The Truth

In reading Hsia's book, it seems to stretch credulity that the interrogators couldn't see the inherent flaws in their methods of extracting confessions. Their continual demands for "the truth!" could only be satisfied by telling them what they already believed to be the case, and they do not seem to have ever considered the possibility that they might have been wrong. Surely it ought to have been obvious to everyone that confessions given under such extreme duress could hardly be considered reliable. And yet, the Jews were executed, and the event was hailed as a great victory for Christian justice.

I'm tempted to dismiss it as something we've outgrown as a society, but then I recalled reading some time ago about false confessions being a problem in the modern U.S. justice system. (This article, for example.) This suggests that some fundamental (or at least deeply-rooted) human biases may be at work.

I'm also struck by the eagerness to sanctify Simon, with actual miracles being attested to him. Was this common, or was it related to the religious conflict inherent in the trial?

The end of chapter six notes that two of the men asked for baptism prior to their execution. Did they perhaps hope this would be enough to spare them?

Stigma

Opening a class with a reading on (relatively) modern society is an interesting way of doing things. It can often be very easy to place the past and present in separate mental categories without considering the ways in which our actions reflect the decisions of our ancestors. The point about shifting social labels is especially relevant, I think. What stigmas of modern society will people be laughing at in another two or three centuries?