Pros And Cons To Blame For The Boston Massacre

646 Words3 Pages
In recent discussions pertaining to Thomas Preston, a controversial issue discussed has been whether he was innocent or guilty in the events of the Boston Massacre. On one hand, some people dispute that Preston was faultless. From this perspective, it is believed that he was not to blame for the actions of his troops when they opened fire into the crowd. They believe the bitter actions of the troops should not reflect onto Captain Preston. On the other hand; however, others argue that Preston was undeniably at fault as he gave the commanding orders to fire. According to this view Preston should be held responsible for the massacre in which he was supposedly at fault. My own view is that Thomas Preston did not give the command to his troops to open fire into the crowd of protesters and the verdict of innocent at his trial was very well justified. On March 5, 1770 a totality of five colonists was shot fatally while six others suffered from non-fatal…show more content…
Some individuals falsely accused the captain, Thomas Preston, of giving his soldiers the command to open fire into the crowd. However, there is no direct evidence pertaining to this crucial accusation. The person who shouted out the order to fire remains a mystery. Several key witnesses who were present during the massacre and saw clearly the face of Thomas Preston was standing right with, or near him, makes it obvious that he does not order his troops to fire into the crowd of protesters. Ebenezer Hinkley, a lady who stood close in proximity of the Boston Massacre, verified that she never heard the word to fire coming from the Captain Thomas Preston. Another witness, Peter Cunningham, stood approximately four feet from the captain also witnesses that he never once heard the
Open Document