Peine forte et dure

Last updated

Peine forte et dure (Law French for "hard and forceful punishment") was a method of torture formerly used in the common law legal system, in which a defendant who refused to plead ("stood mute") would be subjected to having heavier and heavier stones placed upon their chest until a plea was entered, or death resulted.

Contents

Many defendants charged with capital offences would refuse to plead in order to avoid forfeiture of property. If the defendant pleaded either guilty or not guilty and was executed, their heirs would inherit nothing, their property escheating to the state. If they refused to plead their heirs would inherit their estate, even if they died in the process.

An engraving of the peine forte et dure inflicted on a prisoner (appearing in the "Malefactor's register" of 1780) Engraving for the Malefactor's Register the punishment formerly inflicted on those who refused pleading to an indictment.jpg
An engraving of the peine forte et dure inflicted on a prisoner (appearing in the "Malefactor's register" of 1780)

The common law courts originally took a very limited view of their own jurisdiction. They considered themselves to lack jurisdiction over a defendant until he had voluntarily submitted to it by entering a plea seeking judgment from the court. [1] Obviously, a criminal justice system that could punish only those who had volunteered for possible punishment was unworkable; a means was needed to coerce them into entering a plea. [2] Alternatively, individuals were frequently tried under Admiralty law, as observed by Henry de Bracton. [3]

The "Standing Mute Act 1275", part of Statute of Westminster of 1275 of Edward I of England, states: [4]

It is provided also, That notorious Felons, which openly be of evil name, and will not put themselves in Enquests of Felonies that Men shall charge them with before the Justices at the King's suit, shall have strong and hard Imprisonment (prison forte et dure), as they which refuse to stand to the common Law of the Land : But this is not to be understood of such prisoners as be taken of light suspicion.

It appears to have initially meant imprisonment under harsh conditions:

in the worst place in the prison, upon the bare ground continually, night and day; that they eat only bread made of barley or bran, and that they drink not the day they eat ... [4]

By the reign of Elizabeth I it took the form of "pressing" the accused with weights. [4]

The procedure was recorded by a 15th-century witness as follows:

he will lie upon his back, with his head covered and his feet, and one arm will be drawn to one quarter of the house with a cord, and the other arm to another quarter, and in the same manner it will be done with his legs; and let there be laid upon his body iron and stone, as much as he can bear, or more ... [5]

"Pressing to death" might take several days, and not necessarily with a continued increase in the load. The Frenchman Guy Miege, who from 1668 taught languages in London, [6] says the following about the English practice: [7]

For such as stand Mute at their Trial, and refuse to answer Guilty, or Not Guilty, Pressing to Death is the proper Punishment. In such a Case the Prisoner is laid in a low dark Room in the Prison, all naked but his Privy Members, his Back upon the bare Ground his Arms and Legs stretched with Cords, and fastned to the several Quarters of the Room. This done, he has a great Weight of Iron and Stone laid upon him. His Diet, till he dies, is of three Morsels of Barley bread without Drink the next Day; and if he lives beyond it, he has nothing daily, but as much foul Water as he can drink three several Time, and that without any Bread: Which grievous Death some resolute Offenders have chosen, to save their Estates to their Children. But, in case of High Treason, the Criminal's Estate is forfeited to the Sovereign, as in all capital Crimes, notwithstanding his being pressed to Death.

Peine forte et dure was abolished in the Kingdom of Great Britain in 1772 by Felony and Piracy Act 1772, with the last known actual use of the practice having been in 1741. [8] From 1772 refusing to plead was deemed to be equivalent to pleading guilty, but this was changed in 1827 to being deemed a plea of not guilty – which is now the case in all common law jurisdictions.

Cases

Giles Corey was pressed to death during the Salem Witch Trials in the 1690s. Giles Corey restored.jpg
Giles Corey was pressed to death during the Salem Witch Trials in the 1690s.

The most infamous case in England was that of Roman Catholic martyr St. Margaret Clitherow, who (in order to avoid a trial in which her own children would be obliged to give evidence and could be tortured) was pressed to death on 25 March 1586, after refusing to plead to the charge of having harboured Catholic priests in her house. She died together with her unborn child within fifteen minutes under a weight of at least 7 long hundredweight (780 lb; 360 kg). Several hardened criminals yielded to the torture: William Spiggot (1721) remained mute for about half an hour under 350 lb (160 kg), but pleaded to the indictment when an extra 50 lb (23 kg) were added; Edward Burnworth (1726) pleaded after an hour and three minutes at 422 lb (191 kg). Others, such as Major Strangways (1658) and John Weekes (1731), refused to plead, even under 400 lb (180 kg), and were killed when bystanders, out of mercy, sat on them. [9]

In America, Giles Corey was pressed to death between 17 and 19 September 1692, during the Salem witch trials, after he refused to enter a plea in the judicial proceeding. According to legend, his last words as he was being crushed were "More weight", and he was thought to have been killed as the weight was applied. This is referred to in Arthur Miller's political drama The Crucible , where Giles Corey is pressed to death after refusing to plead "aye or nay" to the charge of witchcraft. In the film version of this play, the screenplay of which was also by Miller, Corey is crushed to death for refusing to reveal the name of a source of information.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Arraignment</span> Formal reading of the offence to a criminal defendant

Arraignment is a formal reading of a criminal charging document in the presence of the defendant, to inform them of the criminal charges against them. In response to arraignment, in some jurisdictions, the accused is expected to enter a plea; in other jurisdictions, no plea is required. Acceptable pleas vary among jurisdictions, but they generally include guilty, not guilty, and the peremptory pleas setting out reasons why a trial cannot proceed. Pleas of nolo contendere and the Alford plea are allowed in some circumstances.

In United States law, an Alford plea, also called a Kennedy plea in West Virginia, an Alford guilty plea, and the Alford doctrine, is a guilty plea in criminal court, whereby a defendant in a criminal case does not admit to the criminal act and asserts innocence, but accepts imposition of a sentence. This plea is allowed even if the evidence to be presented by the prosecution would be likely to persuade a judge or jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This can be caused by circumstantial evidence and testimony favoring the prosecution, and difficulty finding evidence and witnesses that would aid the defense.

Nolo contendere is a type of legal plea used in some jurisdictions in the United States. It is also referred to as a plea of no contest or no defense. It is a plea where the defendant neither admits nor disputes a charge, serving as an alternative to a pleading of guilty or not guilty. A no-contest plea, while not technically a guilty plea, typically has the same immediate effect as a guilty plea and is often offered as a part of a plea bargain.

A plea bargain is an agreement in criminal law proceedings, whereby the prosecutor provides a concession to the defendant in exchange for a plea of guilt or nolo contendere. This may mean that the defendant will plead guilty to a less serious charge, or to one of the several charges, in return for the dismissal of other charges; or it may mean that the defendant will plead guilty to the original criminal charge in return for a more lenient sentence.

In law, a plea is a defendant's response to a criminal charge. A defendant may plead guilty or not guilty. Depending on jurisdiction, additional pleas may be available, including nolo contendere, no case to answer, or an Alford plea.

Death by crushing or pressing is a method of execution that has a history during which the techniques used varied greatly from place to place, generally involving placing heavy weights upon a person with the intent to kill.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Giles Corey</span> English farmer accused of witchcraft (c. 1611 – 1692)

Giles Corey was an English farmer, petty thief, and tried murderer who was accused of witchcraft along with his wife Martha Corey during the Salem witch trials. After being arrested, Corey refused to enter a guilty or not guilty plea. He was subjected to pressing in an effort to force him to plead and died after three days of this torture. Because Corey refused to enter a plea, his estate passed on to his sons instead of being seized by the local government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Statute of Westminster 1275</span> English statute

The Statute of Westminster of 1275, also known as the Statute of Westminster I, codified the existing law in England, into 51 chapters. Chapter 5 is still in force in the United Kingdom and the Australian state of Victoria whilst part of Chapter 1 remains in force in New Zealand. It was repealed in Ireland in 1983.

In tort law, detinue is an action to recover for the wrongful taking of personal property. It is initiated by an individual who claims to have a greater right to their immediate possession than the current possessor. For an action in detinue to succeed, a claimant must first prove that he had better right to possession of the chattel than the defendant, and second, that the defendant refused to return the chattel once demanded by the claimant.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Henry de Bracton</span> English jurist (c.1210 – c.1268)

Henry of Bracton, also known as Henry de Bracton, Henricus Bracton, Henry Bratton, and Henry Bretton, was an English cleric and jurist.

North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed that there are no constitutional barriers in place to prevent a judge from accepting a guilty plea from a defendant who wants to plead guilty while still protesting his innocence under duress as a detainee status. This type of plea has become known as an Alford plea, differing slightly from the nolo contendere plea in which the defendant agrees to being sentenced for the crime, but does not admit guilt. Alford died in prison in 1975.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">High Court of Justice (1649)</span> English court that convicted King Charles I

The High Court of Justice was the court established by the Rump Parliament to try Charles I, King of England, Scotland and Ireland. Even though this was an ad hoc tribunal that was specifically created for the purpose of trying the king, its name was eventually used by the government as a designation for subsequent courts.

A mute of malice is a defendant in a criminal case who willfully chooses not to speak, as opposed to one who does not speak because he is physically or psychologically unable to do so.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hale Commission</span> 1652 English law reform panel

The Hale Commission was established by the Commonwealth of England on 30 January 1652 and led by Sir Matthew Hale to investigate law reform. Consisting of eight lawyers and thirteen laymen, the Commission met approximately three times a week and proposed changes as radical as reducing the use of the death penalty, allowing witnesses, legal aid and lawyers for defendants in criminal cases and creating county courts and a court of appeal for criminal cases. Though the Commission was unsuccessful at passing any of its measures under the Rump Parliament, two of its measures were put into law by the subsequent Barebone's Parliament, and, by the middle of the 20th century, most of the others were as well. Debate has occurred over the effectiveness and strife within the Commission between its more moderate and radical members; the general conclusion is that with the sheer volume of work produced and the vast proportion of moderate to radical members, it is unlikely such strife existed.

In modern U.S. usage, forfeiture is deprivation or destruction of a right in consequence of the non-performance of some obligation or condition. It can be accidental, and therefore is distinguished from waiver. In the law of England and Wales, the forfeiture rule is the rule of law which prevents a killer from inheriting the estate of a person they have unlawfully killed. The term also refers to the rule in English law under which an insured person who makes a fraudulent insurance claim loses their claim: this rule was derived from common law until the passage of the Insurance Act 2015, which "puts the common law rule of forfeiture on a statutory footing".

Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742 (1970), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court refused to hold that large sentencing discounts and threats of the death penalty are sufficient evidence of coercion.

William Spiggot was a highwayman who was captured by Jonathan Wild's men in 1721. During his trial at the Old Bailey, he at first refused to plead and was therefore sentenced to be pressed until he pleaded. This was called Peine forte et dure. He was later executed, after a second trial when he pleaded not guilty, on 11 February 1721 at Tyburn, London.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Law Act 1827</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Law Act 1827 was an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, applicable only to England and Wales. It abolished many obsolete procedural devices in English criminal law, particularly the benefit of clergy. It was repealed by the Criminal Law Act 1967.

Jane Wiseman was an English recusant and priest harbourer. She narrowly avoided becoming a Catholic martyr after being sentenced to Peine forte et dure. Her daughter Mary Wiseman was the founding prioress of a convent in Leuven.

References

  1. Pollock, Frederick; Maitland, Frederic William (1968). The History of English Law. Vol. 2. Cambridge. pp. 650–651. ISBN   0-521-07062-7.
  2. See generally Blackstone, William (1769). Commentaries on the Laws of England . Vol. 4. *319324.
  3. de Bracton, Henry. "On the Laws and Customs of England". Translated by Thorne, Samuel E.[ failed verification ]
  4. 1 2 3 Marks, Alfred (1908). Tyburn Tree: Its History and Annals.
  5. Tait, William; Johnstone, Christian Isobel (1851). "Curiosities of Cowell's "Interpreter"".
  6. Francoeur, A. (19 September 2023). "The enterprising and tenacious Guy Miège: four dictionaries from 1677 to 1688".
  7. Miege, G.:"The present state of Great-Britain and Ireland" London 1715, p.294
  8. Drug Control and Asset Seizures: a review of the history of forfeiture in England and colonial America Archived 28 April 1997 at the Wayback Machine
  9. "Mackenzie, The Practise of Peine Forte et Dure in 16th and 17th Century England". Archived from the original on 7 February 2012.

Further reading