Post Reply 
What Was The Role of David Herold
03-05-2013, 04:01 AM (This post was last modified: 03-05-2013 04:45 AM by John Fazio.)
Post: #168
RE: What Was The Role of David Herold
(02-27-2013 04:19 PM)Gene C Wrote:  Is it possible Booth spoke of "others" in an effort to encourage those who might be waivering in their dedication to his cause, by making the number of conspiritors larger than it really was?

As for these unknown "others" on the fringe who are seen acting strangely, in most notorious crimes there are usually eyewitnesses who see things that never were, and see suspicion in ordinary activities. Kooky witness come out of the woodwork to report strange things they've seen.
(Either that or I've wasted years of watching TV cop shows.)

Gene:

Sorry for not responding to this sooner; it did not jog my email in the usual way.

Booth's exaggeration is more than possible; it is probable. Recall that he told Chester in New York that there were between 50 and 100 people involved in the conspiracy and that Herold said he told him there were 35. It could not have been kept secret with such numbers. But an exaggeration does not negate a bigger conspiracy than his immediate action team; it just wasn't as big as he sometimes portrayed it to be. Recall his reference in his diary to the failure of "others" who had failed to strike for their country.

As for others on the fringe, eyewitnesses who come out of the woodwork and see things that never were, etc., recall that Harbin, Stringfellow and Breckenridge left the country. All three returned (Harbin in 5 years; Stringfellow in 2; I don't remember in Breckenridge's case). Benjamin left too, after destroying all his records and correspondence (he used to destroy much of it as he created it), and never returned. Surratt left too, and had to be dragged back. Do innocent men flee? Recall Stringfellow's letter to Davis about being in regular contact, in March, 1865, in Washington, with someone who was very close to Lincoln. And recall, lastly, that Robert Lincoln said, in later years, that he had positive proof that a member of his father's cabinet had been guilty of treason, a statement that ties in well with Jacob Thompson's statement that he would not write memoirs because to do so would positively ruin a man who was still active in national politics.

John

(02-27-2013 06:04 PM)BettyO Wrote:  
Quote:And I haven't even begun to talk about the mail line, Ficklin, Stringfellow, Harbin, Parr, et al. Was Richmond ignorant of them too?

Powell also told Gillette that the head of the house where he boarded in Baltimore, i.e. Branson, was also "in on the kidnap plot." I have recently uncovered information regarding Mr. Branson which will surprise folk - it surprised me..... I'll bring this up at the Conference - so be there or be square! Cool

Betty:

I will look forward to meeting you and sharing information re Branson, et al.

John

(02-28-2013 06:08 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  John, thank you for all your comments. I'll limit this to just one question. You mentioned the Parker House meeting. Can you say for certain that this trip was not simply to see Isabel Sumner? What do you think? Do we really know with certainty that JWB met with Confederate operatives there?
[/quote)

Roger:

Sorry for not responding to this sooner. It only recently came to my attention.

No, we do not know with certainty that the meeting took place, but Tidwell, Hall and Gaddy believe it did (Come Retribution, pp. 262, 263) and the circumstantial evidence for it is strong. Steers (Encyclopedia, pp. 422, 423) refers to the evidence as "thin", but I am inclined, as are most prosecutors, to view circumstantial evidence as frequently better than eyewitness testimony. Start with my firm conviction that Booth was at all times relevant in the service of the Confederate Government and especially of its Secret Service. Follow that with the fact that less than two weeks after the meeting, Booth was in Baltimore recruiting his two boyhood chums, Arnold and O'Laughlen, into his "kidnapping" scheme. Follow that with the fact that within two months, the man-boy was in Montreal for two weeks meeting with Thompson, Martin, Sanders, Clay and all the other Confederate biggies. What reasonable conclusion shall we draw? Remember Occam's Razor: the simplest explanation is the best one. As for Isabel, I know nothing about her, nor about her relationship with the man-boy, and while I do not discount the feminine mystique, it seems a stretch that he would travel all the way to Boston for a dalliance when he already had a "binder" full of women elsewhere. (That was the term used by Romney; so please don't blame me.)

John

[quote='BettyO' pid='14097' dateline='1362002695']
Quote:And I haven't even begun to talk about the mail line, Ficklin, Stringfellow, Harbin, Parr, et al. Was Richmond ignorant of them too?

Powell also told Gillette that the head of the house where he boarded in Baltimore, i.e. Branson, was also "in on the kidnap plot." I have recently uncovered information regarding Mr. Branson which will surprise folk - it surprised me..... I'll bring this up at the Conference - so be there or be square! Cool

Betty:

I will look forward to meeting you and sharing information about Branson, et al.

John
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
RE: What Was The Role of David Herold - Art Loux - 01-07-2013, 05:53 PM
RE: What Was The Role of David Herold - Hess1865 - 01-31-2013, 11:38 PM
RE: What Was The Role of David Herold - Art Loux - 02-28-2013, 12:18 PM
RE: What Was The Role of David Herold - John Fazio - 03-05-2013 04:01 AM
RE: What Was The Role of David Herold - Art Loux - 02-28-2013, 12:50 PM
RE: What Was The Role of David Herold - Art Loux - 04-14-2013, 12:09 PM

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)