Anne, I do understand your points here, but you must be honest with the facts here. Ask the DNA experts yourself. Genetic Genealogy was not intended to be used to compare men of different surnames, it was only intended to be used to compare to men of the same surname. 

If there is no solid paper trail to make that family tree connection, even a perfect 67/67 DNA match is considered a case of DNA convergence, meaning yes 2 men of different surnames share similar or even exact markers, but are not considered related with out that paper trail. 

Paternal and criminal DNA testing while based off the same basic science, is not the same testing as genetic genealogy. 
Genetic genealogy only looks specifically at the male or female chromosomes, they are different kinds of DNA tests all together, though are similar in the same basic science. 

I don't fully disagree with you, but at the same time can not agree with you either lol. Your taking a hard line on a subject that really by all rights, will likely never be proven by you or anyone else, because with out that one single sheet of paper that clearly says TJ is the father, and knowing DNA testing will never agree with you that TJ himself is the father, it can only suggest they did or did not share a common male ancestor, your barking up a tree that will never have a solid answer to. So to continue to take a hard stance on an issue that really will likely never really be resolved if one only looks at one side of the issue. 

If you follow the general rule of thumb of DNA, 2 men of different surnames even if a perfect 67/67 match is always considered a case of DNA convergence until proven other wise. All the experts will tell you that. While a perfect 67/67 DNA convergence may not be all that common, it can and has happened where 2 men of different surnames who are totally unrelated can be a perfect 67/67 match to each other. 

I do get what you are striving at, but I think you are taking far to strong of a stance on less then perfect evidence I think. For all I know, maybe you are right in your presumptions, but proving it is a whole nother matter. But we are talking about a case that I honestly do not believe can really ever be proven 100%. Genetic Genealogy alone is not the answer here, if you soley rely on the DNA evidence at hand, all the experts are going to tell you is, this is very likely a case of DNA convergence. That is just by shear luck of the events, that 2 K2 men just happened to be involved in the exact same piece of history. It can happen, as unlikely as that may seem to you. For all you know, Hemmings at the 67 marker level, may only be say a 61/67 match to Jefferson's, and that finding would clearly blow your theory out the window as that many mutations would clearly blow away your time line. See my point here? You are relying on 1998 evidence and technology has greatly advanced since then, what they knew then may not at all be relivant today using todays technology. Back in 98, heck yes a 25/25 or 27/27 match was wonderful news. 

Not today! Now with 67 markers now available. That same 25/25 match of 1998 may now be a poor 60/67 match and that new DNA evidence if it were to happen that way, would clearly blow your theory all to heck my lady! lol 
I am not trying to change your mind here, I am only asking you to consider the advances in this technology today versus 11 years ago. 
Back in 2004 when I first tested, the 25 marker test was the highest test, then the 37 marker test, then finally the 67 marker test. So in only 5 years time, this technology has greatly advanced, and that is something you must take in to consideration here. Those who were great 25/25 matches even 5 years ago, later learned they were not at all a good match at the 67 marker level and blew their whole theories away with a simple upgraded test. 

Don 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Anne Pemberton" <[log in to unmask]> 
To: [log in to unmask] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 6:16:38 AM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain 
Subject: Re: [VA-HIST] Falsely charging TJ with "bedding a slave" DNA Study 

Don, 

Thank you for a very explicit description of what pitfalls exist in the use 
of DNA to prove a match in lineage. It makes me wonder now, how close the 
DNA finding in detective and forensic works are on which paternity and 
identity are established in matters of law. 

For myself, I am more convinced that the paternity is proven more by the 
circumstances that surround the issue, and, are fueled by the deliberate 
attempt by TJ and close family members to keep the relationship out of the 
public light for their own reasons. Even so, certain actions taken by TJ, 
such as freeing the minor children presumed to be his sons by Hemings, that 
clearly point to a greater likelihood that he was the father of these boys 
rather than just "some member of the Jefferson family". Far greater 
instances of historic accuracy have been attached with less evidence of 
authenticity. Written reports by "observers" are far more suspicious. 

Anne 



Anne Pemberton 
[log in to unmask] 
http://www.erols.com/apembert 
http://www.educationalsynthesis.org 

______________________________________ 
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at 
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html 

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html