First, Bernadotte wasn't stupid. And if it was merely 'an error in judgment' instead of deliberate, I don't see much of a difference. Bernadotte certainly didn't bust him hump to get to Jena and the smoke from the battle was undoubtedly observed from his position and the smoke and perhaps the noise from Auerstadt was certainly there, as Sahuc offered to countermarch to Davout's assistance and was silenced by Bernadotte. That itself is an indicator that the whole episode was deliberate. Good soldiers and good generals hasten to get into action and assist their comrades. Negligent or treasonous ones do not.
Merely offering excuses for Bernadotte really doesn't cut it. The motivations for his lack of action on 14 October go much deeper than that as far as I can see.

Kevin:

So, you feel the responsible thing for Bernadotte to have done was to send Sahuc [who was not even a brigade commender] off with part of his command?

This is what F. N. Maude writes in his history of the campaign on page 175-77 in a section titled "Bernadotte's Conduct":

Bernadotte was with Murat and Davout at Naumburg when the orders of Berthier, dated 3 p.m., 13th, were received, by which the former was ordered to Dornburg, and the latter told to stand fast unless heavy firing was heard from Jena until later insturctions should reach him. As his Corps had been marching all day, he took shelter behind the promise of later orders and halted his men, along the road to Dornburg, on the right bank of the Saale with the tail of the colun in Naumburg, wher he himself passed the night with Davout. There seems no doubt the in the general disposition he had been overlooked, for whten the orders dated 10 p.m,, Jeana, weer despatched to Davout, [recieved at 3 a.m.] directing him to march on Apolda, the Major-General added: "If Marshal Bernadotte is still with you, you can march together, but the Emperor hopes he will be in the position indicated to him at Dornburg." Now no position had been indicated to Bernadotte, hence he concluded that some order had missed him, and though this note to Davout must have effectively covered his responsibility had he acted on it, he decided to march to Dornburg. Had he acted with energy on his arrival at Dornburg his presence there would have been more effective than his presence at Auerstadt, hence he does not seem to be seriously to blame. Unfortunatley for his reputation, however, he did not act with anything approaching energy, but carried out his march so tardily that he failed to reach eithe rfield in time to render assistance. [He took six hours to cover eight miles.]

It is said that the Emperor had actually decided to court-martial him, and feeling in the Army ran so high that he would certainly have been convicted, but at the last moment, in veiw of his relationship by marriage to the Imperial family, the Emperor related... One thing is quite certain, viz, that in going to Dornburg instead of staying with Davout, he showed a better grasp of the Imperial idea than his many critices. His troops being already on the Dornburg road, they could only have followed Davout into action, and must have arrived too late to prevent his defeat had the Prussians only pressed home their advantage. [So, he should have ignored the orders he did know about, reverse direction and come in behind Davout late in the day...? For pursuit, Bernadotte was far better positioned than behind Davout.

Maude was an experienced soldier. Is there some reason that Bernadotte should have understood where the Prussian forces were to a better degree than Napoleon? Should he have known to ignore the orders he could infer to do something else? Should he have divided his forces because some staff officer suggests it? He certainly should be castigated for his lackluster march [Negligent, certainly], but how Bernadotte, as an intelligent man, could have known that it would 'hurt' Davout, or better his own reputation has not been explained at all. Nor has any possible 'treacherous' or 'deeper' reason for his behavior been identified other than saying they existed.

There is no doubt that he screwed up, but why is the question here. It was a failure as an experienced officer, no doubt. However, deliberately malicious motivations have not been identified at all.

Bill