| | |
|
WilliamPennTrial 34 - 20 Dec 2019 - Main.DaihuiMeng
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebHome" |
|---|
On William Penn's trial | | |
Conclusion--Criminal trial as a show | |
<
< | I hope for those readers who found Penn's trial dramatic and amusing can have a better understanding of that trial after reading this article: what was the historical background of the trial, how trials of Quakers normally looked like, and why Penn could get an acquittal verdict. I only presented some reasons I think as the most important, but of course there were certainly more than those reasons, some my knowledge is insufficient to understand and some we might never know. In the end, I want to share with you a very inspiring idea professor Moglen shared with me, that the criminal trials in those times were in nature a show the court put on. The defendant played the opposite Court in the trial, and the jurors were the audience (and also those real audiences). In Quakers persecution shows the Court almost always won, by controlling the evidence put on show and sometimes by some threats. However, Penn's trial was the epic failure of such a show, when the audience refused to buy it and gave its appulse to the defendant, for reasons we just analyzed: the culture trend (crown's attitude), player's outstanding skills (Penn's eloquence and charisma), and the audience's preference (jurors' conscience). | >
> | This article only presented several key reasons for Penn's acquittal, but of course there were certainly more than those and some of the reasons we might never know. In the end, to conclude this short survey with one inspiring point made by professor Moglen: the criminal trials in those times were in nature a show the court put on. The defendant played the opposite Court in the trial, and the jurors were the audience (and also those real audiences). In Quakers persecution shows the Court almost always won, by controlling the evidence put on show and sometimes by some threats. However, Penn's trial was the epic failure of such a show, when the audience refused to buy it and gave its appulse to the defendant, for reasons we just analyzed: the culture trend (crown's attitude), player's outstanding skills (Penn's eloquence and charisma), and the audience's preference (jurors' conscience). | | | |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |