Who actually killed Albert Fountain and his son. Was it Oliver Lee? From most accounts, Lee wasn't the type of Man who could murder a 10 year old boy.
How did Johnny Ringo die? Was it really a suicide, even though Wyatt Earp and Frank Leslie both claimed to have "done the deed".
Did Tom Horn kill the son of his intended victim. Was it an accident? If so, why were the rocks placed under his head. Was his confession legitimate, or the ramblings of a drunk?
Was Mangus murdered while trying to escape, or was it an execution?
Did the killing of Billy the Kid happen as Garrett described it?
Do we know the truth about the killing of Pat Garrett?
Did Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid die in South America, even though several old timers stated that they saw Butch years later at a family gathering?
If anyone has the answers, let me know...
Every time someone has to resort to personal attacks to try and win an argument, that person's credentials become suspect!!!
In the Fountain murder, Lee probably didn't pull a single trigger. However, there were plenty of people in New Mexico he could have hired to pull the trigger, who wouldn't have hesitated to kill a 10 year old boy.
Josie Earp, in her autobiography I MARRIED WYATT EARP, says Wyatt, Doc Holliday, & a couple of others set Ringo up, killed him, & staged it to look like a suicide.
According to John W. Poe, an investigator for the Panhandle Cattlemen's Association out of Texas, whom Garrett deputized and who was on the porch of Maxwell's house, the killing took place exactly as described. Poe stated, in a 1917 letter to Charlie Goodnight, that he thought he heard 3 shots, not 2, but what he thought was the 3rd shot was actually the sound of the kid's bullet hitting the metal headboard of Maxwell's bed.
The probable murderer of Garrett was 'Deacon Jim' Miller, AKA 'Killer Miller.' He was a bible scholar, a faithful and attentive husband, a teetotaller, he did not use tobacco in any form, and he'd kill anybody for $50. He's known to have been in the Las Vegas, New Mexico area at the time Garrett was killed, but nobody's been able to place him at the scene.
Robert LeRoy 'Butch Cassidy' Parker--or his identical twin--was managing a horse ranch in northern Mexico in the teens of the last century. He was photographed there.
Tom Horn may or may not have killed the boy & probably didn't. Whoever killed the boy left Horn's 'mark'. To do that he'd have had to approach the body. He would have recognized he'd killed the wrong one. Everything we know about Horn indicates he would have been too smart to leave his 'mark' at the kid's body. He might not have been hanged for killing the father, but the boy's murder, whether he actually pulled the trigger or not, sealed his fate.
According to Horn, what he described was how the killing was probably done & how he'd have done it if he did it. He never actually confessed to the murder, he simply described how it was probably done. Since he was a professional killer-for-hire, he would certainly have been able to do this. This was twisted into a confession. Horn was hanged as much for the killings he did that he couldn't be convicted for as for the killing he probably didn't do.
Good info Charlie, you obviously are very informed. "Killin Jim Miller" was quite an enigma. Supposedly, the only man he feared was a guy named Barney Riggs. The Riggs clan still live and ranch in my area, the Western flank of the Chiricahua mountains.
Garrett was shot in the back of the head from a considerable range. The head, at range, is a lousy target. People move their heads a lot. At 100 yds--because of the terrain the range at which the shot was fired had to be at least 100 yds & possibly as much as 200 yds--a human head appears to be about the size of a nickel held at arm's length. At 200 yds it appears smaller than a dime.
The most likely intended target would have been 'where the suspenders cross.' That takes out the heart, which is just as effective as a brain shot. My opnion--it & a buck and a half will get you a cup of coffee anywhere but Starbuck's--is that the shooter was used to a .44-40 but had recently switched to a .30-30, a much flatter-shooting rifle. At 100+ yds he would have aimed for the back of the head to compensate for the bullet-drop he was used to with the .44-40. The bullet didn't drop near as far as he expected it would. That's why Garrett was hit in the head, which would not normally be a target at 100+ yds.