"Hey"-- Those Signatures Sure Look Familiar!!

You know, with such good samples of authentic Bonnie and Clyde signatures now available to view-- I guess I'm surprised it took so long, for what are likely new bogus signatures of the iconic Depression Age outlaws to surface. Unfortunately these days, so many autograph mills, seemingly have no shame and hesitation in offering suspect signatures-- often with the backing of suspect "authenticators". Apparently this is so often the game played today, in the autograph biz. "Hey, we don't really know if signatures are real-- but we'll sell 'em anyway, since we can pay someone who'll say they think they could be real."

Well with that mentality, I suppose almost anything goes-- which unfortunately appears to be the case now. "Certificates of authenticity" seem as common now, as the bathroom tissue which lines the shelves in the back room of some autograph concerns-- and unfortunately is often worth just about as much. In fighting this scourge of non-professionalism, and what many might feel is a not so veiled attempt at thievery-- the old adage holds true-- "buyer beware". Now there "are" many reputable dealers, where you can purchase verified historical signatures. But as mentioned last time, even entities such as Christies seem now to be more about the money, in "hedging"-- when it comes to diligence in assuring that authenticity rules-- within signatures transactions. I was going to provide an outline of B&C signature analysis, as well as a detailed history concerning this latest case for this post-- however as it's turned out, I don't feel I need to.

Long story shorter, I was recently made aware of the existence of purported dual signatures of B&C (the signatures on purple paper shown above)-- which others have commented and I agree, look remarkably like the dual signatures of Bonnie and Clyde I possess. These scripts are located in Las Vegas-- and have been offered for sale by a memorabilia outlet called The Art of Music. Upon obtaining an image of these dubious scripts, I spent much time and energy detailing to The Art of Music's management-- why the signatures they are selling, logically are not authentic.

Of course I was pleased, when TAOM seemingly acted with caring and diligence-- in pulling the signatures from sale and view, based on my concerns and pending analysis which I suggested be performed. They initially agreed that scrutiny was needed, but based on the scrutiny conducted-- apparently agreed only to a point. This shortfall became evident, when their good will gesture, quickly turned from caring to insult-- when they rolled out "authenticator" Christopher Morales, who's reputation seems anything but clear. Instead of providing any sort of comprehensive forensic analysis for The Art of Music's B&C signatures, Morales issued a cursory at best, one page certificate. Without providing a "shred" of detail concerning a true forensic analysis, regarding these alleged B&C signatures-- Christopher Morales simply stated that "The individual characteristics and writing habits are consistent with the known writings of Clyde Barrow and Bonnie Parker".

A fox in the chicken coop??-- My response to this supposed authenticators jumble of noncommittal and less than meaningful words-- was that by definition, any forger would be happy to have the backing of Mr. Morale's comments. A careful read of this one line certification (which lacks the benefit of "any" forensic documentation)-- reveals it would indeed support any good forgery-- as well as authentic signatures. Let's see if I can make up a "convincing" statement of my own?? The signature's examined, possess an uncanny similarity to known B&C exemplars-- found within various sources thought reliable. I like my "certification" better-- but neither statement really says anything concrete from a forensic perspective.

More than a slight issue-- Upon examination, there's quite a bit of written criticism available of Mr. Morales and his techniques or lack of them. Indeed from reading quoted statements concerning Morales, his reputation as a document examiner seems questionable at best. Principals at a number of auction and memorabilia houses have expressed opinions in this regard, such as Rob Lifson of Robert Edward Auctions who stated "we will never use Morales". In commenting on Christopher Morales, Mike Hefner of Leland's is quoted as saying "I can't tell you that I've ever seen anything he's authenticated that is actually real". Not exactly glowing words of praise.

Morales was also apparently caught in an HBO "Real Sports" investigation sting, when HBO sent several forged pieces to Mr. Morales-- who authenticated all the forgeries provided him. Concerning his part in HBO's investigation into a number of "authenticators"-- Morales has said he felt he was "set up". My response to that would be, what difference does it make where forgeries come from-- a trained forensic examiner should be able to identify them. Most recently Morales has been involved in a Beatles memorabilia controversy, involving his certification of an alleged Beatles signed guitar-- which some Beatle experts are disputing.

Within his credentials, Morales lists among his experience-- being a Faculty Adviser and Adjunct Faculty Member, of the Forensic Science Department of George Washington University. However according to an article published by theyneedglasses.com concerning self styled authenticators, they quote M. Schanfield, Phd Professor and Chair, Department of Forensic Science (GWU) as somehow needing to clarify Morales' affiliations with the University.

Upon learning of Mr. Morales, one quote of his really caught my eye. He has apparently said that as long as he has an exemplar, he can determine the authenticity of any signature-- "handwriting is handwriting". I find that to be as cursory as statement, as his forensic analysis seems to be. From working with Forensic Document Examiner Emily Will, I can tell you-- there are often good reasons not to be so cut and dry when examining signatures. A person's signature can change over time. Also human factors such as age, alcohol or drug use, sickness and stress can often come into play within a person's signature. As far as having an exemplar to work with, I guess-- as long as the exemplar chosen isn't fake itself. More on this later.

My take concerning Mr. Morales from what I've seen reported on him, is to state that if these revelations are so, then as Ricky Ricardo once said-- it seems this "authenticator" may have some 'esplainin' to do. As far as I'm concerned, with all the negative comment and controversy apparently swirling about concerning Mr. Morale's reputation as a document examiner, for me the conversation is over-- The Art of Music can stand down, and their "authenticator" can have a seat.

As I've been witness to some of the best forensic professionals and their techniques, in discerning the authenticity of my signatures-- I've come to expect an exceptionally high level of forensic professionalism and skill, in dealing with B&C signature matters. I suppose some of the seemingly self styled authenticators I've run into lately-- can only "wish" to dream of having such skills. As this is the 2nd in a series of expose's, concerning a flurry of alleged and unverifiable Bonnie and Clyde signatures-- which seem to be popping up within trendy memorabilia stores and internet signature sites, let me state my opinion concerning the Art of Music's B&C signatures.

Above you will find 4 examples of B&C signatures. The top 2 are considered authentic. The "Your son" salutation and signature, is from Clyde's Nov 18th, 1931 letter to Cumie Barrow-- written from The Eastham Prison Farm. The dual signatures below that Clyde signature, are the dual signatures of Bonnie and Clyde-- which I've owned since 2006. As many are familiar with the quality of forensic signature analysis and material science testing performed on The B&C Signatures-- I don't feel I need to re-state that wealth of analysis here. For those unfamiliar with the testing performed on my signatures, please review the signatures link>> blog right. Needless to say, the real dual signatures of B&C, have "legitimately" been tested 9 ways to Sunday, with impressive results.

The other scripts shown above, are not thought to be genuine. The yours truly example, hails from the purported Clyde letter to Henry Ford, which at this point-- most seem to believe is not authentic. Please note the striking similarity of the purple signatures-- (as I find myself calling them now) to both my signatures and the purported Clyde signature from the Henry Ford letter. After 4 years of intensive research into the signatures of Bonnie and Clyde, I'm so used to looking at B&C signatures, I can usually pick out which genuine or fake B&C signatures were used to create ones thought bogus.

To me, the purple signatures, appear to be a cross between both real and fake B&C scripts. The positioning of these signatures seems to mimic my signatures. Also Bonnie's signature seems a close recreation of the Bonnie Parker script within my authentic dual B&C signatures. However Clyde's signature appears to employ 2 distinctly different elements-- a very close recreation of the Henry Ford letter signature (minus Clyde's pseudo middle name)-- combined with the unique and completely distinctive "Dallas, Texas" tag which appears within only "one" verified B&C artifact. In fact, the inclusion of this Dallas, Texas addendum-- likely reveals these alleged signature's falsity. As noted within The B&C Signatures investigation, the "only" true example believed to exist of this most unusual Clyde Barrow trait-- appears within my B&C Star Filling Station signatures. As L.J. "Boots" Hinton has provided an affidavit, detailing the source of knowledge concerning this "incredibly" rare personal Clyde Barrow trait (Ted Hinton who knew Clyde)-- it's my belief to copy this trait in a virtually identical way within TAOM signatures-- is a dead giveaway, to these signatures almost surely being recreations.

Indeed, the Dallas, Texas tag beneath Clyde's name, is a "key" element-- and one which those who wish to profit, from offering non-authentic signatures need to wary of. Prior to 2006, it's apparent that only "one" living individual (L.J. "Boots" Hinton)-- likely knew of this "uniquely" rare Clyde Barrow trait, which until now appears only within the authentic B&C signatures. Little did those know, who purport the Las Vegas B&C signatures to be authentic-- that they were walking head long into the teeth of a buzz saw, concerning that element within their signatures. Also note, that the lines of both "purple" signatures appear to be of similar manner and writing pressure-- as if written by one individual. This was not true of my dual B&C signatures, where a discernible depth differential in writing pressure was noted between Bonnie and Clyde's signatures. Indeed in real life, and knowing the slight physical stature of Bonnie Parker when compared to Clyde Barrow-- this would make perfect sense.

When I first saw the image of these alleged B&C scripts, I thought it apparent, that someone had attempted to copy The Bonnie and Clyde Signatures-- but with the twist of blending copies of both authentic "and" non-authentic known B&C signatures. It should be obvious, that it's important to know which B&C signatures are considered real-- before stating any are consistent with known examples. Shouldn't it be the goal to compare only "authentic" signatures to a purported signature?? Within a "very" loose sense, I suppose some could say that any B&C scripts mimic any known exemplars, whether real or forgeries. But that doesn't prove anything. Without detailing "which" known and authentic signatures are being compared to an alleged one, and exactly how-- in my view you cannot portray any judgment short of that as having merit. Then I would say inks, writing instruments and paper analysis needs to be conducted-- as part of material science testing-- to eliminate forgery. To me, creative semantics does not an authentication make.

During my many years in studying the signatures of Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow, I've come to terms with a few indisputable facts. One of those facts is-- that real Clyde and Bonnie signatures are as rare as all get out. In the 75 years since their deaths, I believe just 9 Clyde Barrow signatures have come to light which are believed authentic-- and just "3" complete Bonnie Parker signatures are thought to be genuine. Indeed an authentic Bonnie Parker signature, may be one of the rarest scripts "ever" sought-- perhaps as rare as William Shakespere's script, which is generally considered the rarest signature on earth. As far as B&C's signatures together are concerned, to my way of thinking-- there's one additional dual set I've seen only an image of, which "could" have a shot at being real. These scripts appear on what seems to be, an old drug store lid of some sort, which was imaged a few years back. If only this example could be located, it could be tested for authenticity. But without this example being found, we can only go with what we know for now-- concerning authenticated signatures.

Some additional facts concerning the Art of Music's purple or rose colored Bonnie and Clyde scripts, which should be known are-- that "no" provenance has been offered concerning any reported source of these signatures. I have asked politely numerous times for this provenance-- but without a response. At first I was told, if I were to purchase the signatures-- I'll learn the provenance. I believe that statement to be unethical. There's no way any responsible and discriminating signature collector, would pay nearly $7500. for signatures they didn't know the provenance of in advance. My belief is as no provenance has been offered, that no provenance is known-- concerning the alleged B&C scripts written on purple paper.

Speaking of money, the asking price of these signatures $7350.-- flies in the face of reality concerning both previously offered and currently available authentic B&C scripts. There are 2 verifiable Clyde Barrow signatures available now for purchase-- Clyde's letter to D.A. Winter King, which is being offered for $95,000. and Clyde's November 18th, 1931 letter to Cumie Barrow which is available for $35,000. Those are of course singular Clyde signatures without Bonnie's signature. For those interested, no matter where my dual B&C signatures travel to be viewed-- they are required to be insured for well more than double, the Winter King letter asking price. Links to these available Clyde Barrow signatures can be found here-- http://www.historyforsale.com/html/prodetails.asp?documentid=268088&start=1

http://www.theautographsource.com/categories/History/7_Documents/2788_Clyde-Barrow-(Bonnie-&-Clyde)-Handwritten-&-Signed-Letter.html

The Art of Deception?? I would hope not. I trust The Art of Music is a reputable firm, who may have just been fooled by one. But I have pointed out to The Art of Music, my feelings as to why I believe they are offering in this case-- signatures which may not be authentic. Unfortunately in response, the best they've been able to do in attempting to justify their position-- is to employ the services of an "authenticator" who's documented and controversial circumstances, seem to create more issues than they solve. I must have made some impression on this memorabilia concern, but perhaps not enough of one. As I own a registered copyright concerning my dual B&C signatures, I am now looking into further options-- in order to protect the integrity of a legitimate pair of B&C signatures.

There's yet another in this series of B&C signature expose's yet to come, so look for that soon. My thanks to those who have expressed their opinions, on these posts concerning questioned B&C signatures. I find it heartening, that so many seem interested in this aspect of B&C History.

Blanche Barrow Items to be Offered--

For those of you who missed the Heritage Gallery's Blanche Barrow Auctions, held in Dallas in 2006-- I have exciting news. Through special arrangement with the Estate of Blanche Caldwell Frasure, it is indeed my pleasure to announce that additional items from Blanche's Estate-- will soon be offered for sale. These offerings will be made via just 2 outlets. A select group of personal items, will be offered exclusively here through The Bonnie and Clyde History Blog-- and it's planned that a wide range of other wonderful items, will be offered through e-bay. This special group of auctions, will be known as The Blanche Barrow Auctions.

Provenance of these items can be assured, as they are coming directly from Blanche's Estate. As I'm sure many would be honored to own something from Blanche, all are welcome to ask questions of me concerning these upcoming auctions. The opportunity to own anything from a Barrow Gang member, has been exceedingly rare. So look for more information as it becomes available, concerning this exciting chance-- to own personal items from such an historic figure as Blanche Barrow.

The Re-Emergence of a Bonnie Artifact-- Or Not??

This is the first in a series of expose's-- meant to document recent B&C related signature accounts. As I am one who craves historically based finds, I am always primed with anticipation-- when a suspected new find is revealed. However, in the case of this alleged artifact??-- and also concerning a rash of mysterious cut B&C signatures which have appeared lately-- I don't feel there's much basis to believe in their purported authenticity. My recounting of each of these stories along with the evidence presented, will reveal why I consider these new offerings-- to be less than genuine.

In September of this year, I was contacted by a collector from Canada, who had purchased the photograph shown-- from Christies auction house in New York for $7375. The following was the Christies auction listing--

Lot Description

Bonnie Parker

Exceptionally rare, signed photograph of Bonnie Parker of the famous gangster duo, "Bonnie & Clyde," signed and inscribed in black fountain pen To Esther, Bonnie Parker.It is believed this special inscription was made to Esther L. Weiser of Texas whom was the best friend of Blanche Barrow, the sister-in-law of Clyde Barrow (who was married to Clyde's brother Buck). It was Esther, who after Blanche's death, found her memoirs detailing the time that she and her husband Buck spent with Bonnie and Clyde before they themselves were arrested. A connection can be drawn from these details suggesting that Blanche may have asked Bonnie to sign this photograph to her friend Esther during their time together. The original wire photograph with a press credit stamped on the verso pictures Parker posed with a pistol held to her hip and one leg lifted onto the front fender of the "getaway" car used during their 1930's notorious crime spree. Bonnie and Clyde were both killed by police officers on May 23, 1934. 6½x8½in.

Upon viewing this photograph, my mind raced back in time to my B&C Signatures Investigation. Of the few purported Bonnie Parker signatures known in 2006-- the one script "not" available to view, was said to have been inscribed on an 1930's photo sold at auction years ago. During my inquiry, I had been unable to locate any image of this olden photograph, even with the aid of a major auction house privy to auction databases. So whether or not this newly auctioned photo and signature are authentic, I'm excited none the less-- after many years of studying the signatures of Bonnie and Clyde, to see this image. I believe this could well be, the mysterious Bonnie Parker photo with signature known from years ago-- which has now re-surfaced.

However with that said, I immediate noted a problem with this photo's provenance. As I know Esther Lorraine Weiser, I knew she couldn't have been the Esther depicted on this photo-- and mentioned so prominently in forming the family link to Blanche, within the photo's provenance. Why you say?? Because although it's true that Lorraine as she prefers to be known, was indeed Blanche's close friend and did find and preserve Blanche's memoir-- she was only 7 at the time of Bonnie and Clyde's deaths, and didn't meet Blanche Barrow until 1953. So the very first thing I could do in assisting both the nice lady from Canada (who trusted in this photo's provenance) and Lorraine-- was to contact Lorraine on behalf of this woman, to make her aware of this situation. In response, Lorraine provided an clarification via e-mail for Christies, which I forwarded to them-- stating that in reality, she couldn't have been the Esther this photo was allegedly signed to.

But then a funny thing happened on the road to disclosure. The lady from Canada sent me what appeared to be a "2nd" auction listing she found, for the very same "one" of a kind Bonnie Parker photo-- with a virtually identical description and provenance being offered by an internet auction house. Only this time the asking price was $15,000. How could that be?? That's what I said!! I contacted this auction concern called Got to Have It, to inquire of it's owner as to how they could have the same photo for sale-- which was purchased from Christies, and in the possession of the woman from Canada. As of course logically, there cannot be 2 of the very same item-- unless one or both were non-authentic, it didn't surprise me when this other entitie's owner-- didn't respond to 2 requests for information and clarification.

Now having gone through the extensive processes I have, in authenticating the dual Bonnie and Clyde signatures I possess-- and in having worked with some of the finest forensic experts in their fields-- I know a thing or two about authentic Bonnie and Clyde signatures. I could not state the signature which adorns this newly surfaced photo is genuine. However, there are a number of concerns I've noted-- which I feel call into question the authenticity of this piece. First, it appears to the naked eye, that 2 different inks may have used to write the salutation and Bonnie signature on this photo. Also the wire service stamp on the verso of this pic, shows it to have been printed in New York. One would need to reconcile, how a photo made in NY, could have been signed by Bonnie within the southwestern U.S. during the narrow window of time-- which comprised B&C's reign of terror?? These aspects along with this photo's now unknown provenance (since the stated provenance is wrong)-- to me makes this signature's authenticity, a more remote possibility.

However, as I know full well what it's like to be on the buying end of a controversial signature purchase, I encouraged this buyer to do as I did-- and have this photo analyzed by accredited experts. Who knows, even though this Bonnie signature seems to vary substantially from now known and authenticated examples-- with it not having been forensically scrutinized-- there's still the outside chance to back the integrity of this signature. The question becomes, even though the photo's provenance is wrong-- and the image's creation seems to lessen the likelihood of authenticity, might this signature still be genuine?? I hope very much this photo's owner will find out.

A discernible disappointment for me in this case, was Christies response to their being made aware of having sold an historical photo and purported "rare" signature for nearly $7500.-- in which the provenance was proven wrong. This 243 year old and respected auction house's response, was they noted it was "believed"-- the photo was signed to Esther Weiser. Well I would ask who believed that??-- and made Esther and Blanche key to the provenance, which certainly aided in enhancing the possible authenticity of this signature. Also Christies didn't believe, this lot was a questionable historical piece, and said they sold it as a photograph of Bonnie Parker. With all respect, that's not what Christies' lot description seems to say. I pointed out to them, that a 1930's wire service photo of Bonnie, similar to one say of Amelia Earhart, might sell for perhaps $500. Let's be real-- the only reason this photo of Bonnie sold for what it did-- was due to it's signature.

There's more interesting B&C signature controversy to come-- so stay tuned.

Cast For The Story of Bonnie and Clyde-- Rounding Into Shape

I've heard again from Tonya Holly, who says they are working around Hilary Duff's and Kevin Zeger's schedules-- and are slated to begin filming in January. Tonya directed me to a website, which lists the updated cast for the movie. So for all who've expressed support for this exciting upcoming production, here is the cast as it exists now--

Hilary Duff--Bonnie Parker.. Kevin Zegers--Clyde Barrow.. Thora Birch--Blanche Barrow (rumored).. Drew Fuller--Buck Barrow.. Brendan Fletcher--W.D. Jones.. Linc Hand--Raymond Hamilton.. Matt Dallas--Henry Methvin.. Cloris Leachman--Cumie Barrow.. Rance Howard--Henry Barrow.. Dee Wallace--Emma Parker.. Kate Maberly--Billie Parker.. Michael Madsen--Frank Hamer.. Cody Kasch--Joe Palmer.. Lee Majors--Lee Simmons.. Taryn Manning--Mary O'Dare.. Jack McGee--Mr. Methvin.. Natalie Canerday--Mrs. Methvin.. Peter Coyote--"Smoot" Schmid.. Tom Humbarger--L.C. Barrow.. Shawn Ashmore--Ralph Fults.. Richard Tyson--Bob Alcorn.. Donnie Fritts--"Maney" Gault.. Tess Harper--Governor Ma Ferguson.. Lily Matland Holly--Marie Barrow.. Muse Watson--Mr. Pritchard.. Dale Dickey--Mrs. Pritchard.. Dan Beene--Mr. Bucher.. David "Shark" Fralcik--Big Ed Crowder.. Richie Montgomery--unknown role.. Danny Vinson--Bud Russell.. Lindsay Pulsipher--Cousin Mary.. Bob Penny--Doctor.. and Emily Fitzpatrick--Waitress.

My thanks as always to Tonya Holly, for her gracious willingness-- to keep the loyal viewers of The B&CHB, informed on the latest to do with Cypress Moon's production of The Story of Bonnie and Clyde.

The Latest B&C Polls Revealed

In a much needed return to history-- here are the answers to the latest batch of B&C Polls. $18. was the correct amount for 60 hours work on Clyde's Proctor and Gamble pay receipt (30 cents per hour). Within one of Clyde's newspaper war letters to Ray Hamilton-- Clyde notes he doesn't trust Mary O'Dare and Hamilton based on Hamilton's persistence in wanting O'Dare to go into town alone, when all were together. According to accounts noted concerning the Joplin Shootout, one of the last events at Joplin-- was Trooper Grammer leaving Harold Hill's house, after calling for backup. It's said as Grammer exited the house, The Barrow Gang was driving away. Concerning Dexfield Park, 72 bullet holes were reportedly found in Ed Stoner's 1933 Ford Sedan, after the Dexfield Park shooting stopped.

Also regarding Dexter, this next one was a touch tricky, in that including the 2 revolvers present-- it's said there were 36 pistols found in the Barrow car after the shootout. The Wellington question, had to do with the distance the Barrow Gang car traveled-- when it left the road and crashed. Although this distance is now less, in 1933-- the distance to the Red River bed at Wellington was believed to be at least a 30 foot drop. As the Red Crown Tavern burned in 1967-- it was 34 years until the end of the road, for that B&C landmark. And finally in hopefully a most interesting question-- concerning the February 1st, 1934 bank robbery at Knierim, Iowa-- The Fort Dodge Messenger and Chronicle noted "It has been learned since the bank robbery that three men and a woman were in the bandit's car when it raced out of Knierim after the robbery. The woman, it is believed, is "Suicide Sal" Parker, the cigar smoking gun-woman, who is Clyde Barrow's companion."

My thanks to Winston Ramsey for the Dexter gun layout pic. I hope all enjoyed this latest edition of the B&C Polls. Please look for another challenging group of B&C questions, to close out November right. Thanks as always, for your participation in the polls.

Respect-- Versus The Right To Know

As many are aware, I have wanted for some time to do a respectful article on Buster Parker. The reason is simple-- there have been repeated calls over the years, for information regarding Bonnie's brother from those interested in Bonnie and Clyde History. But even with this heightened interest, little is known of Hubert Nicholas Parker. In May of this year, I gave a talk at Gibsland-- where I highlighted numerous accounts from the now public Dallas FBI files on Bonnie and Clyde. One of these accounts involved Buster, and his U.S. Bureau of Investigation interview concerning the outlaws.

I especially wanted to speak of this newly released account, for the benefit of Buster's daughter-- who was present in the audience that night. I wanted to recount Buster's reported offer to put Clyde on the spot to save Bonnie. Now many might feel this gesture on Buster's part completely logical-- however the facts concerning the Parker's Bureau interview and Buster revelation, hadn't been revealed prior to release of FBI File 26-4114. I thought the re-telling of this account, was important for the historians gathered-- and also felt it might provide a source of pride for the Parker family. All went well that night, and from my viewpoint continued as such-- until months later, when I asked to learn more of Buster. I wanted to learn more if I could, about the character of the man-- so that in recounting my Gibsland info here, I could help provide additional insights into a B&C historical figure-- who has been shadowed in obscurity for so long.

Even though my focus was a respectful biographical approach, and even though I asked politely-- difficulty arose with the family apparently feeling I was being intrusive in wanting to learn more of Buster. Even as such, a poignant overview containing many sensitive details concerning this gentleman-- was provided to me by a family member.

Within the telling of any history, sometimes there are places you just can't venture-- out of respect for others. And when historically based confidences are shared, just as in most cases in life-- confidences should be upheld. As many know, I've spent much time over the past year or so-- fighting the "good fight" for Bonnie Parker's reputation, against a couple of authors (both past and present)-- who in my view have made it a point not to be respectful, and to malign Bonnie without cause, justification or valid evidence. In response, some have further knocked Bonnie-- in asking why I would protect the reputation of a killer?? and someone who had such little reputation to begin with. I have felt those to be crass comments, made by some unaware of the true history of these outlaws. Then of course, we transgress into the argument of how Bonnie should be treated, based on the realities of her actions.

Conversely, there are those who are glad I've taken up this fight for Bonnie-- against some less than diligent tellers of fiction. These feelings have revolved around the point, that no matter Bonnie's faults and involvement in this history-- Bonnie didn't deserve to be slandered. And so the debate rages. It seems sometimes you just can't win-- and you're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. But let me say loud and clear, that I have no regrets in supporting Bonnie-- when it's been the right and honorable thing to do. And for the record, the Parker family has thanked me for my help in this regard. For that overture on their part-- I wish to say how much I appreciate those kind thoughts.

With many often protecting closely held information regarding a number of B&C subjects-- you might think that invariably a philosophical tug of war could evolve, between the element of respect and people's historical right to know. My feeling concerning this is simple. Where "historical" matters are concerned, "at some point" before the truth is lost-- the truth should be revealed. Now considering trusts that could be involved, that may take some time. But eventually, I would prefer to see the truth come out. I'm not sure people with an insider's view of the truth, should have the right to leave history wrong. However pertaining to purely "personal" info concerning historical figures and their families, just as with your family or mine-- that knowledge should be a family's business-- and should be respected. With the way things are today concerning "reality everything"-- I'm sure many feel my views archaic, but those are my old school values none the less.

Some have apparently expressed concerns that I would even write a Buster Parker post. But as I plan on doing little differently from last May's Buster expression in Gibsland-- I wouldn't worry. As you'll see, the post which will appear soon-- is not at all about slinging dirt. That worry has surprised me, as much of my entire being-- has been dedicated to fighting against those who have slung B&C dirt. Indeed many expressions from me, concerning combating scurrilous rumor and innuendo-- can be found here and elsewhere. My strong and consistent actions concerning this subject, and over a considerable time are a matter of record-- and haven't wavered. I may have been told a goodly amount concerning some issues surrounding this post-- but that was neither my goal nor my choice in being told. And rest assured-- that certainly doesn't mean I would reveal matters, which in my humble view shouldn't be revealed.

Rather what will follow shortly-- is the story of a brother, who apparently loved his sister very much. Enough to risk a killer's wrath, and stand up for his family's honor-- against what he felt was wrong. The upcoming post concerning Buster, was always meant to be one in a series of articles published here-- concerning the B&C informants, which I discussed at Gibsland. As such I've posted to the blog, articles concerning Bailey Tynes, Hattie Crawford, Informant B, The Sowers Informant and soon Buster Parker. I have also posted here, remarkable unknown insights into Bailey Tynes and his involvement in B&C History-- which Tynes family members gave me permission to reveal. My thanks again to the Tynes family for being so open, in contributing such important knowledge to this history. Concerning Buster Parker, I will be able to relay some basics, but it's the family's wish that more not be known.

Even 75 years later, there seems to be a staunch sensitivity concerning the telling of B&C History. In my view, sometimes this sensitivity is warranted and sometimes it's not. I always encourage those who have valuable information which could change this history to be more correct, to please let it be known-- without advancing prolonged reasoning as to why this cannot happen. I am sensitive to the fact that confidences and family concerns "are" indeed important. Also there may be personal concerns, which can inhibit revelations with the greatest intention of finding daylight. After all, we're all human. But when you stop and think about it, time can be the great enemy of truth. So when the time is right, I call on all who can provide reliable untold accounts of B&C History-- to make their knowledge known.

The Buster Parker post, concerning his early 1934 Bureau of Investigation interview will be up soon. This post will include brief insights into the man, learned from various sources including public access programming-- but will also remain respectful to the wishes of the family-- and stay true, to my standards of right and wrong. I feel I should have no qualms in presenting important aspects of B&C History-- especially ones already accessible to the public. Some might wish their relationship to history, as dictated by events which occurred so long ago-- to be different. In a way for some, I wish that could be true as well. But history is what it is, as determined by others who lived before us. And for those of us who tell of history-- doesn't that same reality, hold true as well??

The Sowers Informant-- The Charlie Stovall Theory Faces New Realities

It's Sunday morning-- I've got my tea, and here we go. I had a spirited discussion last evening, with someone I respect immensely within the telling of this history. It seems the case that lately, I must be terribly controversial with my statements concerning B&C History. Either that, or perhaps it just might be-- that some beliefs once thought sacred, are now harder to reconcile in the face of new evidence.

Invariably-- almost any discussion concerning the Sowers ambush will turn to the informant, rumored since November 1933 to have been a reality. Last night's discussion was no different, with the conversation focused on Charlie Stovall-- as perhaps being the man who without knowledge of their identities-- put B&C on the spot. Some have maintained that Mr. Stovall in seeing suspicious characters near his land, alerted Ed Castor-- who met with "Smoot" Schmid and the boys-- which led to the Sowers ambush. The Charlie Stovall theory advances the notion that good police work, which included the break of Charlie alerting the authorities-- resulted in the Sowers waylay. The Dallas FBI Files paint a much more involved picture of Sowers events. I would politely suggest it likely, that the good police work in question-- included the use of a well placed informant, from within or close to the families.

A number of documents from that FBI file, which remained confidential for 75 years-- support the ambush being a well planned trap which took some time to develop, "and" which benefited from insider information. It's noted Dallas Deputy Sheriff Bob Alcorn, had an informant close to either the Parker or Barrow families-- who supplied information concerning B&C clandestine family meetings. To test the strength of their informant's information, Sheriff Schmid and Deputy Alcorn, spied on 2 family get togethers with B&C in advance of Sowers preparations being made. Convinced their informant's knowledge was good, apparently the ambush was on, for the next B&C family get together.

Based on the Bureau's informant (Red Webster) who knew "Smoot"-- the U.S. Bureau of Investigation had spied on Schmid and Alcorn spying on B&C. It's spelled out within a file document, that the Bureau chose not to act against B&C at either initial clandestine meeting-- out of respect for Schmid's upcoming ambush attempt. So with all respect, I don't know at this point how it can be thought that Charlie Stovall was the key Sowers protagonist. Despite Mr. Stovall's daughter doubting her father's participation-- he my well have contacted Ed Castor, which further aided the ambush. However, in my view, Mr. Stovall could not have known in advance the details of the 2nd Sowers meeting held the night after Cumie's birthday celebration. Nor could W. D. Jones-- who was in jail and likely unable to be helpful, regarding this particular family rendezvous.

Now Marie apparently made it clear, that Sowers was the only time B&C had met with their families in the same location twice. But I've also heard it said that in recent years, that assertion was rebuffed-- in stating the location of the 2nd night's meeting, may in fact have been different from the first. Either way, Mr. Stovall's comments could have proven useful. However for my money, there's just too much specific information within the FBI files to be ignored-- concerning the Sowers informant. The informant admittedly was said to be close to the Parker or Barrow families, and without much doubt-- information provided, led a Sheriff's posse "precisely" to where B&C arrived the night of November 22nd, 1933.

Ah but now we get to the good part-- the credibility of the FBI Files. It seems "when needed"-- the credibility of the Dallas FBI files is placed in doubt to support arguments made. These arguments are almost always long held beliefs, that the FBI Files might shatter-- in revealing their long held secret information. I find it "preposterous" to believe that those files which were meant only for internal use, and designed to aid in the successful capture of B&C by documenting events which occurred, were falsified. If the Bureau released misinformation "to the public"-- in an attempt to either snooker criminals, or aggrandize their successes in the face of failures-- I could see that being true. That form of propaganda should then be discounted, as likely holding little validity. But secret internal files, meant for their own use-- being made less useful by lacing them with falsehoods. I just don't think so. That makes no sense to me what so ever.

I say with the greatest respect, that those with well entrenched beliefs need to be willing to accept change, when new and credible evidence dictates that change is warranted. And for those who harbor secret information regarding Sowers or other B&C historical accounts, which could change this history to be more correct-- I would hope at some point, they will consider advancing such knowledge. I understand family elements can come into play. I also understand, there are confidences involved which are hugely important. Believe me when I say, that I too know considerably more than I can tell concerning some B&C subjects-- so that holds true for me as well. However in the future, there will likely be times when the release of information withheld, "can" be made-- and when those times are right, I encourage all with important B&C information-- to please make it known for this history.

As always, I would welcome you comments.

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.