SMF - Just Installed!
Username  
Password
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
  Print  
Author Topic: What if Boston Corbett had not fatally shot Booth?  (Read 3112 times)
Randal
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3414



View Profile
« Reply #15 on: May 14, 2012, 08:10:52 AM »

"Personally, I think there are some aspects of the Lincoln assassination that we overthink - and this is one of them.  Sometimes, the obvious answer is the correct answer."


Very, very true!
Logged

"It was a walking graveyard"
Randal
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3414



View Profile
« Reply #16 on: May 14, 2012, 08:26:05 AM »

   I mentioned the 12 days quote from the last paragraph of your post # 12 because I can't see how it matters. I believe he was drinking on the 14th. And may have even been drunk, judging from Crawford's statement, but I've never heard of him drinking at Garretts.
     Unless I'm missing something (it happens to me a lot here), the auopsy report states the ball traveled downward and to the rear. If it entered from the right side or front, it's entirely possible that Booth shot himself.


I'll ask Dr. Houmes to comment on that. I thought the shot came from the rear, or, a rear entry-wound.
Logged

"It was a walking graveyard"
wild bill
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 98



View Profile
« Reply #17 on: May 14, 2012, 09:01:57 AM »

Unfortunately, Laurie Verge, the Surratt Society, Rick Smith and/or I do not own the copyright to the article Randal wants to illegally reprint again (we went through all this back in February, but I believe it has been deleted). So we cannot grant him permission to reprint.

Should anyone like to read the article in question I took these entries, the article is in two parts) off off google (sorry but I am not computer-wise, so you are on your own):

Booth Bombshell: Not Suicide By Cop! Part 3 | Suite101.com
rick-stelnick.suite101.com › History › American HistoryFeb 10, 2012 – Could John Wilkes Booth Have Committed Suicide at Garrett's ... was Booth physically able to have committed suicide in such a way as to ...
Booth Bombshell: Not Suicide By Cop! Part 2 | Suite101.com
rick-stelnick.suite101.com › History › American HistoryFeb 10, 2012 – Could John Wilkes Booth Have Committed Suicide at Garrett's Farm? by William Lee Richter and Joseph E. “Rick” Smith III. It is a familiar story .
Logged
Randal
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3414



View Profile
« Reply #18 on: May 14, 2012, 09:33:30 AM »

Hahah, nope,, sorry, I don't want to illegally re-print it, but i can't understand for the life of me that you let Stelnick copyright it! It's beyond my pea-sized brain Wink

I have something else though, stay-tuned!
Logged

"It was a walking graveyard"
Gene C
Full Member
***
Posts: 206


Fido


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: May 14, 2012, 09:57:52 AM »

Who knows what's going through someone's mind in such a desperate situation?  From what little forensic evidence I have read though, it seems highly unlikely Booth killed himself.  How many people try to kill themselves by shooting themself in the neck?

An intersting article from the Indianna State University Library "Neff-Guttridge Collection" (don't laugh)

http://library.indstate.edu/about/units/rbsc/neff/PDFs/guttridge_identification.pdf

« Last Edit: May 14, 2012, 10:16:42 AM by Gene C » Logged

The more you know, the more you think the less you know, because you know that you don't know.  The less you know the more you think the more you know, because you don't know that you don't know. 
 (Not bad for an old dog)
Rick Smith
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 78



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: May 14, 2012, 12:42:06 PM »

Booth Buff,

Very good points made.

No question it was absolutely possible {and I think, probable} for Booth to have shot himself and to have inflicted the type of wound that he suffered.

Rick

Logged
BoothBuff
Guest
« Reply #21 on: May 14, 2012, 12:55:48 PM »

     Thank you, Rick. I did read yours and Bill's article on the Suite 101 website (there's some weird stuff there!) and I enjoyed it. My point is, going from Woodward's report,

     
Quote
Case JWB: Was killed April 26, 1865, by a conoidal pistol ball, fired at the distance of a few yards, from a cavalry revolver. The missile perforated the base of the right lamina of the 4th cervical vertebra, fracturing it longitudinally and separating it by a fissure from the spinous process, at the same time fracturing the 5th vertebra through its pedicle, and involving that transverse process. The projectile then transversed the spinal canal almost horizontally but with a slight inclination downward and backward, perforating the cord which was found much torn and discolored with blood (see Specimen 4087 Sect. I AMM). The ball then shattered the bases of the left 4th and 5th laminae, driving bony fragments among the muscles, and made its exit at the left side of the neck, nearly opposite the point of entrance. It avoided the 2nd and 3rd cervical nerves. These facts were determined at autopsy which was made on April 28. Immediately after the reception of the injury, there was very general paralysis. The phrenic nerves performed their function, but the respiration was diaphragmatic, of course, labored and slow. Deglutition was impracticable, and one or two attempts at articulation were unintelligible. Death, from asphyxia, took place about two hours after the reception of the injury.

     The key words there, for me, are downward and backward. That negates anything about Booth having to put the gun in an awkward position. If the ball traveled downward and backward, it had to come from the front. Easy to do. Period.
Logged
Rick Smith
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 78



View Profile
« Reply #22 on: May 14, 2012, 01:04:15 PM »

Joe,

Glad you enjoyed the article. 

Suite 101 is "interesting."  First time I saw it was when our article appeared.

With his elbow raised, pistol butt up, muzzle to his neck, he could have achieved any trajectory he wanted to.

As you said, easy to do, period.

Rick
Logged
Rick Smith
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 78



View Profile
« Reply #23 on: May 14, 2012, 01:44:04 PM »

Reckon I better make my way to the florist shop.
Logged
kharv
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 61



View Profile WWW
« Reply #24 on: May 14, 2012, 02:23:22 PM »

Maybe the failed immediate death from a possible self inflicted gunshot wound is why Booths reported last words are "Useless, useless."  Maybe he felt that after the assassination, everything he touched was basically a failure.

First he was disappointed that the assassination did not quite go over publicly the way he envisioned.  He was limited in his escape by the broken leg.  Stuck outside for days while waiting for a chance to cross, then failing to get across the first night and losing an additional day at Indian town.  The Jett and Garrett brothers betrayal had to be the icing on the cake.


I still believe he was shot by someone else as that sounds like a very awkward position to hold a pistol and pull the trigger with any finger other than the thumb.


Not sure how accurate the Manhunt version of the story is where it says Booth felt that suicide was the cowards out.

Sadly, we may never know 100%.
Logged
Steven G. Miller
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 752



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: May 14, 2012, 06:21:41 PM »

A Question for Wild Bill and Rick Smith: so you're saying that you sent a copy of your piece to Mr. Stelnick for his blog and he copyrighted it without your permission. Is that correct?

Or did you do it with the full understanding that he would and should sue anyone (the owner of this forum, the Surratt Society or an interested third party) who might reprint it?

Said another way: did you get snookered, or are you willing to punish anyone who DARES to print your work?

Logged
Dan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 270



View Profile
« Reply #26 on: May 14, 2012, 06:46:57 PM »

 "Thank you, Rick. I did read yours and Bill's article on the Suite 101 website (there's some weird stuff there!) and I enjoyed it."

That pretty much sums up the Booth shooting himself in the neck theory!
« Last Edit: May 14, 2012, 07:25:08 PM by Dan » Logged
Rick Smith
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 78



View Profile
« Reply #27 on: May 14, 2012, 07:11:47 PM »

Steve,

Your remarks are ungentlemanly and I think, beneath your dignity.

You know exactly what the situation is.

Furthermore, when Randal accused Bill & I of denigrating you in the text and notes of our article, which is patently false, as anyone can see for themselves by reading the article and as we took great pains to refer to you and Blaine in the most courteous and considerate way, I especially find your remarks repugnant.

You refused to give a direct answer to me when I asked you if you felt slighted by anything Bill & I wrote.  I do not understand why you decided not to put an end to Randal's ridiculous accusations by declaring openly that we referred to you only in a way which can be seen as complimentary.

I did expect something more manly of you.

Rick
Logged
Rick Smith
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 78



View Profile
« Reply #28 on: May 14, 2012, 07:15:49 PM »

Dan,

Glad you enjoyed the article and many thanks for your kind response.

Rick
Logged
Steven G. Miller
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 752



View Profile
« Reply #29 on: May 14, 2012, 08:24:36 PM »

Rick,

I'm going to answer your question by first citing one of the footnotes from Mr. Stelnick's blog. I believe I can safely use this under the fair use doctrine without fear of getting taken to court by the copyright holder.

"Quoted in Steven G. Miller, “Death of an Assassin: Homicide, Suicide, or Something Else,”. Miller has looked at approximately 55 accounts of the shooting at Garrett’s farm and finds Paraday’s story to be the only independently and marginally reliable (in our estimation, not Miller’s) one beyond Corbett’s own self-serving tale. Miller to Richter, November 26, 2011, e-mail in the author’s file."

First of all, the soldier's name was Pvt. Emory PARADY, not Paraday.

So, you are saying that an eyewitness who WAS present at the shooting and who wrote an account TWENTY FOURS LATER was "marginally reliable"? And you are saying, too, that the statements (there are several, by the way) by Corbett are self-serving and likewise "marginally reliable"? Do you similarly dismiss all eyewitness testimony? Or is it just anything said by Boston Corbett? Do you have to like the person who makes the statement, or do you start with a conclusion and look for evidence to support it?

Or, am I such a poor historian that I need to be schooled by the Three Musketeers? I guess I was raised with a different standard of evidence. I try to fit the facts into a theory, not look for evidence that supports my conclusion. Yes, you did not attack me and, I guess, treated me in a "gentlemanly" way, but you pretty much said my reliance on Parady's letter was naive and wrong headed. You pretty much said that my conclusions were faulty.


My questions still stands and to ask it is not ungentlemanly. Will Bill raised the specter of lawsuit for violating the copyright on the article. I think the copyright protection is a reflection of the paranoia the blog is steeped in. Does he (or you) think your argument is so special that folks need to be hauled into court and punished in order to protect the specialness of the piece?
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
  Print  
 
Jump to: