What Was The Role of David Herold

[JMadonna]

There is much speculation as to what really happened on the bridge. As one who has been down the logical rabbit hole as much as I’ve been, let me tell you how I determined what I did. First of all, speculation is necessary because there is no clear path to follow. The more you can tie your speculation to what is historically known the more correct you’ll be. What you don’t want to do is pile speculation on top of speculation it will lead to a dead-end and an indefensible position.

As John pointed out there were too many lucky coincidences for Booth’s escape. To get over the bridge one of 2 things had to happen; negligence of the guard or Booth had passes.

The negligence theory has been accepted for years but there is really nothing to it but speculation. There is no example of bridge rules being lax nor any evidence of a bribe. Stanton never sent an APB to the bridges because he thought the rules were being rigidly enforced. After 150 years have we found any evidence that this assumption was wrong? If so, I don’t know of it.

The army would have investigated the situation and if negligence was the cause a reprimand would be in order. Yet there is no evidence of one. One can speculate that the actual reprimand was covered up but for what purpose, to save the reputation of sergeant? Not likely, cover-ups like that are reserved for higher ups.

Compare Cobb’s situation with that of Parker, the guard who left his post. He received a reprimand that was lost. We know this because its part of the historical record. Is there any hint that Cobb got the same treatment? Anywhere?

Yes, the theory of Booth having passes seems ridiculous but it has a historical anchor point, Atzerodt’s statement that Booth and Herold had seen Johnson. If you accept his statement as true now you have a link to the actual reason why Booth was confident he could get over the bridge. Plus there are other incidentals mysteries that this theory helps resolve like Booth’s note to Johnson and others.

As I’ve said, speculation is necessary but make sure that it’s based upon known historical anchor points and not someone else’s long held assumption.

Jerry

---

(02-04-2013 11:53 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 11:00 AM)John E. Wrote:  Weren't the lights to be extinguished to aid the kidnapping and not the murder ?

Hi John. This is in Jerry Madonna's book. On p. 135 Jerry writes that Spangler was unable to turn out the gas lights because Jeannie Gourlay and William Withers were standing in a spot that blocked Spangler's access to the meter box. That miscue left the lights on as Booth was on the stage.

Roger,
The positioning of Spangler came from Jeannie Gourlay's brother. If Spangler actually intended to turn off the lights for Booth, no one will ever know. But he was a lot closer to commiting a crime than Aterodt was.