Post Reply 
An interesting trip to Surrattsville
09-05-2016, 12:18 PM
Post: #16
RE: An interesting trip to Surrattsville
I think Spangler's comment to Booth about holding the horse conveys that Spangler had no idea that Booth was coming and did not know for what purpose the horse was being held. Spangler knew his job in the theatre required his constant attention and presence; thus he recruited Peanuts for the task. Spangler as a lower echelon "friend" of Booth wanted to please him and thus agreed to do what he could. Spangler did inadvertantly become an accessory after the fact but should not have been convicted.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
09-05-2016, 07:23 PM
Post: #17
RE: An interesting trip to Surrattsville
(09-05-2016 12:18 PM)Dennis Urban Wrote:  I think Spangler's comment to Booth about holding the horse conveys that Spangler had no idea that Booth was coming and did not know for what purpose the horse was being held. Spangler knew his job in the theatre required his constant attention and presence; thus he recruited Peanuts for the task. Spangler as a lower echelon "friend" of Booth wanted to please him and thus agreed to do what he could. Spangler did inadvertantly become an accessory after the fact but should not have been convicted.


Dennis:

In my opinion, your opinion is exactly right, except for the minor detail that he was not really an accessory after the fact; he was found guilty of having helped Booth escape from the theater, but, as you have correctly stated, that finding was a mistake. Well, the Commission tried and convicted eight defendants and got it right with respect to seven of them. Seven out of eight isn't bad, but that was cold comfort for Spangler.

John

John
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)