A 4-year-old's body was discovered in 1957. Police just identified the 'Boy in the Box'.

[RandySF]

Police in Philadelphia this week identified a boy whose body was found in 1957 and whose death became the city’s most famous cold case.

Authorities on Thursday said the boy whose body was found in a wooded area of Philadelphia’s Fox Chase neighborhood is Joseph Augustus Zarelli. Both of Zarelli’s parents are dead, but he still has living siblings, police confirmed. After his body was found, he was estimated to be between four and six years old.

Zarelli was found in late February 1957, wrapped in a blanket and inside of a JCPenney bassinet box. He was beaten to death, authorities later confirmed.

He was eventually buried in Philadelphia’s Ivy Hill Cemetery, though portions of his remains were kept for testing, officials explained on Thursday. In 2019 a court order was obtained for his remains to be exhumed for additional examination.

Zarelli’s headstone read “America’s Unknown Child.” Services were held at the cemetery each year on the anniversary of the discovery of his body.



https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/nation/2022/12/08/boy-in-the-box-identified-joseph-zarelli/10859506002/

[Meadowoak]

1. Between 4 and 6 years old? Wouldn't there have been a birth certificate

That should show his exact age. Also, wouldn't the living siblings know how old he was?

[stopdiggin]

3. he had not been identified

until recently. This was an estimate of the 'remains' found in 57.

[Meadowoak]

4. I know, but once he was identified, and had a name to work with,

you would think by now they would have a birth certificate.

[nilram]

5. And they're identifying him as a four-year-old now.

The story reads, “After his body was found, he was estimated to be between four and six years old.”

[obamanut2012]

6. They did, they stated he was 4 when killed

As the OP plainly stated.

[Princess Turandot]

7. They have a birth certificate: that's how they determined his name.

The 4-6 year range is the information from the original autopsy.

Using mitochondrial (I assume) dna analysis, they found individuals related to the mother. A genetic genealogy group identified maternal siblings of the child, which led to the mother's name. Then with a court order, they searched various vital statistics databases for children in the assumed age range, where she was listed as the birth mother. They found a likely candidate, which included the birth father's name on the record. Further investigation led to some paternal relations, which allowed them to confirm the identity of the father.

The boy was born in January 1953 in West Philadelphia, so he was just 4 years when he was murdered. He had never been reported missing, which leads to an obvious assumption. However, the parents are now both deceased.

[LeftInTX]

8. They found the birth certificate because they identified the boy

[Murphyb849]

2. My father was a detective and participated in the burial of this little boy.

I was amazed to see this.

[LeftInTX]

9. Wow!

Wish there were pics of how he looked when he was alive

A bunch of us figured out who the dad is.

No one knows who the mom is though

[PCIntern]

10. As a Philadelphian of the exact same age

I grew up with the fear that whoever did this to him could do this to me. If I had told my parents of this fear they would have reassured me that it was probably a family issue but of course I never did.

[Genki Hikari]

11. I'd think they'd be more likely to tell you

It was some lone wolf situation, it hadn't happened again, so no need to worry.

When I was growing up, domestic violence was NOT a topic of polite conversation. It wasn't even something discussed where kids could overhear. If they knew someone abusing a spouse, couples would have talked about it in their bedroom after the kids had long been asleep. Or women would talk about it in low voices while kids played outside.

I didn't even know domestic violence existed outside of standard-but-rare butt-whoopings for children, until I witnessed a man haul off and hit his wife in the face right in front of his child and me. That was in 1976. I was so shocked and horrified at what I'd witnessed that I ran right to my mother for what to do about it. That's when she, a nurse, gave me the grim truth: Nothing could or would be done, because, back then, a man could beat the crap out of his wife, and it was considered his right to do so, or at least not something that outsiders thought they should get involved with. And she also told me not to say anything about it, because that wasn't something to talk about in polite society.

This is really how things used to be with domestic violence. That's why i doubt your parents would have told you the Boy in the Box was a family issue. Decent people didn't talk about domestic violence back then to children, not even indirectly. It just wasn't done.

Until Christina Crawford blew the doors right off the entire stinking garbage heap with "Mommie Dearest" in 1978. That's what jump-started the national awareness and discussion and eventually stricter laws about domestic violence. It all started with the violence against children, as in Ms Crawford's case. It didn't take long at all, though, for the discussion to spread to spousal abuse.