As a last resort, and extremely rarely, a medieval trial might be decided by Combat or by Ordeal. In the case of combat, the parties could each appoint a Champion to fight for them. The idea was that, in the combat, God would favour the right. Similarly with the ordeal. A common ordeal was to pick an object, with a bare hand, out of boiling water. Again, the theological basis of the ordeal was that God would give courage to the party in the right - maybe even a miracle. Psychologically, of course, it could work too - as the party in the wrong would be less likely to brave the pain. The reason, however, why such trials are rare is that they were only needed in cases which a Judge could not decide; and in cases so marginal, the difference between right and wrong, even in the minds of the parties, is by definition unclear.
Chat with our AI personalities
There were many different ways, but the most commonly used was:
what is the disadcantages of trial by ordeal
an extremely severe or trying test, experience, or trial.
Trial by ordeal was a judicial practice in medieval Europe where the accused underwent a physical trial to determine guilt or innocence. Some perceived advantages included a belief in divine intervention, the potential for a quick resolution to legal disputes, and the idea that the ordeal would reveal the truth through supernatural means. However, trial by ordeal was ultimately an unreliable and unjust method of justice, as it often led to false convictions and did not adhere to principles of due process or evidence-based decision-making.
The Constitution
The judge hoo does trials.