Tyrion & Shae

[Jory Cassel]

(...) My point was that SHE does not want to go, and that when he brings her leaving up, she doesn't agree, and remind him she will need money, she talks him out of.

I am aware, and I adressed that, Tyrion's knowledge of the threats Tywin and Cersei posed to her was more extensive than hers, thus it is up to him to either terminate the employment contract or adequately convey information about said dangers, neither of which he did.

On this thread the constant refrain has been that 'poor Shae' wasn't even paid for her sex work, which isn't true. She WAS paid. She was paid extremely well, much better paid that she should have expected. It was only due to her failure to act with common sense, that part of her payment was taken out of her hands so she couldn't hurt herself with it and held for her. Much more akin to someone's money being put in trust because they're an addict than the OMG not paid!!!! poor Shae, she only testified against him to get her rightful payment BS. Your payment being held in trust for you until it's safe for you to have it isn't the same as 'not being paid' and also, to restate, this only happened because she wouldn't listen to Tyrion.

The difference between not being paid and having one's pay taken away with nothing but diffuse promises to get it back seems to be completely arbitrary. Someone unable to deal with money due to a psychopathological condition is a different case, and without being versed on that particular subject, I'm fairly certain that supposed naiveté does not suffice to bereave someone of his or her autonomy regarding finances - supposed because we really have now idea whether she'd endanger herself when getting her pay back or whether she would, say, partly pawn it and get on the next ship to Oldtown.

[mambru]

He doesn't want her to go, obviously, but that wasn't my point. My point was that SHE does not want to go, and that when he brings her leaving up, she doesn't agree, and remind him she will need money, she talks him out of.

Uh, which one is supposed to be the genius here? Which one is supposed to know in great detail the actual real dangers facing the whore of Tyrion Lannister? Which one of them FAILED to explain in any detail what those dangers were, and HOW he could make the dangers facing a lone whore leaving the Red Keep into KL where she has no friends or allies seem LESS dangerous in comparison?

I mean, Tyrion is supposed to be brilliant. He supposedly WANTS Shae to leave. He supposedly is TRYING to convince her to go. And yet somehow it never occurs to him to tell her the one thing a prostitute who needs money and protection to survive and prosper might listen to : "You need to go. I'll give you all your jewels and extra money and maybe a deed for property far away and some trustworthy sellswords to make sure you get there SAFELY if you go NOW." Why did this blindingly obvious course not occur to him? Why did he just say, "You've got to go, things are too dangerous for you here," without making the least effort to reassure Shae that when she left she would be assured prosperity AND safety instead of possibly being dropped off empty-handed somewhere, or robbed with her throat cut?

IMO, he didn't take the obvious course of trying to BRIBE her to leave because (even though he wasn't entirely conscious of it) he WANTED her to do exactly what she did - plead that she WANTED to stay with her darling giant of Lannister. BRIBING her to leave would remind him that his fantasy that she really cared about him was exactly that - a fantasy. It would remind him that their relationship was only a business transaction. So he didn't bribe her. And with a prostitute's instinct for telling the client what he wants to hear without being specifically ordered to do so, Shae indulged his wish.

After all, if she just dropped the pretense that she gave a crap about him and flat-out demanded her payment for services rendered before leaving - that would hurt Tyrion's precious feelings. Tyrion has a temper, Shae knows it, and he can be damned petty when insulted. If she offends and infuriates him by disdaining his "love" too openly, he might just decide to pay his debt to her by tossing her a bag of gold and having her tossed out on the street to take her chances with the KL thieves and cutthroats, and consider he owes her no more than that.

[Dany Girl]

On this thread the constant refrain has been that 'poor Shae' wasn't even paid for her sex work, which isn't true. She WAS paid. She was paid extremely well, much better paid that she should have expected. It was only due to her failure to act with common sense, that part of her payment was taken out of her hands so she couldn't hurt herself with it and held for her. Much more akin to someone's money being put in trust because they're an addict than the OMG not paid!!!! poor Shae, she only testified against him to get her rightful payment BS. Your payment being held in trust for you until it's safe for you to have it isn't the same as 'not being paid' and also, to restate, this only happened because she wouldn't listen to Tyrion.

this supposed failure at common sense/ naiveté is something of your concoction. There's nothing in the text outside her asking to go to the wedding that suggests she's lacks common sense. Tyrion does not take away her jewels because she's naive. She was in a mansion with a full regiment of guards, she was not allowed to go wandering around KL, so how was she irresponsible with her payments? Tyrion took them away because he decided to move her to the castle. It was an unnecessary move in reality since she's in more danger under Cersei/Tywin's noses than across town. So Tyrion took away her stuff and forced her into a menial labor job for his own gain of having her closer.

Not to mention that taking away her freaking money for her own well being is a ridiculous idea. She's a big girl, been on her own for quite some time, I'm sure she knows what's up. She's doesn't need some man telling her what to do with her own money.

And once again, there is no evidence that she was paid in any way other than the silks and jewels. So he revoked all payments, like a douche.

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

Please if you want to insist that Tyrion was paying her and or would have eventually paid her and she knew it. Quote the evidence.

Everything else I would have said has been said over night. I've pointed out that if you re read their interactions without taking on board Tyrions thoughts and feelings you might gain a different view of Shae. She never once says I love you, she reminds him she is a whore, she tells him she does not want to go to the keep, he gets violent, she immediately drops into the role of small folk, I'm sorry M'lord I didn't mean to be impudent.

Tyrion is almost killed at the battle and whilst shea thinks he may die she asks Varys for the things, ask yourself WHY? is it because she wants to prance around Lollys chambers in them, or is it because she wants to escape KL? She shags Tyrion and asks for them before his cock is limp. He changes the subject, he suggests she leaves she talks him out of it, she asks to go to the feast and suggests that in order to go he gives her the gowns and jewels. is she really wanting to go to the feast or is she wanting another excuse to get them back? would she go to the feast or run if he gave them to her, if she went to the feast would she be searching for a new patron?

As you can see we/I have presented the material from the text and shown how it could be interpreted differently and how that sheds a new light on Shae's actions. No one is making excuses for lying on the stand. People are saying they can understand why she did it. I understand why Tyrion killed her.

But if you want to dispute the way I have interpreted her intentions, then please at least present an alternative view of the text, as opposed to just saying that isn't right.

To have an argument that holds water you need to present evidence. Where is your evidence that Shae knew Tyrion would never harm her, Where is your evidence that Shae knew Tyrion would definitely one day return her jewels and pay her the rest of what he owed.?

As for she should have been grateful for the small period of time she got to live like a lady as an argument against her character, please stop and think about what that implies.

phrases such as "She's no better than she ought to be" & "Don't try to rise above your station" come to mind. In short it smacks of Classism.

[Mikkel]

this supposed failure at common sense/ naiveté is something of your concoction. There's nothing in the text outside her asking to go to the wedding that suggests she's lacks common sense. Tyrion does not take away her jewels because she's naive. She was in a mansion with a full regiment of guards, she was not allowed to go wandering around KL, so how was she irresponsible with her payments? Tyrion took them away because he decided to move her to the castle. It was an unnecessary move in reality since she's in more danger under Cersei/Tywin's noses than across town. So Tyrion took away her stuff and forced her into a menial labor job for his own gain of having her closer.

Not to mention that taking away her freaking money for her own well being is a ridiculous idea. She's a big girl, been on her own for quite some time, I'm sure she knows what's up. She's doesn't need some man telling her what to do with her own money.

And once again, there is no evidence that she was paid in any way other than the silks and jewels. So he revoked all payments, like a douche.

Sooo... if we discount the evidence of Shae lacking the sense not to parade around in jewels and gowns, there's no evidence of Shae lacking the common sense? Okay. Sure.

Tyrion moves her to the castle because the odds of him being discovered (conspicuous and recognizable that he is) is putting both of them in danger, it's not just for his own gain, though I'm sure there was some of that in there.

You kinda have to make up your own mind though - either Shae is "a big girl who's been on her own for quite some time" and thus, she's responsible for her actions (all of them!) or she isn't, and it's all Tyrion's fault that she doesn't see the reality of the situation, up to and including why he "takes" her jewels and silk dresses away. But if you go with this latter interpretation, then you'd have to agree Tyrion is right to take away her things, because Shae is about to get herself killed. "She doesn't need some man telling her what to do", fair enough, but can we not turn Shae into a feminist victim now, please?

Shae the cutthroat whore who relentlessly pursues a better future at least has agency and will, unlike the "poor Shae" character some people want to make her out to be. I don't like either of them much, but at least one is interesting, the other is just boring - and I absolutely think the actual character in the books is much more the first than the second.

And if we can agree she is responsible for her actions, and we can agree her actions are reprehensible, can we then agree that Shae is a pretty terrible human being? Probably not, but here's to hoping!

[mormont]

I didn't say it would muddy the verdict (as I said, it was a foregone conclusion) I said it would muddy the legitimacy of that verdict.

The distinction is dubious, and in any case irrelevant - it's equally far-fetched to suggest that any truthful testimony Shae could have given would have muddied the legitimacy of the verdict. She knew nothing that could possibly do that, either.

I really don't buy the "she didn't know he was innocent" argument though. She knew the vast majority of her testimony was abject lies, and she has no actual proof of Tyrion's guilt to give - because there isn't any.

There's quite a bit, actually. Some of it is lies told by people other than Shae, some of it is the truth (albeit sometimes spun a bit). Tyrion had motive, means, and opportunity: that goes a long way. There probably wouldn't be enough evidence to convict in a modern-day court, but this is not a modern-day court.

I have no idea why people would suggest that Shae would not have thought Tyrion guilty. If I didn't know he was innocent by virtue of being a reader - and therefore not only being inside Tyrion's head but being privy to Littlefinger helpfully explaining exactly how he did it - I'd think he was guilty.

Tyrion was forced to choose trial by combat, because the actual trial was a sham. A fair trial would have acquitted him of course

'Of course'? On what grounds?

I think you're being swayed by your knowledge that Tyrion is innocent. As I say, to anyone in Westeros other than Littlefinger, he looks guilty as hell, and there is no evidence that could acquit him. That's the entire point of LF's plot, after all.

- and yeah, nobody said her testimony swung the vote, but it's still disgusting, and I reiterate: if it had so little value, why did Cersei and Tywin bother bringing Shae into the equation at all? My guess is because all the false evidence together added up to enough dirt that the travesty of a trial could retain a semblance of justice, and Shae's testimony was a part of that.

No need to guess. We know. The reason Cersei (not Tywin, he was one of the judges) brought Shae as a witness was to publicly humiliate her hated brother. That was the value of the testimony to her. It has no effect on the verdict, the legitimacy of the verdict, etc.

Oh yeah, and sentencing Tyrion to death for a couple of dresses is something a person who lacks any moral fiber would do. Don't know how this point seems to be lost on people.

Possibly because that is not what happened? I've said it before and I'll say it again. Shae's testimony does not 'sentence Tyrion to death'.

And again, Tyrion didn't revoke her swag out of malice, he did it for her protection.

Wasn't it nice of Tyrion to take all the decisions to protect the poor silly girl from her own stupidity? Taking those nasty jewels away so she doesn't hurt herself!

Here's a thought: what if Tyrion had simply told her not to wear the things, but left them with her? But that wouldn't fit the relationship. Tyrion's relationship with Shae is very unhealthy: right from the start, it's about control and jealousy. He justifies it all with the trappings of 'love' and 'for her own good', but it's striking how often 'her own good' seems to involve Shae being completely dependent on Tyrion - for money, for attention, for safety, for everything.

[SeanF]

Shae is a highly unsympathetic character. At one point, she's described as driving Lollys "like a beast". I don't doubt she enjoyed twisting the knife in Tyrion at his trial.

But, she had been Sansa's maid. That placed her under suspicion. Realistically, refusing to testify, or refusing to say what Cersei told her to say, was never an option. Tyrion acknowledged this, in this thoughts, but still murdered her anyway.

[Mad Monkey]

Your payment being held in trust for you until it's safe for you to have it isn't the same as 'not being paid'

It is. Shae would never be safe until she was out of KL and far from Tywin and Cersei, but Tyrion failed to plan seriously to remove her. In essence, if they hadn't gotten caught I see no reason to think that Tyrion wouldn't have kept Shae around and waffled on his plans for her indefinitely, which means that Shae's pay was withheld indefinitely. The danger to Shae was basically a permanent one -- there would never be a time when Shae and Tyrion could be together in the city and Tyrion could let Shae have her nice things. To use a modern example, it's like if your boss decided to withhold your paychecks until the violent crime rate in your country reaches 0% -- for most places, that's basically the same thing as saying, "I'm not going to pay you".

Tyrion had his reasons for thinking this was necessary but I'm not sure why any of these reasons should make Shae feel better for not having any of her nice things. If Tyrion tried this with Bronn or anyone else they would be pissed even if he had a great reason, and Shae isn't really that different.

[Mikkel]

There's quite a bit, actually. Some of it is lies told by people other than Shae, some of it is the truth (albeit sometimes spun a bit). Tyrion had motive, means, and opportunity: that goes a long way. There probably wouldn't be enough evidence to convict in a modern-day court, but this is not a modern-day court.

I have no idea why people would suggest that Shae would not have thought Tyrion guilty. If I didn't know he was innocent by virtue of being a reader - and therefore not only being inside Tyrion's head but being privy to Littlefinger helpfully explaining exactly how he did it - I'd think he was guilty.

'Of course'? On what grounds?

There's no proof of Tyrion's guilt to give, because he's not bloody guilty. As such, any evidence can at the very most suggest he could have done it, maybe even would have wanted to. But since he didn't do it, there can be no truthful proof that he did. Circumstantial evidence is all it can ever amount to, and even then almost all the circumstantial evidence she has to give is lies.

And I really can't see how someone believing another person to be guilty in any way excuses making up lies at trial. I don't care how much of an asshole Tyrion is (especially after these events, but he's no Prince Charming prior to them either). He's still innocent of Joffrey's murder. So what if Shae believed him guilty, she's obviously wrong, and witnesses telling lies in a trial is a crime (in our world) for a reason.

Is this argument that Shae might have believed Tyrion guilty and she wanted justice for Joffrey really supposed to be a point in Shae's favor? Because that seems respectively both irrelevant and unlikely.

And a fair trial would "of course" have acquitted Tyrion because he's innocent, and there's no actual proof he did it ('cause he didn't), only lies. Of course I'm well aware a fair trial wasn't an option, Shae's testimony included or not.

[BlackStark]

There's no proof of Tyrion's guilt to give, because he's not bloody guilty. As such, any evidence can at the very most suggest he could have done it, maybe even would have wanted to. But since he didn't do it, there can be no truthful proof that he did. Circumstantial evidence is all it can ever amount to, and even then almost all the circumstantial evidence she has to give is lies.

And I really can't see how someone believing another person to be guilty in any way excuses making up lies at trial. I don't care how much of an asshole Tyrion is (especially after these events, but he's no Prince Charming prior to them either). He's still innocent of Joffrey's murder. So what if Shae believed him guilty, she's obviously wrong, and witnesses telling lies in a trial is a crime (in our world) for a reason.

Is this argument that Shae might have believed Tyrion guilty and she wanted justice for Joffrey really supposed to be a point in Shae's favor? Because that seems respectively both irrelevant and unlikely.

And a fair trial would "of course" have acquitted Tyrion because he's innocent, and there's no actual proof he did it ('cause he didn't), only lies. Of course I'm well aware a fair trial wasn't an option, Shae's testimony included or not.

Actually I don't think a fair trial would have acquitted Tyrion because Shae's testimony aside a lot of the evidence points to him. The animus between Tyrion and Joffery was well known and threats had been hurled between the two, Tyrion has a history of striking out against individuals who have slighted him, Tyrion has in the past used poisons against Cersei, and Tyrion strangely decided to upset the instrument of Joffrey's death (turning over the poisoned wine chalice). Remember guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is not the standard here. If you didn't have access to Tyrion's thoughts, it would be very reasonable to believe he murdered Joffery.

[Mikkel]

Actually I don't think a fair trial would have acquitted Tyrion because Shae's testimony aside a lot of the evidence points to him. The animus between Tyrion and Joffery was well known and threats had been hurled between the two, Tyrion has a history of striking out against individuals who have slighted him, Tyrion has in the past used poisons against Cersei, and Tyrion strangely decided to upset the instrument of Joffrey's death (turning over the poisoned wine chalice). Remember guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is not the standard here. If you didn't have access to Tyrion's thoughts, it would be very reasonable to believe he murdered Joffery.

I was talking about an actual fair trial (rare though they are), not what passes for a fair trial in Westeros. So the standard I expect is actually guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but like I said previously, that was unlikely to happen whether Shae testified or not. The eventual effect on the trial doesn't really detract from the vileness of her act however, only from the consequences of it.

[Kiporman]

Oh, I am so going to regret this. Knowing some of the people on this forum as good as I do, I’m going to be called ridiculous, disrespectful, and probably become the closest man to the devil in the eyes of some here for having a different opinion, but, let’s go.

DID SHAE DESERVE TO DIE?

Yes.

DID SHAE DESERVE TO DIE AT TYRION’S HANDS?

Yes.

DID SHAE DESERVE TO DIE IN THAT UGLY, DISGUTING IMP’S HANDS, OF THAT MISERABLE EXCUSE FOR A HUMAN BEING THAT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN BORN?

I’m not sure I would describe him that way, but, yeah. She did.

FUCK YOU!

Nah, don’t wanna. See ya.

WHY DID SHE DESERVE TO DIE?

Oh. Wait. You’re actually trying to listen to me instead of just turning around and starting to wish my death? Amazing! I’m really starting to like you right now.

Well, to summarize, Shae deserved to die for three reasons.

THE FIRST: Being a horrible human being (Oh yeah, she may have been raped. Sad. Doesn’t excuse anything. Actually, it probably makes it worse. Remember her reaction to Lollys – a weak-minded simpleton who was raped by half a hundred men? Yeah, she was not nice. And, pardon me, but I’m not going to say that a horrible person doesn’t deserve to die or be punished in some way, especially when they are so willing to screw people over in their own interest. That would, in my opinion, just be false moralism on my part).

THE SECOND: Being a traitor (Oh, Cersei may have coerced her to testify, I don’t really doubt that. Still, it is obvious that she was enjoying her little drama in the judgment, as was it obvious that she was getting something out of it and that she wanted it. And please, don’t come and say that this was for her to get her payment like this justifies everything. If my boss doesn’t pay me, then it’s ok for me to kill him or aid his death so that I may get the pay?)

THE THIRTH: Being a killer (Yeah. Some may not have noticed, but she aided in what she believed was the death of Tyrion. She knew he was going to die, she knew she was going to hurt him. She just didn’t care. Or better; she probably did care, for the way she acted told me she was having the time of her life with getting him killed. What a poor person, right?)

Being a prostitute, being poor, suffering from sexual abuse in the past or present… nothing excuse that things. Even Cersei displays more positive traits than her, and when I’m saying that Cersei looks good compared to someone, you may be sure that this someone is damn nasty! She had no compassion, no loyalty, not even respect for other people. She lied, manipulated, betrayed and tried to kill people for her a bit of gold, all with a smile on her face. She was a sociopath, one that most probably wouldn’t hesitate to fuck (in all senses of the word) anyone if that was giving her more cash. And then you say to me that she is the poor victim when the person she betrayed and tried to kill frees himself and kill’s her, that she didn’t deserve this? Are you freakin’ kidding me?

BUT SHAE WAS ABUSED BY TYRION!

I read about this. I’m going to answer the most commonly points in this:

TYRION DIDN’T PAY HER: He did. He gave her jewelry, a mansion in the capital and guards to protect and watch over her. He took it away, yes… when things began to get really dangerous for both him and her and when Shae herself decided that a newly arrived women who was not a noble could go around with obvious displays of wealth on herself, and no one would suspect that she is related to the newly arrived Imp who is said to be found of prostitutes. She must have know what Tywin does to prostitutes, and even if she didn’t, Tyrion warned her multiple times of both Tywin and Cersei. She obviously thought it sucked, yeah – but Tyrion did warn her before and he did say that he was going to give them back to her when it was safe.

TYRION DIDN’T LET HER GO / KEEP HER PRISONER: He actually did tell her he wished to send her away in the begging of ASOS at least, I remember that clearly. I also remember that she refused and tried to change the subject. Also, I’m mostly sure that in the latter parts of ACOK he also asks her if she wishes to go, and the answer is the same: “no”. Sure, some could say “but Tyrion is the genius dwarf of house lannister. He could send her away anyway”. Well, yeah, but there’s two points to consider. One – he was thinking with his cock and heart, not his head. Two – isn’t that abusive behavior? I’m pretty sure it is. Why the f*ck would you criticize one behavior that you see as abusive and then suggest another abusive behavior as a solution?

TYRION HIT HER: One time, after he was mocked, and immediately apologize. In all my re-reads, this was the only time I saw him hitting her or something like. And before you ask, yes, she deserved it. If you mock someone personal issues, you can hardly hold it against them when they hit you for it, especially if right afterwards this person apologize. The scene was something this:

SHAE: Oh, is the little boy afraid of his big bad daddy who made him rape his wife when little?

TYRION: *hits her*

SHAE: *glares*

TYRION: I apologize. That was Ill-done, on both of our parts.

Not this:

SHAE: Hello Tyrion.

TYRION: DON’T SPEAK UP TO ME, BITCH! *hits her*

SHAE: *glares*

TYRION: Stop your glaring or I’ll hit you so hard your eyes will come out the back of your head, bitch!

I think the difference is kind of obvious.

SO, YOU’RE SAYING YOU’RE ON TYRION’S SIDE?

Yeah. He is no angel and he does quite a bit of fucked up shit, both in the end and the beginning. However, I’m not going to hold killing a blackmailer or a betrayer who tried to have him killed against him. They deserved this, in my opinion. If you want to hate Tyrion, hate him for things that were genuinely evil or malicious. Hate him for the woman in Pentos, hate him for the slave in Volantene territory, hate him for declaring that he will rape and kill his sister, hate him for opposing the Starks, or whatever. You won’t see me defending him on those threads. Just don’t come around trying to tell me that he is a horrible person for killing someone who tried to kill him, for this, especially in this series, is like saying that bears are horrible for shitting in the woods.

And by the way, just to point out; I find it amusing that most people feel more sorry about Shae’s deal than Tywin. That is all.

[Jory Cassel]

THE FIRST: Being a horrible human being (Oh yeah, she may have been raped. Sad. Doesn’t excuse anything. Actually, it probably makes it worse. Remember her reaction to Lollys – a weak-minded simpleton who was raped by half a hundred men? Yeah, she was not nice. And, pardon me, but I’m not going to say that a horrible person doesn’t deserve to die or be punished in some way, especially when they are so willing to screw people over in their own interest. That would, in my opinion, just be false moralism on my part).

THE SECOND: Being a traitor (Oh, Cersei may have coerced her to testify, I don’t really doubt that. Still, it is obvious that she was enjoying her little drama in the judgment, as was it obvious that she was getting something out of it and that she wanted it. And please, don’t come and say that this was for her to get her payment like this justifies everything. If my boss doesn’t pay me, then it’s ok for me to kill him or aid his death so that I may get the pay?)

THE THIRTH: Being a killer (Yeah. Some may not have noticed, but she aided in what she believed was the death of Tyrion. She knew he was going to die, she knew she was going to hurt him. She just didn’t care. Or better; she probably did care, for the way she acted told me she was having the time of her life with getting him killed. What a poor person, right?)

Seeing how these three do not only equally apply to Tyrion, but he exceeds in all three cases, I take it you think he is deserving of death as well?

[WeddinGuest]

TYRION HIT HER: One time, after he was mocked, and immediately apologize. In all my re-reads, this was the only time I saw him hitting her or something like. And before you ask, yes, she deserved it. If you mock someone personal issues, you can hardly hold it against them when they hit you for it, especially if right afterwards this person apologize. The scene was something this:

SHAE: Oh, is the little boy afraid of his big bad daddy who made him rape his wife when little?

TYRION: *hits her*

SHAE: *glares*

TYRION: I apologize. That was Ill-done, on both of our parts.

Not this:

SHAE: Hello Tyrion.

TYRION: DON’T SPEAK UP TO ME, BITCH! *hits her*

SHAE: *glares*

TYRION: Stop your glaring or I’ll hit you so hard your eyes will come out the back of your head, bitch!

I won't even waste my time rebutting anything else, but: So you REALLY think that if someone mocks you, you have the right to hit them? Really? Or are you just giving Tyrion a pass? Slow down and really think about what would happen if everyone reacted to being "mocked" with physical violence. The world would be an even nastier place than it is now.

Also, MANY abusers apologize for their actions afterwards. It doesn't make it any less abuse.

[Kiporman]

Kiporman, on 20 Mar 2014 - 09:51 AM, said:

Seeing how these three do not only equally apply to Tyrion, but he exceeds in all three cases, I take it you think he is deserving of death as well?

Yo, yes. I mean, you did read the last part of my post, right? I do not wish for him to die yet - partly because I find him interesting, partly because I think he really isn't THAT bad YET - but he does deserve to die. As amazingly interesting I find him to be, I'll not complain if someone kills him. In fact, I think he will eventually till the end of this story, but this is subject to another topic, I guess.

I won't even waste my time rebutting anything else, but: So you REALLY think that if someone mocks you, you have the right to hit them? Really? Or are you just giving Tyrion a pass? Slow down and really think about what would happen if everyone reacted to being "mocked" with physical violence. The world would be an even nastier place than it is now.

Also, MANY abusers apologize for their actions afterwards. It doesn't make it any less abuse.

Yes, I do think that if someone mocks you, you have a right to hit that person. You certainly feel the impulse to do so, and I won't really hold it against you if you do that.

And besides, she is not simply mocking him. She is mocking his personal issues. This is literally very similar to, say, I mock a woman that was raped, asking if now she is going to dress like a nun or something. Would you hold it against that woman if she hit me for it?

[WeddinGuest]

Yes, I do think that if someone mocks you, you have a right to hit that person. You certainly feel the impulse to do so, and I won't really hold it against you if you do that.

And besides, she is not simply mocking him. She is mocking his personal issues. This is literally very similar to, say, I mock a woman that was raped, asking if now she is going to dress like a nun or something. Would you hold it against that woman if she hit me for it?

Yes, I would. No double standards here. (BTW, I don't approve of Robert hitting Cersei either, and Shae isn't even one-tenth as nasty as Cersei.) A society in which physical violence is considered an appropriate response to someone using words to mock someone, isn't a place I'd want to live in. Feeling an impulse to do it is one thing, acting on it is quite another.

Also, while this isn't you, I am very disturbed by how many people posting in this topic have stated that they would also have wanted to kill Shae if they were in Tyrion's shoes.

[A wilding]

And it was not the best idea of Shae to go to Cersei after Tyrion' s arrest and to demand her jewels. Actually Shae was delusional if she thought she might get away with that. She could have been aware of the danger she now is in as the kingslayer's whore. And she should have run. This would have spared her the cell.

For the record Shae did not go to Cersei after Tyrion's arrest. Cerei had Shae arrested as a routine measure shortly after the PW because she was Sansa's maid.

Shae went to Cersei after Tyrion's trial to ask for the carrot Cersei had offered for testifying.

And even so, why then Shae humiliate Tyrion that much? I doubt Cercei went to her and gave her a script. She could have stretched the truth a lot; Tyrion did hate Joffrey and all that jazz. But unraveling Tyrion's secrets in public when she perfectly knows he has lots of issues with them? That's a low blow no matter what. Combined to what Shae says of Lollys, it doesn't paint a very good picture of her, even if again she didn't deserve to be murdered.

The key humiliation was the "Giant of Lannister", the rest of the testimony was just lies. And that was notably not in Shae's original script, she came out with it only under cross questioning by the Red Viper when she need to add colour to make her story stand up.

[mormont]

There's no proof of Tyrion's guilt to give, because he's not bloody guilty.

I think you're using the word 'proof' in an unnecessarily limited sense, but okay. There's 'evidence to suggest he could have done it'. Quite a lot. Certainly enough to convince anyone who didn't have the privileged knowledge available only to the reader and to a handful of others in Westeros. Certainly enough to convict at a trial in Westeros. Certainly enough that Shae's evidence made no difference to the outcome of the trial, or the validity of the verdict or the credibility of the verdict or any other form of words you want to use.

By all means condemn Shae for giving false testimony, but don't claim that testimony was actually critical: it wasn't.

And I really can't see how someone believing another person to be guilty in any way excuses making up lies at trial.

Again, I've never said it does. (Not least because, as I keep pointing out, we don't know what Shae thought and we don't know if she would even have cared.)

I've pointed out that I believe that more people would be willing to lie about someone they thought was guilty and thought was going down anyway, than to lie where they thought the evidence was crucial and the accused was innocent. So the degree of wrongness, if we measure it by 'how many people would do this?' (a handy rule of thumb), may be less. But that doesn't mean it wasn't wrong.

My point was, and is, that our reaction to Shae's false testimony is distorted by the inescapable fact that we know Tyrion is innocent. And your posts reflect that: both the original one to which I was reacting, and this one.

I don't care how much of an asshole Tyrion is (especially after these events, but he's no Prince Charming prior to them either). He's still innocent of Joffrey's murder. So what if Shae believed him guilty, she's obviously wrong, and witnesses telling lies in a trial is a crime (in our world) for a reason.

See?

'She's obviously wrong' - well, no, she isn't. It's obvious to us, the reader. It's anything but obvious to pretty much anyone in Westeros, with the exception of Littlefinger and those he has told. It's not obvious to Tywin. It's not obvious to Kevan. It's not obvious to Jaime. And these are Tyrion's closest family!

Is this argument that Shae might have believed Tyrion guilty and she wanted justice for Joffrey really supposed to be a point in Shae's favor?

Who made that argument? Not me. I've repeatedly said we don't know what Shae believed and I've never said anything remotely like the bolded point. I've stated my argument clearly above, and equally clearly before.

And a fair trial would "of course" have acquitted Tyrion because he's innocent

If we define a 'fair trial' as one that doesn't convict an innocent man, yes: but that's tautological.

[DaeronDrumm]

But, she had been Sansa's maid. That placed her under suspicion. Realistically, refusing to testify, or refusing to say what Cersei told her to say, was never an option. Tyrion acknowledged this, in this thoughts, but still murdered her anyway.

She went above and beyond just framing Tyrion for that murder, though: She took the time to personally and deeply humiliate him before everyone, a wholly gratuitous dick move. And then, when she encounters Tyrion, she says it again!!! The very same line she'd used a few hours or days prior in order to gratuitously degrade Tyrion while framing him for a capital murder. I honestly don't know what possessed her to go ahead an say that- any person with half the wits of a particularly dumb duck ought to have assumed that'd immediately slam all the Imp's berserk buttons pretty damn hard.

Taunting somebody you just framed for capital murder with the same line you used to humiliate him at trial? Not cool. I'd wager even many people less evil than Tyrion would have gotten quite violent.

[Jory Cassel]

Yo, yes. I mean, you did read the last part of my post, right?

Yes, but it did not adress my point in any way.

I do not wish for him to die yet - partly because I find him interesting, partly because I think he really isn't THAT bad YET - but he does deserve to die. As amazingly interesting I find him to be, I'll not complain if someone kills him. In fact, I think he will eventually till the end of this story, but this is subject to another topic, I guess.

So you do acknowledge that, by your own standards, Tyrion is indefinitely more deserving of death than Shae? But that should not happen yet because.. you consider him more interesting? Just looking for some consistency here.