Booth escape route north

[L Verge]

(09-05-2013 08:59 AM)Troy Cowan Wrote:  Gene, if you follow the link you provided, you will see that nine people wrote a review of that book. I was one. If you read my review, it will answer your question.

Here's Troy's review, if interested:

William Hanchett is an apologist for William Stanton. Apparently Stanton can do no wrong. He makes one excuse after another, absolving Stanton's actions regarding Lincoln's assassination. He makes no reference to the murder of the hundreds of thousands boys that Stanton allowed to die on the battle field just to gain political control for himself and the radical Republicans.
He calls people misinformed that believe Booth didn't die at the Garret farm. He states he has proof that James W. Boyd died two years after the civil war and therefore he could not have died in the Garret barn. It doesn't bother Hanchett that the Boyd he is talking about is James Ward Boyd not James William Boyd. Anyway, it really doesn't matter, Boyd was and alias and not his real name.
If you believe Stanton had nothing to do with Lincoln's assassination, you would probably give this book five stars. I will give it four stars because it is informative.

Clever how the middle name of Boyd has been changed and now is claimed to be an alias... (speaking of twisting historical facts). The Boyd myth was utterly demolished by William C. Davis back in the August and November 1977 issues of Civil War Times Illustrated. You might also want to read The Body in the Barn: The Controversy Over the Death of John Wilkes Booth in which at least ten historians give their views -- including the escape proponents, Orlowek and Chitty.

[Jenny]

The Body in the Barn: The Controversy Over the Death of John Wilkes Booth is the book that made me seriously start to doubt all of the escape theories I had been so adamant about in the past. Highly recommended.

[JMadonna]

(09-04-2013 08:15 PM)Jenny Wrote:  Yes, some people have interesting theories like Jerry Madonna... but he tries his hardest to find factual sources that would make his claims reasonable. Sure, not everyone believes him... but at the same time a lot of the things he has come up with cannot be completely dismissed either. No one would believe him if he just said "I know this is fact but I can't back it up."

Wait till I'm finished with my next book!
I'll even make Laurie a believer!

[L Verge]

I supported some of your work while you were researching A Threat, but then you threw some curve balls into the final product that made me step back a bit. Will the new book have factual documentation?

[RJNorton]

(09-05-2013 11:20 AM)JMadonna Wrote:  Wait till I'm finished with my next book!

Jerry, are you writing another book on the assassination or will this one be on a new topic?

[JMadonna]

(09-05-2013 02:24 PM)RJNorton Wrote:  

(09-05-2013 11:20 AM)JMadonna Wrote:  Wait till I'm finished with my next book!

Jerry, are you writing another book on the assassination or will this one be on a new topic?

It's a pre-quil to Threat, so yes the assassination will be included.

---

(09-05-2013 01:51 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I supported some of your work while you were researching A Threat, but then you threw some curve balls into the final product that made me step back a bit. Will the new book have factual documentation?

Without curve balls baseball would be boring.
Laurie, I always have factual documentation. You just don't want to believe my conclusions.

[Troy Cowan]

On post #60 Jenny said, "John Wilkes Booth. James William Boyd. Same initials. Both had tattoos on their hands (where's the proof for Boyd? JWB's beloved sister Asia vividly recalls in her memoir that John took India ink and tattooed himself)".

So Jenny, you believe that it is a "fact" that Booth had a tattoo. I find it surprising what people accept as fact. Prior to Lincoln's assassination no one said Booth had a tattoo. No one saw or described the tattoo.

In 1848, when John Wilkes Booth was ten years old, using India ink from his school supplies he drew JWB on the back of his left hand. Booth's sister said, “He had perfectly shaped hands, and across the back of one he had clumsily marked, when a little boy, his initials in India ink.”1 His sister was upset with him because it would not wash off. Others have claimed it was tattoo, but it wasn't. As the skin grew outward, the dead skin and the initials in India ink would fall off. Soon it was totally gone. John Wilkes Booth had no tattoo.
1 Asia Booth Clarke , The Unlocked Book, (Faber and Faber, London, 1938), 60.



Jenny you said, "Boyd falls in with Herold by some strange chance, and they go to the Garrett's together. Boyd acts just like Booth: entertains the kids, eats dinner with the family, mentions the assassination. All by chance."

Jenny, you have it all confused. Boyd was introduce to Booth by Samuel Cox. Boyd showed Booth and Harold where to hide in the pine thicket. Boyd told Booth that for $300 dollars he would take them to Mosby's troops. At the ferry crossing Booth split up with Boyd and Harold. Boyd and Harold went to buy Booth a new pair of shoes and Booth went to the Garrett's. At the Garrett's, Booth entertained the kid, ate dinner with the family and slept in the house that night. The next day he left for his farm and Izola.
That night, Boyd and Harold came to the Garrett's looking for Booth. They were told that Booth had left that afternoon. Being tired, they were taken to a corn crib to sleep. Later that night, Union troops surrounded the barn and mistakenly killed Boyd instead of Booth.

[Jenny]

Oye. This is like hearing a preview of The Return of Assassin John Wilkes Booth Version 2.0.
I'm throwing in the towel now because this is getting ridiculous to the extreme.

PS: It's Herold, not Harold.

[Jim Garrett]

I have initials tattooed and one of them is a "J"!!! I've been in a barn before it burned down, and I am from Maryland. Whoa!! I'm either John Wilkes Booth caught in a time warp, or................

[Gene C]

(09-05-2013 08:59 AM)Troy Cowan Wrote:  Gene, if you follow the link you provided, you will see that nine people wrote a review of that book. I was one. If you read my review, it will answer your question.

Troy's book review of "The Lincoln Murder Conspiracies", is above in Laurie's post #61

Sorry Troy that I overlooked your review. It was quite enlightening. It must be tough trying to convince others of your story when it is so much at odds with well known historical fact and from well recieved and reccognized historians. With the way you have phrased some of your responses to certian questions, I'm not sure how much of your own book you believe to be true. Or are you pretending to believe it?

[Troy Cowan]

Jenny said, "PS: It's Herold, not Harold."





Yes Jenny it is Herold. Another mistake I made is on my book review. I said William Stanton, not Edwin Stanton.

Unfortunately, getting names right is a common problem. For example:

Did Lewis Powell or Lewis Payne attack Seward?

Did Frances Burns or Frances Burke go with Charles Forbes and John Parker to have a drink?

Did James Stewart or Joseph Stewart run across the stage after Booth?

Was it Lewis or Lucas that took Booth to the ferry crossing?

Name errors make things difficult. I will try to correct my error on the review, but unless you convince me that Herold is less confusing than Harold, I will probably continue to use Harold because it is written that way in many government documents.

[L Verge]

Modern researchers and historians have the benefit of following in the footsteps of knowledgeable people who have gone before and successfully done their homework. Therefore, they should not make careless mistakes with people's names. Investigators in 1865 and those who had the responsibility of deciphering how a name sounded into set print can be excused for their errors.

Careless researchers and those who are inventing history continue to make the same mistakes 150 years later. Yell if you need help with people's names as related to the Lincoln assassination. There are many fine researchers and historians on this forum who will help you if you seriously want the help.

Last question: Why do you continue to leave yourself wide open to be slammed for your comments?

[Troy Cowan]

Laurie, it was a rhetorical question not requiring an answer used to illustrate one of the problems researchers have. When you said that "they should not make careless mistakes with people's names." I agree, but your fine researchers do make those mistakes. Miss spellings, miss pronunciation, use of aliases, and pet names were massive at the time and a big problem. Professor Hanchett said he could prove that James Ward Boyd was not killed at the Garrett Barn. Does that statement shake your faith in Hanchette? As it turns out, it is a true statement, James Ward Boyd was not killed in the Garrett Barn. Go figure!

Laurie, because you are being so helpful, I will ask you a question. When a person has multiple names which one do you use? Lewis was born into the Powell family. He was using the name of Lewis Payne when he attacked Seward. Lewis Payne was hung for his crime. To avoid the problem I use his real name followed by his aliases; Lewis Powell (Lewis Payne, Lewis Paine). I would like to know if there are guidelines.

[wsanto]

(08-30-2013 03:15 PM)JMadonna Wrote:  

(08-30-2013 12:59 PM)L Verge Wrote:  6. You already know that I do not believe that Booth lied about where he broke his leg. I am a definite proponent of the fact that it was broken at Ford's Theatre.

6. Absolutely not one person who witnessed the scene would have agreed with you at the time. It was not until his diary was 'found' 2 years after did it become part of the mythology.

Jerry,

Most of the April 28th, 1965 newspaper accounts on of the killing of JWB and capture of Herold report that (paraphrasing) "it is now believed JWB broke his leg leaping to the stage at Ford's Theatre".

We have no way of knowing if any of the witnesses at Ford's would have agreed with Laurie. The question wasn't put to them. The fact that no one gave a statement that indicated Booth broke his leg in the leap does not mean that they may not have agreed with Laurie upon reflection that very night or, at least, thought it likely or possible.

We will all agree that it is a fact that Booth leapt from the box after the assassination and landed on the stage 12 feet below. By most accounts he landed awkwardly. I assume we can all agree that this is a way a person might break their fibula.

What we do not have is any witness to the horse fall or any reliable evidence that Booth and Herold weren't lying about the horse fall to cover his broken leg during their escape.

There is no evidence that I know of that Booth's Bay Mare was significantly injured from a fall. Mudd's famhand's statement in "the Evidence" states the Mare was in "fine trim" with a small quarter sized avulsion on the inside of one of its front legs. Unless someone has other statements of this farmhand that includes more detail--that's it? Hardly evidence of a horse fall.

Thanks--
Bill Carnevali

[L Verge]

Troy -

The correct spelling is misspellings and mispronunciations. However, back in the dark ages when I was education, a hyphen would separate "mis" from the root word. Printers and computers began to drop the hyphens because they are considered to take up too much space.

Your question/statement/or whatever that is regarding Hanchett and James W. Boyd has me confused, but I think it requires me to say yes, I do believe Dr. Hanchett's claim that Boyd was not killed in the Garretts' barn. He could prove that Boyd was killed in 1866 by a horse thief because of the man's obituary.

If you write about Lewis Thornton Powell (and be careful what you write because Betty O. will take you to task!), you should give his legal, birth name as Powell and indicate, preferably in parentheses, that he used the aliases of Paine, Wood, etc. You will notice that I skipped the "Payne" spelling because I believe that that was a deliberate misspelling of the name attributed to the authorities who were insinuating a kinship between Powell and the dastardly Confederate family named Payne.

So much to learn, so little time to teach... And it all depends on the willingness to learn held by the student.