Mary Surratt should not have executed. Mary Surratt was not a good woman, but she did not deserve to be executed by the government. It was possible that Mary Surratt knew about the kidnapping, but she should have never been executed by government on the spot. In source one it states “ At her trial, Surratt was defened by several priests and friends the New York times called “ constant and faithful.” Several priests and friends would have never defend her if they thought she was guilty.
Title Mary Surratt should have been executed. Mary Surratt was guilty because there is evidence of her supplying the criminals and having a very suspicious behavior. Mary Surratt's behavior was very weird and suspicious. Mary Surratt was not shocked at the news of Abraham's murder but when the officials visited her a second time her response was dramatically different and appeared shocked at the news. She pretended to not have heard the news which is lying and if she was innocent why would she need to lie to cops.
She was later hanged July 7, 1865, she wore a black vail and was gone. Mary Surratt certainly did not deserve the death sentence but, did deserve time in prison for the involvement of the assassination. The case of Mary was indeed not a fair case. Doctor mudd the man that helped Booth with his leg, was also in the kidnap plot as much as Mary was. Mary Surratt did not deserve to die but, needed to serve time in prison for knowing about the assassination plan.
A seemingly uncorrelated death of a child becomes an attack on two businesses that brought forth unwanted attention. It reveals how corporations can truly neglect their surroundings and the safety of citizens without remorse. In the quaint town of Woburn, Massachusetts, the death of Anne Anderson’s son due to leukemia quickly transformed from a personal tragedy to an extensive lawsuit. Anne Anderson approached Jan Schlichtmann, a personal injury lawyer, to tackle the case. From the beginning, Anne makes it clear that she does not want money, she simply wants an apology.
The court overseeing the Lincoln assassination case sentenced any conspirator to death who was believed to have remained involved in the plot until April 14th, 1865, the date of the assassination. Mary Surratt’s meetings with John Lloyd incriminated her heavily. Lloyd’s testimony suggested Surratt had not only been aware of the plot’s true nature, but had remained an active supporter of Booth for the duration of the plot. Circumstantial and unproven evidence may have led to her sentence, but can anyone say she didn’t deserve. The court’s rule was clear, anyone who was still involved on the day of the assassination received a death sentence.
The Penalty of Mary Surratt How would you discipline someone who took part in a murder? Would you give them a death sentence, maybe a life sentence in prison? Mary Surratt was charged with death for her involvement in the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Although she may not have known about the murder, she was already going to aide in the kidnapping of the president. Therefore, Mary Surratt deserved her death penalty due to her actions in the murderous plan of Abraham Lincoln.
Even after murdering Patrick, she would still love him somewhat and regret killing him immediately if she was normal. Even after being told terrible news, she shouldn’t consider murder as a proper reaction. If it wasn’t for her unborn baby, she would’ve accepted being jailed or even worse, executed. “She knew quite well what the penalty would be. That was fine.
The False Sentence For The First Woman Executed Mary Surratt shouldn’t have been executed. Her co- conspirators said she was innocent and she might have not known about how much John Wilkes Booth and his partners used her boarding house and tavern. Surratt's co-conspirators said that she had nothing to do with the plan to murder Lincoln.
The opposing side of the argument may say Mary planned on the death of her husband though evidence says otherwise. When Mary went down to the freezer she “took hold of the first object she found” displaying how Mary didn’t deliberately grab a weapon to use on Patrick’s death and his actual killing was not clearly thought-out by Mary, proving diminished capacity and not murder. Mary Maloney deeply loved her husband and her child, through Patricks’ violence push her to her limits. No criminal intent was for sought when Mary’s state of mind obscurely went after Patrick. All in all Mary wasn’t in her right mind whyen all of this took place.
Anna Quindlen states that “the killing of one human being as punishment… is inherently immoral” which I took into consideration in my opinion. Yes, killing one person is “inherently immoral” and even when one person did not commit a crime worth the death punishment, but like prop 66 said only those who have committed the crimes of murder or rape should be on death row. To tie all these opinions and facts together, I believe that the crime of adultery committed by the father of Hester Prynne’s child is not worth the punishment of
“We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal” (Notabelbiographies.com), Elizabeth Cady Stanton changed the words of our founding fathers ever so slightly. This was fitting since she is known as a leading figure of the early women's rights movement. Through her diligent work, she helped change the world for women. Elizabeth Cady Stanton was born November 12, 1815 in Johnstown, New York (Biography.com). She was the daughter of Daniel Cady and Margaret Livingston Cady (Biography.com).
Abigail Adams was extremely influential to the nation’s beginnings due to her drive to push certain decisions and debates through the status of her husband. She found the issues of women’s rights and slavery while also finding local politics to be important. As the wife of a president, Abigail Adams was able to use her status in a way to push and bring to life her political agenda. Abigail Adams was able to provide her husband with information and insights of the political situation in Boston during his decade long trip through numerous letters that had been exchanged for so long. Her letters regarding the political situation “included commentary on the American struggle for independence and the political structure of the new republic.”
Mary Maloney “simply walked up” behind Patrick and struck him with a “big frozen leg of lamb” “as hard as she could”. This completely contrasts the starting character of Mary as a housewife whom was patiently waiting for her husband to return home, which no one had expected. She did it “simply” which moulds an image of her not needing to think through her action, effortless and swift. The readers would be disgusted at how fast her character changes, thus suspense would be created as they would constantly question themselves about how it was possible. Additionally, after she struck her husband, she thought that it was “funny” on how “he remained standing” for a while.
First, let’s start with the prosecution witnesses. They called a neighbor, police officer, and professional psychiatrist. The neighbor was called to attest to Mary’s character and party life style. It helped show that she made bad decisions and had poor judgment at times, but it does not equate to murder. Not everyone who drinks kills their baby.
What did they do? Mary didn 't know and she certainly wasn 't prepared to take a chance. ”So this means that Mary Maloney is a very ruthless person.
