Lion of Judah Posted December 17, 2012 Author Share Posted December 17, 2012 @Lion Of Judah:Although I am not completly convinced I am reconsidering my vote. If I change my mind, am I allowed to change my vote? And if so, may I edit my origional post or add a new section at its end or just make another post?Yes you absolutely can change your vote, just do so in your original post. It makes tallying the vote easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ab aeterno Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 It is good to remember that:A) All subjects of the legitimate and anointed King of the Seven Kingdoms are obliged to fealty to the King: no particular oath is required. B) Any agreement made between traitors is void of any legal obligation.Except that Joffrey isn't king, so their fealty should have been to Stannis. And they also do have to renew their oaths of fealty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion of Judah Posted December 17, 2012 Author Share Posted December 17, 2012 It is good to remember that:A) All subjects of the legitimate and anointed King of the Seven Kingdoms are obliged to fealty to the King: no particular oath is required. B) Any agreement made between traitors is void of any legal obligation.Yes and no. If you are only considering legal rights yes, but if you consider human rights then you can view a king/leader as illegitimate if questions arise about his/her authenticity or his/her effectiveness in applying and interpreting law. You may not have a legal right to depose an ineffective leader, but you can still do so within reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golden&Crimson Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Except that Joffrey isn't king, so their fealty should have been to Stannis. And they also do have to renew their oaths of fealty.But Joffrey was the King. Legitimated and anointed before all the Kingdom.His uncle was another traitor and an apostate to the Faith.Robb Stark was a traitor and the son of a confessed traitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ab aeterno Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 But Joffrey was the King. Legitimated and anointed before all the Kingdom.His uncle was another traitor and an apostate to the Faith.Robb Stark was a traitor and the son of a confessed traitor.Except that this court is based upon our judgements. And we know that Joffrey Waters is a bastard with no legal claim. Faith be damned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walder Waters Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Except that Joffrey isn't king, so their fealty should have been to Stannis. And they also do have to renew their oaths of fealty.I think the constitution of the Seven Kingdoms is some what unclear.Before Robert there were only Targaryens on the Iron Throne. It is possible that the Seven Kingdoms as a construct of Aegon I per tradition demand a Targaryen king only. It seems to me that we have to judge on Robert's legitimity as king as a preliminary question. As the Court has not decided on it yet there is no precedent of a legitime non-Targ-king.And what about former uncertainties as during the Dance of Dragons or the legitimity of the Great Council? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golden&Crimson Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Yes and no. If you are only considering legal rights yes, but if you consider human rights then you can view a king/leader as illegitimate if questions arise about his/her authenticity or his/her effectiveness in applying and interpreting law. You may not have a legal right to depose an ineffective leader, but you can still do so within reason.Doubts in relation to the right of a King to rule is not enough justification to a rebellion.Only proof of a serious fault of a king in relation to his duties, or a proff that shows that the current king is unlegitimate, could gave justification to a rebellion againt a unworthy/false king.In the Seven Kingdoms there aren´t any proof of King Joffrey being unworthy or unlegitimate; Robb Stark acted to avenge someone executed by the royal justice: his father Eddard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golden&Crimson Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Except that this court is based upon our judgements. And we know that Joffrey Waters is a bastard with no legal claim. Faith be damned.True.But it is fun trying to judge has if we only saw and heard the things that some judge in the Seven Kingdoms knows, and not what we, readers, know from the pov`s. :cool4: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walder Waters Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 An incapable ruler has to be overruled by a regent. A cruel but capable ruler may be replaced.It is my opinion that there is a justification to rebel against a cruel ruler, if the ruler himself acts illegal. But I think that the legal order of succession has to be respected. A cruel ruler can only be replaced by the next in the line of succession, who himself can only be skiped if being cruel himself.Having said that Robert may have been an unlawful king. Same for Joffrey even if we would assume he was the son of Robert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pod The Impaler Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Except that Joffrey isn't king, so their fealty should have been to Stannis.Objection: the charge is not regarding fealty to Stannis, but to Joffrey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ab aeterno Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Objection: the charge is not regarding fealty to Stannis, but to Joffrey.My point was only that, assuming that Robb had a duty to pledge fealty to someone, it would have been Stannis, not Joffrey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walder Waters Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Objection: the charge is not regarding fealty to Stannis, but to Joffrey.only the first charge regards the fealty to Joffrey, the second to the realm (whoever the true king may be). The accusation of the second charge regards the separation, to become independent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frey Pie Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Just to be clear there is a misconception that House Stark was overlords to House Frey, that is incorrect. The overlord to house Frey would be House Baelish of Harrenhal. Even after house Frey took the River lands from House Tully, they were never given overlord status to the River lands. They were just a Cadet branch of House Frey whose overlord is House Baelish of Harrenhal.I assume you mean at the current time of Dance? Because at one point their liege lords were the Tullys, whom in turn owed fealty to House Stark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordBloodraven Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Just to be clear there is a misconception that House Stark was overlords to House Frey, that is incorrect. The overlord to house Frey would be House Baelish of Harrenhal. Even after house Frey took the River lands from House Tully, they were never given overlord status to the River lands. They were just a Cadet branch of House Frey whose overlord is House Baelish of Harrenhal.At the time of the deal, The Freys were sworn to House Tully which was sworn to House Stark. So yeah, they were legally Robb's bannermen. They became sworn to House Baelish in AFFC/Dance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion of Judah Posted December 17, 2012 Author Share Posted December 17, 2012 I assume you mean at the current time of Dance? Because at one point their liege lords were the Tullys, whom in turn owed fealty to House StarkAt the time of the deal, The Freys were sworn to House Tully which was sworn to House Stark. So yeah, they were legally Robb's bannermen. They became sworn to House Baelish in AFFC/DanceI stand corrected on that. Not until AFFC were to under House Baelish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stannis Eats No Peaches Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 I find the defendant, Robb of House Stark, Lord of Winterfell and named "King in the North" by his vassals and House Tully and its vassals, guilty of the third charge alone.Penalty: monetary fine and the marriage of two of his siblings to children of and chosen by Walder of House Frey, Lord of The Twins.I vote for the first, second and fourth charges to be dismissed.I also find the defendant guilty of not kneeling to his true king, Stannis of House Baratheon of Dragonstone, the First of His Name, King of the Andals, the Rhoynar and the First Men, Lord of the Seven Kingdoms and Protector of the Realm, once he had found out that the king he was warring against was false. Penalty: monetary fine and the surrender of a sibling to be kept as a ward of the Crown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stannis Eats No Peaches Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 At the time of the deal, The Freys were sworn to House Tully which was sworn to House Stark. So yeah, they were legally Robb's bannermen. They became sworn to House Baelish in AFFC/DanceI don't know where this argument started, but when the deal was made, House Tully was not sworn to House Stark, they were just allies bound by marriage, so the Freys weren't Robb's bannermen.When the deal was broken however, House Tully had sworn fealty to House Stark so the Freys were Robb's bannermen at that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frost Wolf Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I vote for the dismissal of all four charges against Robb Stark. King Joffrey's biological father is disputed, therefore giving him no claim to the Iron Throne until such time as clear evidence can be produced that he is the son of King Robert I. Robb called his bannerman with the intention of helping thousands of innocents being brutally murdered in the Riverlands. Robb Stark acted as the savior of the Riverlands when the ruling government refused to. There may have been a verbal agreement to marry Robb to a daughter of House Frey, however, there was no written contract and Robb never signed anything. The murder of Ser Stafford Lannister was under war time conditions, the Kings Laws do not apply in war, therefore rendering the murder an act of war and thus non-punishable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zupoleon Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 - Counts 1 & 2 dismissed on account of twincest (a false king sat the iron throne, and therefore unlawfully beheaded the defendant's Lord father.- Count 3 - gulity (monetary fine)- Count 4 innocent.P.S. This is great fun, can't wait for the next court date, hahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Remain Unvanquished Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I find Robb Stark, Lord of Winterfell, and King in the North Innocent of the first two chargesTechnically Robb Stark never committed treason. Joeffrey Baratheon (Waters) ordered him to come to King's Landing to swear feality. Robb Stark was in fact on his way. What he would have done when he got to King's Landing cannot be known well enough to establish guilt and you can't convict someone for something he might have done. As for the war in the Riverlands, Robb was simply protecting his Grandpa and Uncle from an unlawful invasion led by Lord Tywin Lannister.Innocent, of the charge of The murder of Stafford Lannister. Stafford Lannister's death was a casulity of war and was actually at the hands of Rickard Karstark.Guilty of the charge of breaking his marriage pact with the Freys. Sentence, monetary compensation or two marriages to other houses to be decided by Lord Frey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.