With enough money, it's usually possible to come up with pretty much whatever research and whatever results you want, genetic or otherwise.
I personally believe that, at least in most nations (Australians make a possible notable exception, for instance, having perhaps never had kings over them before a couple hundred years ago, and conspicuously foreign ones then.), every human is descended of slaves and of kings. Likewise, everthing has been in some sense, at some point, stolen, and you must decide, I guess where the line accrues; we all steal life just to eat. We live on stolen land, bought in blood. All of us. Those who rent may still feel a twinge, if they think too much. How far back do you want to go? The Latins used to have a saying about the concept of "dirty money". "Money doesn't stink," they said. I have mixed feelings about the concept that buying antiques (as contrasted to literally stealing them) constitutes an assault upon the seller's cultural heritage. I must say that it is VASTLY my observation on the worldwide antique scene that the source of the majority of old stuff on the market (granted, this is slanted by it being stuff I can afford, but I have not found that tightly bounded by quality or even fanciness) is people for whom it is old junk they do not respect and do not want. And yes, I've acquired rusty old "junk" as junk, at junk prices, coming out of ancestor-worshipping central Africa, as well as Indonesia and PI. And yes, it was good stuff. Don't get me wrong; theives suck; Oh, I've been stolen from
but it's an awful complicated ethical issue when you really think about it, and drawing the line may not be as simple as it seems.