John Surratt's real parents?

[Eva Elisabeth]

(03-07-2015 03:18 PM)LincolnToddFan Wrote:  Would abduction have been acceptable from the religious (Catholic) point of view in your opinion? -

Eva, the short answer is NO. Depriving a person of their liberty via abduction is an assault/violation upon them. That is absolutely not only a sin, it's a crime.

Thanks, Toia, I think so, too. Thus and re: "Father I wish to say something," "Well what is it my child?" "That I am innocent" - innocence to me from the religious as well as from the legal point of view (as pointed out by Ed Steers in "Blood on the Moon") would mean total innocence, i.e. that she didn't know anything and believed the shooting irons and field glasses were intended for fox hunting. I can hardly believe that (she wouldn't have needed Weichmann praying for her intentions) and even though Laurie recalled she added to the "I did not know what they intended to do" this doesn't necessarily mean she knew nothing - it could just mean she didn't know of the change from abduction to assassination (but abduction would have been a senseless action and risk after Appomattox - why still support such?)

Now, if she knew of or sensed more than nothing - whether abduction or assassination - she must have been aware of that those shooting irons were intended to be used for killing human life during the exercise of that political plot, and the actual use of them would be most likely since the (whatever) action was against the government (that she must have somehow sensed, too). By delivering the message and field glass IMO she actively participated in executing the plot and "undersigned" her agreement, thus to facing the respective punishment the law provided. A German proverb says "Ignorance doesn't prevent from punishment". Even if she was naive, sorry, she must have been aware that such is not a children's game and men have been hanged for less. So I think even if she believed in "only" abduction going on she was still guilty - ESPECIALLY if she was such a devout beliver (a sin and crime, as Toia, too, said). As I see it, a devout believer wouldn't have assisted (even if "only" by delivering messages or field glasses) in ANY plot and crime that uses weapons against humans or even threatens to do or that deprives a person of his/her liberty .

And thus I also think (assume) she was as guilty as Atzerodt who strenuously expressed he did not want to participate in murder (as she might have to) but saw himself sort of in Booth's hands and was too cowardish to go to the police and confess instead of drinking, which would most likely have saved him (and Lincoln).


[Just to add - for all goes "from what I know/have learned so far". Also that I find her guilty and responsible for her fate (i.e. that she must have been aware of the possibility fatal punishment the law provides doesn't mean that I personally think it was right to execute her (as to execute anyone- I've already said since I highly respect the Sixth Commandment I am opposed to the death penalty) - but that is an entirely different topic.]