A Pardon for Billy the Kid?

Any way you slice or dice it, Billy the Kid was a psychotic killer, he was not just a misunderstood kid from a rough neighborhood. It is highly doubtful he killed 21 men, that's Hollywood and the dime novels but the fact remains he did murder several men in cold blood. He was also a horse thief, cattle rustler and petty thief. To pardon him for the tourist trade would be a grave miscarriage of justice, even at this late date. Just my opinion and I have others:)
 
I thought the possible pardon is only about murdering the deputies, not about every crime he ever committed.

Hawg Haggen said:
How many of you would kill a man today to escape being hung if you had the chance? Or would you just go to the gallows peacefully?
Click to expand...

I think that I would carve a pistol out of a bar of soap and cover it with shoe polish and use it to take a prison guard hostage and then bust out of jail!
Does that scenario ring a bell? :D
 
Last edited:
I thought that in the movie the gun was a bar of soap. :rolleyes:

I did check and you're right, it was a fake wooden gun. But it wasn't his first escape conspiracy and some guards were killed that first time. That first chapter of his first escape plan is described last:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dillinger

The police boasted to area newspapers that the jail was escape-proof and posted extra guards to make sure. Louis Piquett, John Dillinger's attorney, was able to sneak a wooden gun within the prison and into the hands of Dillinger. Using it, he was able to trick a guard into opening his cell. He then took two men hostage, rounded up all the guards in the jail, locked them in his cell, and fled. Before leaving, Dillinger said to the guards he locked up, "See what I locked all of you monkeys up with? Nothing but a little piece of wood. Well, so long, boys. I'll have to be moving on."[30] Dillinger stole Sheriff Lillian Holley's new Ford car, embarrassing her and the town, and traveled to Chicago.
Click to expand...

About the earlier escape:

Tracked by police from Dayton, Ohio, he was captured and jailed in Lima. After searching him before letting him into the prison, the police discovered a document which appeared to be a prison escape plan. They demanded Dillinger tell them what the document meant, but he refused.[5]

Dillinger had helped conceive a plan for the escape of Pierpont, Clark and six others he had met while previously in prison, most of whom worked in the prison laundry. Dillinger had friends smuggle rifles into their prison cells which they used to escape, killing two guards, four days after Dillinger's capture. The group known as the "first Dillinger gang" included Pierpont, Clark, Charles Makley, Edward W. Shouse, Jr. of Terre Haute, Harry Copeland, James "Oklahoma Jack" Clark, Walter Dietrich and John "Red" Hamilton. Three of the escapees arrived in Lima on October 12, where they impersonated Indiana State Police officers, claiming they had come to extradite Dillinger to Indiana. When the sheriff asked for their credentials, they shot him and beat him unconscious, then released Dillinger from his cell. The four men escaped back into Indiana where they joined the rest of the gang.[5]
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Any way you slice or dice it, Billy the Kid was a psychotic killer, he was not just a misunderstood kid from a rough neighborhood. It is highly doubtful he killed 21 men, that's Hollywood and the dime novels but the fact remains he did murder several men in cold blood
Click to expand...

Billy killed four men on his own. Two in self defense and the two officers he killed to escape hanging. He was credited with some he had no part in.
He was involved in the deaths of five other men but he wasn't the only one shooting so you can't credit him with those either. Accessory yes. To call him a psychotic killer requires a very vivid imagination.
 
There's more to it than that. The Lincoln County War was a war between two mercantile owners for military beef contracts. The Dolan side decided they wanted the contracts more so they killed John Tunstall. Well the Tunstall side couldn't go to the law because the "LAW" was very close friends with Jimmy Dolan. In fact the men that murdered Tunstall were deputy sheriffs. The county judge was also friends with Dolan. The county judge was also the territorial judge. The territorial judge was the one that sentenced Billy the Kid to hang. One of the jail guards (Bob Olinger) was a gunman on the Dolan side in the "war". Olinger was also a known murderer and thief in his own right. Billy was also the ONLY person on either side in the war to be hunted down, tried and sentenced to anything. The only crime Billy was ever charged with was killing the sheriff! Billy was one of 6 or 7 men that did the shooting. Did I mention that the sheriff was in with the Dolan side? Now, does it sound like the Kid got a fair shake in the whole thing? And Hawg is right, Billy only killed four men. "Windy" Cahill in AZ was shot while beating on the Kid. ( Cahill was 6ft tall and about 240 according to witnesses, the Kid was 5ft 8 or 9 and about 125) Cahill's own deathbed testimony said he attacked the kid. Joe Grant was a Texas "badman" lookin to kill someone in Bob Hargrove's saloon. Tried to shoot the Kid in the back and died shortly after. The 2 jail guards. Olinger taunted Billy, marked the days off till Billy's hanging on a calender outside the Kid's cell. Even Pat Garrett said Olinger was a bully. Pat even called Olinger his "killer deputy". The other guard, Jim Bell was kind to Billy. After the escape Billy told John Medows ( A friend ) that he did not intend to shoot Bell, but as he ran Billy had no choice. Like I said look at the facts, do some reading on your own then make a judgment.
 
Last edited:
I think that it's safe to say that nobody involved in the business in New Mexico had clean hands and some were dirtier than others. There's legend and there's fact and there's tourist's to be shaken down. Me, I can't really muster the energy to pick a side, so I guess I'm for the status quo.

I have to say that back in 1870s and 1880s, territorial law and law enforcement could be very screwed up, and not just in New Mexico. My great great grandparents arrived in Idaho around that time and, although I don't think they would have called it "lawless", there were certainly different factions that had different ideas about how the territory ought to be run.
 
I agree. I don't think the Kid should be pardoned for a couple of reasons. First, Billy was promised a pardon by Lew Wallace for testimony in court about a murder. Billy testified as promised. Gov Wallace however did not live up to his part of the deal. Billy then drifted into open lawlessness. He could've left New Mexico and noone would've bothered to look for him. But he stayed there and was hunted down and killed. The "law" had it in for him. He was not a psyco killer, but he was no angel either.
The second reason is it would be a killer for the tourist trade. People go to NM to see the haunts of the "outlaw" Billy the Kid.
 
Well, just to put things in proper perspective, it seems to me that our young Billy was sort of a scum of the earth character. The fact that other similar folks were around at the time doesn't make Billy any less culpable. Also, on the number of murders, one ought to be enough to have a neck tie party or so it seems to me. On the pardon aspect, I always thought the pardon was for a conviction not fugitives from justice. I'm not sure if our Billy ever went through a trial and was actually convicted of anything.
This conviction aspect- remember when Clinton (another Billy) pardoned that guy who was a fugitive from justice. I think his name was Vick? I can't remember. In any event we have a law library near where I live so I checked out some old Supreme Court decisions on this "Pardon" business because the news media was saying a pardon was an "unlimited power without restriction" and I thought that didn't sound right-the old founding fathers didn't seem to like unlimited powers without restrictions.
IN ANY EVENT, the OLD time view of the Supremes was that the pardon ONLY applied to a conviction, the conviction could be overturned or the sentence reduced. The idea was that if the pardon power applied before a conviction -such a power would undermine the separation of powers, namely the judicial branch of government. In other words the trial had to take place, all the facts had to come out, a conviction had to be rendered, and then a pardon could apply. I think I remember there was some talk that if a pardon could apply before the trial process, it could serve as a shield or obstruct justice.
In any event you have to read the old decisions, any law professor these days would just cite the current "unlimited power" argument.:rolleyes:
 
Is a pardon going to do anyone any good?
Is Billy still alive and facing death, so a pardon will help him? NO
Is a pardon going to benefit any of his relatives (Allow his children to get some benefit that is now being denied them because of his conviction)? I do not know for sure but I think the answer is NO.
Is there any real benefit in a pardon? Not that I can see.


Michael Grace
 
"Well, just to put things in proper perspective, it seems to me that our young Billy was sort of a scum of the earth character"

Have you done any research on him?

"The fact that other similar folks were around at the time doesn't make Billy any less culpable. "

Easy to judge from a modern point of view. Different time and place.

"Also, on the number of murders, one ought to be enough to have a neck tie party or so it seems to me."

Pretty loose definition of murder there, sport. When a group of gunmen, wearing the cloak of legality and who have the territorial and county judge, not to mention powerful politicians on their side try to kill you and your friends, what exactly would you do? Would you just except the fact that you don't have long to live, or would you shoot back? If you did, is that "murder"?
Research the subject before passing judgment.
 
MJN77 said:
First, Billy was promised a pardon by Lew Wallace for testimony in court about a murder. Billy testified as promised. Gov Wallace however did not live up to his part of the deal.
Click to expand...

If Billy had received a pardon as promised maybe his life would have been different. He wanted to stay and the Governor wanted him out, so then maybe he had no chioce but to turn lawless if he wanted to stay.

It would seem that a deal is deal is deal. And since Gov. Richardson is a fair man, if he pardons him then so be it. You will all know the reason why, that some previous Governor renegged on a deal that ended up costing someone their life.
I hope that the profit motive doesn't enter into the picture, about if a pardon is issued then tourist money will be lost.
I don't care either way, but I'm not going to criticize Gov. Richardson for honoring a deal that should have been honored from the beginning. No one forced then Gov. Wallace to make the deal. Unless Billy's testimoney can be proven to have been tainted or dishonest, then he is entitled to his pardon for doing so.
Then everyone will know the real reason for him being granted a pardon and why he was hunted down without it. Just because he chose to stay where he belonged and felt that he had earned that right to stay by testifying.

I think that Governor Richardson should do whatever he can to justify honoring the deal. Because breaking that deal just may have cost Billy his life in the name of the law, and a lawless New Mexican government whose head didn't want to honor it's agreement. All because of the broken word of a Governor. Billy paid with his life. If the Governor made a rotten deal, then that's his fault for upholding a corrupt system that was no better than Billy. A deal is a deal. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
While we're making everything right, let's give the Black Hills back to the Sioux. Now that's something I could get behind.
 
let's give the Black Hills back to the Sioux.
Click to expand...

Why? That's just crazy horse talk! ;)

If Billy was innocent, guilty, or a mixture of both, he's still a legend of the American west. He's dead, leave him alone. Anyway, I don't see kids playing cowboys and Indians anymore. The old legends and heros are fading away for new digital ones, like "Leeroy Jenkins". Shame.
 
Actually I was thinking about most of the outlaws of the time, not Billy in particular. Sorry if I got him misjudged.
Sources; Bob Scott, stage driver for Wells Fargo 1880's
Daniel Leitch, early settler and Sioux Indian fighter
and Dick Wotten, Colorado.

All said the outlaw class were the scum of the earth. Since they were there I sort of took them at their word.
 
"Since they were there I sort of took them at their word"

That's not always the best thing to do. Pat Garrett and his two deputies that were there have two different versions of the shooting. Pat and John Poe, have the same story except in Poe's version he was the one that talked Garrett into going to Ft. Sumner that night. Tom (Kip) McKinney (the other deputy) said Garret set an ambush and shot the Kid with a shotgun. Poe and Garrett had higher goals in life. Both went on to be "upstanding citizens" while McKinney went on to be a miner and rancher. A cook that worked for the owner of the house that the Kid died in, had a completly different story. Not to mention all the other stories that came from people that were nowhere near the shooting. Garrett had first hand knowledge of what happened but most historians don't think he was very truthful about it.
 
Sounds like text book Invincibility Fable. Teenage egocentrism + violent environment = violent kid. It's still going on today. Even though crime is going down, statistically, violent crime is being committed by younger perps. Robberies committed by this age group are much more likely to end in homocide. There is a positive correlation between emotional regulation and the development of the prefrontal cortex (which usually finishes developing around 25 and can take as long as 27 years).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top