Jeff Morey
You outrage is outrageous!
Tue Sep 3, 2019 08:51


Your sense of moral indignation is histrionic. hyperbolic, excessive, extreme, over-the-top, exaggerated and woefully unconvincing. Fitch isn’t “lying”. He’s asking Ike Clanton questions. Does he prevent Clanton from answering? NO! Does he prevent Wells Spicer from hearing Ike Clanton’s responses? NO! So, given that he is eliciting responses from Ike Clanton, how are his questions deceptive? An attorney’s questions are not to be taken as evidence in such a hearing or a trial. Do you honestly believe Wells Spicer didn’t know that attorney questions do not constitute evidence? Your outrage over this is, itself, outrageous. So, now I have two questions for you:

1.) What did the Tombstone Telegraph operator testify to relative to Ike Clanton or Tom McLaury sending a telegram for possible reinforcements?

2.) What did the clerk in Spangenberg’s Gun Shop testify to relative to selling Ike Clanton a revolver?

Apparently you believe Ike Clanton’s responses to Fitch’s questions to be the final word about the issues raised. However, unless or until you can answer the above two questions, you are in no position to pronounce judgement on the veracity of Thomas Fitch’s assertions in his interrogation of Ike Clanton. That you would, after so many years of posting on this board, accept the uncorroborated word of Ike Clanton as ironclad, unquestionable, and unimpeachable on any issue is a stunning act of perplexing naïveté.

My Best,

Jeff Morey

  • Senses! I don't have no stinking senses!!Tom Gaumer, Sat Aug 31 13:22
    Jeff I think the lying Fitch was using is usually used in cases where a jury is present in hopes of poisoning the thinking of a least one to get a not guilty. Can also be used to undermine a witness... more
    • You outrage is outrageous! — Jeff Morey, Tue Sep 3 08:51
      • our outrage at my outrage you perceive is funnyTom Gaumer, Wed Sep 4 04:50
        Jeff I'm not outraged just observant of ethics by sleazy and/or tricky lawyers. Obviously a lawyer’s questions and the answers are meant to influence the jury and/or the judge and now days the... more
        • You are just repeating yourself. (nm)Jeff Morey, Wed Sep 4 07:36
          • Jeff no testimony by the telegrapher or the gun clerk and ignoring anything else that might reflect on the questions. And we are both happy. Sounds good to me. Keep Laughing Tom
            • Incomplete casesBen Harleman, Wed Sep 4 21:30
              Hi Tom, I've always regarded the cases as incomplete, due to the fact that both sides were probably keeping their powder dry in case they went to a full trial. I'm not applying this to any specific... more
              • I think you are right and it makes dealingTom Gaumer, Wed Sep 4 21:57
                HI Ben with some of these issues difficult to impossible as we just can't know everything about their positions and tactics about a possible trial. Keep Laughing Tom
Click here to receive daily updates