Anna Anderson's claim to be Grand Duchess Anastasia

[ChatNoir]

Originally Posted by lucien

Hah,the ROC,they are never in a hurry if it so suits them,anything new?No?Thought as much.

Interfax-Religion

[Menarue]

{Edit Marengo: removed sentense that replied to a deleted post}

Russia Remembers The Romanovs Ninety Years On | World News | Sky News

[Anna was Franziska]

Thank you so much, Menarue! It's so nice to see them say 'with certainty' it's the last two missing children and not have to worry about naysayers pointing out phrases like 'said to be' and using them to instill doubt. Now can it finally be over?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/2304461/Executed-Russian-prince-Alexei's-bones-to-be-put-on-display.html

[AnastasiaEvidence]

Russians mark 90 years since murder of Russian czar and his family - Pravda.Ru
Russian says remains of last Tsar's son identified | Lifestyle | Living | Reuters
Yes. It is certain that the remains are those of Alexei and his sister. I sure hope that this is finally over. The mystery is over with.

[AnastasiaEvidence]

It's not so important to me that AA be AN, what is important to me, is that you and others get to know the real story. From what I have seen posted on this forum and others, I realize that very, very few people really know anything about AA.

We already know the real story. It's been proven so many times. I don't think Chat, will be able to explain why AA is A, now since there is so much evidence against that. He can't prove the DNA wrong. People just refuse to accept reality. AA isn't important anymore, because she's not Anastasia she's an imposter. DNA is the most important evidence of all. Hearsay isn't.

[Elspeth]

I wouldn't get your hopes up too far; people are too fond of a good mystery.

[Elspeth]

Aren't we getting a bit off topic here? We have threads for the DNA evidence and for this latest find of the two bodies.

[OlgaNikolaievna]

How can it be a mystery when it's solved and we have the answers? That would be like pretending a movie continued after the ending credits. It becomes something that doesn't really happen and is only a silly imaginary game.

[ChatNoir]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

His testimony as written in Auclere's book (posted) doesn't say when.

Actually, it does. From Peter Kurth:

"Hastily he explained that he had burned his "Anastasia" dossier after the negative ruling of the High Court in West Berlin, thinking that the case was closed."

The ruling was in 1933. Gilliard was then 54 years old. Hardly senile at that age.

[Elspeth]

So from this extract of a published book, it would appear that he burned the papers because he thought the case was closed. Which is a litle different from your original comment which started this digression, which was "Don't worry, Gilliard had to confess in the Hamburg court that he had been telling, eh, untruths. Why do you think he burned his papers?"

It would appear that he burned his papers because he thought the case was closed, not because he had been telling, eh, untruths. I think we're still waiting for backup for the "telling untruths" assertion. Surely this is a major enough story that it appears somewhere other than some obscure trial transcripts stored somewhere in Germany.

[ChatNoir]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

So from this extract of a published book, it would appear that he burned the papers because he thought the case was closed. Which is a litle different from your original comment which started this digression, which was "Don't worry, Gilliard had to confess in the Hamburg court that he had been telling, eh, untruths. Why do you think he burned his papers?"

It would appear that he burned his papers because he thought the case was closed, not because he had been telling, eh, untruths. I think we're still waiting for backup for the "telling untruths" assertion. Surely this is a major enough story that it appears somewhere other than some obscure trial transcripts stored somewhere in Germany.

A historian who burns his archives? A corpse that stinks.....

As far as lies, he asserted in "False Anastasia" that AN knew no German. His own schedules and AN's schoolbooks tell us otherwise. When AA talked about the Malachite room, he stated that there was no such room in the palace. His photo of FS was heavily retouched to heighten the resemblance to AA, even earrings were added to indicate pierced ears. And when giving Bischoff a photo of AN for a photo comparison, he provided a photo of Olga instead so a comparison would result in a negative verdict. (Rathlef Keilmann.) When AA stated that the Empress' car had a little swastika on the hood, Gilliard published a photo of same car with a big swastika drawn in on the door of the car to show the world that anybody could see it. (Rathlef Keilmann.) And you still wonder why he burned his archives?

[Menarue]

Well Chat I don´t "wonder", I "know" because he stated why, he burnt his papers because he thought that the whole sad case was closed. Perhaps we should all take an example from him and burn our papers about this case and start filing the positive identification articles in a brand new filing cabinet. Keep a few papers claiming that AA was GDA to have a little laugh occasionally and to remember how silly some people were to be taken in.

[ChatNoir]

Originally Posted by Menarue

Well Chat I don´t "wonder", I "know" because he stated why, he burnt his papers because he thought that the whole sad case was closed. Perhaps we should all take an example from him and burn our papers about this case and start filing the positive identification articles in a brand new filing cabinet. Keep a few papers claiming that AA was GDA to have a little laugh occasionally and to remember how silly some people were to be taken in.

Yes, let's have a little book-burning party and erase our memories of AA/AN/FS. Fahrenheit 451 comes to mind....

[Menarue]

Chat I didn´t say books. I said let´s burn all the false information we have in our files as it is now redundant. Actually I have no memories of AA, I didn´t know her and I wouldn´t have wanted to know her, the same goes for FS, and I wouldn´t probably want to have known GDA or any of the IF, it would be too sad. If so many emotions can arise among people who have never known them just imagine how one would feel if one really knew them personally. Too depressing to even contemplate.

[Anna was Franziska]

Chat, you are only assuming he lied based on what you think. There is no evidence here! You keep dragging the 'she KNEW German' thing around the block, yet those who knew her, like Olga A., said she didn't know, didn't use, or only knew a very few words of it. This is technically NOT KNOWING GERMAN. As I've said many times before, I know a lot of people who took German classes, had German schoolbooks, and still do not know German.If you do, well good for you, but that's not everybody. The only reason you hold onto this is because AA used German almost exclusively, and that really hurts her chances of being AN since it was by far AN's worst language and AA didn't use or wasn't good at the three AN knew much better. This is beyond a dead horse beaten to a pulp. The swastika? If it is there, isn't it very possible the man never saw or noticed it? This doesn't qualify as lying! So AA/FS saw it in a book or a photo, or was told about it, and Gilliard never paid any attention. That doesn't prove a thing, it's your own speculation- something you will not accept from me or others! And after all, if he was such an, uh, untruth teller, how do you know he was being honest when he said he burned the papers? If you believe him, then why is he so dishonest about other things that don't suit you?

[ferrymansdaughter]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

Because, sometimes they really don't..

And more often than not, they really do.

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

You take him at his word? But I thought he was a 'liar?' It always happens, if he says something you and Chat want to believe, he's telling the truth, if not, he's a liar..

He is a liar - he told lies and was found out. As you know perfectly well, we are not saying that every single word that ever came out of his mouth was a lie - just certain things relating to certain events and why the heck would he lie about burning the papers when it made him look suspicious?

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

Even if he did burn them it doesn't necessarily mean he had anything to hide. He could possibly have burned them because he was fed up with the whole mess and didn't want to deal with it anymore.

What - and not preserve them for posterity? Not nearly as likely as the fact that he was telling the truth.

[ferrymansdaughter]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

His testimony as written in Auclere's book (posted) doesn't say when.

You just never know when they might turn up! Look at this!
Burnt Hendrix guitar to be sold in London - Yahoo! News

Menarue, I am so sorry about your family photos, I know how that feels. I have an elderly aunt who threw away many one of a kind photos of people there were only one picture, including the only one ever taken of a great great grandmother. It's a terrible loss that can never be replaced, all because of one minute of bad decision making.

Well my grandmother did something similar, got rid of quite a lot of photos including those of her parents and her eldest child who died aged 5. As a family historian, it drives me nuts that she did it but she certainly wasn't anything other than 100& lucid and I am sure she had her reasons, even though I can't fathom them. They were her photos to do with as she pleased - it's not quite the same thing as burning papers relating to an international law suit.

[ferrymansdaughter]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

You keep dragging the 'she KNEW German' thing around the block, yet those who knew her, like Olga A., said she didn't know, didn't use, or only knew a very few words of it. This is technically NOT KNOWING GERMAN. As I've said many times before, I know a lot of people who took German classes, had German schoolbooks, and still do not know German.If you do, well good for you, but that's not everybody.

We've been through this a million times - when will you accept that she had lessons several times a week for several years (The Times trial report of 11 June 1965 says that AA’s lawyers had “presented old school books of Grand Duchess Anastasia dating from 1913 to 1916”. ) Therefore she technically – as you put it – DID KNOW GERMAN. As I have pointed out before – and you keep ignoring – we are not saying that she conversed regularly with Auntie Olga or other family members in German but that after all those lessons she must have had a working knowledge of it. I don’t speak German with my family – but I know it to a reasonable degree. Incidentally, can you give us the quote where Olga said that - I'd like to know exactly what she said.

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

The only reason you hold onto this is because AA used German almost exclusively, and that really hurts her chances of being AN since it was by far AN's worst language and AA didn't use or wasn't good at the three AN knew much better

Massie p 181 - Faith Lavington referred to AA's "purest and best English accent." I certainly think that she would know a proper English accent when she heard one. (You do know who she was, don't you?)

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

The swastika? If it is there, isn't it very possible the man never saw or noticed it? This doesn't qualify as lying! So AA/FS saw it in a book or a photo, or was told about it, and Gilliard never paid any attention. That doesn't prove a thing, it's your own speculation- something you will not accept from me or others!

Well this is nothing but YOUR speculation. Of course, if you can find a photo of the Tsarina’s car showing the swastika and published before AA told this story, then it will not longer be speculation but a fact.

[tian]

Originally Posted by ferrymansdaughter

Well this is nothing but YOUR speculation. Of course, if you can find a photo of the Tsarina’s car showing the swastika and published before AA told this story, then it will not longer be speculation but a fact.

There are pictures of Nicholas visiting troops with a car and the swastika hood ornament is clearly visible. These pictures can be seen in Larisa Yermilova's Last Tsar.

[Anna was Franziska]

Originally Posted by tian

There are pictures of Nicholas visiting troops with a car and the swastika hood ornament is clearly visible. These pictures can be seen in Larisa Yermilova's Last Tsar.

And here I've been reading and looking up stuff on the Romanovs for 34 years and I've never seen that book and never seen or heard of that pic until now. It's very possible Gilliard never noticed it or paid any attention. This still does not mean he lied.

Besides it's all pointless now to try to validate or to disprove one of her 'memories' since they've all been disproven by DNA tests.