John Surratt

[John Fazio]

(08-06-2013 06:59 PM)GARY POPOLO Wrote:  I have read a number of posts questioning where John Surratt was at the time of the assassination. After all was said and done he was found not guilty and walked away a free man. What troubles me is how after all the facts were presented about Dr. Mudd and how he had a huge part in helping Booth medically, allowing him and David to stay in his home and then helping in his escape by giving him names and places he could go to help him escape to Virginia gets nothing but a small jail term and then is pardoned while others who had almost no connection to Booth were given maximum punishment or death. Hard to believe he was able to get off so easy. Not to mention he was a major confederate spy! Maybe I am missing something here. Any help? Best Gary

Gary:

Dr. Mudd was indeed lucky. Here are some particulars as to how lucky he was:

1. The Commission applied the conspiracy laws at the time very loosely. Had they applied them strictly, he would have been on the scaffold too. But it is a good thing they did not, because if they had done so Spangler, a completely innocent man, would have been executed too.
2. The commissioners never found out about the doctor's December 18 meeting with Booth and Harbin.
3. The commisioners never learned of Atzerodt's May 1 confession, in which he expressly implicated Dr. Mudd.
4. The commissioners never learned that Dr. Mudd intentionally misled Federal troops who were pursuing the fugitives, Booth and Herold, by telling them they were headed for Parson Wilmer's home rather than Samuel Cox's home.

Even with these breaks, he came within one vote of being hanged. But it is not accurate to say he received a "small jail term"; he received a sentence of life imprisonment. He was pardoned by Johnson after almost 4 years of imprisonment in hell on earth (Dry Tortugas) because he played a major role in fighting the yellow fever epidemic that struck the islands in August, 1867, and which would have killed him too (as it did his predecessor doctors), but for the ministrations of Spangler, who somehow escaped the scourge. O'Laughlen died from the disease; Arnold contracted it, but, like Dr. Mudd, survived. After the epidemic was over, the other prisoners petitioned the government to release Dr. Mudd because of his work with the epidemic. Johnson granted their wish not only because of the doctor's service on the islands, but also because he knew that Dr. Mudd, as well as Arnold and Spangler, had refused to implicate Johnson to the impeachment committee's representative (Gleason), who was sent there to obtain statements from the three (O'Laughlen was dead) implicating Johnson in the assassination, in return for their freedom. They refused, because they knew Johnson to be innocent, and Johnson was, of course, moved by their integrity. That is why he pardond Arnold and Spangler too, one month after he pardoned Dr. Mudd.

I hope this helps.

John

---

(08-06-2013 11:08 PM)SSlater Wrote:  John Fazio take note. Here is an interesting twist that may amuse you. First, it is important to know that John Surratt was charged only with the murder of the president. No other charges. The Philadelphia Press also published a comment wherein they said that "if the charge had been 'conspiring", they (the Jury) would have convicted him immediately." That's pretty much the same as you said. Had you been there, Johnny Boy would have had his neck stretched. Would that have been good or bad? (Vote here:_______). The eye-witnesses from Elmira were wise enough to provide hard copies of sales slips, all having the "proper" date of sale. That beats a "sworn" statement any day. That reminds me of a joke I heard years ago, about a Lawyer who advised his client "Don't say a word, and I'll have 2 eyewitnesses over there in 5 minutes."

As for his trial, there was an awful lot of legal maneuvering after the hung jury. As I recall, the government was preparing a new charge of treason, but the Judge discovered that the Statute of Limitations had run on that charge, and so that charge too was dismissed. When finally rid of all legal entanglements, he took a vacation for six months to South America. I wonder where this son of a dead boardinghouse keeper got the money for that. I wonder where the astronomical sums necessary to maintain his six month defense came from. Jampoler said his defense counsel, three of the top lawyers in the country, did it pro bono. Maybe.


John


Does anyone know if the prosecution was changing the charges in preparation for the proposed new trial?

SSlater:

For most of my life I was opposed to capital punishment. In recent years I have changed my view. I now feel that some crimes are so heinous, that death as punishment is not inappropriate, though I would enforce the scintilla rule, i.e. if there is even a scintilla of doubt (as opposed to reasonable doubt), an accused should not be executed. This will reduce to almost zero the number of innocents who have been executed ("It is better that 100 guilty men should go free than that one innocent man should suffer." --Blackstone) Therefore, I believe the death penalty for Surratt would have been appropriate. His participation in Booth's conspiracy to decapitate the government was only one of his crimes. He also participated in the murder in cold blood of a half dozen or so emacited and starving Union POW's who had escaped from a Confederate prison and were making their way to their lines. He also treacherously fired into a boatload of Union soldiers who were coming to accept a surrender that he had previsouly agreed to, killing some and then escaping. He aslo cooly executed a Union telegrapher caught in the act of telegraphing. He told McMillan, "If you knew all the things I have done, it would make you stare (or gape), or something similar to that. As it was, he outlived practically everyone else in the drama, not dying until 1916, at the age of 72, and being given a High Requiem Mass by the Church, for some reason.