Talk:Pierre Napoléon Bonaparte

Controversy with Grousset
The description of the events here differs sharply with that given by Thomas March in The history of the Paris Commune of 1871 (p.7). March is hardly a socialist - although he seems to have some admiration for the workingmen, he speaks glowingly of the Emperor and takes the position that the Paris Commune was a sort of historical misfortune to be avoided. Any other sources? --Nixin06 (talk) 15:35, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

" The reason for the acquittal was not pressure by the Emperor or his minions. Actually Napoleon III had little use for his troublesome cousin, and wanted a conviction. But the defense of Prince Pierre showed that Victor Noir was not actually the journalist that he was supposed to be, but actually was the "bully" or bodyguard who assisted various left wing writers (such as Henri Rochefort) to go around and beat up opponents or people they disliked with impunity. The medical evidence showed that Noir, far from just slapping Prince Pierre, hit such a blow on his cheek as to cause it to swell. Furthermore he was armed with a sword stick, and his fellow second had a concealed gun. In reality the Prince had fired in self-defense, and the jury realized that." No citations, completely biased, potentially defamatory and likely made up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.51.186 (talk) 10:50, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: there is a problem with neutrality and evidence on a large number of Wikipedia entries for French political history around this period. Stylistically they would seem to come from the same biased author (who consistently criticizes and ridicules the republican side). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.209.226.131 (talk) 22:07, 15 December 2014 (UTC)