On March 18, 1964, nine-year-old Marise Ann Chiverella left her home in Hazleton, Pennsylvania, carrying a lunchbox for her teacher. She was walking to St. Joseph’s Parochial School, less than half a mile from her front door. It was the last time her family saw her alive.
That afternoon, her body was found in an abandoned coal mine more than two miles from her home. She had been raped and strangled. Her lunchboxes were found beside her body. Investigators collected biological evidence from her clothing that day, evidence that would sit untouched for decades.
Hazleton was a coal mining town in 1964, about 80 miles north of Philadelphia. It was a close-knit community of Slavic, Italian, and Irish immigrant families. Children walking to school alone was normal. Marise was a third-grade student and the older sister of Carmen, who would grow up carrying the memory of her loss for 58 years.
The Pennsylvania State Police took over the investigation immediately. It was a daylight abduction and murder of a child on her way to school. The crime stunned the community and raised questions about the safety everyone had taken for granted.
Investigators interviewed everyone who lived or worked near Marise’s walking route. They questioned drivers who passed through the area between 8:00 and 9:00 that morning. They tracked every person with a history of suspicion. Suspects came forward, one by one, and were eliminated. One had a solid alibi. Another had a different blood type. A third had no opportunity to commit the crime.
In 1964, forensic science could only determine blood type from biological evidence. It could not create a personal DNA profile or compare it against any national database. But the evidence was preserved according to standard procedure in Pennsylvania State Police archives.
The case never closed. Over 58 years, more than 230 Pennsylvania State Police members worked on it. Investigators compiled more than 4,000 pages of documents. Interview reports, investigation notes, suspect files, and test results accumulated over decades, but none of it produced a name.
As new technology emerged, the file was re-examined. In the 1970s, there was improved blood group analysis. In the 1980s, protein electrophoresis. In the 1990s and 2000s, DNA testing. Each new suspect was followed to the end. No one was dismissed without clear reason, and no one was added without basis.
In 2007, DNA technology had advanced enough that the Pennsylvania State Police lab could create a full personal DNA profile from the biological evidence collected from Marise’s clothing in 1964. That profile was uploaded to CODIS, the FBI’s national DNA database. There was no match.
Marise’s killer had never been convicted of a serious crime in the United States. His DNA was not in the system, neither during his life nor after his death. The police had a complete, clear, and accurate DNA profile of the killer, but no name to attach to it.
The investigation continued for another 15 years. Then, during the COVID-19 pandemic, an 18-year-old college student read about the case and emailed the Pennsylvania State Police offering to help. That student was Eric Schubert.
Schubert had been interested in genealogy since age 10. He had helped people find their biological parents. In 2020, he was a third-year history student at Elizabethtown College in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Stuck at home during the pandemic, he read about Marise Chiverella’s case.
“I just read how horrific and heinous the crime was,” he later said. “It moved me deeply, and I knew that if I had the opportunity, I definitely wanted to help.” He emailed the Pennsylvania State Police, offering his skills in genetic genealogy.
Trooper Petroski, who received the email, later described the decision to accept a college student volunteer. “Mr. Schubert emailed me a few years ago asking to work on our case,” he said. For the Pennsylvania State Police, it was somewhat outside the norm. The decision paid off.
Schubert worked with the DNA profile created from the evidence collected from Marise’s clothing. He uploaded the profile to public genealogy databases like GEDmatch and Family Tree DNA, searching for the killer’s biological relatives. The first result was a very distant relative, possibly a sixth cousin, whose DNA partially matched the killer but was not close enough to identify him directly.
From that distant starting point, Schubert began building a family tree. He searched birth records, marriage records, death certificates, census records, local newspaper archives, and scattered pieces of information in public archives. It was painstaking work.
“This was probably the hardest genealogy work I have ever done in my life,” Schubert said. He worked on the case for two years, from age 18 to age 20. Eventually, the family tree narrowed to a small group of suspects. And from that tree, one name emerged: James Paul Forte.
Forte was a 22-year-old bartender in Hazleton in 1964. He lived just six blocks from where Marise was last seen. He was a local, born and raised in the coal region of eastern Pennsylvania. His presence on the streets of Hazleton would not have drawn attention or suspicion.
Forte had previously been accused of a brutal sexual assault on a woman. That criminal history and pattern of sexual violence showed that the March 18, 1964, incident was not an isolated event but part of his behavior. He continued living in Hazleton after the murder, working as a bartender in the same community where the Chiverella family was grieving.
Forte had 16 years after killing Marise Chiverella. Sixteen years when no one knocked on his door with the right questions. He died in May 1980 at age 38, likely of a heart attack. That was 16 years after the murder and 42 years before a family tree built by an 18-year-old college student would bring his name to investigators.
In January 2022, the Pennsylvania State Police exhumed James Paul Forte’s body. Investigators collected samples from his remains and sent them to the lab. The goal was to compare the DNA with the profile created in 2007 from the evidence collected from Marise’s clothing.
On February 3, 2022, the results came back. The DNA from Forte’s exhumed remains was an exact match to the DNA collected from Marise Ann Chiverella’s clothing on March 18, 1964. The accuracy of the match exceeded any legal or scientific standard.
The Pennsylvania State Police described the match with a number. To put it in perspective, an estimated 117 billion people have lived on Earth. To find another match to Mr. Forte, you would have to search more than 4 million Earths. It was not a possibility. It was not reasonable doubt. It was conclusive certainty.
On February 10, 2022, the Pennsylvania State Police held a press conference in Hazleton. The room was filled with current and retired investigators from multiple generations, including the original lead investigator from 1964, who had lived long enough to hear the answer that his investigation could not find.
Also present were Marise’s four living siblings and their extended family. And Eric Schubert, now 20 years old, stood alongside police officers as a colleague, having done something none of them could do.
Lead investigator Corporal Mark Baron spoke to the media with a voice filled with emotion. “This is a very significant day for our agency,” he said. “Although it took almost 58 years to solve this case, I think it will give hope to victim families throughout the state and across the country. And that hope is that no matter how long it takes, as a law enforcement agency, we will never give up. Whether you’re living or deceased, you will be found.”
Carmen Marie Radtke, Marise’s younger sister, stood before the media and said, “We have many precious memories of Marise. At the same time, our family will always feel the void and pain of her absence. Our family now knows the identity of her killer. Justice has been served today.”
The Marise Chiverella case was solved not for a single reason, but because all the elements came together at the right time and in the right way. Investigators collected and preserved biological evidence properly in 1964. In 2007, when technology was advanced enough, a full DNA profile was created. For 15 years, a police force checked regularly without pause, never closing the case.
The 2019 Parabon sketches brought Marise’s story back to public attention, which inspired Eric Schubert to read about her and email for help. That email led to an answer that 58 years, 230 investigators, and 4,000 pages of documents could not find.
The case offers lessons for anyone in America today. If a loved one is a victim of an unsolved cold case, especially one where biological evidence was collected, contact the investigating agency and ask two specific questions. Are the biological evidence samples still preserved? And has the DNA profile been uploaded to GEDmatch or Family Tree DNA for genetic genealogy searching?
CODIS and genetic genealogy are two completely different methods. CODIS can only find a suspect if their DNA is already in the system due to a criminal record. Genetic genealogy can find a suspect through their relatives, even if the suspect was never convicted or died long ago. Marise’s case shows that cases CODIS could not solve in 15 years could be solved in 2 years using genetic genealogy, but only if the investigating agency knows about the method and uses it.
If you are interested in contributing to cold case solutions without being a police officer or forensic expert, consider registering your DNA voluntarily at dnasolves.com, a database created specifically to assist investigations. And if you have genealogy skills like Eric Schubert, know that law enforcement agencies are increasingly open to collaborating with volunteer experts. One email from Schubert changed the history of a 58-year-old case. The right skills in the next email could solve another.