|
Post by davidmorrocco on May 15, 2021 8:46:59 GMT -6
Joan Crawford's birthday is still a mystery. Her tombstone says 1908, a census report from 1910 says she was born in 1905 and many books say 1904 The date that makes the most sense is 1906. There are problems with every other date stating with 1905. The census report taken in 1910 has her brother Hal's age wrong, Anna's age is wrong, and the address to where the family lived was wrong. We all know that Joan took two years off of her birth date and claimed that her birth year was 1908. One of the reasons the birth year 1904 became so popular is because many people already knew of Joan's birth year as 1906 and assumed since she took two years off then she was born in 1904. Joan's brother Hal was born in September 1903; Joan would have born six months later. That doesn’t make sense. 1906 does. Joan registered at Stephens College in 1922 and gave her birth year as 1906. Joan at this time in her life was only 16 years old. That makes sense to me.
|
|
|
Joan’s age
May 16, 2021 15:20:49 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by tom on May 16, 2021 15:20:49 GMT -6
Joan Crawford's birthday is still a mystery. Her tombstone says 1908, a census report from 1910 says she was born in 1905 and many books say 1904 The date that makes the most sense is 1906. There are problems with every other date stating with 1905. The census report taken in 1910 has her brother Hal's age wrong, Anna's age is wrong, and the address to where the family lived was wrong. We all know that Joan took two years off of her birth date and claimed that her birth year was 1908. One of the reasons the birth year 1904 became so popular is because many people already knew of Joan's birth year as 1906 and assumed since she took two years off then she was born in 1904. Joan's brother Hal was born in September 1903; Joan would have born six months later. That doesn’t make sense. 1906 does. Joan registered at Stephens College in 1922 and gave her birth year as 1906. Joan at this time in her life was only 16 years old. That makes sense to me. From what I've read online, the one that JC gave when enrolling in college makes most sense, as she would have no reason to shave or add years, would she? That said, 16 years old seems young for a college freshman, doesn't it? How solid is the birthdate of her brother?
|
|
|
Post by davidmorrocco on May 17, 2021 7:59:19 GMT -6
I found an article about Joan’s birthday as 1906 on another Joan website that I always found reliable. Google - Hal LeSueur Born Hal Hays LeSueur September 3, 1901 or 1903 San Antonio, Texas, U.S. Died May 3, 1963 Spouse(s) Jessie Burress ( m. 1922; div. 1929) Kasha Haroldi ( m. 1931; div. 1935) Wikipedia - Hal Hays LeSueur (September 3, 1901,or 1903 – May 3, 1963) was an American actor and the older brother of Oscar-winning actress Joan Crawford. Hal LeSueur Born September 3, 1901 or 1903 San Antonio, Texas, U.S. (Hal’s military records show he was born in 1903.) That seems like solid evidence I found this on a 4th website. In 1922, Joan registered at Stephens College in Columbia, Missouri, giving her year of birth as 1906. She attended Stephens for only a few months before withdrawing after she realized she was not prepared for college. Mrs. Anna Cassin. Joan’s mother. was still under 20 when her first two children were born. Crawford's elder siblings were sister Daisy LeSueur, who died before Lucille's birth, and brother Hal LeSueur. Daisy LeSueur was the sister of Joan Crawford.Daisy Birth: 1902. How did Daisy die? I can find anything about her.
|
|
|
Joan’s age
May 17, 2021 17:32:39 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by tom on May 17, 2021 17:32:39 GMT -6
I found an article about Joan’s birthday as 1906 on another Joan website that I always found reliable. Google - Hal LeSueur Born Hal Hays LeSueur September 3, 1901 or 1903 San Antonio, Texas, U.S. Died May 3, 1963 Spouse(s) Jessie Burress ( m. 1922; div. 1929) Kasha Haroldi ( m. 1931; div. 1935) Wikipedia - Hal Hays LeSueur (September 3, 1901,or 1903 – May 3, 1963) was an American actor and the older brother of Oscar-winning actress Joan Crawford. Hal LeSueur Born September 3, 1901 or 1903 San Antonio, Texas, U.S. (Hal’s military records show he was born in 1903.) That seems like solid evidence I found this on a 4th website. In 1922, Joan registered at Stephens College in Columbia, Missouri, giving her year of birth as 1906. She attended Stephens for only a few months before withdrawing after she realized she was not prepared for college. Mrs. Anna Cassin. Joan’s mother. was still under 20 when her first two children were born. Crawford's elder siblings were sister Daisy LeSueur, who died before Lucille's birth, and brother Hal LeSueur. Daisy LeSueur was the sister of Joan Crawford.Daisy Birth: 1902. How did Daisy die? I can find anything about her. Hmm. Intriguing. One would guess that military records on Hal would be pretty definitive. If so, that would most likely move JC to 1905 or 1906 time frame. Have never seen or read any info on her sister Daisy.
|
|
|
Joan’s age
May 17, 2021 17:45:06 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by tom on May 17, 2021 17:45:06 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by davidmorrocco on May 17, 2021 23:28:47 GMT -6
Tom. To be honest I was busy working when I sent my last message. I did see the attachment you listed, but I didn’t scroll all the down about Daisy. I didn’t do my homework. Sorry. Thanks for solving my thoughts of what happened to her. I’m still interested on what your best guess is on Joan’s age. I respect your opinion. Let me know. Thanks 😊
|
|
|
Post by tom on May 18, 2021 18:16:58 GMT -6
Tom. To be honest I was busy working when I sent my last message. I did see the attachment you listed, but I didn’t scroll all the down about Daisy. I didn’t do my homework. Sorry. Thanks for solving my thoughts of what happened to her. I’m still interested on what your best guess is on Joan’s age. I respect your opinion. Let me know. Thanks 😊 No worries. Learned a good bit today I didn't know by Googling your query about Daisy. I think 1905. I love JC, but we can all agree that she wasn't the strongest student! So, 17 year old college freshman seems more reasonable to me than 16.
|
|