Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum rules before posting.

Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free registration is required.

If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.

    Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion Page: 1  Previous   Next
Conflicting data for Joan Crawford's BY
Author Message
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorCubbyUps
Registered: March 14, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 4,245
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Doing a CLT search I found that an actress by that name starred in a 2003 program called Sanitarium.

So a birth year is needed to separate them, but I discovered that her birth year is reported as being 1904, 1905 or 1906.

I found this on this site.

Quote:
*Lucille LeSueur has no record of her birth year -yet. The mystery continues to this day. Most sources say Lucille was born in 1904, even her daughters say that their mother was definitely born in 1904. Christina Crawford recalls on several occasions that her grandmother, Lucille's (Joan's) mother, stated that Joan was born in 1904. Another date that could make sense is 1905, on many documents from MGM it stats that Lucille LeSueur was nineteen years old in early 1925, which would make her birth year 1905. Another piece of evidence supporting 1905 is a census report that was taken in 1910 (image below) stating Lucille's age was 5 years old. This looked like a sure sign of her birth year but there are MANY errors including her own brothers age which says he was eight years old in 1910 which is incorrect, the 1910 census report ha Hal's age two years off (he would have been only six years old in April of 1910, his seventh birthday would have been that September, the census lists his age as eight years old). Anna's age is also wrong on the 1910 census (Anna would have been 26 years old in 1910, not 28 years old as the inaccurate 1910 census report claims). ALSO, Henry Cassin would have been at least 43 years old in 1910 and the 1910 census says he was only 38!

The credibility of the census report is unfortunately too inaccurate to support for a fact that Joan was born in 1905. The third possible birth date is 1906; there are many signs that point to this date as well. The documents that were filed at MGM were not signed until after Joan's birthday on March 23rd and it still stated that Joan was nineteen years of age in 1925 after her birth date, which would make the year 1906 her birth year. Also, when Joan enrolled in Stephens College her birth year was recorded as 1906 (documentation for this fact is still needed). Lucille had no reason to lie when enrolling at Stephens College about her birth year. Since 1906 makes the most sense, 1906 is the year that this website will base Joan's date of birth on. 1906 was also the year Joan initially said she was born early on in her career and right up until her thirties, then she "mysterious" changed her birth date to 1908. The year 1908 has been completely ruled out and in no way could be her "real" birth date.



What BY do we use for her?
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorscotthm
Registered: March 20, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
United States Posts: 2,850
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
I would say 1906 unless a birth certificate to the contrary shows up.  That's the year on her tombstone as well.

---------------
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorCubbyUps
Registered: March 14, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 4,245
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting scotthm:
Quote:
I would say 1906 unless a birth certificate to the contrary shows up.  That's the year on her tombstone as well.

---------------


Tombstone 1908?

Even that site can't figure out her BY. Text says 1906, but it looks like the tombstone has 1908.

But the contracts she signed with MGM and her college enrollment says 1906.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorscotthm
Registered: March 20, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
United States Posts: 2,850
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting CubbyUps:
Quote:
Tombstone 1908?

Even that site can't figure out her BY. Text says 1906, but it looks like the tombstone has 1908.

I believe it says 1906, but it would be nice if the picture was a bit clearer.

The fact is in this case it really isn't that important that the date be correct as it is that it be agreed upon.  1906 was 107 years ago, and it's unlikely that any date before 1910 will cause any problem from a DVD Profiler perspective.
 
---------------
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar ContributorGreyHulk
Fixin' it for everyone..
Registered: November 24, 2008
Reputation: Highest Rating
United Kingdom Posts: 1,261
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
This one better?



From here.
 Last edited: by GreyHulk
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorscotthm
Registered: March 20, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
United States Posts: 2,850
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting GreyHulk:
Quote:
This one better?

Much better.  But as I said, the absolute "correct" date is not as important as that everyone agrees on a specific date.

Maybe we should just lay out all the evidence and do a poll.

---------------
    Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion Page: 1  Previous   Next