Inspire Critical Thinking Workshop 2: Are some crimes excusable?

Inspire Critical Thinking 2023/24

Does Crime Always Deserve Punishment?

WORKSHOP 2: ARE SOME CRIMES EXCUSABLE?

1

inspire@sjc.ox.ac.uk sjcinspire.com

Contents

WELCOME TO INSPIRE CRITICAL THINKING 2024

WORKSHOP TWO: Are some crimes excusable?

Dr Tom Kemp: editor, Emeritus Fellow in Biology, St John’s College; Lily Middleton Mansell: student editor, English graduate, St John’s College

WELCOME TO INSPIRE CRITICAL THINKING?

03 Does Crime Always Deserve Punishment?

04 How do I use the workshops?

05 Introduction to Workshop 2 - Are some crimes excusable?

06 Crime Nature or Nurture? (Biology) – Dr Tom Kemp 10 Excusing Crime: Duress (Law) – Antonia Sundrup and Summary Video Dorothea Oyetunde 13 Critical Thinking Video: Ima Lyer - Alfie Dry 14 Critical Thinking Skills: Argument Fallacies Part 1 - Lily Middleton-Mansell and Zi Ning Lau 18 Blood Feuds in Medieval Iceland: Justice or a breakdown of law and order? (History) - Ollie Hedges 22 Do Animals Commit Crimes? (Biology) – Dr Tom Kemp 25 Music Piracy: A cowardly crime or catalyst for changing practice? (Music) - Thomas Lockyer 28 Brain Scans in Court (Experimental Psychology) – Professor Laurence Hunt 31 Age of Criminal Responsibility (Philosophy and Law) – Antonia Sundrup 34 Workshop 1 Super Challenge winners

Crime and Punishment

36 University Spotlight: Objects of Punishment in the Pitt Rivers Museum– Lily Middleton-Mansell 41 University Spotlight: Oxford Libraries– Lily Middleton-Mansell 44 University Spotlight: A day in in Oxford during summer vacation Antonia Sundrup 46 Inspire Critical Thinnking Summer School for Year 11 49 Coming up: in Workshop 3

2

Free?

This is the fifth year St John’s College has produced its Critical Thinking online programme, and we have grown very proud of it and the 1500 or more annual participants! It is aimed primarily at Years 9 to 11 and is designed for students of all abilities and interests. We are glad to say there is no charge for full participation, neither online nor for coming to our associated Oxford Summer School at St John’s College.

Each programme centres around a broad area of human interest, with contributions from many of our colleagues, who are leading, and often internationally renowned academics, and who bring to the topic a wealth of different scholarly viewpoints from the arts, the humanities and the sciences alike. We all share a passionate commitment to education at every level, encouraging students to broaden their understanding of the world and develop their critical thinking skills. We are bombarded nowadays with information from so many sources, some truthful and reliable, others sadly unreliable and maliciously prejudiced. If your generation is going to try and make the world a better place, then it is essential that you learn

how to critically assess rather than unthinkingly accept what you hear and read.

The broad area we have chosen for this year is “Crime and Punishment”.

Few aspects of human behaviour have been so pervasive throughout society. Ideas of what even is criminal have changed throughout the course of history and amongst different communities. Philosophers have agonised over what are appropriate punishments, and social scientists over the causes of crime. Several branches of science look at improving ways of apprehending criminals, and medicine is interested in discovering treatments for a tendency towards violence and aggression. Think how much crime enters literature, from the great classics to all those detective novels, into film and drama.

How many wonderful medieval and renaissance paintings depict cruel punishments?

3

DOES CRIME ALWAYS DESERVE PUNISHMENT? The programme is divided into four successive workshops: What is a crime?

Are some crimes excusable?

How effective is crime detection and the justice system?

What is punishment and how has it changed through history?

Throughout this workshop you will find several interactive tasks:

Think pieces

Have your say

X

HOW DO I USE THE WORKSHOPS?

Submit your super challenge piece by the 28th February 2024 for a chance to win.

Vote now

Super challenges

These are all optional and give you the ability to choose how much you’d like to be involved. There are also resources to help you independently explore the topic in more detail.

The 4 super challenges require a little more thinking but offer you the opportunity to complete a task and a chance to win a prize! You may submit a response to one super challenge per workshop. This can be in any format you wish. Submit your super challenge response to inspire@sjc.ox.ac.uk for the chance to win a £10 One4All voucher. With your submission please let us know: Your name Your School ■ Your year group ■ Whether you are happy for us to share your work on social media.

■ ■

INTRODUCTION TO WORKSHOP 2

ARE SOME CRIMES EXCUSABLE? Welcome to our second workshop. These articles continue the discussion on the nature of crime presented to you in Workshop 1. In particular, they look at circumstances in which a crime, even though undisputedly committed, should be excused in part or in whole because the individual is judged not to have been fully responsible. This is often a very controversial question, both in principle amongst criminologists, politicians and philosophers, and in practice amongst law makers, and judges who have to decide what evidence is admissible for a jury to consider.

Social scientists and brain physiologists within their different disciplines have learned a good deal about why some individuals commit serious crime. As a result, it has become increasingly difficult sometimes to decide whether a transgressor acted completely willfully in deciding to commit a crime for their own personal benefit, or whether they could not help themselves. People are not, of course, responsible for the genes they inherit from their parents or any malfunctioning of critical parts of their brains associated with criminal tendencies. Nor can they be held responsible for any malign influences they might have faced during childhood that could have affected their personality and how they behave in later life. On the other hand, the great majority of individuals, whatever their biological or social inheritance may be, have little difficulty controlling themselves to behave as responsible, law-abiding citizens.

There is plenty of scope here for you to think critically for yourself about the various examples, and how you would advise a judge in a particular case.

As you will see from the articles, it is often a question of deciding what the best compromise is between the good of society and fairness for an individual: there can be no simple right or wrong answer that everybody will agree on.

The second of our articles on critical skills is about spotting what logicians call fallacies. These are the several ways an argument can be presented which are logically incorrect and, therefore, invalid. They may often be inadvertent, but all too frequently, they are deliberate attempts to mislead people or to persuade them to accept a biased opinion. Confident as ever, Ms Ima Lyer decides to represent herself in court. Will she be able to avoid any fallacies? Watch her testimony in this workshop before tackling the super challenge task to identify the fallacies presented in the argument.

Dr Tom Kemp, editor Lily Middleton-Mansell, student editor

4

5

The Causes of Crime: Nature or Nurture?

BIOLOGY Author: Dr Tom Kemp, Emeritus Fellow in Biology, St John’s College

It’s not my fault, it’s my genes

S U M M A RY V I D EO

“T

>

ough on crime, tough on the causes of crime”. This pledge was famously declared in 1997 by Tony Blair, the new Labour Party prime minister, in the midst of record-breaking crime rates in Britain. We are fairly clear about what “crime” is, but a great deal less so about the “causes of crime”. From the subsequent action of Blair’s government, it clearly assumed that crime was mainly caused by external social factors like poverty, inadequate parenting, poor education, having criminal relatives, and alcohol and drug abuse. This was indeed the prevailing view amongst criminologists. But it could hardly be the whole story because there are plenty of individuals from deprived backgrounds who are not criminals, and from privileged backgrounds who are. The alternative assumption is that crime is mainly caused by the

6

genetic makeup of those who become criminals. But this explanation also has difficulties because there are disproportionately far more individuals in jail who come from deprived backgrounds than who have privileged ones. We have here the oldest controversy of all in social science, snappily referred to as “Nature versus Nurture”

– how much is variation in human behaviour due to different genes inherited from parents and how much due to differences in the social environment in which they were raised and live?

WHAT DOES THE STUDY OF TWINS REVEAL? The classic way of investigating it is to study twins. Of live births in Britain, about 1.5% are of twins and these are of two kinds. Two-thirds of them arise from two different mother’s eggs that were fertilised by two different sperm from the father. They are called non-identical or dizygotic twins, and the pair are no more similar to one another genetically than any other pair of siblings. But usually they have been raised in the same 7

social environment and therefore differences between them must be due to different genes. The other onethird of twins arise by the division of a single fertilised egg in the mother’s womb. These are identical or monozygotic twins, and are genetically identical to one another.

Most pairs of monozygotic twins are brought up together in the same social environment, but in the small number of cases where identical twins were separated and brought up soon after birth in different families or institutions, their social environments were different. Therefore, differences between them must be due to these

different environments. By studying the differences in personality and behaviour between pairs of twins, social scientists can try to disentangle how much is due to genetic and how much to social environmental factors.

CAN GENES EXPLAIN WHY SOME PEOPLE ARE CRIMINALS? The more recent way to study the causes of criminality is to look for correlations between particular genes and criminal behaviour. There was great excitement some years ago when a modified version of a gene called MAOA was found in a relatively high proportion of very violent criminals. The effects of what is called the MAOA-L variant include lowering the level of a brain molecule called serotonin, and low serotonin is known to affect parts of the brain that are active during violent, antisocial behaviour.

Sensational journalists soon dubbed the gene the “Warrior Gene” and misleadingly implied that anyone who possessed it was more or less certain to be a violent, criminally inclined individual.

In fact, only about 10% of violent criminals studied have this version

of the gene, while over a third of the non-criminal population also possessed it but were not criminals.

MAOA-L is a positive risk factor, but does not alone cause a violent personality. Since then other genes too have been discovered to be significant risk factors for criminality, but again none are single direct causes.

The one thing all these studies point to is that genes and social environment are both substantially

involved and interact in complex unpredictable ways. But there is still a lot of uncertainty about their relative importance and this allows people to hold a range of views about the best way to reduce crime. At one extreme are those who believe that improving social environments can have little effect because inherited genes are the most important. For them, more effective policing combined with sufficiently severe punishment is how best to reduce serious crime.

The opposite extreme is that nothing much can be done about inherited genes and their biological functions and that the best way to reduce crime is by improving social conditions.

The majority view amongst criminologists is that criminal behaviour is indeed a result of complex interactions between genes and social environment – between “Nature and Nurture”. Being “tough on the causes of crime” requires a combination of improving social conditions and research into medical treatment of abnormal brain function.

As to how responsible for their actions a criminal is held to be, whatever the underlying cause of their behaviour might be, all that matters is whether they were aware they were committing a crime and that they could have chosen not to commit it.

If you want to find out more: LINK

>

● Why Do People become criminals? Psychiatrist explains - YouTube

LINK

>

● What are the causes of crime? | Tom Klidzia | University of Kent - YouTube

LINK

>

● Exploring the mind of a killer | Jim Fallon - YouTube

LINK

>

● The Brain of a Murderer - Are You Good Or Evil? - Horizon - BBC - YouTube

LINK

>

● Can your genes make you violent? | BBC Ideas - YouTube

LINK

>

● What identical twins separated at birth teach us about genetics - BBC Reel - YouTube

L I N K > ● Williams, K., et al., ‘Prisoners’ childhood and family background. Results from the Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction longitudinal cohort study of prisoners’, Ministry of Justice Research Series 4/12, 2012 LINK

>

● Young, Ed., ‘Dangerous DNA: The Truth about the ‘warrior gene’, New Scientist, 2010

Super Challenge I hope you see from reading this article how it is a complicated topic demanding very careful critical thinking!

Write a short 500 word article of your own about whether a man charged with murder who has the MAOA-L gene ought to face the lesser charge of manslaughter, and if convicted be given a lesser sentence.

Here are things you might think about: Is it “fair”?

What might be the wider implications for the judicial system?

PHENOTYPE – the observable physical traits of the organism

Should he actually have a longer prison sentence because he is supposedly predisposed to commit violent crime again?

Have you say Do you think genes play an important role in criminality?

Discuss with your peers in the chat forum below.

GENOTYPE – the genetic information of all organisms on earth 8

9

Duress – Are Threats an Excuse for Committing Murder?

LAW Author: Antonia Sundrup, 2nd year Law student, St John’s College

Self defence?

I

n the case of R v Howe, the two defendants, Howe and Bannister were convicted of murder on two counts and conspiracy to commit murder. They were 19 and 20 years old when they met Murray, who was 35 and had previously been convicted of violent crimes and spent time in prison. On the day of the first crime, Howe and Bannister were driven by Murray to an isolated place, together with 17-year-old Elgar and another man named Bailey. On Murray’s instructions they battered and tortured Elgar until Bailey killed him. Another crime much like this took place, except this time Howe and Bannister killed the victim themselves. Another victim escaped.

During their trial Howe and Bannister said that the only reason they had battered, tortured and killed the victims was because they were afraid of Murray.

They said that Murray had threatened them and that they were afraid to suffer the same fate as the victim if they did not do as he said.

10

However, this did not end up helping them at all in court – the judges decided that even if they had acted under the influence of threats, this was not a defence to a charge of murder.

Let us first look at what a defence is in general. For each crime, there is a list of requirements that to be fulfilled, meaning that in order to convict someone of the crime, you need to prove that all of the elements are true. For murder, it needs to be established that the defendant caused the death of the victim, that the victim is a person and that the killing was intentional. However, even if all these things are true, the defendant might not be punished because he has a defence.

One of the most well-known defences is self-defence, or, as lawyers call it, private defence. This defence states that a person may use reasonable force to protect themselves or others. Private defence is a defence to all crimes, including murder. So, if in the case of R v Howe, Murray had held a gun to Howe’s head and Howe had hurt or killed Murray, because he could not defend himself any other way, he 11

would have had a defence against a charge of murder.

However, there are two important differences between this scenario and the real case: Firstly, Howe and Bannister did not kill Murray, but other innocent parties. And secondly, Murray did not hold a gun to their heads, instead he made more vague and non-immediate threats.

There is another defence which might have helped Howe and Bannister, which is that of duress by threats. This defence applies where the defendant reasonably believed that they or a person close to them was threatened with death or serious injury by someone else, unless the defendant committed the offence.

Howe and Bannister argued that this applied here:

Murray had threatened them, and they believed that he would hurt them if they did not do as he told them to.

Super challenge: To what extent do you agree that duress is an appropriate defence for murder? Explain your answer in no more than 300 words.

Try to look up examples of specific cases that may support your argument. Don’t be afraid to critique the judge’s ruling if you think it’s wrong, but remember that they have to work within the parameters of the law!

If you want to find out more: Watch this video for some more detail on the law behind duress by threats: Duress by Threats - Criminal Law - YouTube LINK

>

The problem is that duress is not a defence to murder.

This is a very controversial rule in criminal law. Some think that it is right because the crime of murder is too serious to be excused by the fact that someone was pressured or threatened. Others think that when someone threatens to kill you or your family, it is at least understandable that you would do what they ask of you no matter what it is and therefore we should not punish the people who do so. An alternative view is that duress should be a partial defence to murder, meaning that someone who kills under duress may only be convicted of manslaughter or get a shorter prison sentence. Do you think Howe and Bannister should have been convicted of murder?

Unfamiliar technology presents us with new questions. We will need to find a way to answer them.

Critical Thinking Video: Ima Lyer Author: Alfie Dry, Human Sciences graduate, St John’s College

Critical thinking skills are difficult to teach but really important skills to have. Our students at St John’s College have made a funny video featuring the character Miss Ima Lyer to help you understand different types of critical thinking skills so you can apply them to the articles in this workshop and our super challenge task.

Ima Lyer finds herself in court for a crime she refuses to accept guilt for. She builds her own defense but fails to sidestep six key fallacies which undermine her entire argument. Watch the video below to find out what she does

LINK

12

>

13

Critical Thinking Skills: Argument Fallacies (part one)

Conflation False Dichotomy

Authors: Alfred Dry, Human Sciences graduate, St John’s College Oxford; Lily Middleton-Mansell, English Literature graduate, St John’s College, Oxford

Post Hoc

T Slippery Slope False Clause

Circular Argument

14

he list below gives you a toolbox for identifying the first six of the twelve main argument fallacies.

Using the video featuring Ima Lyer, and the toolbox below, see if you can identify the fallacies that feature in the court case on the next page to complete the super challenge. Part two will feature in Workshop 3!

SLIPPERY SLOPE The slippery slope argument does not consider a proposition on its own, but rather imagines its future consequences. It rests on the idea that allowing one, relatively harmless thing will begin a trend that may lead to much worse things occurring.

For example, imagine that it has been proposed that the legal age for driving should be lowered to fifteen. The following would be a slippery slope argument against that proposition: “if the driving age was lowered to fourteen, it’ll just keep getting lower and soon enough we will have toddlers driving trucks!”

The idea that lowering the driving age would result in toddlers driving trucks has no factual relation to the initial proposition, rather it is just that assuming that the age will continue to lower, and eventually lead to dire

consequences. The reason that the slippery slope argument is a fallacy is that it claims that something will lead to undesirable consequences without providing sufficient evidence that they will actually occur.

POST HOC The post hoc fallacy is the assumption that because one event preceded another event, they must be causally related - meaning that the first must have caused the second to occur. For example, if you walk under a ladder on your way to the bus stop, and then the bus is delayed by half an hour, you may believe that it was delayed because walking under a ladder gives you bad luck. However, there is no actual causal relation between your actions and the bus’s journey. The principle that disproves a post hoc argument is the idea that correlation is not causation. While two events may correlate (seem connected in some way) that does not necessarily mean that one is responsible for the other.

CIRCULAR ARGUMENT A circular argument is one where the claim is used as its own evidence.

Instead of explaining the reasons 15

behind an argument, it essentially says the same thing twice. It therefore works on the assumption that statement it is trying to prove is innately true. If you were to argue that “stealing is bad because it is immoral”, that would be a circular argument: the statement does not explain the actual reasons why stealing is bad, but rather just repeats its initial assertion in slightly different terms. Circular arguments follow the formula ‘X is true because of Y, and Y is true because of X’, which simply returns to the same point at which it started.

FALSE DICHOTOMY A false dichotomy, also known as restricting the options, is an “eitheror” type of argument which presents a choice between only two options, despite the fact that more may exist.

Say that a parent is trying to argue that lacrosse classes should be held at their child’s school. They may say that either the school can hold the classes, or all the students will be terribly unfit. However, those are not actually the only two options available.

Perhaps the school holds football classes, which would provide plenty of exercise to the students. A false

Super Challenge

dichotomy therefore obscures the big picture of a situation in order to magnify the importance of its own argument, or make a choice seem direr than it actually is.

CONFLATION Conflation is when you mix two (or more) things together which are not actually connected. For example, if you were to argue that owning Bengal cats should be banned because someone was eaten by a Bengal tiger, you would be conflating Bengal tigers, very dangerous wild creatures, with Bengal cats, a friendly domestic breed.

This means that the evidence that you are using to support your evidence is in fact completely irrelevant.

The below argument was recorded in a court case. Identify the two fallacies in the argument and explain what makes them a fallacy. [the following script is entirely fictional, written by Zi Ning Lau, 1st Year Law student, St John’s College ]

Cause?

Coincidence?

Separate cause?

Judge Coddery: “You may be seated.

Mr. Salomon, you are faced with 2 charges: One count of battery and another count of assault. Now, I will provide a brief summary of the Statement of Facts.

On the fish— apologies, FIFTH— teenth of October, on Kahlamary Street, you approached Mrs. Bass and slapped her across the face with a raw piece of fish fillet. This act was unprompted, leaving her dazed and injured. After doing so, you raised the piece of fish over your head and screamed, ‘No one can kelp you now. It is O-fish-shal.’, before running off. This left her feeling incredibly frightened and traumatised. Let me ask, do you understand the scale of what you have done?”

Mr. Salomon: “Yes, your honour. I do.”

Judge Coddery: “Do you plead guilty?”

Mr. Salomon: “Indeed I do, your honour.”

FALSE CAUSE This refers to when you confuse cause and effect or simplify causal relationships. Post hoc (defined in the last workshop as when you falsely interpret two events that occurred one after the other as having a causal relation) does fall under the category of false cause. But the term can also apply to the assumption that, because two things often happen simultaneously, one causes the other. For example, you notice that whenever you wear trainers you get sore legs, and therefore conclude that wearing trainers gives you sore legs.

However, this argument ignores a third factor which likely explains the connection: you only wear trainers to work out. It isn’t the shoes causing the sore legs, but rather the muscle strain from exercise. False cause therefore ignores the possibility that the two events co-occurring could either be a coincidence, or there could be a separate, unidentified cause.

Judge Coddery: “Then we shall proceed to sentencing. Prosecution, what is your proposed sentence?”

Ms. Hickinbottom(Deputy Public Prosecutor): “Prosecution proposes imprisonment of 3 years, your honour.”

Mr. Annemony (Mr. Salomon’s Defence Lawyer): “With all due respect, we believe such a sentence is disproportionate.

It’s cray-zy. Our client understands the wrongful nature of his actions and he is remorseful. We propose a maximum sentence of 13 months.”

Judge Coddery: “Ms. Hickinbottom, please present your reasons for proposing such a long sentence.”

Ms. Hickinbottom (Deputy Public Prosecutor): “Your honour, we think 3 years of imprisonment is the best sentence for such a crime as Mrs. Bass suffered a great amount of harm. You betta believe it. Her psychologist reports states: ‘Mrs. Bass has been unable to enter the fish section of supermarkets. The waft of seafood brings her to deep, dark places.

Harsh punishment will also caution Mr. Salomon and any like-minded criminals in repeating these harmful actions. It is simply a matter of deterrence. A high sentence will signal to both Mr. Salomon and the public that this behaviour is unacceptable. If this behaviour is to continue, society will be in shambles! We cannot allow individuals to go around slapping strangers with fillets of fish! And if such awful acts continue, the environment would be at stake. Can you imagine how many people would be using fish for these horrendous purposes? Soon enough there will not be enough fish in supply! Ecosystems would fall apart! The seafood economy would be a wreck!”

Mr. Annemony: “Respectfully, Ms Hickinbottom is just fishing for reasons to justify such an unreasonable sentence. One year is more than enough of a punishment. Three years of imprisonment for a simple crime is just unjustified. There is not any reason to provide such a long sentence. Three years is considerably longer than one. I do not see how it would make sense to subject Mr. Salomon to an overly extensive sentence, especially when he has swimmingly expressed his remorse.”

Judge Coddery: “I will take your arguments into consideration. Court adjourned.”

16

17

Blood Feuds in Medieval Iceland: Justice or a Breakdown of Law and Order?

HISTORY Author: Ollie Hedges, Inspire Year 12&13 Programme Lead, St John’s College

I

Lawful Killing?

deas regarding what is a crime and what is suitable punishment can vary wildly depending on which country, and which period, we look at. This article will look at early medieval Iceland through descriptions found in sagas; we’ll see a culture that has a relatively established legislative system, but no centralised way of enforcing it (such as a police force). The purpose of blood feuds, in particular, has been debated by historians – does their occurrence suggest a breakdown of society or an acceptable way of dealing with lawsuits? To find out, historians have examined sagas, or long stories, to see what they reveal about law and order in Medieval Iceland.

WHAT ARE BLOOD FEUDS? Blood feuds are lengthy conflicts between families or groups involving a cycle of retaliatory killings or attacks.

For example, if a man in a family was killed, the victim’s family would kill a member of the perpetrator’s family and so on. So how and why did this occur in Medieval Iceland?

18

HOW WAS ICELAND GOVERNED? Iceland was pretty much unoccupied until the second half of the 9th century with the first documented Scandinavian settler arriving in 870AD and promptly founding Náttfaravík. By 930AD most of the farmland had been claimed, and the first Althing, a basic parliament, was created. Knowledge of the system of government in medieval Iceland stems mainly from two main primary sources: surviving copies of the written law code; and the Book of the Icelanders which was a short history of Iceland written in the 12th century. Iceland was divided into four administrative regions, each of which had its own court, judges and chieftains. The Althing was a yearly assembly that functioned as a legislature, a high court, and an important gathering and meeting place. Decisions here were made collectively by the chieftains at the assembly, as no king or other central power existed. The chieftains also appointed a Lawspeaker every three years, whose job was to recite and clarify existing laws. From this structure we can see that early medieval Iceland was by no means lawless, which raises the question of why feuds occurred within the society.

19

WHY DID BLOOD FEUDS OCCUR? There is debate amongst historians about why blood feuds occurred, and the role they played in society. Some view feuds as chaotic violence that represented a breakdown in society in Iceland. Punishments enforced by the courts could come in the form of fines or exile. The enforcement of such penalties was left to the responsibility of the injured party or their family.

This situated feuding directly in the heart of the Icelandic legal system.

It also though meant that there was very little to control an injured party that was not satisfied with the court’s decision. In Njáls saga the book’s main characters, Njál and Gunnar settle a killing ordered by Gunnar’s wife in court with a payment.

However, Njál’s wife is not satisfied, and organises a retaliatory killing.

For which Njál pays Gunnar with the money he had initially received. The story spirals from here, with neither Njál nor Gunnar able to end the circle of death which draws more people in. Taking vengeance with retaliatory punishment is common in Icelandic sagas, often drawing in those who were previously uninvolved. This even sometimes happened pre-emptively.

In the Heimskringla after Asbjorn

killed Atli, he set off to do the same to Atli’s brother, Thormod, with whom he had no prior quarrel. Thormod offered to accept a settlement payment, but Asbjorn refused as Thormod could not be trusted not to seek vengeance later.

Other historians argue that feuds were a formalizing and culturally stabilizing element. Iceland in many ways can be viewed as a large village, rather than a nation, and thus could not afford large instability and war if it were to survive. The culture of feuds then channelled the violence that was seen elsewhere in the medieval world into a more moderate format which was often settled in court or at Althings before it led to violence. These historians tend to argue that blood feuds were part of this system, but just the extreme end of it. There was a large focus on performative honour with the offended party often expected to demand a blood feud up until a settlement is reached. If violence did break out during or after proceedings then it was often limited in its scope. There is less evidence for this in the sagas, but as we’ll see below, there may be a good reason for this.

Whichever side of the argument you land on, it is clear that violence was an accepted part of Icelandic life in the Early Medieval period. What is less clear is whether this violence was a result of vigilante justice, and a sign that the legal system was lacking, or whether it was part and parcel of punishment within the society.

Want to find out more?

Try reading a saga for yourself. For instance Njal’s Saga (penguin.co.uk) LINK

>

Try reading some of the secondary literature around sagas, and Iceland. You could try feuding_viking_age_iceland_byock_vengeance.pdf (ucla.edu) or ‘Bloodtaking and peacemaking: feud, law, and society in Saga Iceland’ LINK

>

Think piece: To what extent can we trust historical sources?

Is violence a useful tool within society?

Can we judge a previous society by today’s moral standards?

We should aim to understand the context and limitations of the Icelandic sagas. In Old Norse, saga is roughly translated as ‘tale’, and like many older texts there seems to be no distinction as to whether they are a ‘history’ or a ‘story’. They often present themselves as a historical narrative, and were probably regarded as such in the Middle Ages. This conflation between history and entertainment poses an obvious problem for modern historians, which is compounded by the fact that sagas were not written contemporary to the events they describe. Instead they are thought to be written recordings of an older oral tradition of storytelling. There is also an argument that they are not a useful depiction of early Icelandic society and were instead written as a comment on contemporary Icelandic problems with blood feuds, which had escalated by the end of the 13th century, rather than give an insight into earlier events. On top of this, most manuscripts that have survived to the present day are copies of the originals which means there is the possibility of translation issues or alterations by later scribes.

20

21

Do Animals Ever Commit Crimes and Deserve Punishment BIOLOGY Author: Dr Tom Kemp, Emeritus Fellow in Biology, St John’s College

I

Guilty?

n 1379, a herd of pigs killed a man at a French monastery. They were solemnly tried in the ecclesiastical court for murder, found guilty, and the three direct culprits were hanged.

This was just one of many Medieval records of animals –pigs like these that freely roamed around the village foraging for food perhaps being the most frequent, but also

rats, bulls, dogs, sheep and others - being found guilty of a crime and punished by hanging or being burned alive.

Even insect pests were not immune, as in the case of the weevils of St Julien charged with eating the grape crop. Punishment for this offense was by banning them from the area under pain of excommunication.

Of course, this all seems absurd nowadays because it assumed that animals had a level of self-awareness, a moral code of right and wrong, and the willpower to deliberately act wickedly, a view long since abandoned. We do in fact often act as if our domestic animals have wilfully misbehaved, like the dog that steals food from the table, the horse that

22

refuses to jump a fence, or the cat that scratches the furniture. What we inflict as “punishment”, such as a sharp telling off, is really just part of conditioning the animal by reward and punishment to do as we want. Even when a dog is put down for savaging a child, it is to prevent a recurrence of the event rather than any sense of retribution; if there is any true punishment, it is of the human owner for not controlling the animal.

But why do animals often commit acts against members of their own species that in humans would undoubtedly be called serious crime?

Male lions may kill the cubs of a

23

female so that she then produces his own offspring in their place (infanticide). Amongst eagles, the stronger of two siblings routinely ejects the weaker from the nest (siblicide). A male mallard duck not uncommonly mates forcibly with an apparently reluctant female (rape). Chimpanzees sneakily or even violently take food from others (theft). Biologists explain this kind of behaviour in terms of evolution by natural selection, with no need for any concept of the animal knowing what it is doing is wrong. All these examples can be seen simply as ways by which an individual instinctively increases

A chimpanzee will physically punish another, especially a subordinate or junior individual that has stolen its food.

However, if it sees one chimp steal another chimp’s food, it will not intervene or even take much notice.

In other words, there is no evidence that third-party punishment plays a part in chimpanzee society. Compare that with human society. Here there is

a system of social norms called laws in place, for the smooth running of society as a whole and which people are expected to obey. Transgressions of these are what are called crimes.

A policing system to capture criminals, and a judiciary system to try and punish them exist that are

administered by people who were not themselves affected by or even observers of the crime in question.

Any attempt to account for the origin of crime and punishment as understood by humans needs to start with the evolution of third-party punishment.

Free?

X

its probability of successfully producing offspring.

We now come to the challenging question of where the boundary lies between the conscious human and the presumed instinctive animal versions of what look like very similar behaviours. Our nearest living evolutionary relative is the chimpanzees, and we have almost 99% of genes in common (although that still leaves about 35 million genetic differences to account for the biological differences). Detailed studies have revealed a surprisingly close similarity in several aspects of chimpanzee behaviour and that of humans. Not only does this include complex cooperative behaviour, reasoning and use of tools, but also what we would call crimes such as the murder of single chimp from a neighbouring colony by patrolling males, and even gang-like violence between rival groups armed with sticks. There is frequent theft of food from one another, physical abuse of lower-ranking individuals, and various kinds of dishonesty. Just how much, if at all, the transgressor is aware in any human sense that it is behaving badly is a matter of long-standing scholarly argument. However, careful observations have suggested one clear difference from humans.

VOTE NOW Do you think an animal can commit a crime?

If you want to find out more: Matt Simon, ‘Fantastically Wrong: Europe’s Insane History of Putting Animals on Trial and Executing Them’, Wired, 2014 LINK

>

BBC article – ‘Murder ‘comes naturally’ to chimpanzees’ LINK

> 24

25

MUSIC Author: Thomas Lockyer, Inspire Digital Engagement Officer, St John’s College

T

oday, music forms a nearconstant companion. Podcasts ease our morning commute, playlists motivate our gym workouts, and songs permeate our social activities.

Whatever your daily routine, you would have enjoyed the flexibility and mobility that online music provides.

If you subscribe to a music streaming platform, you’ll be accustomed to unlimited access, listening across multiple devices and not owning the media in question. If so, you’re not alone in having these user expectations.

In January 2024, 574 million people were enjoying these benefits on Spotify, while 112 million others were doing so on Apple Music.

This gravitation towards streaming platforms is part of a broader social shift. Rather than owning media outright, audiences increasingly consume products on platforms such as Spotify and Apple Music. How often do you play a song on repeat for a month and then simply forget about it? Its convenience and accessibility have certainly changed the value we place on music, which arguably lacks the tangibility that CDs and vinyl once had.

But what factors have shaped this perception and the value we place on music? You might be surprised to discover the influence of an illegal pastime – music piracy.

Piracy, traditionally, is associated with attacking ships to steal from them. But hidden treasure aside, the word piracy has been adopted for equally specific means in the music industry – stealing from artists by copying and distributing recordings of music without their consent.

At the turn of the century, piracy became a significant problem for the

26

music industry, with digital progress forcing a radical recontextualisation of existing business models. In the 1990s, the music industry enjoyed a golden era, with CD sales leading the value of physical music to peak in 1999. This success largely stemmed from the fact that the product (music) and medium (CDs) were mutually dependent; if you wanted a song you had to buy the CD to gain access.

However, as the internet became more mainstream, it became easier for audiences to share files, which in turn facilitated illegal activity.

“Because of piracy there has been a massive downturn in people buying music, which makes it more difficult for artists to make money from the sale of records.” - Lily Allen In response to this threat, the music industry decided to adopt successful aspects of pirate music sites. Firstly, legal services such as iTunes attempted to replicate the way illegal filesharing had unbundled the album; it gave users access to individual songs rather than making them buy entire albums.

By pricing each song at 99p Apple sought to strike a balance between reimbursing artists, whilst also attracting audiences who had been enticed by the free offerings of pirate sites. This gamble appeared to be relatively successful. By 2008, iTunes accounted for 70% of legal online sales, reiterating audience demand for a listening experience that was accessible and portable. However, the industry was still faced with a problem. One of the main selling points of illegally downloading content was that the music was free, and this was something that iTunes still couldn’t offer.

Subsequently, the music industry adopted the concept of streaming, with sites such as Spotify, Apple Music and a legal reincarnation of Napster entering the fray. Pirate activity indicated an audience desire for freely available content, that users weren’t fussed about owning. These legal alternatives therefore tapped into these preferences, providing unlimited music for a comparatively low monthly fee. Perhaps unsurprisingly streaming sites have surged in popularity, with accessbased platforms now superseding permanent media ownership. In this sense, this has allowed the media industry to regain control, as they have successfully monetised the attributes of pirate sites.

“Piracy doesn’t hurt an artist unless the artist puts out a bad album.” - Eminem In summary, the influence of illegal filesharing has had a complicated influence on the music industry. On the one hand, piracy has negatively impacted industry revenue, undermining established business models and depriving artists of their rightful income. This impact cannot be understated. At the end of the day, piracy remains an illegal activity, and one that could put you in prison for up to a decade. However, we can also recognise that the debate is more complicated than that.

Illegal filesharing at the turn of the millennium also formed a response to audience demand, addressing the desire for content to be accessible and freely available. Therefore, piracy could be seen as a precursor to the current music industry, where legal streaming sites have monetised a similar user experience. This experience is far more responsive to what consumers want, something that 27

may not have happened as quickly if pirate music sites hadn’t forced a response. Ultimately, it’s up to you to determine whether you think music piracy has had a negative influence or a positive one. But either way, I hope you can see that unlike a song, it’s an important discussion that should not be skipped.

Super Challenge Design a poster that outlines your predictions for the next stage of the music industry or which explores what future crimes could exist within the music industry.

X

Music Piracy: A Cowardly Crime or a Catalyst for Changing Practice?

Suddenly, pirate sites such as Napster appeared, allowing audiences to download their favourite music for free. At its peak Napster had amassed 57 million users, all opting to get their content for free rather than by legal means. This threatened music industry revenue, as artists and producers were not paid for the product they had created. Indeed, the influence of piracy cannot be underestimated. In the wake of pirate media, the value of the global music market fell from $36.9 billion in 2000, to $6.8 billion in 2014.

Vote Now

Is music piracy an excusable crime?

Have your say

Do you think there will be a return to music piracy, or piracy of other media? Why?

Should Brain Scans be Admissible as Evidence in the Courtroom PSYCHOLOGY Author: Professor Laurence Hunt, Tutorial Fellow in Psychology, St John’s College

I

Exhibit A, your Honour

28

n 1991, passers-by on East 72nd Street in Manhattan witnessed the horrifying scene of a woman’s body falling from a twelfth-floor window.

Initially presumed a suicide, the incident soon escalated into a murder investigation. The primary suspect was the woman’s husband, Herbert Weinstein, a mild-mannered retired advertising executive with no criminal history. Weinstein promptly confessed to hitting and strangling his wife during an argument before throwing her body out of their apartment window.

However, Weinstein was not ultimately convicted of murder. After a plea bargain, he instead accepted the lesser charge of manslaughter. In fact, the initial murder charge never reached a jury trial. This was due to concerns from the prosecution about a crucial piece of evidence the judge had deemed admissible: an MRI scan showing a large, orange-like tumour growing on Weinstein’s left frontal lobe (see picture). The pivotal question emerged: Can someone with frontal lobe damage be held responsible for their actions?

Historically, cases like that of Phineas Gage in the mid-19th century have revealed how frontal

lobe damage can significantly alter what is known from patients with personality. Gage was involved in a brain damage to frontal cortex. fMRI remarkable accident where a tamping studies have shown that activation in iron pierced his skull, destroying the frontal cortex occurs during tasks much of his left frontal lobe. While he involving decision-making, planning, retained his perception, movement, and understanding others’ intentions and memory, his personality during social interactions. underwent a radical shift—so much Yet MRI has also become of so that his doctor claimed he was increasing interest and importance in “no longer Gage.” Since this early the courtroom. Since the early case of case study, numerous other patients Herbert Weinstein, numerous lawyers with frontal lobe damage have been have used brain scans in an attempt studied, revealing how changes in to defend their clients – using MRI decision-making, rational thought and scans to show that their brain was social interaction can all follow from damaged, and claiming that this gave damage to this brain region. rise to their actions. And in the late Brain imaging techniques 2000s, fMRI in particular, entered like MRI in the early 1990s made the public imagination: it was touted it possible to study the brain as a tool for lie detection. Companies physiologically in living humans. It like ‘No Lie MRI’ in the United was possible to examine structural States claimed its efficacy exceeded changes in the brain, pinpointing traditional polygraph tests. However, the exact location of tumours or the scientific consensus indicates brain damage in patients like that fMRI is far from reliable in Weinstein. And it also became determining truthfulness. The human possible to examine the function brain is an intricate organ, and the of the living brain as participants act of lying activates numerous perform cognitive tasks inside the regions that also light up during MRI scanner. The technique used other cognitive tasks. Consequently, here is known as ‘functional MRI’ fMRI as a lie detector has not found (fMRI), which measures changes in widespread acceptance in the legal blood flow as a consequence of brain system. activity. This has largely confirmed 29

Too young to prosecute?

Figure: An MRI scan (left) and PET scan (right) of Herbert Weinstein’s brain, showing the orange-like sub-arachoid cyst that his lawyer claimed was the cause of his behaviour. Source: https://www.kevinadavis.com/brain-defense-true-crime

If you want to find out more: Micah Johnson, How Responsible are Killers with Brain Damage? Scientific American, 2018 LINK

>

Greg Miller, Truthiness? No Lie MRI Hits the Legal System, Science Magazine, 2009 LINK

>

VOTE NOW

X

Nonetheless, the questions remain. Should brain scans be used as evidence in criminal cases? How do we balance scientific insight with moral and ethical considerations?

And where should we draw the line between scientific curiosity and the sanctity of the courtroom?

The technology is progressing, but the ethical frameworks around it are still catching up. For now, while MRI scans may occasionally enter the courtroom, their role in establishing guilt or innocence remains a subject of intense debate.

Do you think brain scans should be used as evidence in court?

Super Challenge Write a short piece in response to one of these discussion points.

1 Can neuroscience ever truly exonerate individuals of their crimes? Discuss with reference to frontal lobe damage.

2 H ow reliable do you think polygraphs and fMRI scans are for lie detection? How might you design an experiment that tests their accuracy?

3 What are the ethical considerations in using neuroscience as a form of evidence in the courtroom?

Kevin Davis. “The Brain Defense”, Penguin Random House, 2017 LINK

8 9

10 11 12 13 14

> 30

31

PHILOSOPHY AND LAW Author: Antonia Sundrup, 2nd year Law student, St John’s College

Stretch yourself! This article was written to be a little more challenging, either in content, theme or style – give it a go!

I

n 1993 in Liverpool, one of the most famous murder cases in recent UK history unfolded: James Bulger was a 2-year-old boy who was in the supermarket with his mum, Denise Fergus, when two other boys, Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, led him out of the supermarket. James was abducted, brutally assaulted and killed by the two boys.

The gruesome details of this case understandably left many in shock, but even more striking is the fact that Robert and Jon, James’ killers, were only ten years old when they committed the act. Nonetheless, they went to trial in a criminal court, were convicted of murder and served a prison sentence until they were 18.

While their identities were not published during the trial, the judge later decided that their names should be disclosed. The case received a huge amount of media coverage, most of it painting the boys as brutal criminals.

Both parents of James have released their own books since and the case is discussed in the media to this day.

While English law and much of the media treated Robert and Jon as criminals, in many other countries they would not have even gone to court. This is because different countries set a different age of criminal responsibility. This is the minimum age at which a young person can be accused and tried for committing a crime, the age at which they can be treated as a criminal.

In England and Wales, the age is 10, which is the lowest in Europe.

Scotland recently raised it to 12, in Germany it is 14, in Spain it is 16 and in Brazil 18. That does not necessarily mean that children who reach the age of criminal responsibility are treated completely like adults before a court: In the UK, those under 18 are prosecuted in special youth courts, receive different sentences and serve those sentences in special closed centres for young 32

people instead of regular prisons.

In many countries with a higher age of criminal responsibility, there is also a different attitude toward children who commit acts that would be considered crimes if they were adults. A year after the Bulger case, five-year-old Silije was killed by two of her friends in Trondheim, Norway.

The attackers were six years old, which is far from the age of criminal responsibility in Norway. Rather than viewing the case as a crime, the authorities and media in Norway viewed it as a tragedy for which not the children, but the adults and the community around them had to take responsibility. The focus was not on criminal law, but rather on giving treatment and support to the boys and protecting their identities – to this day, their names are not known to the public.

The idea behind this approach is that children are not responsible for their actions in the same way that adults are and often do not fully comprehend their consequences.

They will be more heavily influenced by their parents and other adults in their lives, and those people have a

responsibility to ensure the child is not harming themselves or others.

This view is often backed up by reports which show that children who commit harmful acts such as killings are likely to be emotionally and mentally disturbed and that children do not have the same ability to reason and foresee consequences as adults. It has also been shown that increases in juvenile homicide were linked to increases in child poverty, maltreatment and other circumstances.

In a 2010 survey, twothirds of the responding adults were in favour of raising the age of criminal responsibility in the UK and many professionals in the field agree.

Andy Peaden, the head of Leeds Youth Justice service, considers the age of 10 to be ‘ridiculously young’.

On the other side of the debate, there are people like James Bugler’s mother, Denise Fergus, who believes that Jon’s and Robert’s punishment was not only justified, but that they should have received a longer, even a life, sentence, just as adults would have. She told the Guardian that ‘plenty of children have difficult backgrounds. It does not turn them into killers.’ Some also argue that because children are still developing, it is even more important that the criminal law intervenes to deter them from committing further crimes and change their behaviour.

Do you think children can be criminals? What should be the age of criminal responsibility in your opinion? It is equally important to think about possible middle grounds

and modifications to make the criminal justice system more suited to dealing with young people. You might think that a 12-year-old should be criminally liable, but equally agree that they should not be tried in a normal court.

X

Can Children be Criminals?

VOTE NOW Do you think the age of criminal responsibility should be higher than ten?

Think Piece Draw a mind map exploring your ideas about the different arguments for and against a low age of criminal responsibility. Try to think about how people on both sides of the arguments may feel. How might it feel to be a ten-year-old in a court room? How might it feel to have your friend’s murderer walk free because they are a child? Do you think that there is any compromise that can be reached in terms of the age of criminal responsibility?

Have Your Say What age do you think the age of criminal responsibility should be? Do you think children should receive the same punishments as adults if they commit the same crime?

Want to find out more?

Video from the Scottish government as to why they have raised the age of criminal responsibility and what happens when someone below this age commits acts that would make him criminally liable if they were older (it is aimed at slightly younger children).

LINK

>

Video about the experience of going to court as a young person.

LINK

>

Article about the age of criminal responsibility: Responsible Child: Can a 10-year-old be a cold-blooded murderer? - BBC News LINK

>

33

Workshop 1 Super Challenge winners

Sam, Year 9, Bishop Wand Church of England School

Anoushka, Year 10, The Kingston Academy

HERE IS A SELECTION OF WORK FROM OUR CRITICAL THINKERS. CONGRATULATIONS TO THE PRIZE WINNERS! We loved reading your super challenge submissions from Workshop 1 and were impressed by the quality of the entries. It was tough choosing the winners for each super challenge and we want to congratulate all who entered. Here is a sneak preview of some of We loved reading your super challenge submissions from Workshop 1 and were impressed by the the winning entries… quality of the entries. It was tough choosing the winners for each super challenge and we want to congratulate all who entered. Here is a sneak preview of some of the winning entries…

em y Acad n o t s King , The 0 1 r , Yea shka Anou

Sam, Year 9, Bishop Wand Church of England School

Aleen, Year 9, Ellen Wilkinson School for Girls

Aleen, Year 9, Ellen Wilkinson School for Girls

Scarlett, Year Luc y, Y ear

Mahi, Year 9, Park High Schools 34

10, Ark Alexandra Academy 11, Sac kv i l

le S cho ol

Lucy, Year 11, Sackville School

35

I

Objects of Punishment in the Pitt Rivers Museum: Magic and Trial by Ordeal

D

S P OT L

F

OR

G

O N OX T H

OXFORD SPOTLIGHT Author: Lily Middleton-Mansell, English graduate, St John’s College

Pitt Rivers Museum

F

ounded in 1884, the Pitt Rivers Museum houses more than 500,000 objects, photographs and manuscripts from all over the world.

The museum has a unique layout: its artefacts are arranged by type into a ‘democracy of things’, rather than by time or region. This invites visitors to consider distinctions and parallels across cultures through particular objects, demonstrating the consistencies between communities as well as their cultural differences.

The artefacts range from traditional clothing to whistles, ritual objects, weapons, perfume and more.

This virtual tour of the Pitt Rivers Museum will focus on its objects related to magic and trial by ordeal, considering their relevance to questions of crime and punishment.

While the Pitt Rivers is an important centre of archaeological and cultural research, it is also just starting to confront the colonial exploitation that lies at its roots.

Many of the objects in the museum, from cultures all over the world, were taken without the consent of the people who had owned them, or through the force of Britain’s political power over other countries.

36

Certain displays now explore the colonial implications of their arrangements, but some argue that this isn’t enough. Critics of the Pitt Rivers see the ownership of such objects as a crime in itself, suggesting that museums such as the Pitt Rivers should return their artefacts to the countries they came from. As you look through this virtual tour, consider what the objects’ journey into the museum might have looked like, and whether the Pitt Rivers is where they belong.

The Pitt Rivers often uses handwritten labels containing minimal information. Below you can explore a selection of their objects and a transcript of its description alongside my analysis of the objects.

TRIAL BY ORDEAL Some of the objects displayed here were used in various forms of magic and others were associated with the practise of trial by ordeal. In most trials by ordeal an accused person undertook a test of divination, strength, or endurance to prove that they were telling the truth. A favourable outcome was often felt to reflect the intervention of a nonhuman agent or other divine being.

‘This is the poison fang of a snake, used in trials by ordeal. The fang is inserted under the eyelid and the eye 37

is closed. If on opening the eye the fang drops out readily, the person is not guilty. If it remains under the eyelid, he is guilty. (Tophoke tribe, Lomani R., Upper Congo, 1910)’

While it would be considered a brutal form of justice by today’s standards, trial by ordeal can be understood as a way for cultures to shift authority in matters of crime and punishment from their own human judgement, which may be flawed, to the religious or supernatural powers that they would consider all-knowing and superior.

This is because the results of these trials were often felt to reflect the intervention of a supernatural or divine being.

I

O N OX

F

D

S P OT L

HT

OR

G

In this sense, such trials moved the responsibility for judging a crime out of human hands - from the perspective of those employing such methods, their job was simply carrying out the punishment on those who were condemned. Therefore, despite the fact that these trials appear to rely on seemingly arbitrary chance occurrences (such as the fang remaining under the eyelid) to decide serious matters of crime, in their cultures such methods actually act as a medium, a middle-man of sorts, for the action of higher powers.

Have your say Share your ideas in the discussion forum about the following questions: • What methods do we have today for working out if someone is telling the truth about a crime they may have committed?

• Does physical punishment still play a role in our justice system?

Should it?

• To what extent do beliefs about religious morality have an impact on our justice system? What kind of values can our laws be based on, if not from a religious authority?

DETECTING CRIME ‘A Bone wand used by the celebrated “devil doctor” Kootay to summon spirits, and, with the assistance of a live mouse, to detect persons who had caused illness by witchcraft.’

More direct forms of magic and

the supernatural, alongside trial by ordeal, were also used to detect certain crimes. Note the fact that, in the case of this bone wand, the cause of illness is already assumed (as witchcraft) the function of the wand is simply to discover who was responsible for it.

This shows how magical objects such as these were often used to confirm underlying assumptions, often based on pre-existing prejudice (witchcraft has been used to excuse the unjust punishment of many women), rather than any revelations about the crime at hand.

The wand is surrounded by various other objects, including a cone from a tree growing on the Athi Plains, used by a Kikuyu magician for telling fortunes (on the right of the bone wand). According to the Pitt Rivers, the pointed end is held in the client’s mouth, the magician holding the rounded end. The omen is taken by the rattling of the contained seeds.

This demonstrates how, in some cultures, magic could be used not only in relation to crime and punishment, but also as a profession - telling fortunes could be a lucrative trade.

38

lacked the language to comprehend LGBT+ identities, and therefore aligned them with magic, powers that they considered both antireligious and out of their control. This encouraged them to punish people with such identities with the same attitude that they would have towards evil spirits.

However, many cultures actually have more flexibility around gender and sexuality than has historically been the case in the UK (where this witch in a bottle comes from). As the Pitt Rivers mentions, magic and the supernatural could also provide a language for queer identities in a way that gives them a certain freedom from heteronormative ways of understanding.

Have your say Share your ideas in the discussion forum about the following questions: • What kind of assumptions do we often make when considering a crime?

• Is it possible to understand the justice systems of other cultures from objects such as these? What else might we need to know about these artefacts?

• What is the value of comparing objects across different cultures that serve similar purposes? Can they tell us anything about our own cultures?

WITCHCRAFT ‘Europe, England, Sussex, Hove.

Silvered and stoppered bottle said to contain a witch, obtained about 1915 from an old lady living in a village near Hove, Sussex. She remarked “... and they do say there be a witch in it and if you let un out there it be a peck o’ trouble.”

Witch in a Bottle: both LGBTIQA+ culture and discrimination are intertwined with histories of witchcraft.

Many people persecuted as witches were those outside of the socially accepted binaries of gender and sexuality (including many LGBTIQA+ people). However, the occult has since become a big part of queer culture, both aesthetically and in practice. This bottle, collected by Margaret Murray, is directly linked to both persecution history and pagan LGBTIQA+ activism, due to Murray’s own influence on gay witchcraft culture.

This bottle can be understood as a particularly creative form of imprisonment. Trapping a criminal (or, in this case, a supposed witch) gives communities a sense of control over the crimes that occur. However, the bottle poses a danger to whoever holds it, alongside protecting them from the apparent witch. As the old lady comments, if the witch gets out, whoever owns the bottle will have ‘a peck o’ trouble’. Giving punishment has consequences - even further punishment, or revenge, by the alleged criminal themselves.

Witches and other elements of the supernatural have a long history of association with LGBT+ communities. This link between nonheteronormative gender and sexual identities and ideas around magic was partially formed because both concepts exist in the realm of mystery.

Heteronormative societies often

THE MWAVI POISON ORDEAL ‘Skull and skin of a small mammal used by native ‘witch-finders’ to detect persons who have caused illness by witchcraft. The accused then undergoes the mwavi poison ordeal.’

Many of the magical objects in the Pitt Rivers are made from animal parts. The “devil doctor” who used the bone wand was even assisted by a live mouse. Magic is often understood as a diversion from the natural world, belonging instead to the realm of the supranatural, that which is beyond nature. However, objects such as this skull and skin of a mammal show how the natural and the supranatural were actually understood to be intertwined. The natural world was often seen as a route to the supranatural.

Think piece • Is imprisonment the best form of punishment? Why? What possible alternatives are there?

• How can punishing crimes have a negative impact, both to the perpetrator and to the society in which they live?

• How much does social prejudice (against gender, sexuality, race, etc) impact the justice system?

How do these social groups respond to legal prejudice?

This label gives a summary of the object’s use, but nothing on how it worked, or what the mwavi poison ordeal was. How the object was obtained by the Pitt Rivers is also notably absent. Some would argue that this encourages visitors to focus more on the object itself, and makes 39

LI

F

S P OT Think piece

F

D

room for a larger collection, while others would say that the object’s history and context is more important, especially considering the fact that the museum’s ownership of their artefacts can sometimes be problematic. The Pitt Rivers website explains that the first labels used in the Museum have been ‘retained for the glimpses they offer into the mindset of the first Museum staff, as well as into the history of anthropology’. However, they are also ‘conscious that some of the words used on the labels are derogatory and hurtful’.

G

OR

I

O N OX

D

S P OT L

HT

OR

G

O N OX T H

Want to find out more?

• Do ideas about the natural world impact our conceptions of justice? In what ways does the difference between humans and animals inform our systems of crime and punishment?

• How does the labelling (or lack therefore) of an object in a museum impact how it is perceived by visitors? What kind of information should museums give about their artefacts?

• Is there a conflict between preserving the history and traditions of a museum and ensuring that its displays do not discriminate against or offend certain groups?

40

Follow the links below to learn about objects from a range of different places and periods.

Small Blessings - Home (ox.ac.uk) LINK > Arms and Armour at the Pitt Rivers Museum (ox.ac.uk) LINK > Index - LG Galleries (ox.ac.uk) LINK > Object biographies details (ox.ac.uk) LINK

>

41

I

O N OX

F

D

S P OT L

HT

OR

G

Introducing ...

Oxford Libraries OXFORD SPOTLIGHT Author: Lily Middleton-Mansell, English graduate, St John’s College

T

he University of Oxford hosts an impressive range of libraries: twenty-six across the university, not to mention one in each of its thirty-nine colleges. Both the buildings and their books date back thousands of years, ranging from the medieval period to the modern day. Not only Oxford students have access to these texts.

You can also sign up to be a Bodleian Reader, meaning that you can go into the Oxford libraries to carry out academic research from outside of the university. Oxford libraries open up a world of writing to people across the UK and beyond, but being a student at Oxford University gives you the chance to explore all the different kinds of libraries as part of your normal working day.

Those with access to Oxford libraries can request to see books written hundreds of years ago, or ones published last month. This is because the Bodleian, which is the central Oxford University library, is a legal deposit library. There are six legal deposit libraries in the UK, including the British Library, the Bodleian and the Cambridge University Library.

Legislation allows these libraries to claim a free copy of any work published in the UK and Ireland,

Radcliffe Camera Bodleian Library

such as the Bodleian therefore work not only to ensure that books are available to a range of researchers in the present, but also to preserve Britain’s literary legacy for the future.

As a result of its legal deposit status, the Bodleian contains over 13 million written texts, most of which are accessible to Oxford students in some form or another. Students have the opportunity to read the original draft of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, or examine the illuminated illustrations in medieval manuscripts. However, Inside the Radcliffe Camera

either in print or electronically, including books, journal articles, newspapers or more. One of the reasons that these libraries exist is that, if some great disaster wiped out most of the UK’s books, there would be six chances of the vast majority of them surviving in one of the highly secure legal deposit library buildings.

The Weston Library in Oxford, which hosts the Bodleian’s most precious texts (known as the special collections), has special reinforced walls to protect against fire. Libraries 42

realistically, Oxford students will not spend all their time perusing the special collections, despite the temptation. It’s the college libraries and faculty libraries, which are organised by subject, that are the biggest student stamping grounds.

College libraries are the most convenient option for daily study.

Alongside their own collection of books, they will likely be not more than a few minutes away from where you are living and many of them are open late into the night, with some even running 24/7. While it’s not quite true that Oxford students are always pulling all-nighters, some do like to keep a more nocturnal schedule in order to avoid the threat of an early start. College libraries give students the flexibility to work at the times they want to.

The vast number of libraries in Oxford means that there is one to suit every taste. The Radcliffe Camera, with its spiral staircase and intricate interiors, is technically the history faculty library. But it is also one of the most popular libraries amongst all students, as well as a big tourist destination. While tourists usually aren’t allowed inside, prepare to feel like a celebrity on your way in and out of the library, with cameras flashing as visitors pose next to the grand entrance. The Bodleian Old Library, one of the oldest libraries in Europe, is another popular tourist spot, but also has plenty of quiet spaces for students. It incorporates buildings spanning from the 14th to the 17th centuries and is connected to the Radcliffe Camera by the Gladstone Link, meaning that a student could walk from the Bodleian to the Radcliffe Camera without ever going outside. The Gladstone Link is an underground library which relies a lot more on concrete and bright lights

than beautiful architecture. Some students like to work in the Gladstone Link due to its lack of distractions, while others find it slightly soulless.

There’s certainly not much to look at beyond your books!

If you’re looking for a modern library that also sees the light of day, the Vere Harmsworth, which is part of the Rothermere American Institute, incorporates massive windows into its contemporary design - a good alternative if you’re starting to find the traditional Oxford look a

into the library space, meaning that you can still get a sense of being out in the sun even when working among the shelves.

The Oxford Libraries therefore give students the chance to add some variety to their working day, combining study with the discovery of exciting new books and spaces.

They also help make working a social occasion, with students often making trips to libraries in groups. There’s a camaraderie to being one of the last few remaining in the library at

Vere Harmsworth Library

The Laudian Library, St John’s College

little bit suffocating. Finally, while there are libraries in every college, St John’s College is particularly wellequipped because it has three! There is a Law Library open only to St John’s law students; the Old Library, located in Canterbury Quad; and the more modern Study Centre (which you can just about make out through the trees in the picture below). The architecture of the Study Centre, which is right next to college gardens, tries to incorporate the nature surrounding it 43

night. Overall, they exist to support not only your academic development and research, but also independence and sense of belonging in the central university, providing a multitude of shared spaces where you can work among other students during the hours that you choose.

’

INSPIRE CRITICAL THINKING SUMMER SCHOOL FOR YEAR 11 LINK

Are you looking for something fun and CV-boosting to do this summer?

Then why not apply to our Inspire Critical Thinking (Year 11) Summer School!

>

Our Inspire Summer Schools offer you the opportunity to experience life as an Oxford student by staying in St John’s Halls of Residence, taking part in exciting academic sessions, and getting involved in fun extra-curricular activities! The Year 11 Inspire Summer School programme includes:

A day in the life of an Oxford student during the summer vacation LINK

>

• Exciting academic sessions in a range of subjects • A lecture from Dame Professor Sue Black • A Garden BBQ and Formal Dinner in our beautiful Hall • Theatre performances, punting, museum trips and more!

The Inspire Critical Thinking (Year 11) Summer School will take place Monday 29th of July – Thursday 1st August, and is entirely free of charge.

Author: Antonia Sundrup, 2nd year Law student, St John’s College 44

Applications will open later in the Critical Thinking cycle and we will consider your engagement with the Critical Thinking workshops (submitting super challenges) as well as contextual information as part of your application.

45

COMING UP

Inspire Critical Thinking 2023/24

In next month’s issue we will explore the effectiveness of crime detection and the Criminal Justice System, featuring questions such as: • How can TikTok affect court cases?

• How can your hands be used as evidence?

• How are chemistry labs useful to the authorities?

• How does Automated Number Plate Recognition work?

• Can Literature Confront Social Injustice?

• Why do we need to be careful with DNA evidence?

• How true are Oxford’s ghost stories?

• Critical Thinking skills: What new fallacies will Ima Lyer try to avoid?

NEXT MONTH How can your hands be used as evidence?

What new fallacies will Ima Lyer try to avoid?

46

47