Posted by: @mendocino

Posted by: @sailor-haumea

Posted by: @admin

This is something I've considered, but I couldn't quite decide. I mean, how do we determine which cases would fit there? Wouldn't we arbitrarily decide that some claims will end up there because they "don't look old" or are from "a country known for longevity myths," and would we put other claims from certain countries in the "living" or "deceased scs" subforums because they seem true and are from a certain country (but ultimately end up being less true than some of the claims we've put with myths)?

 

I don't know, it feels... wrong to me. But maybe others disagree and do feel a claims section would fit.

 

Any input?

I think a claims section should specifically be reserved for claims that don't have early or mid-life documentation. So someone who isn't GRG-validated yet but has documents from an early age wouldn't be a longevity claim. This distinguishes cases like Oliver-Gabarró, Butariu, Wiggins, Welford, etc. from a claim like, say, Maria Strelnikova or something.

I definitely wouldn't put Butariu in the same category as Oliver-Gabarró.

Butariu also has both early and mid-life documentation, so I'm not sure why you'd say this.

Posted by: @sailor-haumea

Posted by: @mendocino

Posted by: @sailor-haumea

Posted by: @admin

This is something I've considered, but I couldn't quite decide. I mean, how do we determine which cases would fit there? Wouldn't we arbitrarily decide that some claims will end up there because they "don't look old" or are from "a country known for longevity myths," and would we put other claims from certain countries in the "living" or "deceased scs" subforums because they seem true and are from a certain country (but ultimately end up being less true than some of the claims we've put with myths)?

 

I don't know, it feels... wrong to me. But maybe others disagree and do feel a claims section would fit.

 

Any input?

I think a claims section should specifically be reserved for claims that don't have early or mid-life documentation. So someone who isn't GRG-validated yet but has documents from an early age wouldn't be a longevity claim. This distinguishes cases like Oliver-Gabarró, Butariu, Wiggins, Welford, etc. from a claim like, say, Maria Strelnikova or something.

I definitely wouldn't put Butariu in the same category as Oliver-Gabarró.

Butariu also has both early and mid-life documentation, so I'm not sure why you'd say this.

How certain are you that these early life docs actually belong to her, and weren't just tied to her when her birth certificate was created in the 1990s? This type of thing has happened before, and it's especially important to rule it out in her case, since she couldn't communicate due to being born deaf and never learned to write or sign. If she actually possessed something like an ID card from before she entered the nursing home and the original 1882 birth record was found, then I'd be more convinced, but I'm not sure what mid-life documentation was found.

Posted by: @mendocino

Posted by: @sailor-haumea

Posted by: @mendocino

Posted by: @sailor-haumea

Posted by: @admin

This is something I've considered, but I couldn't quite decide. I mean, how do we determine which cases would fit there? Wouldn't we arbitrarily decide that some claims will end up there because they "don't look old" or are from "a country known for longevity myths," and would we put other claims from certain countries in the "living" or "deceased scs" subforums because they seem true and are from a certain country (but ultimately end up being less true than some of the claims we've put with myths)?

 

I don't know, it feels... wrong to me. But maybe others disagree and do feel a claims section would fit.

 

Any input?

I think a claims section should specifically be reserved for claims that don't have early or mid-life documentation. So someone who isn't GRG-validated yet but has documents from an early age wouldn't be a longevity claim. This distinguishes cases like Oliver-Gabarró, Butariu, Wiggins, Welford, etc. from a claim like, say, Maria Strelnikova or something.

I definitely wouldn't put Butariu in the same category as Oliver-Gabarró.

Butariu also has both early and mid-life documentation, so I'm not sure why you'd say this.

How certain are you that these early life docs actually belong to her, and weren't just tied to her when her birth certificate was created in the 1990s? This type of thing has happened before, and it's especially important to rule it out in her case, since she couldn't communicate due to being born deaf and never learned to write or sign. If she actually possessed something like an ID card from before she entered the nursing home and the original 1882 birth record was found, then I'd be more convinced, but I'm not sure what mid-life documentation was found.

There is indeed an ID card from before she entered the nursing home.

Posted by: @sailor-haumea

There is indeed an ID card from before she entered the nursing home.

Do you have proof of this? This contradicts what I've heard about her case from others.

Posted by: @mendocino

Posted by: @sailor-haumea

There is indeed an ID card from before she entered the nursing home.

Do you have proof of this? This contradicts what I've heard about her case from others.

It's from 1962 and is pictured in at least one photograph of her from 1997.

Posted by: @sailor-haumea

Posted by: @mendocino

Posted by: @sailor-haumea

There is indeed an ID card from before she entered the nursing home.

Do you have proof of this? This contradicts what I've heard about her case from others.

It's from 1962 and is pictured in at least one photograph of her from 1997.

Do you still have the photo? She moved into the nursing home in 1964, so this isn't exactly overwhelming proof that she wasn't accidentally given the wrong identity in her later years.

@mendocino it's a delayed birth record issued in 1962 I believe.

Posted by: @930310

@mendocino it's a delayed birth record issued in 1962 I believe.

Is this the document?

Unless I'm missing something here, I don't see how this in any way proves that she was the same person born in 1882. If this is the alleged "mid life" evidence, then her case isn't much different from Jose Uriel Delgado. He has an ID card from the 1990s, but it was based off of the baptismal record erroneously linked to him around the time he entered a nursing home, which seems to also be the case with Butariu.

After the police brought her to the nursing home in the 1960s, she didn't have any way of communicating her name and DOB due to being born deaf and never learning how to write or sign, so they probably found the 1882 baptismal record based on what little information they had (maybe they knew her name, but not her DOB).

I found an article about her in a Romanian newspaper from 1997 that gives more details about the nature of her case. It says that, when she arrived at the nursing home in 1964, her name was originally said to be Ioana Gheorghiță. At some point, however, they began to believe her name was Aniţica Butariu for some reason. 

"Lost in her own universe, she also forgot the distant day of June 25, 1964, when she entered the asylum, not like the others, but brought by the police, under the name of Ioana Gheorghiță, given by a policeman who drew up the formalities for her, in -another day, another official, going back to the first day of her life, 82 years ago, from the Register of births, and today it can be seen, reconstructed her documents. She was left even more alone than the day before on a street that remained anonymous. Ever since she gathers her existence so far, curiosity has exploded around her. But nothing touches her, even if the imagination of some has exceeded the limit and they told her life forcing the spectacular. Which never existed. The day she was born is lost in a register at the Archives in Arad."

Posted by: @mendocino

↑

I found an article about her in a Romanian newspaper from 1997 that gives more details about the nature of her case. It says that, when she arrived at the nursing home in 1964, her name was originally said to be Ioana Gheorghiță. At some point, however, they began to believe her name was Aniţica Butariu for some reason. 

"Lost in her own universe, she also forgot the distant day of June 25, 1964, when she entered the asylum, not like the others, but brought by the police, under the name of Ioana Gheorghiță, given by a policeman who drew up the formalities for her, in -another day, another official, going back to the first day of her life, 82 years ago, from the Register of births, and today it can be seen, reconstructed her documents. She was left even more alone than the day before on a street that remained anonymous. Ever since she gathers her existence so far, curiosity has exploded around her. But nothing touches her, even if the imagination of some has exceeded the limit and they told her life forcing the spectacular. Which never existed. The day she was born is lost in a register at the Archives in Arad."

-- attachment is not available --

I think this significantly weakens the claim.

One wonders if this case may end up having some similarities with that of Carrie White.

I always found that case super sketchy, along with Mendocino. His doubts were mentioned in the first posts here in the topic. I use to have the same doubts and didn’t believe her case after all. Now, this new information, confirms that Mendocino and I we were right.

@chrisr No, rather more similar to the case of Sara Corzo or Jose Uriel Delgado “Chepito”.

Thanks Coyote77.

My own thoughts were formed, based on my take of some of the above posts.

I assumed that a lady with intellectual or similar disabilities had arrived at an institution (like Carrie White) and incorrect data, or perhaps a more loose estimate may have been applied to her age - basically overstating it.

And of course the issue meant nothing until she achieved a very long life in her own right, made to look spectacular, due to the inadvertent age inflation.

I shall look into the other two cases you’ve raised and thanks for the details provided. 

All in all though, disappointing news for this case.

It would be great to see such a humble little lady verified at 115 …… and from that part of the world, in those times.