Shae's Lies.

[The GRRumbler]

Im sorry to be a little off-topic here, but this topic gave me an idea, are therey any lawyers/judges in this board? It would be really fun if any them would analyse Tyrion's case and consider if Shae could be accused of "perjury" of the Lannister of extorsion or blackmail, it would be fun to play around with this.

[Leigh of Oldstones]

in fact, the Imp TRIED to plot Joffrey's death with Sansa, but Sansa distrusted him and therefore ignored him.

I don't remember this at all. Can you quote anything to support this? Or tell me where in ASoS it comes up?

I think you're wrong in this assumption. Tyrion would never have tried to plot anything with Sansa. Tyrion even once wondered if Sansa was "stupid" enough to confide in her maids, who were Cersei's spies (not knowing that Sansa has suspected that her maids were spies all along--at least since early in ACoK). So he never would have thought she'd be a suitable "partner in crime" as it were.

[Fearsome Fred]

Silmarien wrote:

Look, FF argues that because GRRM fades and doesn't explain the sex scene, Shae might not be lying about that BS about saying Shae was privileged to be the king's whore NOT being a lie.

Yes. I pointed out that her testimony on that point is uncontradicted.

You also challenged me to come up with a prior occasion when he seems to have hurt her during sex, and I successfully answered your challenge.

I have also pointed out that on this prior occasion, Tyrion did not remember his actions during sex.

I have also pointed out a prior occasion where Tyrion fantasized about Power while having sex with Shae.

GRRM doesn't skip shit that's important to character development.

This is not an argument but a conclusory statement. You are making a grand statement about what GRRM would or would not do, as though it were fact.

It also ignores the possibility that Tyrion is not entirely aware of what he says or does during sex, as when he left bite-marks on Shae's breasts.

But I will give a counter-example. Do you believe that Cersei is lying when he says that Sansa blabbed to her, because GRRM does not skip stuff? Or is it possible Cersei told the truth.

If he wanted to portray Tyrion as a violent, demeaning, sexual abuser, he would have explicitly done so (see Ramsay, Roose, Gregor, Gregor's crew, Bloody Mummers, and plenty of others).

So, you are saying that if Tyrion is not a cartoon villain, he cannot be a villain at all, nor even a deeply flawed hero?

The theme of my post is not to paint Tyrion as black as Ramsay and Gregor (is that really the standard?), but rather to suggest the possibility that Shae's perceptions of him and testimony about him represent her sincere outlook. My post is not about how God will judge Tyrion's soul, but about how Shae might have perceived Tyrion.

[Stannis the Great]

SHAE'S LIES

It is routinely said that Shae's testimony is completely fabricated. This, however, is unclear. This conclusion is reached mainly by assuming that if something is not mentioned in Tyrion's POV chapters, it never happened. It is also reached by making no allowance for the possibility of honest confusion on Shae's part.

Note, I am completely on the side of those who say that if Shae had lied against Tyrion, it would have been understandable and excusable given the circumstances of her position (she was under the power of Cersei and Tywin Lannister). I also agree with the argument that Shae's lies did NOT cause Tyrion to be convicted, nor was their any reason to believe that this would happen.

However, this post is intended to play devil's advocate against the idea that Shae lied at all. My position is not necessarily that this is the most LIKELY explanation for her testimony. I merely claim that if we place the burden of proof on those who would convict Shae of perjury, they will not be able to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

False, but that does not make it a lie. Shae almost certainly believes these things to be true, as does everyone else in KL, including Pod. Note that she does not say she OVERHEARD them plotting together. But her information is at least partially correct. Both the Imp and Sansa want Joffrey dead, and, in fact, the Imp TRIED to plot Joffrey's death with Sansa, but Sansa distrusted him and therefore ignored him.

It is speculation on Shae's part which any decent court of law wouldn't have allowed. A witness needs to state what they saw or what they heard, they do not have license to postulate theories or to base their testimony on rumour.

Both 100% true.

Sounds about right to me. I think that's exactly what Tyrion would have done: Joffrey, then Cersei, then Tywin. My only quibble is that I think he would have hesitated a bit longer with Tommon – but he certainly would have killed him rather than surrender power. One thing is certain: Tyrion DOES want to control the throne; and these people DO stand in his way.

First lets assume that your statement that Tyrion is power-hungry is true. If so, then the argument is flawed. You don't have to be on the throne to control the throne and this is especially relevant because Tyrion could not become King because Tommen claims his kingship from his father and Tyrion has no claim to the throne. He would not have enough support to secure himself as King. It is much more pragmatic to become the Hand of the King if he truly wanted power.

This is, once again, speculation by Shae and her testimony should have been summarily dismissed. It is quite clear that Shae was coached on her testimony.

Tyrion himself prefers to avoid consciously admitting these things. He prefers to tell himself he would never harm kin, which we now KNOW is NOT TRUE. His method of killing his father was to maneuver himself into position for the kill, and then kill, without ever acknowledging to himself that that was his intent all along. But how else could he have walked away from their interview?

Did he enter the Hand's chambers with the intent to kill Tywin? Confront definitely but not murder. I also thought it was made very clear in the text that Varys had engineered the whole scenario and had planted Shae in the room in order to enrage Tyrion into murdering his father. This is of course speculation on my part, but at least I acknowledge it rather than making claims without examining the textual evidence.

It is not clear how Shae knows this, though. She does not claim Tyrion told her these things directly. But Oberyn then asks: "How could you know all this?" Her answers are very vague.

But since his lust for Shae and his lust for power are intimately connected in his mind, he may have let slip more than he knows in his moments of passion. I have no reason to doubt that Shae believes it.

This is what would cause a modern lawyer to jump up and shout, "Objection! Hearsay!" Then the prosecutor would have to establish that the words came from a relevant source (such as Sansa or Tyrion). Otherwise the words would be stricken. But repeating hearsay is not the same as lying.

I'm sure she overheard lots of things. The castle is full of gossip, and ALL of it says that Sansa and the Imp murdered Joffrey. Is that all she means? It is not clear at all. She clearly does not have in mind things she overheard from Sansa, because she addresses that in the next sentence in a way that implies it was not covered in the first.

It is hearsay and is therefore irrelevant. A proper judge would have dismissed the testimony and instructed the witness to state only what she has (well) witnessed.

She may even have heard things from Varys, who has made clear all along that he suspects Tyrion is plotting against Joffrey (and it is by no means clear that Varys is wrong).

But she COULD have in mind things she overheard from Tyrion, because Tyrion DOES say things that could easily be taken that way. We readers have seen him say to Sansa, "I think Joffrey's earned himself a dagger, wouldn't you say."

In any event, unless she makes clear what she means, we cannot say she is lying.

Well, Sansa DID let things slip. For one, she was trembling the morning of the Wedding (because she was indeed plotting something) and tries to cover this up with a clumsy lie, saying the water was cold, when it was not. Shae may have noticed this. Shae may have noticed many things, because we know Shae is very observant, and we also know that Sansa was indeed plotting something. When, later that morning, Sansa made her escape after Joffrey's murder, Shae would naturally draw a connection to any "clues" she may have noticed in the past.

Since nobody asks Shae what exactly Sansa "let slip", it cannot be said that she is lying. We need more information. We need to know what she means.

This is reasonable.

Makes sense. We can be reasonably certain that Shae is mistaken about Sansa and Tyrion plotting together. So it makes more sense that most of her evidence would come from Tyrion directly, since it is at least arguable that Tyrion WAS in fact plotting Joffrey's death, and is more likely than Shae to allow hints of this to slip in front of Shae. Certainly, if Varys reached the conclusion that Tyrion was plotting against Joffrey.

This is reasonable.

100% true.

This is reasonable as it establishes the connection between the defendant and the witness.

Yes, they did have sex in the dragon room on the morning of the wedding. You may quibble that he did not "drag" her there. But she was certainly taken there on his orders, and it is quibbling (but true) to say he did not literally do the dragging himself.

After sex, she tries to convince him to make other arrangements, such as drugging Sansa so they can have sex in their bedroom. This is consistent with her testimony that she dislikes the dragon room.

Relevance?

We know that, in the past, Tyrion has ignored Shae's cries of pain during sex, preferring the fantasy that they are cries of ecstasy. It is also possible that influence of the dragon-skulls may have made him rather more psycho than normal.

Speculation on your part and the court certainly does not know this.

We actually don't know what was said during sex, because the corresponding Tyrion chapter totally skips that part. But this DOES sound like the sort of thing Tyrion might say. Tyrion hates Joff and is constantly saying nasty things about him. Shae's memory of what exactly was said is probably jumbled, but there is no reason to believe it is actually dishonest.

This is believable on Shae's part but we know that Tyrion didn't envision himself as King.

Note, this is the only thing that Shae explicitly says Tyrion told her directly.

Are the tears feigned? Tyrion fans like to assume so, but it is an assumption.

I'm a sceptic of anyone who cries in court at something other than a death of a person that they were close to. It could just as possibly be Shae trying to gain sympathy and is a tactic that is unfortunately utilised by lawyers.

Almost certainly true, … at least if GRRM intends the Westerosi sex industry to be remotely "realistic". But if GRRM intends Westeros to be a whoremonger's fantasy land (where all whores are eager and willing, except where they are bitches deserving of death) then it is almost certainly false.

It is also consistent with everything Shae has told Tyrion. She says she left home because she did NOT want to become her father's whore. She is constantly telling him, in countless ways, that she aspires to be more than a mere whore.

This is reasonable but isn't relevant.

There is no evidence that this is a lie. A squire is a "knight in training", often found in the service of a knight, and Shae was taken from a knight's tent. If Tyrion meant to keep Shae, it is more than possible that someone else had the same idea, and (whether he told the truth or not) may well have promised his "kept woman" a bit more than Tyrion did in terms of marriage prospects. Whoever had her was unwilling to give her up, even when the Lannister name was mentioned, and had to be dissuaded with Bronn's knife to his throat. That implies a bond a bit deeper than a one-night stand with a just-hired whore who is servicing an entire army.

Speculation. It is just as possible that Shae's client could have simply not wanted to lose an attractive whore. And relevance?

I've seen it argued that this is a lie because Bronn claims he took her from a knight. The first problem with this is that if Bronn did not even bother to learn the fellow's name, he can hardly be expected to know his precise rank. The second problem is that Bronn may have fought, not with her client/fiancee, but with her client-fiancee's'employer (one would expect a knight and his squire to share a tent).

True. She fails to mention she had sex with him immediately after he saw her, but that does not make the statement false.

Nonetheless it is deliberately misleading.

Immediately after sex with Shae, Tyrion left her apparently asleep, and goes around the back of the tent to piss, where he meets Bronn. We later learn that Shae woke up while Tyrion was gone. At the back of the tent, Bronn and Tyrion have a conversation where they talk about Shae's man being Tyrion's enemy, about Tyrion not wanting this "enemy" beside him in the battle, and something about someone being "put in the van". If Shae, listening through the tent flaps, overheard some words but not others, she could easily reach the above conclusion.

Later, at King's Landing, Shae hears Tyrion say that he is terrified of his enemies and therefore kills them all, and it is clear he SPECIFICALLY has in mind those who come between him and Shae. This to Shae would be further confirmation of what she suspected earlier.

This is reasonable.

Tyrion's account of the Battle of Green Fork confirms that a number of lesser knights fought in the van, that they formed the "front rank", and that many of them died.

It will be argued that this is a lie, because (1) Bronn seized her, not Shagga & Timmet; and (2) this occurred before, not after, the Greenfork battle.

To which I can make several observations:

#1 These details, even if false, are not material to Tyrion's guilt. Shae, who we all know hopes for a decent marriage, has just been forced to publicly admit to being a whore, an admission doomed to dash such hopes. She does not want to admit, before a crowd of highborn lords and ladies, that she betrayed her fiancee while he still lived. Meanwhile, the fundamental fact, that she was seized by force of arms, remains true.

#2 It is perfectly possible that Tyrion sent men to fetch her twice. He had left her with Pod, with instructions to take her "home" if the battle went poorly. Pod may well have done so, when Tyrion failed to return from the battle that night (he went straight from the battlefield to his father's tent). Tyrion then shows up next morning, with his arm in a sling, having been treated by his father's Maesters, and sends for her again, perhaps this time sending Shagga & Timmet.

#3 We don't know if others accompanied Bronn when he seized Shae. He would be foolish to go without backup. It is quite possible that other's were grabbing Shae while Bronn had his dirk to the knight/squire's throat.

#4 It is also possible that Shae was instructed not to mention the new "Sir Bronn", who has now won Tywin's favor.

#5. These events occurred over a year prior to Shae's testimony, and certain details may have become mixed up in Shae's mind to some extent. We see, on a daily basis, how events become mixed up in the minds of fans if they do not check the text.

This is quite clearly a deliberate lie on Shae's part. The scenarios #1-#4 are plausible while #5 is very weak. However here her testimony is unconvincing. Unless she stated that Tyrion told her that he had her client/lover put in the van, she would have had no idea that Tyrion was behind it. She would only know if she overheard Tyrion and Bronn discussing the issue which is not really feasible if she was not in Tyrion's tent.

Tyrion himself made no such direct threat upon meeting Shae. But we have no idea what threats Bronn used, as Tyrion's agent, to induce Shae's cooperation, and he may well have warned her that Tyrion would give her to Shagga & Timmet if she failed to please him.

However, Tyrion later made what Shae seems to have interpreted as a direct threat. When she complains of his pot-girl plans, resists his plan to bring her into the city saying she'd rather remain at the manse, and seems to disbelieve his attempt to blame her mistreatment on his father, he slaps her in the face and tells her a story of what happened to the last whore-wife who failed to please him by shattering his little love fantasy.

As to the second point, people will object that this is a lie, because that wasn't before she was brought into the city. Well, it is true that this second incident occurs well after she was first brought to King's Landing. But it was RIGHT before he "brought her to the city" a second time, after taking away her jewels and removing her from the manse (which was outside city walls).

The comment "…so I'd be close when he wanted me," better fits this latter context, and supports the idea that Shae is jumbling her chronology somewhat.

It is also interesting to note that, while Shae is at the manse, Tyrion deliberately surrounds Shae with monsters of the likes of Shagga & Timmet so that she will prefer his company.

This is reasonable testimony on Shae's part.

All 100% true. Some may object at the implication that he sexual performances were reluctant. But such people forget that she was recruited by force of arms, instructed first by Bronn and then by Tyrion to play a part, and then slapped and (by heavy implication) threatened with gang rape when she complained of her working conditions.

It is also often claimed that she is lying when she says he made her call him a "Giant". Please reread the chapter where they meet. He became angry when she accidentally used the phrase "small man", and asked "What am I, a giant?", obliging her to mollify him and give him the "right" answer. The whole "giant" thing was his idea.

It is made clear in Tyrion's POV that he is under no illusions that he is a dwarf and that any attempt to patronise him as a 'giant' would not go down well.

Overall as an impartial member I would doubt the majority of Shae's testimony as she has clearly been coached to say the correct items to implicate Tyrion in the murder of Joffrey. The only believable parts are irrelevant to the main case and Shae basically becomes a character witness. The only conclusion I would draw from this is that Tyrion really wanted to have sex with Shae and used any means to do so (which isn't really a good thing but is not the case at hand). Her testimony on Tyrion's ambitions is clearly false and it only weakens her credibility as a witness.

[Fearsome Fred]

I don't remember this at all. Can you quote anything to support this? Or tell me where in ASoS it comes up?

Tyrion to Sansa: "The boy's earned himself a dagger wouldn't you say."

From SoS: Chapter 51/Sansa 4, p. 807 in the US mass market paperback.

I think you're wrong in this assumption. Tyrion would never have tried to plot anything with Sansa.

Yet he makes, directly to her, a statement that would be perceived as treasonous if reported.

Nor is there, in the final analysis, any point to quibbling over what it was that Tyrion meant, precisely. The point is that Tyrion habitually makes statements that sound treasonous, and Shae may be aware of these statements, and sincerely believe he meant them, especially after Joff was in fact murdered, apparently by Tyrion.

[Fearsome Fred]

Erm, bite marks don't necessarily bother me (unless they are Biter-like bite-marks [...]

Wow! Strange standards!

[...] or if they break skin enough to be bleeding, which the text does NOT indicate Shae was bloody).

The text does not indicate whether he broke skin or not, or left bruise marks. All that is established is that the marks remained visible after sex, and that Tyrion was not aware that he was biting her.

So now if there were nail scratches on her back that would constitute brutal violent rape of Shae, too?

I never used the phrase "brutal violent rape". I suggested the possibility that Shae sometimes perceives their lovemaking differently than Tyrion does, and in particular, that her account of their final lovemaking act (under the dire influence of the dragon skulls), may be sincere.

ETA: I could just as easily interpret that as Shae enjoying some light S&M biting/scrathing. It's really not that uncommon.

Whether or not you could "just as easily" see it this way is beside the point. The theme of this thread is to explore the POSSIBILITY that Shae was not necessarily lying.

I think this is worth exploring, in part because I feel there is more to the Shae story than meets the eye. I think we are still waiting for the other foot to drop.

And if she pretended to like it, the how was Tyrion (self-deluded enough already) supposed to KNOW she hated it if she didn't say "ouch, that hurts me!"

If she screams loudly when at the precise moment he bites her, arching her back, most people would take this as a possible clue that it was a scream of pain and not sexual ecstacy.

He did not know he was biting her. She did not know he did not know this.

She had no problem mocking him to his face about his father, or demanding her jewels.

I know the occasion you are referring to. He slapped her in the face for her defiance. Then he told her what happened to the last whore-wife after he found out she was just pretending to like it. She then lowered her eyes and said "I am yours to command, m'lord."

[Fearsome Fred]

Unless she stated that Tyrion told her that he had her client/lover put in the van, she would have had no idea that Tyrion was behind it. She would only know if she overheard Tyrion and Bronn discussing the issue which is not really feasible if she was not in Tyrion's tent.

Shae WAS in Tyrion's tent at the time of Tyrion and Bronn's conversation. Tyrion and Bronn were NOT in Tyrion's tent. They were standing RIGHT BEHIND Tyrion's tent. Shae, if she was awake (as she apparently was, since she is awake when Tyrion returns) could easily have overheard parts of their conversation. If she heard some parts and not others, and if her client/fiance later died in the van, she could easily have reached the conclusion she testified to at trial.

[Fearsome Fred]

Silmarien wrote:

FF, your argument would be shot down as pure conjecture in a court of law.

What? Is "conjecture" forbidden on these boards? My humble position, and the theme of this threat, is that Shae's statements (or at least most of them) cannot be proven definitely to be lies. I am raising POSSIBILITIES that many seem to have not considered. My case may be stronger for some aspects of her testimony than others, but I believe I Have made some good points.

Anyone who disagrees necessarily takes the position that Shae's statements CAN be proven definitely to be lies. So the burden of proof is on them.

Note: This is not a court of law. However, if it were, whether what you call "conjecture" would be permitted depends on context. For instance, if Shae were criminally accused of perjury, not only would the burden of proof be on the prosecution, but they would have to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. In this context, a jury would not merely be permitted, but also REQUIRED to give serious consideration to interpretations of the evidence that are consistent with innocence of the elements of perjury.

It just does NOT follow from the text that Shae was truly this terrified sex slave who couldn't speak up for herself

Anyone who uses a prostitute, who may have been recruited by a thug, takes the risk that she is acting under coercion, no matter how convincingly she pretends to love your cock. Shae is a prostitute recruited by a thug.

[Fearsome Fred]

First lets assume that your statement that Tyrion is power-hungry is true.

Good move. I have lots of evidence that he is.

If so, then the argument is flawed. You don't have to be on the throne to control the throne and this is especially relevant because Tyrion could not become King because Tommen claims his kingship from his father and Tyrion has no claim to the throne.

You are quibbling. Tyrion clearly wants "the throne." He wants the power and the glory; and it is quibbling to say he is not particular about the title. His lust for power is not necessarily any more realistic than his desire for Shae's True Love. But it is there.

He would not have enough support to secure himself as King. It is much more pragmatic to become the Hand of the King if he truly wanted power.

Well, he WAS Hand of the King. He wanted to remain Hand of the King, and was spiteful and bitter when Tywin returned and took over the position.

And he wanted to rule through Tommen, since Joffrey was intractable.

I think Shae is right that Tyrion would not, in the end, have surrendered power to Tommen IF HE HAD A CHOICE. The question of feasibility is a whole other issue. But some Tyrion fans STILL hope that their favorite clever dwarf will win the Iron Throne.

[Leigh of Oldstones]

Tyrion to Sansa: "The boy's earned himself a dagger wouldn't you say."

From SoS: Chapter 51/Sansa 4, p. 807 in the US mass market paperback.

Yet he makes, directly to her, a statement that would be perceived as treasonous if reported.

Nor is there, in the final analysis, any point to quibbling over what it was that Tyrion meant, precisely. The point is that Tyrion habitually makes statements that sound treasonous, and Shae may be aware of these statements, and sincerely believe he meant them, especially after Joff was in fact murdered, apparently by Tyrion.

He made a snarky comment to Sansa about Joffrey. It's a major stretch to take that and say, as you did, that he tried plotting with Sansa to kill Joffrey!

[Nev yn]

Please reread the chapter where they meet. He became angry when she accidentally used the phrase “small man”, and asked “What am I, a giant?”, obliging her to mollify him and give him the “right” answer. The whole “giant” thing was his idea.

I don't have my books handy at the moment, but wasn't his asking "What am I, a giant?" referring to her implying that he would do something wicked? Playing into the tropes that giants are bad/wicked/etc. In what way would calling him a giant in that context be the right answer? And even if I am recalling incorrectly, in what way is calling a dwarf a giant the "right answer" to anything? They'd think you were patronizingly making fun of them. She just got lucky that he like the sound of it; there is no way somebody with a functional brain would think it was the right answer in such a situation. She rolled the dice on over-the-top flattery and got lucky. There is no way that what Tyrion said was hinting that he'd like to be called a giant. She's the one that made up that particular honorific, unambiguously. He did not "force" her to call him that, by any stretch of the imagination (unless you're implying subliminal mind control powers that he exerted, that we just can't see because he doesn't realize they are there).

[Jamie Lannister]

I think the point is that Shae knew fuck all about Tyrion's intentions. The only thing she was even vaguely truthful about was the nature of their sexual relationship, which on its own would do nothing but humiliate him. I've come to agree that Shae got a raw deal... but she knew about as much as Jon Snow. The damning parts of her testimony were rooted in nothing more than thinly-inferred rubbish, likely pushed more than a little by Shae's new "employers."

Unless I'm missing something huge here. Tyrion does muse that Tommen would've made the more affable king, but he writes the thought off and even shuts Bronn up for suggesting it.

[Alexia]

I tend to think that Shae was either scripted or strongarmed by Cersei with respect to Tyrion's guilt, myself, although I find your thoughts about her commentary on her "relationship" with Tyrion to be very interesting. I also believe that she genuinely believed in Tyrion and Sansa's guilt and I agree that Tyrion has made many comments that would lead any reasonable bystander to think so ("the boy's earned himself a dagger" being the least of these).

Great topic though, and some very interesting thoughts. I would add, to support your theory about Tyrion being capable and willing to kill his family members -- when he tells Bronn the story of Tysha in AGOT Bronn says he would have killed the man who did that to him. Tyrion responds by saying something along the lines of "Perhaps one day you shall" (I don't have my book in front of me for an exact quote).

[oba]

I don't have my books handy at the moment, but wasn't his asking "What am I, a giant?" referring to her implying that he would do something wicked? Playing into the tropes that giants are bad/wicked/etc. In what way would calling him a giant in that context be the right answer? And even if I am recalling incorrectly, in what way is calling a dwarf a giant the "right answer" to anything?

Tyrion had asked Shae about the man she'd been with before him. Here's their exchange:

He asked her about the man Bronn had taken her from, and she named the minor retainer of an insignificant lordling. "You need not fear his like, m'lord," the girl said, her fingers busy at his cock. "He is a small man."

"And what am I, pray?" Tyrion asked her. "A giant?"

"Oh, yes," she purred, "my giant of Lannister." She mounted him then, and for a time, she almost made him believe it.

They'd think you were patronizingly making fun of them. She just got lucky that he like the sound of it; there is no way somebody with a functional brain would think it was the right answer in such a situation. She rolled the dice on over-the-top flattery and got lucky. There is no way that what Tyrion said was hinting that he'd like to be called a giant. She's the one that made up that particular honorific, unambiguously. He did not "force" her to call him that, by any stretch of the imagination (unless you're implying subliminal mind control powers that he exerted, that we just can't see because he doesn't realize they are there).

I agree with you here. Tyrion certainly didn't force her to call him a "giant". It was pillow talk, no more, no less.

As far as whether or not Shae believed in Tyrion's guilt, I don't think it mattered much to her one way or the other any more than it did to Osmund Kettleblack.

Although, interestingly enough for this topic, Shae and Tyrion did have a conversation about Tyrion possibly killing one of his family members. It happened in Clash:

"Because of the queen? I'm not afraid of her either."

"I am."

"Then kill her and be done with it. It's not as if there was any love between you."

Tyrion sighed. "She's my sister. The man who kills his own blood is cursed forever in the sight of gods and men. Moreover, whatever you and I may think of Cersei, my father and brother hold her dear. I can scheme with any man in the Seven Kingdoms, but the gods have not equipped me to face Jaime with swords in hand."

[Fryie]

If she screams loudly when at the precise moment he bites her, arching her back, most people would take this as a possible clue that it was a scream of pain and not sexual ecstacy.

:lmao:

[Ygrain]

An interesting idea that Shae may have believed a part of what she was saying. However, she did openly lie aout her supposed marriage to a squire. Noble sons do not marry penniless campfollowers. They can use the promise of marriage to persuade an innocent girl into being married (Mya Stone) but there is no reason why they should make such a promise to a campfollower.

However, I completely disagree with the unnecessary vilification of Tyrion. While he is truly a flawed hero, there is no need to imply that he planned on getting rid of his family prior the point when he virtually lost everything. Prior that, he was showing a great deal of feelings for Tommen and Myrcella. When Cersei unexpectedly broke down in tears, his impulse was to comfort her.

As to the supposed powergreediness because he was pissed by being removed from the post of the Hand... he was removed while being seriously injured in the battle that was won mostly thanks to him, and his achievements were never acknowledged. In such a situation, I'd be pissed, as well.

[headtrip_honey]

An interesting idea that Shae may have believed a part of what she was saying. However, she did openly lie aout her supposed marriage to a squire. Noble sons do not marry penniless campfollowers. They can use the promise of marriage to persuade an innocent girl into being married (Mya Stone) but there is no reason why they should make such a promise to a campfollower.

Not all squires are noble. Dunk, of the Dunk and Egg stories, was an orphan from Flea Bottom when he became a squire.

[Fearsome Fred]

He made a snarky comment to Sansa about Joffrey. It's a major stretch to take that and say, as you did, that he tried plotting with Sansa to kill Joffrey!

It MIGHT be a "major stretch"; if that were the only clue that Tyrion wants Joffrey dead. But it isn't. One of the first things we learn about Tyrion is that he dreams of murdering his entire family.

Tyrion admits to himself, at last twice IIRC, that he is TEMPTED to murder Joff. But he has at the back of his mind the idea that he could never bring himself to murder his own kin. Which we now know IS NOT TRUE.

Varys twice observes that Tyrion's actions seem aimed at Joff's elimination. He's got a point. Is getting Joff to a whore really Tyrion's ONLY reason for wanting to know when Joff is unprotected by the Hound? While asking himself "could I really do it?", Tyrion is maneuvering himself into position.

His kidnapping of Tommen in CoK. What was its purpose? Not to get him out of Kings Landing to safety - he sent him exactly where Cercei would have sent him - but under his own control rather than Cercei's. His reason for this interest in controlling Tommen: "Should any harm Joffrey, the Lannister claim to the Iron Throne would rest on Tommen's young shoulders."

Another major elephant in the room is Tyrion's second theft of Pycelle's poisons (the lethal ones). Is there some OTHER explanation for this besides Tyrion's desire to, at the very least, keep open the option of murdering family members? This is not a rhetorical question. I am genuinely curious about what that other explanation might be out there. Was he really just there so this "innocent" Tyrion can frame himself?

Note also Tyrion's willingness to manuever Lancel into a position which he knows is likely to cause Lancel's death, even though (unlike Joff) Tyrion does not think Lancel deserves this. A cousin is only one step further removed than a nephew. So either Tyrion thinks cousins don't count as kin, or he thinks that killing someone indirectly, rather than directly, will not provoke the "kinslaying curse".

After his escape after murdering his father, what does he do? Go into hiding? No. He dreams of murdering Cersei, and this time has no doubts about his ability to bring himself to do so. He goes off looking to make common cause with Daenerys, a mortal enemy of the Lannisters, and looking for dragons.

[FanTasy]

@ Fearsome Fred: I like that you started this thread.

You have read the novels thoroughly and you have some clear thoughts about how Shae and Tyrion were thinking.

I think It strenghtens a case if one shows 'exhibits' (what is in the novel, an actual quote) and then states ones interpretation of what motivated what Tyrion and/or Shae said or did.

There's nothing wrong with that last bit. We are all interpretating happily here at this forum.

But I think it could strengthen your case even more if you quoted literally, in context and with clear difference to what is actual text and what is character interpretation.

ETA as you did in your original post :cool4:

[oba]

Varys twice observes that Tyrion's actions seem aimed at Joff's elimination. He's got a point. Is getting Joff to a whore really Tyrion's ONLY reason for wanting to know when Joff is unprotected by the Hound? While asking himself "could I really do it?", Tyrion is maneuvering himself into position.

Bronn inadvertently plants the idea of taking Joffrey to a whorehouse in Tyrion's mind.

"A brothel," Bronn said. "What do you mean to do here?"

"What does one usually do in a brothel?"

The sellsword laughed. "Shae's not enough?"

"She was pretty enough for a camp follower, but I'm no longer in camp. Little men have big appetites, and I'm told the girls here are fit for a king."

"Is the boy old enough?"

"Not Joffrey. Robert. This house was a great favorite of his." Although Joffrey may indeed be old enough. An interesting notion, that.

And Tyrion never thinks to himself whether or not his real reason for getting Joffrey away from the Hound temporarily is for a nefarious purpose.

After that business in the yard, Tyrion had spoken with Varys about how they might arrange for Joffrey to visit Chataya's. A taste of honey might sweeten the boy, he hoped. He might even be grateful, gods forbid, and Tyrion could do with a shade more gratitude from his sovereign. It would need to be done secretly, of course. The tricky bit would be parting him from the Hound. "The dog is never far from his master's heels," he'd observed to Varys, "but all men sleep. And some gamble and whore and visit winesinks as well."

"The Hound does all these things, if that is your question."

"No," said Tyrion. "My question is when."

Varys had laid a finger on his cheek, smiling enigmatically. "My lord, a suspicious man might think you wished to find a time when Sandor Clegane was not protecting King Joffrey, the better to do the boy some harm."

"Surely you know me better than that, Lord Varys," Tyrion said. "Why, all I want is for Joffrey to love me."

The eunuch had promised to look into the matter. The war made its own demands, though; Joffrey's initiation into manhood would need to wait.

Note also Tyrion's willingness to manuever Lancel into a position which he knows is likely to cause Lancel's death, even though (unlike Joff) Tyrion does not think Lancel deserves this. A cousin is only one step further removed than a nephew. So either Tyrion thinks cousins don't count as kin, or he thinks that killing someone indirectly, rather than directly, will not provoke the "kinslaying curse".

Lancel made the request with no prodding needed from Tyrion. Tough for me to equate this with Tyrion maneuvering him into anything.

"Will you grant me the boon I asked of you?"

"Perhaps." Lancel wanted his own command in the next battle. A splendid way to die before he finished growing that mustache, but young knights always think themselves invincible.

Lancel requested a potentially dangerous command. Tyrion granted the request. If that would leave him open to being labeled a kinslayer, then Robert was opening himself up to the kinslayer label when he left Stannis in charge of Storm's End during the rebellion and Balon Greyjoy was a kinslayer because of how his sons died in Robert's Rebellion.

After his escape after murdering his father, what does he do? Go into hiding? No. He dreams of murdering Cersei, and this time has no doubts about his ability to bring himself to do so. He goes off looking to make common cause with Daenerys, a mortal enemy of the Lannisters, and looking for dragons.

I'm no great defender of Tyrion's, but I think this is somewhat circular reasoning on your part. You argue that evidence to support Tyrion's capability of murdering his family before the events at the end of Book 3 is his state of mind after the events of Book 3. That would be a bit like claiming that my wanting to kill someone after they've framed me for murder is evidence that I wanted to kill them before the frame job took place.