Booth's Horse Fell....

[John Fazio]

BINZEL:

PLEASE SEE MY COMMENTS BELOW IN CAPITAL LETTERS. I HOPE YOU DON'T MIND THIS METHOD OF COMMUNICATION; IT SAVES ME TIME.

(12-24-2016 12:57 AM)wpbinzel Wrote:  

(12-23-2016 09:31 PM)John Fazio Wrote:  I DISAGREE. THE PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE FAVORS THE CONCLUSION THAT THE FRACTURE OCCURRED WHEN HE FELL TO THE STAGE.

Thanks, John, for adding your perspective. I have the utmost respect and appreciation for your research and contributions in this field. THANK YOU. I also recognize that reasonable people may draw different conclusions from a set of information. ABSOLUTELY TRUE. That is probably the thing I enjoy most about the study of history.

The purpose of my post was simply to compile a series of observations that, hopefully, provided an interesting perspective of the "falling horse" theory. If I have learned anything in the course of my research -- and based on your writings, I am virtually certain that you would agree -- is that just because something has become "accepted history," it doesn't mean it actually happened that way (e.g., see Lincoln in the Telegraph Office). YOU COULD NOT BE MORE RIGHT. REPEATEDLY, IN DECAPITATING THE UNION I FOUND THE CONVENTIONAL WISDOM TO BE WRONG, OR, IN ANY CASE, MORE LIKELY TO BE WRONG.

While I question some of your comments, I am firmly in the camp of "Nobody Alive Today Knows for Sure," so readers should draw their own conclusions. ALSO TRUE. To me, the central point is either you accept the veracity of the claims in Booth's "diary" or you don't. Those claims are the origin and source of the "broke on stage" theory. Given the context in which they were written, I do not find Booth to be credible. HIS CREDIBILITY IS BEST JUDGED BY WHAT WE KNOW FROM OTHER SOURCES, INCLUDING HIM. FOR EXAMPLE, HARBIN STATED THAT BOOTH SAID TO HIM THAT "COURAGE ALONE PROPELLED HIM ACROSS THE STAGE AFTER HIS SPRAWLING JUMP FROM THE BOX. IF HE HADN'T BEEN VERY COURAGEOUS, HE WOULD HAVE GIVEN UP RIGHT THERE." HE ADDED THAT HE THOUGHT FOR AN INSTANT THAT HE WAS GOING TO FAINT. TO ME, THIS DESCRIPTION FROM ANOTHER SOURCE AS TO BOOTH'S STATE OF MIND IS ENTIRELY CONSISTENT WITH A BROKEN FIBULA. WHAT OTHER IMPEDIMENT WOULD HAVE REQUIRED SO MUCH COURAGE TO OVERCOME? However, for most (myself included), if the standard of proof for either theory is "beyond a reasonable doubt," then neither could prevail. If, however, as you suggest, a more practical standard is that of a preponderance of the evidence, then it will leave people with different conclusions. So be it. AGREED.

JOHN