Question

You have been selected as the jury spokesperson. It is your job to review the following four pieces of testimony. The testimony for the Crown refers to the evidence from the British government, which is trying to convict the soldiers. The testimony for the defense is the evidence supporting the British soldiers to find them not guilty.

Will you and the other jurors find the British soldiers guilty or not guilty? After reviewing the evidence, you will write to the people of Boston about the findings of the jury and explain how you came to your verdict.

Answer 1

Exhibit A: Bystander testimony of Jane Whitehouse for the defense

"A Man came behind the Soldiers walked backwards and forward, encouraging them to fire. The Captain stood on the left about three yards. The man touched one of the Soldiers upon the back and said fire, by God I'll stand by you. He was dressed in dark colored clothes.... He did not look like an Officer. The man fired directly on the word and clap on the Shoulder. I am positive the man was not the Captain.... I am sure he gave no orders.... I saw one man take a chunk of wood from under his Coat throw it at a Soldier and knocked him. He fell on his face. His firelock was out of his hand.... This was before any firing."

Exhibit B: Bystander testimony of Daniel Calef for the Crown

"I was present at the firing. I heard one of the Guns rattle. I turned about and lookd and heard the officer who stood on the right in a line with the Soldiers give the word fire twice. I lookd the Officer in the face when he gave the word and saw his mouth. He had on a red Coat, yellow Jacket and Silver laced hat, no trimming on his Coat. The Prisoner is the Officer I mean. I saw his face plain, the moon shone on it. I am sure of the man though I have not seen him since before yesterday when he came into Court with others. I knew him instantly. I ran upon the word fire being given about 30 feet off."

Exhibit C: Testimony of Dr. John Jeffries, the doctor who treated one of the five victims just prior to his death, for the defense

Q. Was you Patrick Carr's surgeon?

A. I was...

Q. Was he [Carr] apprehensive of his danger?

A. He told me...he was a native of Ireland, that he had frequently seen mobs, and soldiers called upon to quell them...he had seen soldiers often fire on the people in Ireland, but had never seen them bear half so much before they fired in his life...

Q. When had you the last conversation with him?

A. About four o'clock in the afternoon, preceeding the night on which he died, and he then particularly said, he forgave the man whoever he was that shot him, he was satisfied he had no malice, but fired to defend himself.

Exhibit D: Testimony of Samuel Hemmingway for the Crown

Q. Do you know any of the prisoners?

A. Yes, several, there is Killroy I know particularly well.

Q. Did you ever hear Killroy make use of any threatening expressions, against the inhabitants of this town?

A. Yes, one evening I heard him say, he would never miss an opportunity, when he had one, to fire on the inhabitants, and that he had wanted to have an opportunity ever since he landed.

Q. How long was that before the 5th March?

A. A week or fortnight...

Answer 2

i read all the evidences over andf over but it seems they are neither guilty or innocent

Answer 3

hm why do you say that?

Answer 4

because it one person says that the guy who told the soldier to fire was dressed in black and was not an officer and that the officer did not tell noone to fire but the other guy says he saw the officer shout fire, and another guy says that one of the soldiers said he would shoot whenever he had a chance but another guy said that one of the injured said that the soldiers shooted in self defense and they waited and went through alot before shooting

Answer 5

it seems like all evidences cancel eachother out @bngaure

Answer 6

i dont know whether to decide if the soldiers are guilty or innocent

Answer 7

sorry im taking so long this isnt quite what i was expecting haha and well im reading and nothing is sticking so hold on (x

Answer 8

yah its ok

Answer 9

@ChrisNeedsHelp what do you think?

Answer 10

when is your assignment due?

Answer 11

tomorrow morning :( ive been stuck on it for the past hour and i keep rereading the evidences but like i said the evidences are canceling eachother out

Answer 12

hm well what are we supposed to convict them of and in what degree?

Answer 13

@bngaure oh sorry lol was daydreaming, um lets see, well do the Q's represent questions and the A's represent answers?

Answer 14

no worries, and yes.

Answer 15

so we are supposed to determine what their convictions are?

Answer 16

im not sure /: it says guilty or not guilty but the question is what are they supposed to be guilty of.

Answer 17

and i dont see an answer to that /: it would be helpful haha

Answer 18

yes it would lol, this is a tricky one

Answer 19

the soldiers are the ones that are being convicted? all im reading is about mysterious strangers and firing could it be murder?

Answer 20

@bngaure

Answer 21

i think the soldiers are not guilty because the man cloaked in black told them to fire when the captain did not hmm

Answer 22

thats what i was thinking but i dont know im really tired

Answer 23

lol go to sleep ill try to figure it out :D

Answer 24

k hah buena suerte (;

Answer 25

(good luck) sorry in case you didnt know

Answer 26

thanks :)

Answer 27

THE PRISONER IS THE OFFICER :O the soldiers are not guilty it is the prisoner he commited the crime of false impersonation and he had also committed the crime of rendering and ordering troops in the false name of the captain, therefore he is guilty, soldiers are good, god i need to be a judge :) case dissmissed i hope you get an A. goodluck @mumina1999

Answer 28

which prisoner??@ChrisNeedsHelp

Answer 29

ohhhh i finally get it so u mean that the guy in the black was guilty @ChrisNeedsHelp

Answer 30

yea him lol @mumina1999 did you get it?

Answer 31

yah i finally did thankx, btw this was supposed to be a trial based on the boston massacre

Answer 32

ohhh lol did you get graded on it? @mumina1999

Answer 33

not yet

Answer 34

ill tell u when i do

Answer 35

lol alright please do and good luck @mumina1999 :)

Answer 36

thank u

Answer 37

My take on the assignment is that it's just trying to demonstrate that in a situation such as the Boston massacre (these situations happen frequently), it is often difficult or impossible to determine who was right and who was wrong. The soldiers have a right to defend themselves and the inhabitants of the city from deadly danger, but it's impossible to say for sure if they were sufficiently provoked, as the only evidence is hearsay and, in this case, the reports are conflicting. I believe the verdict in this case would be "Not Guilty" because in a capital offense trial such as this one, the defendent has to be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (assumed innocent until proven guilty). That being said, there is certainly room for doubt about the motivations of the soldiers and therefore their guilt.

I don't think the verdict is terribly important though. I think the assignment is meant to show that history is often over-simplified. In the case of the Boston "massacre", were British soldiers really acting in an unreasonable fashion? Truthfully, it's impossible to tell.