Matthew Roberts
Ruthenium Member
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2013
- Messages
- 1,148
- Reaction score
- 5,069
- Golden Thread
- 0
- Location
- Paradise Valley, Arizona
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
Hello Hal,
James Kearney of ASU at Tempe wrote the excellent article on the Fate of Adolph Ruth that appeared in the Journal of Arizona History in the summer of 1992. Kearney concluded Ruth probably died from heat, lack of water and advanced age. That opinion is held by many. Kearney did a great deal of research into Ruth's past life, his disappearance and his demise. But his research was limited to whatever was published in the newspapers, magazines and public records. Many others gathered that exact same material and came up with a variety of theories on what may have happened to Ruth.
The one thing Kearney, and almost no one else did was take the time and effort to read the files that the Maricopa and Pinal county Sheriff's investigators compiled concerning Ruth's disappearance and death. Those files tell a much different story than what appeared in the press during the time period June 1931 - May 1932.
On the issue of the maps that Adolph Ruth allegedly had with him when he went into the mountains. It was Deputy Adams of Maricopa County who made the statement that no maps were taken from Ruth because the (maps) were found with Ruth's remains. This appeared in the newspapers and is taken for granted as a true and factual statement.
But in the Sheriff's file on Ruth's disappearance, a Pinal County deputy questions Adams statement. "How do we know there were no maps taken from Mr. Ruth when we don't know how many maps Ruth's had with him ?"
An excellent question. Indeed, when Ruth's own son was asked how many maps his father had with him, he could not give an exact answer or description of all the maps he thought his father might have.
In the end Sheriff's deputies concluded Ruth could have taken any number of maps into the mountains with him and someone could have possibly taken one or more maps and left behind what Adams found with Ruth's remains. It is not proof either way, it merely pointed out that Adams assumption may or may not have been true. Just because Adams had found a map or maps with Ruth's remains was not proof one or more maps, or papers, or notes, or sketches may have been taken.
Matthew
James Kearney of ASU at Tempe wrote the excellent article on the Fate of Adolph Ruth that appeared in the Journal of Arizona History in the summer of 1992. Kearney concluded Ruth probably died from heat, lack of water and advanced age. That opinion is held by many. Kearney did a great deal of research into Ruth's past life, his disappearance and his demise. But his research was limited to whatever was published in the newspapers, magazines and public records. Many others gathered that exact same material and came up with a variety of theories on what may have happened to Ruth.
The one thing Kearney, and almost no one else did was take the time and effort to read the files that the Maricopa and Pinal county Sheriff's investigators compiled concerning Ruth's disappearance and death. Those files tell a much different story than what appeared in the press during the time period June 1931 - May 1932.
On the issue of the maps that Adolph Ruth allegedly had with him when he went into the mountains. It was Deputy Adams of Maricopa County who made the statement that no maps were taken from Ruth because the (maps) were found with Ruth's remains. This appeared in the newspapers and is taken for granted as a true and factual statement.
But in the Sheriff's file on Ruth's disappearance, a Pinal County deputy questions Adams statement. "How do we know there were no maps taken from Mr. Ruth when we don't know how many maps Ruth's had with him ?"
An excellent question. Indeed, when Ruth's own son was asked how many maps his father had with him, he could not give an exact answer or description of all the maps he thought his father might have.
In the end Sheriff's deputies concluded Ruth could have taken any number of maps into the mountains with him and someone could have possibly taken one or more maps and left behind what Adams found with Ruth's remains. It is not proof either way, it merely pointed out that Adams assumption may or may not have been true. Just because Adams had found a map or maps with Ruth's remains was not proof one or more maps, or papers, or notes, or sketches may have been taken.
Matthew
NO THERE IS NOT ANY PROOF. THANK YOU
.
NP
