The Trial of Roose Bolton

[Nowy Tends]

On 04/10/2018 at 2:34 AM, Bernie Mac said:

Why is Roose on trial and not every other soldier who killed someone during the war?

This is like saying: "why is Eichmann on trial and not every German railroad employees?"

[Bernie Mac]

38 minutes ago, Nowy Tends said:

This is like saying: "why is Eichmann on trial and not every German railroad employees?"

Godwin's law strikes again

[Shi Qiang]

On 4/9/2018 at 5:25 PM, Damsel in Distress said:

This is not a game, but it will require you to put on your thinking caps.  The time period is the near future.  Westeros is back under Targaryen control.  Empress Daenerys Targaryen, the first of her name, has taken back the seven kingdoms from the Lannisters.  The white walkers have been defeated and the wildlings sent back to the other side of the wall.   Roose Bolton is on trial for killing Robb Stark.  The North and the Stark children would like to execute him but many in the south have argued for his release.  A jury that is as unbiased as possible under the circumstances has been called to hear both sides.

The trial is being held at Highgarden.  Her Majesty will not be present at the trial.  The honorable Doran Martell will be the presiding judge.  Roose's guilt or innocence is to be decided by a jury of seven lords from Dorne and the Reach.  You have been chosen to defend Roose Bolton.  Apply the known laws of Westeros to defend your client, if you can.  The jury have taken an oath to act without bias and to apply the *current laws to reach their decision.

There will be court observers from across the Narrow Sea.  The honorable Skahaz Mo Kandaq, the Tattered Prince, and Brown Ben Plumm.  Do keep in mind that laws exists in Westeros but these laws are under review.  Is it possible to defend Roose?

*The outcome of this case could set a precedent for coded law that will affect both sides of the new Empire.  

 

On 4/9/2018 at 6:32 PM, Rosetta Stone said:

Your Honor, my client was following the orders of King Joffrey.  Then pray my client kept his letters from Tywin Lannister.

 

He was following orders.  Robb Stark was actively engaged in rebellion.  It was Roose Bolton's responsibility to take down a rebel.  That he did so is proof of his loyalty to the crown.  He should not even be on trial.  

So who would be the lord of winterfell?  Don't tell me it's Jon because that would be a travesty to justice after the debacle that he caused at the wall with the rescue-Arya-mission.   A man like Mance Rayder got away with crimes against the realm and Roose Bolton is on trial for killing a rebel.  I don't think this has much chance of happening.  

[Shi Qiang]

On 4/10/2018 at 0:18 AM, House Beaudreau said:

if i am defending Roose i would take a few different angles. But ill lay out what I think would be the best defense for him.  I would try to argue that he so at least be restored to lord of Dreadfort. Not all of my reasons are factual but I think these points could be argued and possibly sway Reach and Dornish lords

1. Tell the Jury that Roose learned of the Plot late, and by the time he reached the Twins Robb and the Northmen had already gained guest right and he didn't think Walder Frey would ever break guest right. 
2. During the Red Wedding, Roose realized that it was too late for the Northern cause and was offered a chance of changing his allegiance, as long as he killed Robb Stark himself. He was offered this chance because of his recent marriage to Fat Walda 
3. Roose Bolton had recently married into the Frey's and was just as betrayed by Robb Stark for marrying Jeyne Westerling.
4. Roose hands were somewhat tied because of Vargo Hoat's decision to cut off Jamie's hand, this is why he freed Jamie, just incase the Lannister prevail he didn't want an automatic death sentence from Tywin. He also may Jamie swear to return the Stark girls to Lady Catlyn.  
5. Lastly, He must come clean about Ramsey's action's at Winterfell and what he did to Lady Hornwood. Tell the Jury that he felt Robb would blame him for his bastard son's actions and had the Northern Cause succeeded Roose may have still had his lands and titles stripped and executed or sent to the Wall. Wanting to prevent this from happening the choice to betray was hard for him but ultimate he made it for his house and the North.  

I think all of this would at least save Roose's life if not have him restored to Lord of the Dreadfort. The Reach Lords could probably at least understand these arguments see how they all changed sides multiple times during the War of the Five Kings, not to mention probably alining with Dany at the End.  

Anything less than Warden of the North is a let down for Roose Bolton.  He has the Dreadfort and Winterfell.  Losing one is a set back.

[Bernie Mac]

20 minutes ago, Nowy Tends said:

I'm not the one who posts WALLs of text full of nonsensical arguments, if anyone is insecure here it's you.

Many people on here do. The people I am debating often do as well, does that make them 'psycho's' as well? Please, share with me your expert opinion. 

Quote

 

You're the one who says that killing his liege Lord isn't a crime,

During a war it may not be, depends entirely on the ruler and the circumstance. Jaime was not punished for it, was he? 

Quote

or invokes Godwin's law when Eichmann's trial is evoked, etc.

You brought up a Nazi into the conversion not me. 

Godwin's Law

A term that originated on Usenet, Godwin's Law states that as an online argument grows longer and more heated, it becomes increasingly likely that somebody will bring up Adolf Hitler or the Nazis. When such an event occurs, the person guilty of invoking Godwin's Law has effectively forfieted the argument.

 

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Godwin's Law

 

 

[Nowy Tends]

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

 You brought up a Nazi into the conversion not me.

 

I brought up the trial of a nazi, in a thread about the trial of one of the vilains of the book. You didn't even try to understand why, since brandish Godwin is so much easier. The nazi sympathizers must love people like you, who make the slightest evocation of their crimes, a crime…

[Bernie Mac]

3 minutes ago, Nowy Tends said:

I brought up the trial of a nazi,

Yes, godwin's law. Westeros has very little to do with the Nazis, that is why it is odd when someone brings up the connection. 

3 minutes ago, Nowy Tends said:

You didn't even try to understand

Understand what? You made a flippant remark, at least that is what it appears to be. Was there some deeper meaning to your reply.

3 minutes ago, Nowy Tends said:

The nazi sympathizers must love people like you, who make the slightest evocation of their crimes, a crime…

lol first you accuse me of being a psycho and now a nazi sympathizer. And all based on nothing more than are differing opinions on some aspects ( I imagine there is plenty we agree on about the books) of fictional characters in a fictional universe. Seems perfectly reasonable. 

[Loose Bolt]

Actually most people in Westeros seemed to believe

A) Leader should be strong and most important fact about him is his pedigree

b ) There is no rule of law

c) No parliament

d) Some people are more equal than others (usually by their pedigree)

e) No human rights

f) People who look different or think differently are evil. Althought this seems to be actual fact

So there seems to be a lot of things in Westeros that Nazis would like. Naturally assuming that they would be members of ruling elite if they were not even they would think that system would suck.

[HexMachina]

[mod]cut out the personal attacks. If you can’t engage with one another in a civil manner, there is an ignore feature you can make use of [/mod]

[Brynden Blackfyre]

If I were defending that foul creature, I would state the following points:

 

1. Robb Stark, the "Young Wolf," broke away from the realm and declared himself King in the North. Roose Bolton, being a leal servant of the realm, decides to end Stark in the least bloody way possible. Even though the ancient custom of guest right is broken, this method saved many lives.

2. The Stark boy was drunk, and threatened to send his dire wolf after the guests at the wedding. (Just make smth up)

3. If worst comes to worst, there is always Lannister gold for bribing.

This would still not work I think, as the nobles have a illogical sense of honor and pride in the custom of 'guest rights.' They would chop off his head.

 

[The Commentator]

On 4/10/2018 at 5:11 PM, Nowy Tends said:

Oh, so killing his liege Lord isn't punishable by law? Seriously?

Robb himself was an outlaw.  He was a rebel.  

[The Commentator]

26 minutes ago, Brynden Blackfyre said:

If I were defending that foul creature, I would state the following points:

 

1. Robb Stark, the "Young Wolf," broke away from the realm and declared himself King in the North. Roose Bolton, being a leal servant of the realm, decides to end Stark in the least bloody way possible. Even though the ancient custom of guest right is broken, this method saved many lives.

2. The Stark boy was drunk, and threatened to send his dire wolf after the guests at the wedding. (Just make smth up)

3. If worst comes to worst, there is always Lannister gold for bribing.

This would still not work I think, as the nobles have a illogical sense of honor and pride in the custom of 'guest rights.' They would chop off his head.

 

Walder and the Freys broke guest rights.  Roose was a guest who fought another guest.  I am sure that is not looked on kindly but Roose was not the host.  All he has to say, the Starks and the Freys went at it, I had to choose a side and defend myself.  

[The Commentator]

10 hours ago, Allardyce said:

Anything less than Warden of the North is a let down for Roose Bolton.  He has the Dreadfort and Winterfell.  Losing one is a set back.

Better than losing his head.  I say take his affectionate young wife and his silver out of town.  Walda's weight in silver would equate to a small chest of coins.  Enough to live on.  

[The Commentator]

2 hours ago, Loose Bolt said:

Actually most people in Westeros seemed to believe

A) Leader should be strong and most important fact about him is his pedigree

b ) There is no rule of law

c) No parliament

d) Some people are more equal than others (usually by their pedigree)

e) No human rights

f) People who look different or think differently are evil. Althought this seems to be actual fact

So there seems to be a lot of things in Westeros that Nazis would like. Naturally assuming that they would be members of ruling elite if they were not even they would think that system would suck.

Look, if you want to compare someone to the nazi you have to look at the slave Masters in Essos and the Ghiscari upper class.  Their terrorists arm, the Harpy, is the equivalent of the klan.   The people of Westeros are not a good comparison.  

[Jon Fossoway]

If I were empress Dany I would just pardon the man and charge him some extra tribute or something. He killed a monarch that participated in the War of the Kings, anyways. If I, as empress Dany, would go beheading traitors a lot of highborn should be judged, and I, as empress Dany, would dare not go that way.

Other thing. Why would I, as empress Dany, banish the free folk again to the other side of the Wall? Jon himself was beggining to populate the far North with them. Should be a nice boost to farming in those parts.

 

[The Sunland Lord]

If Roose's lawyer's claim is that "it was war, and in war people die", which is a ridiculous argument, he is toast even by Westerosi laws. 

It's even worse compared to real life standards since Westerosi care about guest right a lot, according to text evidence.

Because, even during a war, if you kill someone in a non-combat event, such as wedding, your deed is murder, and is not some military trick you used to take advantage of your enemy. Your act (murder) would not be viewed in a military, but more in a citizen/noble sense of the word.

What Roose needs is a defender who can prove that he is innocent.

[The Sunland Lord]

51 minutes ago, Jon Fossoway said:

Other thing. Why would I, as empress Dany, banish the free folk again to the other side of the Wall? Jon himself was beggining to populate the far North with them. Should be a nice boost to farming in those parts.

The laughable hate against Jon among some people goes so far away, that these same people would erase everything he did as a LC of the Watch. 

It can't be viewed in a rational way-rather as something which 5 years olds think it's funny, so you just let it be. 

[Nowy Tends]

48 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Robb himself was an outlaw.  He was a rebel.  

No, this argument is totally disconnected from the political reality of the 7Ks. A vassal is no longer a rebel when the bond of vassalage is broken by the suzerain. Joffrey as a bastard was not a legit King, he had no right to attempt to Ned's life. Joffrey was an usurpator, kicking him out was legit.

[SeanF]

I assume that the charges against Roose Bolton are:-

i) Treason

ii) Murder.

The Defence is straightforward.

i) The lawful ruler of Westeros is, and always has been, since the death of Viserys III, Her Imperial Majesty Daenerys, of House Targaryen, first of her name.   The traitor Robb Stark attempted to usurp half her Kingdom, to which he had no claim.  It is not treason to kill a person who has no legitimate claim to be King.

ii) It follows that killing the traitor Robb Stark cannot constitute murder, but rather, was the lawful killing of a rebel who remained in arms against Her Imperial Majesty.  Far from being in any way reprehensible, it was a commendable act.

To dispute either of these points is to dispute that Her Imperial Majesty has any right to the Iron Throne.

I would then submit that both charges be dismissed. 

[Bernie Mac]

1 hour ago, Nowy Tends said:

No, this argument is totally disconnected from the political reality of the 7Ks. A vassal is no longer a rebel when the bond of vassalage is broken by the suzerain. Joffrey as a bastard was not a legit King, he had no right to attempt to Ned's life. Joffrey was an usurpator, kicking him out was legit.

Robb was not kicking him out though, he was claiming kingship of the North and Riverlands, to Queen Dany he was nothing more than a traitor fighting an illegal war. Her claiming his death was a crime may well be her legitimizing his claim and destabilizing her own title. 

As I said before, why would she prosecute this trial other than to make readers of the book happy?