If you look closely at this famous photo-- you'll note the expressions of hardened criminals. But embedded deep within those matter of fact looks, which include the heartfelt elements of love and camaraderie-- are the hopes & dreams of 2 young people which would never be realized. As many interested in this history, just focus on Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow the notorious outlaws-- their human sides are often overlooked. But just as sharks circle their prey-- within that human light, rumors have swirled for decades around Bonnie Parker, Clyde Barrow and other members of The Barrow Gang. And somehow, this fascination into Bonnie & Clyde's personal sides-- doesn't much involve mundane things, like topics of interest they liked to discuss, things they found funny or games they chose to amuse themselves with.
No-- somehow for Bonnie & Clyde, it's their most intimate details which seem most desirable to know. Was Clyde a dysfunctional homosexual?? Was Bonnie an insatiable nymphomaniac?? Were both Bonnie & Clyde aided by Barrow Gang members such as W. D. Jones and Henry Methvin, not only in support of their day to day struggles for survival-- but also for more nefarious needs as well?? And according to Dr. James Wade who examined Bonnie & Clyde in death, both had Gonorrhea. As that account's apparently true, how do you reconcile that fact-- and therefore determine who else if anyone, was involved sexually with Bonnie or Clyde or both?? And in the larger scheme of this history, are those most personal of details which so many long to know-- even useful or important??
Bonnie was said to have become pregnant with her husband Roy Thornton?? But she had an abortion right?? No-- it was a miscarriage?? No-- it was some procedure that went wrong, that left her unable to bear children?? But what about Bonnie when ambushed-- she was pregnant then wasn't she?? No-- the families say that's wrong. Bonnie was never pregnant-- as "surely" the families would have known. But as reportedly related in an interview before her death-- Blanche Barrow who "was" in a position to comment, apparently said Bonnie had never been pregnant. That would have included all years prior to Blanche being captured in July of '33-- but not the months afterward, leading to the May 1934 ambush. As such, Blanche's expression concerning her knowledge of Bonnie-- could call into question, family explanations of why Bonnie in later years couldn't become pregnant-- (The Roy Thornton Defense).
But if the family is right, and Bonnie couldn't have been pregnant-- then how do you explain the numerous and unrelated accounts of a Bonnie pregnancy within just months of her death??-- some of which were related directly by those who shared their homes and meals and time-- with Bonnie & Clyde in Louisiana near the end. There were apparently even contingencies discussed-- women standing by to care for Bonnie's baby, while she was presumed in need of future help while still on the run. Such a keen preparedness, would be unnecessary for a woman who couldn't bear children. In addition other evidence exists pointing to this reality, not only from reliable and well regarded people in Texas who reported a Doctor was said to have been treating Bonnie-- but also it seems from an individual close enough to Bonnie & Clyde, to have appeared in photos with them and who shared their escapades in cheating death day to day in 1934. Thus as an offset to long held beliefs on the part of many-- could it be that one well placed individual, may have known the truth better than Bonnie & Clyde's own families??
And what about Clyde-- he wasn't said to be impotent but he was sterile?? It was Scarlett Fever and the Mumps that did in a young Clyde, from the point of view of his ability to father a child. Who was it again, who confirmed Clyde was tested and found to be sterile?? Without proof or documentation, perhaps it was just assumed Clyde's illnesses netted that result-- within a story passed down without question. And has anyone bothered to check, what possibility there was in the 1930's-- for a young man in having experienced this combination of maladies, to have become sterile?? Well I have-- and it doesn't seem as large a likelihood, as some might have you believe. Then of course there's that troublesome W. D. Jones, who reported that before meeting Bonnie-- Clyde had gotten a girl in a family way. Surely you wouldn't think W. D. could have known anything about Clyde, that others close to him didn't. Could he??
Bonnie never had children-- not with Roy not with Clyde, not with anyone-- and as such not with W. D. Jones?? But what about Grace Davies?? Could Grace possibly be right, in believing that she's the daughter of W. D. and Bonnie?? And some have asked-- Winston, what are you doing lending credence to Grace by reporting her story?? To those folks I would say-- a careful read of my expose' on this case, and you might ask yourselves what support I've provided in critically examining this story?? But unfortunately for those with narrow mindsets toward Bonnie & Clyde History-- there "are" some key and unanswered questions within the Grace Davies mystery-- some quite important ones, that from my point of view need to be explained.
This foreword, in highlighting so many controversial and unresolved Bonnie & Clyde mysteries-- is meant as a lead in to the topic of this post-- At What Cost Truth-- Regarding Bonnie & Clyde History?? Many would ask what difference does innuendo make to the reputations of Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow?? Hell-- for some who despise the very thought of Bonnie & Clyde, they might well ask who cares?? For those who believe these West Dallas desperadoes, were just hell bound murdering marauders to begin with-- I doubt there would exist much concern. Then there are those like myself and I trust many of you, who possess an intense interest in this history-- and who are genuinely predisposed, to learning the truth about Bonnie & Clyde, no matter where that truth may lead.
As I view it, just as with many famous people-- there are varying degrees of caring, diligence and competence-- regarding how historical inquiries are conducted in seeking truth regarding Bonnie & Clyde. Also as many realize who've attempted research within the realm of this enigmatic history, the levels of insight into these iconic desperadoes-- are often complicated by a sheer lack of reliable information and verifiable fact. As such, sometimes sorting through Bonnie & Clyde History is a bit like walking blindfolded in the dark. The path you think you know, with information you've trusted in having been chronicled over the years-- upon further review, may not be as true as once thought. And I don't believe it's as stretch to say, that many facts regarding this history, unfortunately-- may never be known.
Logically you would think, family resources and associations might yield the most reliable insights into Bonnie & Clyde. But in fairness, that seems to depend on the extent those alive today can comment-- based on their knowledge of those who've lived before them. In many cases, we're now 3 generations removed from those who lived and interacted with members of The Barrow Gang. And as has been admitted to in recorded interviews, as well as through family admissions I've witnessed 1st hand-- as it's known those alive today were deliberately sheltered from Bonnie & Clyde insights, by many who lived when this history unfolded-- the families' knowledge as it exists today seems limited.
Sometimes within Bonnie & Clyde History, no matter how hard you try-- you can end up damned if you do and damned if you don't. And when you find yourself as I have on occasion-- within the useless realm of historical hell, where some who don't even give a damn about history, prefer to spend their time and attempt to spend mine-- by spreading hate and shooting at the messenger cowardly and anonymously, from behind a shield of loyal tidings, self righteousness and fictitious names-- rather than consider contrary historical possibilities through productive and legitimate research-- I would ask what are some afraid of?? That new and perhaps uncomfortable possibilities concerning Bonnie & Clyde become known?? That sacred beliefs regarding these outlaws be challenged?? That those related to Bonnie & Clyde nearly 80 years after the fact, are made aware of ongoing curiosities regarding these outlaws-- that likely will never go away. I don't think many would disagree, that unfortunately Bonnie & Clyde themselves-- assured the world and their families of that reality, through their actions long ago.
Perhaps some would prefer, that all knowledge of this history be frozen at some point in time-- and not explored any more than is known. That way, certain images of these outlaws could be preserved as if through cryogenics-- and some Bonnie & Clyde loyalties whether real or perceived, could perpetuate themselves within a closed circle of self importance. I view my "independence" in researching and reporting Bonnie & Clyde History-- to be my greatest strength, in attempting to learn the truth. However for some-- it appears that an impressive level of Bonnie & Clyde close mindedness, is somehow viewed as an advantage. It seems for those who proudly pledge their allegiance to what might as well be called The Bonnie & Clyde Head in Sand Society-- all is good, nothing needs to be challenged-- and "damn" those who would go so far as to question, long cherished Bonnie & Clyde beliefs.
As a response I must say, that my recent investigation concerning Bonnie, W. D. and Grace Davies-- has me thinking of Bonnie Parker well outside the box. I now find myself pondering comments which have shaken loose, from some well placed within this history which I never thought I'd hear. Are there indeed secrets concerning Bonnie Parker, which have been well protected over so many decades-- and as such, never been revealed?? Some seem to believe in that possibility. And what exactly did happen to Bonnie, within a much less than well documented 1931??
In getting back to the challenges of exploring this history-- I don't mention it much, but within my Bonnie & Clyde inquiries-- it seems when I tread too closely to hallowed ground where some B&C types feel I shouldn't go, I'll get an occasional threatening e-mail or pointed behind the scenes comment. I find that remarkable, but sadly it's true. It's the damnedest thing-- but when I went to bat for Bonnie in battling Jeff Guinn, I received praise and encouragement for defending Bonnie and The Parker Family. These expressions of thanks, included more than one from Bonnie's niece Rhea Leen Linder. However now that I'm digging into areas of uncomfortable or perhaps inconceivable thought for some, concerning a more human Bonnie Parker than her oft angelic image might normally allow-- well then, it seems I've crossed some self imposed line in the sand which rightfully should never be crossed.
It's a good thing I don't buy into these contradictory notions. One one hand, it's good that I defend Bonnie from likes of Jeff Guinn, and his ideas of Bonnie being a prostitute and having been slain by a raging and vengeful Frank Hamer at close range-- in pumping her full of holes from the right side of the death car to avenge Bonnie's brutal, and senseless killings of Officers Murphy and Wheeler at Grapevine. My goodness-- that's a lot of unsubstantiated supposition. I wonder if Jeff has the same sort of hateful comments directed at him, as I receive from "the anonymous ones". In those cases, I defended Bonnie because historically she deserved to be defended-- from dubious allegations which seemed far more sensational than accurate. Based on personal exchanges with Jeff Guinn and in questioning footnotes within his book-- I felt Jeff's diligence was lax in researching these points, and his decision to include these over sensationalized and unsubstantiated assertions within a "True Story" of Bonnie & Clyde-- was a disservice to this history. That's my educated opinion, for what it's worth.
Interestingly, when news of the Bonnie Parker Tijuana Bible "Amputated" hit the fan-- I began hearing more about cracks in the perception of Bonnie being so sweet and innocent. It seems a oversensitivity on the part of some, was evident in defending Bonnie from this scourge of an idea-- that Bonnie's own actions could have in any way formed the impetus, for such a sordid parody being created concerning her. I found it interesting to read comments critical of Bonnie's most avid supporters, revolving around the idea that perhaps a more discerning view into Bonnie Parker is not a bad thing-- and so what if Bonnie's not found to be the "precious angel" so many view her as. The point of these admonishments, was to highlight the fact that Bonnie was human-- and perhaps in reality wasn't the perfect young lady many believe her to be. The idea was even advanced, that perhaps Bonnie sought the outlaw life-- and that Clyde Barrow provided the conduit for that opportunity. I must say-- that's an interesting twist I had never thought of before.
It seems at least partially because of "Amputated"-- a new willingness to examine Bonnie beyond the legend, is being discussed. I cant tell you which came first, the Bonnie rumors or the Bonnie Tijuana Bible (although historically it would be good to know)-- but I myself, would rather trust in truths concerning the "real" Bonnie Parker-- than in 1/2 truths built upon an image supported by incomplete knowledge. As such until proven otherwise, I still see no real evidence to support either of the 2 major Bonnie & Clyde sexual rumors being true. Some may wish them to be true, but that seems another issue unrelated to Bonnie & Clyde.
It's not at all remarkable, that people do very human things. Contrary to what some might believe, beyond the myths and legends-- Bonnie & Clyde were indeed human and as such were fallible. But how much change from B&C's long held images, is too much change in the eyes of some?? For example, through many documented accounts, I believe we now know with a good sense of certainty-- that Bonnie swore a good bit. Apparently the sweet young lady, was prone to curse when unhappy. So is that a trait that might forever disrupt someone's image of Bonnie?? Perhaps. But at least, as it seems now-- that would be a true image.
Would it also be a stretch to say, that as sexual active young people on the run with little time to live-- that Bonnie & Clyde may have run a bit free and loose concerning that aspect of their lives?? Bonnie was also said to have loved children. Could it be, that if possible-- Bonnie would want her dream of having a child realized as well?? That is, unless all who say they know better are correct-- that she and Clyde could never have conceived a child?? Or that neither of them had children, before loving one another. But contrary to what some believe or wish to believe-- I'm not sure at this point, the evidence that exists at least of the time near the ambush-- doesn't support a different story. But whether or not there's enough evidence to be conclusive, may be in the eye of the beholder. As far as accepting B&C as they actually were versus the image some have of them-- for me it's easy to say there "was" a reality to this history and for those who lived it. Sometimes it seems emotions come into play with Bonnie & Clyde, where really they shouldn't. But that's human nature-- especially regarding all the dynamics of this story, involving these individuals and the times in which they lived.
And what about Kent Biffle's reported comment made to Grace Davies, concerning an intimated Bonnie Parker?? Well just as in the movie A Christmas Story, when Ralphie didn't say "fudge"-- according to Grace, Kent didn't call Bonnie a "bore"-- but rather a term which sounds remarkably like it. What did this seasoned Dallas reporter with presumably many contacts over the years, perhaps know about Bonnie Parker?? Was/is there an undercurrent of secret knowledge regarding Bonnie & Clyde-- that's never been brought to light??
But I would also ask-- why some choose to take up the cause, of attempting to suppress even the possibility of new Bonnie & Clyde info coming to light?? In my view, although it may be admirable to protect certain individuals from perhaps uncomfortable investigations into these outlaws-- no one should presume to have the right to conduct self righteous crusades of blatant impoliteness and censorship because of it. I don't believe this history is going away any time soon-- and based on the activity within this B&C forum, where nearly 1000 hits in one day have been registered here from all over the world-- it seems interest in Bonnie & Clyde remains strong where ever they are thought of. And although this is not a comment only forum, I appreciate very much when comments are expressed here.
Note-- As I've already had this fact questioned by those with little better to do, I went back and checked. I apologize for being just 13 hits off. The B&CHB which routinely receives strong activity daily from many corners of the world-- experienced a 987 hit day on February 10th of this year. Also the next visitor from any new country, will add the 103rd country or territory-- to the list of those areas of the world who have come here, in search of Bonnie & Clyde truth.
As a side note I would say, what some don't realize in addressing me sometimes in less than respectful ways-- is that once I sense inappropriate comments within messages directed toward myself or this blog-- those comments are usually erased unread. I suppose some feel by expressing crass comments, they will affect some change in my behavior toward this history. But as Romper Room is now so many decades removed from our psyches-- I have no time to play the useless games others seem to thrive on.
I'm more interested in doing all I can, to help those who wish to know the truth concerning Bonnie & Clyde History. I'm focused on bringing to light, interesting and little known aspects of this history-- as well as attempting to sort out certain Bonnie & Clyde truths from rumors, which are often inquired of. I also wish to dispel if I can, B&C rumors which I feel have been perpetuated erroneously over the years. My investigations as always-- are objective, fair and diligently researched. So for those who would rather not have Bonnie defended from the likes of those who would wrongly slander her and as such alter this history-- not have new Bonnie & Clyde knowledge from Billie's journal and her unpublished manuscript-- not have the advantage of numerous Blanche Barrow items and correspondence to view and learn from-- not have important W. D. Jones info now corrected-- not have new Bonnie & Clyde hostage info brought to light-- not know the truth concerning Millie Stamps along with many other Bonnie & Clyde insights as found here-- there's always that magical choice, of not visiting The B&CHB. For everyone else, as always-- my sincere "thanks" for your continued support.
So what really did happen to Bonnie in 1931?? Why is that seemingly the only year within this saga, with so little known about her??-- and how might that truth relate if it does, to the Grace Davies claim?? Did the law knowingly shoot not just an outlaw woman in 1934-- but a pregnant Bonnie Parker?? And is that why some within the ambush posse, seemingly couldn't handle their remaining years without self destructing?? Did The Barrow Gang make plans to leave The United States, as related to a Bonnie pregnancy?? As there seems to be a credible source who reportedly said Bonnie & Clyde did consider such plans-- what is to be made of that knowledge within this history?? What "were" Frank Hamer's actions at the death car, after the ambush posse shooting en mass stopped??-- and which ambush account is correct?? And why is it-- that the Henderson Jordan Memorial Park Plague in Arcadia, LA.-- may still lack any reference to the historic contributions of Prentiss Oakley-- the man generally recognized as having killed Clyde Barrow??
So at what cost truth-- regarding Bonnie & Clyde History?? Sometimes the cost can be high-- but within the realm of reality and respect, hopefully the truth can be learned without hurting others. As I see it, there's still much to do within Bonnie & Clyde History. So with or without unanimous consent, and with my thanks to so many-- we move forward. I dedicate this post to Rick Mattix, as I feel he would approve of it's content.
BTW-- How dare anyone choose to use the tragedy of Rick Mattix's death against me, in drawing disparaging comparisons between Rick and myself. Rick Mattix was a fine Historian, a gentleman and a friend of mine. What a low and despicable thing to do, which exemplifies the twisted mentality of some within this history.
"Revisionist" history can be a dangerous thing-- and rightfully should be guarded against wherever it be found. And as related to Bonnie & Clyde History, there seems to be a question of monumental proportions rising over the Town of Arcadia, Louisiana-- concerning what some might call an attempt at revising this history.
