Examine the case of the prosecution and the defense. Then decide: Which side are you on?
Was The Use Of Torture Legal?
The Amboyna controversy hinges on the difficult question of legal torture. Almost all the confessions (with the possible exception of Edward Collins who you will consider next) were obtained via the use of the 'torture of water' or waterboarding, that is the accused denied all knowledge until they were tortured and brought to confession via this means. The controversy centers on two points. First, was torture used correctly and legally in Amboyna? Second, was waterboarding a reliable mechanism for interrogation? The Prosecution argues that waterboarding was a uniquely moderate form of interrogation that cannot properly be labeled as torture and which can be relied upon to produce accurate information. In contrast, the Defense asserts that waterboarding was a brutal torture that generated unreliable information because the victim would say anything simply to make it stop. As a result, the confessions produced by torture cannot be relied upon to prove the existence of a plot.