In August 1644, Jonet Erskine, a resident of Culross in Fife, found herself entangled in a protracted legal struggle that underscored the complexities of witchcraft proceedings in seventeenth-century Scotland. Jonet’s circumstances were complicated by the fact that her mother was also accused of witchcraft, marking the family as the subject of intense local scrutiny. Her initial trial in Culross ended in a verdict of "not proven," yet this did not secure her freedom. Instead, local commissioners petitioned the Lord Advocate to retry the case, arguing that the procurator fiscal lacked the necessary legal expertise to handle such serious proceedings, thereby effectively nullifying the original outcome and keeping Jonet incarcerated.
The process was defined by significant procedural friction, as the local bailies actively harassed both Jonet’s defence advocate and any others who sought to support her. Jonet contended that this animosity was rooted in the bailies' desire to seize her lands and yards. Seeking redress for this conduct, she and her daughter petitioned the Privy Council, which, on 6 August 1644, granted them a release from prison and ordered an investigation into the bailies’ actions. Despite these interventions, the legal status of the case remained volatile; while a trial took place on 15 August 1644, the procurator failed to pursue the matter further, yet simultaneously refused to formally discharge the women. The records remain ambiguous regarding the subsequent legal activities, including a mention of proceedings on 28 August 1644, which may have pertained to her mother’s ongoing case, leaving Jonet caught in a precarious administrative impasse.