By Celeste Newsome
Game of Thrones, John Wick 4, The Great. These shows all have at least one thing in common: Trial by Combat. Whether it be with swords or dueling pistols, trial by combat is a brutal tradition from a bygone era reserved for fantasy and works of fiction, or is it?
Believe it or not, trial by combat is legal in the United States. Since this country was established, trial by combat was simply never formally abolished, but there are only three states with specific laws surrounding it: Washington, Oregon, and Texas. According to wisevoter.com, trial by combat or “mutual combat” is “a term used to describe an agreement between two parties to engage in a physical altercation with each other, typically with no legal consequences”. This was a popular practice in the 18th and 19th centuries- though people usually partook in unarmed forms of combat like boxing- but because the United States’ legal system does not see mutual combat as a valid way to resolve an argument, it could be considered as assault and battery even if both people agree to fight.
In Oregon mutual combat is illegal, those who participate can be charged with disorderly conduct. Sorry Oregonians, you all will have to conduct your legal matters through regular old due process, no fisticuffs for you. In Washington, mutual combat is legal but it comes with stipulations. Both people have to agree to fight, it must happen in a public place, and there can not be any serious bodily injury. And lastly, we have Texas. Texas has similar mutual combat laws to Washington, both people must agree to the fight and the fight cannot result in serious bodily injuries. I am not exactly sure how one would determine a winner (or in this case, the “not guilty” party) without serious bodily injury, but I suppose that’s for the Texans and the Washingtonians to figure out. But what about the rest of the United States? Well, in places like Michigan or Iowa, the laws around mutual combat are undefined. This means that it is up to the court to interpret the law and how they would like to proceed on a case-by-case basis.
As far as I can tell, it is uncommon in the United States for anyone to request trial by combat but it has indeed happened. An article titled “Man requests ‘trial by combat’ with Japanese swords to settle dispute with Iowa ex-wife” by Anna Spoerre recounts an event in 2020 where a man by the name of David Ostrom requested trial by combat to his ex-wife in Iowa. The court called for a psychological evaluation to be done on Mr. Ostrom as well as suspending his visitation rights to his children until the evaluation was completed. He was declared sane by the evaluation and later admitted that he requested trial by combat to “get media attention and with the hope it could lead to both parties airing their grievances in front of a judge and reach a resolution”. So if you want to have a trial by combat in the near future, your chances are not looking too great. But to be fair, Mr. Ostrom requested trial by combat in a state where there is no legislation for it and he requested to fight using Katana’s (a decidedly deadly weapon that would- at the very least-cause severe bodily harm) and he threatened to “rend their souls from their [corporeal] bodies”, a psychological evaluation was probably for the best. But what would you do? Would you let the courts and juries decide your fate with evidence and facts gathered by lawyers to be presented in a battle of wits? Or would you take your fate into your own hands in a knock-down, drag-out, bare-knuckle-bruiser, winner-take-all trial by combat?
Celeste is currently in the first year of her Masters program. She has a passion for green energy and a love of traveling and trying new things. You can contact her at thenewcitizenspress@gmail.com.
