Outside of Jefferson’s flunkies NO ONE claimed Burr had ever mentioned separating the western states (territories). There was no ONE shred of evidence supporting that charge. Nor were there any military forces ever raised or equipped to undertake an invasion.
Land speculation was a national pastime and there is no doubt that it was part of Burr’s intention or that it was not treasonous.
The system worked IN SPITE of the President’s attempt to intimidate it into an unjust verdict. He did all he could to prevent justice from being served.
Andy Jackson was a firm Burr supporter and developed a hatred of Jefferson over this incident. HE would have never supported any secessionist scheme.
Virtually all of the egregious charges Wilkinson leveled against Burr were ideas W was pushing which he tried to hide until the court penetrated his veil of lies. Everyone in Louisiana knew they were lies but Jefferson did not care and he was involved in every aspect of the persecution unleashed against Burr and the other innocent men.
Luther Martin was right in complaining about “the hand of malignity”.
Outside of Jefferson’s flunkies...
That's an awfully broad qualifier you use there. In fact, it could apply to over 100 witnesses against Burr in some form or another. The court heard from most of them but it generally did not exonerate Burr by challenging what they said - he got off because none of them could show that he ever ACTED upon his alleged intention of separating the western states - a key legal point, which was also the crux of Martin's defense strategy.