Most of us are familiar with the infamous Salem witchcraft trials of 1692. To most Americans, this incident is terrible stain on the history or early colonial America. To attorneys, however, this incident represents a stain on the history of American jurisprudence.

In early 1692, nine year old Elizabeth and twelve year old Abigail took to falling into terrible fits that were found to be “beyond the power of Epileptic Fits or natural disease to effect.” Reverend Samuel Parris of the newly established parish at Salem Village was especially concerned. You see, Elizabeth Parris was his daughter and Abigail Williams his niece. William Griggs, the town doctor, examined the young ladies and declared that they were clearly the victims of witchcraft. After questioning of the young ladies in regard to the identity of the witches afflicting them so, Elizabeth and Abigail accused Sarah Osburn, Sarah Good and the Reverend’s own slave, Tituba.

Local magistrates began started conducting examinations on March 1, 1692. Over time, many more individuals were accused of witchcraft. It is a heartbreaking footnote of history that Dorothy Good, Sarah Good’s four year old daughter, herself confessed to being a witch just so that she could be with her mother in jail.

Procedurally speaking, the first step in the legal process was for an accuser to enter a complaint of witchcraft with the local magistrate. After receiving the accusation, the magistrate would have the accused person arrested and brought in for public interrogation. The accused were strongly urged to confess during this part of the process. Once the magistrates were convinced that the accusation was well founded, the prisoner would be tried in a superior court in front of a jury. At trial, an alleged witch could be charged with “afflicting with witchcraft” or “making an unlawful covenant with the Devil.” Often, the process of public interrogation, trial, conviction and execution would take place within just a few days.

From a legal perspective, the most disturbing aspect of these “trials” were the magistrates’ acceptance of and reliance upon so called “spectral evidence.” Spectral evidence was evidence from an accuser in which the spirit (i.e. the “spectre”) of an accused witch appeared to the afflicted in a dream or vision. The basis of this evidence was the commonly held belief that the Devil could not take the appearance of a person in a dream or vision without that person’s consent. Therefore, if an accused witch appeared in a dream or vision it was only because the accused had knowingly agreed to allow the Devil to take their form and appearance. Many leading legal and religious minds of the day strongly disagreed with the use of this type of evidence, believing that the Devil could take the shape or form of any person without their consent. The famous colonial preacher, Cotton Mather, was a strong proponent of the use of spectral evidence. Interestingly, Cotton Mather’s father, the Rev. Increase Mather, argued strongly against the use of spectral evidence.

Other evidence used in these trials consisted of “confessions” of the accused (often obtained under great duress), testimony of other accused witches (likely given in an attempt to garner mercy), and the existence of a “witch’s teat” (third nipple) on the accused.

In the end, 20 poor souls were wrongly executed by the judicial system of colonial Massachusetts, including one who was slowly crushed to death by the piling of stones on his chest. It was not until October 31, 2001, in a resolution signed by Massachusetts governor Jane Swift, that all those wrongfully executed were finally proclaimed fully innocent.

As an American attorney, I have the honor of participating in what I feel to be the greatest legal system the world has ever known. We must all remember, however, that no legal system is perfect. Injustices can happen anywhere at any time.