Hello all: In _Devil in the Shape of a Woman_, Carol Karlsen discusses a number of cases where sheriffs and magistrates confiscated real estate and money/investments, not just in witchcraft cases. The victims she mentions were women whose property was confiscated and handed over to a male to "better" handle the property for her (whether or not she needed help). In almost all the cases she cited, the woman or women were unable to recover the property; it remained in the hands of the sheriff, magistrate, or male relative. Some of these women were later accused of witchcraft, which ensured that they could not recover the property. So, there were certainly precedents for such officers taking property and holding on to it, with little justification. I'm unable to check the source right now, but perhaps another listmember can look this up to get names and details. Was the law explicit that the property of accused witches could be confiscated only *after* they were convicted? Didn't the family of Mary Bradbury forfeit their property because she escaped from jail when it it appeared she was going to be convicted and hung? The fact that Giles Corey wrote what amounted to a deed of conveyance, transferring his property to his sons-in-law, immediately after he was put in jail tells me he thought he'd better do something fast to keep his property from being confiscated. I have another question about Giles Corey: his behavior seems somewhat contradictory, and he doesn't always seem to have been clear as to what he saw or did, then emphasized in his will that his body was less than healthy, but his memory was perfect. Why emphasize that? Might he have had a cognitive illness like Alzheimer's? Francine Nicholson _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 3 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&SU= http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_eliminateviruses_3mf