The fine was relatively trivial for Picton and someone of lower social status may have faced execution or transportation to Australia for the same offence. Picton appealed the decision using the services of a London attorney, who challenged the conviction on the grounds that the magistrate's record of the year of the offence was incorrectly recorded. The King's Bench held that this was "surplusage" and not material to the validity of the case, so the conviction was upheld. Picton's race was not mentioned in either the judgement or the report of the appeal that appeared in The Morning Post.