LITR 4326 Early American Literature Research Posts 2016 (research post assignment) Research Post 2

Nona Olivarez

Salem Witch Trials Evidence and Court Procedures

After re-reading my first research report on the Salem Witch Trials, I realized I discovered a greater extent of information than I initially thought concerning the operation of the court system during the Salem Witch Trials. However, I knew I could continue to dig a little deeper in order to obtain a more detailed conclusion. For this report, my goal was to research in greater depth the differences between the courts proceedings in the 17^th century compared to today, and furthermore how those differences tie into the manner in which the Salem Witch Trials were conducted.

          As mentioned previously, the court system in the 17^th century differs immensely from the court system today, at least as far as evidence and church involvement goes. I noted in my earlier report that a witness was enough evidence to persecute someone because physical evidence was hard to come by without the scientific knowledge and means that we have now. This difference of attainable knowledge between the time periods lends to the vast disparity between how evidence was handled and how evidence is now handled. To elaborate, I decided to further research how evidence is used in today’s court system. I skimmed multiple law websites and realized how truly complicated evidence is in today’s court system. For instance, the variety of evidence that can be used in today’s court significantly exceeds the types of evidence used in the 17^th century. A particularly interesting article I came across during my research concerning evidence is “The Salem Witch Trials: A legal bibliography” by Lyonette Louis-Jacques. Louis-Jacques points out that the colony created the Court of Oyer and Terminer primarily for the Salem Witch Trials. Moreover, the court did not have the principle of “innocent, until proven guilty” like we do today; instead the defendant was presumed guilty before tried. The fact that the accused were seen as guilty before tried might explain why so many innocent people were condemned. More importantly, Louis-Jacques discusses the type of evidence that the court in the Salem Witch Trials relied on. “Courts relied on three kinds of evidence:  1) confession, 2) testimony of two eyewitnesses to acts of witchcraft, or 3) spectral evidence (when the afflicted girls were having their fits, they would interact with an unseen assailant—the apparition of the witch tormenting them)”, Louis-Jacques affirms. While today we still use confession and eyewitnesses as evidence in a trial, spectral evidence would never be taken seriously. And so, while some similarities exist between the types of evidence used, it is evident how feebly the court system operated in the 17^th century when compared to the court system today. I think it is safe to say the defendants were never given a fair shot to prove their innocence due to the lack of knowledge surrounding science in general.

          Beyond the types of evidence implemented, the procedure of court differs greatly between the time periods. I discovered the website, the University of Kansas-Missouri City’s law school, through reading Stephen Rodwell’s research report. This website contains an abundant amount of information concerning the Salem Witch Trials. What I found particularly engaging about the website is the examinations of the accused witches and the trial records of some of the accused witches provided on the website. I never realized this type of detailed information concerning the Salem Witch Trials was so easily accessible over the internet. What’s more is that the website explains the court procedure used in the Salem Witch Trials, which is exactly the type of information I was looking for. For example, before the person accused is tried, they were examined by one or more Magistrates, who then decided whether or not the person was most likely guilty, and if they were seen as guilty, they were given a trial, which explains why the accused were viewed as guilty before even being tried. For this reason, the accused were not given what we would call today a ‘fair’ trial. I am by no means a law expert, so I did do some research concerning court procedures today. A website that was especially informative is the American Bar Association. The American Bar Association does an excellent job at breaking down the complicated court system that exists today, and from that breakdown I was able to gain a general knowledge as to how court procedures function currently. Moreover, this information helped me gain a clearer understanding of the drastic differences between the court procedures in the 17^th century and today, which exists as my main goal for this research report.

          Conclusively, I feel I may have found more information during the first research report, however during this research report I gained more detailed information concerning how the accused were trialed. In other words, this research brought my conclusion full circle. While the differences between how the court operated in the 17^th century versus how the court operates today are significant, I was pleased to find some underlying similarities as far as types of evidence used. Perhaps it is a bit unfair to compare 17^th century court to today because of the huge time gap. Still, the research I found is intriguing and displays just how far our court systems have come. Dr. White’s website mentions that before the Enlightenment, “people saw the world […] as a mysterious realm in which strange events were animated and motivated by good or evil spirits that they could praise or drive out.” So, they didn’t rely on science to solve their problems like we do now, but instead relied on moralistic ideologies to answer what at the time was unanswerable. As a general conclusion and as something I’ve mentioned throughout my research, scientific knowledge is a major factor regarding the distinction between the court systems. All in all, I feel satisfied with the amount of information I’ve gained from both research reports, and was pleasantly surprised at how much information there is. In fact, the most time consuming part was narrowing down what information I needed and didn’t need because there was a plethora of material about the Salem Witch Trials. Lastly, it is rewarding to reach a conclusion after all my research that I feel adequately explains the manner in which the Salem Witch Trials were held and how that compared to trials held today.