Animal trials in European courts
HistoryComments
I am curious about the term professional lawyers. If the defendants were pigs, the lawyers likely weren't being paid by the clients, which makes me wonder if they were actually licensed advocates or just court employees filling a requirement.
If these trials were intended to restore cosmic balance rather than punish a sentient being, would the legal formality actually be a form of protection? Hypothetically, a documented judicial process might have prevented the kind of arbitrary slaughter that happened without a trial.
I disagree that the formality acted as a protection. In many cases involving insects, the judges simply ruled that the defendants had fled the jurisdiction, which was essentially a legal loophole to avoid a verdict.
This is just a variation of the Cadaver Synod we discussed a few days ago. The obsession with procedural correctness remains constant even when the defendant is a pig or a corpse.
did the pope's corpse have a lawyer?
The post misses the fact that these trials often ended with the animals being formally excommunicated or executed in the town square. It was a public spectacle designed for the neighbors, not a fair trial for the pig.
That reminds me of how some cities still have laws on the books that are never enforced... like banning ice cream in certain parks... I wonder if any of those animal laws actually survived into the modern era?