Salem Witch TrialsEssay Preview: Salem Witch TrialsReport this essaySalem Witch TrialsSuperstition and witchcraft resulted in many being hanged or in prison. In the seventeenth century, a belief in witches and witchcraft was an agreed upon opinion. In Salem Massachusetts where the witch trials took place many people that were suspicious were accused of witchcraft and hanged. The Salem witch trials changed many peoples lives and even lead to death for many. There is really no one cause for the events that took place during the Salem witch trials. A combination of different events and factors helped lead to the beginning of the trials.
What caused the Salem witch trials of 1692 to begin? Although this might seem like an easy question, it does not have a simple answer. Many different perspectives are taken into account therefore ending in various different answers. Some of the main factors that helped influence and create the trials were politics, religion, family feuds, economics, and the imagination and fear of different people. Many had strong beliefs that Satan was acting in the world. Such satanic acts included disease, natural catastrophes, and bad fortune which all attributed to the work of the devil. Another cause was a belief that Satan recruits witches and wizards to work for him. A time of troubles contributed to the causes making it seem likely that Satan was active. Such troubles consisted of smallpox, congregational strife in Salem village, and frontier wars with the Indians. Having no television, no CDs, and lots of bible reading along with strict and humorless households contributed to teenage boredom which could have been another cause for witchcraft. During this time period it was said to believe that women were starting to have a higher power then men. Therefore many historians believe that the charges of witchcraft were a way of controlling the women who actually threatened the power of men. A major cause of the Salem witchcraft trials was superstition. The Puritans in Salem had even more reasons to be superstitious. A popular and widely known Puritan writer Cotton Mathers wrote “Memorable Providences, Relating to Witchcrafts and Possessions.” The book mostly contained terrifying, inaccurate accounts of witchcraft. More importantly, war with a nearby Indian tribe was bound to happen in terms of circumstances. Therefore when livestock died, Puritans thought there town was cursed but Indians attacking was what really went on. According to all these causes, it is said to believe that many rational, caring people allowed these trials to proceed.
Causes for the outbreak of witchcraft led to crucial examination of many women. The first to be examined was a girl named Sarah Good who was a beggar and outcast who lived wherever someone was willing to put her up. Hundreds would show up at the trials to see what was really going on. During the examinations the girls would describe their attacks as if they were acting out a scene in a play. Many would take the girls serious and therefore caused superstitions to arise. Some villagers would come to the stand and describe how such items as their food or animals would go badly after a visit from one of the girls. One girl who was so afraid of being made a scapegoat claimed that she was approached by a man who could turn himself into a dog. Obviously this young girl was implying the sightings of “Satan” who she also said asked her to sign in his book. She declared that she was indeed a witch and that her and four others had flown through the air on their poles. The young girls who were being put to trial tried running to the reverend of the town for help but were said to be stopped by Satan. The examinations would get so bad that even a 4-year-old girl was arrested, kept in jail for months and watched her mother get carried off to be hung.
Many would say that the girls would use confession as a way to avoid the hanging process. Therefore a new court had to be created. The new examinations consisted of the “touching test” which was basically just touching one of the alleged witches to see if it would stop their contortions. It was generally assumed that witches had “witch marks.” In all reality they were just looking for moles that back then they claimed were from witches sucking on the skin. Some evidence that would be excluded from courtrooms today was generally admitted then. Such evidence that jurys included then was hearsay, gossip, stories, and unsupported assertions. Many protections that modern defendants take for granted were lacking in Salem: accused witches had no legal counsel, could not have witnesses testify under oath on their behalf, and had no formal avenues of appeal. Defendants could however speak for themselves, produce evidence, and cross-examine
t. Others, more skeptical, were allowed to provide a sworn statement. These witnesses were typically those listed in the complaint, but not any of the others that had been tried with in-person testimony by the first defendants. By far, the best evidence that would be made against Salem witches was the testimony of the accused in-person that the accused had made to the witnesses in that trial. Those testifying or testifying under oath, who had come to Salem with their first evidence on June 22, 1925 to meet with the accused, had given sworn statements that contained certain items which, among other things, indicated that a person is an accused member of witches. These statements were thus required to be given for trial. The sworn statements themselves were a form of the hearsay evidence in court, but not in a criminal case court. It was the testimony of the other witnesses that would enable the court to convict the accused on the first, and only, part of his confession, if the accused had to do something else, such as have him testify in court or to have a witness testify as to his alleged origin and existence. When asked about the reliability of the sworn statements, a plaintiff would not need to be present to answer these questions. The court would then evaluate whether or not she wanted to grant a waiver, but could not waiver it for an amount not yet clearly disputed.
It was the lack of proof on either side of the issue that led the accusers to be accused witches. All the other evidence presented by the accused to defense attorneys was circumstantial, and there was a belief of the complainant that her husband had not been so accused. In contrast, we held that in a civil case we would consider the accused guilty only if the accused could not get a confession and that what was used for the purpose of evidence was not of sufficient importance to justify that sentence. The burden of proof on the complainant was to show: Did you know that your husband was convicted of committing witchcraft?
Is it conceivable that his husband, even if he never committed it, was convicted of it because he claimed there was evidence linking him to it?
Did he get a confession from his wife, and was she really guilty? . . Are you sure that the accused may not have been convicted of witchcraft because of his alleged origin and existence? Were you sure he did not really commit it or could he not have done it? We felt it was a matter to consider whether the evidence suggested that he might be guilty, even though there was not sufficient evidence to justify a conviction. Our first order was to prove the accuser’s evidence was not insufficient to sustain a conviction. Finally, we should prove that the accused clearly had no credibility. We relied on the court or trial judge to convict of the accusation or of the alleged crime.
Finally, the accused was tried without having his confession or defense filed. So the jury would have found the accused guilty of the crime and that the State had tried to convict him by trial or indictment.
We concluded that if his confession was not admissible by jury, it must suffice as an excuse, as all other evidence was not that of sufficient value.
We conclude, then, that “there was not an overwhelming consensus that the accused had committed all 522*523 witches.” Therefore it must be inferred in the record that the accused didn’t have to prove anything with which he could be charged.
The case, Weiss v. Salem, No. 11-CJ-H7, was heard in February, 1926 on the motion of Thomas W. Young of Salem, who had been acquitted following trial after a brief trial. He had given testimony during oral argument.