|
Post by Wayne Land on Dec 28, 2013 17:52:24 GMT -5
Over on another thread, I've been exchanging comments with our very knowledgeable board member "nmjames" regarding the lineage of Brushy Bill. I've decided to try and move the conversation over to this category of "Revelations and Contradictions" and try and solicit opinions from additional board members. Here's what I believe is the most thought provoking dilemma regarding Brushy's story.
If his alleged natural mother, Mary Adeline Dunn and father, John (or James) H Roberts were fictitious characters as it appears they likely were, then why make them up in the first place? Why did Brushy not tell the truth about his parentage? And if they were real, then how is it they have so many similarities with other Roberts family members that can't possibly be his parents? Was there really a brother to Henry Oliver Roberts named John or James who was married to the half sister of Catherine Bonney? It doesn't appear there was. In fact I'm becoming more inclined to believe that Brushy fabricated these individuals by combining names and stories of other relatives of the Roberts family. If he really was Billy The Kid then why would he do that? On the other hand, if he wasn't really Billy The Kid, then why wouldn't he just stick with the accepted lineage? There's no reason he needed to inject all those made up family members. It only serves to make his story more questionable. It just doesn't make sense in my opinion.
But, I strongly believe he "was" Billy The Kid. I'm willing to concede he was not if I see enough evidence to the contrary, but the contrary evidence has not yet risen to that level in my opinion. Make no mistake here, I'm still a "believer" in Brushy's claim. But my reaction when confronted with such evidence is to try and resolve in my own mind, what possible explanation or explanations there may be. So I have to admit I'm struggling with these questions about who his real parents and grandparents were.
The problem with "possible explanations" is that they sometimes have little or no evidence to support them. These I'm going to throw out here definitely fall in the "no evidence" column but I'm going to share them anyway. Ready or not, here goes!
Theory 1: Brushy truly was the natural born son of Catherine Bonney but by the 1890's, he was growing tired of being on the run, constantly worried someone would discover him. He came across the dead O. L. Roberts, retrieved his belongings as he claimed, and went to Texas with idea of impersonating this fellow and taking on his identity. Elizabeth Roberts was a bit looney at the time and believed he was her lost son. The rest of the family humored her. By 1948 when he met William Morrison, he had become accepted as the real Oliver Roberts and had a life there as a member of that family which he did not want to completely abandon. So he made up the story of how he "really was" a Roberts who had become Billy The Kid and at long last had returned to his family in Texas. He wanted to be remembered as being born a Roberts.
Theory 2: Brushy was not the natural born son of Catherine Bonney and possibly not related to her at all, but she knew his real mother and took him in as her son at a very young age when the mother died. Over the next 10 years or so, Catherine shared this with him and told him his real mother was a Roberts. When he decided to take on the alias of Oliver Roberts and eventually met William Morrison, he tried to fill in the blanks using existing family names. He knew the details he gave were made up or at the best, guess work, but he thought his true identity of Billy The Kid would be more easily believed if he provided such details. And again, he didn't want to be remembered as just "Billy The Kid". He wanted to be remembered as a Roberts.
What is your theory? Please feel free to speculate. Sometimes the truth really is stranger than fiction. I'm just sayin'.
|
|
|
Post by jsaunders on Jan 14, 2014 3:03:59 GMT -5
There are a few things that I would like to add. First who says that Mary Dunn and James or John Roberts are'nt his parents? Who has performed a proper genealogical research for them? And why would he just pull names out of his hat to throw out there? I would also like to point out that on a site where someone was trying to debunk his claims this person used the statement he made about being born in Buffalo Gap, Texas and said it was a lie that Buffalo Gap did not exist in 1859. This is a total lie. Buffalo Gap was developed in 1857 and receive its post office in 1878. I never close my mind to anything until its 100% over. I feel some of the debunkers are just throwing things out there to see if they will stick. There were Dunn's and Roberts in Taylor County, Texas in the 1850's. Families were just arriving in Texas around that time the chances of him guessing these names in that area are highly unlikely. He could not have done research before making ip these names because in 1950 he would have had to go in person to each county to do research. What bothers me the most is why would a 90 year old man make all this up.? He wouldn't. He stood to gain nothing and at 90 I don't think he cared about attention. As we age and begin our journey to the end we tend to relive our lives over and over telling our life history over and over. I've never known a person of 90 to just fabricate a whole new life for themselves. Our memories do however fade and some things blend into others. That is why I believe him over all others. And until someone can prove to me beyond a doubt that he made all this up I will continue to believe he is the real Billy the Kid.
|
|
|
Post by MissyS on Mar 26, 2014 13:27:03 GMT -5
Sorry Wayne, I know this is an old thread but was curious about Brushy's father, in the book by Dr. Hannah Valdez and Judge Bobby E. Hefner, "Billy the Kid Killed in New Mexico died in Texas", there is a copy of a letter that Brushy wrote, (actually Lizzie wrote it for Brushy) on Oct 27 1950 addressed to a Mrs Everhard it pertains to uncle Jesse? But he says in the letter he's the son of a J H Roberts, Wild Henry the Indian fighter, he commenced fighting Indians here ( I guess Texas) in 1853, and he was born in Lexington Kentucky in 1832 and that he knew the James in Kentucky before they went to Missouri, and his dad belonged to the Quantrell gang during the civil war, also he said that he was (Brushy) born the last hr. of 1859, anyway I was wondering if his father was researched under Henry maybe cuz of his nickname Wild Henry, and was really Henry instead of John, being a Quantrell he may have used the alias John? And if there's a Henry Roberts listed in the census in 1832 In Lexington Kentucky?, also i want to add his name may can be verified with a list of Quantrell recruits, I remember reading somewhere there were less than 300 members I believe? dont know where that list can be checked ? Sorry this is a long post, I guess I will cool it with the posting for awhile.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Mar 27, 2014 12:31:49 GMT -5
Oh no, please don't feel bad for writing as long a post as you feel led to. Anytime. I really enjoy reading them as I sure many board members do and you have injected some very interesting possibilities. I'll search for Henry as you suggest and let you know if I find anything.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Mar 27, 2014 14:50:06 GMT -5
As suggested, I've been searching for Henry Roberts, etc. It isn't too difficult to find suspects who were born in Kentucky around 1832 and sometimes there are other tantalizing leads but it seems there's always some reason it just can't be the right one. And then maybe I've already found the right one but ruled it out because of some conflicting information from Brushy that was wrong in the first place. Even if Brushy's intent was to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth when interviewing with Morrison, he had to be basing the information about his parents and grandparents on what he was told by Catherine Bonney. Wherever he got it, who knows how accurate the information was? Maybe the real birth parents abandoned him, maybe Catherine stole him, maybe, maybe, maybe!!! Unfortunately, finding census, marriage records or anything else has proven extremely difficult.
|
|
|
Post by MissyS on Mar 27, 2014 16:59:27 GMT -5
Wayne, I sure have enjoyed reading and posting here, I do hope that one day that one piece of evidence that will prove Brushy's claims will be discovered, I do hope Billy the Kid lived to be 90 instead of thinking he died young and tragic, I have alot of respect for you and persons like you that are determined to do research, spend the time to hunt evidence, and, are determined to find the truth in what you believe in. After reading these boards Im believing more and more that Brushy didnt lie about who he was, many people used aliases and if Jesse Evans which could have been Joe Hines? was still living and did inform Morrison that Brushy was the Kid and living in Texas then Brushy may have changed a few names fearing his family's safety, Jesse Evans would have reason to kill Brushy or his family members since Brushy or the Kid testified against him back in the day and especially after they made a pact, even if Evans wasnt a threat Brushy may have believed it?, its another idea as to why the names dont connect?. I did find a list online of names of Quantrill members, if you scroll down a few paragraphs the list starts, maybe theres a name or two that stands out? www.kansasheritage.org/research/quantrill.html
|
|
|
Post by brianthedude on Mar 31, 2014 11:56:34 GMT -5
As Quantrill's Raiders were an unofficial guerrilla unit with a rotating membership, a comprehensive roster probably never existed at the time (let alone today). The lists cited were compiled long after the Civil War, and are not likely to be complete. I've actually seen a list that includes John Henry Roberts, however this proves nothing either way, as the Brushy story was the source for that inclusion to begin with.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
|
|
|
Post by MissyS on Apr 4, 2014 4:34:20 GMT -5
As Quantrill's Raiders were an unofficial guerrilla unit with a rotating membership, a comprehensive roster probably never existed at the time (let alone today). The lists cited were compiled long after the Civil War, and are not likely to be complete. I've actually seen a list that includes John Henry Roberts, however this proves nothing either way, as the Brushy story was the source for that inclusion to begin with. Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk I understand what your saying Brianthedude, someone could very well add the name to strengthen Brushy's claims, or take it off too , or it may not be there because its not a complete list, and that makes the lists unreliable, thanks for pointing that out, I wonder what documents can be reliable since census records are also flawed? Is there any reliable documents? how frustrating.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Apr 4, 2014 10:01:09 GMT -5
I think census records are more reliable than "family trees" and lists like the members of Quantrill's raiders. But you're right Missy, they too can often be wrong. A census taker visits a home and speaks to one household member. That person gives the information of who lives there, sometimes with incorrect birthdays, name spellings, etc. and sometimes outright lies. The census taker is not aware they are recording incorrect data. But the biggest problem with census records, especially going back into the 1800's or even early 1900's is that they often left out people who were migratory and never reported to the census.
I think the most reliable records are those that were official records of marriages, deaths, and births. But even those are not ironclad. For example, William Henry Roberts married several times using aliases and his death certificate has the wrong birth date and age at time of death. (At least, I believe it does)
|
|
|
Post by Thain Timmertberg on Nov 19, 2014 21:23:59 GMT -5
I made an attempt to do the geneology on him once but life interfered before I was done with a 7 month subscription to ancestry.com. What I did find out besides many interesting questions was that in at least one instance I can barely recall is that people made mistakes in their family trees. What's funny is when I run into something that would pretty much disprove his claim I find out it's someone else that made the mistake.
Family trees are not official records. Nor are official records, haha.
|
|
|
Post by drew2888 on Nov 29, 2014 18:48:00 GMT -5
Hello, I started reading about BTK a few years ago. I have to say I never read so much or nearly as much about any one person or event as much as I have about BTK and his death. After reading Brett Halls book and many post on here as well as many pieces on the internet I have a lot of questions I would like to ask. I will start with the first. Brushy states he came up on Oliver as he lay dead somewhere after a gun fight which he was a law enforcement officer. Ironically the same law enforcement agency Brushy himself said he worked for? I found it to be an amazing coincidence and not very believable. He said this was in 1885. It is witting that Martha, Oliver's sister states in Brett's book that Brushy was not her brother and was unhappy about the situation that he claimed to be Ollie as well as was Ollie's brother in law Heath. On the other hand it is writing several places including Brushy's page on wekipedia that "Brushy Bill Roberts, could not convince his half-sister, Martha V. Roberts that he was indeed Billy the Kid. She was born September 3, 1873, and she always said that she knew the difference between a brother and a cousin. She said that Ollie was not her cousin but her brother. Ollie, aka "Brushy Bill" would come to her house in Jacksonville, Texas wearing his boots and cowboy hat, and he would tell everyone that he had a secret, that he was Billy the Kid, but they did not believe him." So which one is it? which is documented and proven. If she stated he was her brother to me that is conclusive that he was. I have two siblings and could never not be able to identify them. My one brother became obese and looks much different but I still know he is my brother after not seeing him for five years. Why are two different things written and which can be proven? weren't there plenty of family members of Brushy's they could have spoken to? I am eagerly looking forward to hearing educated responses to this.
I have many questions to ask but am not sure where to ask them. Should I just ask them here or should I try to pick the specific board they may pertain to? I like several other people on here am all about facts and really want to get the facts and understand them.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Dec 6, 2014 9:59:04 GMT -5
Hi Drew,
Thanks for joining the message board. I apologize for not responding sooner. I've been out of town for several days with very limited internet access. I do find your post to be very thought provoking but I'm afraid I don't have much of an answer regarding Martha Roberts. Except to point out that it is entirely possible she really did say he was not her brother even though he did not convince her he was Billy The Kid. It is also very possible that she gave conflicting answers at different times. "If" she did indeed say he was not her brother and then on a later occasion stated he "was" her brother, then we have to question her motives in contradicting herself. Unfortunately, the "facts" in all this are very illusive.
On a related topic, I find it very interesting that Brushy's family did not attend his funeral or burial. I also find it surprising that very few, if any, public statements are on record by family members after his death. Did his family avoid him because of his claims or did they know he was the real Oliver?
Again, thanks for your comments. Please feel free to post in any category or thread you feel led. There's no restrictions in that regard.
|
|
|
Post by drew2888 on Dec 7, 2014 0:38:17 GMT -5
Hey Wayne,
No problem I totally understand. That is very disappointing and I too find that very interesting and have been very disappointing with Morrison for his severe lack of thoroughness. Could you shed any light on how he said he came up on Oliver's body? I read this in Brett Halls book. This seemed to be unbelievable. Was this a flat out lie by Brushy? If so why did he lie? Was this just written wrong? Or is it the truth and just a coincidence that Brushy then went to work for the same law enforcement company? Also at 17 or 18 would Ollie Roberts have been old enough to work for the Anti-horse thief association? It is writing in Halls book that according to family tradition Ollie who was born in 1867 left home in 1884 and never returned which would account for his death in 1885. But then the next question is why is it also reported that there was an OPR that was born in 79? If the family said that he left in 84 then obviously who left in 84 was not born in 79. If there were two Ollie's are they both accounted for in the Bibles and what happened to the one born in 79? It states in the census that there was an OPR born in 79 so I assume that must be accurate? What happened to that OPR?
I saw that there were letters wrote and it clearly showed that there were two different people claiming to be OPR so I believe he did take over his identity and it also makes sense that his family would say that he was not actually Ollie. I also saw where the signatures differ and I am very grateful for that evidence. look forward to your response and hopefully the response of others as well.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Dec 9, 2014 19:19:07 GMT -5
I am inclined to believe there were two Olivers. The first being Oliver L. Roberts born in 1867 or 68 and Oliver Pleasant Roberts born in 1879. Some say Oliver Pleasant left Texas in the early 1900's (I think around 1908 or 09) and died in 1935. Some have even claimed to know what cemetery he was buried in but others have debunked those claims. I have a theory that Oliver L was born out of wedlock and raised by someone other than Mary Ferguson. I theorize this is why she made this mistake in believing Brushy was her son. This would also explain why he never showed up on any census reports.
Mind you, all that is conjecture and there are many holes in the theory. Also, I believe the answer to some of your questions is simply that Brushy had a strong tendency to exaggerate the truth to make his story sound more grandiose than it actually was and where he simply "didn't know", he improvised. I too wish Morrison would have been more diligent in pulling the explanations and details from Brushy. Sadly, we will probably never know the whole truth about all of it.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Dec 10, 2014 17:29:19 GMT -5
To clarify my current beliefs about Brushy. I believe Brushy's real name was William Henry Roberts, born in 1859 and that his father went off to war and his mother died or abandoned him as a toddler. I believe Catherine Bonney/McCarty was somehow related to the mother and took little William to raise him as her own. I believe she told him stories of who his real parents were that may or may not have been true and that he later passed on those stories according to his recollection which might have been less than accurate. I believe he may have left Catherine for a time as a pre-teen in order to try and locate his real father but that some of the stories of that time in his life were based on conjecture or exaggeration. I believe he had a friend who went by the alias of Billy Barlow who was mistakenly killed by either Garrett or his deputy in 1881. I believe William (Brushy) then went to Mexico for a time and later fought with the Rough Riders in Cuba (we've found records that show that). I believe some of the stories told later about that time in his life were exaggerations and/or outride lies. I believe he went to the Texas (Van Zandt county) around 1908-1910 and assumed the alias of Ollie Roberts based on one Oliver Pleasant Roberts who had just run off to get away from a domineering wife Anna. I believe Brushy pretended to be Oliver P. and helped Anna obtain a divorce from him. I believe there was a younger cousin born in 1867-68 probably out of wedlock who had run away from home and gotten himself killed. I believe that younger, deceased cousin's name was Oliver L. Roberts.
The rest of the story of how it all happened doesn't mean a lot to me. While I do believe Brushy told a number of inaccuracies to William Morrison, I do not accept that as proof he was lying about being Billy The Kid.
Why? For many reasons based on common sense. For example, if Brushy's true identity was Oliver Pleasant Roberts, how did he get the scars, how did he know what he knew about Billy The Kid and the Lincoln County War, and why is there no record of an Oliver Roberts with the Rough Riders but there is a record of William H. Roberts? I could cite other common sense points but the most important reasons I believe his story are the physical similarities he has with the famous tintype and the firsthand identifications from individuals who knew him in his Billy The Kid days.
|
|