I find it unreal that the lack of evidence underpinning the statement in the Final Report seems to have escaped your notice.
It wasn't possible to scientifically prove that the hairs found in Burgau were not Jane Tanner's, so it's not possible that Francisco Corte Real said that in his report.
The PJ seem to have either misunderstood what he said or misrepresented it.
Hmmmm ~ any idea what the PJ misunderstood or misrepresented from the following information ~
From the PJ files...
The Haplotype identified by the letters M e M*, present in 49 samples, (35 in the Residencia Liliana, 13 in the vehicle Volkswagen and 1 in the bathroom of the apartament in Burgau), and identical to that of Robert James Queriol Eveleight Murat (RQMU), meaning those samples were from that person or individuals of the same maternal bloodline.4358 to 4361 Information re Haplotype-S with rest results
16-Processo 16; PDF page 4358
GENETIC AND BIOLOGICAL FORENSIC SERVICES
Processo no.2007/000565/PT-B
Processo no.2007/000244/CR-B5,B6
Processo no. 2007/000226/LX-BC1
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PORTUGUESE-FORENSIC.htmHere we have a another hair from Burgau - only in this instance the sequence is confirmed as matching Robert Murat's mtDNA.
What on earth do you make of that one. I can hardly wait for your answer which I am sure will be illuminating.