• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Billy The Kid: Really Killed By Pat Garrett?

A

Anonymous

Guest
Billy the Kid gets a lawyer

122 years after shootout, attorney to gather information for a pardon.

Amid talk of posthumous DNA tests and a potential pardon, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has given his go-ahead for an attorney to represent the interests of Billy the Kid. The lawyer, Bill Robins, will work for free — but it’s not yet clear how big a role he’ll play in efforts to identify the Old West outlaw’s remains.

THE GOVERNOR’S office said Robins’ primary task will be to gather and assess evidence during a renewed investigation into the circumstances of Billy the Kid’s violent life and death, to determine whether the Kid (a.k.a. William H. Bonney, Henry McCarty or Kid Antrim) merits a pardon.
“As the investigation proceeds, there is evidence being compiled that needs to be addressed by an experienced trial lawyer, that in the end will be presented to the governor,” communications director Billy Sparks told MSNBC.com Tuesday. The governor announced Robins’ selection last Friday, Sparks said.
Billy the Kid made a bloody name for himself in the 1870s and 1880s during New Mexico’s Lincoln County War. In 1881, he was convicted on the charge of murdering Sheriff William Brady. He broke out of jail before his date with the hangman, and most historians say he was shot by Sheriff Pat Garrett months later in Fort Sumner, N.M.

REOPENING THE CASE

That last point is where DNA enters into the picture. Over the century that followed, several men claimed to be the real Billy the Kid, each implying that he managed to make a clean getaway and that Garrett shot the wrong man. In the past few months, two sheriffs have opened new case files and are petitioning New Mexico’s 6th District Court to exhume the body of the Kid’s mother, Catherine Antrim, as the first step in a process aimed at identifying the outlaw’s true remains — or at least unmasking the pretenders.
The mayor of Silver City, where Antrim is buried, is challenging the petition, saying that the town’s historic cemetery should not be disturbed. A court hearing is scheduled Dec. 8 in Silver City to determine whether the mayor has standing in the case.
Robins told MSNBC.com that he planned to represent Billy the Kid’s interests in the court case as well as in the broader investigation. He said the genetic identification could have a bearing on the historical standing of the Kid and his nemesis, Sheriff Garrett.
“The true story about Billy the Kid needs to be told,” Robins said, “and therefore it seems to me that it would be appropriate and proper for this exhumation to go forward. ... If the DNA doesn’t match, and Billy the Kid was not ever buried in Fort Sumner, and in fact he did live to a ripe old age, that says a lot about what Pat Garrett did.”

Robins, who admits he’s a Billy the Kid history buff, emphasized that the DNA issue was only one part of a broader investigation. He hoped new light would be shed on whether the Kid actually shot Brady, whether he was promised a pardon by then-Gov. Lew Wallace, and whether he was railroaded for being on the wrong side in the Lincoln County War.
“I’m hoping that this investigation will ultimately lead to a conclusion that Billy the Kid will be pardoned,” Robins said.
Robins said David Sandoval, another attorney in the Santa Fe office of the law firm Heard, Robins, Cloud, Lubel & Greenwood, would serve as co-counsel. Robins, as well as Sparks in the governor’s office, emphasized that no state funds would be spent on the case. Robins said the governor “requested” that he get involved, while Sparks said that Robins “volunteered.”

OPPOSING VIEW
An attorney representing Silver City Mayor Terry Fortenberry in the DNA case was unimpressed by the news of Robins’ involvement.
“We think it’s primarily the governor’s attempt to get more headlines,” Adam Baker, an attorney with the Albuquerque firm of Kennedy & Han, told MSNBC.com, “but we don’t think it really adds anything to the case.”
Baker said he’ll be interested to hear Robins explain in court why he should play a role in the DNA proceedings.
“My impression is that there’s no legal basis for appointing a lawyer to speak for Billy the Kid from the grave,” he said. “It will probably complicate things in the court proceedings, but I don’t think it will be too difficult for the judge to dispose of Mr. Robins’ claim.”

Moreover, Baker emphasized that the Silver City case related to Catherine Antrim’s remains, not the Kid’s. “Billy the Kid’s wishes don’t matter,” he said. “What matters is the town of Silver City’s interest in protecting its historical landmarks. It’s their property to protect. It’s our position that obviously we have standing.”
That view is contested by Sherry Tippett, the attorney for the authorities seeking the exhumation of Antrim’s remains.
“Only the heirs have standing to block it,” she told MSNBC.com. Tippett said her side had the support of Elbert Garcia, who has long claimed to be the Kid’s great-grandson.

Even though all sides in the Billy the Kid brouhaha say they’re using pro bono services rather than public funds, critics have wondered why public officials are spending such time and attention on a 122-year-old case. Looking beyond the question of frontier justice, those officials usually point out that the Old West legends — and the tourists attracted by such legends — are big business for New Mexico. And they say that makes looking for the truth worth the trouble.
“What happened? How did it happen? Did Pat Garrett shoot Billy the Kid? Is Billy the Kid buried in Fort Sumner, or is he buried in Texas or Arizona or London? Those are things that still intrigue people,” Sparks said. “It’s a 100-year-old mystery that still intrigues people around the world.”

http://www.msnbc.com/news/995357.asp?cp1=1
 
I wonder if they've been watching too much "Young Guns 2"
 
N.M. Re-Opens Case of Billy the Kid
By RICHARD BENKE, Associated Press Writer

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. - Legend has it that Billy the Kid was gunned down by a sheriff in 1881. But was he? Homer Overton will tell you that the dead man was an unwitting impostor, a drunk shot point-blank in the face by two unlikely chums — the lawman and the legendary gunfighter himself.

Overton learned this some 63 years ago, at age 9, from the widow of the sheriff, Pat Garrett. Overton's sworn statement was offered as evidence for exhuming the body of the Kid's mother, Catherine Antrim, to compare her DNA with that of a Texas man who claimed until his death in 1950 that he was William Bonney, known in Western lore as Billy the Kid.

Authorities in Lincoln County, where the Kid was convicted of killing a sheriff in the 1870s, want to know if that man — named Ollie "Brushy Bill" Roberts, of Hico, Texas — was the real Billy the Kid.

A hearing on the exhumation petition is set for Jan. 27 in Silver City, where Antrim is buried. Town officials oppose disturbing the gravesite. Coroner's jurors concluded in 1881 that Garrett killed Bonney that July in the Fort Sumner bedroom of Pete Maxwell, son of New Mexico land baron Lucien B. Maxwell.

Garrett's widow, Apolonaria Garrett, told Overton and a buddy that her husband and the Kid shot a drunk passed out in a street. With no face left, the drunk was just a body that could be passed off for Bonney, Overton's court affidavit says.

Overton's boyhood friend, Bobby Talbert, has not been located for comment. Lincoln County Sheriff Tom Sullivan has said it is important to determine what is true and what isn't. He has noted that Garrett's image is part of the logo on Lincoln County sheriff's department uniforms.

Overton lives in Alta Loma, Calif., where he issued a notarized sworn affidavit Dec. 27, 2003, that was filed in court in Silver City a week ago. The affidavit says the boys visited Apolonaria Garrett in the summer of 1940, about 32 years after her husband was shot to death in 1908 near Las Cruces.

"I believe what Mrs. Garrett told us that day was the absolute truth. ... It made such an impression on me that I have remembered it in detail these 63 years," Overton's affidavit says.

Historian Leon Metz has said word of a faked death would have leaked; Silver City's motion to reject exhumation says suggesting that such a cover-up could have worked "strains credulity."

Stories have persisted for generations of connections between Bonney and Garrett, said Sherry Tippett, attorney for Sullivan, Deputy Steve Sederwall and DeBaca County Sheriff Gary Graves, who favor exhumation.

"It varies from 'They just knew each other from a card game' to 'They were pals,'" she said. In oral histories recorded during the 1930s under the federal Works Progress Administration, or WPA, several interviewees said they doubted Garrett shot Bonney, she said.

"There are a number of people who believe that," Tippett said. "And now that we have the tools to determine the truthdon't we have the responsibility?"


gg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Billy the Kid’s lawyers want their client dug up

Old West outlaw’s counsel
joins in petition seeking DNA tests
to confirm outlaw's true identity

William Bonney, also known as Billy the Kid, is believed to be depicted in this undated ferrotype picture, circa 1880, provided by the Lincoln County, N.M. Heritage Trust Archive. The ferrotype, which displays a mirror image of a photographic subject, has been reversed to show the Kid as he appeared in life.

By Alan Boyle
Science editor
MSNBC

Updated: 10:52 p.m. ET March 03, 2004

Not content with digging up Billy the Kid's mother to settle a debate over the outlaw's fate, now local sheriffs want to exhume the remains under the Kid's gravestone. And since New Mexico's governor appointed a lawyer to represent the Old West outlaw, one of the petitioners seeking the exhumation of Billy the Kid is ... Billy the Kid.

The petition, filed in New Mexico's 10th District Court last Thursday, opens the latest chapter in a 123-year-old mystery: Who's buried in Billy the Kid's grave?

Exploring that question touches on genetic science and the economics of small-town tourism as well as one of the greatest legends of the Old West.

Tangled Old West tale
Most historians agree that Billy the Kid, a.k.a. William Bonney, was gunned down by Sheriff Pat Garrett in 1881 and buried in Fort Sumner, N.M. But "Brushy Bill" Roberts in Texas, as well as John Miller in Arizona, each went to his own grave decades later claiming that he was the "real" Kid, and that the man shot in Fort Sumner was an impostor. One old-timer even says Garrett's widow told him the sheriff shot an innocent man to cover up the Kid's escape.

Ten months ago, the sheriffs of De Baca County and Lincoln County reopened the investigation, saying that they would take a DNA sample from the Kid's mother, who was buried in Silver City, N.M., then try to match it up with remains from the purported "sons." That idea didn't sit well with the mayors of Fort Sumner and Silver City, who feared the hubbub would do damage to the Old West cemeteries and cast clouds of doubt over the legends that brought tourists to their towns.

The sheriffs started the legal action last November by petitioning a judge for the exhumation of Catherine Antrim, the mother. The judge put that case on hold until August — but signaled that it didn't make much sense to take a sample of the mother's DNA unless other remains were sampled as well.

That's why De Baca County Sheriff Gary Graves, Lincoln County Sheriff Tom Sullivan and his assistant, Steve Sederwall, filed last week's petition for the Kid's exhumation. The three officials were joined by Bill Robins III and David Sandoval, attorneys appointed by New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson to represent the Kid's interests.

The sheriffs' investigation could well lead to a posthumous pardon for the Kid — thus, the long-deceased "co-petitioner" has an interest in seeing the DNA tests done, Robins told MSNBC.com.

"Frankly, we did not expect there to be such a resistance in Silver City" to the mother's exhumation, Robins said. "We don’t want to wait, and then go to another court and have that long of a delay in another court. Our thinking is to kill two birds with one stone."

Robins said the legal team was preparing to seek the exhumation of the Kid claimants in Texas and Arizona as well.

"Our effort remains to get to the truth concerning Billy the Kid, and we feel procedurally this is the most effective and timely way of doing it," he said.

Challenge expected
Fort Sumner Mayor Ray Lopez has not yet filed a formal response to last week's court filing and was unavailable for comment Wednesday, but in the past he has argued strongly against exhumation. Sandy Paul of the Fort Sumner Chamber of Commerce said she was positive town officials would challenge any effort to dig up the Kid.

“We will probably do everything within our power to prevent this from happening,” Paul told MSNBC.com.

Opponents of the exhumation say there's no question that the Kid was shot and buried in Fort Sumner. Moreover, they say the graves have been moved over the years, and there's no guarantee that the Kid or his mother are still buried where their gravestones have been placed.

One of the most vocal opponents, Trish Saunders of the Billy the Kid Historic Preservation Society, says the digging could damage surrounding graves as well as the whole historical aura that has been built up around Old West cemeteries.

“We get e-mail from people literally all over the world, saying, ‘We come to see gravesites that are undisturbed. We want to see the mythic Old West as it is now — lonesome, undisturbed, preserved,’” she said.

But wouldn't a renewed investigation actually give a 21st-century boost to Old West tourism? Saunders said she was sympathetic to that argument. "It will certainly attract a brief blip of controversy, but in the long term, the damage will be severe," she said.

Saunders said her organization was concerned about the sheriffs' latest move, "but we are optimistic that reason will prevail and that this petition will be turned down." Billy the Kid's status as a co-petitioner showed that the drive for exhumation was "just reaching into the realm of the ridiculous," she said.

"How can someone who died 120 years ago petition for the removal of his own corpse?" she asked.

Robins, who is handling the Kid's case on a pro-bono basis, admitted that he was in an unusual position. "This is a strange case," he said

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4441143/
 
Having recently watched Young Guns 2 (for about the 50th time) I was wondering about the old guy 'Brushy Bill' that claimed to be Billy the Kid in 1949 and who tells the story in the film. Just wondering if anyone knew anything more about this character - was there any credance to his claim?

Or was the Kid shot by Garrett?
 
I've found some interesting links here: ultimately, there doesn't seem to be any hard proof for Roberts' claims, but it's an intriguing story nonetheless.
 
Thanks for the links. Had a read through and have to agree that it seems unlikely that he is the Kid. Does seem odd to me though that those people who knew the Kid were prepared to sign legal documents claiming that Brushy Bill was who he claimed to be.
 
New Mexico library has Billy the Kid letters
August 5th, 2009

This undated ferrotype picture provided by the Lincoln County, N.M., Heritage Trust Archive is believed to depict William Bonney, also known as Billy the Kid, circa 1880. In a boon to history lovers and Billy the Kid buffs, a March 1881 letter and an earlier letter to then governor Lew Wallace from New Mexico's most famous outlaw are now in a state history library here and available for public viewing at Fray Angelico Chavez History Library in Santa Fe, N.M. The letters have been out of the public eye for a couple of decades. Acquired by the now-defunct Lincoln County Heritage Trust, they then belonged in turn to the Hubbard Museum in Ruidoso and the Lincoln State Monument. (AP Photo/Lincoln County Heritage Trust Archive)


(AP) -- The handwritten letter to the governor is polite, articulate and to the point. "Dear Sir," begins the missive. "I wish you would come down to the jail and see me."

The sender of the letter to territorial governor Lew Wallace was none other than Billy the Kid, the legendary gunslinger who was being held in the Santa Fe jail at the time. Just four months later, the Kid was gunneddown by Sheriff Pat Garrett.

But in a boon to history lovers and Billy the Kid buffs, that March 1881 letter and an earlier letter to the governor from New Mexico's most famous outlaw are now in a state history library in Santa Fe and available for public viewing.

Bob McCubbin of Santa Fe, president of the Wild West History Association, said the letters are an absolute treasure.

"Anybody that has any interest in Billy the Kid would be thrilled to see a letter that he actually wrote," McCubbin said.

The letters have been out of the public eye for some years.

They belonged to the Wallace family for a number of years before being passed on to various historical organizations. It was recently decided that the most appropriate venue for them was the Fray Angelico Chavez History Library in Santa Fe.

A thug to some, a folk hero to others, Billy the Kid has been permanently embedded in America's pop culture through a seemingly endless stream of books, articles and films.

"It is fascinating to me that a kid of 21 is still so much in our folklore," librarian Tomas Jaehn said recently as he pored over the letters, in good condition and kept in plastic sleeves.

The letters, in black ink, are signed with the name of William H. Bonney, one of the aliases used by the Kid, who was born Henry McCarty - perhaps in New York City around 1859, although it's not certain.

They were written in the aftermath of the so-called Lincoln County-war, a bloody, five-month feud in 1878 between mercantile interests in the southern New Mexico village of Lincoln. The Kid, a ranch hand, was aligned with one of the factions.

In the first letter, undated but believed to have been written in March 1879, the Kid tells Wallace he was a witness to amurder the previous month that had shattered the peace in the county.

He says he will testify in court if he's protected from his enemies, and indictments against him stemming from the Lincoln County-War are annulled.

Gale Cooper, author of a 2008 historical novel about Billy the Kid called "Joy of the Birds," says it demonstrates his cockiness and nerve.

"Here he is a homeless drifter, telling the governor he's going to make a deal," said Cooper.

After the governor and the young outlaw met a few days later, there was a carefully arranged, staged arrest and the Kid testified. But no pardon ever materialized.

That's what the Kid wanted to talk to Wallace about when he wrote the second letter, in March 1881.

He was in the Santa Fe jail at the time, facing trial for the,murder of Sheriff William Brady during the Lincoln County War and increasingly desperate for a pardon. He would shortly be convicted and sentenced to hang - although his famous jail escape in Lincoln County would save his neck for a time.

The handwriting in the two letters appears different. In the earlier letter, it's more slanted and flowing and formal - the Spencerian penmanship popular at the time. In the second letter, it's more constrained.

"They know he was literate. They know he could write well. But they haven't figured out quite yet why some of the handwritings are so different," said Jaehn, the librarian.

McCubbin suggests he could have dictated the jail letter, which he said would make it no less authentic - it's "expressing what the Kid wanted to express," he said. He said further examination should be done.

Cooper, who did extensive research for her novel, is convinced the handwriting is different because when the Kid wrote the letter from jail, he was in handcuffs. In another letter from the jail, to a lawyer, he apologized for his bad writing, saying he was shackled.



http://www.physorg.com/print168693030.html
 
Just for perspective, the "fake death," complete with claimants to identity, is common for mid-to-late-nineteenth century criminals who have captured the public imagination. Jesse James, Butch Cassidy, and John Wilkes Booth are other examples of folks who generated Elvis-like rumors and eventual disputed resurrections. The Booth claimant even toured the nation as "the mummy of John Wilkes Booth" after his death! One of them might even have done it, sometime - outlaws routinely had a dozen aliases, as the easiest way to evade immediate detection - but the consistency of the stories in structure, detail, and proofs offered by claimants screams "folklore" and to consider the evidence of Billy the Kid's survival in isolation from the other cases would be to leave out relevant data.

When analyzing 19th century handwriting, one of your experts should be someone specializing in the different "hands" taught. Not only did different schools promote different penmanship methods, but different handwritings were taught for different purposes. People who wrote all the time as part of their jobs, such as court clerks, might have distinctly different hands for their professional writing and their personal writing, and two people who worked in the same office might deliberately strive to keep their hands similar so as to present a consistent appearance in the record books. The Kid is unlikely to have had two such different hands, given his personal history, but a comparison of the letters with any surviving papers from the relevant jurisdiction and the personal papers of people (such as the jailer) who might have helped him with his letter would be instructive.
 
Billy the Kid,Killed by Pat Garret or did he survive?

:p Say, wasn't there some talk a couple of years ago about digging up
Billy the Kid and Brushy Bill and comparing their DNA?
I seem to remember seeing something about that in the San Antonio Express News. I don't know if Billy was ever this way, But I think John Wesley Hardin hung around here,I think he later died in either DelRio
or ElPaso. His wife lived in Rancho ,Texas in Wilson County, and is buried in Mound Creek .Don't think there is anything to the town anymore,except maybe a few scattered homes, as the last time I was down that way,I didn't see a Texas Highway Department pointing to the town.
 
Hardin was certainly through here - all roads, except the Butterfield Stage, in Texas went through San Antonio, at that time - but as far as I can tell he was neither charged nor claimed to have committed any crimes in the immediate vicinity. His favorite Texas stomping grounds are to the east (Gonzales, DeWitt counties) and north (Brown, Comanche counties) and of course far to the west in El Paso, where his grave is, inside a protective fence in Concordia cemetery.

But the only Fortean thing about him is the peculiar ability of the sociopath to attract loyal defenders and apologists among people who should know better.

As for the Kid's DNA investigation, it hasn't happened and is unlikely to, for a variety of reasons starting with the fact that neither the Kid nor his nearest relative can be located with any confidence. A summary of the course of the case here (the author is a partisan against Brushy Bill and has mixed checkable fact with opinion, but she's reasonably comprehensive and readable and I'm sure you can find a pro-Brushy site that covers the same topic with a little google fu):
http://www.aboutbillythekid.com/billy_t ... gation.htm
 
This gives me a chance to come up with my favourite bit of Billy The Kid trivia.

One of the men accused of killing Pat Garrett as a certain Jesse Wayne Brazel, who was the uncle of Mac Brazel who found the alien debris at Roswell. ...

Brazel's role in Garrett's death has been questioned for a long time - especially by conspiracy theorists who painted Brazel as a patsy within a conspiracy against Garrett. One of the reasons for such speculation was the inability to locate an official ruling on Garrett's death. This has now been resolved ...

How did Billy the Kid's killer die? New doc may put to rest one of Wild West's biggest mysteries

... A soft-spoken records and filings supervisor here may have answered one of the biggest unsolved mysteries of the Wild West: Who killed the legendary lawman best known for fatally shooting Billy the Kid?

Angelica Valenzuela, a clerk for Dona Ana County in southern New Mexico, said she was sifting through boxes of obscure records when she came across a faded document identified as the 1908 coroner's report for the death of Pat Garrett. ...

The handwritten document signed by seven jurors read, in part: “We the undersigned Justices of the Peace and Coroners Jury have attended the investigation of the body of Pat Garrett who was reported dead within the limits of Precinct No. 20, County of Doña Ana, territory of New Mexico on about five miles northeast of the town of Las Cruces and find that the deceased came to his death by gunshot wounds inflicted by one Wayne Brazel.”


SOURCE: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/05/2...to-rest-one-wild-wests-biggest-mysteries.html
 
Garrett and Billy the Kid actually were friends at one point, but that soured when the southern lawman was tasked with tracking down the outlaw in connection with the murder of a crooked sheriff and his deputy in 1878.

^Taken from the Fox link above.

The whole story of Garrett and Billy's friendship is believed to be false from the start as both were never really in the same area for long to forge a friendship (I believe Micheal Wallis book goes into detail about this), but it does make good reading for the popular comics and newspapers that were being printed at the time.

I remember however that Pat's daughter, Elizabeth claimed her father had told her he did not shoot Billy.
 
But the only Fortean thing about him is the peculiar ability of the sociopath to attract loyal defenders and apologists among people who should know better.

But was he a sociopath? At this remove in time; how can we know? It was a very different place and time from the one with which we're familiar. Guns, sudden death, (meaningless 'honour') were all part of the late 19th century "wild west". I think that you'r thinking about a guy who lived in a totally different millou to us - and we can't apply 20th (or 21st) century values to it.
 
But was he a sociopath? At this remove in time; how can we know? It was a very different place and time from the one with which we're familiar. Guns, sudden death, (meaningless 'honour') were all part of the late 19th century "wild west". I think that you'r thinking about a guy who lived in a totally different millou to us - and we can't apply 20th (or 21st) century values to it.

Most people then, the same as most people now, or most gang members, or most mediaeval people, or most Romans, never killed a member of their own community. If you do the maths, it's clear that most soldiers or warriors in history never personally killed an enemy combatant.

Killing is depressingly common in the news, but mathematically rare.

The Wikipedia article suggests that Billy the Kid killed 8 men before his own death at 21.

Sociopath is one of those terms that is often used loosely, but it seems appropriate for anyone who readily kills a member of their own community for personal gain, without apparent remorse.
 
But was he a sociopath? At this remove in time; how can we know? It was a very different place and time from the one with which we're familiar. Guns, sudden death, (meaningless 'honour') were all part of the late 19th century "wild west".

I used to own a book entitled The Encyclopedia of the Old West (sadly, long since passed to a charity shop in one of my necessary weedings of the book collection). I believe it was in that book that the myth of the "Wild West" was exploded, and the truth revealed: the cities of the USA were far more violent than the frontier.

The Encyclopedia of the Indian Wars estimates that total casualties (white civilian, army and Indian) during the forty years from 1850-1890 were only "...21,586 total. Army and civilian totaled 6,596 (31 percent), and Indians 14,990 (69 percent). These are casualties, so deaths are more likely 30-35 percent of the total."

If we estimate that 33.3% of the casualties listed above were fatalities, we can infer that the death rate for the forty years detailed above was (~7,200/40) = 180 per year.

UK murders last year: 736

maximus otter
 
Last edited:
@Mikefule

Most people then, the same as most people now, or most gang members, or most mediaeval people, or most Romans, never killed a member of their own community

Sorry about the time that I've taken replying - I've been on other forums. Also, since I'm tapping this out on my mobile (in a pub) I hope I can reply appropriately.

The above is, of course quite correct, but I would love to know what your definition of "community" is! Skin colour, race, religion, the street you live on, the language you speak? Given the carnage of the wars of the roses - were the two sides part of the same community (by your - I assume, arbitrary, definition or not)?

I don't feel that the above is really relevant to the discussion I seem to have started i.e. 'Billy the Kid; sociopath or not'.

If you do the maths, it's clear that most soldiers or warriors in history never personally killed an enemy combatant.

And again, I would question this. According to what "maths"? I'm aware that an overwhelming number of WW2 infantry soldiers questioned claim that they didn't try to actually kill their enemy, but I question how accurate such a survey is; decades after the event.

Should we believe that during bomber raids on German cities, the gunners in bombers thought: "Oh damn, FW190 night fighter, **must aim to miss**".

Killing is depressingly common in the news, but mathematically rare

Granted.

Sociopath is one of those terms that is often used loosely, but it seems appropriate for anyone who readily kills a member of their own community for personal gain, without apparent remorse.


Yet, as far as I know, Billy the Kid didn't kill for personal gain. He wasn't a bank robber, he wasn't a highwayman, he wasn't a mugger, he killed to avenge the murder of his employer; John Tunstall. Two of the killings with which he's associated were commited when he escaped from jail when he was awaiting execution - after he believed he'd been granted a pardon.

I don't see him personally benefitting in any way from his actions.

Pat Garrett though became rich and famous for his killing of Billy - so - would you say he was a sociopath?

(Phew, tapping this all out on my phone was a real chore. Please excuse any spelling/grammer mistakes).
 
Last edited:
@Mikefule



Sorry about the time that I've taken replying - I've been on other forums. Also, since I'm tapping this out on my mobile (in a pub) I hope I can reply appropriately.

The above is, of course quite correct, but I would love to know what your definition of "community" is! Skin colour, race, religion, the street you live on, the language you speak? Given the carnage of the wars of the roses - were the two sides part of the same community (by your - I assume, arbitrary, definition or not)?

I don't feel that the above is really relevant to the discussion I seem to have started i.e. 'Billy the Kid; sociopath or not'.



And again, I would question this. According to what "maths"? I'm aware that an overwhelming number of WW2 infantry soldiers questioned claim that they didn't try to actually kill their enemy, but I question how accurate such a survey is; decades after the event.

Should we believe that during bomber raids on German cities, the gunners in bombers thought: "Oh damn, FW190 night fighter, **must aim to miss**".



Granted.




Yet, as far as I know, Billy the Kid didn't kill for personal gain. He wasn't a bank robber, he wasn't a highwayman, he wasn't a mugger, he killed to avenge the murder of his employer; John Tunstall. Two of the killings with which he's associated were commited when he escaped from jail when he was awaiting execution - after he believed he'd been granted a pardon.

I don't see him personally benefitting in any way from his actions.

Pat Garrett though became rich and famous for his killing of Billy - so - would you say he was a sociopath?

(Phew, tapping this all out on my phone was a real chore. Please excuse any spelling/grammer mistakes).

Not uncommon though to try and make money out of your reputation Wyatt Earp did it.
 
And again, I would question this. According to what "maths"? I'm aware that an overwhelming number of WW2 infantry soldiers questioned claim that they didn't try to actually kill their enemy, but I question how accurate such a survey is; decades after the event.

Should we believe that during bomber raids on German cities, the gunners in bombers thought: "Oh damn, FW190 night fighter, **must aim to miss**".

This in response to my statement: <<If you do the maths, it's clear that most soldiers or warriors in history never personally killed an enemy combatant.>>

Firstly, I did not say that it was anything to do with a reluctance to kill. That is a separate issue, although important and interesting in its own right.

Note also that I specifically referred to enemy combatants, not to the enemy population as a whole.

It is simple maths. If you set aside the occasional duel where both combatants died of their injuries, and the occasional gunfight or skirmish where this may have happened, and look at all types of conflict from small battles right up to wars that lasted decades, it is immediately obvious that in any such conflict, there are always survivors.

The number of people killed in a conflict is always going to be less than the number of people fighting in it, because it is exceptional for two sides to fight to the last man standing, who then dies of his wounds.

So, if the number of people killed is less than the number of people fighting, you immediately know that the number of people who "score a kill" will be less than the number of people fighting. The number of killers cannot exceed the number of killed.

Put simply: if there are 2 armies of 10,000 men = 20,000 men fighting. You will never get all 20,000 killed in one conflict, therefore there must be fewer than 20,000 men who actually kill someone.

In reality, although the casualty rate may approach — or, rarely, reach — 100% on the losing side, it will be considerably less than 100% on the winning side.

On the losing side, there are usually people who rout and flee, and people who are captured either as slaves or, in modern wars, as PoWs. Casualty rates would vary from era to era, region to region, and conflict to conflict, but 100% mortality of the defeated side would be exceptional.

To put that simply: if there are 2 armies of 10,000 men, that's 20,000 soldiers. If 75% of the losers are slaughtered, and 40% of the winners die, then "only" 8,500 die, so there cannot possibly be more than 8,500 soldiers who kill an enemy combatant.

But, many of those who die will be killed by missile fire before they have closed with the enemy, and these die without killing anyone. Of those who succeed in closing with the enemy, some will die in their first engagement, without killing anyone.

And on the other hand, a few heroes will kill several enemies: a berserker at Stamford Bridge, an archer at Agincourt, a machine gunner at the Somme, and so on. If 7,500 out of the enemy force of 10,000 die, then one man killing 10 of them means that 9 of his colleagues have to "go without".

This is only part of the argument, because the other side of it is the way that wars are fought. With the exception of wars arising from hatred, there is seldom any motive to wipe out the enemy.

Wars are fought over land, resources, grievances, honour, prestige, greed, and lust for power, and a hundred other reasons. In most of these cases, the objective is to gain control of something — an area, city, resource, slaves — or to subjugate an enemy so that they will no longer be a threat, and will pay tribute. A dead enemy cannot be a slave or pay tribute, or even become an ally in a later war.

Therefore, most wars consist of a lot of marching, manoeuvring, posturing, and threatening and very little fighting. Actual battles are rare.

If you were a mediaeval leader, why would you fight a pitched battle? There are only two circumstances when you might: (1) if you felt sure of victory, or (2) you were trapped and had no option.

We learn in school history lessons about Hastings, or Agincourt, Crecy and Poitiers, or about Bannockburn, or Stoke Fields, or the Somme, but we are not told so much about the long boring periods in between, when armies were marching, cities were under siege, and no one was actually fighting to the death.

In most periods of history, it was possible to spend a lot of time — even a whole career — in an army without ever seeing combat.

Even when there is a battle, only a small number of the troops are directly exposed to combat. The others are holding positions, providing support, standing in reserve and so on. If your phalanx is 10 ranks deep, you do not plan for the back 7 or 8 ranks to do anything except be there if needed. In most cases, men do not run blindly onto enemy spears and certain death.

Of those who are exposed directly to combat, many will die at first contact, without every killing anyone. A few will kill many enemies. And many will be "in the press" without ever landing a mortal blow.

So, my original statement was <<If you do the maths, it's clear that most soldiers or warriors in history never personally killed an enemy combatant.>> and this has to be true, for the two simple reasons that (1) most of them never had the opportunity and (2) not enough people died for everyone to have the chance to "score a kill".
 
Here's a decent summary on the subject - which remains firmly on the "inconclusive" side:

https://allthatsinteresting.com/brushy-bill-roberts

I also like this photo, which "may" show Billy the Kid in the middle. Croquet - the Sport of Outlaws. Who knew?


000.jpg
 
... I also like this photo, which "may" show Billy the Kid in the middle. Croquet - the Sport of Outlaws. Who knew?

The 'Croquet Kid Photograph' is itself a source of as-yet inconclusive debate. Here's an article attempting to outline the main points in the debate, which sounds like some of the dogfights discussions known to have occurred on these forums ...

https://truewestmagazine.com/the-croquet-kid/
 
Back
Top