The complaint was about freeing slaves for the express purpose of armed insurrection. As Lord Dunmore said "declare Freedom to the Slaves, AND reduce the City of Williamsburg to Ashes."
The DOI is far from contradictory on slavery. It could perhaps be argued that it only tacitly condemns it. This in order to secure its unanimous passage. It is pretty clear that Jefferson believed slavery violated its principles, and he would know. These are the reasons that I argue the choice of Lincoln OR Jefferson is a false choice.
You may be correct that changes were made to the DOI so that it would pass unanimously. The change of Jefferson's "He has incited treasonable insurrections of our fellow citizens …" to "He has excited domestic insurrection among us …" would be consistent with your thesis. Not everyone back then considered slaves citizens or perhaps even knew of any slave that was considered a "fellow citizen."
Witness Charles Pinckney, a member of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, who said the following in 1821 [Link, scroll to the bottom]:
It appears by the Journal of the Convention that formed the Constitution of the United States, that I was the only member of that body that ever submitted the plan of a constitution completely drawn in articles and sections; and this having been done at a very early state of their proceedings, the article on which now so much stress is laid, and on the meaning of which the whole of this question is made to turn, and which is in these words: "the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities in every State," having been made by me, it is supposed I must know, or perfectly recollect, what I meant by it. In answer, I say, that, at the time I drew that constitution, I perfectly knew that there did not then exist such a thing in the Union as a black or colored citizen, nor could I then have conceived it possible such a thing could have ever existed in it; nor, notwithstanding all that has been said on the subject, do I now believe one does exist in it.
It is pretty clear that Jefferson believed slavery violated its principles, and he would know.
Probably so, but he was outvoted or overruled on the final wording of the DOI. The final version condemns the king (meaning in this case his agent, Lord Dunmore) for freeing the colonists' slaves to fight against the rebels. Very Lincolnesque, that Lord Dunmore. Wait, wait ... the DOI condemns Dunmore's actions and perhaps Lincoln's by extension.
These are the reasons that I argue the choice of Lincoln OR Jefferson is a false choice.
On the question of whether slaves should be free, the difference between them may not be that great. One could argue there is a difference in degree between them on whether slaves should be free.
On the question of whether they followed the Constitution, both Jefferson and Lincoln did some unconstitutional things, i.e, Jefferson apparently so concerning the Louisiana purchase and Lincoln concerning everything but the color of ink the Constitution was written in. That is an overstatement, I know, but gee whiz, what a difference between them over the Constitution!