One probable reason it was difficult to discern what happened at the Haymarket on May 4th, 1886 was the mere fact that the square was dark, lit only by a single gaslight (p. 182). It would eventually grow stormier, adding to the confusion. The meeting will begin at 7:30 pm. Secondly, different men visited the Haymarket scene at different times–as with the case of Mayor Carter Harrison who did not believe that violence would occur, even reporting to Chief Inspector John Bonfield that the crowd did not seem out of control or dangerous, then going home at 10:00 pm (p. 184). Another man named Albert Parsons left early with his children and others due to a change in the weather to a second location, Zepf’s Hall (p. 185). The departure of the aforementioned…show more content… Stanton was at the site and saw and felt the bomb fall (p.186). August Spies was at the site but did not witness the bomb but felt the explosion. Physically removed to Zepf’s Hall–not at the site–Albert Parsons was high enough to see the explosion of light (p.187). In the chaos and darkness, it was highly difficult to produce a straightforward story–regardless of whether one was a police officer, detective, newspaperman, laborer, or civilian. The emotions felt by witnesses in the moment–anger, fear, pain, shock, could also influence one’s perceptions of events. So soon after the American Civil War, men in crisis situations could respond differently–with clarity, confusion, or even PTSD. Regardless, when testimonies were brought forward, the police were more influential and trusted, and appeared to be the most wronged party (p.188). According to Green, it was the police version of what transpired in the Haymarket on May 4 that would “serve as the foundation for legal case law” when they prosecuted the laborers accused of the bombing (p. 188). Meanwhile “anarchists and supporters of the International, as well as others.not connected with the unions or the radical movement” would challenge the police narrative of events
