|
|
Post by leeb on Dec 29, 2020 11:07:28 GMT -5
Brushy bill wasn't shot in the face, brushy bill wasn't there, brushy bill was so infatuated with BTk that he actually convinced himself that he was and took on his persona. Brushy bill was an over zealous groupie. This is clearly your opinion Leeb, and yet you express it as if it were an undisputed fact. As you might have noticed when youve taken part of the discussions on this forum, it is not an undisputed fact. You have every right to express your opinion of course, however I think it would be better if we could all agree upon stating opinions as opinions and facts as facts. The debate would benefit from that, in my opinion. But do as you like, it dont matter that much. feel free to reveal any facts about brushy's story because I'm not so sure there is any. Any help and pointing me in the right direction would be much appreciated. |
|
|
|
Post by leeb on Dec 29, 2020 14:59:19 GMT -5
I guess we all have our on style of debating but it is true we don't need anyone on here telling the rest of us what the "facts" are unless those facts have been proven. No matter how much one believes something to be factual, it should be proven beyond a doubt or it should be recognized as an opinion. Thanks for pointing that out ronnback. Anti Brushy bias as per usual. |
|
|
|
Post by leeb on Dec 29, 2020 15:52:59 GMT -5
Before Morrison's intervention why was no one chomping at the bit to uncover some underhanded scenario?
|
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Dec 29, 2020 20:10:58 GMT -5
I guess we all have our on style of debating but it is true we don't need anyone on here telling the rest of us what the "facts" are unless those facts have been proven. No matter how much one believes something to be factual, it should be proven beyond a doubt or it should be recognized as an opinion. Thanks for pointing that out ronnback. Anti Brushy bias as per usual. What? Is this more sarcasm? Or suppose you can tell me why that statement was 'anti Brushy'? |
|
|
|
Post by leeb on Dec 30, 2020 14:34:43 GMT -5
"We don't need anyone on here telling us what the facts are ". Again you show your true colours towards anyone who disagrees with your thoughts. Personally I think you also know that 'brushy's story 'is a load of old Pony but your to far in to admit it....As you were
|
|
|
|
Post by RonBk on Dec 30, 2020 15:58:52 GMT -5
"We don't need anyone on here telling us what the facts are ". Again you show your true colours towards anyone who disagrees with your thoughts. Personally I think you also know that 'brushy's story 'is a load of old Pony but your to far in to admit it....As you were Or perhaps its the other way around. You are the one who deep down somewhere in your mind understands that you are wrong. Maybe that is the reason you are coming out with such an aggressive attitude. It could be a frustration that you know youre wrong but wont admit it to yourself. So your answer is to slam everybody else instead of contributing to the debate in some more meaningful way? And perhaps this is also the reason you wont let go of the discussion? I mean, if you really were that certain that Brushy was a fraud then you would not spend so much time on this forum? |
|
|
|
Post by Texas Truth Teller on Dec 30, 2020 17:38:04 GMT -5
Opinions are a dime a dozen. Faith is powerful. Facts are even more powerful.
Not a single, verifiable, fact has ever been presented that supports Brushy's incredible life story.
Not a single, verifiable, fact has ever been presented that proves BtK was alive after 14 July 1881.
Not a single, verifiable, fact has ever been presented that proves Brushy Bill Roberts and Oliver P Roberts were two different men.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Dec 30, 2020 18:13:31 GMT -5
I grow weary of all this debate over the facts. There certainly are some facts that relate to Brushy both those that support his claim and those that do not. But this message board exists not only to examine facts but also to express opinion. And there is nothing wrong with expressing opinion unless you try to present it as a fact. So please stop trying to shut down the expression of opinions and beliefs and please stop trying to insist on facts that have not been proven as such. That really isn't too much to ask for and as host of this message board, I have the right to insist on it. In "fact" I do insist on it.
Let this serve as fair notice to anyone who will not exercise these common courtesies. Enough, is enough!
|
|
|
|
Post by tboor74 on Dec 31, 2020 3:04:06 GMT -5
Hear, Hear
|
|
|
|
Post by MissyS on Dec 31, 2020 15:37:20 GMT -5
A good friend of mine pointed out an article where Deluvina states that she sewed money into the waistband of Billy's trousers. Is it true I don't know, is it possible, maybe? I found reference to this story in Tall Tales and Half Truths of Billy the Kid, in a chapter entitled Billy’s Lost Loot, Deluvina sometime in her elder years had mentioned that if she had the money that was buried with Billy that she wouldn’t want for nothing, according to her or the story Deluvina said Billy won a lot of money playing poker in a saloon across the street from Pete Maxwell’s, Billy put the money in the waistband of his worn out trousers and next day he bought a new pair of trousers and he gave them to Deluvina who is happy to sew for him and do his laundry and asked if she would sew the money in the belt, and according to Deluvina Billy wore those new trousers the night he was killed and the money buried with him. But it doesn’t make much sense to me because if it’s true that Deluvina helped to clean and dress Billy then she would have been aware of the money in the trousers? I don’t know where that story came from if it was in an interview or a news article?, there was another story in Stalking Billy the Kid mentioning Paco Anaya in 1931 recalled Pat Garrett giving Pete $25.00 and instructed him to go to Manuel Abreu’s store and buy Billy new clothes; a beige suit, a shirt, an undershirt, shorts and stockings, and he and several others dressed him, so the new trousers wouldn’t have been buried with Billy?, if the two incidents were really reported as being said by the two then I wonder why would there be a need to redress Billy in shorts if he was wearing brand new trousers?, and did Deluvina really help prepare the body for burial? Did she even see Billy’s body before he was buried?, because if she did then she probably would have noticed him laying in a coffin wearing a new beige suit and shorts, and not wearing his new trousers? Billy could of had a more lavish funeral with that money on him, a nice tombstone perhaps? but nothing was said about the loot he just won. It’s all a bit odd?  Happy New Years to All |
|
|
|
Post by aaron0515 on Jan 3, 2021 2:49:02 GMT -5
A good friend of mine pointed out an article where Deluvina states that she sewed money into the waistband of Billy's trousers. Is it true I don't know, is it possible, maybe? I found reference to this story in Tall Tales and Half Truths of Billy the Kid, in a chapter entitled Billy’s Lost Loot, Deluvina sometime in her elder years had mentioned that if she had the money that was buried with Billy that she wouldn’t want for nothing, according to her or the story Deluvina said Billy won a lot of money playing poker in a saloon across the street from Pete Maxwell’s, Billy put the money in the waistband of his worn out trousers and next day he bought a new pair of trousers and he gave them to Deluvina who is happy to sew for him and do his laundry and asked if she would sew the money in the belt, and according to Deluvina Billy wore those new trousers the night he was killed and the money buried with him. But it doesn’t make much sense to me because if it’s true that Deluvina helped to clean and dress Billy then she would have been aware of the money in the trousers? I don’t know where that story came from if it was in an interview or a news article?, there was another story in Stalking Billy the Kid mentioning Paco Anaya in 1931 recalled Pat Garrett giving Pete $25.00 and instructed him to go to Manuel Abreu’s store and buy Billy new clothes; a beige suit, a shirt, an undershirt, shorts and stockings, and he and several others dressed him, so the new trousers wouldn’t have been buried with Billy?, if the two incidents were really reported as being said by the two then I wonder why would there be a need to redress Billy in shorts if he was wearing brand new trousers?, and did Deluvina really help prepare the body for burial? Did she even see Billy’s body before he was buried?, because if she did then she probably would have noticed him laying in a coffin wearing a new beige suit and shorts, and not wearing his new trousers? Billy could of had a more lavish funeral with that money on him, a nice tombstone perhaps? but nothing was said about the loot he just won. It’s all a bit odd? Happy New Years to All . Could it be that his money was back at Silvas with his trousers, I guess I've always thought that he was wearing his "sock feet" long johns when he went for the beef that night. |
|
|
|
Post by MissyS on Jan 5, 2021 2:27:58 GMT -5
I found reference to this story in Tall Tales and Half Truths of Billy the Kid, in a chapter entitled Billy’s Lost Loot, Deluvina sometime in her elder years had mentioned that if she had the money that was buried with Billy that she wouldn’t want for nothing, according to her or the story Deluvina said Billy won a lot of money playing poker in a saloon across the street from Pete Maxwell’s, Billy put the money in the waistband of his worn out trousers and next day he bought a new pair of trousers and he gave them to Deluvina who is happy to sew for him and do his laundry and asked if she would sew the money in the belt, and according to Deluvina Billy wore those new trousers the night he was killed and the money buried with him. But it doesn’t make much sense to me because if it’s true that Deluvina helped to clean and dress Billy then she would have been aware of the money in the trousers? I don’t know where that story came from if it was in an interview or a news article?, there was another story in Stalking Billy the Kid mentioning Paco Anaya in 1931 recalled Pat Garrett giving Pete $25.00 and instructed him to go to Manuel Abreu’s store and buy Billy new clothes; a beige suit, a shirt, an undershirt, shorts and stockings, and he and several others dressed him, so the new trousers wouldn’t have been buried with Billy?, if the two incidents were really reported as being said by the two then I wonder why would there be a need to redress Billy in shorts if he was wearing brand new trousers?, and did Deluvina really help prepare the body for burial? Did she even see Billy’s body before he was buried?, because if she did then she probably would have noticed him laying in a coffin wearing a new beige suit and shorts, and not wearing his new trousers? Billy could of had a more lavish funeral with that money on him, a nice tombstone perhaps? but nothing was said about the loot he just won. It’s all a bit odd? Happy New Years to All . Could it be that his money was back at Silvas with his trousers, I guess I've always thought that he was wearing his "sock feet" long johns when he went for the beef that night. The trousers could have been back at Silva’s? However reading Jesus’s interview it sounded like the last time he saw Billy was outside on the edge of an irrigation canal talking and drinking beer before Billy took off to Pete’s, but if it was around midnight as Garrett said then Billy may have been in his long Johns? Then there was Poe I believe that said the man that night they confronted was bareheaded, wore only socks on his feet, and was fastening his trousers as he approached. Why Billy would be on an edge of an irrigation canal wearing socks is another question? |
|
|
|
Post by MissyS on Feb 9, 2021 12:06:14 GMT -5
What comes to mind when reading many stories from some of the eyewitnesses that shared them about Billy the Kid is that during the time of the writers project when many were interviewed and when many news clippings still stirred about Billy the Kid there was a Great Depression that coincided, I don’t know how much that could have effected the reliability of some eyewitnesses, if some could have shared a little fabricated story for a chance to make a little money during very hard times? I’m not saying all did, but there could be a possibility a few may have?, there’s just so many different versions of Billy’s events that cause me to wonder? The Great Depression was around 1929-39 or even longer, this was a tough time for farmers and ranchers, many went bankrupt, and writers and newspapers journalists and others who were trying to profit from books on the subject may have been eager for information enough to offer payment for contributing to the Billy Lore? I always felt that old timers that were alive and living in the area at the time were the best reliable sources, and may still be? But how reliable can we expect them to be when considering the circumstances at time it was told? |
|
|
|
Post by leeb on Feb 9, 2021 12:54:38 GMT -5
Definitely family members changed their story to nick a couple of quid. Some of them high profile. Doesn't really help but they know who they are/were.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Luevano on Jun 5, 2023 13:01:58 GMT -5
Jesus Silva was my great grandfather - father of my maternal grandmother, Eloisa Silva Gonzalez. I wish to someday unite with my cousins of New Mexico. I want to breathe in the air at Ft. Sumner, embrace the spirit of Puerta de Luna, and feel the memories of my ancestors as they hosted Billy the Kid.
|
|
Happy New Years to All