The Torturer's Dilemma: Analyzing the Logic of Torture for Information

Conscience Concerning Evil Spirits. With Mather's impressive imprimatur, the elites could retain their
authority, and bring the trials to a halt, by arguing that the afflicted were possessed – that is, their
suffering was real, as was the Satanic involvement, but the specters seen by the afflicted, the evidence
provided by the touch test, and the 'evil eye' that caused the girls to enter their fits were all caused by
devils impersonating, and manipulating the innocent. Consequently, all involved could save face: the
judges had been tricked but by the Lord of Lies (and not by little girls); the afflicted were not lying, but
were similarly being lie to. The accused, meanwhile, had simply had the bad luck to be the targets of
this Satanic attack on society.
For this counter-narrative to have been an acceptable replacement for the narrative of witchcraft
and spectral assault, however, the judges would first have to doubt the reality of witchcraft in these
cases. Here we must come to the incentives faced by the confessors: for as long as the accused were
willing to prove the charges against themselves (and consign themselves to the gallows), the authorities
would continue to be convinced that, whatever the shape or spectral nature of the evidence against
them, witchcraft was real, and that those who had refused to confess were nonetheless guilty as
charged. Why did the accused so frequently admit to witchcraft? One theory that has characterized
writings on the trials has been that those who confessed could not be killed – rather, they would save
themselves by renouncing their sins, and be reintegrated into the community. But this could not be the
case at the outset – witchcraft was not a merely religious sin, it was rebellion against the state
punishable by death. 62 That confession cannot have been seen at the start of the trials as a means of
avoiding the gallows can be seen by the fact that every single confessed witch in the period leading up
to the trials (beginning with the first confession by Mary Johnson in 1648) had been executed:
confession, far from offering salvation, merely ensured the confessors destruction. (Hall)
And yet, it is true that, of the 19 executed, only one had confessed, Samuel Wardwell. 63
Moreover, it is clear that by the end of the summer, the link between refusing to confess and execution
had been firmly established in the popular mind: when Mary Tyler was accused, her brother-in-law
62 Witchcraft cases were prosecuted as a felony, punishable by death, by the civil authorities. “The means of execution was
death by hanging, and never that of being burned at the stake.” (Hall, p. 11)
63 Wardwell would furthermore take an active role in denouncing other witches and questioning them as sharply as the
judges. (Roach, p. 270) He was nonetheless sentenced to death once his testimony had been given. The other accused
had confessed at their arraignment or initial questioning – a fact intimately connected with explaining why the confessed
tended to survive. While others who had confessed were also condemned, their executions were either not scheduled
before the end of the trials (as in the cases of Abigail Hobbs and Dorcas Hoar), or they died in prison before sentence
could be carried out (as in the case of Ann Foster).
65