Background: The capacity of people with Down syndrome (DS) to combine intent and severity of consequences information when judging the level of blame that should be attributed to an offender was compared with that of controls. Method: The technique used did not require verbalisation. Twenty-five people with DS and 25 typically developing persons were presented with 6 scenarios in which intentional or unintentional transgressions that varied in consequence severity (minor, medium, or severe) were committed. Participants were instructed to rate the level of blame to be attributed in each case. Results: People with DS were able to integrate both intent and severity information in their blame judgements, but they gave significantly more weight to consequence severity and less weight to intent than controls. Conclusions: People with DS were able to make moral judgements in a way that was not very different from adults of the same age.