Joyce A. Aros
The question was; which of the...
Wed Jul 13, 16:46

...DEFENSE witnesses was the most beneficial. No fair cheating, BJ! You have to do better than the 'old scapegoat' everyone falls back on.

  • Re: a question...B.J., Wed Jul 13 14:52
    The Prosecution’s Witness: Ike Clanton was the best Defense Witness.
    • The question was; which of the... — Joyce A. Aros, Wed Jul 13 16:46
      • Re: The question was; which of the...B.J., Wed Jul 13 21:13
        If you closely observed, assessed and read Ike’s rambling, inconsistent and semi-incoherent testimony (along with his publicly threatening the Chief of Police) Ike single handedly unraveled the... more
        • unravelingpaul j, Thu Jul 14 7:31
          Ike's unraveling of the prosecution case was what he said under cross-examination. So, in effect, it was the Defense team that elicited his most damaging testimony - the nature of his conspiracy with... more
          • Re: unravelingB.J., Thu Jul 14 21:43
            Thank Paul. That is an improved clarification of my previous post.
          • Paul/ thank you for your input...Joyce A. Aros, Thu Jul 14 9:08
   this really becomes a convoluted discussion at times. I do not see Ike's admission of a conspiracy with Wyatt & Co. over the Benson stage talk. I see Ike relating from his point of view what the... more
            • Re: Paul/ thank you for your input...B.J., Wed Aug 03 23:11
              As Paul has indicated, Ike’s problem was subjecting himself to cross examination by the defense and devolving into off-script diatribes.
              • BJ/ off script?Joyce A. Aros, Thu Aug 04 6:29
                Ike's testimony, according to my reading ability, consisted of questions from the Defense and direct answers from the witness, Ike Clanton. I am not aware of a written script referred to; fill me in on... more
                • Re: BJ/ off script?B.J., Fri Aug 05 2:00
                  Joyce, do you really believe that Ike chose to provide testimony without being advised and prepped by the prosecution attorney’s? I think you're taking “off-script” a little too literally. You don’t... more
                  • BJ/ you are quite right...Joyce A. Aros, Fri Aug 05 5:31
                    I did take your comment too literally, but I wanted to make clear how badly the Prosecution lawyers handled the whole presentation. My newest book out is an extension of Turner's examination of the... more
        • BJ/ could you give me a few examples of Ike's...Joyce A. Aros, Thu Jul 14 5:51
          ...rambling, inconsistent and semi-incoherent testimony? It is hard to defend generalities. One needs a few recognizable details, but it should open up an interesting discussion that seems long over-due.... more
          • Joyce, if Ike's claim the Earp's were 'piping off" money (from the Benson stage robbery attempt) was true, why was there no evidence of an actual robbery and no reports of missing money?
            • BJ/ that is the $64,000 question...Joyce A. Aros, Fri Jul 15 7:06
              ...However, Ike did not actually claim the Earps and Holliday did the job. He was asked pre-planned questions which described all the events and he simply answered as to what the Earps and Holliday told... more