the king's peace assaulted him as he went on the
highway, and with his force carried him into Alan's house,
and struck him on the arm so that he broke a small bone of
his arm, whereby he is maimed, and robbed him of his cape
and his knife, and held him while Eimma, [Alan's] wife, cut
off one of his testicles and Ralph Pilate the other, and
when he was thus dismembered and ill-treated, the said Alan
with his force carried him back into the road, whereupon as
soon as might be he raised the cry, and the neighbors came
to the cry, and saw him thus ill-treated, and then at once
he sent to the king's serjeant, who came and found, so
[Thomas] says, the robbed things in Alan's house and then as
soon as might be [Thomas] went to the wapentake [court] and
to the county [court] and showed all this. So inquiry is
made of the king's sergeant, who testifies that he came to
Alan's house and there found the knife and the testicles in
a little cup, but found not the cape. Also the whole county
testifies that [Thomas] never before now appealed Alan of
breaking a bone. And so it is considered that the appeal is
null, and that [Thomas] be in mercy, and that the other
appellees be quit. Thomas also appeals Emma, Alan's wife,
for that she in the peace aforesaid after he was placed in
her lord's house cut off one of his testicles. He also
appeals Ralph Pilate, for that he cut off the other of his
testicles.

28. The twelve jurors presented in their verdict that
Austin, Rumfar's son, appealed Ralph Gille of the death of
his brother, so that [Ralph] fled, and that William,
Rumfar's son, appealed Benet Carter of the same death, and
Ranulf, Ralph's son, appealed Hugh of Hyckham of the same
death and Baldwin of Elsham and Ralph Hoth and Colegrim as
accessories. And the coroners by their rolls testify this
also. But the county records otherwise, namely, that the
said Ralph Gille, Benet, Hugh, Baldwin, Ralph [Hoth] and
Gocegrim were all appealed by Ranulf, Ralph's son, and by no
one else, so that four of them, to wit, Ralph Gille, Hugh,
Benet and Colegrim, were outlawed at the suit of the said
Ranulf, and that the said persons were not appealed by
anyone other than the said Ranulf. And for that the county
could not [be heard to] contradict the coroners and the said
jurors who have said their