Jump to content


Photo

Official court of law vol. 2(Robb Stark)


  • Please log in to reply
102 replies to this topic

#1 Lion of Judah

Lion of Judah

    Lions Never Cower.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,161 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 02:23 PM

Welcome to the 2nd installation of the “Official court of law” for this board. In this thread we will debate and pass judgement on character crimes from the work ASOIAF. As judges we bear a burden of upholding the integrity of our court so being impartial is imperative, keep all arguments in a legal context that suit the standards of this court. All posters are welcomed to make their case, at the end of your argument pass your judgement and sentence!!!!

The rules: Every poster has one vote of guilt or innocence.

**For a guilty verdict our options are:
  • Send them to the wall. (same as prison sentence)
  • Death by sword. (Clean and quick)
  • Death by flames. (An ode to R’hllor)
  • Death by flaying. (oh boy)
  • Monetary fine
  • Exile and/or
  • Stripped of land/title.
**If you find the character innocent, simply state innocent after your argument.
As for as evidence that can be submitted, posters can submit any argument they deem relevant. However we cannot use any pardons or prior convictions as evidence in the matter. Our court will not recognize the judgement of any other court or ruling body.

**You can also vote for charges to be dismissed (majority rule).
**At the end of the week the vote will be counted and the final sentence carried out. Majority rules. Only the nominated character will be discussed.

**Votes can be changed before they are counted, but do so in your original post.
Posters can just cast a vote, which is your right, but try to state a case as well. Your opinion actually matters and it may serve to change the vote of another judge.
*Do not take it personal if your favorite character is being torn to pieces. Everyone is fair game.
http://asoiaf.wester...r/#entry3893576

Now for the trial.

Defendant: Robb Stark Lord of Winterfell, King in the North alias 'The Young Wolf,' this court charges you with the crimes of
1. Conspiracy by calling your bannermen to war against the king of the 7 Kingdoms Joffrey Baratheon first of his name.
2. Acts of treason by rebellion against the realm.
3. Breach of a legal binding agreement with house Frey.
4. And the murder Stafford Lannister alias ‘Uncle Dolt’.

Counselors present your case and pass your judgement!

#2 ab aeterno

ab aeterno

    fidei defensor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,625 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 02:27 PM

Vote for dismissal of the first two charges.
Guilty of the third charge: Monetary fine.
Innocent of the forth.

#3 Barty

Barty

    Council Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,945 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 02:31 PM

I Vote for dismissal of charge 1,2 and 4.
Innocent of the 3rd charge.
Now allow me to ellaborate:
Joffrey is not the rightful King and Robb has sworn no oaths of fealty to him so there can be no question of treason or rebellion.
As for charge 3 : Robb is the rightful King and is hence law unto himself - he can decide what is legal and when - and all was supposed to be forgiven and forgotten by the Freys when they publicly announced a new pact with King Robb.
Coming to charge 4: Innocent - It was Rickard Karstark who killed Stafford and either ways all is fair in war

Edited by Barty, 17 December 2012 - 02:41 PM.


#4 Ruby Chevrolet

Ruby Chevrolet

    Landed Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 456 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:04 PM

Defendant: Robb Stark Lord of Winterfell, King in the North alias 'The Young Wolf,' this court charges you with the crimes of
1. Conspiracy by calling your bannermen to war against the king of the 7 Kingdoms Joffrey Baratheon first of his name.
2. Acts of treason by rebellion against the realm.
3. Breach of a legal binding agreement with house Frey.
4. And the murder Stafford Lannister alias ‘Uncle Dolt’.


Can I add charges?

5. Kinslaying, for the murder of Lord Rickard Karstark.
6. Failure to maintain the rule of law and failure to dispense justice, for failing to punish Lady Catelyn for her treason.
7. Treason, for letting Theon Greyjoy go back to Pyke.

1. Guilty

Robb's pretext for calling his banners was the capture of his father, Eddard, by the Lannisters. Robb then attacked Lannister forces in the Riverlands. Under the precedent established yesterday in Rex v. Lord Tywin, where Tywin was convicted for retaliating after the capture of Tyrion, this is a crime.

Further, Eddard himself then confessed to the treason and proclaimed Joffrey to be King. When Eddard did that, his heir, Robb Stark, owed his allegiance to King Joffrey. [Note that this does not rely on a past conviction of Eddard but on Eddard's own confession coupled with his proclamation for Joffrey].

Punishment: If he bends the knee and gives hostages (Bran, Rickon, Sansa and Arya) and permits the Iron Throne to choose their spouses, he can return to Winterfell, but Roose Bolton will be his overlord/Warden of the North. If he will not bend the knee, death by sword.

Note that if R. v. Tywin had gone the other way, as I argued, I would acquit Robb Stark of this crime.

2. EDITED TO NOT GUILTY.

REASONING: PERSUADED BY POD THE IMPALER'S LOGIC: "As legal scholar Greatjon Umber stated: "It was the dragons we married and the dragons are all dead !".

3. Guilty.

Robb took benefits from Lord Walder, who was not his bannerman at the time, in exchange for a promise to marry a Frey girl in the future. Walder delivered, Robb did not.

Punishment: Reparations.

4. Not Guilty.

Uncle Dolt was killed in combat.

5. Not Guilty.

The kinship is too distant.

6. Not Guilty.

Catelyn committed treason when she released Ser Jaime Lannister. Robb's failure to punish her lost him the respect and obedience of at least one of his lords.

There are mitigating circumstances, in that the traitor was his own mother. And by Westerosi standards, favoritism and nepotism were expected. So legally, he is not guilty.

Politically, this was a grave blunder.

7. Not Guilty.

If Catelyn committed treason by releasing Ser Jaime, it raises the question whether Robb committed treason by releasing Theon. I say no: the KIng is entitled to decide how best to make use of a hostage. Robb made a poor decision, but it was not a crime.

Overall Verdict [EDITED]: Guilty of Conspiracy (Count I). Pardon if he bends the knee, death by sword if he doesn't. Not Guilty on all other charges.

Edited by Ruby Chevrolet, 20 December 2012 - 12:08 AM.


#5 ab aeterno

ab aeterno

    fidei defensor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,625 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:12 PM

Dismiss kinslaying because they're about as closely related as they are to the Vale lords.

#6 JonisnoGarySnow

JonisnoGarySnow

    Landed Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 473 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:16 PM

1. Innocent by reasons of twincest.
2. Dismissal.
3. Guilty. Monetary fine.
4. Innocent by reason of being in a war.

#7 Lady Green

Lady Green

    Noble

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 611 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:16 PM

1. and 2.
Innocent, at the time of said treasons, at the time of calling the banners the defendant's father, Eddard Stark, was wrongfully held and a ccused of treason by Queen Cersei Lannister. In addition the defendant rode to war with the intention of defending the lands of his mother's family from the Lannister hosts.

3. If there was a written countract pertaining to the ;marriage of the defendant and unnamed Frey girl then the defendant is guilty, monetary fine.

4. As to the murder of Stafford Lannister, the defendant did not actually deal the killing blow. In addition due to Stafford's position as general of the enemy it was within in the acceptable realms of war. Innocent.

Defendant is only guilty of charge 3, under the condition that there was a written contract, monetary fine.

#8 Pod The Impaler

Pod The Impaler

    In The Mouth Of Starkness

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,679 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:23 PM

Defendant: Robb Stark Lord of Winterfell, King in the North alias 'The Young Wolf,' this court charges you with the crimes of
1. Conspiracy by calling your bannermen to war against the king of the 7 Kingdoms Joffrey Baratheon first of his name.
2. Acts of treason by rebellion against the realm.
3. Breach of a legal binding agreement with house Frey.
4. And the murder Stafford Lannister alias ‘Uncle Dolt’.

Counselors present your case and pass your judgement!



On counts 1, 2, and 4, Robb Stark is not guilty on three major grounds:

First, that Joffrey was not the lawful King of Westeros, but a bastard who was the product of treasonous incest between Cersei and Jaime Lannister. The result of this incest and the discovery of it was the murder of the lawful King, Robert Baratheon, the murder of the Hand of the King, Eddard Stark of Winterfell (father of the defendant in this case), the murder of many true loyalists and Stark retainers, and a coup by House Lannister which usurped the throne. As a secondary matter, the coup also resulted in the capture and unlawful detention and torture of the defendant's sister Sansa Stark or Winterfell, and the same was presumed for his other sister, Arya Stark of Winterfell.

Second, that Tywin Lannister, and House Lannister and its retainers in general, waged unlawful war against the Riverlands, contrary to the laws and wishes of the true King, Robert Baratheon. This war of aggression and the consequent atrocities committed in the name of House Lannister, and then subsequently in the name of the false king Joffrey also invalidate any claim that the actions of Robb Stark were unlawful. Furthermore, Tywin of House Lannister had been called to King's Landing answer for these crimes against the Riverlands by Eddard Stark, who was lawfully Hand of the King, or else be considered an attainted traitor. As Tywin chose not the answer the summons and continue his actions contrary to the laws of the true King Robert Baratheon, he was committing treason, and therefore any military actions taken against House Lannister by any pesron could be considered lawful actions in defense of the realm.

Therefore, on the first two grounds, the court must find that the actions of House Lannister collectively required a full military response, and the actions of Robb Stark and his retainers should be considered legitimate self-defense in regard to both House Stark and the realm in general. This justifies all legitimate military actions taken as a matter of war, putting it outside the purview of the criminal justice system.

The third grounds for acquittal are that the sovereignty of the Iron Throne ended when the lords of the North and Riverlands declared Robb Stark "King In The North", and any actions taken by Robb Stark since that time were to be counted as within as separate sovereign territory which was in a state of war against the Iron Throne. Additionally, House Lannister could claim no sovereignty by blood over the Iron Throne, as all ties to the Targaryen dynasty ceased upon the death of King Robert and his de facto replacement by someone not of Baratheon blood. It can be argued that House Stark swore allegiance to Robert Baratheon, and previously to House Targaryen alone, never to House Lannister nor any agency under their power. As legal scholar Greatjon Umber stated: "It was the dragons we married and the dragons are all dead !". With the line of the dragon being ended in Westeros, sovereignty reverts to the King In The North, and all those who swear fealty to him do so lawfully, and place themselves under northern law.

In summation to charges 1, 2, and 4:
- Joffrey was no true Baratheon and no true King.
- The Iron Throne had been seized in an unlawful coup by House Lannister.
- The treasonous and unlawful murders and warfare launched by House Lannister necessitated a full military response. All casualties among House Lannister and their supporters are legitimized as part of warfare.
- The sovereignty of the Iron Throne over the North and Riverlands had ended. Northern sovereignty was therefore legitimate.

Verdict: NOT GUILTY.

As to count 3, breaking a marriage contract with House Frey, House Frey did not specify a singular person that Robb should marry, nor a wedding date, so the marriage agreement should only be considered a "letter of intent" at best, not a full contract. Furthermore, House Frey swore fealty to Robb Stark as King In The North, and the agreement of intent was merely in compensation for the crossing of the Twins by the northern armies. Within that agreement it was not implied that Robb Stark would be King In The North, so House Frey's acceptance of his sovereignty cannot be considered as payment for any marriage promised, but rather an act taken solely of their own volition. Once Robb Stark was declared King In The North, and House acceded to the power of his kingship, then House Frey also accepted that the sovereign power of the King included the making and unmaking of marriages and agreements for such. As well, prior to Robb Stark being declared King, House Frey owed fealty to House Tully, which meant House Frey had a duty to help defend the Riverlands from attack, compensation or no. The claim cannot be made they also had a duty to the Iron Throne, as at the time, the Iron Throne was being illegally usurped by House Lannister.

Verdict: SETTLE IN ARBITRATION, LARGELY IN FAVOUR OF DEFENDANT
House Frey is entitled to have the dispute settled in binding arbitration to set the degree of compensation. The court suggests a marriage to Edmure Tully, plus control Harrenhal to pass to a non-heir Frey of Walder Frey's choosing. As well, House Westerling may also be represented in this arbitration as a third-party interest.

Edited by Pod The Impaler, 17 December 2012 - 03:31 PM.


#9 Jslay427

Jslay427

    Ser Niggy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,145 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:33 PM

Chewbacca defense might work here.

#10 Walder Waters

Walder Waters

    Landed Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 389 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:39 PM

Legal Opinion

1. With regard to the evidence of Joffrey not being the trueborn son of Robert Baratheon given in the Song of Ice and Fire Cronicles, while letting open whether or not Robert himself may have been the legal King on the Irone Throne, it deems justified to conspire against him and call the Northern bannermen.
2. Although considering the fact that Robb Stark personally had neither sworn his fealty to Joffrey nor the Iron Throne, it is my opinion that the fealty sworn by Torrhen of House Stark at the end of the War of Conquest was meant binding for ever after - no matter who might become Lord of the North in later days -, further that the constitution of the Seven Kingdoms since its foundation through sword and word of Aegon the Conquerer does not know any legal right to separate form the Iron Throne without the will of the legal King on the Iron Throne.
3. There is no legal argument evident that may justify the breach of the binding agreement with House Frey.
4. Taking into account that the leader of an army can not be hold responsible for every single crime done by his bannermen without his orders and considering that Robb sentenced Rickard Karstark to death – although not for the killing of Stafford Lannister – it is my opinion that there is no legal ground for the third charge.

Vote

I therefore vote that the defendant is

1. innocent
as far as he is charged of a conspiracy by calling his bannermen to war against Joffrey so called Baratheon first of his name
2. guilty
as far as he is charged of acts of treason by rebellion against the realm
3. guilty
as far as he is charged of breaking a binding agremment with House Frey
4. innocent
as far as he is charged of the murder of Stafford Lannister alias 'Uncle Dolt'

and if he is not dead already vote to
allow him to take the Black or otherwise being strippt of lands and titles and being exiled.

Edited by Walder Waters, 17 December 2012 - 03:56 PM.


#11 Lion of Judah

Lion of Judah

    Lions Never Cower.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,161 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:42 PM

Chewbacca defense might work here.

What's the Chewbacca defense?

#12 ab aeterno

ab aeterno

    fidei defensor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,625 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:47 PM

What's the Chewbacca defense?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense

#13 JonisnoGarySnow

JonisnoGarySnow

    Landed Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 473 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:50 PM

Chewbacca defense might work here.


This does not make sense!

#14 Lion of Judah

Lion of Judah

    Lions Never Cower.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,161 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:51 PM

https://en.wikipedia...ewbacca_defense

Needless to say that argument is dismissed.

#15 Erudain

Erudain

    Noble

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 655 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:54 PM

Dismissal of the first charge. Since evidence is provided refuting the legality of the offended party.
Dismissal of the second charge. As direct result of the dismissal of the first one.
Guilty of the third charge: Monetary fine.
Innocent of the forth charge. Is not murder to kill an enemy commander in open war.

#16 Starfell

Starfell

    Sword of the Early-Mid Afternoon

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 807 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 03:57 PM

1. Conspiracy by calling your bannermen to war against the king of the 7 Kingdoms Joffrey Baratheon first of his name.
Innocent, on the grounds that Joffrey is not the legitimate king of the 7 Kingdoms
2. Acts of treason by rebellion against the realm.
Innocent, it's my opinion that as Robb had not vowed fealty to any of the 3 claimants of the Iron Throne at the time and was crowned king by his subjects, his actions constitute a declaration of war against the 7 Kingdoms rather than an act of treason
3. Breach of a legal binding agreement with house Frey.
Guilty, monetary reparations
4. And the murder Stafford Lannister alias ‘Uncle Dolt’.
Innocent, he was a casualty of war killed in battle

#17 Walder Waters

Walder Waters

    Landed Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 389 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 04:04 PM

Dismissal of the first charge. Since evidence is provided refuting the legality of the offended party.
Dismissal of the second charge. As direct result of the dismissal of the first one.


I think the Court charges on its own motion so that the legality of the offended party is irrelevent for the proceedings. Even if Joffrey is not the legal king a rebellion for separation may be illegal.

Edited by Walder Waters, 17 December 2012 - 04:05 PM.


#18 Euron Pink Eye

Euron Pink Eye

    Freerider

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 53 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 04:09 PM

Defendant: Robb Stark Lord of Winterfell, King in the North alias 'The Young Wolf,' this court charges you with the crimes of

1. Conspiracy by calling your bannermen to war against the king of the 7 Kingdoms Joffrey Baratheon first of his name.

Guilty - Suspended sentence until it can be proven of Joffreys heritage - Send him to the wall. - A new king could release him from his vows if believed innocent.

2. Acts of treason by rebellion against the realm.

Guilty - His father bent the knee confessing of his treason, he still persisted with rebellion - Death by sword
ETA: After rethinking there's no reason to execute Robb, Using Balon Greyjoy V Iron Throne he was allowed to bend the knee and give up his heir to be be taken as a ward in a Great House. For now which ever stark that appears will be kept until a true heir has been born and sent as hostage to the Iron Throne.

3. Breach of a legal binding agreement with house Frey.

Innocent - Everyone shits on house Frey, they should be used to it, a new deal was agreed which shows Frey acceptance.

4. And the murder Stafford Lannister alias ‘Uncle Dolt’.

Innocent - All men must die


Edited by Euron Pink Eye, 19 December 2012 - 01:26 PM.


#19 Walder Waters

Walder Waters

    Landed Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 389 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 04:12 PM

Innocent - Everyone shits on house Frey, they should be used to it.


Is this a legal argument or a political opinion?

#20 straits

straits

    m̂ͪ͋ͩ͗̓̈ͨ̓̏

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,190 posts

Posted 17 December 2012 - 04:12 PM

Binding agreement with the Frey family? It is by definition a piece of paper saying he'll marry the girl, not a courteous promise. I can promise you the moon and I don't owe you it. If, however, you lose face when I don't own up, you have the right to be angry and make noise about it. That's about it.