DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Carrie Brown : Murder In The East River Hotel
  HTML https://carriebrown.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: 1901-1902
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 2869--------------------------------------------------
       Points In Favor Of The Veracity Of Damon's Story
   DIR By: HowBrown1953
       Date: August 8, 2024, 12:27 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Discussing the Damon story, its components, and whether it was
       true, after all.
       #Post#: 2873--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Points In Favor Of The Veracity Of Damon's Story
   DIR By: HowBrown1953
       Date: August 9, 2024, 12:13 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       For over a century, the most accepted solution to the case was:
       1. C. Kniclo was the murderer
       2. Ali was a victim of faulty science or a frame-up
       3. Damon was a hero, of sorts, for presenting the story & key
       There was a prevalent consensus that the failure to find the man
       who registered with Carrie Brown at the hotel was significant
       since the best the prosecution could hope to do was convict Ali
       on circumstantial evidence ( i.e., his appearance as a witness;
       the innumerable lies; his resume since he'd been in the States;
       biological material found on his person which came from Brown ).
       George Damon came into the picture as a well-established
       businessman; patent-holder; a man with friends in high places; a
       land-owner; a successful upper-middle-class member of his
       middle-class community; one-time member of the thief-catchers in
       Cranford; etcetera.
       Why would someone invent a story that had it backfired and been
       proven a sham and would probably create some significant
       problems for him down the road?
       Why shouldn't we believe in his story if those involved in the
       events of 1901 did?  The issues within his overall story were
       overlooked or minimalized and considered unimportant. Why
       shouldn't we do the same now?
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1