Witnesses who came forward on their own without being summoned to court were allowed to testify when usually this would not be allowed, and if any such witness had been previously convicted of perjury he would normally be rejected but in the case of an accused witch, his testimony would be allowed (Levack 132). It is clear to see that witchcraft was treated quite differently, “But it is absolutely necessary to bear in mind that the crime of witchcraft must not be treated in the same way as others” (Levack 133). Bodin was very direct in his approach on prosecuting the …show more content…
In Article XXII, Boguet advises that a judge must avoid torture as much as possible; it was his opinion that the accused had certain abilities to avoid feeling pain (Boguet 137). In Article XV, Boguet advises against the use of the ducking stool, for he believed that Satan could somehow affect the outcome and possibly kill an innocent (Boguet 136). Despite some lenient recommendations, Boguet could be just as severe in his recommendations for the persecution of witches. Nicolas Remy while serving on the ducal court of Duke Charles III conducted an intense campaign against witchcraft. . Rémy was a determined prosecutor of witches, hearing hundreds of cases during his career and during his tenure Remy was responsible for sending over 800 witches to their death (Levack 82). Remy penned the witchcraft treatise Demonolatry (1595) in which he included some of his own cases highlighting the prosecution and punishment of witches. Rémy insisted that judicial leniency towards witches was a form of