Justice Spicer used these enlightening words when praising Marshal Virgil Earp's conduct: "...Virgil Earp was at this time the chief of police of Tombstone and charged as such officer by the city ordinance with the duty of preserving the peace, and arresting, with or without warrant, ALL PERSONS engaged in any disorderly act, whereby a breach of the peace may be occasioned, and to arrest and disarm all persons violating the city ordinance which declares it to be unlawful to carry on any person any deadly weapon within the city limits, without obtaining a permit in writing..."
Now I know I get a little extreme here and there, but does anyone recall reading any kind of testimony by Virgil or anyone else that Doc Holliday was requested to present his permit to carry a deadly weapon on the evening before the 26th? Did he not approach and threaten an unarmed and peaceful Ike Clanton in the saloon when so-called lawman Morgan Earp was within hearing and also in position to visually evaluate the situation?
Or did Doc bear special favour so he could ignore Ordinance #7 as he chose? The Justice himself is acknowledging this breach of the law yet not holding Virgil, Morgan, or Doc accountable. Spicer refers to this breach without criticism of any kind!
What is going on here? How do we evaluate such an observation and reference from the judge and not find him biased? Really? He actually tried to use it to support the Defendants' side without realizing what came out of his mouth!
...I suppose you and I, Bob, have a different sense of justice. I thought the judge's or justice's responsibility was to weigh the evidence or testimony and evaluate it in such a way as to arrive at a... more
Spicer's unbalanced decision making... — Joyce Aros,Sat Jun 05 17:39