|
|
Post by gladstone on Nov 12, 2023 19:42:05 GMT -5
What's the most compelling evidence that Brushy is Billy?
What proof supports the evidence?
Don't need the snide comments. Just the evidence and proof that supports the evidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Nov 12, 2023 20:32:59 GMT -5
My answer might seem snide but it isn't intended that way at all. I say the most compelling evidence he was Billy is simply that he said he was. For the following reasons:
1) He stood nothing to gain by making a false claim, but was risking being executed for the murder of Brady.
2) Many have tried very, very hard to prove his claim was fraudulent but 74 years later, no one has really succeeded in proving it.
3) He didn't come forward to make the claim until he was approached by Morrison which goes against the idea he was seeking fame or fortune.
There are myriad other pieces of evidence including similar facial features/measurements, same height and stature/posture, more knowledge about the Lincoln County War and the life of Billy than what one would expect otherwise, and more.
|
|
|
|
Post by devorerd on Nov 13, 2023 8:35:20 GMT -5
IMO, it goes back to motive for saying he was BTK. Wayne touches on it, but to be that late in life and then proclaim and tell his story is highly credible. The other piece of the puzzle which will come out I'm sure is how Belle Reid (Belle Starr) gave him the nickname Bonney...Unless one would think that Brushy was mensa level creative, you just don't make that stuff up out of thin air.
|
|
|
|
Post by DanJohno on Nov 13, 2023 20:10:35 GMT -5
The constant effort of the Wild West hierarchy to defend Garrett's story and reject Morrison's evidence.
Daniel Edwards is facing the same heat Morrison and Brushy did in Mabry's "private meeting ".
If Brushy Believers truly are a lost cause and not worth the effort then why are the hierarchy attacking Daniel Edwards so hard.
So yeah that's my number 1.
Attack the evidence and defend the original story.
Actually it's more like attack the person who finds the evidence and defend the original story.
|
|
|
|
Post by billybarlowofficial on Nov 14, 2023 12:16:16 GMT -5
Define "proof" because only mathematics offers proofs. I suppose you mean it as a layman would: "What is the best evidence?", and I'm not sure there is any strong or good evidence out there for Brushy Bill Roberts being The Kid.
I think a reasonable doubt can be made that Garrett's story was false. It surely was. But inconsistencies and/or false testimony doesn't automatically mean The Kid escaped Fort Sumner. And even if The Kid did it does not mean Brushy Bill Roberts was The Kid.
I say this as a man who went from thinking Brushy was The Kid to not thinking he was The Kid. I do think different things Brushy said about his life was true, but just because some things check out to be true doesn't mean he was Billy The Kid.
The only thing he has going for him, ultimately, is the affidavits of Gallegos and Montoya and Able. Gallegos has a multitude problems including the fact that he made a lot of claims, such as him claiming on his death bed that he killed Pat Garrett so he seems to be a man prone to flights of fancy himself. Able never personally met Billy The Kid. Montoya was a child, like Gallegos, when he knew The Kid so there's the possibility of being mistaken after 70 years.
As for the "official narrative" that Brushy had nothing to gain, etc. There is the account of Morrison's co-worker who claimed Brushy came to Morrison in Missouri, not that Morrison came to Brushy. There's also the story that it was J. Frank Dalton, not "Joe Hines", who told Morrison where to find Billy The Kid. Combine this with the fact Brushy already previously gained a measure of fame from appearing on "We The People" claiming to be a member of the James Gang, etc casts much doubt on the claim Brushy wasn't out for fame or money.
Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all
|
|
|
|
Post by devorerd on Nov 14, 2023 13:14:08 GMT -5
Define "proof" because only mathematics offers proofs. I suppose you mean it as a layman would: "What is the best evidence?", and I'm not sure there is any strong or good evidence out there for Brushy Bill Roberts being The Kid. I think a reasonable doubt can be made that Garrett's story was false. It surely was. But inconsistencies and/or false testimony doesn't automatically mean The Kid escaped Fort Sumner. And even if The Kid did it does not mean Brushy Bill Roberts was The Kid. I say this as a man who went from thinking Brushy was The Kid to not thinking he was The Kid. I do think different things Brushy said about his life was true, but just because some things check out to be true doesn't mean he was Billy The Kid. The only thing he has going for him, ultimately, is the affidavits of Gallegos and Montoya and Able. Gallegos has a multitude problems including the fact that he made a lot of claims, such as him claiming on his death bed that he killed Pat Garrett so he seems to be a man prone to flights of fancy himself. Able never personally met Billy The Kid. Montoya was a child, like Gallegos, when he knew The Kid so there's the possibility of being mistaken after 70 years. As for the "official narrative" that Brushy had nothing to gain, etc. There is the account of Morrison's co-worker who claimed Brushy came to Morrison in Missouri, not that Morrison came to Brushy. There's also the story that it was J. Frank Dalton, not "Joe Hines", who told Morrison where to find Billy The Kid. Combine this with the fact Brushy already previously gained a measure of fame from appearing on "We The People" claiming to be a member of the James Gang, etc casts much doubt on the claim Brushy wasn't out for fame or money. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all So are saying Brushy appeared on the radio show....Is this the show that he was interviewed at during Dalton's b-day? If Brushy, as you articulate gained some fame from a previous exploit, then answer me this. What was his motive in requesting a private meeting to adjudicate the pardon that was promised? |
|
|
|
Post by RonBk on Nov 14, 2023 14:23:28 GMT -5
What's the source for the story about Gallegos claiming to have shot Garrett?
|
|
|
|
Post by RonBk on Nov 14, 2023 16:12:39 GMT -5
One piece of evidence not easily dismissed is the fact that Brushy told Morrison that at the Greathouse ranch gun fight it was actually posse members who shot Jim Carlyle dead by mistake, thinking it was the Kid they were firing upon. Now if Brushy wasn't Billy the kid, how could he have known this is what occured? Or rather how exactly did Brushy Bill learn that this was exactly what Billy the kid had written in a letter to Governor Wallace? Did Brushy learn about this through studies at the university or did he know simply because he wrote that letter himself? I think the answer is obvious. The story about the shooting may have been true or not, it doesn't matter. What matters is the fact that Brushy Bill and Billy the kid both told exactly the same story about this event.
|
|
|
|
Post by billybarlowofficial on Nov 14, 2023 19:24:25 GMT -5
Define "proof" because only mathematics offers proofs. I suppose you mean it as a layman would: "What is the best evidence?", and I'm not sure there is any strong or good evidence out there for Brushy Bill Roberts being The Kid. I think a reasonable doubt can be made that Garrett's story was false. It surely was. But inconsistencies and/or false testimony doesn't automatically mean The Kid escaped Fort Sumner. And even if The Kid did it does not mean Brushy Bill Roberts was The Kid. I say this as a man who went from thinking Brushy was The Kid to not thinking he was The Kid. I do think different things Brushy said about his life was true, but just because some things check out to be true doesn't mean he was Billy The Kid. The only thing he has going for him, ultimately, is the affidavits of Gallegos and Montoya and Able. Gallegos has a multitude problems including the fact that he made a lot of claims, such as him claiming on his death bed that he killed Pat Garrett so he seems to be a man prone to flights of fancy himself. Able never personally met Billy The Kid. Montoya was a child, like Gallegos, when he knew The Kid so there's the possibility of being mistaken after 70 years. As for the "official narrative" that Brushy had nothing to gain, etc. There is the account of Morrison's co-worker who claimed Brushy came to Morrison in Missouri, not that Morrison came to Brushy. There's also the story that it was J. Frank Dalton, not "Joe Hines", who told Morrison where to find Billy The Kid. Combine this with the fact Brushy already previously gained a measure of fame from appearing on "We The People" claiming to be a member of the James Gang, etc casts much doubt on the claim Brushy wasn't out for fame or money. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all So are saying Brushy appeared on the radio show....Is this the show that he was interviewed at during Dalton's b-day? If Brushy, as you articulate gained some fame from a previous exploit, then answer me this. What was his motive in requesting a private meeting to adjudicate the pardon that was promised? I imagine if it is a face to face with one person only, it's easier to convince that person than it is if that individual had historians and family members of Pat Garrett there to fact check anything Brushy said. Don't forget, the governor (Mabry) was related to Walter Burns who wrote the best known book about Billy The Kid at the time. He had to have others there to verify or discredit, for the sake of his own reputation. www.newspapers.com/image/433265563/?clipping_id=27638165&fcfToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJmcmVlLXZpZXctaWQiOjQzMzI2NTU2MywiaWF0IjoxNzAwMDA4MTUwLCJleHAiOjE3MDAwOTQ1NTB9.40FgdeOtW-rTvAWwYX91-Kqy6zCnNAVNH25EIxjaF4EFurthermore, newspapers at the time said IN ADVANCE that the governor wanted historians there, but Andress (Morrison's co-worker) did not want anyone but Mabry to be there. Hmm, sounds fishy don't it? Either the "official" story by Morrison about a press ambush was not true, or Mabry said forget the historians just come in and he reneged. Either way, one has to question WHY a man professing to be The Kid only wanted Mabry and not face cross examinations. And yes, Brushy did appear on "We The People" in New York City alongside J. Frank Dalton, after the "birthday" celebration in Missouri. It would be very cool if somebody could find either that footage or audio. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all |
|
|
|
Post by billybarlowofficial on Nov 14, 2023 19:44:22 GMT -5
What's the source for the story about Gallegos claiming to have shot Garrett? My mistake, not Gallegos, Salazar claimed that he killed Pat Garrett. This was apart of the 1990s affidavits that Tunstill collected. However, Gallegos was also a child when he last seen Billy The Kid so we're talking 70+ years combined with the power of persuasion from Morrison might've tainted Gallegos's opinion. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all |
|
|
|
Post by DanJohno on Nov 14, 2023 20:21:37 GMT -5
So are saying Brushy appeared on the radio show....Is this the show that he was interviewed at during Dalton's b-day? If Brushy, as you articulate gained some fame from a previous exploit, then answer me this. What was his motive in requesting a private meeting to adjudicate the pardon that was promised? I imagine if it is a face to face with one person only, it's easier to convince that person than it is if that individual had historians and family members of Pat Garrett there to fact check anything Brushy said. Don't forget, the governor (Mabry) was related to Walter Burns who wrote the best known book about Billy The Kid at the time. He had to have others there to verify or discredit, for the sake of his own reputation. www.newspapers.com/image/433265563/?clipping_id=27638165&fcfToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJmcmVlLXZpZXctaWQiOjQzMzI2NTU2MywiaWF0IjoxNzAwMDA4MTUwLCJleHAiOjE3MDAwOTQ1NTB9.40FgdeOtW-rTvAWwYX91-Kqy6zCnNAVNH25EIxjaF4EFurthermore, newspapers at the time said IN ADVANCE that the governor wanted historians there, but Andress (Morrison's co-worker) did not want anyone but Mabry to be there. Hmm, sounds fishy don't it? Either the "official" story by Morrison about a press ambush was not true, or Mabry said forget the historians just come in and he reneged. Either way, one has to question WHY a man professing to be The Kid only wanted Mabry and not face cross examinations. And yes, Brushy did appear on "We The People" in New York City alongside J. Frank Dalton, after the "birthday" celebration in Missouri. It would be very cool if somebody could find either that footage or audio. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all Sounds fishy? What's fishy about a private legal application for a pardon? What sounds fishy to me is you claiming you didn't know about the Silver City photo being available to pay and watch on YouTube but your skills in finding any other Billy the Kid information is bordering on world champion level in research ability. |
|
|
|
Post by billybarlowofficial on Nov 14, 2023 20:33:05 GMT -5
I imagine if it is a face to face with one person only, it's easier to convince that person than it is if that individual had historians and family members of Pat Garrett there to fact check anything Brushy said. Don't forget, the governor (Mabry) was related to Walter Burns who wrote the best known book about Billy The Kid at the time. He had to have others there to verify or discredit, for the sake of his own reputation. www.newspapers.com/image/433265563/?clipping_id=27638165&fcfToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJmcmVlLXZpZXctaWQiOjQzMzI2NTU2MywiaWF0IjoxNzAwMDA4MTUwLCJleHAiOjE3MDAwOTQ1NTB9.40FgdeOtW-rTvAWwYX91-Kqy6zCnNAVNH25EIxjaF4EFurthermore, newspapers at the time said IN ADVANCE that the governor wanted historians there, but Andress (Morrison's co-worker) did not want anyone but Mabry to be there. Hmm, sounds fishy don't it? Either the "official" story by Morrison about a press ambush was not true, or Mabry said forget the historians just come in and he reneged. Either way, one has to question WHY a man professing to be The Kid only wanted Mabry and not face cross examinations. And yes, Brushy did appear on "We The People" in New York City alongside J. Frank Dalton, after the "birthday" celebration in Missouri. It would be very cool if somebody could find either that footage or audio. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all Sounds fishy? What's fishy about a private legal application for a pardon? What sounds fishy to me is you claiming you didn't know about the Silver City photo being available to pay and watch on YouTube but your skills in finding any other Billy the Kid information is bordering on world champion level in research ability. Now, don't be rude or sarcastic. No need for any of that. If you read the article Mabry publicly stated that IF Brushy really was The Kid there would be no legal repercussions. Mabry wanted historians present to cross examine Brushy to prove who he said he was. This was all stated in advance. But for some strange reason Brushy, Morrison and Andress did not want historians present. Makes absolutely zero sense, when Brushy had seemingly zero problems going across the country with Morrison getting affidavits. But when it got serious, truly serious, he wanted nobody there to double check his claims or his stories. Thats why I say it's fishy. The fact that we have newspapers at the time giving the facts, prior to meeting Mabry, stating that there would be no legal ramifications for Brushy if he were Billy The Kid and wanting people present, shoots the "official story" presented by Morrison to be inaccurate. Now, maybe Mabry turned it more into a circus having the Garrett family there and having the press there as well... but... it seems Morrison and Brushy had zero problem with using the press when it suited their agenda, as evident with the existence of this article. The meeting with Mabry wasn't done on the downlow as the entire state knew it was going down. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all |
|
|
|
Post by DanJohno on Nov 14, 2023 21:17:39 GMT -5
Sounds fishy? What's fishy about a private legal application for a pardon? What sounds fishy to me is you claiming you didn't know about the Silver City photo being available to pay and watch on YouTube but your skills in finding any other Billy the Kid information is bordering on world champion level in research ability. Now, don't be rude or sarcastic. No need for any of that. If you read the article Mabry publicly stated that IF Brushy really was The Kid there would be no legal repercussions. Mabry wanted historians present to cross examine Brushy to prove who he said he was. This was all stated in advance. But for some strange reason Brushy, Morrison and Andress did not want historians present. Makes absolutely zero sense, when Brushy had seemingly zero problems going across the country with Morrison getting affidavits. But when it got serious, truly serious, he wanted nobody there to double check his claims or his stories. Thats why I say it's fishy. The fact that we have newspapers at the time giving the facts, prior to meeting Mabry, stating that there would be no legal ramifications for Brushy if he were Billy The Kid and wanting people present, shoots the "official story" presented by Morrison to be inaccurate. Now, maybe Mabry turned it more into a circus having the Garrett family there and having the press there as well... but... it seems Morrison and Brushy had zero problem with using the press when it suited their agenda, as evident with the existence of this article. The meeting with Mabry wasn't done on the downlow as the entire state knew it was going down. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all Rude and sarcastic are your interpretation not mine. You question Morrison's honesty and you question Edwards honesty. I'm questioning your honesty. |
|
|
|
Post by billybarlowofficial on Nov 14, 2023 22:05:28 GMT -5
Now, don't be rude or sarcastic. No need for any of that. If you read the article Mabry publicly stated that IF Brushy really was The Kid there would be no legal repercussions. Mabry wanted historians present to cross examine Brushy to prove who he said he was. This was all stated in advance. But for some strange reason Brushy, Morrison and Andress did not want historians present. Makes absolutely zero sense, when Brushy had seemingly zero problems going across the country with Morrison getting affidavits. But when it got serious, truly serious, he wanted nobody there to double check his claims or his stories. Thats why I say it's fishy. The fact that we have newspapers at the time giving the facts, prior to meeting Mabry, stating that there would be no legal ramifications for Brushy if he were Billy The Kid and wanting people present, shoots the "official story" presented by Morrison to be inaccurate. Now, maybe Mabry turned it more into a circus having the Garrett family there and having the press there as well... but... it seems Morrison and Brushy had zero problem with using the press when it suited their agenda, as evident with the existence of this article. The meeting with Mabry wasn't done on the downlow as the entire state knew it was going down. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all Rude and sarcastic are your interpretation not mine. You question Morrison's honesty and you question Edwards honesty. I'm questioning your honesty. If I question Morrison's honesty it's because certain things don't line up. It doesn't mean he's a liar, or that Brushy Bill Roberts isn't Billy The Kid. But it's clear to me that the narrative presented over the years by Morrison and later Tunstill is not entirely accurate. It wasn't supposed to be some private affair between Morrison, Brushy and Mabry. As evident by the article, the whole state was made aware Brushy Bill Roberts was meeting Mabry because he claimed to be Billy The Kid, and Mabry wanted historians there to verify or to discredit Roberts. The "official narrative" made it sound like Morrison only talked to Mabry, that nobody else knew about it, and they were hit from the side by reporters and historians causing Brushy to have a stroke. That Mabry double crossed them. Clearly that can't be the truth if the press already caught wind of it, most likely by Morrison himself or Andress, to get attention for their client Brushy Bill Roberts. So of course they were going to be there. How could they not? Billy The Kid alive and well seeking a pardon from the governor? You wouldn't be able to keep them away. I'm surprised the whole damn state didn't show up. Had it truly been a private affair without the press knowing anything then Garrett's family would've never come either. By team Brushy making it public knowledge there's no way Garrett's family wasn't going to show up. The whole state, neighboring states, if not the whole country was made aware Brushy Bill Roberts was coming to see the governor of New Mexico. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all |
|
|
|
Post by RonBk on Nov 15, 2023 4:18:16 GMT -5
That is clearly a lot of unsubstantiated claims made by billybarlowofficial.
Quote:
"Clearly that can't be the truth if the press already caught wind of it, most likely by Morrison himself or Andress, to get attention for their client Brushy Bill Roberts"
Since you are suggesting Morrison was a completely dishonest person who falsely claimed he tried to arrange for a private meeting but somehow secretely did exactly the opposite, why don't you show some evidence to back up your claim? Where is your proof? You got nothing but speculation. You say it was fishy to ask for a private meeting, I guess that means you believe it was equally fishy when Billy the kid asked for a private meeting with Governor Wallace?
|
|
