In 1957, a discovery by U.S. law enforcement shocked Philadelphia: the body of a battered little boy, stuffed into a cardboard box, and thrown on the side of the road outside the city. When Philadelphia police found the body based on a local college student's report, they didn't know it was just the beginning of a mystery that remained unsolved to this day.
While authorities know that the child, dubbed "the boy in the box" by the media, died of multiple head blows, they do not know how he was subjected to these fatal injuries. Although investigators have pursued countless clues over the past 60 years, they still don't know the boy's name or whether he was murdered or died accidentally — which has led many to call him "America's Unknown Child."
He was beaten to death and then stuffed into a box
On February 25, 1957, police found a cardboard box discarded on the side of the road on a country lane near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, based on clues provided by informants. In the box that once contained the cradle that had been purchased from J. .C. Penney, the officers found the naked body of a young boy, part of which was wrapped in a cheap flannel blanket.
The boy's body was strewn with bruises, and a medical examiner later concluded that the boy's head had died after multiple blows. Detectives tried unsuccessfully to confirm the child's identity — the media eventually dubbed him "the boy in the box."
A woman might buy the boy, then abuse him, and end up killing him
During the course of the investigation, detectives received numerous clues from people who claimed to know the true identity of the "boy in the box", as well as the cause of his death. One of the clues came from a woman named "Martha," who said that when she was a little girl, her mother (who worked as a librarian) bought the child and took him back to her home in Philadelphia. According to Martha, her mother told her the boy's name was Jonathan and let him sleep in their damp, dirty basement.
Martha claimed that her mother, who had sexually abused her, had bought Jonathan to achieve the same goal. She also said that Jonathan vomited in the bathtub, and her angry mother threw the boy on the floor and killed him. After the child's death, Martha said she accompanied her mother somewhere in Philadelphia and disposed of the child's body.
Martha's claim was made decades after the boy's body was found, and soon detectives investigated her claim, and eventually they were unable to find evidence to prove whether the information she provided was correct.
He may have died unexpectedly in foster homes
One of the most popular accounts of "the boy in the box" is that he was an orphan who lived in a foster family and died in an accident, either falling out of a window or drowning in a lake. This particular theory comes from Philadelphia coroner Remington Bristol. A psychic told him that she thought the child had died while living in an old mansion that a couple had converted into foster homes.
Bristol interviewed a couple who run a children's home outside their mansion, and when he attended an inheritance auction after the family moved out in 1961, he said he found a cradle in the house, similar to the kind packaged in cardboard boxes when police found the child's body.
Bristol believes the boy may have been the secret son of the couple's youngest daughter, who carried out the body dumping when he died in some sort of accident because they didn't want to be suspected of murder or want anyone to find out about the existence of their illegitimate offspring.
Decades later, a detective followed this thread and interviewed a woman in what Bristol believed to be the boy's mother, only to discover that she did have a son but was killed in an accident in 1957. However, the morgue's records prove that the "boy in the box" could not have been her child.
There may be someone who wants to drown him
Bristol believes the boy in the box may have drowned after falling into the lake — although he suffered multiple head injuries, but because the child's feet and the palm of one hand had water wrinkles, it seemed to have been soaked in water for a long time. Investigators were unable to determine whether the boy had been immersed in water before or after his death, although they attributed the cause of death to blunt head trauma rather than drowning.
In addition to the wrinkled soles of his feet and palms, the forensic doctor found small clumps of hair stuck to the boy's body, which further confirmed the doctor's view that the boy was wet at the time of his death.
He died of extreme malnutrition
In addition to finding evidence that the "boy in the box" had been underwater before he died, doctors examining his body also found many signs of prolonged abuse. With the help of X-rays, doctors determined that the child's age may be between 3 and 5 years old, but he weighs only 30 pounds (about 13.6 kilograms) and is only 40.5 inches (about 1.02 meters) tall when standing. According to one forensic doctor, the body of the "boy in the box", a child a little over two years old, X-rays also show evidence of "growth arrest".
The child's body was covered with bruises, his lips were chapped, bloodstained, and he looked very gaunt, and his ribs were exposed to the skin. Inspectors also found evidence that the child may have an eye infection and had been treated with medication before his death. Because of the cold weather in Philadelphia, the medical examiner could not determine the exact time of the boy's death, saying he may have died a few days or weeks before the discovery.
His hair was cut
Investigators speculate that before the child died, someone cut off most of his light brown hair. When they found the boy, he had a tuft of his own hair glued to him. However, according to the forensic doctor, the man who cut the boy's hair was hastily and haphazardly cut.
The child reported four visible bruises on his forehead, as well as signs of cerebral hemorrhage. Law enforcement speculates that the cause of death may have been an accident: The person who trimmed his hair with scissors may have inadvertently exerted excessive pressure while fixing the child's head.
A barber from Philadelphia came forward to say he was sure he had cut the boy's hair about a week before the police found him. The barber insisted that the boy had come to the shop with his brother and was not injured. The hairdresser then instructed the authorities to go to a place called the Strawberry Mansion, where the boy said he lived. Investigators followed this lead, but found no further.
He may have been raised as a girl
Another popular theory is that someone raised him as a girl, which is why investigators have difficulty determining his identity. One of the biggest proponents of this theory is Frank Bender, a forensic artist and co-founder of the Vidocq Society, a private group of technologists dedicated to solving crimes.
According to Bend, someone cut off the child's hair before and after his death in order to cover up the fact that he was raised as a girl. Bender also said photos of the "boy in the box" showed someone plucking a child's eyebrows before or after he died. This suggests that someone changed the boy's appearance to make him look more feminine.
Based on his own ideas, Bend drew a sketch of a "boy in a box" with long hair and bangs to identify the child if someone tried to misrepresent the child's gender.
One person who found the body waited a day to contact police
Police did not find the "boy in the box" until February 25, 1957, and Frederick Benonis had found the boy's body the day before. Benonis, 27, a student at La Salle College, told law enforcement he encountered the boy's body while chasing a rabbit, but he did not immediately contact authorities because he believed the body was a realistic doll. The college student said he only decided to call the police the next day when he learned that a child in New Jersey was missing, and later confirmed that the child was not a "boy in a box."
Eventually, investigators learned that Benonis (who initially thought he was a suspect) did not immediately contact law enforcement because he had been spying on the girl at a nearby school when he found the boy, rather than chasing a rabbit.
He may be the son of a carnival staff member
In 1961, philadelphia investigators questioned Kenneth Dudley and his wife, Erin Dudley, to determine whether the "boy in the box" was one of the middle-aged couple's 10 children. Dudley was a itinerant carnival worker, so when he was looking for a job, the family was on the East Coast. However, when The Dudley family's 7-year-old child, Carol Ann, died of neglect, malnutrition and exposure, the Dudley family caught the attention of law enforcement. Instead of burying the body of their young child in the cemetery, the couple wrapped their daughter in blankets and placed her body in a wood in Virginia.
Authorities learned that seven of the Dudley family's 10 children died of malnutrition and neglect, and none were ultimately properly buried, prompting Philadelphia investigators to suspect that the "boy in the box" was one of their sons. However, after interrogating the Dudleys in 1957 and investigating their actions, Philadelphia law enforcement officers determined that the negligent parents had nothing to do with the "boy in the box."
He may have been a Hungarian refugee
Years after police discovered the child's body, fingerprinting expert Bill Kelly speculated that the "boy in the box" might have been one of the many Hungarian refugees who came to the United States in the 1950s. Kelly came up with the theory after reading an article in the newspaper. The article, published in 1956, the year before the discovery, was about people who had recently moved from Hungary to the United States. The article also comes with a photo of a Hungarian refugee, and one of the immigrants looks very much like a "boy in a box."
Kelly conducted a follow-up investigation based on this theory, as police could not confirm the boy's identity and because he was a newcomer, there was no record of his existence. However, after looking at more than 11,000 passport photos, Kelly found the Hungarian boy from a 1956 article and learned that the child was well off and living with his family in North Carolina.
He may have been a child who was kidnapped two years ago
On October 31, 1955, less than two years before Philadelphia police discovered the "boy in the box," an unidentified criminal kidnapped a two-year-old boy. Someone took the blonde Steven Craig Dammam away from a grocery store in East Meadow, New York. When authorities later discovered the "boy in the box," people questioned whether he was really Dammam because of their similar age and physical characteristics.
Investigators followed the trail and found that Dammam had broken his arm before disappearing, and that the "boy in the box" did not appear to have the same fracture. In addition, their footprints did not match, which led the examiners to conclude that the "boy in the box" was most likely not Dammam.
In 2003, law enforcement compared DNA extracted from the "boy in the box" with biological evidence collected from Dammam's sister to determine that there was no connection between the two children.
Officials in Philadelphia went to great lengths to try to confirm the boy's identity
In February 1957, law enforcement discovered the "boy in the box" and thought someone would voluntarily provide the identity of the child to the police. However, when no one contacted authorities to provide the boy's name, Philadelphia officials began experimenting with a variety of different methods to uncover the boy's identity.
Philadelphia authorities made a poster with the boy's face, as well as details of the child's appearance, and items found near his body. They then distributed leaflets throughout Philadelphia. Officials even attached leaflets about "Boys in boxes" to each gas bill sent to residents. Although the poster provided many clues, it did not help the police discover the identity of the child.
His body was exhumed in 1998
In 1998, 41 years after police found his body on a country road near Philadelphia, officials dug up the "boy in the box" to collect DNA evidence from his body. Forensic analysts were able to extract mitochondrial DNA from one of the child's teeth and use his DNA profile to rule out clues that included the boy's possible relatives.
Before the boy's body was exhumed in 1998, authorities buried him in a potter's field. After investigators extracted DNA from his body, city officials directed that he be reburied at The Ivy Hills Cemetery in Philadelphia. On November 11, 1998, the boy was officially reburied in a donated coffin.
Philadelphia detectives paid for his funeral
When no one came to claim the "boy in the box," the Philadelphia detectives in charge of handling the child's case paid for the boy's funeral. They originally buried the boy in a potter's field near Mechanicsville, with a tombstone that read, "Heavenly Father, bless this unknown boy." This simple tombstone also records the date the boy was found— February 25, 1957.
In 1998, after exhuming his body, officials reburied him at the Ivy Hills Cemetery in Philadelphia and erected a new granite tombstone: "America's Unknown Child." The Vidocq Society also donated a bench.
His identity has not been confirmed
While his case has brought countless clues, no one has yet determined the identity of the "boy in the box." Despite his unknown identity, Philadelphia had not forgotten the child. Members of the Vidoc Society hold annual memorial services to pay their respects to the boy.
A Philadelphia man also created a website dedicated to "America's Unknown Child" and the investigation into his death. While decades have passed since police first found the boy's body on a philadelphia country road, investigators and citizens continue to work to identify the child and the person responsible for his death.