Update, John Doe, Eastlake Ohio Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Zodiackiller.com Message Board » Other Zodiac Suspects » All Other Zodiac Suspects » Update, John Doe, Eastlake Ohio « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tommyt
Username: Tommyt

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Wednesday, December 20, 2006 - 3:44 am:   

Was not sure where to start this thread, but decided to put it here. For those new to the site, John Doe of Eastlake, Ohio was briefly considered by some to be a Z suspect. It has been a long time since there has been an update on this guy, but there is a somewhat recent development on this case revealing a possible identity of this person:

http://crimeshadows.com/jondoe.htm
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Etphoto
Username: Etphoto

Registered: 6-2006
Posted on Wednesday, December 20, 2006 - 5:06 am:   

The reasons they list for the two men being the same didn't convince me. You'd think someone would compare finger prints. I'm assuming prints of both men were taken at sometime or another.

ET
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Breakout
Username: Breakout

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Wednesday, December 20, 2006 - 6:00 am:   

I am not convinced either--mostly for the obvious reason that John Doe looks much older than the 54 the Campbell guy is reported as being. Steve Huff had a blog up about John Doe of Eastlake not too awfully long ago.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tommyt
Username: Tommyt

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Wednesday, December 20, 2006 - 12:52 pm:   

One thing that stood out initially with me was the John Doe's mouth was wider then the other. I also thought I remembered reading somewhere that they did not even take prints from John Doe. But how can that be. Isn't it standard procedure to do so?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yarbchris
Username: Yarbchris

Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Wednesday, December 20, 2006 - 7:45 pm:   

You can add me to the list of kooks.

http://www.zodiackiller.com/discus/messages/19/824 .html?1166482857

I offered an explanation for the differences mentioned above. Of course, this is all theory. No one knows for sure who this dude was. One thing is for sure, the man claiming to be Joseph Newton Chandler III was not an innocent man, as some would have us believe. He was hiding something. I stand firm that my "guess" is as good or better than any offered to date.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Wednesday, December 20, 2006 - 9:50 pm:   

People drop out of society and/or change their names for a number of reasons and/or problems, real or imagined. He have committed no crimes, but maybe his heart was broken by a woman he loved and so he changed his name to vanish and forget her.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yarbchris
Username: Yarbchris

Registered: 9-2006
Posted on Wednesday, December 20, 2006 - 11:40 pm:   

Stealing the identity of a dead child is not a crime? Claiming a false and multiple social security number(s) is innocent? He is hiding something. The average person doesn't do what Doe has done. It could have been that he abandoned his family, escaped massive debt, or something more sinister. Maybe, as Ed states, it was just a broken heart. In this day and age lying doesn't seem to be that big of a deal, but John Doe was lying about who he was. A few of us would like to know why. You cannot say without a doubt that Doe has not committed any crimes --we don't know who he was. We can say, with complete certainty, that Doe was very deceptive about his true self. Whatever the reason for his lies, it is certainly a story of interest.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Thursday, December 21, 2006 - 12:15 am:   

I do not think assuming the identity of a deceased person was a crime, although it may be today. It's not like identity theft today; people wishing to change identities would look for birth & death certificates of someone who died as an infant and would be about the right age, and then use the birth certificate to get a social security number and driver's license. There was nothing illegal about it, as long as you didn't do it to commit a crime (at least, that's how I always understood it). It's also not illegal to have multiple social security numbers (unless the law has changed). False SSNs, well, that's another story...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Racerx
Username: Racerx

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 12:24 pm:   

Assuming the identity of a deceased person IS a crime, always has been. It is illegal to impersonate someone else, dead or alive. If you applied or received a birth certificate in the mail, you can add federal charges for mail fraud. getting a drivers license in anothers name is a state charge for fraud and inpersonation. As far as obtaining these items as not to commit a crime; you just commited several crimes in the process to obtain. It is illegal to have multiple social security numbers, always has been. One social security per person; that is why the cards are in numeric form, the number is YOUR i.d. To have multiple social security cards is a federal offense, has been since it's inception. As far as John Doe/campbell; they are two different people; Stevie Wonder can see that.John Doe assumed an identity for a reason and that would be for criminal reasons period.Either he was trying to hide from a past serious criminal conviction, or he was on the run from getting one. Were not looking at a draft dodger here.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 11:25 pm:   

Interesting, because FWIW, I've seen stories on TV where reporters have done precisely as I described and I've never heard of them being arrested after the broadcast for having broken the law. Plus, I've heard that multiple SSNs is not a crime... so now, I officially do not know! LOL
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Racerx
Username: Racerx

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Saturday, December 23, 2006 - 5:50 am:   

I've seen those stories too; the reporters make it clear from the beginning what their purpose was, thus no heat from the authorities and the i.d. was destroyed or returned. Regardless, it's still a crime, it's up to the proper authorities to persue or not ( it's hard to with egg on your face). Call the Social Security Administration and tell them you want to get a couple more social security numbers and they are going to tell you one per person. ( Tip: don't give your real name.)

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Bold text Italics Underline Create a hyperlink Insert a clipart image

Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Post as "Anonymous"
Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action:

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration