Research in adults suggests that their perception of moral transgressions is affected by the moral character of the agent performing the transgression, such that undesirable actions enacted by ‘good’ agents are seen as less serious than those performed by ‘bad’ agents. This may be partly driven our tendency to view undesirable acts as less intentional when the agent has a perceived good moral character. It is currently unclear whether or not children make similar judgements. Therefore, we investigated if children’s use of moral character information is consistent with their judgements of transgressions when the intent behind the act was ambiguous or blatant. Children aged 6–8-years (N = 60) viewed a series of six moral transgressions in which the protagonist’s intent was ambiguous or blatantly harmful, and their moral character was described as being good, mixed or bad. The children were then asked how much they felt the behaviour was intentional, how severe it was and the degree of punishment it deserved. Transgressions performed by ‘good’ characters were viewed as less intentional than those by ‘bad’ characters, but only when the intent behind it was ambiguous. Similarly, transgressions performed by good characters were viewed as less severe and deserving of less punishment than those performed by bad characters, although this effect was not moderated by intent information. These pattern of findings suggest that the view of transgressions performed by good individuals as less serious than the same act performed by bad individuals is established early in development.