AA/FS Photo Comparison - Similarities: What is Wrong With AA Being FS?

[helenazar]

The mtDNA of AA matched FS relatives, but with a slight variance, which means it was less than conclusive. the report was that it was PROBABLE she was related, but not for sure.
Don't forget also, that the mtDNA showed without QUESTION AA could not be related to Alexandra Feodrovna. (Im still waiting for anyone to show me the science that says otherwise...people claim it, but so far, no one has shown us one single reliable report otherwise.)

FA, you are correct, if AA's mtDNA showed a mismatch with the Victorian DNA then it is conclusive evidence that AA could not have been a Victorian descendant, i.e. Anastasia (unless they suspect conspiracy). But even if AA's mtDNA exactly matched Victorian DNA or FS's relatives, that would not conclusively prove that she was AN or FS. The fact that her result was inconclusive for FS's relative(I didn't know that, I thought it was conclusive) tells us that she probably wasn't FS. I think people are confusing two things here: the fact that you cannot prove someone's identity with DNA and the fact that you can disprove someone's identity with DNA. When people talk about DNA tests being more accurate now than 10 years ago, I think that they are actually getting the two things mixed up. Yes, to prove someone's identity they now have a higher criteria, but not to disprove it. So yes, they now use more stringent DNA matches (more strands have to match than before) in criminal cases, but this is when they are trying to prove someone committed some crime - trying to prove that this person was the criminal. In AA's case, it was just the opposite, they were trying to show whom she was not and that is a lot easier to do. You can get a false positive DNA match, although this is rare, but you can't get a false negative(as far as I know). If the DNA doesn't match then this person is not the person they claim to be. But if the DNA matches, then they still may not be whom they claim to be because you may get a false positive or you need a more stringent test. That's all. I don't know if this makes any sense, I may have confused people even more!  :-/

[helenazar]

Ok Jeremy, let me try posting them.

These are from the Nova episode:





 

[Elisabeth]

So in other words, they had a perfect match?

Helen, how reliable do you think this method of identification is? Didn't the Russians use a very similar method in attempting to match photos of the imperial family with the skulls found in the mass grave?

[Annie]

Thanks Helen and Jeremy. For me, pure looks tell the tale, but this is good to know. I remember seeing this on the NOVA episode Helen made, it was a match.

[jeremygaleaz]

So in other words, they had a perfect match?

Helen, how reliable do you think this method of identification is? Didn't the Russians use a very similar method in attempting to match photos of the imperial family with the skulls found in the mass grave?

From what I understand, the Russians did the best they could, but their technology wasn't as up to speed as that of the west. And, comparing photograph to photograph is a bit different than photograph to skull. (Helen, am I wrong about this?)

The AA picture was turned red and the FS picture green. (The FS picture was probably slightly angled by the computer too, as in the original FS photograph she is looking straight at the camera (and wearing earrings? at least she is in the retouched photo), while AA's head is tilted. Does anyone get the impression FS is squinting too? The FS picture is an outdoor photograph so the sun was probably in front of her, behind the photographer.The sun may also explain why the FS features aren't as detailed as some might like.)

But the distance between the two eyes, and the distance and shape of the mouth were found to be identical.

If AA was not FS, then maybe she was that "mysterious anonymous identical cousin with the same mtDNA that went missing at the same time!" Hey, Annie?    

edited to add: Cue the "Patty Duke Show" theme song!

"But they're cousins...identical cousins all the way...."

[helenazar]

... comparing photograph to photograph is a bit different than photograph to skull. (Helen, am I wrong about this?)

I am certainly not an expert of this, but I would think that comparing skulls and comparing points on facial features from photographs would be quite different. I personally think that the skull comparison was stretching it a bit (although I really don't know that much about that either), but that comparing actual faces is more reasonable. At the very least, if the distance between the features didn't match , it could be ruled out that AA was FS. In this case, they did match, so it couldn't be ruled out....
This, taken with the fact that the mtDNA matched and that one dissapeared around the same time the other appeared gives the theory that they are one and same person a whole lot of credibility.

... the original FS photograph she is looking straight at the camera (and wearing earrings? at least she is in the retouched photo)...

I looked at the original photo, at the retouched one and also at the sketch. Not sure about the retouched photo, but it seems that whoever did the sketch later (and he or she did not do a very good job of it!), had mistaken something in the background from the original photo for earrings. When you look closely at the original, it is quite obvious that FS is not wearing earrings (but at first glance it sort of looks like she is!)    

[AGRBear]

When it was mentioned that the book on Vasily Filatov showed proof of him being Alexei by this same method, I do believe it was many of the same people using it, now, who said this was a maniulation of photographs.  How is it different when the same method is used here to prove AA was FS?

AGRBear

[helenazar]

When it was mentioned that the book on Vasily Filatov showed proof of him being Alexei by this same method, I do believe it was many of the same people using it, now, who said this was a maniulation of photographs.  How is it different when the same method is used here to prove AA was FS?

AGRBear

Once again, as I mentioned above, these photos are not any way "proof", they are just another piece of evidence - a tool that can, along with other evidence confirm or rule something out.

If Vassily Filatov also showed that his mtDNA results matched a Romanov relative along with the photo comparison, then he would have a leg to stand on.

[Penny_Wilson]

When it was mentioned that the book on Vasily Filatov showed proof of him being Alexei by this same method, I do believe it was many of the same people using it, now, who said this was a maniulation of photographs.  How is it different when the same method is used here to prove AA was FS?

AGRBear

The answer to this question is self-evident:  Don't confuse the issue by expecting a fair hearing here for all the various pieces of evidence.

This lack of even-handedness is why I'm not in the mood these days to translate and add documents from the Hamburg trial transcript.  The way this forum is progressing, I think I am better served by saving the information for Greg's and my book -- we'll reach a bigger audience that way, too.  

[jeremygaleaz]

.


Not sure about the retouched photo, but it seems that whoever did the sketch later (and he or she did not do a very good job of it!), had mistaken something in the background from the original photo for earrings.  

My bad. I should have said sketch and not retouched photo

[helenazar]

The answer to this question is self-evident:  Don't confuse the issue by expecting a fair hearing here for all the various pieces of evidence.

Or confuse the issue by ignoring the existant physical evidence that is more compelling than any other evidence in this case ...  

[Annie]

If AA was not FS, then maybe she was that "mysterious anonymous identical cousin with the same mtDNA that went missing at the same time!" Hey, Annie?    

edited to add: Cue the "Patty Duke Show" theme song!

"But they're cousins...identical cousins all the way...."

EXACTLY what comes to mind every time this comes up!

I thought that about the show too, they were only first cousins on the father's side, they only shared one fourth the same gene pool so it's impossible to be identical. Even most siblings (other than twins) don't look as  much alike as FS and AA. So it's a WILD stretch to claim that she wasn't FS but a family member with the same DNA who just happened to look just like her?

But I still believe the reasons for doubting AA is FS return to the old 'maybe she's Anastasia' thing. Nobody cares, or would bother to dig around or spend money searching for some nameless lookalike cousin. What kind of story is that? So it will take quite a bit to convince me there still aren't those with such an agenda, and so far I have seen nothing to prove me wrong, only more to give me more confirming of my suspicions.

[jeremygaleaz]

Helen
(or anyone else with the technology)

Is there anyway you can work on the picture of AA by changing the color to the same shade of green as the FS picture as well as taking away all shadow from around AA's eyes and mouth? This would probably heighten the resemblence even more. The FS photo was taken at a distance, outside in the sun (which would explain the lack of shadow)  and the AA photo was taken close up, and indoors.

[Elisabeth]

Jeremy's right, there's the issue of the distance of the photographer from his subject, but also note that the heads are posed in slightly different positions.

[Penny_Wilson]

Helen
(or anyone else with the technology)

Is there anyway you can work on the picture of AA by changing the color to the same shade of green as the FS picture as well as taking away all shadow from around AA's eyes and mouth? This would probably heighten the resemblence even more. The FS photo was taken at a distance, outside in the sun (which would explain the lack of shadow)  and the AA photo was taken close up, and indoors.

So you want to doctor the image to "heighten the resemblence (sic)"?  Shady, shady, shady...