Monday, February 29, 2016

Slander and Disappointment in Locke

This blog was originally set up to be a place where long forgotten, documented, factual evidence of Locke's history could be available to the public. It was never meant to be a sounding board or platform to vent but tonight things have changed, at least for this post.

Let me first start off to say that when I first started researching Locke back in 2012, I couldn't understand why after all these years that a place with such rich history, such as Locke, would have so very little written about it. Yes, you can find a book about it or an article online, but I have noticed it is always the same thing being regurgitated over and over...the same lazily copied and pasted history. There were no definitive historical stories, dates, or primary sources cited. And the few sources cited were secondary or third sources by books dated in the 1970s, but nothing from the time period that the events took place. Also, a lot of the history has been passed down orally, which is known to be less factual as the years go by.

It appears that most people just do not want to do real research anymore. They just rely on the other guy to do the research and they take their word for it, and share it, over and over and before you know it, there is a whole bunch of nothing out there. Which in this case has happened to Locke for nearly 40 years.

When I say a "whole bunch of nothing" that is exactly what it means. There are no details on the origins, the back stories, nothing. Why? Again, because no one bothers to do research anymore. There are a few of us out there though that still search the archives, the newspaper microfische, the old books and magazines, the census records and other directories searching for truth, and searching for answers. My blog is that truth. There is nothing on my blog that cannot be proven by the sources I list. That is why I list my sources in the articles themselves. So the reader has the choice to verify what I am showing them. You cannot rewrite a history that was already documented long ago, that is impossible.  I am bringing you the factual source material to give you the real history of Locke, one you can verify by documented evidence from the time period that the events took place.

Stop believing everything you are told on television shows, or even what certain people tell you in books, articles online or even in person. Unless they can show you the facts, the odds are that they are spinning a yarn and you are taking the bait. The ones who tell history without documented proof are the revisionists, even if they have been getting away with it for many years. And remember that an omission of history is still revisionism because if someone willfully leaves out facts or evidence about people, places or events in telling history they are changing or rewriting it to their own advantage and that is wrong. By excluding various people from Locke's original history, plainly ignoring or erasing those facts is an example of lying and revisionism. I am here to set that straight by way of factual evidence. Evidence you can look up on your own and read for yourself.

Tonight, this blog is to address the latest episode on Ghost Adventures. First off, I have never been a fan of the show. I am not really"into" shows about ghosts, as I have had my own experiences with paranormal and I do not find it amusing to watch sensationalized overly dramatic men jumping in the dark, scared by every little sound they hear.

BACK TO GHOST ADVENTURES

This particular episode, was centered on Locke, and it was a complete mess. Where do I begin? Okay, the story about Mei Ling, that is false. There is absolutely no evidence that this woman existed or that she performed, disappeared or died in Locke. There are no accounts of prostitutes being killed and dumped in the river.  By the way, the prostitutes in Locke were Caucasian. I have never found any documented evidence of Chinese prostitutes having lived in Locke until the later years (1950s-1960s).

Please read my other articles found on this blog, there are quite a few on the subject of prostitution in Locke. You might be surprised.

I found it interesting in the episode Zak acted like he was unaware of the Dai Loy Casino when speaking to Clarence Chu, but then later he seems to know all about it when he speaks about Fred Chisholm's murder.

Here's a news flash...George Shinn wasn't in the Dai Loy Casino when he shot Fred.  In fact, Fred was playing cards at one of the other gambling halls, there were 8 in total at that time period, and he ran out onto the road near the river, which meant he ran from one of the buildings facing the river. The Dai Loy Casino is located on an inner street. To top it off, Fred Chisholm was shot in the road, and he died in Walnut Grove.  Also, a mug shot photo of George Shinn was taken and used from this blog without asking permission. I also found it disgraceful that Jeff Belanger was given the factual information on Fred Chisholm's death for the episode, and yet the show disregarded the facts. I have the emails to prove that they were informed of the truth and still omitted it.

George R. Locke and his brothers (grandsons of George W. Locke, who was originally from New Hampshire) were heirs to their father's estate. George made his presence known in town, which is verifiable in numerous newspaper clippings of the time. G. Locke controlled many buildings there, including the houses of ill-repute to which he allowed his Caucasian madams, Grace Melbourne and Ruby Allen to run. Even Cleveland Hill, (Caucasian) from North Carolina ran a bar there, too.  This was as early as 1916 and well into the 1920s. Locke even had a "Watchman" named George Carlton, born of German/English immigrant parents. He was noted in the newspapers as the Constable.

Remember, when the Chinese moved to Locke they paid rent to the Lockes, their landlords, just like they had paid rent to the Dye Brothers or Alex Brown in Walnut Grove before the fire. There were buildings already present in Locke (known then as Lockeport) before the town itself was officially established. The residents of the area known as Locke, back then, was made up of  several people, all of whom came from various ethnic backgrounds.

The 1930 Census records state there were 136 households living within the boundaries of Locke. Out of those households there were 550 residents. Out of those residents there were 70 Chinese immigrants, 135 Chinese-Americans (a total of 37%) and the rest (a total of 63 %) consisted of backgrounds that varied from Russian, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, Hawaiian, Filipino, Japanese, Americans, a few Scotts, English, German, Armenian, Turkish, etc. There were 10 Chinese businesses, and 6 non-Chinese businesses.


SLANDERING MARTHA ESCH

As the episode goes on, the crew starts to interview a man introduced as Dustin Marr in the Locke Garden restaurant. This person is quoted saying that Martha "is changing the history, how dare her. ..she does not believe there was Chinese here."

 This is a false statement.  Anyone who knows Martha, knows that what he said on national television is untrue. Martha is well aware that many Chinese lived there, that they had a presence there and they left their mark in Locke's history, but she also knows that others lived there too, which appears to be something that many people in Locke do not want the world to know.

Locke was built on the land owned by George W. Locke. Their family continued to own it until the 1970s when the last of their heirs passed away. No one bothers to speak about the Locke family in the episode either, by the way, which is shameful. If it was not for the Locke family, there would be no town of Locke today.

Unfortunately, just because you want something to be so, doesn't mean it is. Locke had many Chinese living there but the town was not built exclusively by, for and lived in exclusively by Chinese and it would be a lie to continue to perpetuate that.  The articles on this blog have the facts backed up by documented evidence. I am not here to please anyone, I am here to state the history, backed up by facts. Telling the facts doesn't take away from the accomplishments or the history of the Chinese community in Locke, but it is a misrepresentation of the truth to claim it was always solely Chinese.

Why is it such a big deal for people to accept that there were other people who made up the town of Locke from its beginnings and onto the years moving forward? Why does it matter so much to certain people to avoid the documented proof? Does it suddenly make Locke less important because other people from other lands came to live there besides the Chinese? No. It makes Locke's history even richer. I would think that those who are lovers of history would appreciate that the records have been researched and the facts that were always there are being documented for posterity. It just took some elbow grease to find it.

Back to the show..... 

In the midst of this apparent attack on Martha, there appears to be a second person, who is interviewed cowering behind the camera, unwilling to be seen or even heard without a voice scrambler because of his apparent fear of Martha. Interesting, I didn't know she was dangerous. I mean, really?! Give me a break!

He goes on to slander her even worse, calling her a "psychopath" and "certifiably crazy." Then he starts talking about some black smoke that swirls around the bar and incites violent attacks at will. That scene made me laugh. Are we really expected to believe that? Really?

Funny, the person or person(s) who claim Martha is rewriting history don't seem to be providing any documents of their own to back up their stories. Yet, Martha willingly took the Ghost Adventures crew into her soda shop and spoke to them on camera for over 45 minutes showing them documented evidence of all of Locke's history, including census records, delta property deeds from 1893, Chinese artifacts and even documents from the Foon Hop Grocery Store from 1946-1957, and yet they left all that on the cutting room floor.

So in the end the show aired stories that were not backed up by factual evidence but then they took the one person on the show who had proof, and who offered it to them honestly and hospitably and they basically threw her under the bus.

Martha has never said that Chinese were not in Locke. We have had conversations for hours talking about all the fabulous history there, and most of which were stories she told me about Chinese families. Martha however doesn't pick and choose her history, she tells it all, including the parts that the chosen exclusionary history leaves out.

So who really is the bad guy here? And why was Ghost Adventures taking their side?

When I asked Martha what she thought of the Ghost Adventures episode and how dirty they played her, she said this:

"Anyone with half a brain, first of all probably would change the channel after watching Zak Bagans for about five minutes, because it is so obvious how much BS (blatant sensationalism) he builds into his stories. Past history of Locke was poorly portrayed, however the current history of bully gang mentality was clearly shown by two of the "self-elected" individuals seated on the Locke public agency boards of directors. Their defamation of my good character and reputation was taped by Bagans and the Travel Channel and shown on national TV for all to see - to try to make me look like a fool. Anyone who didn't fall asleep by the 15 minute mark, if they listen to my words, will see that I only wish for the history of Locke to be told with accuracy, to include the many nationalities of the people who've lived here, not just one." -- Martha Esch

Personally I hope Martha sues all the people who slandered her, including the people running the television show for their part of allowing her character to be assassinated on national television. Martha is an honest, caring and humble person who just wanted the whole history of Locke to be told, not just bits and pieces that have been picked over by certain individuals.

In the end, let's tell the truth. Locke is an amazing town, full of amazing history, which includes various backgrounds of people who have called this place "home."  In an upcoming blog post I will go into all of that even more. As it appears even more important than ever before to get those facts circulating.

I will end this blog with one of my favorite quotes by Cicero that says, "IT IS THE FIRST LAW OF HISTORY THAT THE WRITER SHOULD NEITHER DARE TO ADVANCE WHAT IS FALSE, NOR SUPPRESS WHAT IS TRUE." We should all be advocates for the truth, no matter what it may be, by making sure the whole history is shared, not just bits and pieces.

---
(Copyright 2016- J'aime Rubio, www.jaimerubiowriter.com)
Photos by Roland Boulware.


{DISCLAIMER: "If anyone decides to slander me in any way, be it on television, in a book, online, social media, news media, or any other manner, etc., be informed that I will sue you. I take my job seriously and I do not push false information to the public, that is why I cite my sources. Therefore it would be a very serious allegation to throw any slanderous accusations about me out there, if you choose to go that route. I will not be slandered the same way in which Martha was slandered. I have integrity about what I write about so with that being said, if you choose to slander me or my work in any way, you will be held accountable for it, and I will use every avenue available to the fullest extent of the law to go after you. So think before you speak or write anything about me."---- J'aime Rubio}





No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.