One thing I find odd

[Tsarfan]

Why would anyone go through with DNA testing fully knowing that he was adopted?

The only logic for his submitting a DNA sample was that he believed his mother's story.  After the results came back, he was confronted with one of two possibilities:  his mother lied about being a Russian grand duchess or about being his biological mother.

I'm surprised he didn't argue his DNA sample got switched or that the tests were flawed.  That way he could have avoided the dilemma of choosing which lie to lay at his mother's door.

Oops . . . I forgot.  Those excuses to dodge the DNA findings were already taken by the Anna Anderson crowd.  Can't play the same card twice, you know.  So I guess a belated realization he was adopted was all he had available to him.

[LisaDavidson]

Why would anyone go through with DNA testing fully knowing that he was adopted?

The only logic for his submitting a DNA sample was that he believed his mother's story.  After the results came back, he was confronted with one of two possibilities:  his mother lied about being a Russian grand duchess or about being his biological mother.

I'm surprised he didn't argue his DNA sample got switched or that the tests were flawed.  That way he could have avoided the dilemma of choosing which lie to lay at his mother's door.

Oops . . . I forgot.  Those excuses to dodge the DNA findings were already taken by the Anna Anderson crowd.  Can't play the same card twice, you know.  So I guess a belated realization he was adopted was all he had available to him.

How right you are. still, I have always found survivor stories to be interesting all in themselves, as long as one does not take them too seriously and leave behind critical thinking.

[Robert_Hall]

A quick search on Oskari Tokoi [1873-1963] finds that he was speaker and head of the Senate of Finland from 1913 to 1917. Not Prime Minister. He also sided with the Reds in the Finnish civil war, moved to Russia, and evetually to the USA. He was not cleared of "treachery" until 1944. Apparently, he played all sides. Typical politician.
Does this make him so reliable in the survivor saga?

[Belochka]

A quick search on Oskari Tokoi [1873-1963] finds that he was speaker and head of the Senate of Finland from 1913 to 1917. Not Prime Minister. He also sided with the Reds in the Finnish civil war, moved to Russia, and evetually to the USA. He was not cleared of "treachery" until 1944. Apparently, he played all sides. Typical politician.
Does this make him so reliable in the survivor saga?

So this individual has stretched his talents it seems. How bizzare.

Margarita 

[helenazar]

Perhaps the son was embarassed? Just covering his disappointment by expressing after the fact that he was adopted.  OR was he so sure that his mother was correct that after finding out that his DNA didnt match it made him question his own birthright? Why would anyone go through with DNA testing fully knowing that he was adopted?

I have a suggestion for the son. Since his claim to be the son of Grand Duchess Tatiana seems to have fallen through, he can now try to claim that his late mum was Amelia Earhart - there is after all a strong resemblence between the two... But this time he has to make sure to avoid those pesky DNA tests!

[OTMA-fan]

A quick search on Oskari Tokoi [1873-1963] finds that he was speaker and head of the Senate of Finland from 1913 to 1917. Not Prime Minister. He also sided with the Reds in the Finnish civil war, moved to Russia, and evetually to the USA. He was not cleared of "treachery" until 1944. Apparently, he played all sides. Typical politician.
Does this make him so reliable in the survivor saga?

Dear Robert Hall,
According to  The Finnish Center at Saima Park at http://www.saima-park.org/admin/park/oskari_tokoi.htm
Oskari Tokoi
"His political involvement in Finland included

        Member of Finnish Parliament -- 1907 to 1918
        Speaker of Finnish Parliament -- 1913
        First Vice Speaker -- 1914
        Prime Minister of Finland -- 1917
        President of Finnish Federation of Labor -- 1910 to 1928"

After reading his impressive resume, do you still think Oskari Tokoi is the type of person who lies in his book?
I am still waiting for Lexi4's new posting.

[OTMA-fan]

Welcome, skirt! This place sure can be a lot of fun.  I hope you enjoy it here. 

It sounds to me like this man didn't want a once and for all negative result.  The DNA tests came out negative, then he mentions the question of whether he was actually adopted. This is something he would have known about beforehand if it were true, and so he wouldn't have asked for the DNA tests in the first place.  Therefore, it seems to me that it was simply a way of dealing with his disappointment and leaving the question open to whatever people want to believe.

There have been so many survivors that it goes into the realm of farce. 

Alexei had haemophilia.  He couldn't have survived.  The bodies of five people were found, and there have been hundreds of so called survivors.  So that tells you how much truth can be gleaned from these tall tales.

Have people claiming to be Trupp, Botkin or Demidova ever shown up? Now THAT would be interesting.  I might start a thread.

Rachel
xx

Dear Ra-Ra-Rasputin,
your logic lacks a fundamental point.
A)Alexei had haemophilia. 
B)He couldn't have survived. 

(A) is a fact.
(B) is your *interpretation*.

If there is a sentence between (A) and (B)
(C) Alexa was shot for multiple times.
I would say the (B) is a "logical conclusion" rather than "interpretation". 

However, (C) is not a historical "fact". It is an ambiguous accont supported by a man named Yurovsky, whose account contains multiple contradictions. 
Now, thanks to Lexi4's discovery, (C) is contradicted by the account of Prime Minister of Finland.
Therefore, (D) He could have survived.
(D) is not a fact, it's a my and Lexi4's "argument" which should be discussed in this forum.

[OTMA-fan]

Is there any real evidence of that train search actually occuring or is it just a rumor? Where did the details originate? I don't remember hearing it until I came to this board.

Dear Annie:
Good point. This is why history never stops fascinating us.
Why didn't we know this "Sisu" account? Because we were LAZY.
Remember, as to Alexei, there is no forensic or DNA evidence to support his death.
In fact, DNA evidence is consistent with his survival.
Not even a single DNA molecule was found from "commingled" bodies, which may support he was removed from the target of execution before that incident.

[skirt]

Alexei had haemophilia and was able to survive fourteen years though... IF he wasn't wounded during the attack is there a reason why he wouldnt survive any longer? I am not familiar with that disease enough to know survivor statistics. But after fourteen years it sounds plausible that he would be familiar enough with his body and his illness to be more cautious and aware of his symptoms to avoid activities that would cause him further harm- and perhaps different aids to help him through if he DID injure himself.  Was the boy dying prior to the massacre?
And (just for fun) how is it that Mr.Kendrick is privy to this information and access to these pictures of the alleged GD Tatiana claimant? These comparisons provide some of the best entertainment!! LETS SEE!!!

geez i dont get out much...lol

[OTMA-fan]

To clear up people's misunderstanding.
Haemophilia doesn't necessary mean early death.
For instance, Prince Leopold, Duke of Albany, lived till age of 32, and he had children.

[LisaDavidson]

Alexei had haemophilia and was able to survive fourteen years though... IF he wasn't wounded during the attack is there a reason why he wouldnt survive any longer? I am not familiar with that disease enough to know survivor statistics. But after fourteen years it sounds plausible that he would be familiar enough with his body and his illness to be more cautious and aware of his symptoms to avoid activities that would cause him further harm- and perhaps different aids to help him through if he DID injure himself.  Was the boy dying prior to the massacre?
And (just for fun) how is it that Mr.Kendrick is privy to this information and access to these pictures of the alleged GD Tatiana claimant? These comparisons provide some of the best entertainment!! LETS SEE!!!

geez i dont get out much...lol

So glad to contribute to your amusement. Some survivor stories are really interesting all on their own.

Years ago, I wanted to make sure that Nicholas II was not forgotten and that all members of the House tossed aside like so much refuse got Christian burials. As I continued my studies, I started encountering survivor stories, some of which I investigated. I had become increasingly troubled about the families of these survivors contacting Romanov descendants, all of whom are/were very nice people living private lives. I eventually became a "go to" person for survivor families and as a result heard alot of stories.

My investigations lead me to the Alexander Palace site in the early months of its existence and in the early years, it was just Bob and me working on the site. Bob has always wanted to restore the palace - I always wanted the burial of the Imperial Family - and we both don't want the family to be forgotten. (I covered this in detail at a presentation at the ERHJ conference last weekend).

At any rate, of course I have investigated the Heino Tammet-Romanov case and spoken at length to John Kendrick and shared with him the most interesting of my survivor stories. That's how he saw the photos.

[Annie]

Dear Annie:
Good point. This is why history never stops fascinating us.
Why didn't we know this "Sisu" account? Because we were LAZY.
Remember, as to Alexei, there is no forensic or DNA evidence to support his death.
In fact, DNA evidence is consistent with his survival.
Not even a single DNA molecule was found from "commingled" bodies, which may support he was removed from the target of execution before that incident.

I had heard of the trains story before. It was one of those things I had read and seen but couldn't put a name or a page number to, but I remembered it. It still doesn't mean it's true, or completely accurate, or not twisted by exaggeration over time.

After reading his impressive resume, do you still think Oskari Tokoi is the type of person who lies in his book?

Just because a person is a politician doesn't mean their word is of any more value than anyone else's. In fact, IMO, I regard a politician's word with LESS credibility, considering how they will lie or kiss anyone's butt or change sides in a heartbeat to get what they want.

Even though Alexei's body has not officially been found doesn't mean he survived.

[J_Kendrick]

Even though Alexei's body has not officially been found doesn't mean he survived.

Time to remind you... It doesn't mean he died, either.

.. and, again, as fond as you all are of the haemophilia story...

Alexei's popularly suspected diagnosis has never been confirmed by any form of medical laboratory testing.

[Tsarfan]

Alexei had haemophilia and was able to survive fourteen years though... IF he wasn't wounded during the attack is there a reason why he wouldnt survive any longer? I am not familiar with that disease enough to know survivor statistics. But after fourteen years it sounds plausible that he would be familiar enough with his body and his illness to be more cautious and aware of his symptoms to avoid activities that would cause him further harm . . . .

Alexei almost died in 1912 as the result of a minor stumble, which left him permanently lamed.  He had another crisis in Tobolsk that was precipitated by his riding a sled down a stairwell . . . hardly indicative of caution regarding his condition.  This episode left him too weak to travel when the decision was made to move the family to Ekaterinburg.  His inability to travel was the reason the family was separated for several weeks.  In the last couple of months before the massacre, he was bedridden most of the time.  Almost everyone who saw him in those weeks noted an extremely fragile state of health.

While hemophiliacs in that era could live into maturity, they did so only by a combination of extraordinary caution and luck.  Alexei could barely be kept alive by the best medical care of the era.  The notion that he was untouched by a hail of gunfire in a small room is hard to credit.  The notion that he was wounded and survived in chaotic conditions is ludicrous.

This desperate desire to believe that some member(s) of that family survived is really quite remarkable.  The extent to which people will reach to the outer limits of improbability to support bizarre "what if" scenarios is much more about the emotional needs of the believers than about the good of the victims.

Anna Anderson -- the only claimant who garnered any serious support -- was publically repudiated by Anastasia's closest surviving relatives.  She was courted by opportunists and charlatans throughout her life.  She lived a half-crazed old age amid filth and stray cats.

Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna -- who died in poverty over a hair salon in Toronto -- once said that she never let herself cry, because were she once to start she would never be able to stop.

Why is it so very, very important to grasp at straws to convince oneself that any of the imperial family survived?  What good does it do them or their memory?  What good does it do you?

[Ra-Ra-Rasputin]

Thank you, Tsarfan! I agree 100%.

OTMA-fan, you are right- Alexei not surviving is not a historical fact.  I didn't say it was. 

However, if we are thinking logically, and not with our 'conspiracy theory' hats on, we have to admit to ourselves that the likelihood of Alexei surviving is slim to none.

Facts:
1. Alexei had haemophilia.  I don't believe a word of Mr Kendrick's little theory that Alexei didn't have haemophilia.
2. Alexei nearly died from the bleeding stemming from small bumps several times.

Things we cannot be 100% sure of because we weren't there, but can be pretty certain about due to what evidence we have:
1. Alexei was in the basement of the Ipatiev house during the shooting.
2. Alexei got shot several times, including at least once through the head.

Therefore, using these four pieces of information, two true, two most likely to be true, we can conclude BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT that Alexei would not have survived the execution.  If banging his knee caused him to nearly die, I really fail to see how he could have been shot and somehow managed to magically pull through, especially with the medical assistance available back in 1918.

You people, I am convinced, live with your heads in the clouds. Your constant attempts to deny the deaths of the IF fly completely in the face of pretty much all the evidence available to us.

Rachel
xx