Heard back and it sounds like they have a narrower focus based on the DNA that this would probably be outside. He'll pass it along, I imagine on the outside chance that there's something we can't see on paper - an adoption or an NPE, etc, and while those things happen, it's probably unlikely.
So I think what to take from that is the good news, the narrower focus. I think we are going to have answers soon.
Thanks for the update. I figured I'd try my hand at this, I've never more than dabbled in genealogy, mostly because my great aunt spent the last 30 years of her life, and a lot of it prior to retirement, researching our family line, and I didn't need to. And the brick walls she ran into remain, even with the help of the internet. She did her work the old fashioned way, by making phone calls, writing letters, and visiting archives and cemeteries.
My crack at it has been a real eye opener, mostly because of how involved and time consuming it can be. I knew it would be, just didn't know how much. I figure the official researchers on the case know what they're doing, and I don't, so at times, I felt I was spinning my wheels, no doubt duplicating their work. Plus they have access to more information. What would have helped to know is what branches were already ruled out--not names of current individuals, but the ancestral line they came from. They must know which branches are too far removed DNA-wise, which we wouldn't have access to.
Based on what I found in regards to females in the generations and age ranges of potential candidates for the MC's mother, I've been leaning toward NPE or something similar. Not so much with the mother, but possibly the MC herself.
But I do have a question, in the case of adoption, would investigators be able to obtain adoption records? I ask because missing person Carlene Brown's investigators have been trying for years, without success, to get her records so they can obtain a DNA sample from her biological family to compare her with Jane Does. She was adopted.
.
