(11-19-2012 04:07 PM)wsanto Wrote:  

Quote:So even after all of this time is there disagreement among historians about the peephole in the door? Who carved it? Which door? If the door to box 8 why not box 7 if that was the normal Presidential box?

It seems to me that the Ford's might lie about the hole in the door and the notch in the wall in order to minimize their own complacency in allowing Booth free reign of their theater while he prepared for the assassination. It is my understanding that wood shavings were found in Booth's pocket or in a hankerchief at his hotel with the circumstantial connection that they were the shavings from creating the peep-hole.
The peephole was in the door to box 7 but Kauffman makes the case that Booth entered through the door to Box 8 which may have been ajar or open as per Rathbone's statement. This puts Booth to the right of Lincoln chair instead of behind him. Kauffman claims that Booth shot from this point but that Lincoln's was leaning forward looking left toward the audience and the bullet entered behind his left ear.
Imagine Lincoln, he knows the play and he wants to see the audience's reaction to the funniest line in the play. He leans forward and looks left after Hawk delivers his zinger while Booth shoots from the right of his chair. Makes sense to me.

I was watching a video today on the Assassination and it was stated that the President's right eye was swollen because of the bullets path. Having dealt with the media before I am aware that errors are made. The bullets trajectory is the best indication as to what direction the weapon was fired from. If Booth entered from Box 8 and made his way to the President who was leaning forward and looking down at the audience on the left and fired behind the left ear one would expect a lot of damage to the inside of the skull on the left side of the head. Of course Booth could have walked to the President and stepped to his left side and fired and the bullet would have had more impact on the right side inside of the skull. I subscribe to Mr. Kauffman's thoughts on the matter.

Quote:...If Booth entered from Box 8 and made his way to the President who was leaning forward and looking down at the audience on the left and fired behind the left ear one would expect a lot of damage to the inside of the skull on the left side of the head...

I believe the entry wound was behind the left ear. Entry wounds are typically small and depend on the caliber of the projectile. For Lincoln, this was a small round hole. I assume this is what you'd expect from a round projectile fired at close range from the derringer. There was no exit wound as the bullet travelled across the midline of the brain and lodged behind the right eye. Most of the outward signs of the injury were displayed as swelling and discoloration of the right eye.

If Lincoln is leaning forward and looking down and to his left, his left ear would be exposed to the assassin who was approaching from behind and to the right.

It goes against every depiction I've seen or heard of the assassination until now. Every re-enactment and image show Booth approaching from behind left (from door to box 7) with Lincoln looking forward toward the stage. Kauffman challenges this ingrained assumption.

One of the many unknowns in all of this is also the matter of how far Booth actually leaped. Various sources cite a range from 8 to 12 feet.

8 to 12 feet is a long way and maybe thats partly why he landed on his ankle wrong casuing the break. Just my idea anyway.

Welcome to the world of Lincoln studies!

Not everyone believes Booth broke his bone from the jump onto the stage. Some believe he broke it from a fall while riding his mount during the escape.

(11-19-2012 11:23 PM)LincolnMan Wrote:  ...Some believe he broke it from a fall while riding his mount during the escape.

I believe he broke his fibula in the jump to the stage. If he landed with his weight on the outside of one foot, most of the impact would have been transferred to the lateral aspect of his ankle joint. This force, again transferred from the ankle to the fibula, could be enough to cause a fracture of the distal fibula. Not being a weight-bearing bone under normal circumstances, he would still be able to make his escape through the backstage of Ford's and onto his horse. He probably wouldn't even realize it was broken with all the adrenalin coursing through his system until he was across the Navy Yard Bridge. Of course, as the ride slowed and the swelling increased it probably would become more noticeable and painful inside the boot.

Kaffman's theory that he broke it when his horse fell on his ankle is plausible and based on Lloyd's account of what Herold had told him. But we have to remember Herold might say anything under the circumstances. He certainly wouldn't offer that his friend had broken it leaping to the stage after assassinating the President.

In previous discussions on this issue I have always argued the break happened at Ford's. But the purpose of this forum is to look at all angles of the issues we discuss. Here are Mike Kauffman's arguments scanned from Blue & Gray magazine, June 1990:

I, too, personally believe Booth broke his leg from the leap. As we all know, there are so many mysteries and differing explanations in the Lincoln assassination story. It seems many things that are taken for granted as "accepted" knowledge, are not accepted by everyone. That's one cause for why new books on the subject are being published constantly! Hard to keep up with it all!

(11-20-2012 07:22 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  In previous discussions on this issue I have always argued the break happened at Ford's. But the purpose of this forum is to look at all angles of the issues we discuss. Here are Mike Kauffman's arguments scanned from Blue & Gray magazine, June 1990:

---

(11-20-2012 09:47 AM)wsanto Wrote:  

(11-20-2012 07:22 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  In previous discussions on this issue I have always argued the break happened at Ford's. But the purpose of this forum is to look at all angles of the issues we discuss. Here are Mike Kauffman's arguments scanned from Blue & Gray magazine, June 1990:

Thank you for this article. It helps me see Mr. Kauffman's argument more clearly.

Most of his argument is based on which story of Booth do you believe-- Was he being honest about his injury during his escape when he was actively fabricating a story about his identity or was he more honest in his diary when he was explaining and defending his actions? The other evidence is more compelling-- the injured horse, and accounts by Herold after the fact about the fall.

First, I hope we never conclusively solve all the questions surrounding even the minutae related to the assassination - that would spoil the fun of being detectives and ultimately end the research.

In reference to what Booth wrote in his diary: 1) His deed that night is written in pretty much chronological order, and he places his breaking of the leg before his riding into the night. 2) He specifically says "in jumping" broke my leg. Should "jumping" refer to his horse jumping a fence or obstacle and falling? 3) He speaks of walking amongst so many of Lincoln's friends to get to the target. He did. The theater was packed that night. 4) He writes of riding 60 miles that night. Yes, it was 30; but that horse did not have an odometer on board! In the good old days, people thought in terms of how long it took to get somewhere, not in how many miles it took to get there.

That said, in regards to Mr. Kauffman's assessment of the broken leg: it is based on considered speculation, just like what many of us are doing here. To me, the issue is moot. We are never going to know for certain how he broke his leg (or how other little things went down either). Excuse the pun, but I think we're beating a dead horse theory...

(11-20-2012 11:02 AM)Laurie Verge Wrote:  First, I hope we never conclusively solve all the questions surrounding even the minutae related to the assassination - that would spoil the fun of being detectives and ultimately end the research.

The bravado brings you in but the minutae keeps you wondering. I have to hand it to all of you that have studied and researched this so closely to be able to introduce new theories and uncover new facts that keep the rest of us so interested.

(11-19-2012 11:23 PM)LincolnMan Wrote:  Welcome to the world of Lincoln studies!

Not everyone believes Booth broke his bone from the jump onto the stage. Some believe he broke it from a fall while riding his mount during the escape.

True. Here is to my thinking aloud but, didnt he sorta limp a bit on the way out? And maybe in the heat of the moment it could have been scrolled out a different way? I mean you bring up a good point. So I guess I'm saying do you think the aspect of the broken bone could have been missed judged as to when it really happened?
Like I said you brought a up a good point as to that it could have been broken at a different time. We know the people in the theater went into panic after the gun shot so it could be possible one could have seen it differently which also begs the question, If he didnt break the bone from the leap then how would we know if he suffurd a broken bone after that?
Ashley

(11-20-2012 11:02 AM)Laurie Verge Wrote:  First, I hope we never conclusively solve all the questions surrounding even the minutae related to the assassination - that would spoil the fun of being detectives and ultimately end the research.

In reference to what Booth wrote in his diary: 1) His deed that night is written in pretty much chronological order, and he places his breaking of the leg before his riding into the night. 2) He specifically says "in jumping" broke my leg. Should "jumping" refer to his horse jumping a fence or obstacle and falling? 3) He speaks of walking amongst so many of Lincoln's friends to get to the target. He did. The theater was packed that night. 4) He writes of riding 60 miles that night. Yes, it was 30; but that horse did not have an odometer on board! In the good old days, people thought in terms of how long it took to get somewhere, not in how many miles it took to get there.

That said, in regards to Mr. Kauffman's assessment of the broken leg: it is based on considered speculation, just like what many of us are doing here. To me, the issue is moot. We are never going to know for certain how he broke his leg (or how other little things went down either). Excuse the pun, but I think we're beating a dead horse theory...

Laurie, As my wife says of my OPB when it comes to the asaassination, "What does it matter, Lincoln's still dead".

As he may yes still be dead, he was still an interesting man and it is interesting to say the least to have an idea as to what happened to him and how it went the night of his death.
I think it is interesting anyway.

(11-20-2012 07:29 PM)Ashley Norman Wrote:  As he may yes still be dead, he was still an interesting man and it is interesting to say the least to have an idea as to what happened to him and how it went the night of his death.
I think it is interesting anyway.

The Lincoln Assassination is the most interesting event in American History. I think it safe to say, that if you are on this web site, the event holds a deep meaning to your life. My grandmother drove me by Ford's Theatre in 1965 and it has been a part of my life (or lack of a real life) ever since.