"What If John Wilkes Booth Went To Trial?"

[Thomas Thorne]

Roger,it would seem that Atzerodt;s statement did on the face violate the common law precept I described. But apparently most legal policies seem to have exceptions, I don't have my references at hand but remember reading a 1980's Surratt Courier and American Brutus or possibly a separate article by Kaufman on the subject of defendant testimony, The profound difference with modern courtroom practices made a great impression on me, a non lawyer. who has enjoyed watching movies set in the 19th century depicting defendants testifying at trial being subjected to withering cross examination.
.
The Lincoln trial record is replete with admonition to witnesses not to quote what the defendants said but I remember puzzling exceptions that did not come remotely close to the doctrine that defendants' words could only be quoted while they were committing a crime.

I am equally puzzled as to why Atzerodt's statement was permitted and if legal why the other defendants did not submit their own statements. Perhaps Atzerodt's statement was considered to be a confession. Did he not admit being part of the kidnapping conspiracy and being present with JWB and friends at the crucial 4/14/65 meeting or meetings?
Tom