this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2024
266 points (95.2% liked)

Today I Learned

17872 readers
115 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**



Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

TIL in 1818, an Englishman accused of murder demanded a trial by combat. Surprisingly, the law that allowed for trial by combat was still valid, and the man was acquitted when his accuser declined the offer of battle. Trial by combat was abolished the following year.

all 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 104 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Seems like something a murderer would demand.

[–] [email protected] 94 points 3 months ago (3 children)

"I know what to do. I'll murder my way out"

[–] [email protected] 32 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It may be weird, but applying the Jason Mendoza problem solving tactics could work.

Anytime I had a problem and I threw a Molotov cocktail, boom! Right away, I had a different problem

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I just carry a few half-empty bottles of vodka, rags, and a few kilos of baking soda everywhere. There's no problem I can't solve with this kit.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

Hitchhikers Guide to the Revolution

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Baking soda? In those quantities? Please, tell us more. Like what do you do with it?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Put out the fires, then get called a hero

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

"mix things up a little"

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Well if you know your choices are "definitely go to prison for something you didn't do and either die in prison or come out a completely different person, out of time." or "trial by combat, maybe death, maybe freedom" I know which one I would choose.

Especially if I know my accuser knows they're lying and it's not just a misunderstanding.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago

England had the death penalty only abolished for murder in 1969.

So the options would have been, maybe get convicted of something you didn't do and be hanged, or trial by combat so you have some agency in the whole either death or freedom thing I guess.

[–] [email protected] 45 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Reading the article, it looks like the accused was originally acquitted in a jury trial, but the victim’s brother appealed and so they were going to try him again. At that point he asked for the trial by combat. I’m glad they just dropped it, sounds like the case was pretty flimsy.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago

lol its funnier in context

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The US also has a right to face one's accuser. Just not in a gladiatorial arena sadly.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

We've also got the right not to be tried twice for the same offense which could of saved him from resorting to trial by combat.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Who does he combat? The dead man or the judge or the prosecution or the bereaved?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

His "accuser" apparently. So... Detective?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

Judges hate this one simple trick!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I thought that was just a thing in Game of Thrones!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

No, much like the 'trial by ordeal', in more religious times it was believed that god(s) would grant favour to those who were truly righteous and/or innocent, allowing them to survive an ordeal or win a fight.

It was effectively a verdict rendered by god, rather than the courts.