Joyce A. Aros
Are we to assume...
Sat Nov 12, 5:32


...that Spicer did not do his job and examine testimony from the Inquest? Was he not aware of every statement made behind closed doors as well as in every saloon in town? He knew what was said by Fellahy and there is no justifiable reason to reject the accompanying testimony from witnesses in the Inquest, though they might have not have been part of the Hearing, but they were known by Spicer and had to weigh on his mind. Spicer either did his homework or he didn't!

Why would we assume that Fellahy 'misheard' a conversation that he quoted? Obvious? Hardly. The man quoted what he heard Virgil Earp say to the Sheriff. There is no reason to dismiss his testimony. That is an assumption without basis. Are we to accept only direct comments based on an involved conversation? What about all the witnesses that testified regarding something they heard next to them though they were not part of the conversation? That would certainly narrow the field.

It doesn't change the fact that Virgil threatened to kill certain men on sight when he had no actual contact with them; and Behan, though he did not repeat those words in testimony, nevertheless heard them. This was supported by Fellahy; Spicer knew it and he allowed his own viewpoint to over-shadow a just decision in the case. His continued favoritism toward the defendants surfaces throughout his summary.

  • Uh, JoyceCasey Tefertiller, Sat Nov 12 5:01
    Fellehy testified in the coroner’s inquest, not Spicer’s preliminary hearing. And Behan never claimed to have heard these words, even though they were supposedly spoken in a conversation with him. ... more
    • Are we to assume... — Joyce A. Aros, Sat Nov 12 5:32
      • Remember Mrs. King also testified as to VirgilsTom Gaumer, Sat Nov 12 14:43
        Joyce murderous intentions and only a few feew and seconds before the shooting started. Keep Laughing Tom
        • So,Tom, while Mrs. King's testimony tends to lend credence to Fallehy's, why would Behan testify to a different statement from Virgil that, while still injudicious, was not an indication of murder wit... more
          • Murder with malice?Tom Gaumer, Sat Nov 12 21:24
            BOB Behaan says Virgil said "there were "a lot of sons of bitches in town looking for a fight.{Does sons of bitches indicate some malice?} "I said to him (Virgil) "You had better disarm the crowd."... more
          • Hi, Bob...Joyce A. Aros, Sat Nov 12 16:17
            ...I think the answer to that is the difference in the two men. I often like to argue that you can read between the lines without altering the record and that is the way I tend to look at this situation.... more
        • Right, Tom....Joyce A. Aros, Sat Nov 12 14:48
          ...and her testimony alone should have changed the course of history!
      • Re: Are we to assume...Bob Cash, Sat Nov 12 6:31
        Joyce, even if Spicer were allowed to consider the Inquest testimony, and I'm not sure that he was under Arizona law (Steve Gatto?), Behan, under oath, testified in the Spicer hearing as follows, "...saw... more
        • Re: Re: Are we to assume...Steve Gatto, Mon Nov 14 11:15
          Bob, Spicer should have considered only the evidence introduced during the preliminary hearing through witness testimony or otherwise admitted into evidence during the hearing. There is no indication... more
          • Kill them on sightCasey Tefertiller, Tue Nov 15 4:20
            Steve, Thank you for that. If Virgil did make the “on sight” comment, all of the following would have to be true: 1 Behan managed to forget the most volatile comment of the day. Either that,... more
            • Are the prosecution a Dream Team?Tom Gaumer, Thu Nov 17 0:35
              Casey Let's take a look at one example of their work as an example of their "dream team" ability. Albert Billicke testifying about Tom acquiring a gun from a butcher rather than a gun store or the... more
            • Re: Kill them on sightSteve Gatto, Wed Nov 16 11:15
              Casey, You're trying to rationalize what was said in the conversation prior to the gunfight with what occurred (or did not occur) during the preliminary hearing to reach the position you favor - that... more
              • Re: Re: Kill them on sightCasey Tefertiller, Thu Nov 17 9:13
                Steve, Thanks for those interesting thoughts. Yes, I guess that Fellehy could have been terrorized by the Earps, or he could have been running away from seagulls with Tippi Hedron. Anything is... more
                • Casey/ I have to wonder...Joyce A. Aros, Thu Nov 17 10:01
                  ...why you think the Nugget should have made a major issue out of the 'kill them on sight" comment. The Nugget missed making an issue over quite a few comments in testimony that were just as serious. They... more
            • Casey/ 'on sight' comment...Joyce A. Aros, Tue Nov 15 8:09
              Your first reflection about Behan is interesting, but I think there is more to it. I don't recognize Virgil's comment as more volatile than one or two of his others that day, but certainly it gives us... more
              • Virgil the reluctant warrior?B.J., Wed Nov 16 16:12
                I seem to remember reading somewhere that Virgil had to be awakened multiple times that morning, including by one of his Deputy’s about Ike’s loud, public, heeled and aggressive behavior. Also remember... more
                • BJ/ Ike's what?...Joyce A. Aros, Thu Nov 17 7:50
                  ...I think loud, aggressive behaviour is a slight exaggeration, don't you? Ike was in a couple of Saloons, but so was every other man in town who was awake. There was no other place to go. Ike spoke... more
                  • Re: BJ/ Ike's what?...B.J., Thu Nov 17 17:38
                    From what you are assessing, Deputy Bronk (sp?) exaggerated Ike’s behavior and he should not have tried to elicit action from Virgil Earp? 🤔
                    • Bumbling Bronk...Joyce A. Aros, Thu Nov 17 18:48
                      Well, I don't know if officer Bronk exaggerated Ike's behaviour or not, but according to Virgil, Bronk seemed a little pre-occupied before he informed Virgil that he was at death's door. This while Bronk... more
                      • Bronk's pre-occupation...Joyce A. Aros, Fri Nov 18 11:03
                        Well, BJ, as you may have noticed by now, I not only have a suspicious nature but am inclined to read every few lines with an "...wait a minute. something doesn't sound right here!..." attitude. It slows... more
                      • Re: Bumbling Bronk...B.J., Thu Nov 17 19:22
                        Joyce, I’m trying to understand your train of thought so I appreciate your patience per my limited education level and cognitive deficits. I also remember reading that other citizens were very concerned... more
        • How would you translate Virgils wordsTom Gaumer, Sat Nov 12 15:12
          Bob as reported by Behan? "I said to Earp you had better disarm the crowd; He said he would not, he would give them a chance to make a fight." Isn't it fair to assume that Virgil would not give... more
          • Re: How would you translate Virgils wordsBob Cash, Sat Nov 12 18:59
            Thse are very nice suppositions and questions, but they in no way address the question I've been raising and you and Joyce have been beating around several bushes not to answer. How do you explain Fallehy... more
            • Re: Re: How would you translate Virgils wordsTom Gaumer, Sat Nov 12 22:01
              Bob Unanswered suppositions and questions make points. Focus on Virgil He is going to give them a chance to fight which he believes will result in their death or he will shoot them on sight which... more
              • Re: Re: Re: How would you translate Virgils wordsBob Cash, Mon Nov 14 10:09
                Tom, you are now making an entirely new argument to the question of why Fallehy and Behan testified to different statements by Virgil. You, apparently, now are saying that Virgil made both statements,... more
                • In trying to reach the truthTom Gaumer, Wed Nov 16 5:29
                  I know Fellehy was in the Inquest and not the hearing. What he said does not become irrelevant because of that. Behan testified to a couple other things which might have some application about what... more
        • Re: Re: Are we to assume...Bob Cash, Sat Nov 12 6:53
          Even if Spicer were allowed to consider Inquest testimony, he would have had to consider whether Fallehey or Behan were in the best position to understand what Virgil said to Behan. According to Behan's... more
          • In your opinion?....Joyce A. Aros, Sun Nov 13 5:32
            Bless your heart, Bob. Almost no one ever asks for MY opinion! However, you did. Apparently, as Tom described, Fellahy was in a very good position to hear what Virgil said and his confident statement... more
            • It's semantics, butolds, Sun Nov 13 8:28
              describing someone as stupid is not name-calling any more than would be describing someone as thuggish. Calling someone a thug is name-calling. Adjective vs. noun. As a rule, the problem with name-calling,... more
              • Olds/ it is only fair to tell you...,.Joyce A. Aros, Sun Nov 13 11:18
                ...that you are talking to someone who never completed the fifth grade and so am considered a fourth grade idiot. What that amounts to is I haven't the faintest idea what the heck you are talking about,... more
                • In other wordsolds, Sun Nov 13 12:05
                  what we have here is a failure to communicate? Tell you what. Let's make a deal. If I accept half the blame for not expressing myself clearly (or perhaps too clearly since clarity, like compression, so... more
                  • Joyce Aros!Sharon Cunningham, Mon Nov 14 13:31
                    Olds, wordsmith that you are.... please know that you are 100% correct in that Joyce Aros is In wonderful company... and she can dang well hold her own with the lot of them!
                  • Olds/ a good deal....Joyce A. Aros, Sun Nov 13 13:54
                    ...I have no trouble accepting responsibility. I'd just like Spicer and a few others to be held accountable if only in absentia. (spelling?) And I thank you for reassuring me that lack of sufficient... more
                  • Forgot to add--olds, Sun Nov 13 12:31
                    Faulkner was a high school dropout as well. Anyone see a pattern here? Thomas, not Tom, Wolfe, on the other hand, had a graduate degree from Harvard, which perhaps explains why he is virtually unreadable.... more
                    • Faulkner ages well (nm)Dan Brown, Sun Nov 13 18:58
                      • Exactly.olds, Sun Nov 13 19:48
                        And like many if not most writers of his caliber, not that there are many, his work benefits from re-reading. Someone, a teacher probably, once counseled me that one of the criteria when appraising... more
                        • Yes, absolutelyDan Brown, Tue Nov 15 10:55
                          We grow together, the book and I. There is an alchemy in the experience.
                          • That's the word,olds, Tue Nov 15 14:55
                            and it's a good one--alchemy. Only the best work affords the reader that experience. (There's a reason it's called the PHILOSOPHER'S stone.) Evan Connell, he of the terrific "Son of the Morning Star,"... more
          • Here is what Fellehy said as to his positionTom Gaumer, Sat Nov 12 17:15
            Bob with regard to Virgil and Johnny. "A stranger that was standing near me says "there goes the Sheriff" He was going towards the Marshal FOLLOWED HIM RIGHT AFTER. [C ORRECT AS IN THE ORIGINAL].... more
          • Bob/ to answer your last question...Joyce A. Aros, Sat Nov 12 12:07
            Why would you assume Fellahy was 'trying' to hear what was said? We don't know if he was very close or not, but he seemed pretty confident about what he heard. And as Virgil was irritated enough to make... more
          • skip to part two....Joyce A. Aros, Sat Nov 12 8:20
            I understand your point but I think I did not make mine clear. I am fully aware Spicer could not incorporate the Inquest testimony into the Hearing testimony. I was trying to focus on how biased Spicer... more
            • I always liked Ike's testimony best!Dan Brown, Sun Nov 13 11:59
              Ike would have fit in well today. I'm not entirely sure where. Maybe in an all night donut shop in San Francisco. His testimony turned the page for a lot folks. It is far more impressive than Wyatt's written... more
              • Dan/ Ike's testimony....Joyce A. Aros, Sun Nov 13 13:58
                I think you are the first person I have talked with who saw Ike's testimony as interesting and even enlightening. I thought he handled himself quite well even though the Defense lawyer seemed so frustrated... more