I had completely forgotten about the analysis done in Denmark.
I Googled up a Seattle Times article written three years ago and refreshed my once very good memory.
As I recall, the original Denmark researchers could only assemble a partial DNA profile because the bones laid in wet sand for thousands of years, so their conclusions were by no means definitive.
I also forgot that the scientist who led the lawsuit to preserve the bones for research concluded that the bones belonged to person with a maritime or coastal diet - heavy in salt water fish and crustaceans - which was completely at odds with the discovery of the bones hundreds of miles away from the Pacific.