The rest of the evidence offered comes directly from the trial itself, some of the testimonies produced come from the Prosecutor, whose bias would probably be against the British, and one from Richard Palmes who was for Preston. The third and final source is anonymous. We do not know why this person would want to keep is identity unknown, but the recordings are no doubt influential to future opinions of the trial. The first witness for the prosecution is Edward Gerrish who explains how the whole event started. According to him, he went up to the sentry to tell him that he owed money in which the sentry responded, “that he was a gentle men and would pay …show more content…
Gerrish responds back with an insult stating that “there was none in the regiment” (Gerrish Testimony, 89). This one response is enough to start the whole terrible event, thus showing how unstable the atmosphere was. Another observation from the testimonies is that they greatly differ, for example on page 89, Gerrish claims that there were 20-30 soldiers, while William Wyat claims there were only 8-10. This is already in contrast with the engraving which shows seven and historians who believe that there were six. The description of what the Captain was wearing is also inconsistent. On page 90, William Wyat claims the Captain wore “a cloth colored surtout” while Cox ascertains that he was wearing “a red coat with a rose on his solider.” On page 92, Diman Mortan agrees with Gerrish that the “The Captain had a Surtout on” but that it was “cloth colour,” while Nathaniel Frosdick claimed that the captain “Was dressed in his Regimentals. Had no Surtout on.” This confusion is explained in Benjimin Burdick’s testimony on page 90 which mentions that the event occurred around 9 o’clock, meaning it would have been dark and hard to see. It was