Post Reply 
Porter & Comstock
01-09-2016, 10:43 AM
Post: #1
Porter & Comstock
Just read in Roy Z. Chamlee’s “Lincoln's Assassins: A Complete Account of Their Capture, Trial, and Punishment” that Gen. Horace Porter on May 10, 1865 was removed from the Military Commission (like Maj. Gen. C. B. Comstock) because of defense objections that he would be biased. Strange, because IMO the defense had no opportunity to object, because no defense counsel had attended the sessions of the tribunal, which started in secret on May 8, without any defense counsel. I thought the first defense witnesses were heard on May 12. Am I right? Was the proper reason to remove Porter and Comstock because they were uncooperative in the eyes of Holt and Stanton?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
Porter & Comstock - loetar44 - 01-09-2016 10:43 AM
RE: Porter & Comstock - Eva Elisabeth - 01-09-2016, 11:03 AM
RE: Porter & Comstock - John Fazio - 01-09-2016, 02:31 PM
RE: Porter & Comstock - loetar44 - 01-09-2016, 05:03 PM
RE: Porter & Comstock - John Fazio - 01-10-2016, 11:07 PM
RE: Porter & Comstock - loetar44 - 01-11-2016, 08:42 AM
RE: Porter & Comstock - JosephARose - 02-02-2016, 02:52 AM
RE: Porter & Comstock - RJNorton - 02-02-2016, 04:58 AM
RE: Porter & Comstock - John Fazio - 02-02-2016, 05:40 AM
RE: Porter & Comstock - John Fazio - 02-02-2016, 08:00 AM
RE: Porter & Comstock - RJNorton - 02-02-2016, 08:15 AM
RE: Porter & Comstock - John Fazio - 02-02-2016, 08:58 AM
RE: Porter & Comstock - JosephARose - 02-02-2016, 04:34 PM
RE: Porter & Comstock - John Fazio - 02-05-2016, 02:35 PM
RE: Porter & Comstock - JosephARose - 02-06-2016, 01:50 AM
RE: Porter & Comstock - Gene C - 02-06-2016, 08:06 AM

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)