Search All      View Names A-Z      View Locations A-Z

Source

TypePetition
Unique Identifying TextTNA SC 8/262/13099
Archive nameThe National Archives (London)
CountyNorfolk
Published source (may be more than one)English summary taken from the TNA catalogue entry, compiled as part of the AHRC project 'Medieval Petitions: A Catalogue of Exchequer, Chancery and Gascon petitions in the National Archives', led by W. Mark Ormrod (2006-7)
Text (English translation)John Creyk, alias John Betes, of Wymondham, states that he was maliciously indicted before the justices of the Bench of having risen up against his allegiance during the disturbances, and of other things, and was utterly acquitted by several inquests, but the justices do not wish to release him without the King's command because his name was included among those not covered by the general pardon. He asks that his deliverance might be ordered according to the law, notwithstanding this exception. Response: If the said John has been acquitted by due process, then the justices are to proceed to his deliverance, notwithstanding that he is excepted in the manner claimed by this bill.
General Information[c. 1383] Bettes was one of the more well-known Norfolk rebels from 1381, and details of his alleged crimes appear on the plea rolls of King's Bench. A reference to this petition appears in a royal mandate of May 1383, finally acquitting the petitioner of all charges (A. Prescott, 'The Hand of God: the Suppression of the Peasants' Revolt of 1381', in N. Morgan (ed.), Prophecy, apocalypse and the day of doom, Harlaxton Medieval Studies, 12 (2004), pp.317-41).

People

IDFirst nameLast nameGenderOccupationDomicileRole in sourceIncidentsGo to participant page
18949JohnCreykMaleWymondham,Norfolk3811Go to participant page

Incidents

IDSummaryDescriptionTypeGo to incidents page
3811Petition from John Creyk (alias Betes) requesting his release from prisonJohn Creyk, alias John Betes, of Wymondham, states that he was maliciously indicted before the justices of the Bench of having risen up against his allegiance during the disturbances, and of other things, and was utterly acquitted by several inquests, but the justices do not wish to release him without the King's command because his name was included among those not covered by the general pardon. He asks that his deliverance might be ordered according to the law, notwithstanding this exception. Response: If the said John has been acquitted by due process, then the justices are to proceed to his deliverance, notwithstanding that he is excepted in the manner claimed by this bill.Abuse of legal procedure: false accusationGo to incidents page

Incidents and People

PersonIncidentRoleComments
John Creyk ( 18949 )Petition from John Creyk (alias Betes) requesting his release from prison (3811)Petitioner