GRRM's intentions: Discrediting the trial of combat?

[Minstral]

There is a common belief that Tyrion will somehow be absolved of being falsely condemned for his double nephews death. It's not a belief that I actually believe, but considering the idea made me think that in order for him to be absolved the result of his "trial" would need to be overturned. There is a wrinkle in this idea though, as the trial is supposed to invoke the God to favor the innocent and condemn the guilty. While I don't think Tyrion will be absolved for his guilt neccesarily, I do think that GRRM is moving in a direction to discredit the whole concept of "trial by combat".

The amount of times that it is invoked to resolve issues in this series and setting is staggering, along with duels in general. The trial by seven from the Hedge knight and the joust from the Hedge Knight. Tyrion invoking it twice in his life. And now Cersei, whom I feel is the key to do away with the concept of justice from combat. Not to mention that GRRM shows that it is not an effective method for justice to be served, I believe he relies upon it so often so that he can one day move away from it.

Owing to the fact that Cersei just happens to have a very intimidating champion, and likely undead, I do not see Ser Robert being defeated by any normal man (I agree that it would be nice for the Hound to get some closure but I don't see it happening anymore at the trial). However, if the secret to FrankenGregor is ever inconveniently discovered, but still manages to vanquish whatever champion of the accuser, then how can the Gods be working through such a monstrosity? And how would the Dornish react to a hulking thing that is near tall as the man that killed nearly a a couple of generations of their princes/princesses?

Nym and Tyene are on the road to KL, they will not fail to notice the eight foot giant defending the Queen Dowager. With the death of Kevan though, Nym may not see her seat on the council and be shunted aside by the Tyrell's. But, Tyene has instructions to go over the Faith and High Septon in order to get him on the Dornish side. These two will not wish to see Cersei innocent, and are likely to look into the silent giant to confirm their suspicions. If they succeed in unmasking FrankenGregor (which I do believe they would take steps to do, the man that killed their father) then they stand to annul any victorious trial that he took part in.

I am not saying that the trial that condemned Tyrion will be annulled, I am suggesting that as a whole the High Sparrow would claim that such trials no longer hold the will of the gods. If such a plea to the gods could be so perverted, I do not see him ignoring such a corruption of an ideal and hold to it.

[Yukle]

I am not saying that the trial that condemned Tyrion will be annulled, I am suggesting that as a whole the High Sparrow would claim that such trials no longer hold the will of the gods. If such a plea to the gods could be so perverted, I do not see him ignoring such a corruption of an ideal and hold to it.

Hmm... that'd be a really odd move for the High Septon to make, though. The Faith Militant has just been re-armed, which greatly enhances the authority of the Faith of the Seven's political power (at least, for the corrupt leadership, the poor septas in the various castles will probably still get raped and murdered in war). They wouldn't do anything that would reduce their authority and renouncing trials by combat removes their power to act as judiciaries.

It was said that Tyrion's reluctance to bed Sansa could annul his marriage. Similarly, the Faith would have clauses for officially renouncing the outcomes of trials they know generated the incorrect result. This would hardly be the first time an obviously guilty party was absolved in a trial by combat.

Perhaps they could declare that Oberyn used a poisoned spear to ensure that he won even if he lost, and therefore the Gods decreed he should lose for dishonouring the rules of a fair trial. On that basis, the trial wasn't legitimate and Tyrion hasn't really been charged yet. Or, since Gregor died too, they might declare that the Gods saw fit to pass his sentence and also curse the man who cheated trying to win a fight that was meant to be "holy" and curse the man for his earlier monstrous crimes of killing children.

[Ser Leftwich]

Another way out for Tyrion, in the case of being accused of Joffrey's death, is if/when Joffrey is deemed the product of incest.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

Unlikely that the HS will discredit the trial by combat as a whole. I consider it far more likely (almost a given), that upon learning that the Lannisters dabble in necromancy and defiled the trial by combat, he will call a crusade against. Heresy of the worst kind. That's enough to eradicate the entire House (for the HS). Just burn everybody at a stake.

Cersei gambles high. Well, she always did.

[Gneisenau]

Aren't all trials "trial by combat" ? In the modern world we hire champions of the mind to battle for us in court (lawyers).

[Feliciano69]

Another way out for Tyrion, in the case of being accused of Joffrey's death, is if/when Joffrey is deemed the product of incest.

How would that even happen ? Not even the characters who know have undeniable evidence.

[Roose The Weddingcrasher]

That's enough to eradicate the entire House (for the HS). Just burn everybody at a stake.

I don't think he'll have them burned.... he leaves that to Stannis

[TheCasualObserver]

It's frustrating that because of the reliance on trials by combat, we see very little evidence of how other trials work. Tyrion can't get "witnesses" when he's in the Vale and doesn't really bother in KL because of the sheer weight of people willing to speak against him. The judges in both his trails are ludicrously far from impartial - Lysa Arryn wants a scapegoat for her husbands death, Tywin is father to Tyrion, Grandfather to the murdered Joffrey, Mace Tyrell thinks his daughter was threatened by the accused and Oberyn simple wants vengeance against Gregor and one of his fellow judges.

Where is there room for justice in or out of trail by combat?

[Stan the Man Baratheon]

I don't think he'll have them burned.... he leaves that to Stannis Melisandre.

[Gneisenau]

It's frustrating that because of the reliance on trials by combat, we see very little evidence of how other trials work. Tyrion can't get "witnesses" when he's in the Vale and doesn't really bother in KL because of the sheer weight of people willing to speak against him. The judges in both his trails are ludicrously far from impartial - Lysa Arryn wants a scapegoat for her husbands death, Tywin is father to Tyrion, Grandfather to the murdered Joffrey, Mace Tyrell thinks his daughter was threatened by the accused and Oberyn simple wants vengeance against Gregor and one of his fellow judges.

Where is there room for justice in or out of trail by combat?

What is justice ? Isn't justice whatever society deems to be just ?

[King of the Road]

Aren't all trials "trial by combat" ? In the modern world we hire champions of the mind to battle for us in court (lawyers).

Indeed some people would like to see a return to trial by combat!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1416262/Court-refuses-trial-by-combat.html

[Bright Blue Eyes]

I don't think he'll have them burned.... he leaves that to Stannis

He'll figure something out.

[Minstral]

Hmm... that'd be a really odd move for the High Septon to make, though. The Faith Militant has just been re-armed, which greatly enhances the authority of the Faith of the Seven's political power (at least, for the corrupt leadership, the poor septas in the various castles will probably still get raped and murdered in war). They wouldn't do anything that would reduce their authority and renouncing trials by combat removes their power to act as judiciaries.

It is possible to think that though I still think that he would not be a fan of religious duels deciding the outcome of a trial if it is able to take the power out of his hands. He is likely fond of his own swords, but to grant them the legitimacy to use them in judgments could take away from his own authority. Perhaps I am too influenced by what I know of history, but religious heads of the Catholic church and the clergy always wrestled with the Kings and nobility of Europe when there was an ambiguity where the power lay. Nor were they fond of those that utilized duels to settle matters of dispute and law. Come to think of it, the Church was also opposed to the chivalric ideal of the tournament.

[Zman1863]

GRRM definitely portrays the flaws of the trial by combat, but I doubt we'll see any regime try to uproot the tradition during the series. It just seems like such a firmly rooted thing that some evolution of values is going to need to occur before it becomes acknowledged as a foolish practice.

As for Tyrion's ASOS trial, whether it stands or not depends almost completely on whether he is in the new King or Queen's good books. A couple kings down the line from Tommen, the killing of Joffrey might be so stale that no one really cares, especially since whoever is king or queen will have seen Joff as a usurper. And if the new ruler wants to observe formalities, Tyrion could simply be pardoned.

[Iona]

How would that even happen ? Not even the characters who know have undeniable evidence.

That's the beauty of a trial by combat, no undeniable evidence needed. If Cersei loses hers, her children will be bastards born of incest. Because the gods say so.

I don't know whether this would help Tyrion though. One could argue that he wasn't guilty of regicide since Joffrey had no business sitting the throne, but he'd still be a murderer. Might be the Faith would absolve him from all guilt if it suited them, claiming that Tyrion was some kind of saint for killing such an abomination, an instrument of the gods or something.

All in all the trial by combat is extremely flawed, since it places the two parties in such an unfair position. If you are not a martial person and have no-one to defend you, you're screwed if the other party requests for a trial by battle. I don't know if Westeros would be ready to abolish the whole tradition, but to make it fair I say they should allow trial by combat only if both sides agree to it.

[Petyr Patter]

It's frustrating that because of the reliance on trials by combat, we see very little evidence of how other trials work. Tyrion can't get "witnesses" when he's in the Vale and doesn't really bother in KL because of the sheer weight of people willing to speak against him. The judges in both his trails are ludicrously far from impartial - Lysa Arryn wants a scapegoat for her husbands death, Tywin is father to Tyrion, Grandfather to the murdered Joffrey, Mace Tyrell thinks his daughter was threatened by the accused and Oberyn simple wants vengeance against Gregor and one of his fellow judges.

Where is there room for justice in or out of trail by combat?

I think you are scratching why Trials by Combat actually perform a pretty important function. They take some power over guilt and innocence away from parties that might otherwise be highly partial. Tyrion was accussed twice of crimes he did not commit, but got an "innocent" verdict once thanks to trial by combat. Without trial by combat, he would have been found guilty both times. Hence, trial by combat improved the justice system to 50% versus 0%. No one can argue with math.

Even the prospect of trial by combat might serve to let two parties reach the medieval equivalent of a plea bargain.

[IamMe90]

I think you are scratching why Trials by Combat actually perform a pretty important function. They take some power over guilt and innocence away from parties that might otherwise be highly partial. Tyrion was accussed twice of crimes he did not commit, but got an "innocent" verdict once thanks to trial by combat. Without trial by combat, he would have been found guilty both times. Hence, trial by combat improved the justice system to 50% versus 0%. No one can argue with math.

Even the prospect of trial by combat might serve to let two parties reach the medieval equivalent of a plea bargain.

What? I can definitely argue with your mathematics. Having 1 person undergo 2 trials by combat and experiencing a 50% success rate hardly suggests that trial by combat in general is a 50% sort of deal. That's a terribly limited sample, and it doesn't take into account the multitude of factors that affect your outcome (eg, how rich you are, your access to a good champion, etc...) trial by combat is definitely NOT fair by any means. And it's not 50% for anyone, except in a strict, simplified statistical sense.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

All in all the trial by combat is extremely flawed, since it places the two parties in such an unfair position. If you are not a martial person and have no-one to defend you, you're screwed if the other party requests for a trial by battle. I don't know if Westeros would be ready to abolish the whole tradition, but to make it fair I say they should allow trial by combat only if both sides agree to it.

It was never the goal of the trial by combat to get a fair judgement. The goal was to settle a conflict once and for all, that otherwise would spread into feuding, war and ultimately a blood feud for generations. Regardless of who got hurt. Just a solution (almost) everybody could live with.

[mormont]

It's frustrating that because of the reliance on trials by combat, we see very little evidence of how other trials work. Tyrion can't get "witnesses" when he's in the Vale and doesn't really bother in KL because of the sheer weight of people willing to speak against him. The judges in both his trails are ludicrously far from impartial - Lysa Arryn wants a scapegoat for her husbands death, Tywin is father to Tyrion, Grandfather to the murdered Joffrey, Mace Tyrell thinks his daughter was threatened by the accused and Oberyn simple wants vengeance against Gregor and one of his fellow judges.

Where is there room for justice in or out of trail by combat?

The idea of an impartial judge wasn't one that really existed in medieval times, by and large, so in that GRRM is being accurate. 'Justice' is only one aim of trials, by combat or otherwise: as BBE says, at this point in history trials are also about resolving conflicts and enabling a community to move on, at a time when the 'truth' could be difficult or impossible to reliably ascertain.

[mankytoes]

Hmm... that'd be a really odd move for the High Septon to make, though. The Faith Militant has just been re-armed, which greatly enhances the authority of the Faith of the Seven's political power (at least, for the corrupt leadership, the poor septas in the various castles will probably still get raped and murdered in war). They wouldn't do anything that would reduce their authority and renouncing trials by combat removes their power to act as judiciaries.

It was said that Tyrion's reluctance to bed Sansa could annul his marriage. Similarly, the Faith would have clauses for officially renouncing the outcomes of trials they know generated the incorrect result. This would hardly be the first time an obviously guilty party was absolved in a trial by combat.

Perhaps they could declare that Oberyn used a poisoned spear to ensure that he won even if he lost, and therefore the Gods decreed he should lose for dishonouring the rules of a fair trial. On that basis, the trial wasn't legitimate and Tyrion hasn't really been charged yet. Or, since Gregor died too, they might declare that the Gods saw fit to pass his sentence and also curse the man who cheated trying to win a fight that was meant to be "holy" and curse the man for his earlier monstrous crimes of killing children.

Eh? Isn't the leadership of the Seven, ie the High Sparrow, finally not corrupt?