Family Card - Person Sheet
Family Card - Person Sheet
Birth1626, Glastonbury, Somerset, England1994
Death18 Oct 1672, Norwick, New London Co, CT
OccupationAttorney
FatherThomas Rood.
MotherElizabeth Greene
Misc. Notes
1995 1996
On October 18, in the year 1672, Thomas Rood was executed in Norwich, Connecticut for committing the crime of incest with his adult daughter Srah. Incest is generally defined as sexual intercourse between close relatives, though the exact definition and the degree of biological relationship, varies between individual states.
Criminally charged along with his daughter Sarah in 1672, Thomas Rood allegedly confessed to his incestuous sexual relationship, from which their son George was born. Though the written laws of the colony said nothing about incest, the Hartford Court inquired of local clergy about the propriety of such incestuous activity between adults and determined that the death penalty was appropriate .
Upon Rood’s plea of guilty the Court ruled as follows:
not haveing the feare of God before thine eyes thou hast committed that abominable sin of incest haveing carnall copulation with Sarah Rhood thy reputed daughter for which according to the law of God & the law of this colony thou deservest to dye … [Note: misspelled as it appears in the original text of court archives]
On October 18, in the year 1672, Thomas Rood was executed in Norwich, Connecticut for committing the crime of incest with his adult daughter Srah. Incest is generally defined as sexual intercourse between close relatives, though the exact definition and the degree of biological relationship, varies between individual states.
Criminally charged along with his daughter Sarah in 1672, Thomas Rood allegedly confessed to his incestuous sexual relationship, from which their son George was born. Though the written laws of the colony said nothing about incest, the Hartford Court inquired of local clergy about the propriety of such incestuous activity between adults and determined that the death penalty was appropriate .
Upon Rood’s plea of guilty the Court ruled as follows:
not haveing the feare of God before thine eyes thou hast committed that abominable sin of incest haveing carnall copulation with Sarah Rhood thy reputed daughter for which according to the law of God & the law of this colony thou deservest to dye … [Note: misspelled as it appears in the original text of court archives]