Talk:Barrett v. United States

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

Excluding testimony edit

The case summary at Quimbee says that the case hinged on whether the court erred in excluding testimony by witness James Melvin, who stated that Barrett was not involved in the crime. If so, this should be included; but I'm not confident enough in the facts of the case to know how to incorporate this. – Quadell (talk) 12:30, 16 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

That's a different Barrett v. United States from 1976, not the 1894 case that is the subject of this article. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 12:58, 16 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
Wow. Oops! Okay, nevermind. – Quadell (talk) 13:20, 16 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Barrett v. United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:06, 27 October 2016 (UTC)Reply