My understanding is that the DNA was partial and can only exclude, not include. Also, the FBI never publicly eliminated Hahneman.. So, they have internal discretion and that discretion can't be used to infer "guilt", only lack of a "public" elimination.
I hope your approach shakes something loose though.
The FBI didn't compare Hahneman's DNA, he died in 1991 before they had Cooper's tie DNA.
You are correct that the profile is partial. However, by definition, if the DNA can exclude suspects it must also be able to include suspects. The field may be large, for example 75% of suspects tested may be excluded meaning you have 25% who match the partial, but, those 25% cannot be removed.
I have actually tried to find out how strong the Cooper DNA profile is, meaning will it exclude 50% of random subjects or perhaps 95% of random subjects. However, the FBI will not say. Regardless, the DNA is inadmissible in a court of law even if it clears 99% of subjects. Technicalities aside, that would be critical data to have in hand for investigative purposes if for nothing else.
What we do know is this: Of the three compared, two (67%) have been cleared, one (Sheridan) has not. Why?