Legal records from the Middle Ages show that courts were reluctant to sentence some female criminals under the law. An example from the City of Stockholm's Book of Thought may clarify this. On June 27, 1489, Peder Andersson's wife was on trial in the Stockholm City Hall, accused and convicted of theft. The brief entry in the book shows that the woman was sentenced to be banished from the city. The writer has since added that if she returns to Stockholm she will "stand thief's right," in other words, she will receive the correct punishment for theft. The statutory punishment for theft was to be buried alive if the criminal was a woman; a convicted male thief, on the other hand, was to be hanged. The late medieval court records for Stockholm show that the court there often sentenced men to death for theft while women were spared execution. What is the explanation for this? Did the court not think that women should be held responsible for their crimes like a man? My project aims to examine how the courts thought about female criminals in the late 15th and early 16th centuries. It will show if and when men and women were treated differently in medieval jurisprudence. It will also clarify whether women were considered fully liable for their criminal acts.