Booth escape route north

[wsanto]

(09-08-2013 12:20 PM)Troy Cowan Wrote:  Wsanto said, "I understand that the horse fall is critical to your theory and to Jerry Madonna's theory and others i suppose but I don't see much evidence that his horse actually ever fell. doesn't support them in any way either."

I would like to clear up the fact that it is not important to me when Booth broke his leg. The problem I have is when people state an opinion as a fact. No one knows when Booth broke his leg and people that state it as a fact, I find troublesome.

You go on to say: "There are no statements that I know of from Mudd's farmhand, John Davis, beside the one in "The Evidence". This statement does not describe the bay mare as injured. In fact he claims the mare was "in fine trim"."

I don't believe the horse Booth left the theatre with is the same horse that he had when he arrived at Dr. Mudd's. During the kidnapping plan, Booth had made arrangements to obtain fresh horses and he took advantage of obtaining fresh horses during his escape.

George W. Baird wrote, “I inquired of some boys (at the Surratt tavern) whom I found very communicative. One boy said that Mr. Jenkins, Mr. Griffith, Mr. Wylie and Mr. Lloyd were all out that night listening for the horses coming. That when the two men came, fresh horses were brought out of the stable, saddles transferred from the tired horses to the fresh, and the men rode on.”

Wsanto continued, " I've never heard anyone claim that Booth was complaining about his back more than his broken leg and I doubt this is true. Dr. Mudd did not treat Booth for an injured back but for the broken leg."

From Dr. Mudd's statement: "After they had knocked twice more I opened the door, but before doing so they told me they were two strangers on their way to Washington; that one of their horses had fallen by which one of the men had broken his leg. On opening the door I found two men. One on a horse led by the other man who had tied his horse to a tree nearby. I aided the man in getting off his horse and into the house, and laid him on the sofa in my parlor. After getting a light I assisted him in getting upstairs where there were two beds, one of which he took. He seemed to be very much injured in the back, and complained very much of it."

Laurie, if you don't know the distance from the floor of Lincoln's box to the stage, please don't add to the confusion. A number is all I need. For example: 8'3" .
Hanchett said he could prove that James William Boyd was really James Ward Boyd, but he didn't. He let the matter drop and he moved on. If proof is so easy, why are we on this forum?

Dave, I agree.

Troy,

I don't know for a fact that Booth broke his leg at Ford's. A lot of people that know a lot more than me seem convinced that he broke his leg in a hose fall.

I do know for a fact that Booth jumped from Lincoln's box to the stage. I do know it is a fact that Booth claimed he broke his leg at Ford's in his diary. Harbin and Jones and George Mudd are on the record that they believe Booth broke his leg in the leap.

I also know it is a fact that Samual Mudd was lying in his statements to investigators. Herold was too.

When i read quotes from Herold or Mudd or Atzerodt to support a new theory, I'm very suspicious and don't really give them any weight. Just as if I were a juror and it was a fact that a witness perjured themselves, I wouldn't believe any element of their testimony.

I understand that Booth may have injured his back as well as broke his fibula, but you claimed that Booth was more concerned about his back pain than the pain from his broken leg. That is simply not true in my opinion. Why didn't he say in his diary "when leaping broke my back"?

The horses are pretty well identified at Mudd's by Mudd's farmhand as the same horses that Booth and Herold were riding when they left Washington. It seems to me the description of the horse is the same from the stablemen to Cobb to Mudd's farmhand to Jone's book. I suppose they could be different horses with similar descriptions but I feel this is unlikely.

Most horse fall theories claim that the bay mare that Booth was riding fell somewhere near Soper's Hill and injured Booth while also injuring it's left shoulder. Herold caught up and they traded horses for the remainder of their escape until they ditched them in the swamp near the pine thicket per Jones' instruction. They rely on some statement from Mudd's farmhand that the bay mare was injured and, according to Kauffman, had "a badly swollen left shoulder" That is not in the statement in "The Evidence" and i have never had access to any other statements. That doesn't mean they don't exist, it just means that I have never had access to them.

So, it is my opinion, and certainly not a fact, that Booth broke his leg at Ford's. I do not see any good evidence to the contrary. So on this I disagree with Dave Taylor. I realize that he knows more about the assassination in his little finger than I will ever know. I might move off my position toward Dave's if someone could show me a statement from Mudd's farmhand that confirmed the bay mare had a left shoulder injury.