Final answer:
The content provided does not clearly specify the types of guilt mentioned. Collective guilt involves shared responsibility within a group, while individual guilt refers to personal remorse. The context provided does not suffice to definitively categorize the implied guilt as one of the mentioned types.
Step-by-step explanation:
You asked about the types of guilt mentioned in the given content. Unfortunately, the content provided is insufficient to determine the types of guilt specifically mentioned. It seems the question might be referring to a particular case study or context not included in your query. However, generally speaking, collective guilt refers to the feeling of guilt shared by a group for actions taken by one or more members of the group that are perceived as wrong or unethical. Individual guilt, on the other hand, is the personal feeling of responsibility or remorse when an individual believes they have done something wrong.
Regarding the references provided, there is a mention of the 'guilty will be punished,' which could potentially indicate an implied guilt of the authorities, if they fail to uphold what is considered just in a given cultural context. Furthermore, the phrase 'unaccountable to a great many people' suggests the possibility of a dispute over the verdict, but without more explicit context, it is not possible to accurately define it as one of the types of guilt mentioned.
As for the questions about biases in the account, Abu Zayd's view on ordeal by fire, and the commonality of the method historically, more contextual details are needed to provide accurate answers. Nevertheless, such methods were often used based on cultural and societal beliefs before the establishment of more empirical methods of determining guilt or innocence.