The Crucible

In The Crucible, the boundaries between truth and lies are disturbingly blurred, both in the courtroom and in the minds of Salem’s citizens. Even though Abigail and her cohort of accusers are lying about seeing Salem’s citizens “with the devil,” the court wholly accepts their testimonies. They are allowed to present spectral evidence as fact (such as the “wound” Abigail claims to receive from the doll with the needle stuck in it). In the courtroom, the accuser is “holy,” and the accused is seen as “guilty” until proven innocent. As Danforth explains in Act II:

witchcraft is ipso facto, on its face and by its nature, an invisible crime. Therefore, who may possibly be witness to it?—the witch, and the victim. None other. Now we cannot hope the witch will accuse herself; granted? Therefore, we must rely upon her victims—and they do testify, the children certainly do testify (59).

Likewise, the accused can’t testify. Judge Danforth holds people who question the accuser’s authority in contempt of court (because he, Hathorne, and Parris are concealing their own suspect political agendas beneath the witch trials). For example, when Giles Corey attempts to prove that Putnam encouraged his daughter to accuse George Jacobs (so Putnam could steal Jacobs’s land), Danforth orders Corey’s arrest.