|
Post by Dakota V. Lancer on Feb 12, 2017 8:08:00 GMT -5
I have been prowling around this board for a while now but have stayed far from any discussion so far. Both pro & anti Bushy make sense at times while at other points make things sound unlikely. I have not yet made my mind up if i believe Brushy's story or not but i do enjoy reading all the "stories". But it made me ask myself... do i want to know what really happened? I came to this board after spending an eve watching both Young Guns movies. Now i know about Billy The Kid and Pat Garret but i always figured the second movie was completely made up juist to make some extra money. Then i found it was based om a "true" story and found this board and i started reading document, books and websites about The Kid and Brushy. Do i care if he really was Billy? No! Would i like it to be so? Hell yes! It would be so amazing if he made his biggest escape that night and lived to become an old man BUT would it make me think different about Billy The Kid as we all know him from the stories? Nah... Billy to me is that Kid who lived in the wild west and pullen off some pretty amazing stunts. I don't think people should fight over if he survived or not but rather enjoy the fact that after all these years he is still very much alive in books, movies, our minds and hearts. Maybe one day i will take a stand on Brushy Bill but for now i will enjoy the idea he MIGHT have survived
|
|
|
Post by MissyS on Feb 12, 2017 20:58:59 GMT -5
Welcome to the board, Dakota V. Lancer Sometimes the board is slow and sometimes its busy with many posters, when its slow I like to go back and read over old posts there's always a thread or so I missed , many here like me love Old West history and like to read any thing or person, outlaw or event during that time period, but theres always alot to discuss about Billy and Brushy Bill, his life story was sad, and like you I would love to know he lived to be 90 instead of 21, I hope one day the mystery of Billy's death would be solved with proof enough for everyone to accept, but untill then we can enjoy the discussions, and the stories.
|
|
|
Post by mckinley412 on Feb 20, 2019 5:25:04 GMT -5
Billy was never described as having a long face to my knowledge. Unless it was by modern day people that see what they want in an old tintype. Am I wrong? But he was described as having a sweeping jaw which by definition is wide and broad. He was said to have a large forehead which from Brushy's side profile i would say fits that description also. All this from Mesilla trial, can be found in Nolan's West. Just trying to keep everything accurate here.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jun 11, 2019 4:03:05 GMT -5
Some mysteries are better left unsolved.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2019 3:40:17 GMT -5
Whether we want something to be true or not is immaterial. What matters is if it's true. The only field of study that gives "proofs" is mathematics. Every other field has to rely on a cumulative collection of various types of evidence to reach a reasonable doubt whether something is of the highest probability of truth or falsehood.
When it comes to Brushy Bill Roberts, while I would love him to be Billy The Kid, I think it's more reasonable to say that he knew Billy The Kid and he himself was some unknown individual involved in certain events and for whatever reason changed his name and for whatever reason tried to get his old friend pardoned.
Still, at that, I think the "accepted historical record" on Billy The Kid, especially the night of his alleged death, is in doubt enough to re-examine all sides. Garrett's account just doesn't add up, nor does Poe's account. There's still no death certificate yet to be found. There's nothing but conflict in every account of everybody involved. And we can't even dig up the body of the alleged grave because we don't even know if the body is even there or not.
So that leaves Roberts. We can certainly match his DNA to his alleged relatives to see whether they are really his cousins or immediate family. We can certainly try to relocate Joseph Antrim's remains or even William Antrim's, etc and compare DNA. If any of these things remotely validate Roberts claims, then Hico has hit a gold mine, although that doesn't necessarily mean Roberts is Billy The Kid even at that. At best it'd only mean Roberts was indeed a cousin to the Antrim's like he always claimed, unless we see a curve ball we didn't expect (ie, being the son or brother of the Antrim's).
Only until that grave in New Mexico was unearthed and all the bodies were checked and verified or dismissed, could we ever say that Roberts really was Billy The Kid or not.
|
|