Where was John Surratt on April 14, 1865 ?

[L Verge]

It has been ten years since I read AB, but I can't believe that I let that one slip past. I have never seen that mentioned anywhere else. Perhaps like other writers, Mike slipped it in with the assumption that "it should have happened that way?" I would be surprised if he did that, but we all have the tendency to fill in blanks if needed.

Why would Weichmann leave out such a significant detail? Why did Mike leave out such a significant note, when his chapter notes are practically books in themselves?

---

Sneaky little trick by Mike or his editor: Go to page 446, chapter notes for Chapter 11 where the statement about Booth being in the parlor is supposedly explained. #65 (which is cited as #66 in the text on page 224) states: "Weichmann did not see Booth in the parlor, but said he heard a man's footsteps and inferred it had been Booth..." based on Anna's exclamation the next morning -- about THAT man.

Another case of Gerry-rigging the facts to make a point?