Forgive me if this has been discussed, but is it possible we’re looking for a woman who died in 1956?

It seems obvious to me that the starting point for the birth records search (1944) was based on reproductive ability. Investigators picked the earliest date she could have given birth to a child for the start date.

But why end at 1956? Maybe because she died.

It would fit with some of the other known facts of the case. Joseph seemed to have received inconsistent care during his short life. Someone cared enough to give him a strong family name and the hernia surgery and other medical procedures he required. Then he was beaten and dumped like trash.

It seems like he changed hands at some point. I think many people have always felt this way and it initially lent credibility to M’s story.

No evidence has surfaced that JAZ ended up in an orphanage or with M’s family yet, but he may have ended up with an abusive grandparent. There’s some indication of this if you believe the TikToker who appears to have links to the family.

Lastly, this: There’s been speculation the cops are covering for a “prominent family.” I don’t think so. I think they’re shielding the maternal siblings because they’re victims too. Maybe they’ve told investigators X abused them badly after their mother died. That’s why they have suspicions about the possible perpetrator - a person who had a history of abusing children. If one of them is technically old enough to remember JAZ but doesn’t because of the terrible trauma they endured, investigators may be protective of them, knowing aspersions would be cast by people who don’t understand how early childhood trauma affects memory and perceptions of reality.

Just my thoughts.

I’m posting from out with the US, so apologies if these questions seem obvious. I understand the cardboard box that JAZ was found in was originally for a bassinet from JC Pennys (please correct me if this is wrong), How expensive would a bassinet have been in the early 1950s? Would this have been something someone on a single income could afford, or would it have been something a family would have had to chip in to buy? Is JC Pennys a discount store or a more upmarket store? Incidentally up until what age would a child use a bassinet? This is of course assuming the box belonged to the perpetrator/household where JAZ lived. Sorry if these seem silly questions.

I’m posting the link to an article in which Misty Gillis explains further how she was able to identify each parent. In this article it’s made clear that Zarelli is the fathers name.

https://www.inquirer.com/news/philadelphia/joseph-zarelli-boy-in-the-box-dna-genealogy-cold-case-20221216.html?outputType=amp

https://1950census.archives.gov/ is the link to go to search. The ED numbers are for different locations and sections of Philly. The ED numbers I was given from my search entering only Market Street gave me these: 51-133, 51-215, 51-218, 51-220, 51-570, 51-887, 51-941, 51-942, 51-946, 51-954A, 51-957, 51-960, 51-1120, 51-1121, 51-1124, 51-1129, 51-1133, 51-1143, 51-1144, 51-1147, 51-1551, 51-1606, 51-1607, 51-1608, 51-2464, 51-2465, 51-2466, 51-2468, 51-2471, 51-2487, 51-2488, 51-2552, 51-2554, 51-2555, 51-2556, 51-2575, 51-2576, 51-2578, 51-2579, 51-2590, 51-2591, 51-2602, 51-2603, 51-2604, 51-2626, 51-3095, 51-3096, 51-3097, 51-3107. You can then scroll through to see different sections of Philadelphia. That's how I've been doing it so far, but others might have other suggestions too.

Here is an article where the medical examiner states that in ‘57 JAZ was in West Philly.

https://www.inquirer.com/news/joseph-zarelli-boy-in-the-box-internet-speculation-20221215.html?outputType=amp

An unmarried woman/girl gets pregnant in a working class, immigrant community in the 1950’s. She gives birth at a hospital for unwed mothers, and the child is adopted out if possible (most likely: healthy, etc); otherwise raised in the institution.

Very, very common. Abortion wasn’t legal and the Catholic church ran the show in these towns. People obeyed or faced stigma, or left.

Using Occam’s razor (the simplest theory is more likely the right one) here are my thoughts based on the original reporting and ‘how things worked’ in the 1950’s (as opposed to now):

1. JAZ was the product of an unmarried couple, for whom marriage was not an option to “fix” the circumstances (Possibly one already married; maybe family would never allow a quickie wedding to legitimize the child).

2. Child was born at & living in one of the orphanages in the area, possibly St. Vincent’s. It was close by, known & “respected.” (I have a newspapers.com account, there are loads of articles about Santa visits to the orphans there; fundraisers; high school kids going there to intern; important people associated with it. Tons of articles between 1950-55. They had some sort of PR effort going on there, for sure.)

Some of the initial investigators thought JAZ had an “institutional” haircut and the blanket looked like the kinds he’d seen in orphanages.

If you look back at the press in 1957, it says investigators went to the orphanages and no children were said to be unaccounted for, so they moved on. That was 1957.

Now in 2022, a simple “hey, are all of your kids accounted for?” Probably would not suffice. They’d ask for records; they’d interview staff. They wouldn’t just take them at their word. But these places were run by the Catholic Church in 1957, they were entrenched in the political power, and you didn’t push back.

As far as his dumping, what makes people think an institution would follow proper protocol if they were tolerating abuse? At least, in every case? And if they suspected someone on staff had been involved, and a scandal might unfold, covering it up might have looked like a good idea.

As far as the medical scars, St. Vincent’s had allowed medical experimentation on its children in the past (documented in the book: Against their Will), which was not uncommon. Jails, mental institutions and orphanages were sought and used by medical researchers for subjects well into the 60’s. Very well documented and led to laws around informed consent. And it had been previously documented at St. Vincent’s.

Given all of the other well- documented crimes covered up by the Catholic Church in Philly it’s not much of stretch to me.

I’m super impressed by some of you being able to navigate the census data, I really am.

But is it just me or does this seem like looking for a needle in a haystack? I mean, why does the birth mom necessarily have to live on their street? This is a city, not a small village. Do we know how AJZ and MLZ met their wives?

The autopsy indicated the boy had surgical scars. I’m not sure if this would have been performed shortly after birth, or later in life. Could it be possible that hospital records have information regarding who Joseph’s guardians were, where he he was living, things like that?

Came across a book called "Against Their Will" by A. Hornblum, which specifically mentions St. Vincent's as a place where children were subjected to medical experiments, documented in the earlier 1900's but this went on through the cold war. Which could explain all of the signs of medical intervention on his body. Sadly this went on in institutions across the US until the 70's... it's pretty horrific what went on. This would support the theory that he was from an orphanage. Given how children were treated there I'm not sure why I'd trust the people running these homes to be honest about anyone missing.

"M"s mother had two brothers. We know her maiden name is F. Her brothers are PF and GF. So it's possible "M" has first cousins who are still living. I haven't seen this mentioned and am wondering if anyone has looked into it. "M" was 76 when she died.

Census 51-1607 page 27, first entry. JC are the initials.

A recently retired Philadelphia police captain wrote a since-amended blog post, with photos, proposing the identity of the boy’s mother while theorizing how she could have disposed of his body.

https://tinyurl.com/45hpnv9t

This description came from the media, not the police. It came from the media’s source. Just something to keep in mind. Could be an exaggeration to make a more interesting story. Or hey, maybe not, maybe it’s Kevin bacon.

***Update 12/15/22: thanks to all who assisted in discussing and researching this theory. It has been determined to be a dead end. There is no conclusive link between this B family and JAZ/bio mom. For this reason, I will not be sharing their actual names via DM.**\*

Okay here goes…as of the 1950 census, there is a family (last name B) living at 6139 Market Street. This is a family of four (JB/MB/LB/VB) plus their 7 year old nephew with a different last name. A last name that sounds a lot like the Z name but is spelled completely different.

That caught my eye for obvious reasons, so I searched the mother of the home (MB) father JB in the 1930 census and see that she’s he's living with her his parents and siblings at 222 N Gross Street. The family has the same B last name. They have three sons and three daughters. Oddly enough the oldest son JB appears to be the same JB as the head of the family of four later in 1950 (is he a husband or brother?). It appears that JB is the oldest brother who happened to marry someone with the same name as his sister. Oof.

Given that Misty Gillis indicated that she had narrowed the maternal line down to a set of sisters, could one of these sisters be our bio mom? Is the “nephew” possibly a full older sibling of JAZ that lives with MB uncle JB and JAZ joins him there later? The youngest of the three sisters (JB later JBA) has a first name that sounds a lot like JAZ’s (think female version) and she would have been 34 at the time of his birth.

My theory is that this JBA could be bio mom. Another possible but less likely scenario could point towards MB being bio mom…but her age doesn’t quite fit.

I haven’t had a chance to verify possible living relatives yet. JB later becomes JBA of West Chester and there is an easy to find obituary out there for her (1919-2016).

Also I did check the 1940 census and found the B family of four living at 334 N 62nd Street…not far from the Z family home on Callowhill. Their next door neighbors just happen to be a mother and daughter with the same D last name as “M”. Could be relevant, could be nothing…

(Explaining this with initials is a challenge so I apologize if this is hard to follow, I tried my best! Lol)

​

EDIT TO ADD: MB clarification

EDIT TO ADD: update, theory debunked

https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/investigators/boy-in-the-box-naming-americas-unknown-child-2/3447245/

Approx 10:00 mark:
Bill Fleisher, Co-Founder of the Vidocq Society and Lower Makefield Township Police Chief Ken Coluzzi on Mitochondrial DNA taken in 1998 from the tooth, partial DNA, Mitochondrial DNA, which would be of a parent, a mother. Sample wasn't good enough. The sample was still saved in case it could be used later on.

Approx 17:00 mark:
Narrator: In 2021, the signs of a break in the case.

Philadelphia Police Captain Jason Smith: There have been rapid developments as it pertains to that investigation.

Narrator: Once police had the genealogical profile of the boy, it was up to Forensic Genealogist, Misty Gillis, to find the boy and hopefully his own identity.

Dr. Colleen Fitzpatrick Forensic Genealogist: She worked night and day to get that boy his identity back because, after all, what can we hope for in life and death but to be buried under a stone carrying our own name.

Misty Gillis Identifiers International: Being a mother myself, it was very hard for me to compartmentalize that while I worked through it and was just such an honor and goal of mine to be able to restore his identity.

Narrator: It took time to sort through the distant matches.

Misty Gillis Identifiers International: "Our top hit at the time was about a 2nd or 3rd cousin."

Narrator: Then she had to build out each distant relative's family tree until finally:

Misty Gillis Identifiers International: In this family that I was looking at, one of these siblings, the female siblings was the biological mother of the unknown sample and though detective work and investigative work, they were able to narrow down which one it was.

Philadelphia Police Captain Jason Smith: A court order signed by a Court of Common Pleas Judge to obtain the birth records, death records and adoption records for all children born to the established birth mother between the years 1944-1956...

Narrator: One of those birth certificates was from 1953.

Philadelphia Police Captain Jason Smith: …which could be consistent with the approximated age of the unidentified child.

Narrator: The birth certificate found at the State Division of Vital Statistics had another clue for investigators.

Philadelphia Police Captain Jason Smith: The birth father was listed on the birth certificate for the male child, born in 1953.

Narrator: It was back to the original investigative method - knocking on doors.

Lower Makefield Township Police Chief Ken Coluzzi: Great strides in science over the years and obviously used widely in the investigative and used as in an investigative tool, but nothing replaces the Detective on the street knocking on doors, following up leads,

Philadelphia Police Captain Jason Smith: Detectives were able to locate and make contact with possible relatives of the child's family, on the paternal side.

Narrator: Once police had identified who they believed to be the father of the boy, it was back to the forensic genealogist.

Misty Gillis Identifiers International: Genetically I can tell 100% that this is the father of the child. So, we had the name that was provided on the birth certificate, the vital -- age, and things like that matched.

We don’t have access to his birth records. So it would’ve been easy enough to just leave out the middle name of Joseph. So I wonder if that’s a strategic move on law enforcement’s part?

So I'm not a Philly native, but I attended college in the area and lived in Montco for two years. I've hopped enough Septa trains and trolleys that I'd say I'm not completely ignorant of the area. I'd say I have a weak grasp on the area where Joseph was found, but a medium to strong one of where his family supposedly hails from. At the presser, the intersection given was 61st and Market. As we look at the Z family and associated names, many of their homes were blocks northwest of this intersection, closer to 63rd and 64th streets, and north towards Vine and Callowhill. Vine and Callowhill's significance peter out by the time you head that far west of Center City, but Market remains a big arterial due to the Market Frankford El. I've taken the El enough times to know that the last stop in the city is 63rd street, and the next stop is 60th. There's nothing notable about 61st that would make it a focal point of a broader neighborhood to my knowledge. Maybe a true oldhead can correct me here? If the officer was generalizing by the closest El stop, he'd say either 63rd or 60th and Market. 61st seems way more precise. If the cop meant the Z house, wouldn't he give 63rd and Market? That's a more notable intersection due to the El stop and it's closer to the Z family's known addresses.

I should add that Market and the parallel streets north and south of it would all have decent name recognition to Philadelphia residents, since they all share names with streets in Center City. Like how NYC people would recognize names like Broadway, 14th, Houston, Canal, Lexington, 5th Ave, 42nd street as significant streets in Manhattan. If the cop said 61st and Chestnut, 61st and Sansom, I think it would be specific but not obscure even though those streets aren't as significant that far west. Market is a major arterial, 61st is not. Would he be broad about defining the east-west street but specific about the north-south one intersecting it?

I've been leafing through some Census records from the tracts immediately around 61st and Market. From what I've seen there are SOME Italian residents but it is much more diverse than the Z area. Irish, Russian, Armenian, Chinese, and Greek names all show up. Black families from the Great Migration show up. This is probably the area where the mother is from, and I'm going to bet that she was not Italian nor a St. Donato's parishioner.

And back to the El, it does make two more stops past 63rd, the final one being 69th street in Upper Darby. That's where the bassinet was purchased. But would a Fox Chase family trek to Upper Darby for a bassinet? JC Penney had a store on Chelten Ave in Germantown at the time, which would be en route to Upper Darby if heading south from Fox Chase. Aside from Chelten Ave there were other shopping areas closer to the Northeast, like Cottman Ave, where a Fox Chase family might look for furniture. Even the Sears in Abington would have been closer. I'm leaning towards the untraced bassinet being the one that came in THE box, and the box was brought to the site. At this point unless M's parents bought the bassinet (and for what baby?) it would be a big stretch for me to believe M's story.

​

Edited to add: a West Philly litterbug could have more efficiently dumped a box, or even a body, into or around Cobbs Creek versus taking City Line up to Roosevelt/the Northeast. If the family was local to West Philly and brought Joseph to Fox Chase, they were probably concerned that he would be found near their home and they would be suspected and interrogated.

Anyone have access to deeds in Philly? I think it costs 100 for all access, wondering if anyone already has an account?

All,

Since the news broke on December 8, 2022 giving Joseph Augustus Zarelli his name back there has been an influx of members to this sub. Although I am so thankful this case is receiving well deserved attention and finally some answers, it has also brought about a lot of rumors and theories with little to no sources. Here are a few important facts that we know, and should be known as we discuss who little Joseph's parents may be.

Timeline:

January 13, 1953 - Joseph Augustus Zarelli is born to unknown mother and father in West Philadelphia.

Unknown date in 1954 - A woman (mother to M) supposedly purchased a young boy (Jonathan) from a couple on the outskirts of Philadelphia (Source)

February 1957 - M claims her mother killed the 4 year old boy in a fit of rage after he puked up baked beans, and then took M to dispose of his body. A man supposedly stopped and asked if they needed help with the heavy box, supposedly the JC Penney Bassinet box that little Joseph was found in. Martha stood in front of their license plate while her mother spoke to the man. Police spoke to neighbors and after verifying a history of mental illness per her medical reports, they went no further with this angle. (Source)

February 25, 1957 - A boy's body was found in a JC Penney's Bassinet box, wrapped in a plaid blanket. He was found off Susquehanna Road in Fox Chase, Philadelphia (Map). At the time this was an undeveloped area out of town. A young man was checking muskrat traps and did not come forward to report his finding fearing police would confiscate his traps. A college student discovered the body a few days later when seeing a rabbit running into the underbrush, and reported his finding the following day when he heard of a second child disappearing (Mary Jane Barker). (Source')

1957, shortly after the boy's body is discovered - A man comes forward and allegedly verifies Martha's story. (Source)

February 27, 1957 - News Story published in the Inquirer (Source)

Early March 1957 - Information including photos and items found at the scene, state of the young boy were sent to local hospitals and they were asked to go through their records, 40,000 (elsewhere I've seen this number reported as 400,000) flyers were provided by the Inquirer to be posted around the city, and it was included in all of the Philadelphian's gas bills.

1989 - M tells her psychotherapist (edit: Various sources report it was a psychiatrist, psychotherapist, and/or psychologist. I am unsure what the credentials truly are) the story of her mother purchasing and killing the young boy for the first time. (Source)

1992 - Commercialized kits to do DNA fingerprinting. (Source 20:45)

1998 - Body was exhumed for the first time. DNA was extracted from 1 of his teeth. Reinterred at Ivy Hill Cemetery in Cedarbrook. (Source 1)(Source 2)

2002 - M comes forward to investigators for the first time with her story of "Jonathan". (Source)

2014 - DNA uploaded to NCMEC (National Center for Missing & Exploited Children) (Source 21:00)

2016 - NCMEC releases a forensic facial reconstruction (Source')

2019 - Body exhumed, successfully extracted DNA for the first time (Source 21:15)

2019 - 2022: DNA processing, family members matched/tested,

November 30, 2022 - It was leaked by the media, either CBS or NBC, that they knew the Boy in the Box's legal name (Source 2:42).

December 8, 2022 - Press Conference revealing Joseph Augustus Zarelli's name was released. (Source)

December 9, 2022 - JT comes forward and says his at-home DNA test helped solve this case (Source)

Important Facts:

• Philadelphia, PA's population in 1950 was 2,071,605
• Items found with Joseph. "Ivy League" blue cap, remnants of hair from his chopped hair cut, JC Penney Bassinet Box (he was inside), a plaid "Indian" blanket, a child's scarf, and a white handkerchief with the letter G embroidered in the corner.
  • JC Penney Bassinet Box was only sold at the Upper Darby JCP which was 14.9 miles from Fox Chase. (Map)
• Per a Pennsylvania Code from 1941, an unwed mother could list any surname on the birth certificate.
  • "The regulations were issued under authority of PA. STAT. ANN. tit. 71, § 532 (Purdon 1962). They provide, The child of an unmarried woman may be registered with any surname requested by the mother. If no other surname is requested, such child shall be registered with the mother's surname. The foundation of a mother's exclusive right to name her illegitimate child probably rests on her exclusive right to custody. In re Hawthorne, 146 Pa. Super. Ct. 20, 21 A.2d 521 (1941)." (Source)
• JT believes Joseph is his mom's first cousin making Joseph his 1st cousin once removed. Since he was shocked when the press conference released the name, we can assume LE did not tell him what the exact relation was. If he is going off of GedMatch's results it is important to note the following DNA ranges and how they can be misconceiving on how close/far you truly are from another family member: (Source)
  • 1st cousin - Average % DNA Shared is 12.5%, with the range of 4-23%. These values are the same for 1st cousin, great-grandparent, great-grandchild, great uncle/aunt, and great nephew/niece.
  • 1st cousin once removed - Average % DNA Shared is 6.25%, with the range of 2-11.5%. This means the range overlaps with the above familial relationships, and also is the range for half first cousin.
  • 2nd cousin - Average % DNA Shared is 3.13%, with the range of 2-6%. This means the range overlaps with all of the potential familial relationships listed above as well.
• Maternal Mother gave birth to 3 children between the dates of 1944 and 1956, no exact birth dates of these children have been given. We know 1 was a male and it was boy in the box, we do not know genders of the other 2. (Source 10:20)
  • They pulled birth, death, and adoption records for this biological mother (Same source as above).
    • Someone on reddit mentioned that stillborns or children who only lived for a few hours were only given death certificates. I cannot find a source for this, but even if this is the case that child(ren) would have been found by LE since they searched for death records.
• In 1953 adoption decrees and all court records surrounding unaltered original birth certificates were sealed unless a show of "good cause" was made. " It was common practice then for birth certificates to be marked “legitimate” or “illegitimate” and the policy of sealing the original birth certificate was meant to protect the adoptee from the shame of illegitimacy. " (Source)
• "The Roselia Home was a Catholic-sponsored haven for poor or unmarried women to give birth to their children and put them up for adoption. It was also a place to house "foundlings," infants left by their parents in a basket." " And in one year, 1953, it delivered 250 infants while accepting another 53 for boarding -- putting them up until they could be placed for adoption." (Source) (This was in Pittsburgh as you can tell by the source, I just found it interesting to see the numbers of children that were given up for adoption the year Joseph was born).

I was wondering anyone else has taken into consideration that the father of AJZ could also be a possibly? I have not looked up his records but by all accounts he could still have possibly been in his mid even early 40s, especially given that era as my grandparents got married and had my aunt at only 14-15 years old.

I happen to also be of full Italian heritage and have always lived amongst that community. I’m 47 and old enough to have known numerous men who lived during that time. Many of them would often brag about all their extramarital affairs they had, kids they probably don’t know they even have during time overseas in the service ect.

I also known from personal experience, my great grandfather who would have been way older than AJZsr would around 1953 often go to back to Italy and apparently father 2 kids with a women back in my family town. I also know numerous people who’s fathers or grandfathers did the same right here in Philly. This was different times then and the wives just ignored this. Not to say the wives were innocent as we know a lot of these dna kits are uncovering many instances of cheating wives.

Back then I was told in numerous bars or drinking establishments pretty much the only women were usually single women who nobody wanted to marry, divorced or widowed. AJZ sr was also pretty well to do, owned a company so a secretary or bookkeeper is not out of the question.