactly like the boy in the 1st polaroid picture, but investigators still can not figure out who the boy in the picture really
On August 4, 1892 in Fall River, Massachusetts a married couple was viciously murdered in their home receiving several blows to the head from an axe. The deceased married couple’s names were Andrew and Abby Borden. Almost all of the hits were specifically aimed at both of the victim’s heads’ which, in the end, caused them to be almost entirely unrecognisable. A known fact is that the first few hits would easily have killed the victims, yet the killer continued to hit the victims with an axe long after they were dead. The Bordens’ deaths spread through the media like wildfire; all the newspapers were printing about what happened, the entire United States knew of the Borden murders. Police investigated the case for weeks and there were different suspects, however none were truly able to match up. Much of the evidence along with motive all seemed to lead to one
In the quiet New York town of Savona, Eric Smith, age thirteen, intercepted four year old Derrick Robie on his way to a park recreation program and offered to show him a shortcut. Hesitatingly, Derrick set off with Eric. He never made it to the park. That same day the little boy's savagely beaten body was discovered outside the park area (Seifert 98).
He later pulverised the bones with a sledge hammer and scattered the bones around the [his grandmother’s] property. The flesh was put into bags and buried in a crawlspace under the house. It wasn't until 3yrs later that police and forensics found the remains.” (Blanco) His second murder was not until 1987.
The main question that appears from the crime scene is how can this one suspect place the body in the trunk of the car by himself and is it even possible for the suspect to be able to lift and carry the suspect to the trunk of the car. The victim was a larger man approximately 250 pounds. The medical examination states that the suspect could of had help or may not of had help placing the victim in the trunk of the car. There were minor abrasion and scrapes found on the body possibly from dragging the body down the stairs. This was unconfirmed and the medical examiner said it was possible that he placed the victims body in the trunk by himself. There was no physical evidence proving that there was another suspect tied to the case. No other fingerprints
story is a young boy. The motive to kill is that he sees the boy’s