Evidence in the roman criminal trail of the republic period on the example of Cicero's speeches

Abstract

The subject of the study is evidence in the Roman trial of the Republic period, which Cicero invokes in its speeches. In this study was analyzed three of Cicero's speeches on the charges against Catilina and two of Cicero's speeches on the defence in cases against Lucius Murena and Gnaeus Plancius. It is concludes that even after 2000 years there are, in general, the same sources and evidence in the current Polish criminal trial as well as in the Roman trial of the Republic period. The sources of evidence are persons and objects as well as documents, and by means of evidence: testimonies of witnesses and expert opinions as well as the content of documents. There is a so-called a small crown witness who was Titus Volturcius in the trial against Catilina. There are identical enquiries. The difference between the two trials is the lack of influence of public opinion on a judgment and all other procedural acts and on an assessment of evidence. Arguments (probationes artificiales) are not evidence in the Polish criminal trial. Both criminal trials also differ in the nature of the defendant's explanations. They did not constitute evidence in the Roman trail and nowadays it is an important evidence of direct or indirect nature.