Monday, August 10, 2015

A Black Eye For Bonnie & Clyde History And Affront To A Legend??

Recently, it was pointed out to me by someone I respect greatly-- that up until not many years ago.. Bonnie & Clyde History was frequented by those who conducted themselves with civility and honor.  Oh, we may have disagreed vehemently on things historically defined.. however, most expressed themselves in ways both commendable and with the future in mind.  But how times have  changed.  And how dramatically, the definition of character has changed within this history.  

Case in point-- a number of us close to Bonnie & Clyde History, have been concerned in having seen "Boots" Hinton items for sale recently-- when those of us who know him, have known for years, there was little or no chance of "Boots" parting ways with his Bonnie & Clyde treasures.  So it came as news to us, when this same individual and great friend of "Boots" who many trust implicitly.. said according to fresh info from "Boots" Hinton-- none of "Boots" personal items have been offered for sale.  "Boots" himself, also said the same to the "American Pickers" publicly not that long ago.   Thus a question for those who participated in crafting the following ebay offering.  

"So what was this”??

For those unaware of the displays there-- the image shown within this ebay listing.. is from the Bonnie & Clyde Ambush Museum in Gibsland.  The .45 caliber bullets shown in this photo, along with other items-- are possessions of L. J. "Boots" Hinton.  So now apparently-- at least one of "Boots" Red Crown bullets has been offered for sale.. along with "location pieces" which to my knowledge, he's never owned.  Seems this ebay auction doesn't lie.. but also seems "Boots" doesn't know??  Could that be true??  "Hmmmmm"..

But "there they are".. the same rocks, bricks and swatches, at least some of which now called into question concerning their authenticity-- along with a bullet from "Boots" Hinton's personal collection.. all neatly packaged and offered for sale within a medium Mr. Hinton rarely frequents.  And for just $1200.  And for those who support the renewed Gibsland "museum" and some might say new way of doing things, along with alliances perhaps questionable for this history-- I suppose all is fair (and benign) in love and Bonnie & Clyde History??

Well, not for those who truly care about this history.  Not by a long shot. 

And like a bunch of shameless Elmer Fudds.. some people's reaction is "Shhhhh.. Be very, very quiet".. for apparently, some would rather turn a blind eye, both ears and their character-- rather than face truth, concerning fair questions asked-- and to date, non-defended actions so boldly wheeled out in the presence of all. 
Description accompanying ebay auction.

Different lead page used for same ebay items.  Photoboy1988 is the seller.
Seems it's time once again, to evoke the spirit of Ricky Ricardo-- in saying some may have some serious "esspainin" to do.   As this is a valid Bonnie & Clyde forum, and to be fair to both gentlemen, my offer still stands-- for both Perry Carver and James Howard, to please provide specific and valid provenance here on The B&CHB, for their high-ticket items claimed to be authentic from Bonnie & Clyde History.  And now also explain-- how personal items said not for sale (and supposedly under the cloak of diligent care)-- have been paraded for sale on the Internet?? How is that possible.. unless something is really askew in Bonnie & Clyde Land?? 

Fair questions have been asked.. but without answers forthcoming.  And as honor begets honor-- don't some think it's time to ante up, for the benefit of right??  For while some seem content lining up Facebook friends, in what could be an attempt to limit descent and create what is seemingly a dwindling group of "likers"??-- others of us are focused on important human elements, like loyalty
, respect and honor.  And on behalf of this history-- truth.  Some it seems, feel they can just ignore questions concerning provenance.. but it's much harder to wish away a reality such as an ebay auction, with records kept to prove a conflict with a respected man's expectations. 
Bonnie & Clyde History-- Often a "Big Bang Grand Adventure" in Dysfunctionality

Within Bonnie & Clyde History, unfortunately at times-- people choose up sides as if some epic pick-up basketball game was about to break out.  Concerning this latest B&C debacle-- it's remarkable to me, how anyone could end up on the wrong side of this grandiose snafu historically??-- by choosing misplaced group praise over history, and apparently dissing a Bonnie & Clyde History family member who deserves people's best.. not their worst.  But I guess all in all-- with the lack of reason and civility exhibited within this history in recent years-- it's not surprising.

Those who find it hard to defend this man and the man standing as an image behind him.. perhaps would benefit from knowing more-- as stories thought by some to be less than plausible, may be reconciled "and" in some instances.. dual stories could both be judged true with the addition of more detail.  Gotta think outside the box and have respect..  "Ah respect"-- yes, that's important too. 
From my viewpoint, those who support murkiness, alleged deception, possible misuse of an iconic Bonnie & Clyde History family member, and proliferation of alleged unsubstantiated artifacts-- are "NOT" the "good guys", as I've seen it said-- just because some who admire games of admiration say so.

Yes unfortunately within Bonnie & Clyde History-- a variety of games are sometimes played with the "twisted fun" of vengeful schoolchildren.  I figure as long as there are "cliquey leaders" and misguided followers of those leaders, where adulation means more than history-- and anonymity is often used to spread hurtful and childish gobbledygook.. there will continue to be issues such as this to contend with.  

And BTW-- if I want mudflaps-- I'll buy a pair for my car and have some pretty female mechanic install them.  That way-- I'll know the mudflaps are doing a respectable job-- and not just wallowing in the muck.

The bottom line to many good questions having been asked, in trying to ferret out the truth concerning a whole new focus on "historical marketing" with unknown scruples within this history-- and sometimes countered by those with seemingly nothing better to do than attempt a "defense of the less than defensible".. for what??-- the stroking of egos??.. is a simple one.  Just like with any circumstance.. ask "What is right"??.. and "What is wrong"??

For our purposes, what's right-- is to support truth in history, and unique and loyal stewards of this history as they face the Autumns of their time with us.  What's wrong-- is to support selfishness, an apparent void in honesty and violation of human trust and dignity.  And I surely have no good feelings for people, who praise and make excuses for those who by accounts logical do wrong-- and cannot defend their actions straight up.        

Oh-- and related to the effects of Bonnie & Clyde cliques-- for the benefit of anyone still wanting answers concerning the famous case of the Clyde Luger pic-- please read my comment attached to this post.  It doesn't seem right devoting a post to that issue now-- but perhaps approaches made to me, will help some sort out queries still wondered about.  Happy to help.


A. Winston Woodward said...

Another case in point concerning the B&C cliques. Last November, I received an e-mail from someone named Dave going by the email handle dtenyo. "Dave" asked if I had seen the photo with Clyde holding the Luger?? I replied that yes, I believe I have-- but if you have a copy, please forward it to me. Oh, I can't do that, was Dave's response-- as that's so and so's pic (Bonnie & Clyde family member shielded to protect the innocent). I replied OK, thank you anyway.. as I wouldn't want you to betray a trust.

But then in typical and sometimes grandly dysfunctional B&C fashion-- this person went "on and on" wanting to know why I wouldn't want the Luger photo that he approached me about (and I suppose publish it??)-- and then proceeded to berate me up and down, throwing insult upon insult-- on top of what to me, was a nonsensical and needless approach. To me, if something cannot be shared as a matter of trust-- then "that's that"-- no further comment necessary, with a "thanks for thinking of me" usually the last and polite word.

It was then, I learned from another B&C historical fellow-- that he had been accused of "leaking" this same photo, which had been shared with him by it's owner (entirely proper)-- which made this B&C friend upset. My comment to this fellow (a really good guy within this history)-- was along the lines of "Man what is this shit??.. who is this mystery person causing issues-- and why do some people deliberately go out of their way to waste time and spread bad feelings so unnecessarily"??

But you know-- this experience somehow prompted me to revisit my e-mails. And "low and behold"-- I found an e-mail sent to me in 2013.. with a copy of the Clyde Luger pic, sent to me by, you guessed it.. dtenyo-- which I didn't publish back then, and wouldn't do so without permission.

When I forwarded this e-mail to dtenyo-- the same person who'd sent the original e-mail and "now" chastising me for wanting to respect others wishes.. I realized what I thought the truth was, and said something like.. "Hey man-- you're the leak from back then, in causing hard feelings and doubt among those who could be trusted.. right"?? You're the leak-- but somehow forgotten that (maybe too many leaks to keep track of)-- in contacting me now. How about I contact the owner of the pic, and have her deal with one of her own (apparently from a B&C clique)-- who betrayed her to begin with, by stirring up trouble in Bonnie & Clyde land??

Never heard from that person again. Perhaps all of this irrational and scattered behavior, may have had something to do with an attempt at CYA-- in hoping I'd publish the photo?? I also figured that unless someone knows dtenyo-- as many times around here people use aliases, so as not to stand on their own subversive lack of character-- well, there ya' go. I've been told who dtenyo may be-- and if true, wouldn't surprise me. As for myself-- I stand tall under my own name, with no need for anonymity.

Joe said...

Hello Winston,
It has been a long time since we have spoken or I have commented. I continue to follow your blog and always enjoy your writings except when you are defending against comments and actions of other. I realize you are trying to defend history and trying to keep it in it's reality but I feel you are wasting your energy and valuable time. This energy and time, in my opinion, could be better spent researching and writing about the history and what happened.

There will always be negative people, forget them. Once you give them space on your site they win.When you put yourself out there which you have, you are bound to get detractors.You have already given negative thought enough air time

Please stick to what I feel you do best and I enjoy so much..... write about the Bonnie and Clyde story. Other people may feel the same as me as I have noted less and less comments even from the old regulars on your posts through time.

This is meant for food for thought
Your buddy up in Canada

A. Winston Woodward said...

"Hi Joe". So good to hear from you, and I surely hope all is well. Man-- I wish I could agree with you wholeheartedly, as I would want to very much.. but unfortunately in this case, I cannot. If this were some run 'o the mill B&C History drama, your points would be well-taken. And normally, I wouldn't give 2 hoots and a holler about much of anything the "outer fringes of banter" within this history think about things. However, there are times to stand up for what's right.. and this is one of them.

The B&C Ambush Museum has always been about history 1st-- and merchandising as an afterthought. Ken Holmes reputation as well as "Boots" and Ted Hintons' reputations are now forever linked to that site. Serious accusations have been made, and without some shred of denial, I'm not sure many would have much choice-- but believe the damning statements made against the new regime there. I would think innocent people would move quickly to defend their position-- however in this case, I and others who care have seen no defense attempted.. just silence, to counter a pointed eyewitness account. And when someone's willing to put their ass on the line, as Mr. Prince has for the benefit of this history-- seems that's worth a lot.. and worth paying attention to.

Also I have grave concerns, re: the attitudes of some-- who it seems, blindly support an entity accused of such wrongdoing. Seems egos and nonsensical esscuses are the norm within some B&C History comment now. Jealousy and negativity?? "No"!!-- right and wrong, class and character should be the standards employed to determine truth. And I'll tell you what.. the ebay auction attempt concerning "Boots" Red Crown bullet(s) (the other stuff, to my knowledge he has never owned)-- I and others cannot help but view as a remarkable and personal affront, to such a great and still vital human being. "Wow"!!.. what else can you say?? You've gotta be kidding right?? But there it is-- a clear record of that attempted sale. And to me-- the ebay sale goes a long way toward proving accusations made. A bold, incredible step-- and giant "red flag" concerning all of this.

No-- the Ambush Museum doesn't seem to act much like a museum any longer. By their own admission-- seems they're busy looking into bobble heads now.

And there "cannot" be a circumstance where artifacts are doubted in such large numbers within any history. That just cannot stand. Either defend them and explain their provenance satisfactorily-- or remove them from sale to good folks for good money. Plain & simple. Provenance can either be explained for questioned items or it cannot. Which is it?? Silence isn't good enough within an historical realm-- as we are not talking about cheating at Tiddlywinks here.

Yes, sometimes you've gotta fight for what's right-- and concerning wasting time, I don't think so. This blog has good reach, and I believe I have been quite fair to those accused, in offering a wide-open opportunity for them to use this forum for their defense. But again.. only silence. I don't know how others view such a deafening silence in this case??.. but for me, silence is not the answer.

Thanks much for your comment Joe.. and feel free to comment often.

A. Winston Woodward said...

Also I hope you and all, will enjoy the old key posts I'm re-publishing. More are coming soon. There's so much more history here than comment on other things-- but sometimes, you've just gotta let your passion fly.. when the need is thrust upon you.