Gilbert Green

If his testimony was used to support Tyrion's annulment, he is also a perjurer.

Slander. Not a crime, maybe, but certainly a Tort.

Adultery.

I listened to the podcast. I know the context. He was discussing a hypothetical. In order to consider splitting WINDS into two books, it would have to be "not 10 pages longer but more like 300 pages longer". And even then there would be other options, like editing it down. But he never predicted this would happen. It was merely a hypothetical situation.

He seems to expect about 1600 pages. He never mentioned the number of chapters. If we allot 20 pages per chapter, that might be 80 chapters or something. Of course, the tale could still grow in the telling.

You were mistaken, then. He did not say that that it would be 300 pages longer. He was discussing a hypothetical.

Seems like alot to me too. But I long ago gave up on wishful thinking. I read everything GRRM says as true, but read it narrowly. Previously, I could not prove that GRRM had written more than 600 pages. Now, his words seem to add about 500 pages to that total. It's a major progress update for me.

Gold, self-preservation, and all kinds of other things, could play a role. If he accuses LF, LF is not going to take it lying down. He will respond with accusations of his own. And other punishments. Going along is the path of least resistance. LF cannot expose him without exposing himself. We don't need to know the whole story. When you see a man committing murder, you arrest him first, and ask him why later. As for whistleblowers sending Ravens, you think LF cannot anticipate that problem and keep a guard on the rookery? And now she knows that LF has done this more often than she knew. And she still does not know about the "something vile" that LF put Sweetrobin's milk last night. There is definitely SOME mystery that Colemon is keeping hidden. Real murderers don't twirl their mustaches That's in cartoons. Administering a medicine "against his better judgment" is already a culpable act, possibly amounting to complicity in murder, depending on how far or in what way it goes against his better judgment. But it clearly goes well beyond negligent medical malpractice. This is deliberate recklessness at least. This is not inadvertent. He knows. If he is not potentially complicit in a depraved-indifference murder or an intentional murder, it is at least the sort of recklessness that could result in a manslaughter charge. What is his motive for acting against his better judgment? I could just as easily ask you that question. But, again, we don't need to know his life story to follow the clues that he is acting against his better judgment. But he does panic. We see his adam's apple bobbing up and down in his extreme nervousness. I wasn't pedantic. i said I understood what you meant, and addressed your objection. Vitamins, tinctures, herbs. WHATEVER! You are the one being pedantic, and evading my answer merely because I used the same word you did. If his herb/tincture/vitamin/medicine/whatever was innocent WHY DOES HE SUDDENLY STOP HIMSELF FROM SAYING WHAT IT WAS?? No that is not possible. His mother died months ago. And he believes he likes "sweetmilk", which at the very least is ordinary milk sweetened by something, such as honey or sweetsleep. Also, it is weird enough that Lysa breastfed little Robert for so long. There is no need to assume he has never tasted other food before. The situation is not THAT weird.

I'm thinking you misread the evidence, unless I missed something. When did he say it would be 1820 manuscript pages? That would have been closer to my own guesses, based on his remarks of last month. Again, unless I missed something.

Colemon is neither a quick thinker nor a smooth talker. And he is obviously very nervous about something. And he almost DOES blurt out what it was that he gave Sweetrobin. Then he thinks better of it and stops himself. LF has already implicated himself by ordering doses, and arguing with Colemon about the dangers. You are essentially saying LF would never do what we know he has done. There is no need for LF to suddenly say "my man Colemon, let's slow-murder Sweetrobin". And by the time Colemon puts 1 and 1 and 1 and 1 together, he's already an accomplice. Colemon is a weak man, who wants to follow orders and avoid trouble. The situation probably developed slowly with every new dose making him more and more guilty. He's like a frog in a pot being slowly heated. Vitamins would be anachronism, but never mind. I get the idea. My answer is this: If it was only vitamins, he would have said "I only gave him vitamins". Instead he says "I only..." then stops himself, and suddenly asks about nosebleeds. And he seems to also associate nosebleeds with sweetsleep poisoning. And you can hardly be serious. Would GRRM really tease a mystery like this, and have the solution be "health supplements"?

My position is that she has no authority. "Influence" is a broader term, and depends on time place and circumstance. Will I conceded that time place and circumstance have given her an opportunity to "influence" him? Sure. And reminding him that it would be a bad thing if sweetrobin had a seizure and fell off a mountain is an example of such influence. But this does not depend on her authority -- she has none. Nor, at least in this case, does it depend on her status as LF's daughter. It depend merely on the fact that everything she says is obviously true, and Colemon has no counterargument. But I can think of one reason why he might refuse her suggestion. And that is because he has already given Sweetrobin a dose. Not three days ago, like he pretends, but that same morning. And not for the innocent motives suggested by Sansa either. See the "something vile" quotes I provided earlier in this thread. I think Colemon is deliberately slow-poisoning him on LF's orders. I recognize it is only a theory, like Frey pies. But I thought it was the premise of this thread. And, except for the "blame Sansa" part, I happen to agree with it. Agree with all except Colemon's innocence. You never answered my question about the "something vile" that Colemon is secretly administering in Sweetrobin's drink. See my quotes posted above. Colemon publicly protests against weak doses while he secretly administers strong ones.

Irrelevant. Regardless of whether a serving maid would have spoken, if the serving maid had spoken, Colemon would have followed her suggestion. It is the suggestion that is compelling, not the identity of the person making it. If a little bird had said it to Colemon, the suggestion would have had the same effect. To object that little birds cannot talk is to miss the point. Anyhow, serving maids can talk and sometimes do.

Agree on Sansa. But what is the vile something that Colemon is secretly putting in Robin's milk? She does not have to, and she doesn't. She reminds him of LF's wishes, because she has no authority of her own. @Springwatch is right. All she does is say a true thing that Colemon cannot possibly argue against, because it is so obviously true no matter who says it. If a serving maid had said the same thing, Colemon would have had no choice but to realize that what the serving maid said was true. The identity of the serving-maid's father has nothing to do with it.

For those of you who think the wicked Sansa is forcing the poor innocent Colemon to poison Sweetrobin, do you have a theory as to what, exactly, is the "something vile" that Colemon is secretly administering to Sweetrobin without Sansa's knowledge? My hypothesis would be (1) Sweetrobin thinks he likes sweetmilk, but this merely means he likes sweet sugary things; (2) he has developed an aversion to actual sweetsleep, and to sweetmilk sweetened by actual sweetsleep; (3) this aversion is a symptom indicating that the poison is building up in his body; (4) nosebleeds are another symptom, which is why Colemon associates nosebleeds with tasting something vile, as well as with sweetsleep. Some quotes, in order: Robert sniffled. "Maester Colemon put something vile in my milk last night, I could taste it. I told him I wanted sweetmilk, but he wouldn't bring me any. Not even when I commanded him. I am the lord, he should do what I say. No one does what I say." [....] He hesitated. "Did you observe any shaking while you were with him?" "His fingers trembled a little bit when I held his hand, that's all. He says you put something vile in his milk." "Vile?" Colemon blinked at her, and the apple in his throat moved up and down. "I merely . . . is he bleeding from the nose?" [...] Time will not matter if his lordship has a shaking fit and falls off the mountain. If my father were here, I know he would tell you to keep Lord Robert calm at all costs." "I try, my lady, yet his fits grow ever more violent, and his blood is so thin I dare not leech him any more. Sweetsleep . . . you are certain he was not bleeding from the nose?"

Nobody denies that Colemon is a morally weak character. But moral weakness is not an excuse for murder. In modern times, professional interrogators take advantage of moral weakness, when trying to get confessions from suspected murderers. "Yes, we know you did it, but your reasons were so UNDERSTANDABLE. How could any reasonable person expect you to resist such sore temptations? Why don't you just admit that you did it, but only because of these understandable reasons." Of course, all that sympathy and understanding goes out the window, once the interrogator gets his confession and hands the case off to the prosecutor. If this applies today, it applied four-fold in medieval times to any murderer tries who to hide behind an excuse of cowardice. This was an age when courage was not merely expected of men -- it was required. A man was expected to lay his life on the line for his wife, for his children, for his lord, and for his faith. As we found out in the case of Gareth, the penalty for desertion could be death. Then you move on to arguing that Colemon was "justified". Okay. Maybe he was. But if he was justified, then there was no crime at all, and we can end the thread. When it comes to sweetsleep, Colemon knows more than Sansa, more than LF, and more than the reader. If he really and truly thinks the doses are "justified", then nobody else can say they know better. If Colemon is truly "justified" then that is all the more reason why you cannot blame Sansa. She is guilty of nothing more than encouraging him to do what you now claim is the right thing. Sansa has no "clout" whatsoever in this case. Colemon, in following her suggestion, does not do so because she has any authority, but because she happens to be right. Her argument is almost unassailable. Either sweetsleep is justified in this one instance, or it is never justified. Nobody wants Robin to have a seizure and fall off the mountain. For Colemon to ignore this consideration after it was pointed out to him would be almost unthinkable. And it would not matter if it came from Sansa or the dairy-maid. Sansa, BTW, never threatens to tell LF anything. She merely makes a perfectly true statement about what LF would want. Even LF does not want Robin to fall off a mountain. Not yet, anyway.

It depends on what you mean by poisoned. All drugs are poisons, but that does not make every doctor an attempted murderer. Coleman literally doses LF to protect his life, this one time. Or so we assume (we don't actually see Robin take the dose). Sweetsleep is a medicine. That's why maesters have it. The reason he doses him is because it would be a bad thing (yes even from LF's POV) if Robin were to have a seizure and fall off the mountain. Sweetsleep does not become a deadly poison because of this one dose to save his life. It becomes a deadly poison, potentially, because of all the doses before and afterwards. Her words show she wants to save his life. Her internal monologue shows that she she is loyal to his broader interests as both boy and Lord. So whatever she is "complicit" in, it cannot be murder or attempted murder. And your position is what exactly? Are you accusing her of murder, or medical negligence?

Sansa pressured Colemon only once, and only to save Robin's life. Nor did she appeal to her own authority. She has none. If Robin dies of sweetsleep poisoning, it won't be because of this one time, but because of all the doses before or afterwards. And if anyone has the power to pressure Maester Colemon to murder the Lord he is sworn to serve, it is Littlefinger, and not some 13 year old girl. Expected or not, if Robin dies because of their actions, Colemon and LF will both be murderers. Not Sansa. Well, now you are shifting to the argument that, really, nobody is murdering Sweetrobin by slow poison at all. Which is only all the more reason why you certainly cannot blame Sansa. I skip the discussion of WINDS as I don't know how to do the hide contents trick. But I don't agree.

Do you think LF is administering the doses himself? Or is he telling Colemon to do it? Is your defense of Colemon that he is just following orders? Is this some hyper-narrow idea of "purpose"? Or do you suppose that Colemon, of all people, does not see the implications of his own actions? There is some evidence that Colemon continues to administer doses to Robyn, on LF's orders, AFTER he gets safely down the mountain, and AFTER his warnings to Sansa that he says he previously discussed with LF. And Sansa is apparently not involved in that at all.

It's a slow-poisoning scheme. Colemon, not LF, is the one who I said would probably be relieved if Robyn fell off a mountain. Are we no longer talking about what Sansa meant by the words? You removed the context provided by Sansa, and provided your own. Even so, the larger concerns you mention do not conflict with Robin's wellbeing. All you have done is provide an additional selfish reason why Sansa might want Robin alive, while suggesting no reason why she might ever want him dead. Except for "alive long enough for Sansa and Harry to marry" part. But Sansa is completely unaware of this particular "larger concern". She does not even know that Harry is Robin's heir when she talks of "larger concerns." As for their being "no proof" against Coleman, I guess that's true. But If we remove the clues that involve Colemon you could say the same about LF. So what exactly is your position here. That nobody is slow-poisoning Robin with sweetsleep? Maybe you're right. Might as well end the thread, then.

Sansa is not thinking that Alayne and Pa are disloyal to Robin. She is thinking that they ARE loyal, but based on a broader and more-complete understanding of his needs, interests and concerns. She thinks Coleman is loyal to Robin based on his needs as a boy; and LF is loyal to Robin based on his needs as both a boy and a Lord. She sees Colemon as something analogous to Lysa -- someone with a too-narrow idea of Robin's needs. Sansa is wrong about LF. LF is not loyal to Robin at all. He is a complete traitor to Robin in every possible way. She is, I think, wrong about Colemon too. Colemon is not concerned about Robins needs as a boy at all. Colemon is only concerned that if the boy dies, the crime not be traced to Colemon's hand. That's why he gets so nervous and jittery when he is asked by Sansa to deliver such doses openly, and within her knowledge. Meanwhile, it is probably Colemon who has been secretly administering the doses in his food without her knowledge. And if Robin were to throw a fit and fall off a mountain, that would be a perfect solution as far as Colemon is concerned. Colemon is not some innocent being forced to murder Robin by the wicked Sansa. He's been secretly murdering Robin, and starts acting all guilty, when asked to openly administer a single dose for the temporary and reasonable purpose of preventing Robin from falling off a mountain. Yes, there are supposed to be issues here with "Alayne" hiding from her true self, and attempting to avoid facing unpleasant truths. But she is not an accomplice to a murder plot.

Its odd. A Lord Protector conspires with a Maester to slowly poison a child, and people want to blame another child, merely because that other child does not leap to thoughts of murder at the sign of the first clue. The significance of Sansa's argument with Colemon is that it induced Colemon to blurt out things that otherwise would have been kept entirely between Coleman and Littlefinger. Then, as Sansa descends the mountain, the wolf within her starts to awaken. Sweetrobin does not do so bad either, marching on his own feet across the gap that paralyzed Catelyn. Then, at the end of the chapter, LF reveals to Sansa that he expects Robin to die, putting Colemon's clue in a new light. I don't think this is going where you folks think.

Colemon is dosing him, on Petyr's orders. Sansa was involved, with any knowledge of danger, only once, and that time to prevent him from falling off a mountain. Colemon never warned Sansa before, because Sansa is not really involved or in charge. She is hearing it for the first time, and she points out, correctly from her perspective, that it is an odd time to raise the objection. You are assuming she won't remember the warning once Robert is safely off the mountain. Why? How does Sansa trying to save Robert's life prove that Sansa does not care about Robert's life?

Educated people - yes, even in the US - tend to know that "couple" correctly means "two". That's seems to how GRRM uses the word in his fiction. He uses "a couple of children" for Bran & Rickon; "a couple" of black brothers, out of a score in the Hall, refers to Fornio and Ser Byam. There are of course numerous other occasions where one cannot verify what is meant by "couple", but I think in those occasions "two" is meant as well; for instance, "a couple of pennies" probably means two pennies. My philosophy with GRRM, when it comes to the progress of WINDS, is to read his his ambiguous statements narrowly. So I think "a couple" means "two" and not "more than two". If wishful thinking were a better guide to GRRM's ambiguous statements, we would have seen WINDS years ago. But if you prefer to imagine it really means six, that is fine. You asked for the opinion of others, and I gave mine. I am not denying the possibility that "couple" could theoretically means "a few". But you said it HAD TO mean that. And I asked you why. Your last sentence seems to concede that a "couple" could indeed mean only two. And yes, of course he also has many chapters done for incomplete POVs.

Less than 10 years is a pretty safe bet, I think. The first five volumes barely covered more than 2 years. The 5-year gap idea has long since been discarded. Winter has already begun. And the title of the last volume "A Dream of Spring", implies the story will end during winter.

I expect a book-long hiatus for a Jon POV. He will be seen through the eyes of others, and will be a monster. The real Jon will reemerge in a later volume.