Odd bug? Previous residences AFTER a death.

LegacyUser

Justin Masters said: I have a distant cousin that died in 2003, and a record I came across shows a number of residences AFTER he died. (Neat feat, if he pulled it off!) But was just wondering WHY this is showing previous residences AFTER he died.

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619...

LegacyUser

Gordon Collett said: Part of investigative research of any type, whether scientific, forensic, legal, or genealogical is evaluating your sources.

On a scale of 1 to 10 with a notarized birth certificate obtained two days after a child's birth being a 9.5 and a work of total fiction being a 0, the "United States Public Records, 1970-2009" database rates at about 0.5.

This is pretty much the same database that you can find all over the internet from ads such as "Who Your Neighbors Really Are! Find Out Today!". The description for it reads "This collection is an index of names, birth dates, addresses, phone numbers, and possible relatives of people who reside in the United States between 1970 and 2009, although there are a few records outside this range. These records were generated from telephone directories, property tax assessments, credit applications, and other records available to the public."
(See: https://www.familysearch.org/search/c... )

I view this database as a way to get possible hints about where living or recently deceased people might have lived and who they could be related to as a starting point to find real information. But I would never trust anything it says.

In the case of this record, you could theorize that for some reason someone left your cousin in the phone book for a few years. I have heard of widows who keep their deceased husbands in the phone book because their friends know who they are and they don't want their enemies to know they are living alone.

LegacyUser

Justin Masters said: Very good points Gordon! Every one of them.

Thank you.

Thankfully I had already verified all the other stuff attributed to him. He was a very interesting and fun fellow to meet! I somehow fit his contact info and was on the last few days of a 9 week trip around the US.

I called his number up, and a woman answered the phone. I explained who I was, and was trying to find out more about him, as I had heard he had info about the family of a common ancestor (great - great - grandmother). And I must have talked about him in the past tense or third person a bit too much... She says, "Well, do you want to talk to him?" I stammered a bit and blurted out, "He's alive??? "

She laughs, and says, "Oh my heavens, very much so!"

He was a fun character!
(second time on that trip that happened to me, and both people were INCREDIBLE people to meet! I could have listened to the first one for years (matter of fact, I tracked her down from a photo of my grandfather in college from the 1920's, and I would have been THRILLED to have taken her home as my grandmother! JOY of life just oozed from every pore of her body.

LegacyUser

Amy Archibald said: Public Records index contains directory listings. My grandmother kept my grandfather's name on the phone account. He died in 1990 and she died in 2012. My grandfather shows in this Public Records listing in FamilySearch through 2012.

Description of that index:

"This collection is an index of names, birth dates, addresses, phone numbers, and possible relatives of people who resided in the United States between 1970 and 2009. Not everyone who lived in the United States during this time will appear in the index. These records were generated from telephone directories, property tax assessments, credit applications, and other records available to the public. Birth information may be included for those residents born primarily between 1900 and 1990. These records have been gathered from multiple sources. The original sources are not available."

LegacyUser

Justin Masters said: Thank you Amy!

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: I've seen a similar problem with the County and City directories, where a deceased person is indexed and shows up with respect tot he wife's name.

LegacyUser

Brian Jensen said: Justin,
I've created a ticket to address the display issues with the Previous Residence facts.
Thanks,

LegacyUser

Justin Masters said: Thanks Brian. Given what was said by others, perhaps his name may have continued to be published. He was not married, so it wouldn't have been a wife, nor any children. He had a caretaker, but I'm not sure if she would have continued to use his published name.

So... I don't know if there's anything to fix... but I appreciate the notice.

LegacyUser

Amy Archibald said: Thanks! I run into the HTTP version of the display error mostly in records from the mid 2000s. Records before 2000 seem to display correctly.