In July 1487, Richard Crocheman sued William Baldewyn for defamation: Baldewyn had repeatedly over the last six weeks called Crocheman a sheep thief. The witnesses, all from Barking in Essex (as presumably were also Crocheman and Baldewyn), paid close attention to the legal requirements for defamation: the plaintiff had to have suffered a loss of reputation as a direct result of the damaging words the defendant said.
LMA, MS DL/C/A/001/MS09065, fol. 27rv
Testimony of William Bruges, 28 Jul. 1487
On behalf of Crocheman c. Baldewyn
28 July by Master John Millet, in my, Spencer’s, presence
William Bruges of the parish of Barking [Essex], London diocese, where he has lived for forty years, illiterate, of free condition, almost fifty years old, as he says. Inducted as a witness etc., he says that he has known Richard Crocheman for thirty years, and William Baldewyn for twenty years. To the first, second, and third articles of the libel, he says that their contents are true. To the fourth and fifth articles of the libel, [he says] that on a certain Saturday about six weeks ago, which day he cannot otherwise specify, this witness was present in the parish of Dagenham [Essex], that is in the yard pertaining to John the butcher’s dwelling-house, together with William Baldewyn and Thomas Broke. The aforesaid men were talking there amongst themselves about Richard Crocheman, and William Baldewyn said about him, “he took a sheep out of my fold and he is a thief.” And this witness said to him that he should consider carefully before saying such a thing, and then William said, “By God, I will prove him a thief.” And he says that around a month ago, in the cathedral church of St. Paul in London, William, in the presence of John Frost, William Clerk, Thomas Broke the elder, and Thomas Broke the younger, said that he would prove Richard Crocheman a thief. This witness deposes these things from his own sight and hearing, as he says. And he says that he heard many people saying that many times, while eating and drinking, in the presence of many people, he repeated these words, saying that he would prove him a thief. To the sixth article, he said that because of the speaking of the aforesaid words, he believes in his conscience that the status and good fame of Richard fell, and that many serious persons spoke badly of him, and that this was after this day and because of the speaking of those words, from his knowledge. And otherwise he knows nothing concerning its contents. To the seventh article, he says that what he deposed above is true and that public voice and fame circulated and circulate concerning it in the parish of Dagenham and in other neighbouring places, as he says.
Testimony of Thomas Broke the younger, 28 Jul. 1487
Thomas Broke the younger of the parish of Barking, where he has lived from the time of his birth and where he was born, illiterate, of free condition, thirty years old or thereabouts, as he says. Inducted as a witness etc., he says that he has known Richard Crochman for twelve years, and William Baldewyn for two years. To the first, second, third, and fourth articles of the libel, he says that their contents are true. To the fourth and fifth articles of the libel, as far as the words spoken by William in the yard and in the church of St. Paul, London, he agrees with the previous witness examined above, that, as he says, in the yard William said, “He hath pilfered away my sheep, he is a sheep [sic] and I will prove him a thief.” This witness deposes these things from his own sight and hearing, as he says. To the sixth article, he says that because of the speaking of these [words], Richard has suffered vexation and expenses, and he sustained them in prosecuting his cause, and otherwise he knows nothing concerning its contents. To the seventh article, he says that what he said above is true and concerning the fame he agrees with the previous witness.
Testimony of John Hokley, 28 Jul. 1487
John Hokley of the aforesaid Barking, where he was born and where he has lived from the time of his birth, illiterate, of free condition, thirty years old or thereabouts, as he says. Inducted as a witness etc., he says that he has known Richard Crocheman for twenty years and William Baldewyn for twelve years. To the fourth and fifth articles of the libel, he says that around six weeks ago the aforesaid William Baldewyn said to this witness in the home of Thomas Swetyng of Barking and in his presence that the same Richard Crocheman was a thief and that he had stolen his sheep. And afterwards about a month ago in the home and in the presence of Robert Keppe, he repeated the same words about Richard, at that time absent, in the hearing and knowledge of this witness. And he spoke these words or similar about him in the presence of many people at many places and times, as he heard say, and otherwise he knows nothing concerning its contents. To the sixth, he agrees with the first witness examined above and otherwise he knows nothing concerning its contents. To the seventh article, he agrees with the first witness.
Consistory 