At last count, Joyce's top of the board post, has elicited 80+ responses.
Multiple historians have responded and posted well thought out, evidence based historical perspectives, including for and against the Earps.
The above is both objective and measurable evidence that any historical perspective which elicits discussion, debate and additional secondary research is a valid, if not an accurate perspective.
On page 175 of my book, as I was refreshing my memory on something in Ike Clanton's testimony, I had to laugh when I read about Doc Holliday's trouble-making the night of the 25th or early morning of the... more
...BJ. Thank you for trying to unite both Mike and I in our perspectives on the History discussions we've been examining. We come from opposite ends, apparently, and I do not want to drag on in my... more
Hey Joyce, I know that I tease you sometimes per your cowboy behavioral rationalizations, but I also observe that you and several others bring a much-needed balance to the historical discussions especially,... more
...that your responses to me are meant with humorous needling and I have no problem with that. I have a hide like an alligator most of the time. I approach this whole Tombstone evaluation from a... more
...when I posted the 'Put up job!' at the beginning of this thread, I was having a little fun trying to get a discussion going as it had been rather slow for a couple of weeks. It was meant 'tongue-in-cheek.'... more
Hey Joyce, Mike is a very serious, nationally recognized writer and researcher. He doesn't need any humor tutorial lessons from myself. It might be a good idea to include an emotion icon with your... more
I remember having to add another humanities class as a requirement to graduate from college many years ago. My girlfriend at the time suggested that I sign up for a philosophy-301 class with her. ... more
Ike made threats, the Earps chose to ignore him, Doc did not. It's that simple. The Earps intervened to keep the scenario from getting violent. That's blatantly obvious. Yet she calls that at attempt... more
Hey Mike, I completely understand your frustration with what I refer to as 'cowboy behavioral rationalizations'. That said, I just wanted to pass on a consultation I had with my history master's resource... more
Let me clear the air. It is not the opposing perspective that I am against. One-sided discussions offer no enlightenment, but ignorant bias is also where enlightenment goes to die. What I AM against... more
wading into the middle of this contentiousness, but as I have in good faith been invited to do so, I shall do my best to play the mediating umpire, if not the know-it-all keeper of the peace. (Granted,... more
Mike, with all due respect Your statement: “The fact that those words come from a professor gives them no more credibility” Is a bit over the top? How do you rationalize away a perspective... more
It's not over the top because the statement isn't true. It doesn't matter if it came from a sidewalk propped or a person with a degree. Have you not lived long enough to know that a credential, a... more
Actually Mike, you might be right. LOL My daughter thinks it funny that at the tender age of 76 and having served two tours of duty during the vietnam war, recently full time retired after working... more
Hey Mike, it occurred to me that maybe you and Joyce have a at least a few things in common. You both reject the history processes which I have learned during my graduate studies. Several times... more
...acceptable on a discussion board and that certainly seems to be the case here. But this poster, M & M, suggests that one-sided arguments, which offer no enlightenment in his view, might be the main,... more
Mike The Earps watched the Doc/Ike situation develop for awhile rather than bring it to a quick halt. They did not arrest Doc for making public threats (Article 7 Disturbing the Peace) They did not arrest... more
reveals the Earps and Holliday were the first to initiate the action. Ike was eating at the Alhambra when he was accosted first by the Earps and then by Holliday Butch
...what were the threats made by Ike PREVIOUS to the accusation by Doc Holliday in the lunchroom or saloon where Ike was quietly enjoying a Beer, a sandwich and likely catching up on a recent newspaper's... more
What was Doc referring to when he approached Ike ? What were the remarks that had angered Doc? It seems to have been of a personal nature ,enough so that it angered Doc and sent him looking for Ike.
Could be Doc was a little more irritated by Issac than the Earp brothers. He was known to get ahead of the news with a drink or three before taking his evening stroll. Maybe he just didn't like the cowboy... more
...well, yes; anything 'could be.' But don't you think that he should have a reason for the irritation? Even if he didn't like cowboys or ranchers, and being an urban dweller, it is entirely possible he... more
Joyce ... all Mike Mihaljevich and myself hope is that you please don't forever reiterate what you yourself consider mostly false testimonies ... read Tefertiller pages 114 & 115
I followed your suggestion and looked up the pages you recommended. However, on page 114, paragraph two, I ran into a minor roadblock. But it is the way my mind works, I guess. The writer states... more
Joyce ... apologies, I thought we were concentrating on the actions in the lunchroom ... I have no place for the previous conjecture [or oral history] either ... take care What is this first threat... more
...you are absolutely right. We were supposed to be concerned about the incident in the lunchroom, but when I started reading the pages referring to that, the references referring to the start of that... more
We were talking about Doc Holliday's arrival at the lunchroom after Ike had settled down to some lunch. When Doc came in he began berating Ike quite strongly, accused him of threatening the Earps, and... more
Joyce ... oh, I see ... but. as I said before, I was referring to the action in the lunchroom, not any testimony as to the verbal interaction ... that's open to any interpretation and I couldn't argue... more
...I am not quite sure what you are trying to explain to me. If we are referring to just the ACTION in the lunchroom, it seems clear enough. Holliday obviously was the initiator, approaching Ike without... more
Joyce ... I'll go back to the beginning ... no hearsay by implication ... no witness conjecture on intent [especially by the author] based on other witnesses' statements ... all witness statements are... more
...no real reason to fear there, was there? Even after the confrontation and threatening by Morgan, Ike wasn't concerned about joining the follow-up card game. Neither was Tom. Later Ike met Wyatt and... more
Joyce ... irony is never wasted, even on stony ground but your first paragraph and most of the second is fine I thought I'd answered the previous missive ... if not ... "Holliday obviously was the... more
has an agenda. I read everything he writes with utmost caution. I double-check what I read from Casey. I am not saying Casey doesn't have a great deal of knowledge, I just think where the Earps are... more
Y'all, if you go back and read ALL these posts... pro & con the freakin' Earps... EVERYBODY has an agenda!! Casey and Joyce might just have more prominent approaches, both having been published, yes?
Hi Sharon, happy to see you posting again. I just wanted to mention something Casey said during one of his real time/real world discussions years ago. If I remember correctly, ...Casey said... more
Butch ... your unbiased opinion ... where do you double-check and what mistakes do you find? I have no idea about this first threat thing ... I should have told Joyce to avoid the mental conjecture... more
Mr. Tefertiller once posed that an article in a San Francisco newspaper was evidence of an investigation into Wyatt Earp in which Wyatt was given a clean bill of health. The article - which Casey sent... more
Butch ... so, not so much a mistake as a biased opinion ... and based on an article from the notoriously unbiased SF press? As you don't pinpoint the investigation how can I argue? A lot of work would... more
Carolyn Lake did not have the diaries (by her own admission) for the Tombstone years of Fred Dodge. How can we know if Dodge's recollections for that period are even close to what happened. And Ms. Lake... more
But only in the newspapers context with Casey Tefertiller and what he attempted to pass off as a Wells-Fargo investigation. There was no investigation. Butch
Butch ... how many more sitting ducks do I have to post for you to shoot down before you show the rest of us the damning evidence or what you keep confirming as fraudulent? What evidence and provided... more
I have a solution for you. Why don't you and Mike just not read any of my posts? Don't you have anything else to do? There are others, like myself, who find there are still questions about the Hearing... more
https://nediscapp.com/discussion.cgi?disc=39627&article=39853&search_page=0&search_term=Mike%20Mihaljevich https://nediscapp.com/discussion.cgi?disc=39627&article=39222&search_page=0&search_term=... more
Joyce Isn't it true that in the lunchroom the night before the shooting on Fremont street this testimony says Doc made all the threats trying to get Ike to shoot it out and Ike just repeated he was unarmed?... more
Tom There is no proof of whether or not Doc was illegally armed. He could have gotten a Permit from the Sherriff or the Town Marshall. We do not know ,TRUE ?
Pat Are you sure the Sheriff or Town Marshal could give a permit? I thought it was another source for a permit? How could Doc have been legally armed? He could be the security in a saloon... more
Permits as I understand, at the time, were issued by the local Law enforcement at their discretion. Very similar to how it is handled today except with much less paperwork! Perhaps someone more... more
Pat According to Lynn Bailey in his book "Too Tough To Die" It is hereby declared to be unlawful to carry in the hand or upon the person , or otherwise any deadly weapon within said City of Tombstone,... more
Presiding Officer in this case was the city Chief of Police. The members of the police commission were Commissioners. The CoP was an officer, and would be presiding because he stood election for the position.... more
obtaining a permit in writing (and upon good cause shown by affidavit) from the presiding officer or the Board of Police Commissioners" Keep Laughing Tom
...There is no proof that Doc was illegally armed and so there is no proof he wasn't. So the only sensible and logical conclusion arrives with the recorded conduct of the lawfully behaved marshal's party... more
Do you not think that the City Marshall would know how had a Valid Permit for a weapon? Especially in the case of Holliday? If the permit was known about there is no need to actually ask to see it!
there, Tom. It is apparent that many of the townsmen were heeled in defiance of the law. This probably included most of the gamblers. Joyce is right; the hearing evidence of any threats made by the... more
I'll bet most of the gamblers were armed. I wonder if there are stats on how many shootings they were responsible for? Here is another point that seems very unclear to me. What do you think? ... more
You asked, "Both Virgil and Wyatt swore in Spicers court they heard Behan say he had disarmed the cowboys, believed it and put their guns away. If they truly believed it, why didn't they thank Behan and... more
Hi Bob The thing is according to his own words, Virgil initially did trust Behan to go down alone to disarm them. Something or someone must have changed his mind.
Peter Virgil may not have trusted Behan but considered that letting him go talk was a prudent thing to do in order to avoid a confrontation. Anyone in Virgil, or any of the City Marshall's posse,... more
Peter When Virgil swore under oath that he believed Behan had disarmed them and kept going down there anyway, he could no longer claim he was going to disarm them. Keep Laughing Tom
Peter, I find nothing in the Behan or Virgil's testimony that state that Virg showed that he trusted Behan to disarm the Cowboys, just that he did not try to stop him from doing so. There was a lot of... more
Bob Virgil said “I called on Johnny Behan who refused to go with me…he said if he went with me they would fight sure., they would not give up their arms to me. He said ..I will go down alone and see... more
Bob that they believed Behan said he had disarmed the cowboys. They then testified under oath they believed Behaan and put their guns away. Obviously they were both lieing as they continued towards... more
Tom Yep, and I think Wyatt said he’d actually put his pistol in a more inconvenient position on the strength of that. Sure. My take is that this was to claim they had no aggressive intention. But... more
Peter Wyatt said he put his gun in his pocket. Virgil said he moved his gun to his left hip and put Doc's walking stick in his gunhand. Keep Laughing Tom
Butch That’s true. I’ve been reading “Wyatt Earp by Wyatt Earp” which is the Flood manuscript. Wyatt says Doc was getting ragged by onlookers for the “popgun”. I guess he tried to cover it coming... more
Peter Yep . Wyatt said he put his revolver in his pocket after he believed Behan had disarmed the cowboys. I think the most likely interpretation of the Earps actions was what you are saying. They... more
...shotgun under his coat but the coat kept blowing open and exposing it, according to testimony. Hi Butch. Nice to hear from you again. I think Doc was likely a risky witness as he seemed to be drinking... more
...how Virgil completely condensed the whole scenario by eliminating the immediate attack on Frank McLaury and the shotgun assault on Tom in his testimony so as to focus completely on Billy Clanton, as... more
It's been a little unexciting on BJ's the past week or two so I thought I would see if I could get a few folks involved in a discussion of sorts. After all, isn't that what the site is all about? We all... more
I always thought the story of why they had to get Doc to return to Tombstone in such a hurried fashion was b.s. What was the urgency? The explanation makes no sense at all. It seems Doc was the person... more
I believe research has shown the celebration in Tucson where Morgan supposedly went to get Doc did not occur at the time claimed by the story. I don't remember the dource for the conflicting dates. ... more
The date I have is Doc returning Oct 22 a Saturday evening and confronting Ike that Tuesday evening. According to Kate, Morgan arrived in Tucson and tapped Doc on the shoulder and said "we want you... more
...because it demonstrates that all the Earps are in unison, agreement about something. This is not a personal slight to an individual. Something more is going on and it convinces me that Doc's job was... more
...the more you break it down and analyze it, the clearer it is that the Earps side of the story makes no logical sense. They are very poor at putting it all together. It has nothing to do with being... more
I think were missing a key point.... the Earp"s motive. Why send for Doc in a seemingly emergency circumstance to just placate Ike? Why rile Ike at all as they apparently were around when it occurred?... more
Bruce, that is the really serious thing that we are missing, as you suggest. Naturally, I have a couple of theories on that if you are interested. Some people don't know when to quit! My first thought... more