Beric v. Lady Stoneheart?

[OldGimletEye]

So let me ask you this - how much understanding do you think Martin has about that? Do you really think Martin considered even 1/10th of all the stuff you wrote in that epic post when he wrote the AGOT chapter where Sandor murders Mycah?

Does anything about that scene make the killing look like a legal execution? Legal executions are committed by executioners publicly. Sandor isn't an executioner. Why didn't he take Mycah to Ilyn Payne if he gave a damn about legality and this was supposed to be a legal execution?

Even if the murder of Mycah was technically legal (extremely unlikely IMO), so what? It is still morally wrong. And as Minsc said, Beric has already hanged hundreds of people who have committed acts which were technically legal - Tywin's dogs were following his orders to torture and murder people after all.

Martin may know a little or a lot. It's possible that he may know some of it because he does seem to have an interest in history and even minored in it in college.

I do not know why you seem to think that the legality of the execution on Mycah turns upon Ser Illyn Payne doing the act. The issue here is whether Sandor lawfully followed an order. Ser Illyn Payne's lack of involvement doesn't mean that Sandor illegally followed an order.

Certainly just because something is legal doesn't necessarily mean it's moral. However, most people learn their ethical behavior from societal norms. Typically, the strongest expression of a societal norm is the law. When the law backs a normative standards of conduct, it's much more reasonable to expect people to follow those normative standards. On the other hand, when the law contradicts a normative standard of conduct, people are more likely to break that normative standard. This is one reason why ex post facto laws are frowned upon. And by the way, interestingly enough, the issue of ex post facto laws does come up in the books. So Martin must be aware of that issue. Generally, you don't punish people for their bad acts, but for the laws they broke.

Minsc's point fails to consider that even within Westeros a distinction may be made between orders that are legal and those that are illegal. For example, if Tywin Lannister orders one of his soldiers to murder an unarmed civilian, who has not been accused of a crime, then such an order would be illegal. However, if Tywin Lannister orders one of his soldiers to execute someone accused of a crime, then such an order may very well be legal, if the soldier plausibly believes that the person committed a crime.

[OldGimletEye]

Your premise is flawed because you are assuming Sandor was given an order by someone with that authority. He wasn't. As for Beric, he also doesn't have the authority to just order an execution which is why he is to be judged by the gods. This is according to Westeros law - the same law that Cat and Lysa use to judge Tyrion since they, too, do not have the authority to just order an execution. Neither did Cersei, btw. The gods allow the Hound to win so he is judged innocent. That is what happened in the books, not some excused loophole for following orders. Finally, Sandor, himself, recognizes that he did the wrong thing with regards to Mycah. I don't know how Martin can be any clearer about this situation. Sandor is not innocent of the charge of murdering the boy, who was innocent of the charge levied against him.

Nope. My premise was whether Sandor could have plausibly believed that Cersei had that authority, not necessarily whether she had it in fact. Also, Sandor admitted to killing Mycah. Tyrion never admitted to doing anything to Bran. If Sandor had just said, "Yeah, I killed Mycah" without any further explanation would he have been given a trial?

[OldGimletEye]

It was, by no law of Westeros did Joffrey or Sandor's bore the right to kill the boy, worse they could do was caught his hand off.

The issue is whether Sandor could have believed that Cersei had the authority to order the execution.

[NorthGirl]

Beric

[Ser Pounce FTW]

Nope. My premise was whether Sandor could have plausibly believed that Cersei had that authority, not necessarily whether she had it in fact. Also, Sandor admitted to killing Mycah. Tyrion never admitted to doing anything to Bran. If Sandor had just said, "Yeah, I killed Mycah" without any further explanation would he have been given a trial?

Sandor had been serving the royal family for years. He knew there was no way for Cerse to authorize an execution. And yes, Sandor was judged to deserve a trial.

[OldGimletEye]

Sandor had been serving the royal family for years. He knew there was no way for Cerse to authorize an execution. And yes, Sandor was judged to deserve a trial.

But, how would Sandor know that Cersei hadn't gotten such authorization from Robert or, at least, Robert had not acquiesced to her demands? Certainly, he would have known that Robert had a great deal of trouble standing up to Cersei's demands. And if Sandor had simply admitted to killing Mycah, without qualification or explanation, would he really have gotten a trial? Is that how it works in Westeros?

[Ser Pounce FTW]

But, how would Sandor know that Cersei hadn't gotten such authorization from Robert or, at least, Robert had not acquiesced to her demands? Certainly, he would have known that Robert had a great deal of trouble standing up to Cersei's demands. And if Sandor had simply admitted to killing Mycah, without qualification or explanation, would he really have gotten a trial? Is that how it works in Westeros?

Because the King wasn't present. I'm positive he knew the order came from Cersei and not Robert. Precedence has shown that it's not Robert's style. However, I recognize that it put Sandor in a difficult position since angering Cersei could have serious, if not deadly, consequences. So it was easier to do as she asked but he knew the order came from her not Robert.

[UtherSnow]

It's a shift in direction, and to pander to someone's quest for vengeance. How can you compare leadership when the motive has changed?

If vengeance is LSH's sole purpose, will she avenge her sister? She must kill LF because he's wronged her family.

Also, how would she view Sansa in LF's presence when news reaches her about Lysa? Double reason to go after LF, or else she's operating with double standards.

Instead of hanging, would she see if that infamous scar needs additional work done to it. Curious? Has anyone seen this scar? (I mean recently.)

[OldGimletEye]

Because the King wasn't present. I'm positive he knew the order came from Cersei and not Robert. Precedence has shown that it's not Robert's style. However, I recognize that it put Sandor in a difficult position since angering Cersei could have serious, if not deadly, consequences. So it was easier to do as she asked but he knew the order came from her not Robert.

Well, I think Sandor probably would have known that the idea originated from Cersei. The question, here, I think is whether Robert would have acquiesced to Cersei's demands. Robert was a moral coward that had trouble standing up to Cersei. Sandor would have known that most likely. I mean before the hearing at the Darry Castle, Robert had a hell of a time saying no to Cersei's demand that Arya be physically punished. All he could do was to get drunk rather than just saying no. And Arya was a highborn girl that happened to be the daughter of his best friend.

Certainly we can ask two sets of related questions here. The first is would be what would have been the best ethical thing for Sandor to do? A reasonable answer could be that Sandor should have verified the order with Robert before proceeding, even if such an action by Sandor would have got him in serious hot water with Cersei.

The second question is what did the law in Westeros require of Sandor? It would appear from Beric's reaction that the answer would be "not much". Evidently, Sandor was entitled to rely on Cersei's representations, without having some legal duty to go on an extensive fact finding mission to verify the legality of Cersei's order.

[Wmarshal]

The issue is whether Sandor could have believed that Cersei had the authority to order the execution.

Save in no case she did, Robert did as he is the lord and master of law of the land.

[OldGimletEye]

Save in no case she did, Robert did as he is the lord and master of law of the land.

And yet, lords empowered to judge criminal cases, delegate that authority all the time in Westeros. Like Randyll Tarly administering cases in Maiden Pool outside his ancestral lands. And like Ned Stark delegating authority to Catelyn before he leaves for KL. Jaime passing judgement upon a serial rapist, presumably upon the authority of King Tommen Baratheon. Ned Stark passing judgement upon Gregor Clegane upon the authority of Robert Baratheon.

[TrueOrFalse]

Eh, the BWB at best is just a group of vigilantes with dubious morals. At worst they're every bit as bad as the evil they claim to oppose. That in a nutshell is Beric vs Stoneheart.

:agree: :agree: :agree:

[Seaworth'sShipmate]

It's a shift in direction, and to pander to someone's quest for vengeance. How can you compare leadership when the motive has changed?

If vengeance is LSH's sole purpose, will she avenge her sister? She must kill LF because he's wronged her family.

Also, how would she view Sansa in LF's presence when news reaches her about Lysa? Double reason to go after LF, or else she's operating with double standards.

Instead of hanging, would she see if that infamous scar needs additional work done to it. Curious? Has anyone seen this scar? (I mean recently.)

Im not sure she much liked Lysa, and maybe doesn't even care.If she ever learned Lysa's role in LF's plots, she might want to thank Littlefinger. Even in her current state, I think she is fine just hanging Freys

[Wmarshal]

And yet, lords empowered to judge criminal cases, delegate that authority all the time in Westeros. Like Randyll Tarly administering cases in Maiden Pool outside his ancestral lands. And like Ned Stark delegating authority to Catelyn before he leaves for KL. Jaime passing judgement upon a serial rapist, presumably upon the authority of King Tommen Baratheon. Ned Stark passing judgement upon Gregor Clegane upon the authority of Robert Baratheon.

By law and code of Robert, beyond that they are law breakers. Sandor and Cersei had no right to go beyond the law.

[OldGimletEye]

By law and code of Robert, beyond that they are law breakers. Sandor and Cersei had no right to go beyond the law.

Cersei may not have. But, the issue is whether Sandor had any right to rely upon Cersei's representations that she had obtained that authority or that Robert had simply acquiesced to her demands. The issue is what duty did Sandor have, under Westeros law, to investigate the lawfulness of Cersei's order. The only evidence upon this question is Beric's reaction to when Sandor said, "It's not my place to question princes." Beric seemed to have accepted this as a possible defense.

Now, as I've said before, it's a reasonable argument to make that Sandor could have acted ethically better by going to Robert and verifying the lawfulness of Cersei's order, even if it meant that Sandor would have been punished by Cersei. But, the original question here was whether Sandor had committed murder under the law and norms of Westeros.

[Narvi]

Beric for sure. They went from Robin Hood to the Punisher under LS.

[LordStoneheart]

Lady Stoneheart.

Beric was a delusional twat who didn't understand true justice. Stoneheart makes no false claims of ideals. Her agenda is clear.

Eh, the BWB at best is just a group of vigilantes with dubious morals. At worst they're every bit as bad as the evil they claim to oppose. That in a nutshell is Beric vs Stoneheart.

And this.

[Cladinator]

I think the whole zombie thing is kinda dumb. I love the series and pretty much like everything that GRRM has done to the story. But I think the zombie crap is annoying. Beric was one thing. Lady Stoneheart is definitely another (like, she should have never made it in the story).

Though, to be fair, I don't know how that part of the story will pan out. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised and will eat the above words.

[LordStoneheart]

I think the whole zombie thing is kinda dumb. I love the series and pretty much like everything that GRRM has done to the story. But I think the zombie crap is annoying. Beric was one thing. Lady Stoneheart is definitely another (like, she should have never made it in the story).

Though, to be fair, I don't know how that part of the story will pan out. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised and will eat the above words.

I don't know why you don't like Lady Stoneheart then because she's clearly not a zombie.

[ShadowCat Rivers]

I think the whole zombie thing is kinda dumb. I love the series and pretty much like everything that GRRM has done to the story. But I think the zombie crap is annoying. Beric was one thing. Lady Stoneheart is definitely another (like, she should have never made it in the story).

Though, to be fair, I don't know how that part of the story will pan out. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised and will eat the above words.

Given that Calelyn's rise from the dead was foreshadowed as early as in the first book (a wolf with a fish in its mouth) and that the infamous outline implies that Cat's rise was intended before the books weren't even started, it's sort of obvious that any "overkill" result should fall on Beric's story, not on Stoneheart's. Beric was included as undead only to facilitate Stoneheart's narrative, otherwise there is no reason at all for him not to be just plain old living Beric.

Now to the OP, the difference between BwB under Beric and BwB under Stoneheart is the difference between autumn and winter. The BwB alone as well as the way it operates is not a matter of choice. It has always been the result of the action-reaction principle, IMO.