SOMERTON MAN DNA & THE ROMANOV EXAMPLE...

 

...TABLE 8...
THE ROMANOV ANALYSIS...

The Romanov Report from which this table was taken was published in January 2022. The items in bold actually refer to the identification of the owner of the hair sample being a female..

Learning from the Romanov Case

The image at the head of this post is an item from the FBI files on the Romanov case.

This isn't the first time forensic science has grappled with the challenges of extracting DNA from hair shafts. In the case of the Romanov family, forensic scientists faced similar difficulties. Hair shafts, unlike roots, contain very little nuclear DNA, which made the task of identifying the remains particularly challenging. However, through persistent efforts, enough nuclear DNA was extracted from hair shafts to confirm the identities of several Romanov family members.

In that case, as with the Somerton Man, the quality and quantity of DNA recovered were critical. While it was possible to determine certain genetic markers, such as biological sex, the extraction process was far from straightforward, requiring meticulous handling and advanced techniques. The success in the Romanov case offers a precedent but also a cautionary tale about the limitations of such forensic methods.

The study, linked here:

National Center for Biotechnology Information,

discusses the whole DNA case including how nuclear DNA was successfully extracted from hair shafts, leading to significant forensic breakthroughs despite the inherent challenges. Please note that this is a very technical document! A visit to this site may be of benefit: 
https://blog.insidetracker.com/dna-101-basics-beyond

It leaves us with a question as to why, given that the gender of the owner of the hair shaft apparently could have been identified by Astrea Forensics, wasn't published. I ask that question specifically as it seems to me that the point of submitting the sample rootless shaft of hair was to identify the Somerton Man as a male. Step 1 should have answered the question, was the owner of the sample hair shaft a male?

DNA & FORENSIC CHALLENGES FACED IN THE SOMERTON MAN CASE:

The Somerton Man case remains one of the most perplexing mysteries in forensic history, a puzzle that has eluded resolution for over seventy years.

In this post, we explore some of the intricacies of this case and are reminded again of the complexity of getting to the truth, especially when faced with the limitations of forensic science and the passage of time.

A Forensic Puzzle from the Start

When the body of an unidentified man was found on Somerton Beach in 1948, the initial investigation was thorough by the standards of the time, yet it left many questions unanswered. Despite extensive efforts, the man's identity, the cause of his death, and the circumstances leading to his demise remain shrouded in mystery. The years that followed have seen many attempts to solve this case, with advances in forensic science offering new hope—but also new challenges.

The Role of DNA in the Search for Answers

Recent efforts to identify the Somerton Man have focused on DNA analysis, particularly using a single hair shaft sent to Astrea Forensics. The extraction of DNA from this hair shaft was a remarkable achievement, given that hair shafts typically contain little to no nuclear DNA—the type of DNA that provides the most detailed genetic information. This success was hailed as a significant breakthrough, potentially opening the door to solving the case once and for all.

However, as we delve deeper into the scientific process, we must ask whether all the necessary steps were taken. Determining the biological sex of the individual, which is typically one of the first steps in forensic identification, was not explicitly mentioned in the report. This omission raises questions: Was the DNA quality insufficient for gender determination? Or was it assumed that the identity would be revealed directly through genealogical matching, making gender less of a priority?

Balancing Historical Insight with Modern Forensic Techniques

It's important to look back at the work of those who have come before us and to acknowledge the critical importance of their work. Gerry Feltus, the former SAPOL detective sergeant, documented his thorough investigation in the book "The Unknown Man," offering invaluable insights into the case. Feltus's dedication to uncovering the truth is evident, but even he acknowledged the difficulties inherent in the investigation, particularly with the evidence that was available at the time.

Forensic experts like Dr. Xanthe Mallet have also weighed in, expressing concern that standard forensic procedures may not have been followed rigorously in the current claim that the Somerton Man was Carl Webb. Dr. Mallet, a respected forensic scientist, has questioned whether the Somerton Man’s identity will ever be known, given the possible procedural shortcomings in the handling of forensic evidence. Her concerns are a reminder that every step in the forensic process is crucial, and any lapses can have lasting consequences. In the 1940s, the need for scrupulous adherence to handling of evidence practiced today while present, could not have accounted for the impact of forensic science.

The Path Forward

The pursuit of truth is a complex, often difficult, and frustrating journey. Evidence must be approached with care, scrutinizing every detail while remaining open to new likelihoods, possibilities, and probabilities. Each avenue needs to be carefully and meticulously explored.

The work of those who have dedicated themselves to this case, from Gerald Feltus to the latest forensic scientists, offers a foundation upon which we can build. But it also serves as a reminder that the truth is not always easily found and that every piece of evidence must be handled with the utmost respect and diligence.

In the end, the goal here remains the same: to uncover the circumstances of the man's death and if possible to accurately identify him. This task has been and will be long and challenging, but each step brings us closer to the truth.