Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: fortheDeclaration
[ftD] Your phony conspiracy theory had been dealt with in other posts.

You seem unaware that a military trial was held and 8 people were convicted.

I can understand why you are unwilling to post the charges and specifications. They spell out the OFFICIAL conspiracy theory.

SOURCE: Pitman Transcript, pp. 18-19

CHARGE AND SPECIFICATION

AGAINST

DAVID E. HEROLD, GEORGE A. ATZERODT, LEWIS PAYNE, MI­CHAEL O'LAUGHLIN, EDWARD SPANGLER, SAMUEL ARNOLD, MARY E. SURRATT, AND SAM­UEL A. MUDD.

CHARGE. -- For maliciously, unlawfully, and traitorously, and in aid of the then existing armed rebellion against the United States of America, on or before the 6th day of March, A. D. 1865, and on divers other days between that day and the 15th day of April, A. D. 1865, combining, confederating, and conspiring together with one John H. Surratt, John Wilkes Booth, Jefferson Davis, George N. Sanders, Beverly Tucker, Jacob Thompson, William C. Cleary, Clement C. Clay, George Harper, George Young, and others unknown, to kill and murder, within the Military Department of Washington, and within the fortified and intrenched lines thereof, Abraham Lincoln, late, and at the time of said combining, confederating, and conspiring, President of the United States of America, and Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy thereof; Andrew Johnson, now Vice-president of the United States aforesaid; William H. Seward, Secre­tary of State of the United States aforesaid; and Ulysses S. Grant, Lieutenant-General of the Army of the United States aforesaid, then in command of the Armies of the United States, under the direction of the said Abra­ham Lincoln; and in pursuance of and in prosecuting said malicious, unlawful, and traitorous conspiracy aforesaid, and in aid of said rebellion, afterward, to-wit, on the 14th day of April, A. D. 1865, within the Military Department of Washington aforesaid, and within the fortified and intrenched lines of said Military Department, together with said John Wilkes Booth and John H. Surratt, maliciously, unlawfully, and traitorously mur­dering the said Abraham Lincoln, then Presi­dent of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, as aforesaid; and maliciously, unlaw­fully, and traitorously assaulting, with intent to kill and murder, the said William H. Seward, then Secretary of State of the United States, as aforesaid; and lying in wait with intent maliciously, unlawfully, and traitorously to kill and murder the said Andrew Johnson, then being Vice-President of the United States; and the said Ulysses S. Grant, then being Lieutenant-General, and in command of the Armies of the United States, as aforesaid.

Bear in mind that the military tribunal returned CONVICTIONS for that insane rant.

Congress never authorized the tribunal. It was authorized by a presidential proclamation. The civilian courts were open and functioning.

In a civilian court, the prosecution of John H. Surratt failed miserably.

[ftD] I guess you think repeating nonsense is going to make it non-nonsense.

Your inability to rebut anything I wrote is noted.

[ftD] Your 'facts'are half-truths woven into a idiot theory.

I posted historical facts. Here they are again. Deal with it.

[nc] Considering the disclosure of the suppressed Booth diary with 43 sheets/86 pages missing without adequate explanation; the exculpatory material that remained in what was left of the diary; the disclosure of the panel recommendation for clemency for Mary Surratt which was withheld from the President; the failure to convict at the trial of John H. Surratt, and the imprisonment, for perjury, of a key witness from the military conspiracy trial, the government did not dare to bring Jefferson Davis to trial.

711 posted on 01/11/2005 4:05:49 AM PST by nolu chan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 700 | View Replies ]


To: nolu chan
the government did not dare to bring Jefferson Davis to trial.

Because he would be found innocent by a Virgina jury (which Johnson feared) or because his case for secession would be upheld?

The first reason is reasonable, the second one isn't.

713 posted on 01/11/2005 4:31:16 AM PST by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 711 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson