You know how the episode implied a cover up and that Booth was not the man killed in the barn....

Read this website everything mentioned in it is happening now and i believe they are the ones responsible for Lincolns murder among others

http://www.rense.com/general86/pres.htm

The Lincoln Assasination is a proven conspiracy and Booth was an accomplice in this. The real question is the actual players involved and how events transpired. I'll look into the site.

The "Man in the Barn" story is a legend which has built up around the actual conspiracy of the Lincoln Assassination. I am ashamed of UM giving air time to this crock of lore.

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=203073&highlight=Wilkes

It's still going around. I just posted the following to the Facebook page and Comments page for the Travel Channel's Mysteries at the Museum:

Hey, I love this show, never miss it if I can help it, but just want to say the John Wilkes Booth segment was total BS. It never even mentioned that the doctor who made the claims to finding Booth alive had the claimant mummified. The mummy was around for years and disappeared just as DNA tests became available. It is totally untrue that no DNA exists from the man shot in the barn--to prove whether or not it was Booth. This museum http://www.roadsideamerica.com/story/2114 has a piece of his spine, which could easily be tested against living members of the Booth family. There is absolutely no need to exhume any dead members of the Booth family or anyone else to solve this. Why is it not done?

Yep - this is one of those UM segments (along with "was Kurt Cobain murdered?" and "Are the Zodiac Killer and the Unabomber the same person?" and anything about Jeffrey MacDonald) which just makes me shake my head :rolleyes:

The Travel Channel won't publish my comment unless I rewrite it to be "nice." Geez, give me a break! :rolleyes:

Host Don Wildman answered via his Facebook page, "That's a very good question (facebook page) I'll raise the alarum." (I asked why the show's Facebook page had not been updated in over a year.) "As for Booth…you're likely on point with that. Unfortunately I sometimes have to explain away an inaccuracy probably due to overworked staff (we do three series! Stories are constantly batted around and facts sometimes slip). But that's a poor excuse. I'll get my whip out of my drawer now and go implement corporeal punishment."
I answered saying that's a video I'd love to see!

The Lincoln Assasination is a proven conspiracy and Booth was an accomplice in this. The real question is the actual players involved and how events transpired. I'll look into the site.

All the talk respecting the Kennedy assassination made me remember a story my junior high school history teacher told and I went looking to see if I could find any version of it online. This seems to fit the bill pretty well. http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1992-03-05/news/1992065036_1_lincoln-murder-clinching-evidence-lincoln-cabinet

The version my teacher told was that every 75 years, it comes up for vote (presumably in Congress) whether to unseal secret papers pertaining to the Lincoln assassination. The first 75 years after the assassination, which would be 1940, it was voted not to unseal the papers for another 75 years. My teacher said some of us might live to see them unsealed in 2015 if they didn't vote to keep them sealed again. So...since these things are supposed to turn up next year...did they ever exist in the first place? From this story, it would seem they either did not, or were destroyed long ago. The guy who wrote the book on this was the author of the short story on which the famous film It's a Wonderful Life was based.

It's a Wonderful Conspiracy?

I believe it! :cuss: Off to consult the Lincoln Presidential Library. :whatever:

HA, bet you thought I was kidding about contacting the Lincoln Presidential Library! You should only be so lucky! The following (part in quotes) is the beginning and end of a lengthy response from Ian Patrick Hunt, Historian of the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library Foundation. Below it (not in quotes) is my response in full.

"I am sorry to inform you that there is no vast conspiracy to cover up the Lincoln assassination nor does congress routinely vote to keep documents related to his assassination secret. The stories you remember from your youth sound like the over active imagination of an educator combined with a few loose facts to create a semi-plausible story. Your teacher was likely suffering from what historians refer to as “presentism” which is defined as “an attitude toward the past dominated by present-day attitudes and experiences.”

One major item that confuses people is that when Robert Todd Lincoln donated his father’s personal papers to the Library of Congress in 1923 he added a stipulation that they could not be opened until 21 years after his death. This was not to hide a conspiracy but rather Robert was concerned that there were still people alive at that point who knew his father personally and might find unflattering or negative information about themselves within those papers; Robert felt that by delaying their release until 21 years after his death it would avoid any embarrassments. Since Robert died July 26, 1926, his father’s papers were opened to the public exactly 21 years later on July 26, 1947.

I hope that this helps."

Dear Mr. Hunt,

Thank you for your prompt and complete reply regarding the alleged Lincoln assassination document coverup.

Regarding my junior high school history teacher, I didn't want to come right out and say first thing, but he was a major jerk. Here is what he told us concerning the following historical figures:

Marcus Whitman (local missionary killed by Native Americans in 1847): "Whitman was warned--he was warned repeatedly--but he didn't leave because he was arrogant--'Those Indians wouldn't dare kill him--'" Stopped just short of saying "he got his." At the time I knew little of the case or I could have roundly disputed this. Later I wrote a book in which I made crystal clear exactly why Whitman did not leave--he was a medical doctor with an epidemic on his hands (measles affecting both white settlers and natives). Doctors take an oath to help anyone in need, not to mention many in his own family were seriously ill--I think ten of the eleven children were affected at some point (two died following the doctor's death) and the oldest wasn't sick only because he was not home at the time--and Dr. Whitman was supposed to just leave because of a rumored threat? I don't think so!

Abraham Lincoln: Told us the assassination conspiracy story I sent you.

Eleanor Roosevelt: I forget exactly what he said about Mrs. Roosevelt except that it was deprecating and rude. A girl countered with, "Could you do better?" for which he had no answer. I never forgot this--it was a great moment!

John F. Kennedy: "All I cared about his assassination was that school was let out--" he may have gone so far as to use the word "vacation."

He probably said lots else--the most cringeworthy examples have stuck after forty years.

Regarding John Wilkes Booth, there are no words for how great of a creep I regard him to have been. He professed to be devoted to the Southern cause and yet wouldn't join up or do anything of value to help those who did...for starters. Years later I heard stories of how Booth escaped, a man not resembling him was shot in the barn, who the doctor was pressured into identifying as Booth. I did a search online and discovered this was based on the doctor's actually saying, as he entered, that the man had no resemblance to Booth, but after being shown a tattoo and operation scar he knew Booth had, he immediately took it back and only remarked he had never seen anyone's appearance so changed by death. The rest of the story was concocted and endlessly rerun on programs such as Unsolved Mysteries. I recently chastised Don Wildman for featuring it on Mysteries at the Museum, a usually excellent program, and received a nice reply. I absolutely believe the body returned to Booth's family to have been his, but that the case was horribly botched. The body should have been identified by as many family members as could be rounded up, photographed, and publicly displayed. All of this was done in the case of Bonnie and Clyde. Family members and photographers were promptly called in and the bodies were viewed by tens of thousands. Because this was so well-handled, no one has come forward claiming to be them and miraculously survived the hail of gunfire.

Regarding Robert Todd Lincoln, I read that he is not the historians' favorite--they wished he had died much sooner. I did read the account of his grandchild coming in to find him burning papers including letters from his parents that historians would kill for. He did this because he felt that very little information about a man and absolutely nothing about a woman should be made public. "Just the facts, ma'am."

Two stories I am sure I heard in more than one place about Robert Todd Lincoln: 1) Soon after Abraham Lincoln's assassination, Robert came in to find Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton burning pages from John Wilkes Booth's diary. I believe a) my dad, who was a huge Lincoln buff, was the first one to tell me this b) the pages were being burned in a furnace, not a fireplace, and c) the exact number of pages taken was 18--and b and c are extremely tenuous! It could have been a fireplace, and the number of pages may not have been specified--it's just that I spent two years hearing about the missing 18 1/2 minutes from Nixon's audiotape, sooooo.... Anyhow, in the story, Robert Todd Lincoln asked Stanton what the hell he thought he was doing, and Stanton replied in rude and abusive language that Robert should mind his own business or else. It makes no sense that someone said that in 1923 Robert was burning papers he specifically stated was to avoid incriminating someone, presumably Stanton. Why would he want to protect an assassination conspirator?

The second story is that following the death of President McKinley in 1901, Robert Todd Lincoln did everything in his power to avoid being around any president, because he had been in the vicinity when three were assassinated--that he would leave the area at a run if he heard a president were around. Yet there is a picture of Chief Justice Taft, President Harding, and Robert Todd Lincoln at the dedication of the Lincoln Memorial in 1922. So, unless that's a fake, I guess that one isn't true, either. Closest I can claim to coming to the Lincolns was touring Robert Todd Lincoln's train car. I know the date was September 15, 2001, as it was four days after September 11.

Anyhow, I hope someone finds all this of interest.

No virtual flowers for John Wilkes Booth, either! http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=63453329 His family claimed the body but left the grave unmarked--just one of several reasons he can't be exhumed.

And no grave for the Booth pretender, as the body has disappeared! :rip:

This article claims to identify the Booth pretender, the first I ever heard of this. http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/04/14/history/post-perspective/the-assassins-mummy-john-wilkes-booths-post-mortem-career.html

Two stories I am sure I heard in more than one place about Robert Todd Lincoln: 1) Soon after Abraham Lincoln's assassination, Robert came in to find Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton burning pages from John Wilkes Booth's diary. I believe a) my dad, who was a huge Lincoln buff, was the first one to tell me this b) the pages were being burned in a furnace, not a fireplace, and c) the exact number of pages taken was 18--and b and c are extremely tenuous! It could have been a fireplace, and the number of pages may not have been specified--it's just that I spent two years hearing about the missing 18 1/2 minutes from Nixon's audiotape, sooooo.... Anyhow, in the story, Robert Todd Lincoln asked Stanton what the hell he thought he was doing, and Stanton replied in rude and abusive language that Robert should mind his own business or else. It makes no sense that someone said that in 1923 Robert was burning papers he specifically stated was to avoid incriminating someone, presumably Stanton. Why would he want to protect an assassination conspirator?

The second story is that following the death of President McKinley in 1901, Robert Todd Lincoln did everything in his power to avoid being around any president, because he had been in the vicinity when three were assassinated--that he would leave the area at a run if he heard a president were around. Yet there is a picture of Chief Justice Taft, President Harding, and Robert Todd Lincoln at the dedication of the Lincoln Memorial in 1922. So, unless that's a fake, I guess that one isn't true, either.

Ha, I should never have doubted myself! The number of pages was 18 after all! http://www.independent.com/news/2011/mar/31/did-booth-get-away-killing-lincoln/ I've found references both to Stanton suppressing pages, and burning the diary, but none to Robert Todd Lincoln catching him burning the diary. I'm pretty sure my dad told me this but I have no idea where he heard it.

(There is also some story about all roads out of Washington being closed following the shooting, except for the one Booth used to escape, and of Stanton being behind that--I think this may have been included in the UM episode.)

The second story is also true. The 1922 meeting was the one exception. Harding did die in office but it was never proven to be murder and Robert Todd Lincoln was not nearby when it happened.

I was intrigued after viewing the UM segment for the first time. There were odds and ends to the story that really make you think about the possibility of Booth's escape. But then again, this was over 100 years after the fact. And the facts reported at the time of Booth's death, seem to indicate that it was in fact Booth who was shot and killed. There were pictures of women found in his pockets (one of whom was Booth's fiancee), and Booth's personal diary. I don't see how anyone other than Booth would have been in possession of these. Booth's body was id'ed by a tattoo on his left hand. Knowing what we now know, I think the theory that John St. Helen was really Boston Corbett (man who shot Booth) is much more intriguing.

I was intrigued after viewing the UM segment for the first time. There were odds and ends to the story that really make you think about the possibility of Booth's escape. But then again, this was over 100 years after the fact. And the facts reported at the time of Booth's death, seem to indicate that it was in fact Booth who was shot and killed. There were pictures of women found in his pockets (one of whom was Booth's fiancee), and Booth's personal diary. I don't see how anyone other than Booth would have been in possession of these. Booth's body was id'ed by a tattoo on his left hand.

The story was he "realized he forgot those things" and sent the other man to fetch them who was shot in his place. The man proposed as the victim on the UM segment is documented to have died two years later, and, yes, he wouldn't have had Booth's initials tattooed on his wrist!

Knowing what we now know, I think the theory that John St. Helen was really Boston Corbett (man who shot Booth) is much more intriguing.

Intriguing, perhaps, but utter bulloney. Boston Corbett was crazy all right but met quite a different end. http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=5836144 The actual identity of the Booth pretender is proposed in an article to which I posted a link above.

of course the episode happened, we have it on the DVD!

Intriguing, perhaps, but utter bulloney. Boston Corbett was crazy all right but met quite a different end. http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=5836144 The actual identity of the Booth pretender is proposed in an article to which I posted a link above.

Corbett's death was never verified. It was believed he died in a fire, but it was never verified.

of course the episode happened, we have it on the DVD!

:rolleyes:

Corbett's death was never verified. It was believed he died in a fire, but it was never verified.

Now that, I never heard, but doubtless he was not only a nut, but a nutless nut at that! If the mummy could be turned up, all anyone would have to do is check for a certain something that Booth and his pretender would have and Corbett would not! This should not take a doctor...except to see when and how it was removed, if gone!

:rolleyes:


it's true!!

Moving up for the 150th anniversary (Sesquicentennial).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPtfCbmLz2o

An interview with Nate Orlowek. I was listening to this and immediately recognized his voice from the UM segment. After pulling up the video and rewinding to his introduction, my suspicions were confirmed that it was Orlowek. 23 years after the UM segment aired (the video is from 2013), he doesn't really look the same. An interesting video, in my opinion. I have always found the John St. Helen possibility fascinating.

It is also interesting (as a completely useless fact) that Finis Bates is a the grandfather of actress Kathy Bates.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPtfCbmLz2o
It is also interesting (as a completely useless fact) that Finis Bates is a the grandfather of actress Kathy Bates.

Yes, and Dr. Mudd treated Booth for a broken leg, while in Misery, Kathy Bates mistreated a man with injured legs. Having just suffered a broken leg myself on Thursday, I still don't feel sorry for Booth, but I do agree with Dr. Mudd--you wouldn't turn away a dog in that condition!

[QUOTE=Cori aka ChrisSCrush].

(There is also some story about all roads out of Washington being closed following the shooting, except for the one Booth used to escape, and of Stanton being behind that--I think this may have been included in the UM episode.)

The roads were all guarded but Booth talked his way across the Anacostia River bridge. I'm sure the guard was punished.

I used to work at Fort McNair where the Federal prison was in 1865 where Booth's body was first buried and where the Lincoln conspirators were both tried and executed. The prison and one wing of the courthouse building were torn down right after the war as the Army did not like having a Federal prison on one of its forts. The bricks were used to build the outside wall of what is now called Fort McNair (other names: Washington Barracks, Washington Arsenal, Army War College). The site of the executions is now a tennis court. The wing of the building where the trial was held is still there, now as quarters. Of course It is claimed that Mary Surratt haunts the place.
Surrattsville, the place Booth went to to get supplies, is now called Clinton, although the local HS is still called Surrattsville High School.

Booth's death was badly botched similar to Billy the Kid's.

Booth's death was badly botched similar to Billy the Kid's.

I disagree. The pursuit of Booth was well executed. He had to hide in a swamp for two days before he and his accomplice could cross the Potomac River with help of a confederate sympathizer. then even though in Virginia he was quickly tracked down by the Army. the only flaw was him being shot by a soldier (who later disappeared on the Kansas frontier) while being flushed out of a barn by it being set on fire. The corpse was brought to the Washington Barracks (now Fort McNair) and definitively identified and then buried under a cell in the Federal prison there.

I saw as a little kid lee Harvey Oswald shot on live tv yet years later they had to test his corpse to definitely prove it was him. years later they had to exhume the boston strangler to prove it was him and it was. crazy times.

Yeah, that Oswald case got crazy to the point that his widow agreed to have him exhumed. Of course, it was him. Then his brother got wind of a plot hatched at the funeral home which sold the replacement casket, to sell the remains of the original casket to the highest bidder. Being the person who paid for the original, the brother took the case to court and won the casket. I don't know what was done with it after that.

Yeah...so, I just heard a claim on some TV show on some questionable "history" channel that the 18 missing pages of Booth's diary turned up in the possession of a Stanton descendant. It would seem not, and if they did turn up, might shed no additional light on the events. http://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussionSymposium/thread-1818.html

The same show said the man shot in the barn was not Booth but James W. Boyd, who had his initials tattooed on his wrist. This would appear to be fiction: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/mar/12/20040312-090120-9914r/

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zo9Hhk9-KMI&t=6s

Is this the segment the OP is referring to?

I think St. Helen was another one of those "dead ringer" impostors. People mistook him for Booth, so he just went with it.

I think St. Helen was another one of those "dead ringer" impostors. People mistook him for Booth, so he just went with it.

236534

Just watched the STUPIDEST History Channel special, History's Greatest Mysteries, on John Wilkes Booth. They padded out two hours on various claims that Booth escaped and lived to father children, and people who were told they were descendants of his. They took these people's DNA and proved they were all related, but from the Booth family they had ONE person who claimed to be descended from John Wilkes Booth's aunt and said since these people weren't related to her that DEFINITIVELY PROVED they weren't related to Booth. How dumb can you be? Did Booth not have many brothers and sisters? They needed to take DNA from as many relatives as possible, not base it on ONE, and on the father's side at that when maternal DNA tells much more. I'm not saying I believe Booth escaped, but the whole way the DNA aspect was handled was DUMB.

I was trying to locate a copy of the original affidavit by John Frederick Mays who examined Booth‘s corpse and was perplexed by his feckless and sandy hair. It doesn’t seem to be available upon a cursory search, but I found a pretty good book called Myths After Lincoln from 1929 and on Pg. 236 (link below) it elaborates that Mays did very clearly assert that the body did not look like Booth. But he did identify not only Booth’s scar left by his surgery, but the scaring left by the reopening of the surgical wound that occurred later on. Based on that Mays very much concluded that this was Booth. He sticks by his belief that the deterioration in his appearance was remarkable, but seems to conclude this was Booth. The historian on the show definitely was cherry picking from his affidavit. It would be nice to see the affidavit. It must be on some online archive somewhere.

https://libsysdigi.library.illinois.edu/OCA/Books2012-05/mythsafterlincol00illewi/mythsafterlincol00illewi.pdf

I read someplace that the freckles and sandy hair details were added and no one there at the time observed or remarked on those.

I believe there may be some truth to it. Do you really think the US government wanted the public to think that the man who killed Abraham Lincoln escaped and they had no idea where he was? Of course, they would cover it up. The fact that they won't allow the remains of the man they claim is John Wilkes Boothe to be exhumed tells me that even now, over 150 years later, they don't want the truth to be known.

He isn't buried on government property but in an unmarked grave in the Booth family plot. The family doesn't want him exhumed for fear of disturbing other graves.

Just dropped by to say that The Why Files on YouTube has just done a segment on John Wilkes Booth. There are a few mistakes, such as a date being wrong and a random Revolutionary War guy turning up at the conspirators' meeting during which everyone spoke with British accents, but it is mostly excellent. You should catch it by all means!

I am you know who I am you are on the right track all will be shown

You know, I agree. As impossible as it sounds, yes, Unsolved Mysteries really DID air an episode about John Wilkes Booth escaping and living life as some obscure weirdo who admitted who he was forty years later. Crazy that they would bother with such nonsense, but de gustibus non est disputandum!

https://lincolnconspirators.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/johnsthelen1.jpg

Never seen the actual photograph of St. Helen when he was alive, but rather a painting done of it. He looks nothing like Booth, IMO.