A Time For Vigilance

Who ever said participating in B&C History was easy?? It "should" be easy to discuss history without some sort of hate and venom being advanced-- "and" without the distractions necessitated by these issues. But unfortunately, within the B&C community-- that's not always the case. Those who know of my passion for this history, know of my aversion to those who make hate filled rants an art form-- in turning apparent inabilities to cope, into creative and cruel attacks on others. This attempt at poisoning the B&C historical waters through the use of lies, manipulation and deceit-- can be a vicious and pathetic display of needless rhetoric.

In the past, I have voiced my condemnation of those who would attempt vile character assassinations-- and called for those who proliferate such activities, to be sanctioned. Despite such calls for reason, I have been witness to a number of good people being targeted in heinous and self serving attacks. Sometimes those in question, will go to great lengths in expending deplorable behavior to hurt others.

Recently, I've found myself the focus of such an attack. I believe I was targeted, because I rejected a former friend, in taking issue with his unsavory actions toward others. But it's hard to tell, as sometimes in this person's mind it seems there can be issues present-- which in reality, aren't reality. Whatever reasons were chosen, the recent attacks on myself and The B&CHB have been particularly hurtful-- in that they "were" advanced by someone I once called a friend. But lost friendships are no excuse for vitriol. It became apparent early on, that the target of these salvos was my reputation-- just as the reputations of others have been targeted by this individual, so viciously in the past. As I take both this history and my reputation seriously, I was in no mood to compromise either-- in resolving this issue in any other way, than to put down this hatred.

Those who lie so easily to promote themselves and hurt others, are the worst kind of offenders-- in that they use misinformation to sway people's opinions away from the truth, and into a narrow game of deceit. Based on this person's considerable talent in expounding hate, I might suggest he seek out a job within a vengeful and heated political campaign, where unfortunately-- character assassination is an accepted form of warfare. But within this historical context, there is "NO" room for this sort of despicable behavior.

Message boards can be places where harmful expression is allowed to fester-- as those mediums for discussion create the perfect harbor, for those who lie in wait to dispense hate. Just this year, I commented at length as Blanche's Hangout-- a good B&C message board went down by the bow, based on hateful expressions. But within my outcry in deploring hate there, I had it wrong. The cause was just, but unfortunately-- I misidentified the antagonist. I as others were fooled by this clever manipulator, who seemingly works hard at causing harm to others. After the hurt and lies leveled at me this go round, I am convinced this was the case in the past.

Now this same individual who has attempted to malign me here, is spouting his lies and hatred on another message board. There are many good people on that forum I call friends. I trust these good folks will do all they can, to make sure they don't fall victim-- to the same maliciousness that brought down Blanche's Hangout. I hope those on the side of good-- will remain vigilant. For some who are holdovers from Blanche's Hangout, this sort of thing must seem all too familiar-- as it's apparent the same individual, always seems to be at the center of these controversies. And for those who have seemingly embraced the "evil cause", and feel it is I who am FOS-- I would say patience is a virtue. Just wait-- and you'll see.

I for one won't be silent, in the face of abhorrent behavior which continues to afflict B&C forums including my own. There is good in the world and there is bad-- there is right and there is wrong. I will continue to side with the truth, and stand by those who believe in what is good about this history. I will leave it to my detractor-- who is now the nemesis of enough individuals to be an historian's club, to lay example of what not to do in life. On a positive note, it's my sincere hope-- that will change.

But as my detractor would have some believe he is not proliferating this exercise in terror-- for the record, I've received 14 new insulting e-mails from him in the past 2 days-- all before I completed this post. Those are in addition to a flurry of activity, over the past week. Normally I might say thanks for caring, but in this case-- could this much activity be considered an obsession with hate?? As someone wise once said-- enough is enough!!

A special note: As it's been said by he with little regard for the truth, that my apology to Debbie Moss is somehow fake and insincere. I want it to be known, my apology couldn't be more sincere. But as my gesture also reveals my feelings concerning the true nature of this hurtful individual, I'm not surprised that even an apology-- would be targeted by hate. I hope you are well Debbie, and I wish peace to all.

The Latest B&C Polls-- A Walk In the Park or Daunting Task??

It's been quite some time since so few votes were cast for the B&C Polls. This led me to wonder whether this wasn't too hard a batch?? Yet, the 1st person who e-mailed me concerning the poll contest ran the table-- in getting them all right!! Nicely done. As there's only one way to know how challenging these queries were-- here we go.

As usual, there were multiple sources used for the poll questions-- and Joe Gunn was the key to question 1. On February 12th, 1934 at Reeds Spring Missouri, Joe Gunn was walking to town for his weekly groceries. A car full of people stopped, saying they were lost. They "encouraged" Joe to get into the car, which he noticed was full of guns. In helping B&C, Raymond Hamilton and a man they called Gibbons find their way toward Arkansas-- Gunn inadvertently helped them run straight into a roadblock of Galena Sheriff's officers. After an exchange of gunfire, they piled back into the car-- only to be pinned in from behind by the Reeds Spring Marshall and another deputy. After firing on the later group, they drove right at the lawmen in front of them. According to Gunn, as they drove around the officers' car-- Bonnie and Raymond Hamilton showered their car with bullets as they drove past. Joe Gunn noted that Bonnie had cursed a lot, during this expending of lead.

The next question involved the triple gas station robberies at Fort Dodge, Iowa-- which preceded the Red Crown incident. The 3rd robbery of 3 said committed within about 10 minutes time, was Leon Chavalier's Texaco station. As the Barrow Gang started off, Clyde took Justin Chevalier's keys-- to make sure they wouldn't be followed. Justin asked Clyde, if he wouldn't mind throwing his keys out the window down the road-- so he wouldn't need to get another set. Clyde apparently obliged. After these robberies, the gang drove 250 miles south-- and found themselves at another service station about 6 miles south of Platte City, Missouri. Delbert Crabtree was working the pumps, when Clyde asked him about the cabins across the street at the Red Crown Tavern. Although that service station was operated by Kermit Crawford and his sister, it was apparently Crabtree that Clyde asked first, concerning renting the Red Crown cabins.

Ted Hinton can be thanked, as the source for a couple of this round's questions. According to Hinton, Oklahoma license plate 485-370 was spotted during B&C's likely robbery of the McMurrey Oil Refinery at Overton, Texas on November 8th, 1933. After Jim McMurrey was robbed, he notified Dallas Sheriff "Smoot" Schmid, who sent Ted Hinton out to McMurrey's home. After hearing descriptions of the 2 men and tiny good looking woman, Hinton showed McMurrey photos of Bonnie and Clyde. The refinery man, said he was sure B&C were the robbers, and that he would be willing to swear to it in court. That is, until Hinton showed McMurrey the names on the backs of the photos. McMurrey then told Hinton he'd rather just take his lumps and go about his business.

Hinton was also the source of the story of Henry Methvin, being identified as the man who was waiting for sandwiches and soft drinks at the Majestic Cafe in Shreveport, LA-- when he noticed a car outside drive away. It was said Methvin hurriedly left, without his sandwiches. Ted Hinton interviewed the waitress who served Methvin, who identified him from a grouping of photographs. In apparently a related account, Alcorn, Hamer, Hinton and Gault, who were all staying at The New Inn Hotel-- were called down to the Shreveport Police Chief's office to be told about a car, which the police had "spooked" and chased away from the Majestic Cafe that same evening.

It was the photo of Clyde holding Bonnie on his shoulder, that Bonnie reportedly told Emma Parker she liked best-- at the May 8th, 1934 family meeting with B&C. Also Frank Clause, was the burglar Nell blamed-- for sending Clyde down a more serious road of crime, during the time Clyde was dating Gladys. And last but not least, Dexfield Park, opened in 1915. The park included a merry go round, Ferris wheel, go carts-- as well as other rides, a dance hall, cafes, baseball diamonds and the large brook fed swimming pool-- so often depicted. Many thanks as always for your participation in the B&C Polls. And thanks to Winston Ramsey, for the Dexfield Park pic-- and for some info used in this edition of the B&C Polls. Look for another group of polls to be posted, in time for another round prior to the end of October.

A Brand New Day-- (Now w/Video Link)

Unfortunately with Blogs-- sometimes troublemakers try their best to spoil the fun. Recently a former friend of mine decided to be disruptive, by posting crass and inappropriate comments repeatedly-- not in the spirit of B&C History-- but instead aimed at me, in an attempt to be caustic. As this person has a history, of being disruptive in similar ways on other B&C forums-- and after being given fair warning on more than one occasion, I've made it known I feel this individual should no longer participate or comment here.

Also since this person is apparently capable of unsavory activities, up to and including issuing threats to myself and others-- I'm really in no mood to humor this individual's seeming desire, for venom, attention and control. I will not have this blog affected negatively, by such issues. Therefore I have enacted the following change. Comments are encouraged as always. However, all comments will now be monitored for inappropriate content prior to posting. This means when you post comments, they go to me first-- and then I post them. This will still allow for your wonderful comments to be viewed on The B&CHB, but also help assure-- that hateful comments can be avoided.

In response to this individual's attacks on me both personally and via the internet, let me respond by saying in my view-- being arrogant, scheming and untruthful-- is no way to go through life. Good people abide by their word-- and friends don't threaten friends. Also-- I see no reason to go elsewhere to banter, over perceptions of things of which I am already aware of the truth. Often one's own words and actions, speak volumes in revealing one's true nature-- and such I believe is the case here. Some can also project their issues upon others, in a attempt to hide issues which really should be addressed. Hate filled obsessions cannot be good-- and I leave it to others to judge for themselves-- what unfortunately I've already experienced.

I am sorry, this scurrilous behavior occurred here. As all can participate openly on The B&CHB-- I trust in the goodness of each participant, to maintain decorum, civility and politeness within this B&C forum. As it appears my affiliation with this individual is now over, I don't anticipate further issues of this sort going forward-- but I will be diligent in guarding against any recurrence of these events. I wish to say I appreciate the expressions of support I've received, during times I've needed to act such as this for the betterment of all-- and for the integrity of the blog. It's always my aim, to make The Bonnie and Clyde History Blog the best resource of it's kind concerning Bonnie and Clyde History-- and make this a welcome place, where all can enjoy sharing the history we love. "Thanks" as always for your continued support. Please look for more posts concerning B&C History soon.

I hope for a peaceful resolution for this circumstance. My thanks to Sting, for the inspiration for the title of this post. Here's a video link, to hopefully make all feel a little better-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQQax5AofV8

A special note-- I also wish to offer a public apology to Debbie Moss, for my wrongful defense of a certain individual-- who caused upheaval on the Blanche's Hangout message board. This wasn't always true, but was true enough. Some may feel this apology long overdue, however in my defense-- sometimes it takes time to sort out the truth. This gesture, is about doing the right thing.

Who Was the Sowers Informant??-- Round 2

After quite some time without comment, 2 comments were recently added to the July 18th post concerning the Sowers Informant.

Anonymous said-- I followed with great interest your comments regarding accusations against Bonnie Parker and the harm that may be done to family etc. by suppositions and innuendo. Yet you have done the very same to Joe Bill Francis. What sources are you quoting when you imply he may have been the informant? If Marie, there is good reason to have suspicions about her point of view. In all this time, I still wait to here from those who should know who that informant was. Both Boots and Buddy should know and even though this was a closely guarded secret the evidence has always stared everyone right in the face. I use both the historical evidence from after the fact to personal information related to me by the last person I know of who in some way was involved. If Joe Bill was the person, would he have remained a close friend to the family for the rest of their lives? Would Clyde still have had contact with him and trusted him? As for the reason for not contacting the Dallas Sheriff it is a little more obvious than the tale you paint. All I ask is the same consideration for the families. There are still stories yet untold by those who were there, but were taught to remain silent, "because nothing good would ever come of telling--"

Then Tom said-- Good points. Everybody is so worried about upsetting the Barrows and Parker families-- but little regard is given to other families involved.

I must say I find it interesting, both of these comments seem aligned somehow in either supporting the families or appearing detrimental to them. Strangely, the first comment appears to both support the families-- and knock Marie at the same time?? I would make a suggestion to the anonymous individual who's made many claims, but offers few details-- to please identify yourself, and provide "specifics"-- as to why you believe what you do. There are a multitude of stories and rumors bandied about concerning Bonnie and Clyde, which unfortunately cannot always be substantiated-- with many claims lacking credibility or provenance. But they amount to B&C stories none the less.

In stating "Boots" Hinton or Buddy Barrow Williams "should know" the truth concerning the Sowers informant-- I'm not sure that's the case. And with all respect, making so many veiled claims without the benefit of detail or objective analysis, to me cannot be considered very meaningful. If anyone has reliable information concerning the Sowers informant, let them speak up and lay their evidence out for all to see. In my view, if some reason still exists for secrecy in the minds of some concerning Sowers-- then at some point, these secrets will go to the graves of those unwilling to express what they know. I'll also state the obvious, that all individuals even indirectly involved in the Sowers ambush which occurred 76 years ago next month-- have been gone for many years. Thus at best, without first hand knowledge-- we are into 2nd generation information to sort through.

Often Parker and Barrow family accounts (particularly from the book Fugitives)-- are used to justify B&C arguments. But then seemingly, when doubt needs to be employed-- family accounts are disparaged, in being used for opposing effect. To me, "selective" use of B&C historical information-- is one of the most egregious offenses made within the telling of this history. Jeff Guinn used selectivity in Go Down Together, by touting Dr. Wade's expertise in describing Clyde's wounds, but then ignoring Wade-- in his analysis of Bonnie's wounds. Wade's observations you see-- didn't support the Hamer hate filled assassin theory. I view the longer comment above, as employing selectivity as well-- in rebuking Marie's opinion of the Sowers informant, in such an out of hand and disparaging way.

It doesn't seem to me, that anyone has the right to criticize Marie Barrow-- for having been an eyewitness to the Sowers ambush. Like it or not??-- Marie was there, and was said not to have put her head down, when the shooting started. As such, it's thought she witnessed both the ambush attempt and B&C escaping from the Sowers trap. She also held the opinion that as B&C had never met with the families at the same spot twice-- and since the meeting place on the 2nd night near Irving was known only to family members-- that she felt one of 2 individuals sold them out-- either Billie Jean Mace or her own husband Joe Bill Francis. And according to John Neal Philips, Marie's suspicions rested equally between them.

Marie as many, discounted reports that dairy farmer Charlie Stovall had witnessed suspicious people near his farm and alerted police in advance of the ambush. About 9 years ago, Stovall's daughter Mary Louise Stovall Wadsworth was interviewed for a documentary concerning the Sowers ambush-- and addressed stories concerning her father's purported participation in notifying the authorities. She said her father was a shy man, who wouldn't have paid much attention to the comings or goings of people near their land-- and was unlikely to have alerted the police.

And in fact, now that the Dallas FBI files have confirmed with little doubt-- that there "was" indeed an informant responsible for Sowers, I'm not sure the Charlie Stovall angle holds enough water to stand alone. We now know that based on Bob Alcorn's informant's information, Deputy Sheriff Alcorn and Sheriff Smoot Schmid observed "2" family meetings with B&C in preparation for Sowers. It's also obvious, the law knew the exact location of the 2nd Sowers meeting on November 21st-- which occurred just one day after Cumie's birthday celebration. Another clue to the accuracy of the posse's information, is that it was reported they parked their cars about a half mile away, and walked to the ambush location. It's also documented, that the U. S. Bureau of Investigation-- who was spying on Schmid and Alcorn who were spying on B&C (good informants all around)-- didn't act against Bonnie and Clyde at those earlier meetings even though they could have, out of respect for Schmid's upcoming ambush attempt.

So I ask you, and those concerned as to why Joe Bill Francis and Billie Mace have been keyed on all these years, as perhaps being the Sowers informant-- who else, would be "more" likely as suspects?? I don't believe it was Billie, and I'll state why in a moment. If he or she who commented, says the truth has been staring us in the face for so long-- then please say why. Who else could it have been?? Who else could have known the family held location of the 2nd night Sowers meeting-- "except" the short list of family members present that night?? In fairness, I have evoked the name of Floyd Hamilton as a possibility-- as he was known to have driven the Barrows to some clandestine meetings with B&C. But in the case of Sowers, has it ever been said that Floyd was present or knew of the families' plans??

I'm not sure this "vaporous" link can be drawn-- in comparing my defense of Bonnie Parker against erroneous and baseless attacks, to my pointing out what logical analysis, family held beliefs and now independent documentation show to be likely, concerning the Sowers informant. Someone within the families, or on the outside-- someone close to the families with knowledge from a family member, would almost certainly have been the Sowers informant. And Marie's suspicions concerning this individual are important in trying to root this out. Marie was an insider-- she was an eyewitness-- she knew Joe Bill intimately and she was old enough to be well aware of the circumstances that night-- where apparently someone led authorities right to Bonnie and Clyde. Interestingly, if you take the FBI files at their literal value-- it's said the informant is someone close to the Parker or Barrow families. Thus to me, it wasn't an outsider.

With all respect to those who believe it was Charlie Stovall, or just good old fashioned police work that put B&C on the spot at Sowers-- I for one don't see that as true. I would also think criticism of Marie Barrow in this regard, would be more justified-- if she had led people "away" from her family-- and not right within it. Remember it was Marie who often blamed others for Clyde's faults and actions-- who had trouble believing Clyde did wrong. So why wouldn't she believe the Sowers betrayal, was due to outside influences?? Perhaps because it wasn't.

So what evidence points to Joe Bill Francis?? I as many, feel the preponderance of existing evidence points his way. I would ask, what evidence would exonerate him?? And if Joe Bill's innocence is advanced, I would ask what evidence would lead to another as being the Sowers informant?? My feeling is, that Billie in loving Bonnie as certainly she was known to-- would not have placed her sister, in a position to have been killed that November night. Does anyone feel Joe Bill Francis would have had any such similar regard-- for either Bonnie Parker or Clyde Barrow??

Remember Grapevine hadn't happened yet-- therefore the law couldn't use a trumped up capital offense, as leverage over Billie Mace. But also remember the Bureau exchange between Dallas Acting SAC McCormack and Director Hoover, concerning Joe Bill Francis. Now why would Joe Bill Francis be brought to Hoover's attention?? And why was it agreed, the Bureau would not let the Dallas PD know-- of the Bureau's request concerning Joe Bill's fingerprints?? Ever since the Dallas FBI files were released, I've wondered why a 2 bit hood like Joe Bill Francis-- would require a special request of secrecy to J. Edgar Hoover himself, regarding the Bureau's handling of his fingerprints?? I believe that memo, to be the smoking gun concerning the Sowers informant. It doesn't spell it out-- but is sure makes you wonder. Do you think perhaps, the Bureau knew something about Francis that made him special-- and therefore he was someone, who's interest needed to be protected?? I do.

I would welcome your comments.

A Human Reminder-- to Turn Up the Heat on B&C Research

The passing this week of our friend Olen Jackson, brings to mind just how wonderfully strong yet fragile human life really is. Living to age 98 as Olen did, represents a magical life and almost surreal existence. And in having maintained his keen mental faculties until the end-- well to me, that's an even more remarkable blessing. However regarding Bonnie and Clyde History, Olen's passing reminds us of a great concern. My view is, those who conduct research into this now 75 year old story (including myself)-- need to get at it, if we intend to uncover many more useful insights-- from those fortunate enough, to be able to relay 1st hand accounts of this history.

I understand, that concerning the end game for B&C in and around Northern Louisiana, there may be just one known survivor remaining-- who it's thought interacted with B&C. Then there are those such as Olen Jackson-- who were there that fateful day, and old enough to relay 1st hand accounts-- which to many represent priceless recollections. But unfortunately logic tells us, that time may be short as well-- for this group of valuable eyewitness observers.

As life rolls on, naturally we will lose our elders. But sadly, along with the passing of many wonderful lives-- so too we lose valuable windows into our past. Anyone interested in the Titanic, knows that this year-- the passing of Milvena Dean signified the passing of the last Titanic survivor. And with Ms. Dean's demise, has come the reality that no more 1st hand accounts can now be told-- and few if any new revelations are likely to come to light again.

I plan to redouble my efforts concerning my investigation into a rumored Bonnie Parker pregnancy. I sincerely hope those who are involved in other B&C research as well, will do their best to get back to those kitchen tables and front porches where the action is-- and where what's left of this history's stories lie-- to document whatever new revelations are still possible to be learned. Otherwise, just as with the Titanic disaster, life will take it's course-- the remaining B&C voices will be silenced, and at some point within that silence-- will be the harsh reality, of the end of new Bonnie and Clyde revelations.

Olen Jackson-- Another B&C Original Now Gone

I'm most sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but Olen Jackson of Gibsland, LA has passed away at the age of 98. Olen was known to many of us, through his loyal participation in the Authentic Bonnie and Clyde Ambush Festival-- held each year in Gibsland. He also helped to run the Authentic B&C Museum in Gibsland (yes Gibsland supports 2 B&C museums)-- and in addition, Olen was serving an elected term as a town Alderman.

For all who knew him or knew of him, Olen will surely be missed. I had spoken to "Boots" Hinton just last night, who told me of Olen's turn for the worse. Apparently Olen suffered a heart attack on Friday-- and passed away this morning. This upbeat man who didn't look his age, was always a most interesting person to talk with concerning B&C. Olen who was in his 20's at the time, was in a nearby field plowing-- when the ambush occurred. His recollection was, that the gunfire sounded like dynamite going off. He was also quite close to Rosa Canfield (Ma Canfield)-- and just this May, Olen and I shared a conversation concerning his memories of her.

There aren't many 1st generation folks left, who can speak with authority concerning Bonnie and Clyde-- not many such as Olen Jackson, who had stories to tell from being there that fateful day in 1934. I will never forget the upbeat mood, good nature and broad smile of the grand old man of Gibsland. May God rest your soul in peace Olen Jackson.

B&C "Controversial Quotes"-- Were Herbert Corey's Bonnie and Clyde Slanders Attributed to Hoover??

Try this "Controversial Quote" on for size. This comes from Herbert Corey's 1936 book Farewell Mr. Gangster! America's War On Crime. The foreword to this book was written by none other than J. Edgar Hoover. Hoover has been cited by many, for spreading rumors about B&C-- however, I've never seen any of these reported slights documented anywhere before. "Perhaps" this book, written by Corey with foreword by Hoover-- is the the source of comments attributed to Hoover?? I found this reference in the John Treherne book. Note comments perhaps linked to Hoover-- concerning B&C being unclean etc. I've heard that comment before, however-- no one seems to know where it came from. Perhaps it originated from Herbert Corey?? As Mr. Corey writes--

"Bonnie Parker was quite as devilish as Shoe Box Annie (a well-known thief, swindler and mistress, who showed great enterprise in the disposal of her victims' bodies) but with every will in the world to give her place on the big-time it must be admitted that she was a cheap and noisy killer. A scourge of the filling stations', someone called her. Not a kind word may truthfully be said of Bonnie Parker or her mate, Clyde Barrow. They were physically unclean. The woman boasted that she never took a bath. They slept in the cars they stole, hiding in the woods and fields. Their activities were possible through the kindness of the Governor of Texas, who not only granted them whatever a "general parole" may be, but also released Clyde's brother Buck to keep them company"

I need to find a copy of this old book. Does anyone agree, that with the tone of these comments concerning B&C-- that Herbert Corey's book from back in the day, may too have been a source of degenerate B&C rumor-- as put forth over the years?? Hmm

B&C "Controversial Quotes"-- Feel Free To Comment

"You make it sound as though Bonnie was completely innocent, and was dragged along by Clyde as a hostage. She loved the excitement of life on the run from the law. They were a team. It was equal between the two of them, they both shared in the spoils and the fame. If you see Clyde as a monster, than you must see Bonnie as one as well. She was thinking clearly in her own mind. She loved Clyde, and she loved the thrill that came with being an outlaw."

The Latest B&C Polls-- Piece of Cake-- Or Sweetness Full of Surprises??

Don't look now, but it's that time again. Time to reveal the latest B&C Poll answers. So without further adieu-- here we go. The Winston Ramsey book, actually shows 29 of the rocky outcropping and wooded bluff pics-- said to be in their correctly developed order-- from the rolls of film found. I would add to that group, the rare pic of W. D. Jones laying on top of one of those bluffs-- as shown on the last page of that oh so wonderful book, and a "rarely" seen photo of Clyde (kneeling in front of their car, with his hat in his hand)-- which again, "looks" to have been from those same rolls of film. Thus it's my belief there are at least 30, but perhaps 31 such photos-- and therefore, 30 would have been the closest answer.

Hilton Bybee and Raymond Hamilton, were thought to have entered the 1st National Bank in Rembrandt, Iowa-- to rob it on January 23rd, 1934. The remainder of the enhanced Barrow Gang were said to have remained in the car. After the robbery of the Grand Prairie State Bank-- bank VP J. F. Waggoner was said to have immediately gotten into his car, and taken off after B&C alone. He followed the robbers, until Dallas and Fort Worth police responded. To my surprise, no one got the question regarding Clyde's "once documented" time in the glass industry. I felt some may have figured it out, by the way the question was worded. This conspicuously referenced account is of course incorrect, but none the less the answer was 4 years-- as documented on Clyde's death certificate.

$12.75 was said to have been the amount netted by Clyde and Ray Hamilton, from their 1st robbery in Grand Prairie, Texas on July 29th, 1932. In taking this small amount from the interurban office, Mr. Speer in checking his losses-- noted the robbers left $10.50 in another part of the drawer. Walter Enloe recalled Clyde entering the Grayson County jail to visit his brother L. C.-- who was being held there on suspicion of car theft. At the time, Enloe was helping chief jailer R. V. Graham feed the prisoners. It was felt Clyde was armed-- when he was witnessed backing out of the jail, with his hands in the pockets of the overcoat he was wearing-- after apparently being told, no one could visit while the prisoners were being fed.

The "We piled into her car and lit a shuck out of town" comment was attributed to W. D. Jones. This comment was from W. D.'s 1968 recollections of the killing of Doyle Johnson. And finally, in a fitting segue from one W. D. comment to another-- W. D. had noted that when Clyde counted the bullet holes in their car after the Red Crown incident-- he counted 14 or 15. Thanks as always, for your participation in the B&C Polls. I'll be posting more B&C Polls-- as well as the winner of September's B&C Poll Contest soon.

Should They Have Knocked The Smile Off Bonnie's Face??

At one point, apparently due to Bonnie's facial muscles relaxing while in death-- her expression was thought to include a perceptible smile. This remarkable image was captured on film at Congers. The story goes, it was thought Bonnie smiling in death-- wouldn't have appeared good for the day, or perhaps the lawmen-- or memories of those who had died at the hands of The Barrow Gang. Thus Bonnie's expression was altered-- to appear as is known, and burned into the minds of so many.

Within the same spirit as "Controversial Quotes"-- a "Controversial Pic" and question for all. Should those at Congers or McKamy-Campbell, have changed Bonnie's expression as it had settled into place??

As an aside, this photo seems to show Bonnie's front teeth-- said by some to have been shot out-- as a result of one shot to her face or another?? So many stories-- so little truth.

I would welcome your comments.

More Wellington Insights

It's said a picture's worth a 1000 words. Well one look at the Barrow Gang car burned at Wellington that summer night in 1933-- says it all. It appears from this fabulous pic of the burned car seemingly taken the next day, that Bonnie, Clyde and W. D. may have cheated death that fateful night.

Quoting from the Winston Ramsey book (which all should own)-- "Jack and Alonzo rushed down the hill expecting to see the vehicle wrecked and the occupants dead. Instead they found the car-- a 1933 five window Ford coupe-- still largely in one piece sitting upright but facing the way it had just come. They tried the doors but found them jammed. Suddenly a voice came from inside the car. "Hey, can you give me a lift?" After working on the right- hand door for a few minutes they finally got it open and assisted the man out. He told them he didn't think he was hurt but that there were two more people inside. Both were unconscious and it was only with great difficulty that they were extracted. The woman's right leg was bruised and bleeding and had been burned with sulphuric acid from the battery, situated beneath the front floorboards, which had been smashed in the crash. The other passenger showed no visible injuries and his friend brought him around by shaking him."

"At this point Jack and Alonzo became somewhat alarmed as the men began passing out pistols, shotguns, rifles and ammunition and something which to the young farmers looked suspiciously like a machine gun. The slightly- built woman, wearing a plain gingham dress, was still unconscious so the taller of the two men ordered Jack Pritchard to carry her up to the house but, as soon as he had picked her up, she began struggling and kicking so violently that he nearly dropped her. Jack tried to quieten her by telling her he would go to fetch a doctor but this caused her to fly into a fresh frenzy of kicking, scratching and cursing. Meanwhile the guns were being moved by the other two men. When the woman asked Jack if he knew who they were, she is reported to have told them "they're Clyde and Buck Barrow" but this may either be misreporting or because Bonnie did not want to reveal the identity of Jones"

My thanks to Winston Ramsey, for this truly insightful photo and quote-- apparently reconstructed from eyewitness accounts. And from me to you, a not too shameless plug for this "wonderful" book-- On the Trail of Bonnie and Clyde Then and Now. To me, a must have and must read B&C resource.

Gladys Cartwright-- A Wellington Survivor

For all who have asked or wondered, this is a photo of Gladys Cartwright. Gladys was shot by W. D. Jones at the house owned by her parents, Mr. and Mrs. Sam Pritchard in Wellington, Texas-- after Clyde ran off the road and their car caught fire.

Here, Gladys is shown displaying her right hand, which sustained Jone's shotgun blast through a window. W. D. apparently thought Gladys was reaching for a rifle kept above the door. However, it's said Cartwright was only reaching to lock this door instead. 14 shotgun pellets entered the back door and 6 entered her right hand, severely injuring it.

All the shots seemingly passed through Glady's hand but 1-- which lodged just above her ring finger knuckle, permanently destroying the ligaments or tendons. That finger it's said would never bend again. Although many bones were broken via this shotgun blast, contrary to some accounts-- Gladys Cartwright's hand was not mangled, with fingers lost. This picture shows Gladys with her injuries in 1937. I had always envisioned Gladys being older than she was. But that too-- was not the case. Many thanks to my namesake Winston Ramsey, for this pic and info from his book.

The Latest "8" B&C Polls-- Perhaps Some Surprises

Here are the answers to the latest "8" B&C Polls. Purple hexagonal sunglasses were Clyde's choice for eye wear, on the day of the ambush. Many thanks to Professor Carroll Rich, and his research-- for providing the account of the purple lenses. The 6 sided shape of these sunglasses, can be obtained by observing the glasses dangling from Clyde's head-- within the Clyde stretcher pics taken in Arcadia. Similarly, I took the question concerning Bonnie's dress that day, from Carroll Rich's writings as well. Bonnie's dress was described by eyewitnesses on May 23rd, 1934-- as being a red rust color. And one more from Professor Rich's research-- a movie magazine, opened to the page Bonnie was reading at the time-- was said to have been found between Bonnie's feet, on the floor of the Warren car. Her pistol, was said to have been found in her lap. And speaking of the Warren car-- after a prolonged "custody" battle with Sheriff Henderson Jordan was settled by a judge-- Ruth Warren finally got her car back on August 2nd, 1934, some 70 days after after the ambush. Thus 2 months, was the closest answer.

In an interview from November 1933, according to W. D. Jones, Bonnie fired 2 or 3 times, toward Lillie McBride's house on January 6th, 1933. Although Nell Barrow apparently gets the Lucerne and Okabena bank jobs mixed up in Fugitives, Ura Witters is said to have attempted to wreck the fleeing Barrow Gang vehicle-- by throwing a log or large piece of wood in front of it. Apparently, Clyde wanted Bonnie to shoot Mr. Witters to prevent him from wrecking their fleeing car. According to Nell, when Clyde asked why she didn't shoot the man-- Bonnie replied "Why Honey, I wasn't going to kill that nice old man-- He was white-headed." This event happened in Lucerne, Indiana. According to information included with her mugshots, when arrested after the Dexfield Park shootout-- Blanche was 22 years old, stood 5 ft 1 inch tall and weighed 81 pounds. Accordingly, 80 lbs, was Blanche's approximate weight that day. And finally, Glen Bufkin was the man said to have held the door for Clyde, as he exited the bank in Stuart, Iowa. That's a great B&C story.

As always, my thanks to all-- for your participation in the B&C Polls. Please look for more polls to be posted soon.

Go Down Together by Jeff Guinn-- Sensational Fodder Does Not a True History Make

Among the flood of comments exchanged, within the Bonnie and Clyde historical community concerning Go Down Together-- Jeff Guinn's revisionist account of Bonnie and Clyde History, many remarks have been "pointed"-- more so perhaps than comments made among the general public. This may be true, because more casual observers of Bonnie and Clyde-- may not possess all the facts necessary, to make informed judgments regarding their favorite outlaw history.

Those who know me, know me to be polite but direct-- and I will be here. Having commented at length, regarding Jeff Guinn and his latest "true crime" offering so much over the past year or so-- I feel in actuality, I may have written this review nearly a dozen times. However for those who've asked me for an "official" look at Jeff's book-- here it is. Many of my comments here concerning Go Down Together are newly composed, with some recounted from past writings-- which I've found hard to improve upon. Even more detailed statements from myself and others, concerning this less than factual "True Story"-- can be found here on The Bonnie and Clyde History Blog as well as on the Boodles message board. I along with many, hope these comments will be widely viewed-- as it's important for an "historically" based commentary of Go Down Together, to reach people interested in B&C. Many reviews of this work have been nearly glowing, and conclude with "pats on the back" praise. Not this one.

First let me say, I differ from most who've reviewed Go Down Together-- The True Untold Story of Bonnie and Clyde. I am not a full or part time book reviewer for any news or Internet outlet. And frankly, I'm not much concerned with how "good a read" Go Down Together is. If I had a dollar for every time I've heard that comment regarding this book, I might be writing my review from a sun drenched beach on the island of Fiji-- and skipping my cell phone across the clear blue sea. Discerning how well this book flows to wherever it's going, or giving style points-- for how punchy or effectual Jeff Guinn's well practiced linguistics are-- are not genuine interests for me.

For Go Down Together was touted as an historical work, as evidenced by it's clearly stated sub-title-- "The True Untold Story of Bonnie and Clyde". No, I'm not one who makes my living writing quick and shallow reviews of books-- just in time, to make it to press in covering the next release. I'm an historian. More to the point, a Bonnie and Clyde Historian. B&C Historians (admittedly or not) may be an eclectic and slightly eccentric bunch, but there's one thing we share in common-- we are passionate about the "history" of Bonnie and Clyde. Also, we're more than likely familiar with a literal "bevy" of Bonnie and Clyde historical accounts, myths, legends and lore-- from the most commonly related stories, to the most obscure tidbits of info rarely or never cataloged.

I suppose Go Down Together, could be called a literary leap for Jeff Guinn. According to Goodreads.com-- prior to this effort, 5 of Guinn's previous books were written concerning the topic of Santa Claus. One of his efforts dealt with vampires. Still another, chronicled the photographic history of the Dallas Cowboys. And yet another, was penned about the game of baseball. So as perhaps Mr. Guinn's first serious fore' into the realm of written history, there was heightened anticipation, in welcoming his new Bonnie and Clyde book. But the truth be told, there's always a pronounced "buzz"-- when a new B&C book hits the stacks. It also seems fair to point out, that in titling his book a "True Untold Story"-- there could be little ambiguity regarding Jeff's intentions to present a rare, new and factual account-- of America's most iconic outlaws.

However it became clear to me early on, that in considering Go Down Together-- I wouldn't need to comment on chapter and verse-- or even choose between multiple pro and con talking points in passing judgment on this B&C work. Rather I would need just "3" elements-- in order to classify this effort, as being a less than relevant addition to the Bonnie and Clyde stable of literary works. As threes are synonymous with strength in history, I've come to call these key elements The Guinn Triad. They are: Mr. Guinn's telling of the ambush-- his labeling of Bonnie Parker as a prostitute-- and an event so astounding to me, it too now has it's own title-- The Guinn Doctrine. This last element, has to do with a "more than remarkable" admission made by Jeff Guinn-- within an e-mail to me on March 14th, 2009. I still don't know, why Jeff selected the fateful words he did?? I may never come to terms with trying to figure out why, he would let this "telling" impression of historical writing-- travel from his head to his fingers and onto an e-mail, to be noted and preserved by me-- whom he knew was critical of his book??

For those who feel my focus too narrow within this review, I respectfully disagree. To me, these 3 elements are so wrong, profound and striking in their lack of diligence and historical responsibility-- I feel whatever good points are contained within the pages of his book, Jeff has trivialized by his egregious errors-- on the 3 fronts I've deemed critical to my opinion of Go Down Together.

The Sailes Ambush-- Many things are known of the waylay executed so memorably, that Wednesday morning in May 1934-- and yet many aspects remain unknown. However, one aspect of the ambush which was meticulously detailed-- was documented by Bienville Parish Coroner Dr. J. L. Wade. His accounting of the wounds suffered by Clyde Barrow and Bonnie Parker that hot and fateful day, have remained a constant within B&C History for more than 75 years. In conducting his coroner's jury inquest, Dr. Wade made note of the numerous bullet wounds, cuts made by flying glass, previous injuries and other physical characteristics evident in Clyde and Bonnie that day. Numerous photos of the infamous pair in death, were taken, developed and printed by Dr. Wade's assistant King Murphy. Also as noted within scores of eyewitness accounts, the crowded mayhem at Conger's furniture store and morgue that day-- would have provided little opportunity, for anything other than the truth which was witnessed in so public a forum-- to be accounted for.

64 years later, 2 research historians named Sandy Jones and Bob Fischer, would release a report made for limited consumption-- called quite simply It's Death To Bonnie And Clyde. I suppose some viewed this report as ground breaking. However in reality, the assumptions made, particularly concerning the ambush of B&C-- would prove to be erroneous, as they clashed with more credible and well documented events from May 23rd, 1934. Although as stated within this report, it "was" a goal to provide a newly researched account of the death of Bonnie and Clyde-- one of the primary purposes of Jones having examined the Warren car, was to use it as the best model possible-- to build an accurate recreation of itself. From that point of view, the Jones/Fischer report was a success. Sandy Jones built a stunning recreation of the Warren car, which historian Jim Knight later purchased.

However, this perhaps well meaninged report has also caused controversy-- in presenting a version of the ambush which flies in the face of known reality. Key to this fodder, is one singular photo of Bonnie Parker (complete with illustrative arrows)-- which the Jones/Fischer report states, shows an "entry" wound within Bonnie's right cheek-- thus causing the gaping exit wound within her left cheek. It's then somehow advanced, that since there are a small number of entry bullet holes above Bonnie's passenger door-- and that the caliber of bullet may have matched a gun thought used by Capt. Frank Hamer that day-- that low and behold, Hamer must have fired at Bonnie from her right side, as evidenced by the bullet hole in her right cheek.

The problem for these assumptions, is that there was never an entry wound in Bonnie's right cheek. Concerning the perceived bullet wound, Dr. Wade's coroner's report is clear for all to read. The gaping wound in Bonnie's left cheek was noted by Wade (the coroner who examined her that day)-- to be an entry wound, with it's exit made through the top of Bonnie's head. Also as noted within by a number of photos taken of Bonnie "after" being cleaned up, the indentation noted by Jones and Fischer (previously filled with streaming blood)-- was apparently nothing more than a dimple. Dr. Wade had it right, and unfortunately Jones and Fischer had it wrong.

Also regarding the bullet holes above Bonnie's door, Dallas Deputy Sheriff Bob Alcorn-- admitted in an interview made with the Dallas Morning News on the day of the ambush, that it was "he" who fired at Bonnie's door with his rifle. And unlike Hamer, who was "not" known to have had a Colt Monitor at the ambush (that's thought to be wrong as well)-- Alcorn in firing a Remington Model 8-- did possess the correct caliber weapon, to apparently match the holes above Bonnie's door. By the way, it's felt by many that Capt. Frank Hamer used an automatic shotgun-- as his primary weapon that day.

The issue for Guinn, is that he admittedly used the Jones/Fischer report in spinning his version of the ambush. It's never been documented with any credibility, that Bonnie was shot from the right side of the Warren car multiple times by Frank Hamer, in firing his powerful Colt Monitor machine rifle, or by anyone else-- in firing multiple times directly into Bonnie from the right side. To put it politely-- BS. As only left and rear shots were noted by Dr. Wade in having entered Bonnie-- "no" right handed wounds were found.

And before anyone starts spouting off, with conspiracy theory-- to protect Hamer and the boys from having shot the hell out of a woman in 1934, who Hamer at least thought to be pregnant-- don't get me going on that one. They shot the hell out of Bonnie Parker in 1934, who Hamer thought to be pregnant. Plain and simple. I'm not sure what possible motive anyone could have had, for sugar coating what occurred, and making that "lauded" group assassination appear less dramatic-- than the carnage it already was?? I believe Professor Carroll Rich, who knew Dr. J. L. Wade-- in saying Wade would never have been pressured, to do anything he didn't want to do. Besides-- Hamer himself, was witnessed calling Wade a "straight arrow" which in the 1930s, meant an honest man.

Indeed Guinn's version of the ambush, is fraught with shameless sensationalism and inept inaccuracy. This is further evidenced by the millisecond by millisecond analysis provided by Guinn, via the Jones/Fischer report-- of the firing order of the officers present that day. With all the years that have passed, no witnesses left to interview and so many assumptions used (which may or may not possess any hint of accuracy)-- I'm not sure how or why, this "carefully crafted" firing order, would have validity or usefulness. All of these bold assertions sound good I guess, until you realize all were formed from the ballistics, forensics and photographic interpretations of non-experts.

The sensational supposition employed by Guinn, follows the lines of 1930's rumors-- involving Hamer having targeted Bonnie at Sailes for the Grapevine murders, which seemingly had no basis in truth at the ambush. I am aware of a report that apparently exists, which states when Hamer approached the Warren car and saw there was nothing left to do-- that he holstered his weapon without firing another shot. But hey, a monstrous and vengeful Hamer dramatically "finishing off" Bonnie sure sounds good-- and what a splash it would make, especially when picked up and used within a well publicized new book-- which along with this dubious claim, sports other instances of sensationalized supposition.

Bonnie Parker "Prostitute"-- For anyone who doubts the impact of Guinn's book, please Google Bonnie Parker Prostitute, and read the results you find. To me, Jeff Guinn absolutely lays the gauntlet down to be slapped in the face with-- in espousing that Bonnie Parker may have engaged in prostitution. He uses as proof for his claim a poem, allegedly written by Bonnie Parker called "The Prostitute's Convention".

"The Prostitute's Convention" has been thought by some, to have been written by Bonnie when she was imprisoned in Kaufman, Texas in the Spring of 1932. Although the story behind this poem is intriguing, I'm not sure it can be proven with any confidence, that Bonnie wrote "The Prostitute's Convention". Never the less, Guinn used it anyway, even though he "didn't know" the correct provenance for it. That poem did "not" come from Marie Barrow via Jonathan Davis as Guinn stated. The provenance for that poem was said to have been Kaufman Sheriff's Office guard J. W. Tidwell, who signed the 10 poem grouping of poetry, written in a bank book-- of which this poem was included. This book of poetry, entitled "Poetry From Life's Other Side", was allegedly given to Tidwell by Bonnie Parker, while she was imprisoned in Kaufman. It was sold at auction by Bonham's in June of 2006 for $36,000-- reportedly to a collector from England.

Within their preparation for auction, Bonhams offered the opinion of a memorabilia dealer and handwriting expert, who judged the poetry authentic-- by comparing it to a letter believed written by Bonnie for Clyde-- and addressed to Raymond Hamilton, as part of Clyde's newspaper war with Hamilton. As many know, I spent 2 years authenticating The Bonnie and Clyde Signatures. In 2006, when I asked noted forensic handwriting expert Emily J. Will CDE (who had worked on the signatures)-- to look at scans of some of these poems I obtained from Bonhams-- she disagreed with the opinion of the Bonham's hired gun. Ms. Will's opinion was, the very aspects of the handwriting the other gentleman deemed similarities in declaring the poems authentic-- were not unique at all, in that so many would have written in the same style they were trained in, within the 1930's. Emily keyed in on what she thought were more "unique" features of the handwriting-- which she felt didn't jive with the Hamilton letter.

I don't think there's any credible evidence, to support Bonnie being involved in even casual prostitution-- whether or not, "The Prostitute's Convention" could be proven to be Bonnie's creation. Half of the 10 poems within that Kaufman grouping, were "not" Bonnie's poems anyway-- but instead, poems known to have been written by others. Within the auction listing, it's surmised Bonnie may have included these other poems along with hers-- as she may have liked them. It's a "long" stretch to prove a poem autobiographical-- especially one so hard to prove was Bonnie's to begin with. I asked Jeff, since he didn't know the correct provenance of the poem he used as "evidence" in backing a Bonnie prostitution claim-- how he could have felt comfortable in advancing such a claim?? I never got a viable explanation in return.

The Telltale Heart??-- So what is The Guinn Doctrine you ask?? In addressing concerns I had regarding his book, on March 14th, 2009-- Jeff Guinn made the following statement in an e-mail to me-- "all written history is ultimately best guess, and clearly you and I have guessed differently in some instances." No Sir, I don't believe I have-- but never the less, that's the verbatim quote. I say with all respect, others can believe what they want. But I for one, cannot find credibility in Guinn's "True Story" of Bonnie and Clyde, while fraught with blatant inaccuracies-- and defined by such a lax and perhaps arrogant historical credo. Some have jumped to Guinn's defense-- in saying they think they know what Jeff meant, in making such a declaration. But to my way of thinking, there are "3" absolutes within the statement "all written history is ultimately best guess". Thus, as I see it, there is little ambiguity in this astounding revelation.

In addition, so many facts "do" exist within written history. So on the face of it, that statement is incredible and obviously false!! So I don't know what Jeff meant, but in uttering such a concise and well structured statement-- I can only feel he meant what he said. I find Jeff's credo concerning historical writing a self defining, damning and scary one for any historical writer to make. However some seem to now question, whether Guinn is indeed either an historical writer or an original one?? It's been pointed out to me, that some of Guinn's "inner circle" revelations have been used previously by other B&C authors-- particularly by Jim Knight in his 21st Century Update of Bonnie and Clyde.

The Damage Is Done-- But the Fight Isn't Over. As many know, feel I can draw a close parallel between Jeff Guinn and John Toland, in having advanced such controversial assumptions regarding Bonnie and Clyde History-- without apparently having the facts to back them up. Thus I view Guinn as the modern day John Toland. Of course, Jeff may not mind being compared to a Pulitzer Prize winning author. But Toland won acclaim, for his chronicles of WWII history. It's his "odd" book of the lot-- The Dillinger Days, where Toland seemingly strayed off course-- to write a not so well regarded account of lawlessness in the 1930's. But perhaps Guinn too-- may have veered away from his more comfortable base, in writing a book perhaps out of his element?? The shame of this for B&C History, is I feel confident in believing the likelihood of Guinn's sensationalized assumptions-- being as harmful and influential in the future-- as Toland's claims have been from 1963 until now.

As I have in the past I will again-- state my belief, that Jeff Guinn should issue a public apology to Bonnie's niece, Rhea Leen Linder (Bonnie Ray Parker)-- for the shameful way he's disparaged Bonnie Parker and the Parker family-- by calling Bonnie Parker a prostitute without just cause. I also feel it would be the right thing to do, for Jeff to apologize publicly to L. J. "Boots" Hinton, for the USA Today review of his book written by Craig Wilson. Mr. Hinton was misquoted by omission within this review of Go Down Together, which was published worldwide.

On a personal note, and on behalf of so many-- I wish to "thank" Rhea Leen Linder-- for being "so kind" to us over the years, and for helping with her contributions to Bonnie and Clyde History. Rhea Leen may now have decided to discontinue her participation in B&C events and assisting with B&C projects-- due in part to B&C "dirt" being bandied about-- which she finds offensive. I can't blame her for her feelings, and can only hope she'll reconsider her position-- as she is a sweet woman, and important friend to this history.

As all who know me understand-- together with "Boots" Hinton and others, I have been a tireless advocate for accuracy in B&C History. As I see it, Go Down Together-- The True Untold Story of Bonnie and Clyde is far from the "True Story" it purports to be. It seems Mr. Guinn has succeeded in revising B&C History, or at least the perceptions of some concerning this history-- but without the proof needed to do so. The problem becomes, in getting past those like me and so many others, who care about this history intensely-- and who won't let sparse diligence and a non-caring spirit, pass for history-- when it's not. Others seem to have their own issues with Go Down Together. For me, my digs are the ones I mentioned. It is not my goal, to make life difficult for Jeff Guinn-- as I have much of importance to accomplish both within this history, and personally within my own life. However within my love for this unique history, and concerning Go Down Together-- my choice became say nothing, and just chalk it up to another bunch of B&C folly being espoused-- or take a stand and join those who would say "the historical buck stops here"!!

One footnote-- I feel it important to say, that I have nothing against Sandy Jones and Bob Fischer, who have contributed historically in many important ways. I just believe in this case, assumptions were made that were unfortunate.

I didn't create the caption or photographs at the beginning of this opinion. But I kind of like them. As the caption so aptly says-- book 'em. Yea-- "book 'em Danno"-- for impersonating a true historical account of Bonnie and Clyde. Thanks for your time, and my thanks to all-- who share the hunger for "truth" in Bonnie and Clyde History.

A Renewed Spirit For B&C Historical Accuracy

As has been the case over many days this past year-- I spent part of yesterday, exchanging comments concerning a seemingly still vibrant debate, over the reasons why some seem to enjoy entertaining the notions and nuances of unfounded B&C lore-- even though many who do so, may realize these innuendos to be false. Today's forum for this exchange was The Boodles Board.

Somehow I just have to wonder, whether those who play You Bet Their Life-- where some apparently bet on when famous people are going to die-- experience a similar sort of rush if you will, as some of the more extreme B&C rumor driven curious-- when exploring the depths of seedy and unsubstantiated B&C lore?? With some having said it's indeed fun to speculate about such rumor, I don't know-- forgive me, but somehow my mind (perhaps unfairly)-- flashed to You Bet Their Life. The You Bet Their Life website, warns that their form of entertainment can be addictive. I suppose it can. I guess so too, that B&C rumor mills-- can be entertaining and addictive as well.

But with my interest in B&C History-- I just can't support the premise or purpose, in debating the incessant B&C "fluff" with such impassioned fervor. To me, the most heated and divisive of these unenlightened and unrelenting B&C rumor factories-- is You Tube. If you want to be entertained in an odd way, and gain a useful lesson in how "not" to be historically relevant concerning Bonnie and Clyde-- just read the comments, connected to many of the B&C videos posted there. There's "so" much impassioned and utterly nonsensical banter expressed there, that unfortunately-- it doesn't seem worth even considering jumping into that darkened snake pit, to try and affect an overall change in mentality. I've thought about it, but have opted not to-- in avoiding what would likely be an acute "slippery slope" of frustration.

Now granted, many there don't seem to be history driven individuals-- but they are the sort of B&C curious who've also read the books, where some of the most blatantly unfounded B&C rumor has been advanced. A good testimonial to my beliefs, concerning the harmful nature of B&C lore being espoused to no good-- can be found within the You Tube environs, where many quote from B&C books in support of one myth or another!! But before you say, You Tube is not a serious B&C forum-- that may be true, however don't forget the importance of this video behemoth's incredible internet reach. According to Google-- You Tube videos are requested 1.2 "billion" times per day!! And one look at the popularity of some B&C videos, and I'm not sure the point needs driving home any further.

Fortunately, some of the same knowledgeable B&C folks who frequent the B&CHB-- participate on The Boodles Board as well. It now seems, many on Boodles are ready to introduce new threads there-- to tackle a number of B&C books, regarding discerning fact from fiction within B&C History. "Bravo"!! May I recommend as a supplement to your experience here on the B&CHB-- the Boodles link blog right>> Great spot-- great people-- and worthwhile debate concerning B&C. For someone like me, this new energy in support of historical accuracy-- is wonderful and most gratifying news. My thanks to so many, for your dedication and passion for this history.

Are We Really the Generation of Idle and Hurtful Nonsense-- and Has this Hurt Now Spilled Over Into B&C History??

I was going to reply with these thoughts, to comments made within previous posts on this subject-- but instead, decided to expand and bring my feelings more to the fore here. These days, it seems throngs flock to reality TV which has little basis in reality-- in order to revel in watching others destroy themselves. And media outlets "can't wait" to provide more scandalous shows, fueled by those who can't wait to watch them. To me, along with the blatant disrespect for women and authority expressed so openly in top 40 video and music these days-- is it any wonder, people have become used to this now "acceptable" element of disrespect in our society??? In many ways, we seem to have become the generation of idle and hurtful nonsense.

Only last night, I drove my daughter and her friend to a high school football scrimmage, which ended before we got there. Why?? Because apparently, fights within the stands were so serious, the game was canceled!! It's good we arrived late, as I wouldn't have wanted those I love and friends-- to be within an environment where someone could be hurt, for just showing up to watch a football game. To my thinking, we live in dangerous and callous times-- where many "idiotic" people especially within the influential money driven media, and unfortunately within many family confines as well-- have seemingly risen to a level of influence, where the teachings of today have more to do with disrespect and selfishness-- than of goodness and upstanding moral value.

When "so many" seem to seek out the dirt "historically" concerning B&C-- and apparently enjoy reveling in it, then I would question, why we don't have a reality TV show (to paraphrase some)-- called Clyde was a homo and Bonnie was a tramp. "Of course" some close to B&C, pay a price-- for their relation to such controversial and polarizing historical figures. But it seems for some who I don't believe crave the spotlight-- the constant, shoddy and historically wrong condemnation of their loved ones, by those who don't seem to give a "damn" about historical accuracy, common sense and common courtesy-- has taken it's toll. To me, there's quite a difference between fielding what comes with the territory-- and having to deal so often with baseless and hurtful claims, which may in reality have been invented-- by those with vivid imaginations or worse, to be "sensational" and sell books.

Those who wish to gossip, and somehow find it fun to speculate-- concerning some aspects of this history which most feel can be discerned to the contrary-- in my view need to stop and "think"-- upon keying into this blog for example, with salacious B&C inquiries. I would respectfully say-- if sordid B&C rumor is more the "game" of some, rather than "history"-- then those for whom this applies, should consider more what it would feel like over and over, to have someone close to you mistakenly and perhaps irrevocably labeled a prostitute. That-- along with the other B&C sexual innuendos, which seemingly have no basis in fact-- which some appear to enjoy delving into so much.

It seems for all these many months, I've just been getting warmed up in my commenting on this. Now that a different reality seems the case, and the hurt has come full circle-- to negatively affect an individual and family I have spent much time in defending (and for good cause)-- I suppose I might need to sharpen and redefine my feelings on this kind of thing even more. It's been hard to watch this historically depraved tidal wave, in becoming personally hurtful to some I respect greatly-- without my commenting with passion about this. I am hopeful for a different outcome, in convincing a good and caring person to reconsider backing away from this history. However, based on e-mail conversations already exchanged, I'm sorry to say I'm not optimistic.