Identification of Booth's body

[mikegriffith1]

(12-21-2018 01:04 AM)AussieMick Wrote:  Mike wrote "But, Stanton also could not be certain that someone who had seen the diary, such as Baker, would not later reveal its existence. So he kept it."

I love that "So he kept it". As if keeping it was the most obvious and logical thing to do. When in fact, as has already been said, the most obvious thing to do (if he were guilty) would have been to destroy it. If anybody had demanded "Where's the diary that Baker says he gave to you?" a duplicitous Stanton would have simply said "Diary? What diary? Baker gave me no diary. Conger may have given one to Baker, but I was never given it."

The "most obvious and logical thing"??? There would have been an absolute firestorm if Stanton had destroyed it and then, after Baker revealed its existence, had to claim that it was "lost." Nobody would have bought that tale. Nor would anyone have believed the line that "we destroyed it because we didn't think it had any evidentiary value."

The fact that the diary was so heavily edited and had 86 pages removed says volumes.

When the diary was released, it raised some very embarrassing questions, but it had been edited enough that Stanton and his co-conspirators were able to weather the storm.

(12-21-2018 01:04 AM)AussieMick Wrote:  "Did you ever answer Warren's question about why the supposedly brutal and maniacal Stanton left Booth alive? I would ask the same question about John Surratt. "

Sigh. . . . I've answered this question, this point, several times in this forum. Are you folks just brand new to true crime? Have you never heard of enemies cutting deals to kill a common enemy? Why would the brutal and maniacal Stanton agree to let Booth escape? Because that was part of the deal. In such an arrangement, Booth, or those speaking for him, would have made sure that Stanton, or those speaking for him, knew that if there were a double-cross, they would bring out evidence that would implicate Stanton and his allies. That is just one scenario that would not be unheard of in the history of crime.

I can think of other scenarios that would not be implausible: Lafayette Baker was bribed to let Booth escape and to accept a substitute body. Or, Stanton intended to kill Booth but Mosby's men got him to a safe house and left James W. Boyd at the Garretts' farm, and Lafayette Baker, Conger, etc., were willing to pass off Boyd as Booth to get a huge amount of reward money.

We can trade theories and speculation all day, but you guys need to address the scientific problems with the "identification" of the body as Booth. If you can find me a single case in the history of forensic science where a body underwent just one of the impossible changes under conditions even halfway similar to Booth's flight, I'd love to see it. I really would.