Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
Steve Gatto
Re: Thanks for the correct phrase
Thu May 17, 2018 07:58
173.224.3.166

In actuality, Mrs. King was asked during the coroner's inquest what had frightened her and caused her to run back into the market:

“[W]hat frightened me and made me turn back? I heard the man on the outside kind of stop or look at Holliday and said "Let them have it;" Holliday said, "All Right." then I thought there would be shooting; from what these parties said; and ran for the back of the shop;” Tombstone Nugget, October 30, 1881.

Furthermore, Mrs. King during the hearing stated:

“Mr. Holliday and the man on the outside, were just a little in front of the middle two; they were walking nearly abreast of each other; Holliday was on the left side near the building; I heard remarks from the party as they passed; I heard the gentleman on the outside, as I stepped into the second folding door, as he looked around to Mr. Holliday. "Let them have it;" Mr. Holliday said, " All right;" I suppose he said it to Mr. Holliday, for he answered him; no names were used; I heard no other conversation, at this exact time; I saw nothing of the fight; I ran when I heard this gentleman say what he did to Mr. Holliday; I went back in the shop.” Tombstone Nugget, November 5, 1881.

  • Thanks for the correct phrasePat Mulligan, Thu May 17 04:52
    KTK Thank you for the correct interpretation of Mrs. Kings Testimony. Specifically the part on What she heard from the butchers or others present. I agree That the piece of conversation was not the... more
    • Pat/for the correct phrase?...Joyce..., Fri May 18 19:24
      Pat, I meant to get back to you on this particular reference after Kenny's post but have been elsewhere. Please note Mrs. King's actual comment regarding the part where you think she heard... more
      • A problem for both sides it seemsBen Harleman, Fri May 18 19:56
        Steve Gatto points out that the defense didn't pursue it much either. It does seem strange that this overheard dialogue wasn't examined more by either side. It certainly seems like it could be... more
        • Ben//bboth siddes??...Joyce..., Sat May 19 07:57
          Well, you can understand why the Defense did not pursue the matter. They probably heaved a huge sigh of relief when the Prosecution sat there twiddling their thumbs. I certainly have no understanding ... more
          • Re: Ben//bboth siddes??...Ben Harleman, Sat May 19 11:11
            Hi Joyce, thanks for the response. I say both sides, because if one side doesn't find it advantageous to pursue, then as adversarial viewpoints, it would seem logical that the other side would want... more
    • Re: Thanks for the correct phrase — Steve Gatto, Thu May 17 07:58
      • Newspapers primary purpose is to sell papers.Larry in WA, Thu May 17 20:04
        “The feeling among the best class of our citizens is that the Marshal was entirely justified in his efforts to disarm these men, and that being fired upon they had to defend themselves, which they... more
      • ParadoxBen Harleman, Thu May 17 19:32
        The two things that stand out from this is, as has been alluded to already, that Mrs. King never states that nothing more was said, only that nothing more was heard. That's a huge difference of... more
        • Re: ParadoxAnonymous, Fri May 18 07:42
          Well, Martha King provided direct eyewitness testimony when she stated: "no names were used; I heard no other conversation, at this exact time." She is very clear that that was all she heard at that... more
          • Earp party not all on the same page..bfrey, Sat May 19 11:19
            I agree that experienced lawmen and stage guards knew enough to have their guns at the ready for any violence that had been threatened towards them. If we are looking at the statement of "let them... more
            • Right, BfreyK.t.K., Mon May 21 09:59
              And according to the Epitaph, Martha only supposed the outside man was speaking to Holliday "let them have it." Just as likely the outside Earp who, "as he looked around" - was speaking to the whole... more
            • Intent and pagesBen Harleman, Sat May 19 11:50
              I agree, but I don't think it was an intent by either side. I also don't think that it was so much not being on the same page but that in a split moment, for each side, they had to try and... more
              • Stop, I don't want that...Eddie Lanham, Sun May 20 04:30
                Ben, Just wanted to let you know that I really enjoyed reading your "Intent and pages" post. The pot had been on the fire way too long for it not to boil.
                • The miles between the mind and textBen Harleman, Sun May 20 09:08
                  Thanks for saying so! I am always left wondering if the things that make sense in my head still do once they've been typed out. It's sometimes hard to tell, and a half-decent thought might come... more
          • Re: ParadoxBen Harleman, Fri May 18 11:29
            Thanks for the response. I think it's a great point that the statement in question wasn't pursued more by the defense. It seems that if it were damaging testimony then they would have challenged it... more
          • Re: ParadoxBen Harleman, Fri May 18 11:27
            Thanks for the response. I think it's a great point that the statement in question wasn't pursued more by the defense. It seems that if it were damaging testimony then they would have challenged it... more
          • Very well saidTom Gaumer, Fri May 18 10:36
            Mrs. King said she heard no more words at that time. If there were war council words minutes earlier and a block away that would not effect her testimony. An order was given to Doc and he... more
            • Re: Very well saidBob Cash, Mon May 21 18:40
              Where is Tom Gaumer and what have you done to him? It is obvious that the same person who wrote the link below is not the person now writing, "Mrs. King said she heard no more words at that time. If... more
              • we know there was a war council...bfrey, Tue May 22 09:11
                We know there was a war council because you would obviously discuss a plan to face men who were armed and threatening your life. There was a plan because the shot gun was given to Doc, and there was... more
            • The parallel book....!Ben Harleman, Fri May 18 11:34
              Hi Tom, this is a perfect illustration why that idea of a parallel record of the different accounts with a column for commentary would be so invaluable. I can just imagine this whole topic being... more
              • Ben/parallel book...Joyce..., Mon May 21 09:29
                That is the project I have been working on for a couple of years. It will certainly stir up a lot of controversy but that will be fun for all...even me. I hope you will like it. Should be out in a... more
                • I have no doubtBen Harleman, Mon May 21 12:41
                  That I'll enjoy it. I'll be looking forward to it, for sure! I bet it's a fun project to put together, too. Ben
              • There is a book in preparation Thomas K Gaumer, Sat May 19 16:41
                Ben by well know and respected historians, I think. As I understand it the goal is to cover Earps whole life with sources but there should be some about the Spicer Hearing and testimony? P.S. If... more
                • Ordinance No.7, Section 1Ben Harleman, Sat May 19 18:00
                  (effective April 12, 1881): It shall be the duty of all policemen to arrest all parties found in the public streets within the city limits, engaged in brawling, quarreling, etc., and all persons who... more
                  • Ben/#7 application...Joyce..., Sun May 20 10:10
                    Ordinance #7 certainly applied to Doc Holiday when he began harassing Ike Clanton, who was sitting quietly eating a lunch. Yet you are applying the same ordinance which resulted in the killing of... more
                    • We got the wrong "All's"...Ben Harleman, Sun May 20 15:12
                      I think you misunderstand my focus with the posting of the ordinance. What I was looking at was the words "It shall be the duty of ALL POLICEMEN to arrest all parties." As opposed to what I think... more
                • Hot headsBen Harleman, Sat May 19 17:47
                  My best guess is that Virgil was in a "fed up" mind set and didn't feel that Behan was trustworthy or effective. I do, personally, think that Behan was sincere in his attempts, but I think both sides ... more
          • The Anonymous post was from me (nm) (nm)Steve Gatto, Fri May 18 07:43
      • Steve/thank you....Joyce..., Thu May 17 13:15
        I always appreciate your quiet oversight. Thank you once again. Regards, Joyce
        • Glad to have a good exchangePat Mulligan, Sun May 20 05:47
          To all, I am glad to have been able to add to this exchange. Compliments to all,especially Ben for the reasoned responses. Questions I ask now; 1. Is it possible that the defense knew of other... more
          • I would like to see some answers to this Pat Mulligan, Wed Jun 20 11:43
            how do I move my previous post to the top ? I would like to see some discussion on the questions I asked. Thank you to anyone who can help Pat
          • Staying levelBen Harleman, Sun May 20 16:58
            Hi Pat, thanks so much for the kind words. I really do try to consider everything and answer honestly, accepting that I may be right or wrong, but it's encouraging when I know that my words have been ... more
            • Ben / inquestPat Mulligan, Wed Jun 20 17:45
              I believe both sides hedged their bets expecting a trial. Too many loose ends and obvious questions left unasked. Both sides were well represented by experienced lawyers. I wish they had left their... more
              • Boy, what an amazing addition...Ben Harleman, Thu Jun 21 10:55
                ...that would be to find notes from the trial attorneys of both sides! For raising a discussion to the top, the thing I've seen done the most is posting the new additional comment in a new thread at... more
Click here to receive daily updates