Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

AussieMick · 12-12-2018, 02:16 PM

All these meals that the runaway/flightman had its a wonder he wasnt putting on weight.

Mike, you wouldnt have a description of the menus ? Its just that as (Laurie I think) has been written many of these war-stressed homes and farms would have been subjected to scavenging by soldiers.

And its one thing to say he said he had a meal here one day and a meal there that day ... mate, I'm skinny but there's no way I can survive on one meal a day.

Warren · 12-12-2018, 03:23 PM

I wonder if the freckles observed on the dead Booth (assuming they were observed) were just Tardieu spots?

mikegriffith1 · (This post was last modified: 12-12-2018 03:55 PM by mikegriffith1.)

(12-12-2018 02:16 PM)AussieMick Wrote: All these meals that the runaway/flightman had its a wonder he wasnt putting on weight.

Mike, you wouldnt have a description of the menus ? Its just that as (Laurie I think) has been written many of these war-stressed homes and farms would have been subjected to scavenging by soldiers.

And its one thing to say he said he had a meal here one day and a meal there that day ... mate, I'm skinny but there's no way I can survive on one meal a day.

Did you not read my reply on the weather and Booth's meals? He had much more than just one meal per day.

As for the theory that Booth showed no sense of urgency but instead relaxed and socialized at the Garrett farm because the Garretts didn't know what he had done, I see this as implausible for two reasons:

One, Booth had already had one close call with federal troops and had had to delay crossing the river because he was warned that federal forces were nearby. So it seems unimaginable, incomprehensible that he would have hung around the Garrett farm for so long. For that matter, as Dr. Arnold points out, it is hard to fathom why he would have gone there in the first place instead of continuing to head toward safer territory.

Two, the behavior of "James W. Boyd," as the Garretts knew him, at the Garrett farm fits much better with the theory that Boyd really was Boyd. One can totally understand why Boyd would have felt free to hang around for days with the Garretts and would have been in the mood to socialize.

What about when Boyd hurried into the woods when warned that federal cavalry were coming, assuming this event actually occurred? If Boyd was wearing a Confederate uniform, as some accounts state, then it makes perfect sense that to be on the safe side he would have sought to get out of sight. Keep in mind that the two Confederate soldiers who warned him, Bainbridge and Ruggles, likewise ran into the woods. These were not good times to be in a Confederate uniform and to be seen on an isolated farm by Union cavalry.

By the way, Boyd was clearly more ambulatory than Booth was at this point. This fact is seen again in Boyd's actions in the barn, as Dr. Arnold points out.

Someone still needs to explain when and how Booth's body supposedly underwent its amazing transformation from being recognizable by Rollins less than 48 hours before the barn shooting and the time the body was allegedly examined on the Montauk. How and when did the freckles magically appear? How come no one who saw him during the days leading up to the barn shooting describe him as appearing "half-starved," "much older," "freckled," etc., etc.?

AussieMick · (This post was last modified: 12-12-2018 05:34 PM by AussieMick.)

Mike you write,
"Did you not read my reply on the weather and Booth's meals? He had much more than just one meal per day. "

I did indeed read your reply (I read all of them, so you dont need to keep asking).

You wrote earlier #207 about Booth eating, but nothing about him having more than one meal per day...

" Booth ate at Mudd’s house.

* Booth ate at Cox’s house.

* After eating at Cox’s house, Booth hid in the woods near Cox’s house.

* At Cox’s request, Jones brought Booth food every day of the six days that Booth was hiding in the woods. This food included ham, bread with butter, and coffee (Jones, loc. 527).

* Jones fed Booth a meal outside his house just before he led him to a boat to cross the river.

* Dr. Richard Stuart fed Booth after he crossed the river. He also let him sleep in his barn.

* William Rollins let Booth rest in his house while Booth was waiting to cross the Rappahannock River (Winkler, Lincoln and Booth, p. 177).'

"

Rob Wick · 12-12-2018, 05:48 PM

Quote:Booth had already had one close call with federal troops and had had to delay crossing the river because he was warned that federal forces were nearby. So it seems unimaginable, incomprehensible that he would have hung around the Garrett farm for so long. For that matter, as Dr. Arnold points out, it is hard to fathom why he would have gone there in the first place instead of continuing to head toward safer territory.

Unless you accept the more plausible theory that Booth needed to rest after the 12-day ordeal he had just been through, and once he found safe haven with someone who didn't know what he had done, he let his guard down.

Quote:the behavior of "James W. Boyd," as the Garretts knew him, at the Garrett farm fits much better with the theory that Boyd really was Boyd. One can totally understand why Boyd would have felt free to hang around for days with the Garretts and would have been in the mood to socialize.

One can understand if they turn reason on its head and throw logic out the window. The lengths to which you'll go to make this all fit is so contorted as to defy belief.

Quote:What about when Boyd hurried into the woods when warned that federal cavalry were coming, assuming this event actually occurred?

And what proof do you have that it didn't? Why would the Garrett's have locked Booth and Herold in the barn? They were concerned about losing their horses because of the reaction of Booth upon hearing the news. Otherwise, locking them in the barn makes no sense.

Quote:If Boyd was wearing a Confederate uniform, as some accounts state, then it makes perfect sense that to be on the safe side he would have sought to get out of sight.

"If" seems to be one of your favorite words. What accounts? No one at the Garrett farm ever said that Booth was wearing a uniform. Why run into the woods? Why not just walk into the house or to the other side? The house was set back from the road, so seeing someone clearly was not a given. None of the Garrett Farm Patrol even noticed the house on their way past. Indeed, Conger forced Jett to take them back to the house as a guide.

As for your fascination with freckles and the state of Booth's corpse, all I can say is if that's your ace in the hole as to why Arnold's theory is anything but nonsense, you need to do better. I'll put my research and that of Steve Miller and Dave Taylor above anything you've provided.

Best
Rob

AussieMick · 12-12-2018, 05:58 PM

By the way, when looking for references to Rollins (Mike seemed to imply that Rollins was quite an important player, e.g. "let Booth rest in his house while Booth was waiting to cross the Rappahannock River"), I came across this in Blood on the Moon ... after the stay in Lucas cabin , Page 187

"on the morning of April 24 ... Before departing, Booth wrote out a note to Stuart on a page he had cut from his little memorandum book ... "

L Verge · (This post was last modified: 12-12-2018 07:14 PM by L Verge.)

(12-12-2018 05:58 PM)AussieMick Wrote: By the way, when looking for references to Rollins (Mike seemed to imply that Rollins was quite an important player, e.g. "let Booth rest in his house while Booth was waiting to cross the Rappahannock River"), I came across this in Blood on the Moon ... after the stay in Lucas cabin , Page 187

"on the morning of April 24 ... Before departing, Booth wrote out a note to Stuart on a page he had cut from his little memorandum book ... "

He did, and then he discarded that one and wrote out another one on a page from the appointment book (sent a more sarcastic message than the first). It was delivered, but Dr. Stuart threw it in the fireplace - luckily, Mrs. Stuart retrieved it and showing it to the authorities probably spared Stuart from additional prison time. The Feds had already imprisoned him a few times during the war.

Stuart was descended from the Stuart line of England and was definitely high on the list of very wealthy Americans at the start of the war. His wife was on the direct line of the Calverts, founding proprietors of Maryland (and also the niece? of the Calvert gentleman who was dunning Mrs. Surratt for money). They were also related to Robert E. Lee, and several of the Lee daughters spent time with the Stuarts during the war.

(12-12-2018 03:50 PM)mikegriffith1 Wrote:
(12-12-2018 02:16 PM)AussieMick Wrote: All these meals that the runaway/flightman had its a wonder he wasnt putting on weight.

Mike, you wouldnt have a description of the menus ? Its just that as (Laurie I think) has been written many of these war-stressed homes and farms would have been subjected to scavenging by soldiers.

And its one thing to say he said he had a meal here one day and a meal there that day ... mate, I'm skinny but there's no way I can survive on one meal a day.

Did you not read my reply on the weather and Booth's meals? He had much more than just one meal per day.

As for the theory that Booth showed no sense of urgency but instead relaxed and socialized at the Garrett farm because the Garretts didn't know what he had done, I see this as implausible for two reasons:

One, Booth had already had one close call with federal troops and had had to delay crossing the river because he was warned that federal forces were nearby. So it seems unimaginable, incomprehensible that he would have hung around the Garrett farm for so long. For that matter, as Dr. Arnold points out, it is hard to fathom why he would have gone there in the first place instead of continuing to head toward safer territory.

Two, the behavior of "James W. Boyd," as the Garretts knew him, at the Garrett farm fits much better with the theory that Boyd really was Boyd. One can totally understand why Boyd would have felt free to hang around for days with the Garretts and would have been in the mood to socialize.

What about when Boyd hurried into the woods when warned that federal cavalry were coming, assuming this event actually occurred? If Boyd was wearing a Confederate uniform, as some accounts state, then it makes perfect sense that to be on the safe side he would have sought to get out of sight. Keep in mind that the two Confederate soldiers who warned him, Bainbridge and Ruggles, likewise ran into the woods. These were not good times to be in a Confederate uniform and to be seen on an isolated farm by Union cavalry.

By the way, Boyd was clearly more ambulatory than Booth was at this point. This fact is seen again in Boyd's actions in the barn, as Dr. Arnold points out.

Someone still needs to explain when and how Booth's body supposedly underwent its amazing transformation from being recognizable by Rollins less than 48 hours before the barn shooting and the time the body was allegedly examined on the Montauk. How and when did the freckles magically appear? How come no one who saw him during the days leading up to the barn shooting describe him as appearing "half-starved," "much older," "freckled," etc., etc.?

1. Have you read any of our replies to your assertions that Booth was warm and snug in his thicket or where he got food? Prove your statement that he and Herold got more than one meal a day. I don't think you can. You have already fibbed about getting food at the home of William Rollins.

2. Did you read Rob's post about personally thinking that Booth made a serious mistake by deciding to stay at the Garretts? I think you just came close to stating it as yours and Arnold's belief.

3. Ruggles and Bainbridge did not run into the woods. They were on horseback and pulled a Mosby special of skedaddling further south. They were also from the area as was Jett (there's a very nice vineyard and winery on his old property), so they were better equipped to melt into the countryside. Jett should not have let love get in the way.

4. Please point out how ambulatory Boyd's actions would be any different than those we know of Booth.

5. Don't you get sick and tired of constantly repeating that old garbage about Booth's appearance? And you once again used the word "freckles..."

Christine · (This post was last modified: 12-12-2018 07:18 PM by Christine.)

With all due apologies to Laurie for using the "freckles" word here. hahaha!

Anybody have any opinion about the possibility that Booth had syphyllis, which could explain the freckles, jaundice, and personality shifts? Obviously that would not have been uncommon during Civil War times, and he certainly had many opportunities to contract the disease. Interesting.

Another possibility about the freckles - how do we know he wasn't carried upside down or on his face after his death? Which would result in blood pooling in his head area, causing Tardieu spots.

And another possibility for those pesky freckles. Looked up petechiae. A petechial hemorrhage is a tiny pinpoint red mark that is an important sign of asphyxia caused by some external means of obstructing the airways. They are sometimes also called petechiae.

Anybody know if bone fragments or bullet went through his lungs? I guess if he was paralyzed his lungs may have been also, which could have caused asphyxia.

From the Mayo Clinic,other reasons besides asphyxia which cause petechiae:

Tiny blood vessels (capillaries) link the smallest parts of your arteries to the smallest parts of your veins. Petechiae appear when capillaries bleed, leaking blood into the skin. A number of things can cause this bleeding, including:

Prolonged Straining
Medications
Medical conditions

Prolonged straining

Tiny petechiae of the face, neck and chest can be caused by prolonged straining during activities such as coughing, vomiting, giving birth and weightlifting.
Medications

Petechiae may result from taking some types of medications, including:

Phenytoin (Cerebyx)
Penicillin
Quinine (Qualaquin)

Infectious diseases

Petechiae may be caused by any of a number of fungal, viral and bacterial infections, including:

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection
Endocarditis
Meningococcemia
Mononucleosis
Rocky Mountain spotted fever
Scarlet fever
Sepsis
Strep throat
Viral hemorrhagic fevers

Other medical conditions

Petechiae may also be caused by noninfectious medical conditions. Examples include:

Vasculitis
Thrombocytopenia
Leukemia
Scurvy (vitamin C deficiency)
Vitamin K deficiency

Hmmm. lots of things which could have caused Booth's 'freckles.'

L Verge · 12-13-2018, 12:54 PM

Christine - Thank you so much for this medical summary. Warren had mentioned the Tardieu spots, which I had first termed as livor mortis. Our correspondent wrote them off as silly, of course. Upon death, Booth was wrapped in a blanket and placed face down in the rickety old wagon to make the trip to the ship. Lord knows how the body was treated while on the John S. Ide.

Your question about the syphilis possibility is another good one, and I should have remembered it because over a decade ago, the Surratt Courier carried an article by a doctor from Annapolis that theorized that Booth may have been a victim of that social disease and that it may have advanced to his brain, causing his irrational behavior in 1864-65. That article caused quite a stir.

Sepsis is another possibility because we know that Booth had previously been very ill with erisyphilis in an arm and recuperated at Asia's home in Philadelphia in the late summer of 1864. (Read Asia's memoir edited by Terry Alford.) -- Note the spelling of that disease...

Petechiae is another interesting idea that might apply to the fact that Booth did die from paralysis of the lungs due to his wound. In the autopsy report, one of the doctors makes a point of stating that his death was long and excruciating (words to that effect) as if they were assuring Stanton and the world that Booth surely suffered for his crime.

Now, I am going to throw another piece of kindling on the fire. In looking for the mention of erisyphilis in Asia's memoir, I ran across a very interesting point that raises another point: While Wilkes was with his sister, he was also suffering from a carbuncle on his neck. Asia's family doctor sent a Quaker physician to lance it, and while they were setting out the instruments, a lampshade was removed and the gas line to the lamp got too close to the flame and started a fire. Booth instinctively extinguished the fire with his hands and suffered painful burns. (pgs. 84-85)

Asia recalls noticing how rough and hard Booth's hands were, and he explained that he had been doing a lot of "nights of rowing" and also stated that he had been wearing double layers of clothing. Makes me wonder if the rowing refers to multiple trips across the Potomac for meetings in Richmond?

The issue of the carbuncle also makes me wonder. Dr. May removed a carbuncle in April of 1863 in Washington City, and then a Philadelphia doctor removes one in 1864. In the exact same spot? How many carbuncles did Booth have in his life -- thus, how many scars??

Joe Beckert and Rick Smith will appreciate another reference on these same memoir pages: Asia describes the boots that her brother wore at that time as "reaching to his thighs" with "pistol-holders in them." Wonder if he was wearing those boots at Ford's and if that's where the later pistols came from. Can we scratch the imaginary saddlebags?

And while I'm blathering away, I decided to double-check how many scars from knives that Booth had since the mummy theory involved identification via a scar to the eyebrow as well as the deformed thumb joint (which was really a problem his father had). American Brutus lists two such scars -- one near his armpit where he had fallen on his own dagger during a stage fight and one on his cheek delivered by an irate love interest, actress Henrietta Irving. Kauffman also cites a sword scar across Booth's eyelid from another stage fight. That injury almost cost Booth his sight. Is that the eyebrow scar that the mummy folks refer to?

OK, I'm worn out. Someone else's turn to carry on good history.

mikegriffith1 · 12-13-2018, 03:52 PM

(12-12-2018 05:48 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:
Quote:Booth had already had one close call with federal troops and had had to delay crossing the river because he was warned that federal forces were nearby. So it seems unimaginable, incomprehensible that he would have hung around the Garrett farm for so long. For that matter, as Dr. Arnold points out, it is hard to fathom why he would have gone there in the first place instead of continuing to head toward safer territory.

Unless you accept the more plausible theory that Booth needed to rest after the 12-day ordeal he had just been through, and once he found safe haven with someone who didn't know what he had done, he let his guard down.

For two days, knowing that federal troops were swarming into Virginia to find him???! Really?

You first need to come up with a logical explanation for why Booth would have gone to the Garretts' in the first place, instead of continuing toward safer territory.

Quote:the behavior of "James W. Boyd," as the Garretts knew him, at the Garrett farm fits much better with the theory that Boyd really was Boyd. One can totally understand why Boyd would have felt free to hang around for days with the Garretts and would have been in the mood to socialize.

(12-12-2018 05:48 PM)Rob Wick Wrote: One can understand if they turn reason on its head and throw logic out the window. The lengths to which you'll go to make this all fit is so contorted as to defy belief.

You are the one who is turning reason on its head and throwing logic out the window. A man who is running for his life and who knows federal troops are desperate to find him is not gonna spend two days on a pleasure trip casually relaxing and socializing. For that matter, such a man would not have gone to the Garretts' in the first place but would have continued toward safer territory as quickly as possible.

Boyd, on the other hand, would have behaved exactly as the "Boyd" at the Garretts' behaved, since he had not assassinated the president and did not have thousands of federal troops trying to find him.

Quote:What about when Boyd hurried into the woods when warned that federal cavalry were coming, assuming this event actually occurred?

(12-12-2018 05:48 PM)Rob Wick Wrote: And what proof do you have that it didn't? Why would the Garrett's have locked Booth and Herold in the barn? They were concerned about losing their horses because of the reaction of Booth upon hearing the news. Otherwise, locking them in the barn makes no sense.

Uh, no it makes perfect sense if Boyd's reaction (which Bainbridge and Ruggles duplicated) made Garrett uneasy about his guest. Even without the reaction, Garrett did not know Boyd and his companion and might have ordered his sons to lock the barn just as a commonsense precaution that he would take with any strangers.

Quote:If Boyd was wearing a Confederate uniform, as some accounts state, then it makes perfect sense that to be on the safe side he would have sought to get out of sight.

(12-12-2018 05:48 PM)Rob Wick Wrote: "If" seems to be one of your favorite words. What accounts? No one at the Garrett farm ever said that Booth was wearing a uniform. Why run into the woods? Why not just walk into the house or to the other side? The house was set back from the road, so seeing someone clearly was not a given. None of the Garrett Farm Patrol even noticed the house on their way past. Indeed, Conger forced Jett to take them back to the house as a guide.

Obviously, you're reading has been rather one-sided and incomplete. The Garretts said he was wearing gray clothing. Two of the soldiers there later said he was wearing a gray Confederate uniform. Towsend agreed that he was wearing gray clothing. I already answered the question about why he would have run into the woods, assuming this happened.

And speaking of Conger and Jett, why did Jett insist on talking to Conger alone?

(12-12-2018 05:48 PM)Rob Wick Wrote: As for your fascination with freckles and the state of Booth's corpse, all I can say is if that's your ace in the hole as to why Arnold's theory is anything but nonsense, you need to do better.

No, you need to provide a scrap of scientific evidence that freckles can magically sprout on the corpse of a person who was not freckled in life. You need to explain how "Booth's" body could have aged so markedly, not to mention when it did this magic act, since no one who saw him through April 25 noticed that he looked markedly older than 26 or that he had freckles.

While you're at it, you also need to explain how the body that was viewed in 1869 had hair that was 10-12 inches longer than Booth's, had the wrong number of fillings, and had damage on/just below the knee, which no one at the autopsy mentioned. I've already documented that hair never grows more than a fraction of an inch after death, and that it is rare for teeth to fall out of a corpse, not to mention that a missing tooth would have contradicted the dental chart.

(12-12-2018 05:48 PM)Rob Wick Wrote: I'll put my research and that of Steve Miller and Dave Taylor above anything you've provided.

Then you should have no problem explaining the freckles, the too-long hair, the wrong number of fillings, and the inexplicable damage to the knee. I've provided plenty of sources to document that these are serious issues that cannot be dismissed with your echo-chamber appeals to authority and casual dismissals. Just fine one single case in the history of forensic science where a body underwent the kinds of changes that Booth's supposedly underwent.

We can go back and forth all day about the accounts of Booth's appearance and clothing, and you can accept the accounts you like and reject the ones you don't like, but you can't fiddle so easily with science.

We know from medical science what does and does not happen to bodies when they are dead. And you and your band of fellow I See the Emperor's New Clothes believers can posture and dismiss all day, but you can't play your games with medical science. If you can find me just one, just one single case in the history of forensic science that provides a precedent for what the fairy tale you're defending about the body on the Montauk and at the 1869 viewing, then let's see it.

Gene C · (This post was last modified: 12-13-2018 04:36 PM by Gene C.)

(12-13-2018 03:52 PM)mikegriffith1 Wrote: No, you need to provide a scrap of scientific evidence that freckles can magically sprout on the corpse of a person who was not freckled in life. You need to explain how "Booth's" body could have aged so markedly, not to mention when it did this magic act, since no one who saw him through April 25 noticed that he looked markedly older than 26 or that he had freckles.

While you're at it, you also need to explain how the body that was viewed in 1869 had hair that was 10-12 inches longer than Booth's, had the wrong number of fillings, and had damage on/just below the knee, which no one at the autopsy mentioned. I've already documented that hair never grows more than a fraction of an inch after death, and that it is rare for teeth to fall out of a corpse, not to mention that a missing tooth would have contradicted the dental chart.

(12-12-2018 05:48 PM)Rob Wick Wrote: I'll put my research and that of Steve Miller and Dave Taylor above anything you've provided.

Then you should have no problem explaining the freckles, the too-long hair, the wrong number of fillings, and the inexplicable damage to the knee. I've provided plenty of sources to document that these are serious issues that cannot be dismissed with your echo-chamber appeals to authority and casual dismissals. Just fine one single case in the history of forensic science where a body underwent the kinds of changes that Booth's supposedly underwent.

We can go back and forth all day about the accounts of Booth's appearance and clothing, and you can accept the accounts you like and reject the ones you don't like, but you can't fiddle so easily with science.

We know from medical science what does and does not happen to bodies when they are dead. And you and your band of fellow I See the Emperor's New Clothes believers can posture and dismiss all day, but you can't play your games with medical science. If you can find me just one, just one single case in the history of forensic science that provides a precedent for what the fairy tale you're defending about the body on the Montauk and at the 1869 viewing, then let's see it.

You can talk all you want about freckles, long hair, tooth fillings and gray clothes, but everyone who viewed Booth's remains identified them as Booth's, and none of them in later years recanted their testimony.
As I recall, only one witness said the body had freckles, and he still identified it as Booth and never changed his testimony.

L Verge · (This post was last modified: 12-13-2018 04:38 PM by L Verge.)

In American Brutus, Mike Kauffman mentions that Booth's photo was used to identify him at Garrett's, but that the body and been laying facedown since then, with blood pooling under the skin and giving it a haggard appearance. The examiners on the Montauk had to have more positive identification, and this is where Dr. May comes in. The tattoo on the back of the hand was also found, and Willie Jett would later say that he noticed them at Port Conway; Jack Garrett also attested to seeing them on Booth at the farm.

Mike also addresses the issue of modern researchers assuming that the inquest was conducted in secrecy since it was on a heavily guarded ship. However, hundreds watched from shore; reporters gave such details that they must have been closer (small boats drawn up to the monitor?). Naval officers and guards from the Navy Yard Bridge were allowed to bring friends - some taking away souvenirs - and there was quite a contingent of "officials." When Stanton found out about the crowds, he questioned the lax security until he was reminded by the Montauk's commander that no one from the War Department had offered any guidance. He called the episode "a most informal and unmilitary proceeding." With so many in attendance, how can we buy Mr. Griffith's version of a clandestine and falsified inquest?

Please cite me a reliable book chapter, page, and verse that confirms your statements about Booth/Boyd being in a Confederate uniform (and please remember that not all Confederates wore gray). Also, I don't believe that you have ever responded to the fact that Booth's stick pin, engraved as a gift from his friend Dan Bryant, was found on his undergarments. What silly retort can you offer for that?

A little help here, folks. Using the military records of James W. Boyd, please see if you can determine the color and style of his Confederate uniform.

Rob Wick · 12-13-2018, 06:02 PM

Quote:The Garretts said he was wearing gray clothing.

Wrong. Richard Baynham Garrett delivered a speech in the 1880s and 1890s on Booth's stay at his father's house. In this speech, he said "Mr. Boyd turned to my younger brother and offered to trade his neat dark suit of citizens' clothing for his old Confederate suit. My brother thought at first that he was jesting but, when he pressed the matter, asked his object. Boyd then said, "I will tell you, I have changed my mind about going home. I am going to make my way to North Carolina and join Johnston's army. Now as I am still to be a soldier and your battles are over, I will need a uniform, while you will need a citizens' suit." (Betsy Fleet and Richard Baynham Garrett, "A Chapter of Unwritten History: Richard Baynham Garrett's Account of the Flight and Death of John Wilkes Booth", The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 71, No. 4 (Oct., 1963) pg. 393

Quote:A man who is running for his life and who knows federal troops are desperate to find him is not gonna spend two days on a pleasure trip casually relaxing and socializing. For that matter, such a man would not have gone to the Garretts' in the first place but would have continued toward safer territory as quickly as possible.

The only way the Garrett Farm Patrol knew that Booth was in the area was because William and Bettie Rollins confirmed that. Had they decided to lie, or not tell Conger et al about Willie Jett, they would have ridden past Richard Garrett's home, as they did on the way to find Jett.

Quote:No, you need to provide a scrap of scientific evidence that freckles can magically sprout on the corpse of a person who was not freckled in life. You need to explain how "Booth's" body could have aged so markedly, not to mention when it did this magic act, since no one who saw him through April 25 noticed that he looked markedly older than 26 or that he had freckles.

Actually, I really don't. What you don't seem to understand about historical revisionism is that it's not up to me to prove you wrong (although I can in several hundred ways), but rather it's up to you to prove yourself right, which so far you and Dr. Arnold have failed miserably in doing. You can see those of us who understand and follow the rules of real historians as court historians or blinded by our own prejudices, but that means little to me. Nothing I say or show you will change your mind. The official version has stood this long, and it will continue to do so.

Quote:And speaking of Conger and Jett, why did Jett insist on talking to Conger alone?

Well, given that I never met either man, you would have to ask Conger or Jett. My belief is that Jett assessed the situation and believed Conger to be the one in charge, but I'll be the first to admit that I can't prove that with documentation. I'd love to know why you believe he did, although I think I know what you'll say.

Best
Rob

L Verge · 12-13-2018, 07:44 PM

Mr. Griffith - " For that matter, as Dr. Arnold points out, it is hard to fathom why he would have gone there in the first place instead of continuing to head toward safer territory." First, I would counter that the fugitives had managed to evade those search parties for ten days. Perhaps they were so tired that they let their guards down. Also, the Garretts were the first people in Virginia that actually offered them some hospitality, they had received no reports of troops crossing into Virginia on their trail, let's buy some time for R&R?

Also, what in the world makes you and Dr. Arnold think that they would have been safer to keep going south? Richmond was in easy distance, but occupied by the Union. Major forces were gathering with Joe Johnston to try and stop Sherman's forces that were heading north (and it all ended in nearby North Carolina). Most of the rail lines were under the control of Union forces, and the chances of finding a brave privateer hiding in an inlet to the Atlantic Ocean who was willing to try running them south were pretty slim. I would vote for making a run for Texas and Mexico, but that was a long journey that would end in an area where fighting was still going on -- remember the Trans-Mississippi campaign?

Use common sense and logic, sir.

mikegriffith1 · (This post was last modified: 12-13-2018 09:09 PM by mikegriffith1.)

Let’s go back to Occam’s Razor. The Booth-escaped theory does not require all the strained theoretical gymnastics that the traditional theory does. For example:

* The Garretts saw Boyd writing in a black diary two days after the last entry in Booth’s red diary because Boyd’s diary was not Booth’s diary and because Boyd was not Booth.

* The Garretts and Herold initially said the man in the barn was Boyd because he was Boyd.

* Booth used aliases at least twice during his flight from April 14 through April 24. The Booth-escaped theory does not require us to believe that by an amazing coincidence Booth chose as his last alias the name of a real person, a person who we know was on crutches, who was seen not very far from Port Royal a week or so earlier, and who never returned to his family even though he was anxious to do so.

* The James W. Boyd who stayed at the Garretts was relaxed and sociable because he was not running for his life and was in no particular rush, because he had not just assassinated Abraham Lincoln.

In contrast, we know that Booth was very impatient to complete his journey to safe territory. Thomas Jones twice had to persuade him not to continue his journey because of the danger of nearby federal troops. So with the Booth-escaped theory we don’t have to float the illogical, implausible speculation that Booth, fearing for his life and knowing that federal troops were pursuing him, suddenly decided to take two days off to lunge around the Garrett farm.

* When the man in the barn was dragged out of the barn and was still alive, he expressed surprise when he heard someone mention Booth’s name because he was not Booth. Boyd looked around with a surprised look on his face, as if he was looking for Booth after someone had mentioned Booth’s name. This is exactly what you would expect Boyd to do under the circumstances.

* Luther Baker did not take off with the man in the barn’s body for several hours for no reason. The Booth-escaped theory does not require us to ignore this bizarre, extremely suspicious event. Rather, we can plausibly theorize that Baker had a very important reason for taking off with the body: to change the clothing, to break the body’s left fibula near the ankle, to slightly burn the back of the body’s neck if necessary (unless the body happened to have a scar on the back of its neck), and possibly to write the initials JWB on one of the hands.

* The Booth-escaped theory enables us to understand why Luther Baker was never called on to explain under oath and/or for the record why he took off with the body for at least three hours. It also explains why Baker’s sworn statement was “lost” and why he was never asked to testify at the conspiracy trial.

* Any crime theory has to have motive, means, and opportunity. Conger and Luther Baker had all three. Stanton, Lafayette Baker, and Holt likewise had the motive, the means, and the opportunity to ensure that the body was falsely identified as Booth.

Conger and Luther Baker stood to make life-changing money if the body could be false identified as Booth. Lafayette Baker also stood to make a handsome penny if the troop detail that he sent out was the one that found “Booth.”

* Lafayette Baker specified that the officer who would lead the 25-man detail had to be an officer who was “discrete” because he knew that this officer would see things that would need to be kept secret. That officer, Doherty, got a handsome reward and an immediate promotion because he “kept his mouth shut,” as Lafayette Baker ordered him to do after he returned.

* The body on the Montauk “bore no resemblance” to Booth and “shocked” people by its lack of resemblance to Booth because it was not Booth.

* The body’s lineaments “bore no resemblance” to Booth’s because the body was not Booth.

* The body’s face was heavily freckled because the body was not Booth. We can accept the scientific fact that dead bodies do not magically grow freckles. We don’t have to reach and strain after far-fetched, unscientific, and wholly unsupported explanations for the presence of the freckles.

* The body looked “much older” than Booth because it was not Booth. Here, too, we don’t have to float unsupported, unscientific theories to try to explain how the body could have look “much older” than Booth when no one who saw Booth during his flight described him as suddenly looking much older than 26; nor did anyone describe him as having freckles.

* There is no record of Dr. Merrill’s alleged identification of the body on the Montauk because he came, saw the body, saw that it was not Booth, and was unwilling to give a sufficiently helpful statement or report.

* Either no autopsy photo was taken or one was taken and then suppressed because the body looked so unlike Booth, and it looked so unlike Booth because it was not Booth.

* Dr. May stumbled over his words and markedly contradicted himself in his April 27 deposition with Holt because he was falsely saying that the body was Booth when he could plainly see that it was not Booth.

* Dr. May came up with lame, implausible story that he identified the body by the “large ugly scar” on the back of the neck because it gave him an excuse to claim the body was Booth. Of course, a wound that had heals by granulation is going to look virtually identical to a similarly sized wound that heals by granulation. There would have been no “mark of the scalpel” that Dr. May could have recognized, since the line that he cut and then joined would have been obliterated after the wound was reopened and the granulation process occurred.

* There was so much massive confusion over the JWB initials because Dawson did not see them on the body on the Montauk but had seen them on Booth’s hand at the National Hotel, and he couldn’t remember exactly where he had seen them because he had seen them in passing. The two most reliable reports we have on the JWB initials indicate that they were between the thumb and the forefinger, not on the wrist or the arm. It’s not that the decades-belated witnesses who claimed they saw the initials forgot basic anatomy and could not distinguish between the area near the thumb and the wrist and the arm; it’s that they were lying about seeing the initials and randomly made up where they supposedly saw them.

* Holt and Baker made sure that no one who knew Booth well saw the body because they knew the body was not Booth and did not want to risk having to deal with a close friend or family member who saw that the body was not Booth.

* Barnes turned away Col. Cobb, a longtime friend of Booth’s who came to ID the body, because he did not want Cobb to see the body.

* Two of the crewmembers lied and said they had known Booth for six weeks because Holt and Baker needed witnesses who would say that the body was Booth. We don’t have to marvel at the amazing coincidence that two crewmembers on this ship of all the ships in the Union fleet just happened to both know Booth and just happened to have known him for the same amount of time. We can see that they were plainly lying.

* We don’t have to be baffled that most the Montauk witnesses said they identified the body “by its general appearance” when Dr. May said that the body bore no resemblance to Booth. There’s no mystery at all. The witnesses were lying. They couldn’t identify Booth by any of the numerous scars he was known to have because they didn’t know him.

* Speaking of all the scars that Booth was known to have, other than the neck scar, none of the witnesses mentioned seeing any of them, not even the two autopsy doctors, because those scars were not on the body because the body was not Booth.

* Dawson lied when he said he’d seen the neck scar when he viewed the corpse—Dr. May could not see the scar until the head and neck were lifted. Dawson had seen the neck scar when he saw Booth at the National Hotel while Booth leaned over the counter to sign room paperwork.

* Holt and Baker did not take the obvious step of having the Booth conspirators who were below deck come on deck to ID the body because they knew the body was not Booth.

* The body at the 1869 viewing had hair that was 10-12 inches longer than Booth’s hair because the body was not Booth, not because this one corpse defied all known science and magically grew 10-12 inches of hair and not because Pegram was legally blind and misjudged the hair length by about 400%.

* The body at the 1869 viewing had the wrong number of filings because it was not Booth. Booth had two fillings, but the body only had one, and there was no mention of a missing tooth, which would have contradicted the dental chart, not to mention the fact that it is rare for teeth to fall out after death because they usually fuse with the jaw bone and remain intact.

* The body at the 1869 viewing had visible damage to the knee, or to the area of bone just below the knee, because the body was not Booth. Booth had no such damage, and no such damage was noted on the body on the Montauk.

* The claims of the witnesses at the 1869 viewing are so contradictory, problematic, and in some cases utterly impossible because by that time there was no way anyone could identify the body by looking at it because the flesh was blackened and rotted. The family members did not want to raise questions about Booth’s fate, and the government certainly did not want to revisit the issue either. So the family lied and the government was only too happy to accept their lies.

* We don’t have to dismiss every single one of the post-April 27 sightings of Booth as hoaxes. We can accept the credible sightings as genuine.

* We don’t have to put ourselves in the odd position of justifying the strange refusal to allow any scientific testing of Booth’s remains or of the spinal section at the NMHM to definitively settle the issue once and for all.

When researchers and Booth descendants wanted to exhume Booth’s body to perform a well-known kind of scientific analysis of the skull face, “Lincoln assassination scholars” came out of the wood work and told the court that there was no need for science in this case, that this issue was already “settled,” etc., etc. In other words, faced with the chance to obtain scientific evidence that would positively identify the corpse as Booth, traditionalist scholars did all they could to prevent the scientific testing from being done.

When researchers and Booth descendants then wanted to do a DNA test on a very tiny, tiny, tiny piece of the spinal section at the NMHM to compare it with Edwin Booth’s DNA, the Army Medical Command refused, even though the test would have required the extraction of only 0.4 grams of the spine. 0.4 grams is only 0.014 ounces, or only 1.4% of 1 ounce. By way of comparison, a grain of salt weighs 0.0023 ounces. So we’re talking about a fragment of bone that would have been no more than 7 grains of salt combined.

The Army Medical Command said it denied the request because they wanted to preserve the specimen for future generations. For what? Why? What harm would be done by removing 0.4 grams of bone from the section?