One thing I find odd

[Romanov_fan]

Yes, there is no doubt in my mind that Anna Anderson believed in who she was, or as the truth was, was not. All the evidence points to the fact it wasn't just a scam for her. She believed in herself, and in her claim. Thus, she seemed more convincing, and people believed her more than they might have had she had doubts in her mind. It was easy to believe someone survived if you wanted, and it was also easy to be greedy. But if I was someone who had known Anastasia, as she was, the real one, and then saw Anna Anderson, I would prefer to believe that Anastasia was dead, and in peace. It would have just seemed more fitting and appropriate, rather than thinking of all she had had to deal with if she really was AA, and her current state.

I agree.  After all they had suffered together as a family,  i feel they died and are in heaven as a family. That was one blessing in all that ugliness was that they did not have to be separated. No matter where their bodies are now.

I hate to be redundant, but the this person is right about the above. They may have died a tragic and cruel death, but they live  on, both in heaven and in our memories. It's rather better than the whole survivor concept.

[J_Kendrick]

So then if we accept the results of the Russian forensic scientists, are we not discrediting the work of the Americans/Brittish? It seems to me, either way a group of scientists get descredited. What if you have no personal bias and are just looking for the facts?

Dear Lexi:

There are two very important questions here that Margarita and her fellow members of SEARCH clearly have no intention of answering.

First.. How much longer will SEARCH continue to keep chasing shadows before they finally give in and admit to the possibility that there are no more Romanov bones to be found in Pig's meadow?

.. and...

Second... as you have asked... Why does it now appear from the content of their website that SEARCH is now supporting the stated Russian position that GD Marie is the missing daughter... and in so doing... are they not also now discrediting the stated position of the American forensic team that the missing daughter is Anastasia?

SEARCH and its members clearly have no intention of ever answering that first question.  The members of SEARCH will never be able to bring themselves to accept the very obvious possibility that their own continued failure to find any more evidence of human remains in Pig's Meadow -- even with their use of the most modern of high-tech search equipment -- is actually proof that the two missing Romanovs were, in fact, NOT killed and buried in Koptyaki.

As to your question to Margarita about SEARCH's now apparent change of direction -- clearly turning away from the American forensic team's stated position that Anastasia is the missing daughter and now obviously leaning towards the Russian forensic team's continued insistence that the missing daughter is Marie -- as is evidenced in the wording of their website... 
 
You will have noticed that your repeated questioning has still not received a straight answer... but... There may be a very simple explanation for SEARCH's apparent change in direction on the suspected identity of the missing daughter.

Remember back to early 1998, when the US team of renowned forensic professors Dr. Anthony Falsetti and Dr. Diane France had both flown to Ekaterinburg to assist in the search efforts that were planned for that year...

Drs. Falsetti and France had both publicly expressed their shock and disbelief when they were confronted by the Russian authorities who insisted that they must first sign an agreement they would be looking for the remains of Grand Duchess Marie... before the search would be allowed to proceed.  You may well recall that Drs. Falsetti and France had both then refused to sign the agreement that was being required by their Russian hosts and promptly flew home in disgust after only three days.

So... If the Russian authorities are continuing to maintain that same position as they had done eight years ago... that the searchers must first sign an agreement they will be looking for the remains of GD Marie before they will be allowed to proceed...

If the confrontation experienced by the US forensics experts Drs. Falsetti and France eight years ago is any indication, then it can be safely concluded that SEARCH probably has no choice.  They must fall in line with the stated position of the Russian authorities that the missing daughter is Marie... or they will not be allowed to return.

jk

[Bev]

Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.  That SEARCH hasn't found anything as of today, doesn't mean they won't find something tommorow, or a year from now or even a decade from now. It's a silly assumption that because they haven't found bodies that is proof that they escaped.  It's only proof that they haven't found any bodies. 

It couldn't possibly make a difference in whose bones they're searching for, the methodology would be exactly the same.  All the circumstantial, physical and eyewitness evidence confirms that all members of this family were murdered in July of 1918.

[Lemur]

Very true bev. People have been convicted of murder in cases where the victim's body was never found.

[lexi4]

So then if we accept the results of the Russian forensic scientists, are we not discrediting the work of the Americans/Brittish? It seems to me, either way a group of scientists get descredited. What if you have no personal bias and are just looking for the facts?

Dear Lexi:

There are two very important questions here that Margarita and her fellow members of SEARCH clearly have no intention of answering.

First.. How much longer will SEARCH continue to keep chasing shadows before they finally give in and admit to the possibility that there are no more Romanov bones to be found in Pig's meadow?

.. and...

Second... as you have asked... Why does it now appear from the content of their website that SEARCH is now supporting the stated Russian position that GD Marie is the missing daughter... and in so doing... are they not also now discrediting the stated position of the American forensic team that the missing daughter is Anastasia?

SEARCH and its members clearly have no intention of ever answering that first question.  The members of SEARCH will never be able to bring themselves to accept the very obvious possibility that their own continued failure to find any more evidence of human remains in Pig's Meadow -- even with their use of the most modern of high-tech search equipment -- is actually proof that the two missing Romanovs were, in fact, NOT killed and buried in Koptyaki.

As to your question to Margarita about SEARCH's now apparent change of direction -- clearly turning away from the American forensic team's stated position that Anastasia is the missing daughter and now obviously leaning towards the Russian forensic team's continued insistence that the missing daughter is Marie -- as is evidenced in the wording of their website... 
 
You will have noticed that your repeated questioning has still not received a straight answer... but... There may be a very simple explanation for SEARCH's apparent change in direction on the suspected identity of the missing daughter.

Remember back to early 1998, when the US team of renowned forensic professors Dr. Anthony Falsetti and Dr. Diane France had both flown to Ekaterinburg to assist in the search efforts that were planned for that year...

Drs. Falsetti and France had both publicly expressed their shock and disbelief when they were confronted by the Russian authorities who insisted that they must first sign an agreement they would be looking for the remains of Grand Duchess Marie... before the search would be allowed to proceed.  You may well recall that Drs. Falsetti and France had both then refused to sign the agreement that was being required by their Russian hosts and promptly flew home in disgust after only three days.

So... If the Russian authorities are continuing to maintain that same position as they had done eight years ago... that the searchers must first sign an agreement they will be looking for the remains of GD Marie before they will be allowed to proceed...

If the confrontation experienced by the US forensics experts Drs. Falsetti and France eight years ago is any indication, then it can be safely concluded that SEARCH probably has no choice.  They must fall in line with the stated position of the Russian authorities that the missing daughter is Marie... or they will not be allowed to return.

jk

Good to see you John. You keep things interesting around here.

This is black and white to me. Either you descredit the Americans or you descredit the Russians. There is no middle ground here.

My next question, and I hope I will get an answer, is did the members of SEARCH have to sign the same type of document that Falesitti and France were expected to sign?

[J_Kendrick]

Very true bev. People have been convicted of murder in cases where the victim's body was never found.

In cases as politically and historically important as this one, you can never afford to make any assumptions at all about the victim's true fate... without first finding and positively identifying that same victim's human remains.

Let's put it in terms that you can understand... using the most current example

It had recently been reported that Osama Bin Laden had died of typhoid... but... Before that same story can be said to be true, Osama Bin Laden's mortal remains must first be recovered and positively identified. 

Until that same proof of his physical remains has been obtained and positively identified, the claims of Bin Laden's death must be assumed to be false.  There is too much at stake to do otherwise.

The same is true of the missing Romanovs.

jk

[Belochka]

There are two very important questions here that Margarita and her fellow members of SEARCH clearly have no intention of answering.

First.. How much longer will SEARCH continue to keep chasing shadows before they finally give in and admit to the possibility that there are no more Romanov bones to be found in Pig's meadow?

John, when you posed your questions in the manner you have, do not expect a reply.

Second... as you have asked... Why does it now appear from the content of their website that SEARCH is now supporting the stated Russian position that GD Marie is the missing daughter... and in so doing... are they not also now discrediting the stated position of the American forensic team that the missing daughter is Anastasia?

jk

Your presumption is incorrect. SEARCH is open to finding the skeletal remains of one Grand Duchess AND Tsarevich Alexei.

Please note the following statement on the SEARCH website:

"Our goal is to find the remains of Tsarevich Alexis and one of his sisters so that the Romanov Imperial Family can rest in peace, together, and close this sad chapter in Russia's history."

Margarita

http://www.searchfoundationinc.org/ThirdSearch1.html

[J_Kendrick]

There are two very important questions here that Margarita and her fellow members of SEARCH clearly have no intention of answering.

First.. 

John, when you posed your questions in the manner you have, do not expect a reply.

Why not?  Is it because, as a member of SEARCH, you just don't have an answer?  Or is it because, as a member of SEARCH, you simply don't want to answer?

Eighty-eight years of searching for those same two missing Romanovs since 1918 have been completely unsuccessful.  The last three rounds of digging by SEARCH in the past eight years -- now aided with the technology of ground penetrating radar --  in fact, have produced nothing more than a bullet or two and a handful of topaz beads.
 
The question is clear enough: How much longer will SEARCH continue to keep chasing shadows before they finally give in and admit to the possibility that there are no more Romanov bones to be found in Pig's Meadow?

So do tell us all, please...

Why should I not expect a reply to what is, in fact, a perfectly valid question?

jk

[Ra-Ra-Rasputin]

Mr Kendrick, you state that the lack of any findings to this date constitutes a proof that the two missing Romanovs were not killed and buried in the Koptiyaki forest.

What kind of logic is this? Just because nothing conclusive is yet to be found, we cannot say that therefore the two missing children were not killed.  That's absurd.  Until you can prove definitively that the two missing children were not killed and buried where Yurovsky said, you cannot start throwing around such statements as you have done on this thread.  Where is your proof that they weren't, besides an absence of any skeletal remains? The vast majority of contemporary evidence says that all of the Romanovs were killed in that room.  Nothing that is actually verifiable as the truth has ever been unearthed that has given the details of an escape/removal of the two children.  Therefore you have nothing to go on here to support your theory bar the fact that no remains have been found.  This means nothing- many a murderer has been convicted because of overwhelming circumstantial evidence, despite the lack of a body.  I will specifically site the case of the English child murderers Myra Hindley and Ian Brady. They killed several children; we know their identities and their parents have no doubt that they were murdered.  However, there are several bodies that have yet to be found, despite intense searching in an area not dissimilar to the Koptyaki forest.  Do we doubt the deaths of these children because no remains have been found? No.  So why should we treat the Romanov case any differently, I ask you? Is it simply because you WANT to believe that Alexei and a GD escaped to support your own theories? I think that's more the issue here, isn't it?
 
I find it difficult to take your comments re: the missing children seriously. Firstly, because they show a complete lack of logic and a clear bias agains the work of the SEARCH foundation, and secondly, because your own belief that Alexei survived the execution and lived on well into the twentieth century, based on the ridiculous assumption that Alexei didn't have haemophilia after all, despite the family history of haemophilia, is clearly colouring your desire to push the theory that one GD and Alexei somehow magically escaped.  Great application of science there, might I add.

Keep up the good work, Margarita.

Rachel
xx

Rachel
xx

[Bev]

Well, first of all, I didn't say that we should take anyone's word as proof of anything.  I said that all of the evidence would constitute proof and I would add, that evidence would certainly convict Yurovsky in a court of law - beyond a reasonable doubt. The eyewitness, physical and circumstantial evidence is such that no other logical conclusion could be drawn.  An historian would add to that anecdotal evidence and the proof is overwhelming.

"Eighty eight years of searching for those same two missing Romanovs since 1918 have been completely unsuccessful" - a rather ironic statement from someone who claims to have found one of the "missing Romanovs."

[J_Kendrick]

Nothing that is actually verifiable as the truth has ever been unearthed that has given the details of an escape/removal of the two children.

Nothing that is actually verifiable as the truth has ever been unearthed that can prove the suspected murder of those missing Romanov teenagers at Ipatiev.

No Bones.  No Proof.

Without those bones, all you have is popular suspicion... and nothing more.

If you did have proof of those two missing teenagers' murders, then 'SEARCH' would NOT exist.

jk

[Ra-Ra-Rasputin]

The very fact that SEARCH does exist shows that there are a lot of people who believe in the murders enough to spend a hell of a lot of money, time and career respectability to look for bodies that may or may not exist.  Right?

Rachel
xx

[Romanov_fan]

Can't we go back to talking about AA? I have always thought that it is odd that of all the imposters, she became the most famous, most believed in when it was rather apparent that she wasn't who she said she was. It was she who created the myth that there were more Anastasia imposters than any others, even though this wasn't true. AA was rather in her own category...

[lexi4]

Well, first of all, I didn't say that we should take anyone's word as proof of anything.  I said that all of the evidence would constitute proof and I would add, that evidence would certainly convict Yurovsky in a court of law - beyond a reasonable doubt. The eyewitness, physical and circumstantial evidence is such that no other logical conclusion could be drawn.  An historian would add to that anecdotal evidence and the proof is overwhelming.

"Eighty eight years of searching for those same two missing Romanovs since 1918 have been completely unsuccessful" - a rather ironic statement from someone who claims to have found one of the "missing Romanovs."

Bev brings up an interesting thought. Would there be enough evidence (using American jurisprudence) to convict Yourosky. Maybe we could examine what evidence there is and see for ourselves, or would that be another thread?

[Annie]

The body of Michael Romanov was aslo never found but no one doubts he died as the Bolsheviks described. Could it be the only reason people still deny the murders of Anastasia and Alexei is because they were the ones who had the most interesting claimaints, and people want to believe they got away? If not, why does no one question the death of Michael due to a lack of a body?