COMMENTS

• 
  03/22/2012 at 8:00pm

  laverge-01

  Please do not believe the old escape theories related to John Wilkes Booth. The Enid, Oklahoma story is just one of about a half-dozen that have him all over the globe.
  
  The Oklahoma version was made popular in the early-1900s by a Memphis lawyer named Finis Bates, who did more to screw up history than you can imagine. It has been perpetuated over the past forty years through the undying efforts of a man in Maryland, who even attempted to get the body of Booth exhumed. His efforts failed in civil court and in a special appeals court for lack of evidence.
  
  Your classmate's story is even wrong to the point of saying that someone else was executed in place of Booth. Four other conspirators were hanged for their involvement with Booth, but not one of them was a Booth look-alike.
  
  There are thousands of Lincoln assassination researchers and scholars around the world who have worked tirelessly to bring the true facts of the crime to public attention. It is time to start listening to them instead of theorists.

  from Brig. Gen. Joseph Holt - His Role as Chief Prosecutor in the Military Tribunal
• 
  03/15/2012 at 3:05pm

  LiverLovesNancy

  Im 15 And my Class is doing a project on mary surratt and it has to do with her being inoccent but im not finding a lot of of her being evidence of her being inoccent just of her being guilty.. can anyone help me?

  from Mary Surratt - Guilty, Innocent, or does it matter?
• 
  03/11/2012 at 8:12pm

  taletotell

  Quick addendum to the story:
  
  About 30 years ago(give or take a few), I was in Oklahoma History class at the University of Tulsa. Our assignment was to come up with un unusual research paper regarding a little known part of Oklahoma history. We were encouraged to do this through unconventional means, like actual interviews and personal accounts if possible.
  
  I thought I probably had the most unusual report because mine was first hand accounts of rooster fighting and how much the underground enterprise affected the economy of the state. I was wrong.
  
  A fellow classmate by the name of Jana Boothe(not sure I spelled her name correctly) had family documents and photos regarding her great-great(don't know how many greats)uncle John. Apparently he actually escaped to Indian territory and resided in what is now Enid, Oklhoma where he died a natural death some years into his old age. Another was actually hanged in his place.
  
  She was quite convincing. And, of course,she would have no reason to WANT to be associated with John Wilkes Boothe if in fact she didn't have to. Her family had actually been protecting the shameful secret all these years.

  from Brig. Gen. Joseph Holt - His Role as Chief Prosecutor in the Military Tribunal
• 
  03/11/2012 at 5:37pm

  lapappas

  I am so happy to hear that a new film is in progress about the American Revolution. I sincerely hope that it is the first of many. I own and have watched the HBO series on John Adams many times and look forward to more quality films on that era of our history.
  
  I also wish that Ken Burns would put together an epic documentary on this part of our national story. If you haven't seen Ric Burns' doc on the history of New York City it is well worth a look... I love it.
  
  A list of other topics for future films ought to include Lewis and Clark, Theodore Roosevelt, FDR and the history of America's involvement in the procuring of Alaska and Hawaii.

  from Historians View the Assassination
• 
  01/12/2012 at 4:50pm

  Lray1

  I've been reading the discussions with Dr. Larson on her web site, and I have a few thoughts. Historian that you are, I differ with you on a couple of issues. First, the evidence presented by Mr. Weichmann and Mr. Lloyd was not that strong - just managed by the prosecution. They themselves seemed questionable as to veracity and motive. Mrs. Surratt was not going to receive a fair trial. That was a military kangaroo court representing itself as a vehicle of justice. (I am surprised that Dr. Mudd himself was not executed) Incidentally, newly-President Johnson, himself a Southerner, was on very thin ice, inasmuch as Secretary Stanton was perhaps the single most powerful person in the country at that time, and probably would not have bucked the Secretary
  Second, though it may be that Mr. Aiken was newly-minted and relatively inexperienced, Clarence Darrow himself would not have gained her freedom. I refer you all, and you, Dr. Larson, to the closing argument in the case by Mr. Aiken. It's listed in some annals as one of the world's most powerful speeches. I respect your grasp of history, but we all know it is written by the winners, and since we can only read what is written, it's subject to multiple interpretations.

  from Frederick Aiken: A Rookie Defender