Threatened over my Family History research

[ThoseBefore]

Hi all,

I hope someone can give me some guidance here, as this is making me quite agitated.

On my family history website I have a profile for someone born c.1870 in Australia. She was involved in an interesting court case. As part of the contemporary newspaper reporting, it was said of her that she was half Australian Aboriginal. On my website I said in a note that she was half Australian Aboriginal.

I was contacted by a member of her extended family to say that this was untrue; he had done research which showed her ancestry back on both sides to England etc.

I checked what I had written, realised that I really should have said "A contemporary newspaper reported that she has half Australian Aboriginal, but there is no evidence to support this", and emailed the other researcher to say that I would make this change, and offered to accept any further research he has done. The other researcher emailed me back with what (to me) sounded quite angry words, saying that if I didn't take this incorrect information down, he would take 'further action'. he stressed that he was not racially motivated.

==========
So what to do? I don't enjoy conflict and don't want this to turn into a fight. I also don't really have any skin in the game; I am not related to the subject of the article.

I've got a range of options, and could really do with some help.

Regards,

Tim

[jim1]

As the information you included is in the public domain there is no "further action"
that can be taken.
I wouldn't be bullied into changing it, it's part of an historical document.
It may also be that the other party's research is incorrect.

[eddiebooth]

I would change the wording and name the newspaper. I wouldnt bother saying there is no evidence to support this.
As Jim1 says, this information is in the public domain, if the other person has an issue he should take it up with the newspaper (if still in existence) or if he still pursues you he needs to back up his side of the story - at least you have something that supports what you have said. He would at the least need a birth certificate naming both parents, although it could well be that the 'father' named may not be the biological father at all.

[Viktoria]

Methinks he doth protest too much !
I don’t think he isn’t racially motivated !
In my view he ought really to be contacting the newspaper ,assuming it is still in existence ,that was your source.

If you added a note saying this was never proved and further research by other family members has that it is not true so you have amended your records accordingly .
I am not sure what else you can do.
What can he do?

Gosh, if I believed half of what my mother’s surviving siblings told me ——
 
Don’t worry ,if he were not racially prejudiced he would be proud of the Aborigine connections.You could throw that at him, that far from not being racially motivated he patently is ,is that an offence ?
I think it is here .
He will probably then be more worried than you - I sincerely hope so.

You won’t be the only researcher who has this info in your tree ,what can he do? He won’t know  of all the others .

Tell him to take it up with the Newspaper.
Viktoria.
PS- Sorry folks your replies arrived whilst I was typing mine .We are in agreement anyway,
V.

[BumbleB]

Just a thought - do you have a copy of the actual newspaper article?  If so, then attach that to your website, in which case there is no case to answer.

[Viktoria]

Yes, then he HAS to contact the newspaper or shut up!
If not still in existence then shut up anyway!
I like it 
Viktoria.

[Nanna52]

When I wrote a piece about a cousin of mine I used an interview he gave as reference for part of it.  I named the paper, it’s date and said that it was according to an interview he gave.

I imagine that a statement along the lines of according to a report in such and such paper printed on this date she was half aboriginal.

[groom]

Surely you should have added your sources ( the newspaper) anyway, especially if you were writing about the court case? If you have already done that, then as the others have said, it isn't you he has to take action against, but the newspaper - you will have covered yourself as you have acknowledged the source.  I doubt if he'll get anywhere trying to sue about an article written over 150 years ago.

[james52]

Methinks he doth protest too much !
I don’t think he isn’t racially motivated !

Giving him the benefit of the doubt it may not be racially motivated. He could have spent countless hours (and money) researching that branch of the family tree; the possibility that it was all based on one incorrect link may be too unpalatable - better to be in denial. I know I've had to bring my willpower to the fore on occasion when I was unsure about a half-lead but it would have been all too convenient to take it as truth.