+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Was he framed?

  1. #1
    Starting to feel at home.
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts

    Default Was he framed?

    My convict ancestor, Charles Rogers, was accused (according to a report in the Sydney Gazette of 22nd June 1837) of attempting to burn down a house and store belonging to Mr. James Milsom, for whom he was working as an assigned servant.

    The report says that "Rogers has been fully committed to take his trial", but I can find nothing further about the case.

    I have a copy of Charles' Certificate of Freedom dated March 1838. He appears to have worked his way on board ship back to England, where he married in 1844.

    Can I assume from the lack of follow-up to the newspaper report, and from his release less than a year later, that the case never came to trial? He would surely have faced the death penalty for such a crime, had he been guilty of it?

    http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/2211547

  2. #2
    Seriously addicted to family history research. spison's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Newcastle, Australia
    Posts
    1,066
    Thanks
    110
    Thanked 97 Times in 91 Posts

    Default The one that got away?

    Hi Davyr,

    If there was nothing more about a trial then perhaps the accusation was proved to be false and it went no further. If it had gone to court at this time I'd expect it to have been in the Sydney Gazette. Even if he had been tried I doubt it would have been death at this time - probably just 'transportation' to a different area - not sure where it would have been in 1837 but Newcastle, Brisbane (Moreton Bay) and Port Macquarie were examples of places where those committing further (or initial) crimes in NSW were sent to get them out of Sydney.

    Even though it certainly sounded quite serious, I believe that you are correct in assuming that as you have his Certificate of Freedom from less than a year later, no trial had taken place.

    Your bloke didn't get a very flattering description did he? After reading the report I figured Lomer was very sus so perhaps there was an attempt at framing him!

    I couldn't find anything else either.

    Jane

  3. #3
    Starting to feel at home.
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts

    Default

    Thanks, Jane - that's reassured me that he was probably only guilty of his original crime (larceny) and not arson too!

    I did wonder what on earth he must have looked like, with that "remarkable countenance" (which mercifully doesn't seem to have afflicted later generations)...

    Dave

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Select a file: