The trial of Sir Thomas More has fascinated historians, legal and More scholars alike. His trial often raises the question of the meaning of justice. What were More’s legal rights at the time? Did he even have any, and if he did, were they respected? Was he, at all, given due process? Did the king form a prejudiced, malicious jury? Were the judges and jury pressured to find a guilty verdict?

1. THETRIAL OF
SIRTHOMAS MORE

2. BACKGROUND
■ BORN: 1477/1478
■ STUDIEDAT OXFORD
– formal logic, writing comedies, studying
Greek & Latin
■ IN 1494, MOREWAS ADMITTEDTO
LINCOLN’S INN, ONE OF ENGLAND’S
FOUR LEGAL SOCIETIES.
■ BETWEEN 1501 AND 1504,AS A FULL
MEMBEROFTHE LEGAL PROFESSION,
MORE BECAMETORN BETWEENA LIFE
OF LAW, SPIRITUAL LIVINGAND SERVING
HIS COUNTRY IN A POLITICALCAPACITY.

3. POLITICALCAREER
■ PERSONALADVISORTO KING HENRYVIII
■ MOREAND HENRYVIIIWEREALSO CLOSE FRIENDS
– MORE DID NOT MAGNIFY HIS OWN IMPORTANCE OR MANIPULATETHE KING

4. ACT OFTREASON
■ ACCORDINGTOTHE ACT OFTREASON, ITWAS CONSIDERED MALICIOUSTO DENY
THE KING OR HIS FAMILY OF ANY OFTHEIR RIGHTS.
■ MORE REFUSEDTHE OATH ANDWAS CHARGEDWITHTREASON
■ ACCORDINGTOTHE ACT OFTREASONS, IT ISTREASONTO
“maliciously wish, will, or desire by words or writing, or by craft imagine, invent, practice, or
attempt any bodily harm to be done or committed to the king’s most royal person, or the
queen’s, or their heirs apparent, or to deprive them or any of them of their dignity, title, or
name of their royal estates, or slanderously and maliciously publish or pronounce, by express
writings or words, that the king our sovereign lord should be a heretic, schismatic, tyrant,
infidel” (Kelly et al, 2013).

5. CHARGES
MOREWAS IMPRISONED INTHETOWEROF LONDON INAPRIL OF 1534 AND HEARD
THE CHARGESAGAINST HIM FORTHE FIRSTTIMEON JULY 1ST, 1535.THE CHARGES
ARE AS FOLLOWED:
– REMAININGSILENT AGAINSTTHE ACT (INTHE PROCESS DEPRIVINGTHE KING
OF HISTITLE)
– ARMING BISHOP FISHER AGAINSTTHE ACT (PERSUADING HIMTO USE HIS
CONSCIENCEWHENTAKINGTHE OATH)
– CONSPIRINGWITH BISHOP FISHER (REFERRINGTOTHE ACT AS ATWO-EDGED
SWORD)

6. DEFENSES
■ SILENCE
– “ONE COULD ONLY BE PUNISHED FOR DOING OR SAYING SOMETHING
OFFENSIVE, NOT FOR DOING NOTHING AND SAYING NOTHING” (Kelly et al,
2013).
– THERE IS NO LAWTHAT PUNISHES SILENCE.
– FOLLOWING ONE’SCONSCIENCE IS MORE IMPORTANTTHAN RESPONDINGTO
INTERROGATION.
– MORE CONTINUEDTO REMAIN SILENT AND GAVE EVASIVE AND RHETORICAL
ANSWERSTHROUGHOUTTHETRIAL.

7. ■ COLLUSION
– THE CONTENTOFTHE LETTERS BETWEEN MORE AND FISHERWERE OF DAILY
LIFE ANDTHEIR FRIENDSHIP.
– “WHEN FIRST EXAMINEDONTHE STATUTE […] I REPLIEDTHAT I HAD
EXONERATED MY CONSCIENCE AND FOLLOWED REASON” (Kelly et al, 2013).
– MORE DESCRIBEDTHE ACT OFTREASON AS A “TWO-EDGED SWORD” AND
DEFENDED HEWAS SIMPLY SPEAKING HYPOTHETICALLY.
– MORE DEFENDED, “HOW COULD ANY PERSONTAKE CARE AGAINST COMINGUP
AGAINST ONE EDGE ORTHE OTHER?” (Kelly et al, 2013).
 THESETHREE CHARGESWERE EVENTUALLY DISMISSED

8. FINAL CHARGE
■ CONVERSATIONWITH RICHARD RICH INTHETOWEROF LONDON
– MORE’S RESPONSEWASTO A HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION POSED BY RICHARD
RICH.
– MORE CLAIMED PARLIAMENTCOULD NOT MAKE RICH POPE ANY MORETHAN
IT COULD NOT MAKE GOD NOT GOD
– IN RICH’S REPORT, RICH SUBSTITUTED HIMSELF AND USED HENRYVIII BEING
MADE SUPREME HEAD OFTHE ENGLISHCHURCH. RICH FALSELYCLAIMED
MORE DENIED PARLIAMENT HADTHE POWERTO MAKE SUCH A DECLARATION.

9. VERDICT & EXECUTION
■ INDICTEDON HIGHTREASON
– CONVICTEDONTHE PERJUREDTESTIMONYOF ONE WITNESS (SOLICITOR-
GENERAL RICHARD RICH)
– ITWASN’T UNTIL EDWARDVI’S REIGNTHETWO-WITNESS RULEWAS PUT INTO
PLACE.
– DURING MORE’STRIAL,THEREWERE NO RULESOF EVIDENCE. “EVIDENCE”
CONSISTED OF EXAMINATIONS AND INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS.
■ SENTENCEDTOTRAITOR’S DEATH
– DRAWN, HANGED,QUARTERED
■ HENRYVIIICOMMUTED SENTENCETO BEHEADING

10. MEDIA
■ A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS (FILM & PLAY)
– PORTRAYED BY PAUL SCOFIELD IN 1966 FILM
■ THETUDORS (2007-2010)
– PORTRAYED BYJEREMY NORTHAM
– SEASONS ONE toTWO
■ WOLF HALL (2015-present)
– PORTRAYED BY ANTON LESSER

11. WORKS CITED
Kelly, Henry, Louis Karlin,GerardWegemer (2013). Thomas More'sTrial byJury: A
Procedural and Legal Review with a Collection of Documents. Suffolk: Boydell Press.