What really bugged me was the whole thing about putting Vicki (or Phyllis) on trial for witchcraft. The Salem incident was just barely over a 100 years old and had embarrassed the heck out of New England, bringing such trials to an end. To think, a century later, that they would accuse somebody of the capital crime of witchcraft to me was simply ludicrous. Okay, so it was a good angle, but it was still horrifically historically innacurate.
Now, I could see them still filled with superstitious puritanism and thinking Vicki was a witch, and wanting to deal with her, yet knowing putting her on trial for it would be impossible. It would've made more sense, in my opinion, if they had charged her with murder, since that was a crime, and said she used witchcraft as the weapon. That way, they could've had their cake and ate it, too. They could argue that they weren't trying her for witchcraft, and even though it was no longer considered a crime, that doesn't mean that it didn't exist. All they had to do was prove that she used it to commit murder or any other illegal mayhem. That, I think, would have made the whole story more interesting: she's being tried for murder, and the "weapon" was witchcraft, and there could be a whole lot of arguments between the characters if the accused choice of weapon was real or not.
Gerard