Identification of Booth's body

[mikegriffith1]

I would just like to note that I see that no one has been able to cite a single known case in the history of forensic science where a body's appearance changed so drastically after 10 days under similar/worse conditions (1) that it "bore no resemblance" or "so little resemblance" to the person in life, (2) that it sprouted freckles on the face to the degree that it was described as heavily freckled, and (3) that even its lineaments "bore no resemblance" to the person in life.

I will also note that I provided numerous linked articles on cases where bodies were discovered outdoors after being exposed to the elements for 48-72 hours or more and where family members and/or friends were still able to identify them. The idea that 10 days of flight of the kind that Booth experienced could alter a person's appearance to the degree described above is unscientific and has no precedent in the history of forensic science.

I will further note that the witnesses at the 1869 identification described seeing features that disqualify the body as being that of Booth, such as hair that was 10-12 inches longer than Booth's hair, the wrong number of filled teeth (and, by the way, no one reported a tooth missing that was not noted as missing on the dental chart, which would have been the case if a filled tooth had fallen out or had been removed), and visible damage on or just below the left knee (there is no record that Booth suffered any such damage).

I find it revealing that at every point where Holt and Baker could have made the identification on the Montauk significantly stronger, if not indisputable, they chose not to do so. I also find it revealing that the War Department suppressed the fact that the body's face was heavily freckled and that the witnesses were initially shocked by the body's lack of resemblance to Booth. We did not learn those two crucial facts until decades later.