|
Post by Justine T on Oct 25, 2010 17:04:04 GMT -5
"Following the massacre, the English soldiers responsible for firing on the mob were arrested and tried in American courts. All of the soldiers were eventually found to be not-guilty. The reason for this was an American from the mob (not an English officer) had actually yelled the word, "Fire!" ". How could the soldiers be found to be not guilty? It was their mistake for taking orders from an American trying to start something. How could they have even proved that "Fire!" was yelled by an American and that they weren't just trying to get out of a mess? The proof couldn't have been straight from the American's mouth who yelled it (or could it have been?) because that person would have been given the blame and severely punished.
|
|
|
Post by laglaeske on Oct 27, 2010 10:49:36 GMT -5
The courts of America surprisingly had strongly followed the rule of law enough to prevent American hatred of the British to cloud their judgements. Obviously, witnesses gave their testimony (swore by the Bible to tell the truth, the whole truth, & nothing but the truth, etc.) which turned the guilt away from the British soldiers. The Captain of the British regiment, Cap. Preston, was tried for the firing & found not guilty, as were 6 of the 8 soldiers also tried, for there was little proof that they actually fired or that the order was given. Source: [glow=red,2,300]http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/bostonmassacre/bostonaccount.html[/glow] It's actually interesting how Colonial Courts could hold trial for Soldiers of a country they then detested greatly. And find them not guilty. Hope this helps.
|
|