Preview

The Boston Massacre trials

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
515 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Boston Massacre trials
The Boston Massacre Trials
Boston Massacre considered the real beginning of the American Revolution, the first shots heard around the world. It took place in Boston, Massachusetts, in March, 1770 when Captain Thomas Preston, Corporal William Wemms, and seven British soldiers confronted a crowd which attacked them with cudgel, ice balls, and other makeshift weapons. The soldiers formed a line and loaded their guns, warning the crowd to disperse. A soldier fired a musket into the crowd, immediately followed by more shots they heard someone shouting “fire.” five men, including a black man named Crispus Attucks, were killed on the spot; two more were wounded and later died.
Two trials were held, the first of the commanding officer, the second of the soldiers. Captain Preston and Corporal William along with six soldiers were acquitted; two privates were convicted of manslaughter, branded on their thumbs, and taken out of the army. Although, neither side was satisfied with the verdict, these trials were models of civility and due process, conducted professionally and intelligently by all the lawyers. The British legal system, administered by colonial American, was able to turn a potentially explosive incident into a civics lesson about the rule of law.
John Adams successfully defended Captain Preston and his soldiers. He believed that the rule of law should be predominant and that the British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre deserved a fair trial. He defended them through principle rather than sympathy for their cause; argued that “we are to look upon it as more beneficial, that many guilty persons should escape unpunished, than one innocent person should suffer.”
Adams played the "race card" by telling the all-white jury that Crispus Attucks was the one to blame for the confrontation, and that Crispus's mad behavior attributed to terrifying the soldiers. Crispus formed unlawful assembly, according to Adams, and led this army with their clubs in order to

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Midterm Test Review: History

    • 2930 Words
    • 12 Pages

    Boston Massacre-a riot in Boston (March 5, 1770) arising from the resentment of Boston colonists toward British troops quartered in the city, in which the troops fired on the mob and killed several persons.…

    • 2930 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    43. Boston Massacre- An event that killed five Boston colonist by British troops. It was sparked by a colonial rebellion in result of British taxes and the British opened fire. On March 4, 1770, a group of colonials started throwing rocks and snowballs at some British soldiers; the soldiers panicked and fired their muskets, killing a few colonials. This outraged the colonies and increased anti-British sentiment.…

    • 1975 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    John Adams was the only lawyer in Boston to take on the defense case of the British troops for the Boston Massacre. Adams agrees to take on the case, despite its unpopularity, because he believes that all men were entitled to a fair trial and deserved equal justice. He also has a position in Boston’s legislature as motivation, which is not shown in the film. We don’t get to see the rest of the defense team in the docudrama either; Josiah Quincy is left out. All accused men receive their own individual trial. All but two soldiers are acquitted; Hugh Montgomery and Matthew Kilroy are charged with manslaughter. Adams wins the case for his client and is elected to a higher position in the Massachusetts House of Representatives.…

    • 207 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    On March 5, 1770, British soldiers were badgered to the point of outrage by a small group of boys (Wheeler and Becker, 75). The soldiers eventually retaliated at the group and the church bells started ringing alarming the town that a fire had broken out only leading the numbers in the crowd to increase (Wheeler and Becker, 75). Captain Thomas Preston and his sentry were called to the scene to assist. However, their attempts to redirect the crowd were unsuccessful. It is at this point that a musket was fired and the situation continued to escalate leaving some dead and others wounded (Wheeler and Becker, 75). Was Captain Thomas Preston guilty of murder by ordering his soldiers to fire? Or was he innocent and the soldiers fired out of provocation and their own volition?…

    • 719 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The very next day we were told to leave the Boston by the Gov.Hutchinson .All the people of the Boston came on the street to insult and curse us .On march 13, the colony attorney general issued 13 indictments for murder. We were accused that the murder was all planned and all of us had revenge in hearts. In March 6 a warrant was issued for the arrest of Captain Thomas Preston and the officer in charge of the troops who did the shooting .Me and other seven soldiers under Preston’s command were clapped into prison later the same day. In a particular witness testified that one or two weeks before shooting , Pvt Killroy had said that “ he would never miss an opportunity ,if he had one to fire on the Boston people .…

    • 650 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    His doctor, Doctor Jefferies, later said that Carr did not blame the soldier who shot him. Carr was surprised that they did not shoot sooner. His ‘deathbed testimony’ was presented to court by Dr. Jefferies as follows, with Jeffries repeating what Carr said to him. “Prosecutor- Were the soldiers greatly abused? Jefferies- Yes, they were. Prosecutor- Would they have been hurt if they had not fired? Jefferies- Yes. Prosecutor- So they fired in self-defense? Jefferies- Yes, and he did not blame whoever it was that hit him.” This testimony was believed due to the fact that the jury did not think a dying man or his doctor would lie (Boston). This short excerpt from a newspaper article about the Boston massacre supports Carr’s testimony about the soldiers being harassed, “The noise brought people together; and John Hicks, a young lad, coming up, knocked the soldier down but let him get up again; and more lads gathering, drove them back to the barrack where the boys stood some time as it were to keep them in (Boston Massacre Historical).” Carr’s words let the soldier that shot him go free and spread unrest among the colonists. Samuel Adams took…

    • 589 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Patrick Carr Influence

    • 615 Words
    • 3 Pages

    His doctor, Doctor Jefferies, said that Carr did not blame the soldier who shot him. Carr was surprised that they did not shoot sooner. His ‘deathbed testimony’ was presented to court by Dr. Jefferies as follows. With Jeffries repeating what Carr said to him. “Prosecutor- Were the soldiers greatly abused? Jefferies- Yes, they were. Prosecutor- Would they have been hurt if they had not fired? Jefferies- Yes. Prosecutor- So they fired in self-defense? Jefferies- Yes, and he did not blame whoever it was that hit him.” This testimony was believed due to the fact that the jury did not think a dying man or his doctor would lie(Boston). This short excerpt from a newspaper article about the Boston massacre supports Carr’s testimony abiut the soldiers being harassed, “The noise brought people together; and John Hicks, a young lad, coming up, knocked the soldier down but let him get up again; and more lads gathering, drove them back to the barrack where the boys stood some time as it were to keep them in (Boston Massacre Historical).” Carr’s words let the soldier that shot him go free and spread unrest among the colonists. Samuel Adams took…

    • 615 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the episode Join or Die, everything starts at the point of the Boston Massacre, due to the Coercive Acts, and most of the hour is spent on debating and choosing sides in court. After the event occurs, John Adams is asked to represent the English guards in the Massachusetts court of law. After hearing their story, he decided that representing them would only be right and just to the law. The viewers do not get to see John Adams’ planning process in the case, other than accepting it, since it jumps directly to the court scene. Here, the people of Massachusetts proceed in saying that the commander of the English guards, Captain Preston, told his men to fire upon the crowd of civilians. Adams opposes this and provides facts and evidence that contradict every part of the civilian argument, which is how he earns acquittal for the case against the guards. Later, Adams is offered a prominent position in the name of the King, but turns it down, which results in his appointment to the Continental Congress. This is where the episode ends, with Adams leaving his family and riding off to join the Congress.…

    • 623 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The colonists were throwing snowballs, sticks, and even stones at the soldiers. Furious the soldiers fired into the group of people, at that piont 3 people were killed and 8 people were badly injured. So, Captain Thomas Preston was taken on a trail there, John Adams and Josiah Quincey defend Captain Preston…

    • 450 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Adams was asked to defend the soldiers and their captain in court the day after the shootings. The soldiers had the odds against them. They were in an American court, with an American judge, and an American jury. No one else was bold enough to take on case as precarious as this case was. McCullough went on to state that John accepted this case because he strongly believed that no man in a free country should be denied the right to counsel and a fair trial (92). Adams knew what troubles he was getting himself into taking on a case like this and the repercussions it had. It would not have been his first difficult case, as he took on a similar case that involved four American sailors killing a British naval officer in self-defense that boarded the American ship. The captain was given a separate trial from the soldiers. Adam’s argued that it couldn’t be proven whether or not the captain gave orders to fire, and with a virtuoso performance given by Adams, the captain was found not guilty.…

    • 610 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Adams knew he had to be the one, only a known radical could defend the soldiers. In the end, John Adams got most of the soldiers acquitted and the rest reduced to minor charges. The right by trial by jury was one of the rights the radicals were defending. The British were trying to limit trial by jury because too many smugglers were being acquitted.…

    • 1052 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The film’s depiction of the trial differed from the article in the sense that, the men were found guilty of manslaughter, not let go free and the Boston Massacre’s trial was much longer in the article. In the docudrama, once John Adams had defended the soldiers and won the trial, it was shown as if they were able to just walk away from the scene. However, many complications came before they were let go without a death penalty. Also, in the article, the trial of this case occurred seven months after the trial, allowing much anxious uproar to arise around the town.…

    • 204 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The colonists were able to protest, and put the soldiers on trial. In the midst of all of this, Parliament pulled the Towshend act to release tension. In the end, the British soldiers were proven to be free of guilt. This is what ended the great commotion of the Boston massacre How would you feel if you had your favorite drink taken away from you?…

    • 1450 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the years leading up to the American Revolution, many events occurred that not only demonstrated the rising tensions between Britain and the colonies, but stoked the revolutionary spark in America. The Boston Massacre was one of these pivotal events, occurring on March 5, 1770 when an altercation between British soldiers and Boston rebels resulted in the death of five Boston men. There is much controversy as to which party incited the violence, but ultimately the Boston Massacre was a result of the Bostonians’ desire to break away from British control, with the British soldiers only acting in self-defense.…

    • 712 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Ap Boston Massacre Trials

    • 251 Words
    • 2 Pages

    After this whole case, and a lot of thought, I find each of the eight British soldiers guilty of voluntary manslaughter. They were not found guilty of murder because they were provoked, but not to the point where they killed anybody under self-defense, which would deem them as not guilty. They are found guilty for manslaughter because they were being threatened, but not to the point where their lives were in any danger. In the trial, John Adams specifically stated " Adams conceded, however, that if the assault "was not so severe as to endanger their lives ,this was a provocation, for which the law reduces the offense of killing down to manslaughter." This supports my verdict as voluntary manslaughter, they should be punished according to the punishment.…

    • 251 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays