Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
Spoiling a Good Yarn...
Thu Aug 30, 2018 2:49pm

More documents. These come from the article “New Wild Bunch Documents Surface” by Buck and Meadows. The article is roughly a year and a half after “Leaving Cholila.” Just like “Leaving Cholila” this article looks at exciting new documents that have Ryan and also Place’s signatures. According to the authors, a 1997 symposium was organized by none other than Senor Marcelo Gavirati. By a strange coincidence, documents that had been sitting around for ninety plus years were found just prior to the symposium by the organizer himself. Wow! How lucky is that? Being in charge of an important gathering and being able to show off this new information would be like winning the Wild Bunch lottery. He must have been the star of the conference with this newly found evidence.
This is the first time that HA Place’s signature is found. However, we should remember that a tracing of his signature was found in the Pinkerton files. The HA Place signatures in the newly found document look pretty close to what the Pinkertons have on file.

 photo newwild_zpsbj6er4kr.jpg

The first document in the article is an undated land office filing has both J.P. Ryan and H.A. Places signatures. The duo must have been excited to sign the filing, as they were first to sign the document.

 photo place5_zpsfxhvxr6r.jpg

The other document is a November 5, 1901 cattle brand transfer document for Martin Alberto Underwood, signed by Milton Roberts, who was the government official in charge of brands. (Rumor has it he had a crush on Etta.) Two testigos (witnesses) also sign. John(Juan) Gardner, a new comer to the area who later fell in love with Etta, and H.A. Place. To me, and other people, this document has serious issues.

 photo place underwood_zpswcsye6um.jpg

First, the document lists Martin H. Underwood. It should be Martin A. Underwood. A simple mistake? Maybe or the forger didn’t do his homework. Ill let the visual evidence speak for itself. Its not an A

Secondly, where is the government stamp? I couldn’t find any other cattle brand registration documents that didn’t have stamps. Why is there no pictorial representation for the brand itself? Other brand documents have them.

Thirdly, if Milton Roberts is a government official, why does he need two witnesses to sign? I looked at other cattle brand documents and not one had eyewitnesses sign with the official. Why use Gardner and Place for witnesses when they are newcomers to the area? Both are not well known by this date. Milton Roberts just decides to basically use two total strangers….doesnt make sense

Page twelve of Digging Butch and Sundance describes Milton Robert’s account. Milton says Ryan and the Places didn’t arrive in Cholila until 1902. How then, can Place have even signed the document? Might want to get this straightened out dan. lol

 photo gardner_zpsn7atvdvg.jpg

Lastly, John (Juan) Gardner signs his name completely different than he does in a later 1902 official land document. A certified forensic document examiner concluded that the two signatures are not from the same person, but Im sure none of us needed their expertise to see its not the same person

    • Re: Spoiling a Good Yarn...Daniel Buck, Thu Aug 30 6:53pm
      I'm glad we cleared that up, that H.A. Place actually signed the November 1901 document. I didn't mention the two Gardner signatures because I thought I'd caused you enough angina for the day. People ... more
      • Re: Spoiling a Good Yarn...Anonymous, Thu Aug 30 8:15pm
        The Nov 1901 signature matches the undocumented scribble on a piece of paper that anyone could have planted in the Pinkerton file. How convenient. I think that sums up the similarity. I'm glad you've ... more
        • what I wrote vs. what you postedDaniel Buck, Fri Aug 31 4:21am
          What I wrote: "People do put each others names on documents, on petitions, open letters, for example, especially in an early 1900s frontier region where not every one is accessible. Another even more ... more
          • CNNChrisV, Fri Aug 31 5:20am
            Lets see the estancia horse purchase. Never seen it You forgot to mention the July 18, 1901 document the pair sign giving D Brand authority to work on their behalf. Very important for your theory.... more
        • You never disappoint ChrisV, Thu Aug 30 8:23pm
          "I'm glad you've acknowledged the likelihood that BC and SK didn't sign the 1901 docs in person because they weren't accessible. Hmm, I wonder where they could be? No witnesses in 1901, only signed... more
      • Re: Spoiling a Good Yarn...ChrisV, Thu Aug 30 7:46pm
        We didn't clear that up. The November 5, 1901 document is a poorly done forgery. The other undated document is fine IMO but should still be looked at by a expert. As far as John Gardner's signatures, ... more
    • dadaesque forensicsDaniel Buck, Thu Aug 30 3:44pm
      Not sure if you understand the Digging Up Butch and Sundance narrative structure. The story is told via anecdotes and interviews, some of them contradictory. It's a story unfolding as people tell... more
      • Re: dadaesque forensicsChrisV, Fri Aug 31 5:00am
        Butch and John Gardner were BFF's right? I think we both agree on that. Here is a bigger shot of the land document. If Gardner wasn't there, it would be logical Butch would have signed for him. He... more
        • Re: dadaesque forensicsDaniel Buck, Fri Aug 31 5:13am
          Chris, Butch Cassidy and John Gardner were BFFs? I did not know that. For those of you without access to the, BFF means either Best Friends Forever or Big Fat F**k. Either way,... more
          • Page 11 of your own bookChrisV, Fri Aug 31 6:09am
            This shouldn't be a shock to you as its in your book. You wrote that Butch and Gardner grew quite close. They were even magazine buddies. haha Gardner hated Sundance.... Strange that they would be... more
          • fight or flightChrisV, Fri Aug 31 5:57am
            You didn't know they were friends? You might want to study up on Wild Bunch history and your comebacks.
      • Re: dadaesque forensicsDeborah, Thu Aug 30 7:36pm
        It looks like an A and that the pen/ink skipped at the uppermost curve. It also looks as though it was done left to right as the ink looks trailed off and feathered on the bottom left of the A.
      • Re: dadaesque forensicsChrisV, Thu Aug 30 5:13pm
        Thats nice that your book was done in such an impartial way. Ive noticed that about you, always listening to others and presenting both sides. Thanks dan Your still bringing up the RR photo. You... more
  • Click here to receive daily updates