The hole In the door

[Eva Elisabeth]

(11-12-2015 10:32 AM)jonathan Wrote:  Yeah Laurie, that's exactly what I meant. I haven't read the argument that Booth made a dry run an hour earlier, but the thought of it brings some obvious questions immediately to mind. Why would he have done that? What is the benefit? He knew the theater. He had been there that afternoon so he likely knew the setup of the box. If he had entered the box at 9:30, wouldn't many people have seen him and reported that in the aftermath??

Again, putting myself in his place, I have no real need for a dry run. I'm intimately familiar with the theater, I've been there in the afternoon so I know the set up, I've got my hole in the door to peek in just before I do the deed. That's all I need really. Why go through the trouble of entering the box twice and drawing extra attention to myself? As far as Clara's statement, it sounds like she's saying that Booth actually opened the door and either stuck his head in or stepped inside, looked around and then left. If that was the case, surely someone else in the box would have noticed that. Although Mary was too distraught to think straight, it seems like Rathbone would have recalled this at some point and verified Clara's story.

---

It's a very curious statement from Clara though. What reason could she possibly have for saying that if it didn't happen?? Would it be she was just mis-remembering? Could it be someone else opened the door to look in and after the assassination she got confused about who it was? Was she just embellishing? At what point was that statement made? Was it in the immediate aftermath, or years later, or at the trial? Did she even testify at the trial?

I agree with you, Jonathan, Roger, and Laurie - it makes the most sense to me JWB bore the hole but I am suspicious about Clara Harris' statement.

The statement was published in the NYHerald two days after the assassination and reads:
"Nearly one hour before the commission of the deed the assassin came to the door of the box, and looked in to take a survey of the position of its occupants. It was supposed at the time that it was either a mistake or the exercise of an impertinent curiosity. The circumstance attracted no particular attention at the time."
She didn't testify at the trial, I believe Henry's testifying was considered to be sufficient.

(However, re.: "...wouldn't many people have seen him and reported that in the aftermath?" - Yes, and? Anyway he could be sure to be identified (and for sure wanted to be so), so what would this have mattered to him? Still I, like you, tend to doubt the dry run.)

As for Clara Harris, I find it strange that she didn't accompany and care for her bleeding, fainting fiancee when he was carried away (to her father's home!).