My first post: thoughts on Booth leg fracture

[Rhatkinson]

Laurie, thanks for the advice on the Wok 'N Roll. We'll try that out. I did mean to say any Booth/Lincoln sites. What I would like to see (that may not be included on the tour) are things like the exact location of where the Navy Yard Bridge was, the exact location of Souper's Hill, things like that. Any advice or suggestions would be much appreciated.

Hey Roger,

Hearsay is technically "any out of court statement offered in court to prove the truth of the matter asserted." This definition obviously covers a very wide area and so there are numerous exceptions to the hearsay rule (e.g., a dying declaration: the robber shoot me and when the cops arrive I blurt out "John Doe shot me" then I die. At court the cop could testify about my statement even though it is hearsay.)

However, statement by a party/defendant is NOT hearsay (e.g., if of the plaintiffs in the car wreck suits that I defend for the at fault driver tells his buddy that "my back isn't hurt at all, I'm just making this up for the suit", that buddy would be able to testify at trial about what the plaintiff said because it was the plaintiff's OWN statement and he is there to be cross-examined and (try to at least) explain it.

As it pertains to Booth, his diary would be allowed into evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule (written declarations of a party). His oral statement to Herold, etc. MAY be allowed depending on the circumstances. In SC, our "Dead Man Statute" (which is basically the same in all other states) says that no witness can testify about what the dead guy told them IF what the dead guy said helps the witness (or the party that called the witness to the stand.) For instance, a son who was excluded from his dad's will could not testify that "dad told me he wanted me to get everything he owned when he died" because that obviously helps the son. He could say, "dad told me that he once met a man who claimed he was John Wilkes Booth" because that doesn't benefit the son.

So, probably any statement that Booth made to Herold about how he broke his leg before he was killed would be allowed into evidence because it didn't help the government. The diary most certainly would be allowed in. If Booth had confessed on the Garrett porch before he croaked then the soldier who heard that could testify about what Booth said because that would be an exception to the hearsay rule (dying declaration). It all just depends on the circumstances as with most things in the law.

Heath

---

Thanks for the info on Jones. I have not actually read his account (embarrassingly enough). His confirmation that the leg was broken at Ford's goes a long way in my book as he would:

(a) be in a position to know from his first hand conversations with Booth and Herold following the assassination (i.e., if the Ford's excuse was just made up by Booth to favor him, Herold would know it was b.s. and Jones had a chance to speak at length to BOTH Herold and Booth and discern what was the truth), and

(b) have no reason to lie about that in his book.

---

(02-16-2013 04:33 PM)MaddieM Wrote:  Something that may well have already been discussed but I'll bring it up again is that there was a third horseman at the bridge after Booth and Herold rode over that night of the 14th but he was turned away by the guards. Would that have been Powell or someone else?

Maddie, the third horseman was not Powell, but Fletcher, who was chasing Herold to try and get his stolen horse back. He was told that he could cross, but not return, so he decided to go back to the city.

There also is some theory that Atzerodt went to the bridge (he was supposed to help guide Booth and Herold in to Virginia) but that he chickened out. I don't think he ever made it to the bridge.

Heath