In the book, Chasing Lincoln’s Killer, a total of five co-conspirators served the death penalty. Although, out of these five suspects, it seemed that George Atzerodt’s punishment far outweighed his role in the crime. In my opinion, I do not believe that he did anything worthy of death. Firstly, Atzerodt never killed President Lincoln or Vice President Johnson. Even though he was ordered to kill the vice president, he never followed the plan and ended up quitting. “But that night, Johnson escaped death. Atzerodt could not do it...Abandoning his mission, Atzerodt got on his horse and rode away.” (page 69). Unlike Lewis Powell, George Atzerodt didn’t attempt to murder his victim at all. The plan presented to him by Booth was never completed and remained just a thought in his head. A failed idea shouldn’t justify his cruel punishment. …show more content…
He didn’t escape with him or didn’t aid him during his escape, like the other conspirators did. Atzerodt never escaped or followed Booth across the bridge either, having no intention to. On page 65 it states, “Once over the bridge, Booth turned to see if his henchmen -- David Herold, Lewis Powell, or George Atzerodt -- followed in the distance…Booth saw no one, neither friends nor pursuers, behind him.” For instance, Mary Surratt gave all of the suspects shelter and Herold joined Booth on his escape route. Should Atzerodt have been punished even if he didn’t contribute to the
Booth assembled his men;the men he met over the years who were filled with southern pride and anger at the new nation. His conspirators in Lincoln’s assassination and escape were: Lewis Powell, David Herold, John Surratt Jr., Samuel Arnold, Michael O’Laughlen, and George Atzerodt.To prepare, Booth packed his weapons of choice: a .44 caliber pistol and a Rio Grande camp knife just in case. When Abraham and Mary Lincoln arrived at Ford’s Theatre, they were met with loud applause, even though they didn’t send word of their arrival;the crowd never thought that this would be the last night they would see Abraham Lincoln
... go ahead with the death sentence made the North realize that he was a hero whereas the South believed that Brown was a terrorist and committed an act of treachery and horror. This specific invasion also assisted on choosing Abraham Lincoln for president, who advanced to achieve the vision of John Brown with the Emancipation Proclamation.
As to Brown’s trial, Virginia governor Henry Wise was left with a daunting decision that would change the course of history: hang Brown, which would please the South, but only at the expense of alienating the North and martyr him in the process, or he could let him live. Wise knew that the only way Brown could get off alive was if he was declared
The American Civil War not only proved to be the country’s deadliest war but also precipitated one of the greatest constitutional crises in the history of the United States. President Lincoln is revered by many Americans today as a man of great moral principle who was responsible for both preventing the Union’s dissolution as well as helping to trigger the movement to abolish slavery. In retrospect, modern historians find it difficult to question the legitimacy of Lincoln’s actions as President. A more precise review of President Lincoln’s actions during the Civil War, however, reveals that many, if not the majority, of his actions were far from legitimate on constitutional and legal grounds. Moreover, his true political motives reveal his
George shouldn’t go to jail for killing Lennie, even though Lennie was completely innocent. Lennie is illiterate and ill-informed. He killed Curley's wife and many animals and to keep people safe from him would be hard. He might of had to just stay in one place all day alone, that isn't good for a human. Lennie's death could save many lives.
Learning your brother has passed is sad but watching him be murdered is the most traumatic thing a young boy could be put through. Sam had been accused of cattle theft, but it was his own cattle. Tim tried to explain to general Putnam but he refused to listen saying that the execution would show soldiers that they will be punished for their actions and might save civilians lives. They went on with the execution and “shot him so close that his clothes were on fire.he went on jerking with flames on his chest until another soldier shot him again.then he stopped jerking”(208). The patriots killed on of their own to save others. Sam did not do anything and was totally innocent but he did not have enough telling points to prove that he was. It was unfair that instead of somebody that actually committed a crime was not executed as an example. Tim would not want to choose a side where he was not protected by his own people. Being neutral was the best choice for Tim since he was against war overall and did not want to support either
Without any question, most people have a very clear and distinct picture of John Wilkes Booth a in their minds. It is April 1865, the night president Lincoln decides to take a much-needed night off, to attend a stage play. Before anyone knows it a lunatic third-rate actor creeps into Lincoln's box at Ford's theater and kills the president. Leaping to the stage, he runs past a confused audience and flees into the night, only to suffer a coward’s death Selma asset some two weeks later. From the very moment that Booth pulled the trigger, the victors of the Civil War had a new enemy on their hands, and a good concept of whom they were dealing with. A close examination of the facts, however, paint a different view of Booth, a picture that is far less black and white, but a picture with many shades of gray.
During the trial itself, there was no need to connect communism with the charge of espionage, never-the-less, it was done excessively. Prosecutors used a primitive bias as a substitute proof of motive. President Eisenhower practically admitted to this. "The execution was necessary to refute the known convictions of Communist leaders all over the world that free governments.are notoriously weak and fearful and that consequently subserve and other kinds of activity can be conducted against them with no real fear of dire punishment." The primary consideration was that going through with the execution would send a message to the Communists that from now on, American nationals recruited into Soviet espionage networks would be treated with the utmost security. So many recognized and respected people believed the verdict of death had been sealed from the beginning by a conspiracy of the fascist, anti-semitic forces that controlled America.
10,000 police , federal troops, and detectives out to find Booth become the biggest manhunts. Even though people might have agreed on Booth’s decision to kill Lincoln. Even though people might have agreed on Booth’s decision to kill Lincoln for the “better of America” it was still unjustified. Though Booth had a different opinion on Lincoln choices, it doesn’t make sense to end someone's life. The effect on the community was terrible, many were grieving over his death and praying in churches hoping he was wounded but alive.
...shment: A Defense,” an article in The Death Penalty: Pro and Con written by Ernest Van Den Haag , shares this “Abolitionists appear to value the life of a convicted murderer or, at least, his non-execution, more highly than they value the lives of the innocent victims who might be spared by deterring prospective murderers”(3)
Don’t get me wrong, if a person proven guilty of murder, especially as heinous as this crime was, they deserve the death penalty but only if there was “no shadow of a doubt” hard pieces of evidence, more real proof, not circumstantial evidence, are connecting that person to the crime.
... to a miscommunication between the Captain and his soldiers. If the crowd had not been in such an uproar the Boston Massacre never would have happened. With all the testimony and the deposition from the Captain, the jury made the correct decision by determining Preston innocent.
It took 70 years after his execution to exonerate him”, Lindsey Bever, states, “He was questioned in a small room, alone – without his parents, without an attorney” (Bever). It happens to be that George fell under the category of a minor, therefore it was illegal and immoral for deputies to interrogate him without proper legal representation or a legal guardian. This indicated that his “confession” might have been coerced or intimidated out of him. According to Terrell Jermaine Starr, author of “Executed at 14: George Stinney’s Birthday Reminds Us That the Death Penalty Must End”, adds that, there was no record of George actually confessing to the crime, no physical evidence whatsoever even exists (Starr). Starr also confirms that the deputies reportedly offered young George ice cream in order to further manipulate him into confessing (Starr). Whether Stinney actually confessed or was forced to confess; the confession could not have been used in court due to the false pretenses it was obtained
In Truman Capote’s famous non-fiction novel, In Cold Blood, there is evidence that supports the injustices of the trial: the death penalty. The final outcome of the trial was never to be any different than death. “Of all the people in all the world, the Clutters were the least likely to be murdered” (Capote 85). We know the two men who killed the Clutter family, Perry Smith and Bill Hickock, preplanned the crime with malice and forethought. Although the actions were cruel and gruesome, does Death Row fit what they did if their pasts, childhood environments and situation, are bad?
Do you think that George Atzerodt’s punishment was fair for his part in Lincoln's assassination? Some people might say yes and others might no. George Atzerodt was a co-conspirator of John Wilkes Booth, but he did not influence Booth at all. Atzerodt was sentenced to death by hanging just for being connect to Booth. Therefore, George Atzerodt’s punishment outweighed his role in the assassination of Abraham Lincoln.