B.J.
Re: unraveling
Thu Jul 14, 21:43

Thank Paul. That is an improved clarification of my previous post.

  • 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: unraveling — B.J., Thu Jul 14 21:43
    • Paul/ thank you for your input...Joyce A. Aros, Thu Jul 14 9:08
      ...as 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