Update Dated November 1, 1999 Titled, "Re: Response to Kathy Reynard"
by David Hedgepeth, Dallas Texas - [email protected]
Subject: Re: Response to Kathy Reynard
Date: November 1, 1999
From: [email protected]
To: Mailing list members
This letter is my (David Hedgpeth) response to a letter from Kathy
Reynard who testified in the September 17 "Exhumation of James L.
Courtney" hearing. Her letter can be found under the October 3, 1999
response to Genforum Update #7 in the COURTNEY section.
Also refer to these web sites. Both are in process of building:
Betty Duke's support site: http://www.studiosr.com/courtney/
Max Courtney's support site: http://www.andruss.net/courtney.htm (NOTE for webmaster: this site was learned later to be The JLC Controversy - A Rebuttal by a Friend of Kathy Reynard's at her request)
Dear Kathy,
I appreciate your courteous response to the questions that I posted on
the Genforum on October 3, 1999. Yes, you did clear up some things and I
thank you. You have my sincere apologies for any and all of my
misunderstandings. You were correct in assuming that I was not trying to
deliberately misrepresent the facts or my observations. I have asked
questions because I did not fully know the answers.
As you recall, Kathy you were very soft spoken that day in court and even
the Judge commented that he had a hard time hearing you. I questioned
what I thought I heard. There is no need for you to provide a court
transcript to prove your statements for I will take you at your word. The
only real reason I would be interested in reading your testimony is to
better understand your research findings.
I have my own family interests in finding the truth. My great-grandfather
Pleasant James was reported to have had contact with Jesse James in both
Tennessee and Texas. Keeling Smith Caraway, the father of the two sons
who married Pleasant's daughters is buried in the same cemetery as James
L. Courtney. Pleasant lived about 70 miles from JLC. Family lore says
that Pleasant and Jesse were related. Yes, I was and am very interested
in Betty's research, and to uncover the true genealogy is what I want
more than anything else.
Hopefully you can appreciate some of my feelings and frustrations in
court on September 17. It looked like a battle between David and Goliath.
Max Courtney's three seasoned attorneys performed slicker than the James
Gang in a stick-up. On the other hand, Ms. Duke's young probo attorney
performed more like the Don Knotts version of the Lone Ranger. Yeap,
Betty was clearly out gunned and the result was direly predictable. Oh,
why does it hurt for me to laugh? Well, I guess I have to accept that all
is fair in love and in the courtroom.
Now seriously I am still bewildered over this whole unfortunate courtroom
drama. That's not sour grapes, but a genuine disappointment in seeing
what I feel was Ms. Duke's sincere efforts to learn the truth blitzed to
death by seemingly "shady and underhanded" tactics. Thwarting Betty's
efforts ultimately benefits no one.
You suggested I contact the Judge about some of my questions. I really
think that Max Courtney could better answer my most serious questions.
I wonder why three attorneys were necessary or even affordable on his
side?
Was winning at all costs rather than an earnest group search for the
whole truth what he really thought was in the best interest of the family
and the world?
You may ask, why have I said all this? There are several reasons.
Max knew and I suspect you also knew that the hearing was supposed to be
a no new evidence hearing. The previous hearings were for the purpose of
examining the evidence. The hearing on September 17 was to be a summary
hearing. Ms. Duke presented her brief about August 26. It was only a few
days before the hearing that Betty received the brief from Max Courtney's
attorney. THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU GAVE IN YOUR TESTIMONY WAS NOT INCLUDED
IN THE BRIEF FOR BETTY'S REVIEW. My question to you is why wouldn't you,
as a family member, have introduced your evidence at an earlier hearing
or at least fairly forewarned it to Betty in the brief? Was it to take
advantage of her? If so, why was that necessary if your research was
solid? Even if the attorneys so advised, a person's ethical choice is
their own. Many others and I really want to know those answers.
Try to imagine yourself (When I say "you" I mean all opposing Betty Duke
on this issue.) going through a grueling 5-hour hearing. No one there
objects to the inconsistencies. You feel unprotected, betrayed, and
overwhelmed. Then new evidence is presented that you have not reviewed.
After that hammering you are suddenly told that you have a few minutes to
respond. You know that your unprepared statements will not be equated to
the well-planned and well-orchestrated surprise attack that you have
experienced. You know too late that you have been had.
Now I ask you, how well would you have performed under those
circumstances?
If your goal was simply to win and keep the evidence buried, so to speak,
then you clearly won. If your goal was to fairly consider all evidences
and seek to uncover the whole truth, then you clearly lost.
Under fair circumstances, had Betty had time to collect her thoughts I
think she would have presented a good argument.
Now, I will restate your response to my question and then make my
comment.
"Q5 - Max Courtney's credentials as a forensic scientist were included in
an affidavit he had presented to the court at the earlier hearing."
Of course it is known that Max Courtney is a forensic scientist. In fact
I would expect that he is quite skilled in his field. I ask though, were
credentials presented that he was an expert in the field of photographic
analysis? Even if he was qualified would he as the complainant be
unbiased enough to give the kind of expert opinion that would have fairly
and evenly weighed the issues of both sides before his conclusion? I know
that would have been hard for me to do if my feelings were slanted off a
neutral center. (Remember that Betty used two unbiased professional
sources to present her photographic analysis.)
"Q8 - Tintypes weren't mentioned because the original pictures weren't
tintypes. Go to www.andruss.net/courtney.htm to see the original picture and
follow-ups."
To tell you the truth I know just enough on this question to ask
it. It seems though
that a picture could be made of a tintype and then reproduced as
a picture. Don't
some of the pictures in the various Jesse James books appear to
be reversed; i.e. the
buttons shown on the wrong side? To explain one case should
explain the other.
"Q9 -at no time did I state that I am a certified genealogist. I am
strictly an amateur who
has been doing genealogy research for ten years, as I stated in my
sworn testimony. I
was not hired by the family, I did this research because I AM
family. I was not flown
to Texas by the family, I drove there on my own. I was not paid by
the family - I AM
family."
I really must have misheard that one. I assume from what you have said
that you are a Courtney or Haun relative. I did not hear that mentioned
in court and it seemed that you were being handled as an unbiased expert.
I must admit that your information was presented on an impressive if not
on a professional level. That is quite a complement for an amateur. The
fact that you lived in Kansas City and that fact that you weren't known
by at least the Courtney family that I talked to, naturally left me to
wonder what I did.
"Q10 - When I gave each item of evidence, I clearly presented it with
certified copies of
census records, newspaper articles, etc. I also clearly stated
that this research took
me four WEEKS, not four hours as you state. Again, this can be
verified when I
receive the transcript of my testimony."
I do believe that magnitude of work would take at least four weeks.
Others besides myself thought you said "four hours." Thanks for the
clarification.
"Q14 - I can assure you there is no connection between me and the James
farm. We have
lived here 29 years, and until August I had never been to the
James farm. I have
little or no interest in a psychopathic killer."
Again thanks for the clarification. May I in lighthearted humor add that
I hope you are not disappointed too much if one day it is
shown that you and Jesse are related.
You and others may wonder if I want to boost my ego by proving that I am
kin to the outlaw, Jesse James. Well the answer is no. I find no pride in
the fact that someone else has done wrong. On the other hand I will not
be ashamed if he is my kin. That was his life, not mine. I will not be
too hasty to judge him either. If anyone or I had suffered the torments,
abuses and rejections that he did, then they/I may have wrongly justified
the vengeful acts that he did. I'm just glad that I didn't have his lot
in life.
"Q16 - I think the key work here, David, is "reportedly". Reported by
whom? Since
James L Courtney married the daughter of one of the richest
men in the state,
there can't be any doubt as to the source of his wealth, now
can there?"
From what I understand the Courtney family and others reportedly stated
that JLC came to Texas with gold in his saddlebags. What you are
suggesting is that Thomas Barron gave him the money. I could accept that
as reasonable if there wasn't a preponderance of information that
suggests otherwise. I don't know of any of Thomas's other children and
their spouses who were so generously endowed as you suggest that Mary
Ellen Barron and JL Courtney was.
"Q18 - I really can't understand why you are so adamantly opposed to a
DNA match
between a male descendant of JLC and a male descentant of one
of his male
siblings. This method of identification has been accepted by
DNA scientists all
over the world. If Mrs Duke has no faith in this type of
matching, why did she ask
one of the male descendants of one of JLC's brothers to send
hair samples to a
DNA lab in California several months ago? Who else was asked
to send samples
for comparison? And if these samples should prove that JLS
really was JLC, will
the public be told of this?"
The DNA issue is explained in Betty's book. Because there is so much
confusion about whom is who and if that person is the real brother of
that person, the male DNA testing would be questionable, although it
would be interesting to see. The surest way is to compare the DNA of
James L. Courtney to a female direct descendant of Zerelda. As far as
other testing, I have directed the question to Betty and only she is
qualified to address it.
This questions and other topics will soon be addressed by Betty and
others at a newly developed web site:
http://www.studiosr.com/courtney/
Kathy, may I say something sincerely and with no intent to flatter or
disarm you? I was genuinely impressed with your thorough presentation. If
I did not know what I do, I may have tended to believe that Betty's
research was inadequate and that it should be dismissed. Even with my
present position, I have no reason but to assume that Max Courtney, his
supporters, and you really do believe that there is no connection between
James L. Courtney and Jesse W. James.
Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion. And is that where we want to
leave it, as opinion and not fully proven truth?
Remember the movie, "Raiders of the Lost Ark"? At one point Indiana Jones
put his ideas and interests aside because he had a higher selfless desire
to know the full truth of what was in the ark. If this kind of hunger,
and may I add humility, were in the hearts of all concerned then all
would want to uncover rather than cover the truth.
You are a researcher and I would like to ask you a question of the heart.
Have you spent an equal amount of time in trying to prove Betty Duke
right as you have in trying to prove her wrong? Hasn't her book and her
evidences presented in court at least made you more than wonder if she
were right? Like Indiana Jones, don't you really want to know for sure,
regardless if you are right or wrong?
How could anyone who was advocating a lie continue to receive more and
more supporting evidences? You know and I know that Betty's growing
documentation has been largely ignored in court and by Max Courtney's
supporters. Now honestly tell me why the whole truth won't be weighed
with due respects? Is someone afraid to be wrong? Is there some other
reason? If so, let everyone rise above it.
You know, I really don't care who is right. I just want to know what is
right. You and well meaning others like you may be unwittingly stifling
the truth rather than preserving it. I issue you a bold challenge. Give
four weeks of the same intense research time to support Betty Duke's side
that you did to support Max Courtney side. Do this and I think your
feelings will likely change, and who knows, history may have good reason
to sincerely thank you.
Best regards,
David Hedgpeth
Your comments, information and support would be greatly appreciated.
David Hedgpeth- E-mail: [email protected]
Contact me if you want to be added or deleted from the update notices.
David Hedgpeth
Dallas, TX
Send Regular E-mail to: [email protected]
Send Attachments to: [email protected]
Go Back to top Or use your Browser's back button to return to the page you came here from
|
|
Courtney and James GenConnect Boards by Rootweb 
