In case you missed it, here is yet another example of a politician’s sloppy use of history.
Even Salem witch trials didn’t use anonymous testimony. The accused had to be confronted by a witness willing to put their name and reputation behind the charges and then had to be available for cross examination.
— Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) October 8, 2019
Or watch this. (Now I am really curious to know what “two books” on the Salem Witch Trials that Trump’s personal attorney read).
Although those suspected of practicing black magic have been persecuted at least since biblical times, hysteria around witchcraft in the United States peaked in the late 17th century. Young girls who started screaming and flying into “fits” would prompt local men to complain to a judge that someone was harming the girls through witchcraft. A dubious legal process would follow.
“Under the English tradition of justice, you are innocent until proven guilty,” said Emerson W. Baker, a history professor at Salem State University who has studied the witch trials. “However, in 1692, that clearly did not happen.”
Giuliani was correct that accusers at the Salem trials had to attach their names to their testimony. His claim that people accused of witchcraft were confronted by the witnesses in their cases, however, was largely false.
Many of the people who accused others of witchcraft never appeared at trial, Baker said. Instead, the supposedly afflicted girls would give depositions that were then presented in court. In these cases, there was no opportunity to cross-examine the accusers.
To start a witchcraft investigation, a person would complain about someone to a local judge. The judge would compel the sheriff’s office to arrest the accused so they could appear before a panel of judges, who would determine whether there was enough evidence to detain them before trial.
Read the entire piece here.
Of course Giuliani breaks almost every rule of good historical thinking here. The comparison between 17th-century New England and impeachment process in the U.S. Constitution is absurd. The legal culture of Puritan New England and the legal culture of the early American republic were completely different. If you are going to invoke the Salem Witch Trials, then let’s talk about spectral evidence and execution of Quakers in Boston Common. Or let’s just talk about how things ended up for the supposed witches in 1692.