Why was Booth admitted into the presidential box?

[John Fazio]

(04-26-2015 07:34 PM)L Verge Wrote:  John - I forgot to say that I read the chapter on Mary Surratt today. I could have written it myself! I still disagree with your assessment of Booth and John, Jr., but I concur on your judgment of Mary. I still think the three were in it for love of what they thought their country had been and should continue to be. Lincoln was a Republican; they were republicans.

P.S. Don't let her ghost hear me say that. I have enough problems with real people without getting her ghost mad at me!

Laurie:

Thank you. I have already said that apart from Booth and John Surratt, I have sympathy for all of them. They were all victimized by their circumstances. I like to quote the Spanish philosopher, whose name is something like Jose Ortega y Gasset, who famously said: "I am I and my circumstances." Booth and John Surratt, however, were not victims, in my judgment; they were the victimizers. They were in control of their circumstances, and they used that control to destroy other people's lives. Arnold was right: Booth was their executioner. Fortunately, he survived, to return to his still-living mother and father and his beloved Dash, who waited for him.

John

[LincolnToddFan]

Booth and John Surratt, however, were not victims, in my judgment; they were the victimizers. They were in control of their circumstances, and they used that control to destroy other people's lives. Arnold was right: Booth was their executioner. ]// quote[

I so much agree, Mr. Fazio. I cannot help but wonder if the three men and one woman who stood on the gallows in July 1865 had reached the same conclusion about John Wilkes Booth.

[HerbS]

JWB and JHS were very slick,and sick,victimizers.They created thier own doom!LincolnToddFan-I agree with you 100%.

[loetar44]

(04-26-2015 08:05 PM)John Fazio Wrote:  What would be wrong with your using your second sentence above, plus the next four words, followed by an ellipsis, as a review for Amazon. The Amazon entry for the book has space for five reviews. That would be a fine review. You can say anything else you care to, in place of or in addition to the suggested material, as long as you don't tell the world what you REALY think of the book and its author.

John,

Just between you and me ... I will be happy to do that for you, after I've read the whole book. If you don't mind I will not use an ellipsis, but a 4-dot ellipsis, the 4th dot floating around in the ethers looking for absolute proof!

Kees

[John Fazio]

(04-27-2015 10:55 AM)loetar44 Wrote:  

(04-26-2015 08:05 PM)John Fazio Wrote:  What would be wrong with your using your second sentence above, plus the next four words, followed by an ellipsis, as a review for Amazon. The Amazon entry for the book has space for five reviews. That would be a fine review. You can say anything else you care to, in place of or in addition to the suggested material, as long as you don't tell the world what you REALY think of the book and its author.

John,

Just between you and me ... I will be happy to do that for you, after I've read the whole book. If you don't mind I will not use an ellipsis, but a 4-dot ellipsis, the 4th dot floating around in the ethers looking for absolute proof!

Kees

Kees:

I'm OK with that. And thanks.

John

[Eva Elisabeth]

(04-27-2015 03:30 AM)John Fazio Wrote:  I have already said that apart from Booth and John Surratt, I have sympathy for all of them. They were all victimized by their circumstances. I like to quote the Spanish philosopher, whose name is something like Jose Ortega y Gasset, who famously said: "I am I and my circumstances." Booth and John Surratt, however, were not victims, in my judgment; they were the victimizers. They were in control of their circumstances, and they used that control to destroy other people's lives. Arnold was right: Booth was their executioner. Fortunately, he survived, to return to his still-living mother and father and his beloved Dash, who waited for him .

Well said by Jose Ortega y Gasset, and I wholeheartedly agree, also on Booth and Surratt being victimizers.

I sure have a lot of sympathy for human weaknesses and failures, however, when it comes to murder (unless acting in self-defense) I cannot simply excuse the fellow conspirators this way (especially not Powell). Understand from their point of view perhaps, but have sympathy? I believe it inherent to deep inside feel that murder is wrong and a sin (despite it's a crime by law and all knew it). It's a pity that Atzerodt, who evidently felt this, didn't have the courage to turn himself in (would it have safed his life?).
Booth's victims (despite Abraham Lincoln himself) were first of all those who suffered from the deed although they were truly innocent - the Lincoln and the Seward family, his own brother and family, the Ford brothers, the conspirators' families, and many more.
And Dash, who had to wait so long for the return of his master. Dash however sure loved him without caring for his past record and gave him a new start and chance he sure then deserved.

[LincolnToddFan]

Eva, of all the conspirators who were executed I always felt sorriest for Atzerodt. Then I read Ed Steer's "Blood on The Moon". The man could have stopped the whole tragedy in it's tracks by going to the Metropolitan Police and making a desperate, urgent confession. If that had failed, he could have gone to Ford's and personally tried to stop it. Even though he was implicated deeply into Booth's spider web at that point, if he'd had a hand in saving the life(or trying to save the life) of the president he would have saved his own neck for sure.

Not only did he not do this, he went around boasting about his part in the plot while he was on the run!

Not a very smart thing to do, to put it mildly.

[loetar44]

The one I'm feeling most sorry for was Mary Surratt. What did Mary Surratt know and when did she know it? Did she know about the initial plot to kidnap the president, and possibly about the assassination plot? Did she get a fair trial? Did she deserve to hang?

If you have strong nerves, click:

https://app.box.com/s/4ocrq4t7i2ymva7qp83twnm97gt7ok44

[Eva Elisabeth]

Kees, I am afraid my phone's nerves are not strong enough to open this...
As for your question - my reply would exactly be the same as in my post #104 here:
http://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussio...4910.html?
In the course of that discussion I was recommended this most interesting book, which exactly examines this question - I highly recommend it, too!
http://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussio...-2339.html

[HerbS]

Kees,What is your point in watching the execution video?

[Jim Page]

(04-28-2015 07:02 PM)HerbS Wrote:  Kees,What is your point in watching the execution video?

Wow. Glad I didn't watch that!

As for Mary Surratt, I believe Mrs. Surratt may have been the key person in the Lincoln assassination conspiracy. In those times, being a woman could have been an effective cover for a shrewd and ruthless planner.

This opinion is probably as unprovable as my other belief that Booth and Herold didn't spend five nights in a pine thicket.

--Jim

[RJNorton]

(04-28-2015 05:49 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  Kees, I am afraid my phone's nerves are not strong enough to open this...

Eva, please go here and see if that might work for you.

[Eva Elisabeth]

Thank you, Roger, this link does work.

[loetar44]

(04-28-2015 07:02 PM)HerbS Wrote:  Kees,What is your point in watching the execution video?

To illustrate that the execution of Mary Surratt was wrong and an injustice that can never be rectified. Guilty or innocent, she was a civilian tried in a military tribunal, so her trial was illegal. The fact that she hung and her son (who appears to be just as if not more involved) ultimately went free, brings up the question of justice. She was primarily convicted by the evidence given by Lloyd and Weichman, in return for their own freedom. Mary Surratt's rights were completely denied her.

---

(04-28-2015 05:49 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  Kees, I am afraid my phone's nerves are not strong enough to open this...
As for your question - my reply would exactly be the same as in my post #104 here:
http://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussio...4910.html?
In the course of that discussion I was recommended this most interesting book, which exactly examines this question - I highly recommend it, too!
http://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussio...-2339.html

Thank you Eva!

[L Verge]

(04-29-2015 09:13 AM)loetar44 Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 07:02 PM)HerbS Wrote:  Kees,What is your point in watching the execution video?

To illustrate that the execution of Mary Surratt was wrong and an injustice that can never be rectified. Guilty or innocent, she was a civilian tried in a military tribunal, so her trial was illegal. The fact that she hung and her son (who appears to be just as if not more involved) ultimately went free, brings up the question of justice. She was primarily convicted by the evidence given by Lloyd and Weichman, in return for their own freedom. Mary Surratt's rights were completely denied her.

---

(04-28-2015 05:49 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  Kees, I am afraid my phone's nerves are not strong enough to open this...
As for your question - my reply would exactly be the same as in my post #104 here:
http://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussio...4910.html?
In the course of that discussion I was recommended this most interesting book, which exactly examines this question - I highly recommend it, too!
http://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussio...-2339.html

Thank you Eva!

Fred Hatch has a new book out on The Lincoln Assassination Conspiracy Trial and Its Legacy. I have only read parts of it that he shared during his researching and writing, but Fred contends that the trial was illegal.

I have also been corresponding with a young gentleman who is seeking answers regarding "our" military trial and the convening of others over the years. I have referred him to Ed Steers and also to Fred. Let me find his initial email and share it with you for input.