Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - sparrow

Pages: [1] 2

leads to answers


Posts: 88
 Re: DNA RESOURCEs: Romanov-related scientific pape
« Reply #275 on: Jul 9th, 2005, 9:42am »  Quote  Modify  

The following is the begining of an E-mail from Dr. Ginther about his testing of DNA.  Follow the link for the rest of his E-mail:

on Jul 9th, 2005, 9:23am, CuriousOne wrote:July 6, 2005

Dear J.A. Hubert,

I realize from going through my files that there is a large amount of "Romanoff" material there.  In addition, I have copies of lab notebooks that have details of the work (and that I have not been able to find yet.)  Since your questions pertained mostly to the Anna Anderson slide, I will send you the information that surrounds that part of the data.  I do have some caveats.  This work was done over 10 years ago, and so many details are vague to me.  To be completely honest, I had forgotten about some of the experiments and only had my memory jogged by the documents in my files.  In addition, this work was done when DNA forensics was experimental in the truest sense of the word. Of the workers active in mtDNA identification at the time, I would generally believe the work of Mark Stoneking (Penn State), Mark Wilson  (FBI),, Mitch Holland (US Army), Peter Gill and Kevin Sullivan  (Forensic Sci. Service, UK), Also note, the Anderson sequence often referred to is the standard sequence used for most mtDNA comparisons,  It was the first mtDNA sequence done, and Anderson refers to the scientist who led that work, and has nothing to do with Anna Anderson.  So here is the material from my two folders that relates to Anna Anderson:
(See next post)

Good morning,  a question concerning a reference to the hair sample, was that hair sample not found in a box of books put up for auction and then claimed to be AA hair.   Also Dna testing in the eighties is not and I stress not the Dna testing in the year 2000.  In the early days of Dna testing (look it up) had so many flaws and gliches that many labs were shut down for contaminated evidence, including FBI labs.  Many workers did not understand the importance of chain of evidence and therefore did not respect the necessity of trasporting the evidence in the manner of today.  And even today Dna testing is not perfect, and will not stand alone.  It must have collaborating evidence to support it's findings.   Identical twins have the same dna and so can triplits.    There is room for a considerable amound of doubt here and one should not base the evidence solely on a piece of intestestine lost for three months and a hair found in a box of books from Auction.   sparrow

Hello   I have enjoyed reading this thread very much. I really wonder thought when discussions include words like duh"I would just like to enjoy the facts without the rudeness that seemst to run rampant in these threads conserning a old woman.   a good debate is always the greatest sign of intellegence.  we only resort to anger when we can not back our facts.  i enjoy real anastasia comments and questions.  sparrow

The Myth and Legends of Survivors / Re: DNA Evidence
« on: March 28, 2005, 11:21:30 AM »
The actual sourse used to determine AA idenity.  Hair from a box of books, heck i could be.   Many of those same "Best" labs had to be shut down for the shoddy work being done  for exp.   FBIThe IG probe will be completed in the next few months. Fine ordered the audit after former FBI lab technician Jacquelyn Blake admitted she failed to follow required scientific procedures while analyzing 103 DNA samples during the last few years. Her failures may affect the civil-rights trial of five New Jersey police officers accused of killing a prisoner. The officers are challenging Blake's analysis of blood collected. She has resigned.  

We have learned, mistakes are made.  I call on those who do believe, to do another dna test   I am  sure Althea  would still have something of AA to use   like a real sample of hair, not one found in a box of books.  

Peter Neufeld, director of the Innocence Project, which to date has worked to exonerate 127 wrongfully convicted inmates through DNA testing of evidence, says Blake's errors indicate more serious problems. "The FBI peer-review system never caught the Blake errors," he says. "That tells us that the system is bogus and at least ineffective."

The Myth and Legends of Survivors / Re: DNA Evidence
« on: March 27, 2005, 03:10:36 PM »
Just having a look at all the major dna mix ups in the early days of dna.  The types of tests, the calculations, the lab policies, etc and i say the dna test is a bunch of baloney.  Crime labs can be flawed, especially with motive, like name and power, and maybe more,  just go to dna flaws and you will see for yourself the many things that have gone wrong.  add in the hokey pokey stuff of AA samples and you end up with a mess.   i just do not believe it and i am ready to add my name to the list of those who will go about chalanging the findings at some point.  the balance is not there, too many discrepancies.  i just dont buy the dna not after searching for three days all the mistakes being made, even now.  

Let us look at the Certified experts opinion on the ear, please.  combined with several other pieces of very important evidence suggests something as well, doesnt it?To me, it speaks louder than a very distorted photo and lack of true evidence.

 i know olga did not get funds from this, i refer specifically to the funds in question when it comes to money that was supposedly in trust somewhere.  maybe not for her, but definately for someone, i would not slander her by suggesting it was funds for her, but the money issue is real  even if we choose to discount the amount.  and later on in olga's book she was pretty sincere in  regards to AA then huh?  about what she had thought or done?

i would say that if Olga based her sole denial on the finger incident then we have to stop this whole discussion here and now.  Afterall, i mean really! what is the point of going on, if i can be discredited as who i am based only on some one elses recollections of what happened to me.  for goodness sakes, i do not for a moment believe she based her denial on this, it was about the money,  we all get that.  at least i hope so.  this is much bigger than any of us could imagine, it involved royalty.  those types of people run a different type of race, and we can not even get tickets to watch.  so we need to look hard at the evidence and then we need to pool our resourses and retest the dna evidence.   I am willing.......lets prove her to be Anastasia and give them a fight for justice.   sparrow

The Myth and Legends of Survivors / Re: AA and the Russian Language
« on: March 07, 2005, 04:16:04 PM »
Hi this has been the my favorite thread in the whole theme. I was thrilled with the court stuff and even more excited to have a point in fact laid out there as concrete evidence.  So thank you Penny, it was worth coming on today just for that.  As for the idea that the shape of eyebrows never change, ( for the person who commented on the shape of eye brows)have you been outside lately to see other people? this shape can change daily for those who own tweasers.  yes, i watched it change in the same evening for my daughter.   but lol.  i really really loved the stuff on the lanuage issue.   sparrow

I have just reviewed that thread. it was very intersting indeed.  I thank everyone for their information it helps to have a variety of ideas on the subject.  i think had FS had a Baby it would have been disclosed during the trials to validate that AA was FS in favor of the FS supporters.  Because it was not, i believe it to be a sore spot in the side of the FS supporters.  What Motive would the information about the child have been a positive benifit to AA?   When i tell you of myself, i might say for instance i have four children, and i am so and so.  etc.  and this would help you to know me better.  Was AA helping us to understand what had happened since she left Ipatiev?  as best as she could, including the issue of a out of wedlock child.  that is very vulnerable.   She was very open with this issue, even to the point of defending someone she knew to be involved with the murders.  i dont know, but i sure do love to come when i can to read all of the ideas and theories, especially when they remain civil.  I have found it to be a wonderful place to hear both sides of the issue.  I wish only one thing, i wish i knew the whole truth, i hate unfinished business.  lol  :P :o :o

Hi, i just wanted to mention the Baby.  1919 AA had A baby and said so,  in 1919 FS did not.   It would have been brought up somewhere.  I find this a very important discrepancy.  it takes forty weeks to have a child and in that time the body grows.  A baby born to FS would have been recorded, somewhere.  AA admitted to having a child in 1919 is that not relevent here.  i think so.  

I read these forum comments daily.  I would like to understand why people choose to pick and choose the facts, as they stand.  I will, just for the sake of some point of some very important descrepancies.   One,1919 AA had a baby, one boy, she gave up,  In bucharest.  FS lived with Doris in 1919 and was never pregnant.  By her families own admissions.    Between 1916-1920 FS had been in/out six times, of the asylums.   The only one to ever claim AA was FS, was, Doris.  No other family/friends came forward to say she was FS  Not from that time, nor forward into AA s life.    No matter how many times AA"s was compared to Anastasia's EAR  the result was always the same. in her favor.   why was Fs Not once compared( ear analysis}. The result would not have Played out in the Favor of FS.  The Information AA gave concerning the cellar was far too accurate, some claimed she learned it from the Sokolov Reports.  They were not made public until 1936.  AA spoke fluent english, by their own admissions{the family},FS did not speak the languages that AA spoke in 1920. Nor play the Piano, nor know the names of flowers in Russian.   FS was not ever diagnosed with TB during her visits to the asylums.  AA was.  AA and FS had completely different characteristics.  Both in Personality and in physical appearances.   AA was considered and exact match, in height, hair color, eye color, foot deformation.  Gertrude  said about FS "no distinushing bodily marks.  IN particular, no scars, moles, orf foot deformation.  these are iportant bodily marks.  AA  had incredible fine soft hands. destintive personality, scarred by many lacerations.   AA was recognised by some, on her distinctive blue eyes alone.   FS"s own family could not even tell the color of her eyes.    i have been told that my penmanship is terrible, so if you can bear to read this please just concentrate on the questions.  Quote"whoever she is, she is no Polish Peasant, she is a lady of good society and it not true that she cannot speak Russian" Princess NIna of Russia.  FS spoke no Russian.   AA Was register by the Berlin Police,as the "die unbedannte Russin" The unknown Russian Woman.  Nurses documented her speaking Russian "like a Native" at the same time FS was Not able to speak it.    well? one last point, please,  i would care very much to discuss these points in the most curteous manner,  thank you.        sparrow

This theory on sommersby and Anna, together, make for one crazy lady.  Or so  this theory would have us believe.  Does not say much for the doctors and nurses in the Institution she visited for two years.  I suppose no-one there had the training to spot this type of mental illness.  Or the ability to treat it.  It was just called depression then, i suppose.   Here is another theory that could cause a problem.  A severe blow to the head, watching others, especially those you love,  murdered, imprisonment with guards who wanted to use you, and having to reinvent yourself to not be a GD.  This  could also cause one to be crazy. But when admitted they did not refer to her as crazy, depressed, afraid, terrified of the Russian, yes.  But not crazy. Sommersby, at first, wanted what looked like a better life.  A woman who needed him, a home, and food in an empty belly.  this all made sense to him after the hardship of the civil war.    what did Anna endure.  Years and years of hatred, death threats, and a court case that would not admit her back into the world she had once known.  not denied, not accepted.  limbo.   why not re reinvent the self then?  "i fear i have lived too long" this is how she felt at the end.  

inventing herself to be someone before she even knew who it was to be?  evolving? perhapts,  but i doubt it

 " a liar must have a better memory"  this is to say that we often tell lies.  speaking even from experience.  but we often forget the lies we have told and then the following lies do not add up.  our lies become apparent.  we can not keep up.  the truth might vary somewhat but generally remains mostly the same.    lies do not.     did the supporters of her believe her, just for the sake of not looking bad?   i am rereading all the material i have access to just to get a clearer picture of that,  then i will look in to the issue of the sommersby mental illness to see what happens even during fever etc. she was coherant even if she was depressed in Dalldorf.  just for the record i believe her.

Pages: [1] 2