New Development in Booth Case Coming Soon

[Steve Whitlock]

(07-19-2019 12:13 AM)Steve Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 10:10 PM)Steve Whitlock Wrote:  I don't think Black was showing a daguerreotype and photograph of John St. Helen, but of John Wilkes Booth. The undertaker couldn't have buried David E. George/John St. Helen, who was still doing his mummy role on the fair circuits. So, the undertaker was being asked whether John Wilkes Booth who died and was buried in Leadville, CO in 1916 was the same John Wilkes Booth in Black's daguerreotype and photo.

You're right, I guess I just didn't notice that the article had already expanded from Bates claims to other claims/issues. The phrase "photograph of the claimant" makes it sound like Black actually had a photograph of the Leadville JWB, though.

Yes, he does. If so then we would want to see that photo of the Leadville, CO John Wilkes Booth. Perhaps it's in a collection for Mr Black's research.

Finis L. Bates states that John St. Helen went to Leadville in 1879, and from there to CA. However, we know he died in 1903, so if claimant is the 1848-1916 JWB that's after John St. Helen came and went his elusive way.