Anna Anderson's claim to be Grand Duchess Anastasia

[Charlottesville]

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

I thought that the Helen Hayes speech when she played Empress Marie in 'Anastasia' - the 1956 film with Ingrid Bergman as Anderson- summed it up so well;

"I will not deny that there is a resemblance but there are certain things that cannot be taught - you are not my grand-daughter"

There was another brilliant comment but I'll have to dig out the DVD to find it.

Of course, thats only fiction but the sentiment is the same sentiment I have - lookalikes exist. And so do con-artists. Anyone could have told Anderson the things that convinced some of her testimonials.

But this dosen't expain why her opponents had to create lies to discredit her.

[princesslily]

It is a really interesting thread, but wasn't it Ana NOT Anna?

[juliamontague]

who do you mean?

[Charlottesville]

Originally Posted by princesslily

It is a really interesting thread, but wasn't it Ana NOT Anna?

No. It was Anna Anderson.

[Charlottesville]

I can assue you that Anna Anderson was no imposter. Not only did she have the same scars and memories of Anastasia, she was recognized by most of the people who knew Anastasia as being exactly who she was. That is, except by Olga Alexandrovna and Pierre Gilliard and others who met her. These two also initially recognized her as Anastasia, but then changed their strory, saying they knew instantly she was an imposter. Gilliard was one of the biggest liars of the century. Just read the court documents. He was exposed for lieing so many times it's not even funny. The identity of Franziska Schanzkowska is ridiculous. She was several inches taller than Anna Anderson, she wore a size shoe 3 sizes bigger, spoke perfect German, and was not even wounded in the factory explosion. The family of Franziska didn't even recognize Anderson as their sister. The DNA tests are not even valid today. Those methods are no longer even used.
1) 20-point STR method is now used instead of 6-point STR method, making the nuclearDNA tests obsolete.
2) mtDNA is no longer even used in court cases. It can be contaminated by simply toucing it or breathing on it.
3) Recent studies show that 40 of a random 1,000 people share the exact same mtDNA profile.
Anna Anderson was exactly who she claimed to be. There is absolutely no evidence against it, and taken with the fact that the body of Anastasia is not in the grave, I think our answer to the question of Anastasia's whereabouts are at Castle Seeon in the ashes that lie beneath the stone which says, 'Anastasia Manahan 1901-1984'.

[Charlottesville]

I'm amazed at how people say that there were things Anna Anderson knew that someone could have told her. That is a weak argument in my opinion, because some of the things she told people like Felix Dassel and Princess Xenia were things that no one outside of the Russian court could have know, especially a polish farm girl. Numerous royals and others would try and trip her up and catch her in a mistake, but they could not trip her up no matter how hard they tried. Lili Dehn recognized Mrs. Anderson as the Grand Duchess without reservation and Ms. Dehn and Anastasia had been especially close to each other. Anna Anderson was certainly not an imposter, and certainly not a Polish farm girl. Just read 'Anastasia: The Riddle of Anna Anderson' by Peter Kurth and you will understand.

[RussianHistoryBuff]

Anna Anderson's DNA testing was considered inconclusive after several facilities fought over their results. Although she did exhibit some charactoristics of Anastasia, she was found out to be a runaway from some factory job in Poland. Several different Historical Sociaties agree on this, and it would be better in my opinion to follow up on the DNA that was sent to the Uk. The website http://members.surfeu.fi/thaapanen/Articles/st12.html tells more about this theory.

[Charlottesville]

I am kind of confused. I've never heard of anyone fighting over their results, but I can tell you the Polish factory story is false.

If AA was not Anastasia, there is too much which cannot be explained. How did she manage to know about the play in Tobolsk where Anastasia dressed as a man and her skirt flew up if it wasn't even confirmed until much later by Sydney Gibbes. How did she know of the incident which occured between Empress Alexandra, Anja, Lili Dehn, where the little Anastasia was there if she was not Anastasia (Lili Dehn herself pointed this out). How did she know the exact place Alexandra wrote her initials in her room at Peterhof? How did she know Alexandra had the swastika on her car when it could only be confirmed with a magnifying glass?

These are just some examples of MANY. There are too many coincidences between AN and AA to be overlooked.

The Franziska Schanzkowska story rings very false from beginning to end. How did this investigator attempt to discover AA's identity in a matter of weeks while the Berlin police couldn't even do it after a serious effort of seven years?! Why did Getrude Schanzkowska add belts and buttons to those photographs in court? Why did Pierre Gilliard touch up Franziska's photographs in his book to look like AA? What are the chances AA would he gotten a scar on her foot in the triangular shape of a bayonet from an explosion in a grenade factory? Very low.

The results of the DNA tests can be explained in a few ways. Either the DNA was not her's, was tampered with, was simply misidentified, or we were all fed a lie by the scientists (which I consider very unlikely). The chain of custody would never stand up in court. This is a fact, which is probably why it was never submitted for judicial reviewing.

If AA was not AN, then why are so many documents being hidden from us? It makes no sense. The Danish Royal family still holds Ambassador Zahle's papers, and Grand Duke Andrew's papers are being kept from us as well. The writing is on the wall however. The results of the DNA tests are not what would have been given if DNA had been extracted directly from the body of Anna Anderson Manahan if her body was still in existance. I promise you that.

[Mapple]

I'd like to remind everyone that a group of leading forensic experts determined in the 1990s that Anastasia's remains were among the bones which had been found in Sverdlovskaya Oblast.

[Charlottesville]

Originally Posted by Mapple

I'd like to remind everyone that a group of leading forensic experts determined in the 1990s that Anastasia's remains were among the bones which had been found in Sverdlovskaya Oblast.

I'd like to remind you about the American and British team that determined her remains in fact missing. The body of no. 5 the Russians kept insisting was Anastasia was in fact 5'7. It couldn't be Anastasia. The Russians are not nearly as advanced as the US and UK teams either. They placed their assertion that AN was in the grave on photo comparisons with only a few photos which is controversial in itself, this with a skull which had to be placed together. The US/UK teams determined by roots in the teeth, vertebrae, etc.- things which are MUCH more reliable than those photo comparisons- that the bodies are ALL too old to be that of a girl who JUST turned 17. Are we to forget Anastasia was smaller than most girls her age? Anastasia is not in that grave. The Russians had an agenda. They didn't want the rumors of Anastasia's escape to be true.

[Charlottesville]

It's also important to note this 'leading group of forensic experts' who think Anastasia was in the grave also originally identified the pelvis of Anna Demidova as belonging to Nicholas II.

http://www.peterkurth.com/RUSSIAN%20...ICS%20TEAM.htm

[Ritka]

I believe those were the men who found the bones. The specialists were separate people.

[Charlottesville]

Originally Posted by Ritka

I believe those were the men who found the bones. The specialists were separate people.

No. I just read in "The Fate of the Romanovs" and it refers specifically to Abramov and his team. I'll find the page number later and post it.


Anyways, I found this on Kingandwilson.com posted by AGRbear. The chain of custody for the AA tissue would never be acceptable in any court.

"Timeline
Let's explore the timeline between the surgery of AA in Aug of 1979 to the delivery of the intestine sample to Dr. Gill on 29 June 1994.

20 Aug 1979 - AA was rushed to Martha Jefferson Hospital where Dr. Richard Shrum operated on her small intestine obstruction which prove to have turned gangrene. Massie tells us the details on p. 194-5 THE ROMANOVS, THE FINAL CHAPTER:

>>The procedure of sending the tissue to the pathology lab was sent 5 inches of intestines. This tissue was divided into five one-inch segments which were bathed in a issue preservative called formalin, sealed inside a block of paraffin wax one inch square and half an inch deep, and placed in a small blue and white box on a shelf filled with other similar boxes containing tissue specimens.<<

12 Feb 1984 - Anna Anderson Manahan died. Her body was cremated the same day.

July 1992 - Dr. William Maples stated that he believed Anastasia was the missing Grand Duchess and not Maria whom the Russians claimed was missing

22 Sept 1992 Syd Mandelaum writes to several major laboratories looking for genetic samples of AA's to test at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory or at Harvard Medical School because he was writing a book on DNA and wanted to add it's usage to forenic in regards to AA. The one letter went to Martha Jefferson Hospital where AA had surgery.

p. 195 Massie tells us the answer Mandelaum receive to his inquiry:

>>...Martha Jefferson Hospital, replied to Mandelbaun that "we have nothing here that could be useful to you."

[Charlottesville]

Klier and Mingay give us more information on this request p. 203
>>...At the time the hospital was in a chaotic administrative state due to a major refurbishment, and although officals conducted a cursory search of their files, they did not find any recoreds under either of those names. Hospital officals claim they did not intentionally mislead Mandelbaum. Indeen there was no tissue sample stored in the hospital under either name proposed by Mandelbaum.<< The names he had given were Anna Anderson or Mrs. Jack Manahan.

22 Nov 1992 Mary DeWitt, p. 196, >>a student of forensic pathology of the University of Texas<< asked the hospiital for some tissue because she'd like to stuy it for a paper. They reply from Penny Jenkins was: >>"No, I can't help you."<< Mary DeWitt did not give up. She contacted Lovell asking for his help. Lovel received a letter from John Manahan's cousin Fred Lowvel who granted Lovel authority to dispose of the tissue.

Dec 1992, two days after Mary DeWitt's first letter - Dr. Willi Korte conatacted Jenkins. Her story was different to Korte. She told him that they did have compartitive samples of AA.
p. 206 of Kleir and Mingay:
>>Korte's...phone calls galvanized the hospital's acting director of medical records, Penny Jenkins, to take a more detailed look at the hospital's patient database. She made a through search of the viles and the pathology departemtn's vaults and found that, indeed, a tissue sample from Anderson was held there, albeit under the name of Anatasia Manahan.<< This was found Dec 1992one month after his first phone call.

Dec. 1992 - Thomas Kline with the law firm Andrews and Kurth contacted Jenkins. Jenkins told him they had samples.

Sping 1993 Mary DeWitt's lawyer contacted Martha Jefferson Hospital, again....

The agreement between DeWitt and Lovel disintergrated and Lovel refused to be part of DeWitt's research. Evidently DeWitt's husband was an investigator but there is no mention if he had been hired by anyone or if he was acting on his own or if she was just doing this on her own.

Jan 1993 - Thomas Kline contacted Fred Manahan who referred him to Lovel.

16 April 1993- Kline wrote to Lovell formally asking for help in obtaining access to AA's tissue for DNA testing to be done by the Forensic Insitute in Munich.

18 March 1993 -Kline wrote Lovel again and explained what he thought of Korte and suggested Dr. Mary-Claire King [UC Berkeley] if he did not wish to use Munich with whom Dr. Gill was a part.

date? Lovel contacted Richard Schweitzer for advice.

Meanwhile, Penny Jenkins who had been contacted by these people and attorneys, started to ask the hospital attorneys what needed to done. The hospital attorneys dealt with Richard Schwitzer who is a lawyer and use to post here on this forum.

May to Sept 1993 -
(1) Agreement was made to use a litigator Matthey Murray.
(2) Richard Schweitzer approached Dr. Gill after he was told the Armed Forces Institue of Pathology in Maryland could not agree to the terms of the test of the DNA. And filed his wife's petition 30 Sept 1993 because of who she was and her contact with AA and being a citizen of Virgina which was required

1 Nov 1993 Circuit Court Judge Jay T. Swett dealt with this case


I will continue with this timeline as I have time.

So, what timeline do we have so far with just the discovery of the sample to the first court appearance: 20 Aug 1992 to 1 Nov. 1993 which is more than a year.

So, what timeline do we have so far with just the discovery of the sample to the first court appearance: 20 Aug 1992 to 1 Nov. 1993 which is more than a year.

p. 202 of Massie's THE ROMANOVS, THE FINAL CHAPTER:

1 Nov 1993 Circuit Court Judge Jay T. Swett dealt with this case
The following people became involved during this time:
(1) Richard Schweitzer wo was representing is wife's petition
(2) Matthew Murray, the attorney for Martha Jefferson Hospital
(3) attorney (not named) from the Richmond Times
(4) Lindsey Crawford from the law firm of Andrews and Kurth under the New York Corp. known as the Russian Nobility Association

Since Crawford had not filed a peition the judge, after hearing why Crawford had not, gave her three days to file.

4 Nov 1993- Crawford filed her petition
One can read in more detail a version of Crawford's claim on p. 205. The highlights were:
a) Marina Schweitzer's petition was not valid because she was not related to Anastasia Anderson
b) using the tissue sample to discover the true identity of Anastasia Manahan would be usedful and cannot be achieved in the manner requested by Schweitzer. p. 205 a quote: >>...the Russian Nobility Association heaped further calumny on Dr. Gill: his laboratory was said to represent "second-best scientific testing", and his samples were said to have been possibly "contaminated."<< Attached to these remarks about the possibly "contaminated" were affidavits from (1) Prince Alexis Scherbatow and (2) Dr. William Maples who praised Dr. King at UC Berkeley and her ability to preform DNA test.

The word "contaminated" was drawn into the petition by Crawford and not by Schweitzer who had requested Dr. Gill be the one to test the sample for DNA.

4 Nov 1993- Crawford filed her petition
One can read in more detail a version of Crawford's claim on p. 205. The highlights were:
a) Marina Schweitzer's petition was not valid because she was not related to Anastasia Anderson
b) using the tissue sample to discover the true identity of Anastasia Manahan would be usedful and cannot be achieved in the manner requested by Schweitzer. p. 205 a quote: >>...the Russian Nobility Association heaped further calumny on Dr. Gill: his laboratory was said to represent "second-best scientific testing", and his samples were said to have been possibly "contaminated."<< Attached to these remarks about the possibly "contaminated" were affidavits from (1) Prince Alexis Scherbatow and (2) Dr. William Maples who praised Dr. King at UC Berkeley and her ability to preform DNA test.

10 Nov 1993 - Ellen Kailing-Romanov, a German citizen, petitioned to intervene. She claimed to be the daughter of GD Anastasia

16 Nov 1993 - Richard Schweitzer told the court that he would not oppose tests by Dr. King at Berkeley p. 208 >>...he would only oppose testing exclusively by Dr. King. <<

Out of court the various sides talked.

7 Dec 1993 -
(1) Judge Swett allowed both the Russian Nobility Assoc., and Mrs. Kailing-Romanov to inervene in the suit.


(2) Dr. Mary-Clarie King wrote and notarized an affidavit comtradicting what Dr. Maples had said about Dr. Gill's competence.

Dr. King wrote: p. 210:
>>I have been working for the past seven months on the identification of the skeletal remains of the nine individuals believed to include Tsar Nicholas II and the members of his family," she said, "I have also received blood and tissue samples from descendants of Tsar Nicholas and his wife, Alexandra." <<

date? Dec 1993
Judge Swett told the three parties to p. 213:
>>..meet, confer, and resolve among themselves the questions of how and where the tissue should be tested. If the quantity of tissue was sufficient, he instructed that parallel tests be done by Dr. Gill and Dr. King.<<

10 Jan 1994
Place of the meeting between parties would take place in Charlottesville office of Page William's, the hospital lawyer's, office. Those present were:
1) Richard Schweitzer who reprsented his wife Marina
2) Page Williams who represented the Martha Jefferson Hosptial
3) Matthew Murray the other attorney who respresented Martha Jeff. Hosp.
4) Dr. Willi Koerte replaced Lindsey Crawford and represented the RNA

21 Jan 1994 - Ulrich von Gienanth whom AA had named as one of her four executors signed a "declaration" that he accepted the role of executor of AA. If his status was accpeted by the court, his power of executor would supersede Scheitzer nd all others. p. 217

One year and five months later, Dr. Gill and Dr. King have not received the samples of intestines.

22 Jan 1994- Another court appearance occured. Present were Richard Schweizer, Matthew Murray, Linsey Crawford and Page Williams. Judge Swett asked if all parties were in an agreement.

"No."

Case was dismissed due to the entry of von Gienanth as executor of AA's estate which included her sample of intestines.

Swett said a new lawsuite could be tissued.

Legal manuvers were made. Judge Swett had to review, clarify, modify his nonsuit order. A law was found which stated that von Gienanth would have to appear in person... The old man was too old and couldn't fly and was eliminated.... from the case.

5 March 1994- New hearing and Judge Swett ruling rejected Andrew & Kurths and said that if Marina Schweitzer wanted to terminate this case she had a right to do so. Also Mary Claire-King's affidavit (written 7 Dec 1993) was entered into the case. If Andrews and Kurth wish to continue they needed to gain and injunction and must so file.

[Charlottesville]

5 March 1994- New hearing and Judge Swett ruling rejected Andrew & Kurths and said that if Marina Schweitzer wanted to terminate this case she had a right to do so. Also Mary Claire-King's affidavit (written 7 Dec 1993) was entered into the case. If Andrews and Kurth wish to continue they needed to gain and injunction and must so file.

15 March 1994 - Injunction by Andrew and Kurth was filed. Andrews and Kurth wanted a "a parallel testing of the tissue samples at two qualified laboriatories" p. 220.

16 March 1994 - Ed Deets, a friend of Richard Schweitzer, was sworn in as personal representative and administrator of Anastasia Manahan's estate in Virigina.

30 March 1994- Another hearing in Judge Swett's courtroom. Present were Matthew murray, Page Williams, Alexis Scherbatow, Marina and Richard Schweitzer, ed Deets, Penny Jenkins, Julian Nott, Ron Answen, Massie, Dr. Korte and Dr. Adrian Ivinson. This was about the injunction.

11 May 1994 - FInal court hearing took place. Case was dismissed.

19 May 1994 - Swett gave Andrews & Kurth 30 days to file an appeal. No appeal waas filed, Case was over.

19 June 1994 - Peter Gill arrived in Charlottesville to collect a sample of Anastasia Manahan's tissue.

p. 225 Massie tells us the details:
>>Gill had lunch that day with the Schweitzers and then went to the hspital to collect the tissue. He was greeeter there by Ed Deets, Matthew Murray, Penny Jenkins, and Dr. Hunt Macmillian, director of the hospital pathology laboratory. While the layers and nonscientists watche from the back of the room and a documentary filem crew recorded everything that happened, the process got under way. Macmillan, Gill and Betty Eppard, a resgiestered histology technician who actually cut the tissue, appeared ... The five blocks of paraffin containing the embedded tissue...were produced, and the same procedure was repeated five times: Macmillan handed Gill a tissue block and identified it. Gill sterilized it and handed it to Eppard...." <<

And so it went. The tissue was placed in sterilized vials which were tamper proof....

Gill did not take the sample that day.

29 June 1994- Ten days after the slicing of the sample, Peter Gill collected the tissue in Charlottesville.

So, it took from 20 Aug 1992 to 29 June 1994, which was just short of two months of being two years, before Peter Gill was taking the tissue sample to his lab.

[Mapple]

Originally Posted by Charlottesville

I'd like to remind you about the American and British team that determined her remains in fact missing. The body of no. 5 the Russians kept insisting was Anastasia was in fact 5'7. It couldn't be Anastasia. The Russians are not nearly as advanced as the US and UK teams either. They placed their assertion that AN was in the grave on photo comparisons with only a few photos which is controversial in itself, this with a skull which had to be placed together. The US/UK teams determined by roots in the teeth, vertebrae, etc.- things which are MUCH more reliable than those photo comparisons- that the bodies are ALL too old to be that of a girl who JUST turned 17. Are we to forget Anastasia was smaller than most girls her age? Anastasia is not in that grave. The Russians had an agenda. They didn't want the rumors of Anastasia's escape to be true.

I understand your point of view, but I would like to clarify some details.

Firstly, what agenda did the Russian government have? However callous it may sound, o one here cares who exactly was found in the Koptyaki forest -- actually, most of Russian will name Anastasia as missing if asked. It evident, though, that there are persons whose agenda is to defend the version of escaped Anastasia...

Secondly, your dismissal of the Russian experts strikes me as hollow, as I happen to know several of them, and they are learned people of integrity. Of course, they were somewhat underfunded (and were telling that openly), but it is a bad scientist who doesn't ask for more financing when facing the work of importance... I know that well. Their expertise in the field of forencics, unfortunately, is unrivalled when you talk about old burials -- the Russian scientists had to explore mass graves of the 1930s.

Thirdly, Gerasimov's method of comparing photographs is quite reliable. The problem with determining age of the persons buried for so long are understandable, as is the minority report by Maples's team -- it is science, not a Communist Party Congress, after all! :)

Fourthly, I am not aware of any report mentioning the height of # 6 as 171 cm. I am not able to confirm or deny this.

Fifthly, let us suppose that the Russian experts made a mistake, and Maples is right. # 6 is n one else but Maria Nikolayevna... where was Anastasia Nikolayevna then?

The sad answer is: the sisters were not far apart. There were found four lower jaws belonging to young girls of high standing and resembling one another...

[Mapple]

Originally Posted by Ritka

I believe those were the men who found the bones. The specialists were separate people.

Quite so; there were no connection between the groups of Ryabov and Plaksin.

[Charlottesville]

It is completely obvious that Abramov, Ryabov, and others wanted to put an end to the Western legends. I know it's ridiculous, but it's plainly obvious. I really don't have a problem with the Russian experts at all, but they refused to accept the opinion of western experts, and really thought a photo comparison of a few photos with a skull which was placed together was more accurate than the examination of bone structure.
The photo comparison is not completely reliable when you consider this skull had nothing below the brow and had to be placed together. And even if not, it's still a controversial method.
But we disagree, and that is fine.
Where is Anastasia? To me, it is obvious.
Her ashes are scattered at Castle Seeon.

[Charlottesville]

Originally Posted by Mapple

Quite so; there were no connection between the groups of Ryabov and Plaksin.

No, it was Abramov and his team who mistook the pelvis as that of Nicholas.

[Charlottesville]

"There were false Alexeys, too. For example, a Heino Tamet from Vancouver."

The results of the DNA tests on HT were never made public. So I must wonder how you can assume he is an imposter when you seem to credit others.
You also write than Anna Anderson was Franziska Schanzkowksa. The 1994 DNA tests are very complicated because the chain of custody for the sample was HORRIBLE. We can't say for a fact Anna Anderson was a fraud. The evidence clearly shows she was not. Many who were close to Anastasia, Empress Alexandra's best friend Lili Dehn and Alexandra Tegleva (Anastasia's nanny) identified Anna as Anastasia. I don't think it is fair to now because of some tests which were done on alleged samples to conclude AA was a fraud.