Deputy Governor William Jones, one of the magistrates in the special court, “had devoted considerable time and energy to reading legal manuals and theological works that discussed the issues involved in witchcraft cases,” despite having no formal legal training, which was typical of magistrates (88). The author notes that the death penalty was not taken lightly; even in cases where magistrates believed the guilt of the accused, without clear, concrete evidence, the preference was to sentence the accused to something short of the death penalty. Public opinion, however, was another matter, and the public “often considered the evidence presented in court to be clearly damning and felt betrayed if the accused was acquitted” (89).

After careful study of both precedent and legal philosophy, Jones wrote a seven-point memorandum outlining the grounds for examining a witch; if any one of the conditions were met, it would be grounds for examination, but not conviction. By the grounds outlined in the memorandum, all of the accused had been rightfully detained.

There was some debate as to whether or not Goody Clawson and Goody Disborough satisfied the sixth requirement, that the suspected have “the Devil’s mark,” or witch’s teat, a small abnormality that was thought to allow demons to feed on blood from the accused.