And the 8th Blogiversary Rolls Around

Wow, it has been eight years already?!  How time flies when we're having fun!  Lisa Hork Gorrell and I started our blogs the same day, after attending Craig Siulinski's class on blogging held at the California Genealogical Society.

My primary focuses are Jewish, black, newspaper, and forensic genealogical research, but I've posted about a lot of other subjects over the years, ranging from Africa to Ypres (France), Aaron Lansky to Zooey Deschanel, Abell to Zook (family surnames), and abolitionists to Zundapp (motorcycle).  I'm close to 1,500 posts at this point!

I've been having some health problems, so I wasn't as productive last year as I wanted to be.  My project to document the births, marriagees, and deaths in my family tree fell off at the beginning of June (also caused by my hard drive failing), and I've missed the past two seasons of Who Do You Think You Are?  I don't know if I'll be able to catch up on the latter, but I'm hoping to restart the former this June and pick up where I left off.  I also really need to return to the saga of Emma Margaret (Shaefer) Petit La Forêt, whose file I finally have found after my move from Oakland.  There's always so much to write about!

Well, it is a new year, which means new opportunities to try again.  So off we go!

What Was the Rest of the Story?

I've written previously about doing heir research, one aspect of forensic genealogy.  I track down the family connections, find contact information for heirs, and pass on everything to my client.  I rarely find out what happens after that (though once I had an adventure and went in person to talk to a potential heir).

Sometimes, however, I find stuff that makes me wonder just what happened in the family.  One case I recently worked on left me with lots of questions afterward — not about who the heirs were, but why they ended up being the heirs.

As usual, I was given some bare-bones information about a man — we'll call him "Joe" — and was asked to track him forward in time.  I needed to find what happened to him, his wife, and the child in the household in the 1930 census, and also to check on the wife and child in the 1940 census (who were not the same as those in 1930).

Most of the time, given this set-up, the heir turns out to be the child, or perhaps that person's children if the person has already passed away.  Sometimes it's the spouse, if the people in question were of an appropriate age to have survived until the present day.

I learned that Joe was one of eight children.  He himself was married three times.  He and his first wife had a son.  His second wife, the one in 1940, had a son from a previous relationship.  Joe had another stepson later, though I was unable to determine who that man's mother was.

When Joe wrote his will, his seven siblings were still alive, as was his biological son.  So who were his heirs?  His three sisters, but none of his brothers, and no one else.  He mentioned a stepson (the one whose mother I was unable to identify) in the will but said that he had already been provided for.  And he specifically stated that he had no issue.

So here's the first time my curiosity was piqued.  Why leave bequests to the sisters but none of the brothers?  Did he not get along with his brothers?  Were they all so well off that he decided they didn't need anything from him?  And what about his son?  I found the birth record; there's nothing on it to indicate any question of paternity.  Did Joe learn something about his son that made him question whether he was really the father?  Maybe that's why he and wife #1 divorced?  Or maybe he just had a totally broken relationship with his son after the divorce?

After finding this will, I then had to research the families of the three sisters to determine their heirs, as all three also had passed away.  Only one of the sisters — let's call her "Jane" — had a will.  She left everything to her son and stated that she had "no other child living."  In researching her part of the family, I found that the son was from her first marriage.  Her first husband died young, and she remarried.  She had a daughter — "Joan" — from her second marriage.  Joan married and had a daughter.  Sadly, Joan committed suicide.  But her daughter is still alive and has a child of her own.

Then my curiosity kicked in again.  While Joan's death explains the phrase "no other child living", I wonder why Jane left nothing to her granddaughter.  Did Jane blame her granddaughter's father in some way for Joan's death?  Was she so distraught over her daughter's death that she couldn't bear to have a relationship with her granddaughter?

Some interesting family dynamics seem to be going on here, but ones I'm unlikely to learn about.  I'm just left wondering, what was the rest of the story?

Top 10 Posts of 2014

I'm still very new to blogging, but it occurred to me that I'm coming up on my fourth blogiversary and I've never looked to see which of my posts people had found the most interesting, based on the number of views.  These are my ten most popular posts for 2014.  I have to admit, some of the results surprised me a little.

Would you have guessed that transcription could be a popular subject?  Well, #10 on the list is my commentary about the episode of Antiques Roadshow when we finally saw an appraiser suggest on air that a guest transcribe his important historical materials.  Sure, the guest wasn't excited about the idea, but baby steps, right?  At least genealogists know that transcription is important.

Now, a story about a bride I definitely can see generating interest, especially when a mystery is attached.  #9 in popularity is the story of Sheri Fenley and her family's search for a photo of Jeanette Augusta Meir wearing her wedding veil.  (The best news about that story is that a photo was found, a great Christmas present for the family.)

It appears that forensic genealogy is interesting to a lot of people, as my review of the sessions in the Advanced Forensic Evidence Analysis track at this year's Forensic Genealogy Institute came in at #8.  I'm particularly happy to see this, as I am a proud member of the Council for the Advancement of Forensic Genealogy and want people to recognize the difference between real forensic genealogy and merely matching the edges of photographs.

Another surprise for me is that a family photograph I posted for Wordless Wednesday was the #7 post of the year.  It's a nice photo of part of the Sellers family, but I don't know why this one caught people's eyes more than any other.

These four posts were all relatively close in the number of views.  The top six had significantly bigger gaps between them.

Speaking of forensic genealogy, I was not at all surprised that my post about how Dick Eastman declined to approve my response to his item came in fairly high, at #6 to be specific.  This post also had the highest number of shares that I could track.

Many people have told me that they enjoy reading my write-ups of Who Do You Think You Are?, so it makes sense that three of those posts placed high:  Cynthia Nixon at #5, Jesse Tyler Ferguson at #4, and Valerie Bertinelli at #2.  It's no mystery to me that the McAdams sisters didn't do as well, as I didn't think the episode was that compelling, but I thought Kelsey Grammer would have been up here also.

Another surprise for me in the top numbers was that #3 is a post about the new newspaper links I had added to the Wikipedia page I regularly contribute to.  It's gratifying to see such interest in newspaper archives, but none of the other newspaper update posts during the year came close to this one.

And at #1, with 25% more views than the next closest post, not Who Do You Think You Are?, but the Anthony Bourdain's Parts Unknown episode that was part of of CNN's "Roots:  Our Journeys Home" series.  The surprise for me about this is not only that it came in at the top, but that it continually adds significant numbers of new views.  That's interesting, considering how little genealogy was actually in the show.

What did I learn from this?  First of all, I noticed that half of my top posts are about television programs.  To me, that indicates the recent explosion of programs about genealogy really is a great way to connect with other people who are interested in family history.  I hope people who come to my blog and read those posts stick around and find other interesting material.  Second, the only other topic with more than one post in the top 10 is forensic genealogy.  It's hard to say how much of a groundswell of interest that indicates, but I'll take it as a positive thing.  And third, as with the family photograph, you never know what will pique people's interests.

While I was looking at these numbers, I also figured out my top post in the past four years.  Would you believe Lionel Ritchie on Who Do You Think You Are?

Real Forensics!

Recently I had the opportunity to attend a presentation on forensic science at the Santa Clara County Crime Laboratory.  I love watching true crime TV programs that discuss the forensic aspects of solving the crimes, and I am a forensic genealogist, so of course I jumped at the chance.

One of the first things the speaker did was explain what exactly forensic science is:  the application of the physical and natural sciences to law (emphasis mine).  I discussed the meaning of the word "forensic" a few months ago and how Mr. E. used a definition available from online dictionaries but declined to quote the entire thing.  As I said then, forensic means “relating to the use of science or technology in the investigation and establishment of facts or evidence in a court of law”, with the fact that it relates to law being an important distinction.  Anyone can misuse the term, but that doesn't make her . . . um, those individuals right.

So after the definition of forensic science, the audience heard about the crime lab, which is a full-service lab with a staff of 65 people.  They work with about twenty different Santa Clara County police agencies but don't do anything with explosives (which are handled by ATF) or biological threats (e.g., anthrax).  About 10% of their work is related to collecting evidence, about 80% is analyzing evidence at the lab, and the final 10% is taken up by writing reports on their analyses and occasionally testifying as expert witnesses in trials.

The different areas of the lab cover pretty much everything you might expect:
• trace evidence (using chemistry and microscopy)
• latent print processing (using graphite and ninhydrin)
• narcotics and controlled substances
• toxicology (blood and urine analysis, breath and blood alcohol testing)
• firearms and toolmarks
• tire tread impressions and shoe impressions
• computers and digital evidence (deleted files, cell phones, security cameras)
• document examination (handwriting, indents, alterations)
• biology and DNA

Several powerful databases are available to the criminalists working in the lab. For example, CODIS (COmbined DNA Index System) is the generic term used to describe the combination of the National DNA Index System and other criminal justice DNA systems.  AFIS (Integrated Automatic Fingerprint Identification System) is the national fingerprint database maintained by the FBI.  (I'm in there because I've worked with children in the past, and to do that you have to be fingerprinted so they can check to see if you have a record.  I'm clean!)  SoleMate is a database of more than 12,500 shoe sole patterns.  Fascinating stuff!

The speaker showed slides relating to several crimes the lab has worked on, such as the Wendy's "finger in the chili" and Kenneth and Kristine Fitzhugh.  I knew I had watched too many forensic shows when I was able to recognize several of the cases immediately just from one slide, before he even said anything!

I asked how many people working in the lab were certified and was told that a little under half of the staff are certified in their fields.  I also asked specifically about forensic document examiners, because I know one; both forensic document examiners on staff are certified.

So what does all of this have to do with genealogy?

Well, directly, not much.  Indirectly, however, there's some crossover.  Certainly, it gave me another chance to kvetch about questionable (and conveniently truncated) definitions of "forensic."  But I also got to thinking about how the kind of DNA testing done in crime labs is far more detailed and accurate — because it has to be — than the automosal tests that the general public pays for.  If that kind of testing were available and affordable, can you image the kinds of family connections that could be made?

Oh, and the forensic document examiner I know?  I met her at the Forensic Genealogy Institute, of course.

Oops, I've Stepped on Someone's Toes ....

Image courtesy of digitalart/FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Or at least that's the best explanation I can come up with.  Dick Eastman posted an article on Sunday, June 15, titled "Forensic Genealogy Explained."  I disagreed with several points in the article and posted a comment — which didn't appear online.  I thought, "Hmm, maybe my comment didn't go through.  I'll try it again."  And the second comment . . . didn't appear.  Then I received five comments from other people on the post, so the problem does not appear to be that the comment function isn't working.  The majority of the other comments agreed with my points.  And I know my comments to other people's WordPress blogs haven't had any problems in the past.  So I guess he didn't like what I had to say or how I said it.  I wasn't trying to tick anyone off, I promise.  But I am tired of people using the term "forensic genealogy" in whatever manner they choose.  My first career (which I still practice) was as an editor, and I still appreciate accuracy and precision in speech and writing.

Well, luckily for me, I have my own blog, where I am free to post whatever I want.  So below is the comment that Mr. Eastman declined to include as a response to his item.

===

The word “forensic” does not precisely mean “relating to the use of science or technology in the investigation and establishment of facts or evidence”, because the rest of the definition has been truncated, deliberately or otherwise.  It actually means “relating to the use of science or technology in the investigation and establishment of facts or evidence in a court of law” [added emphasis mine], which is an important distinction.  Forensic intrinsically means having to do with legal matters, not simply relating to scientific endeavors.

Because the complete definition makes it clear that forensic means relating to legal matters, the term “forensic genealogy” is not being misused when it is applied to heir searches.  Heir searches are conducted to determine the legal heirs to an estate and allow the disposition of that estate.  The legal implications of that should be abundantly clear.

Colleen Fitzpatrick's book Forensic Genealogy does not relate to actual forensic genealogy.  It deals in scientific and analytical aspects of family history research.  Using DNA to determine if I am related to someone else is scientific, but if there are no legal implications associated with that identification, it is not a forensic matter.  Looking at the edges of photographs to see if they match up is an analytical exercise, but unless I am doing that in conjunction with a legal matter, it is not forensic.  Magnifying a photo to see the detail is again analytical, but if there are no legal ramifications, it is not forensic.

Arbitrarily changing the definition of a word to suit one's own purposes is a habit usually attributed to governments and propagandists, not historians, family or otherwise.

===

Disclaimer:  I am a member of the Council for the Advancement of Forensic Genealogy, which is concerned with laying a strong foundation for genealogists to practice sound forensic genealogy.  This post is my own opinion.

My own take on the incorrect use of "forensic" is that it's being done to capitalize on the current popularity of the term, with no regard for accuracy.  But the latter is also strictly my own opinion.

2014 Forensic Genealogy Institute a Great Learning Experience

I've been back in California for a few days since returning from the Council for the Advancement of Forensic Genealogy 2014  Forensic Genealogy Institute, where I attended the "Advanced Forensic Evidence Analysis" track.  The lectures covered a wide range of topics where forensic genealogy ("genealogical research, analysis, and reporting in cases with legal implication", from the CAFG site) can be applied.

Half of the first day was devoted to DNA and the current state of the technology as it applies to genealogy casework.  Those lectures were complemented by two talks about how the U.S. Department of Defense's Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command searches for, identifies, and confirms MIA and POW military personnel in order to repatriate

remains to family members.  DNA is often used in these cases, in addition to research into military actions in the locations in which remains are found, identification of artifacts found with the bodies, a lot of ruling out possibilities by exclusion (it can't be this person, this person, or that person, so it has to be this other person), and much more.  DoD wants to be absolutely sure before making an ID.

A large portion of the second day covered how oil and gas industry companies go about looking for land that is viable for energy use and then try to find all possible owners and/or heirs to the property so that they can begin exploration and extraction of the resources.  While genealogists are not involved in the energy side of things, it was interesting to learn how they do things (with a decided slant in favor of the oil and gas companies, of course).  The second presenter that day discussed dual citizenship cases, with details about procedures for Irish and Italian descendants.  I learned that my stepsons are not currently eligible for Irish dual citizenship but might be some time in the future — once the pool of eligible candidates with Irish ancestry begins to dry up due to descendancy restrictions (at most, someone must have had a grandparent with Irish ancestry), it's possible the Republic of Ireland might extend eligibility back to great-grandparents to maintain the revenue stream.  (You did know that the main reason countries offer dual citizenship through right of descent is to bring in [mostly American] money, right?)  The final talk of the day was about translation, when someone might need it, the difference between a translator and an interpreter (translation is written, interpreting is spoken), and certified translators (less common in the United States than in Europe, for various reasons).  Having done translation for many years, it was refreshing to hear a speaker explain to others the benefits of hiring a professional translator with experience versus merely using Google Translate (helpful in a pinch, but still only machine translation).  (By the way, if you need a translator, the best place to start a search is at the American Translators Association site.)

The final half-day we heard about two very different heir search case studies, both of them coincidentally involving Jewish and overseas research.  In the first case, the researcher who was contracted to find heirs had no prior experience with Jewish or overseas research, so was extremely surprised at many of the twists and turns involved, including formal and informal name changes, changing country borders, and the necessity sometimes to "grease the wheels" at repositories before research access would be granted.  The case has not yet been closed, but the researcher's running total was thirteen countries and eight languages.  (A couple of us found this somewhat entertaining, as these obstacles are very familiar to those of us who have done Jewish research.)  The second case study should have been pretty straightforward, as the deceased had left a will and "all" that was needed was to verify noninheriting heirs per state law.  This case again had surprises due to unexpected name changes, Jewish ancestry which some family members had tried to cover up, and the difficulties of conducting reearch in multiple countries with multiple rules and restrictions.

As advertised, the institute covered a lot of very relevant material, and the presenters were experts in their fields.  The opportunity to network was also important, and I was able to meet several people with whom I have been corresponding via e-mail.  It was well worth the investment in time and money to attend.  I definitely learned new things at the institute, but I was also pleasantly surprised to find that I had a good amount of knowledge already about the topics that were discussed.  I'll be looking for the announcement for next year's institute to see what subjects will be offered.

2014 Forensic Genealogy Institute

I have written before about the fantastic educational opportunity that the Forensic Genealogy Institute offers.  Now, keep in mind that when I say "forensic" as applied to genealogy, I mean it in the true definition of the word:  "genealogical research, analysis, and reporting in cases with legal implication" (from the Web site of the Council for the Advancement of Forensic Genealogy).  I don't mean merely using science in your own genealogical research, such as when you compare the results of your DNA test with someone else's to determine if you might be related, or if you analyze the backs and edges of photographs to figure out if they were printed at the same time.  Neither of those is forensic genealogy (no matter what a book might be called), because there's no legal implication in the results.  Scientific?  Sure.  Forensic?  Nope.

So now that we have that out of the way, the 2014 Forensic Genealogy Institute, to be held in Dallas, Texas from Monday–Saturday, March 24–29, offers in-depth instruction in tools and techniques for genealogists who are doing or want to do forensic research, along with real-world examples and business advice.  Two tracks are offered:  "Foundations in Forensic Genealogy" and "Advanced Forensic Evidence Analysis."  More details are now available for the two tracks.  The early-bird discount ends December 30, 2013 (only a few days from now!).  A discount is also offered to those registering for both tracks.

In "Foundations in Forensic Genealogy", which will run Monday–Wednesday, March 24–26, 2014, the sessions to be offered include:
• How to establish a forensic genealogy business
• How to evalute the ethics of a case
• How to deal with the legal profession in complex research cases
• How a forensic genealogists establishes credibility as an expert witness
• A mock witness cross-examination, conducted by Michael Ramage, JD, CG
• "Forensic Techniques for Genetic Genealogy", which will explain the concepts of DNA and how it can be utilized by the forensic genealogist, taught by Debbie Parker Wayne, CG

The "Foundations" track is a prerequisite for "Advanced Forensic Evidence Analysis", which will follow immediately after, running Thursday–Saturday, March 27–29, 2014.  Sessions will include:
• Current advances in DNA technology and application of the science by a forensic genealogist, taught by Debbie Parker Wayne, CG
• Department of Defense methods used to identify and confirm missing military personnel through the use of DNA and forensic genealogical work
• Finding missing heirs in an ethical and professional manner, taught by Michael Ramage, JD, CG
• A case study of heir searching with international consequences and lessons to be learned, taught by Catherine Desmarais, CG
• Insight into the process of dual citizenship, from clients to contracts to international case studies, taught by Melissa Johnson
• How to manage research projects and subcontracted researchers in foreign countries, taught by Catherine Desmarais, CG
• Who, what, when, where, and why forensic genealogists might need the services of a certified document translator

The instructors for the Forensic Genealogy Institute combined have more than 70 years experience in the field and its related specialties.  The "Foundations in Forensic Genealogy" track is a comprehensive course of study covering research techniques, methods, business preparations, business forms, work products, legal and ethical courses with case studies, and more.  The new advanced track is designed to present a new set of challenges and instructions each session.  This year's "Advanced Forensic Evidence Analysis" will include instruction found nowhere else concerning allied and subspecialty fields to aid the forensic genealogist.  Both tracks are designed as learning opportunities for those already experienced in the field, as well as for the professional considering accepting forensic cases.

So far, among those registered to attend the 2014 Forensic Genealogy Institute are:
• More than half of the genealogists who attended the original two Foundations tracks are returning for the new Advanced track.
• About a dozen people have signed up for the combination Foundations and Advanced tracks.
• Among those registered are 17 full-time forensic genealogists, several new forensic genealogists, three investigators, five attorneys, one journalist, and two paralegals.
• We have one Accredited Genealogist (AG), seven Certified Genealogists (CG), and one Fellow, Society of Antiquaries of Scotland (FSA).
• Attendees will be coming from Canada (1), Germany (1), and 22 U.S. states, including one person from Hawaii.

Come join this diverse group of professionals (including me!) at the 2014 Forensic Genealogy Institute.  And if you're on Facebook, Like the Institute's page there to keep up with the latest announcements.

If you are considering going, make your hotel reservation as soon as possible.  Rooms may be scarce during the Institute due to sporting and other events in Dallas.  Please use the hotel reservation link found on the Institute Web site.  Rooms may not be available if you delay making your reservation.

Registration Opens for the 2014 Forensic Genealogy Institute

The Council for the Advancement of Forensic Genealogy has announced it is offering two series of courses at the 2014 Forensic Genealogy Institute at the Wyndham Love Field Hotel in Dallas, Texas.  Registration for the institute is now open.

"Foundations in Forensic Genealogy" will be held from Monday, March 24, through Wednesday, March 26, 2014.  "Foundations" is designed as a basis for the study of forensic genealogy.  It assumes the student has an intermediate or advanced level of understanding of genealogical research and explores the forensic genealogy landscape, application of forensic genealogical techniques to research, and career paths available to forensic genealogists.  It is a prerequisite course of study for the advanced-level courses.

"Advanced Forensic Evidence Analysis" will be held from Thursday, March 27, through Saturday, March 29, 2014.  New in 2014, this year's advanced program will explore in depth a number of applications of forensic genealogy, to include the development and use of DNA in solving forensic genealogy problems, the repatriation process of military remains presented by the U.S. Department of Defense, forensic genealogy in mineral rights cases, and forensic document analysis.  These topics, along with others being formulated, will be "hands on" discussions, case studies, and workshops.

I attended the most recent institute, which was held in April of this year.  At that time the only courses offered were what is now called "Foundations."  It was an intensive educational experience and well worth it; I wrote about how valuable the lessons were.  I've already registered for the advanced series of courses, so next spring I'll be taking another trip to Dallas.

Registration is open to the general public.  Hotel accommodations and further information about the Institute may be found on the Forensic Genealogy Institute Web page.  Those wishing to attend are encouraged to make their hotel reservations now via the hotel link on the site due to sporting and other events scheduled in the Dallas area.

Thank you to the Napa Valley Genealogical Society

It was a beautiful day today in the San Francisco Bay area, perfect for taking a drive to the Napa Valley and the library of the Napa Valley Genealogical Society (NVGS).  There were two plates of yummy-scrumptious homemade chocolate cookie bars with walnuts and dried cherries (or maybe cranberries?) available for snacking (I think I had three).  And the meeting room was full of people (so full they had to bring in extra chairs) waiting to hear me talk about forensic genealogy.

This was a brand-new presentation, requested by NVGS this past February.  Carole, their programming person, had just heard about something called "forensic genealogy" and then found my name listed on the Council for the Advancement of Forensic Genealogy Web site as a member.  So the day I came to teach a class about methods to research women's maiden names, Carole asked if I could come back later in the year and talk to them about forensic genealogy.

Unlike most of my classes, this presentation was not about techniques on how to do research.  It focused on what forensic genealogy is -- "genealogical research, analysis, and reporting in cases with legal implications" -- how that affects the research process, and what types of research are most likely to fall into this category.  I also discussed some things that are called forensic genealogy that really aren't.  (Hint:  Neither "DNA" nor "scientific" means the same thing as "forensic.")

And I'm happy to say that everyone really enjoyed the talk, including me.  I had several interesting questions after the presentation, and I think everyone attending gained an appreciation for the unbiased, impartial approach a forensic genealogist has to bring to her work.

So thank you to NVGS for inviting me to speak!

Last Day of Ohio Genealogical Society Conference

I went to more interesting sessions today at the conference.  The first session was on how to do research for a house history.  I've been wanting to do that for a while with my house, which was built in 1910.  I started the research a while ago, but now I have more good ideas on places to look for information.  After that I went to Colleen Fitzpatrick's session, "Forensic Genealogy:  CSI Meets Roots."  Unfortunately, this really wasn't a talk about forensic genealogy (see my recent post about the Forensic Genealogy Institute I attended two weeks ago to learn more about what that actually is).  Her talk was really about DNA and using science in your research.  So I was a little disappointed, but right at the end of the lecture she talked about her family connection to a surname I am researching in County Cork, Ireland, so that helped salvage the talk for me.

We had a three-hour lunch break today, which gave me time to catch up on four days of e-mails.  After that I headed back downstairs for a case study by Jay Fonkert, where he discussed how he tracked down four wives for an ancestor of his wife's where people originally thought there was only one.  He used several less common record types and had to prove several condlusions through indirect evidence, and it was interesting to see how it all came together.  In the next session James Beidler gave an overview of German Palatines, the area they came from, and the historical governmental structure in that area and how it affects research.  My family, Sellers, which was originally Söller in German, were Palatines.  Currently I have the family tracked back to 1615, but I want to see what else I can find.

The last session was on using estate papers and deeds for Irish research.  Richard Doherty had lots of wonderful information and links, which I hope to use for my research in Cork, Roscommon, and Sligo counties.  The Irish estate records seem to be very similar to the Polish magnate records which many Jewish researchers have been finding in archives.  Feudal landlords preceded governments in many areas; they owned the land, and they kept track of who was renting land, how much they paid, repairs that were made to buildings, etc.  So if you can find out who owned the land, you look for that person (or family's) archives and see if your ancestors appear in the records.  It's an excellent way to look for people who were not landowners.  And to celebrate a great convention, I took myself out to dinner at Ruth's Chris Steak House!  (Well, it wasn't much of a splurge, because someone gave me a gift card, but it was still a treat.)

Tomorrow I have allowed myself more time for research at the Cincinnati Public Library.  I'm going to see what else I can find on my con man and maybe do a little research on my Columbus relatives.  Then I head back to California on a nonstop flight (yay!) and get ready to go back to my regular schedule on Monday.

Cincinnati is a really nice city, and I've enjoyed my visit a lot.  I also got along great with my roommate for the conference, Luana Darby.  She is also a professional genealogist, and it was amazing how many things we have in common -- we've both done musical theater; we know multiple languages; we like NCIS, Criminal Minds, Chopped!, and Iron Chef America; we love to cook and sew; and we love to talk!  We stayed up late talking every night.  I'm glad I got to meet her, and I'm sure I'll see her again at another conference.

The Forensic Genealogy Institute in Dallas, Texas

For the past few days, I have been in Dallas, Texas, where I participated in a great genealogical educational opportunity.  I attended the Forensic Genealogy Institute, offered by the Council for the Advancement of Forensic Genealogy (the second time they've done this).  Forensic here means "genealogical research, analysis, and reporting in cases with legal implications" (from the CAFG home page).  I and about two dozen more genealogists -- most of us professionals, but some just starting to test the waters -- had more than 20 hours of instruction that included real-world work examples and resources.  Sessions covered an overview of different applications of forensic genealogy, legal and ethnical considerations, the role of the forensic genealogist, and business aspects.  We each earned a Certificate of Completion (not to be confused with being certified!).

I have been researching my own family history for almost 40 (!) years now, and other people's for close to 15 years.  Working as a genealogist has no set educational or experience requirements, so the background I already had in history, research and analysis techniques, writing reports, multiple languages, indexing, etc. was enough to get me started.  Over the years I have attended many, many talks on genealogical topics and techniques and have learned quite a bit.  But I was impressed with how much information the institute managed to cram into our heads over such a short time.  The case studies and real-world experiences related by the instructors were by far the most valuable part of the institute.  I recommend that anyone considering forensic genealogical work watch the CAFG Web site and sign up the next time the institute is scheduled (current plans are for next March).

Another enjoyable aspect of the institute was actually getting to meet several people I've previously communicated with only by e-mail.  It was a pleasure to meet Dee Dee King, Leslie Lawson, Kelvin Meyers, Michael Ramage, Debbie Parker Wayne, Amy Coffin, Janis Martin (who has the same birthday as I do!), and Charlene Pipkin in person.

New Genealogical Affiliation

I am proud to announce that based on my past experience with forensic genealogical research I have been accepted as a Junior Member in the new Council for the Advancement of Forensic Genealogy (CAFG).  The word "forensic" means relating to courts of law, so forensic genealogy is research that has legal implications.

A good portion of the genealogy research I do is for heir searches, where there is some sort of inheritance or property and someone is searching for the person or persons with the legal right to that property.  I have also conducted research for a U.S. Army contractor who searches for relatives of MIA Army personnel to try to verify the identity of recovered remains through DNA comparisons, and research to determine eligibility for citizenship.

I was told I have a strong background and that I do good work, but that I have great potential to do better and to broaden the range of my work.  I look forward to increasing my skills and to working with other members of CAFG on the Council's objectives.

I've been welcomed on the CAFG blog.

A New Perspective on Heir Research

A lot of the family history research I do is heir research -- looking for people who are eligible for some sort of inheritance.  This might be because they are direct heirs of someone who died without a will, or because they are descendants of someone who was left a bequest in a will.  Until recently, my part in this has been to do the research, find documents, connect the dots, and look for contact information for these people, then give the results to my client.  He then contacts the potential heirs, explains the circumstances, and follows through with whatever legal requirements there may be.

The age of mobile phones, however, has put a kink in this process.  Many people nowadays have given up landlines and have only mobile phones, which are not listed routinely in directories.  So more and more often I can find an address for a person I believe to be an heir, but I cannot find a telephone number.  The primary client for whom I do heir research strongly prefers a personal contact, usually by telephone, before he mails information.

I have been working on a project recently that had this situation come up.  I had tracked two of the three heirs, but I had only addresses.  I had exhausted the resources available to me and simply couldn't find any phone numbers.  One of the people lives an hour away from me.  So my client asked me to drive down and speak to her in person!

Considering how publicized inheritance scams are these days, I wasn't sure what type of reception I was going to get.  When I rang the doorbell, dogs started barking very loudly and rushed to the door.  Soon a man opened the door just a crack and asked what I wanted.  I told him who I was looking for, giving her maiden name and married name, and said it was about a possible inheritance.  He looked very suspicious but let me in.  The dogs immediately swarmed me, but I discovered quickly they were more bark than bite, and I love dogs anyway.  I think the fact that they obviously liked me helped a little.

The man went to get his wife, and I gave her a quick explanation of the family connections and inheritances that had led me to contact her.  She was amazed that she could be inheriting anything but confirmed that all of the research was accurate.  Then she was curious about how I had actually managed to find her.  I told her a little of the process and how one piece of information led to another and eventually to her home address.  I gave her contact information for my client and let her know what information he needed, and soon left.

As a contract researcher, I work on the periphery of these cases.  I primarily deal with computers and paperwork, and then funnel the information I find to someone else.  It is easy to forget that what I do relates to living people.  It was enjoyable to step outside of my normal role for once and be able to put a face on my research.