Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
Did the photo experts include Armandd DeGerois (I probably butchered his last name) or George Warfel? Those are the two most respected James photo authenticators I know of.
The theory that Jesse never really married Zee flies in the face of all photographic evidence AND eye witness testimony from folks that knew Jesse, that Jesse James was in fact in Kearney, MO. on the day of the wedding inviting folks to "come see us when we get settled". There are too many authenticated photos of Jesse after 1874 that match the 1860's Jesse for that theory to hold water. No way does Jesse, who fell in love with Zee in 1865 and courted her all that time, allow some impostor to marry her so he can run off with his gold to Texas.
It's just not logical. Cole Younger would never accept a subordinate role to anyone except Jesse James and that was only because of his friendship with Frank James. And Frank James would have never rode with a false Jesse. I believe for most of Franks career he rode on these raids to watch out for Jesse. If Jesse really weren't at Northfield Frank would not have been either.
Hang in there and keep plugging, but I disagree, the truth will never come out any more than what is now out. If there are those that dispute the 1995 DNA result's, what makes anyone think they will accept any findings from any other DNA testing, if it doesn't agree with what they want to hear.
Followups:
|
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/courtney/messages/541.html | ||
 |
Agreement of Use Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|