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, something not based on the written record, just another contrived bush to hide behind.
Behan, given two chances to report on Virgil's conversation with him, testified in the inquest and hearing that Virgil made the outrageous statement about giving the cowboys a chance to make a fight, but not that he said he would kill them on sight. Behan's testimony in the hearing came after he and the prosecuting attorneys were aware of Fallehy's testimony. The prosecution chose not to call Fallehy and also not to ask Behan if he actually heard Virgil say he would kill the cowboys on sight. It is obvious that the prosecution believed Behan’s recollection and that Behan chose not to “correct and expand” his version of what Virgil said. Had the prosecution called Fallehy they would have been in the awkward situation of presenting a reason his account and Behan’s were so different.
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 words — Bob Cash,Mon Nov 14 10:09
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