Robert Arnold's Book The Conspiracy Between John Wilkes Booth and the Union Army

[AussieMick]

(11-11-2018 11:12 AM)mikegriffith1 Wrote:  You still have not explained the problems posed by the wound ballistics evidence discussed by Dr. Arnold (and supported by Dr. Barnes' first identification of the type of bullet). Since Corbett could not have fired the shot, who fired it?

Moments after the man whom everybody at Garrett's farm called Boyd was shot in the barn, Luther Baker believed that Conger had shot him and said so. Conger denied being the shooter and suggested that the man had shot himself, a theory that no one believes and that the AFIP forensic experts rejected.

#1 Mike, it has been repeatedly put to you (but you ignore it) that the man could have been shot as he stumbled ( I wrote he could have been crawling) or falling to escape the burning barn. This would easily answer the reason for the trajectory of the bullet.

#2 The "question" as to whether a rifle or a pistol was used is irrelevant, IMO. Corbett presumably was issued with a rifle. Once he'd been named as the killer, I doubt that anybody interrogated him as to whether he'd used a pistol or a rifle. The bloke in the barn was killed. Rifle or pistol ? Who cares?

#3 Dr Arnold may have been a made a Captain (so what?) . You say he was a respected surgeon and a coroner (later you say he was an 'assistant' coroner). He was not though a ballistics expert. He could certainly use the relevant terminology ... but that doesnt make him a ballistics expert.

#4 You havent suggested any reason (please, dont bother ... I , for one, am not interested) as to why Corbett was erroneously, deliberately or otherwise, named as the killer.

By the way, in your list of possible killers you left out Colonel Clarence Cobb or Paymaster Benjamin Price.