Let's set the record straight here:

If you've reached this page, then you've probably clicked on a link included in an article written with the purpose of defaming us or our client.  Having been harassed by this party for some time, we do not feel it necessary to name them and thereby provide them any additional exposure.  Our consignor believes that these attacks stem from a disagreement he had with this party some time ago. The party responsible for that article has blatantly mischaracterized our comments and those of our consignor, and could aptly be described as a common cyber-bully. 

Their entire "analysis" was an exercise in confirmation bias.  We would not insult our bidders intelligence by paying someone to tell us what we already believe to be true and then holding that up as some objective  proof of fact. 

The Jesse James ambrotype in question was researched by objective third parties before we would even accept the consignment.  These were not people we paid, and they do not have any financial interest in the item.  With an item sure to stir controversy, we would never offer it unless 1) we were convinced of its authenticity, and 2) there were experts who shared our opinion.

So, be aware that the article which led you here is far from objective.  Our bidders are an intelligent and highly educated group, and they do their own research.  Any photo of Jesse James is going to be controversial and will bring forth an array of opinions, but to hold up any subjective analysis as objective proof is pure folly.  We welcome diverse opinions on the matter.   We happen to agree with the opinion stated by the independent third-party, below, who has not only examined the ambrotype in person but also the supporting documentation in possession of our consignor.  Furthermore, the evaluation below was made 3 years prior to us even being aware of the existence of this item.