27 quentcr” - was considered only a probable one by St. Thomas Aquinas.Fuga rei (flight of the accused), considered as a kind of confession by the glossators, was taken as half a proof by later medieval scholars.*’^ One of the half proofs, namely(reputation), carried important repercussions all the way into the nineteenth-century Finnish law of proof. In the earlier literature, reputation was often confused with notoriety; by the late Middle Ages, however, a clear distinction was made. Notoriety was “what everyone knew”;/*^??^^?, “what everyone said.” Faina could only be considered a half proof if, after a proper inquiry, it could be confirmed as well founded; if not, it was worthless {vana voxpopuli). Thus, the medieval doctors did not assign fama itself, but only the facts behind it, much weight. Flowevcr, Levy points out that in judicial practicefama was used as a way of commencing judicial procedure to a considerable extent, especially in cases of usury, heresy, and those involving questions of morality. What happened, according to the medieval juristic writing, if the accuser or plaintiff presented only a half proof? The outcome depended on the type of case in question. In medieval literature, a supplementary oath was one of the modes of proof. It was assigned by the judge to the party that presented a semiproof; thence the term“supplementary.” In civil cases, a supplementary oath could be used to complete the proof; in criminal cases, a supplementary oath was not available.'’'^ Apurgatory oath could be used in criminal cases as well: if the accused took the oath, he or she was acquitted in the absence of full proof; a refusal to take the oath resulted in condemnation, for the refusal was taken as a confession. Both supplementarv and purgatory oaths yielded before new compelling evidence. Normally, two semiproofs would be added to each other to form a full proof; however, there were two exceptions. First, in cases of serious criminality, as the proof needed to be “clearer than the light of day” {“luce mcridiana clariores”), lesser prciofs could not be cumulated to full proof. Second, in order for the semiproofs to be added up to full proof, they had to be compatible with each c)thcr; in other words, it had to appear natural to combine them. For instance, two probable presumptions or one such presumption and one witness testimony or one witness and ol fama publica constituted full proof. Furthermore, both had to deal with the same fact.^' What if one party produced full proof and the other, counterevidence of semiplena probatio} Was there full proof or half a proof? On this particular question, the legal literature seemed 66 Levy 1939 pp. 84, 109. Ibid. p. 110. Ibid. pp. 115-117. 69 Ibid. pp. 117-120, 139. The purgatory oath wa.s of Germanic origin; ibid. pp. 120-121, 143, 147. Ibid. pp. 123-125.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=