More tattoo muttergrumbling

NamUs has posted a new case which I already had on Charley, that of Latrice Belton. The NamUs casefile has more info, including another photo of Latrice and info about her tattoos. But as ever, the information about the tattoos is kind of ambiguous.

The tattoo section reads thusly:

tattoo right leg “Lebaron” and “Larry Ross”
tattoo right leg – heart

That doesn’t sound confusing, but then I saw this photo of one(?) of Latrice’s tattoos in the photo section. The photo would suggest that the “Lebaron” and the “heart” tattoos are not separate tattoos, but rather components of a single tattoo. You know, since the photo shows a heart with “LeBaron” on it.

Given the text info and the picture I can see as many as three possibilities:

  1. There are two tattoos, one of a heart with “LeBaron” on it and one reading “Larry Ross”
  2. There are two tattoos, one of the heart with “LeBaron” on it and one reading “LeBaron and Larry Ross”
  3. There are three tattoos, one of the heart with “LeBaron” on it, one reading “LeBaron”, and one reading “Larry Ross”

I hate having to do guesswork like this.

Argh… *headdesk*

I’m trying to write up an MP case to post today and I’m really having trouble with the tattoo descriptions as given by NamUs and the Texas Department of Public Safety.

For Texas DPS we’ve got:

a butterfly on her hand, “Shawn and Rose” on her left chest area, “Gemini” on her lower back.

Okay…is that the WORD “Gemini” or the astrological sign for Gemini? And is that the phrase “Shawn and Rose” or two different names, “Shawn” and “Rose”? It looks like it’s probably “Gemini” the word and “Shawn and Rose” the phrase, but I’m not 100% sure on that.

Meanwhile, on NamUs:

TAT L BRST TAT HAND 0F A BUTTERFLY,TAT LEFT BREAST 0F SHAWN 0R R0SES T0 C0VER THE NAME

The plot thickens. So maybe there’s no “Rose” or “Shawn and Rose” at all. Maybe it’s a tattoo of the name “Shawn” covered by a tattoo of roses.

And NEITHER source mentions the leopard spots on this lady’s shoulder, which are plainly visible in this photograph.

I am SO not in the mood for this kind of thing.

Follow-up on my previous post

Remember my previous blog post about the missing lady whom I believed was Aboriginal Australian? Well, I’ve heard from her brother again. I asked him directly if she was Aboriginal and he says not: she is of Sri Lankan and Indian descent.

But he also said:

I rang up your place at [a Burbank, California phone number] on 30th may 17 and spoke to a lovely lady called Jeanette. She took down my details and said she would get in touch with social security and try to find out about [his sister] but I haven’t heard back from her. Would you be able to just remind jeanette about this please and see if she can follow it up ??. Appreciate your Help as days are approaching fast ( I will be in L.A in 10 days time) and it would be nice if I can meet her.

Um…what? Jeanette who?

I think I’ll have to call this number himself and see if I can find out who on earth he spoke to. I’ll have to wait awhile, though, because right now it’s 3:00 a.m. California time.

I’ve been up all night…

Spent much of the night prying photographs loose from the Newspapers.com archives, for MP cases that have NamUs pages but no pictures. My efforts yielded… three pictures. That’s all. But three pictures means three casefiles for the Charley Project, and perhaps the photos I found will eventually migrate to NamUs, so there you go.

It’s really frustrating when I know a ton of information about a case but I can’t put it on Charley due to lack of a picture. NamUs, for instance, has the case of an HIV-positive infant who was abducted by her babysitter back in the 1980s. Plenty of details, interviews with her parents, name and description of the babysitter (whose identity is known), etc — but I have no photo of the baby. (And without her AZT drugs, that baby is almost certainly dead now.)

There was another case I found where a teenager was washed away in a flood, along with the busload of people of he was sitting in. His was the only body not recovered, and for years afterwards his parents persisted in the hope that he might still be alive. It’s a very sad story and again, there are plenty of details. In fact, Newspapers.com actually had a picture of this kid, but it was of such poor quality that even I, with my utterly abysmal standards, could not accept it. So disappointing!

Sigh… my old friend Contradictory Sources reappears

Tonight in my updates, for Emmanuel Cornelius Quarles, the various sources I found were giving his age as anywhere from 24 to 28 and claiming he was last seen in either a red car or a white truck. I think the vehicle discrepancy may be related to the unconfirmed sighting after he left Pendleton but I’m not sure. I’d love to get his actual date of birth from somewhere. NamUs said he was 26 to 27 years old, and I picked 27, because of the age of his older son, who was eight years old when he disappeared. Though it is by no means unheard of or even terribly uncommon for 24-year-old to have an eight-year-old child. Who knows? Not me.

Meanwhile, for Cynthia Ramirez Rico, her NamUs page says she disappeared on June 30, 1987, but the Abilene Crime Stoppers page listed the year as 1983. That issue was settled when I looked at the “investigating agency” section on NamUs and it said her case got entered into the computer on February 23, 1987 — that is, before her alleged date of disappearance. 1983 it was, then. But her age was a bigger mystery, because Crime Stoppers said she was 20 but NamUs said she was 25 to 26. Even given the date discrepancy that didn’t make sense. However, both NamUs and Crime Stoppers give her current age as 53, which would make her year of birth 1963 or 1964. To this end I decided to list her age as 20, because that would make sense with the 1983 year of disappearance.

Cynthia Rico disappeared from a group home for mentally disabled adults. It’s likely that she lived there, meaning it’s likely she was mentally disabled, but because I don’t know that for sure, I didn’t say she was. I just explained about the group home and left readers to draw their own conclusions.