Jump to content

The Trial of Roose Bolton


Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

but officially that is why he was executed, that is what the record book in westeros have recorded Ned committing treason against Robert and his children. That is how histroy works, you have boasted a fair few times about studying it, until someone with authority change that then Ned was executed for treason, something he actually admitted to a crown of hundreds of people. 

And in actual fact Ned did commit treason, his king ordered him to write his last will and testament and Ned falsified it. That is treason, it is not the treason he was executed for but Ned did commit treason against Robert (and Aerys). 

He committed treason against Robert and Joffrey, going by the official history. He definitely didn't commit treason against Aerys. You might be able to pin that on Jon Arryn but Robert and Ned were sentenced to die without a trial and without an indictment/accusation because of the deeds of their relatives (stretching Robert as a relative).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

He committed treason against Robert and Joffrey, going by the official history. He definitely didn't commit treason against Aerys. You might be able to pin that on Jon Arryn but Robert and Ned were sentenced to die without a trial and without an indictment/accusation because of the deeds of their relatives (stretching Robert as a relative).

My opinion on what happened 17-18 years ago is this.  Aerys was right to call for Robert's head because he was part of Rickard Stark's plans to remove the Targaryens from power.  It doesn't seem like Ned to plot against his king but he may have known and was conflicted about it.  In that case, he would be an accomplice because he knew and kept it secret.  All this depend on whether you believe Rickard was guilty of plotting against Aerys.  I think he was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 4/13/2018 at 7:49 AM, SeanF said:

The Greatjon was present.  He knocked out one of the attackers with a leg of lamb.

What a waste of a good roast!  Damn that savage!  

Roose's guilt can't be proven.  The most people can do, look back at his tactics and how he kept his own men safe.  That will raise a cloud of suspicion but it is not proof of his treachery.  Besides, influential people like Barbrey Dustin will side with him.  The RW was not only Frey and Bolton vs. Starks.  There were men from other houses who took part against the Starks.  The motivation is not going to be there to punish them for something that happened during a rebellion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, The Transporter said:

 

Besides, influential people like Barbrey Dustin will side with him.  The RW was not only Frey and Bolton vs. Starks.  There were men from other houses who took part against the Starks. 

Of course Roose's guilt can be proven. Do you seriously think a court would call Lord Umber a liar?

Barbrey Dustin's game is a bit more complex than what you think, IHMO. She'd be a fool to take Roose's side, that would make her a pariah in the North.

As for the other Houses, are they named in the books? Boltons are the only Northerners who helped the Freys.

Maybe some sub-vassals of the Frey took part because they were forced to, but who cares about them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, The Transporter said:

The motivation is not going to be there to punish them for something that happened during a rebellion.

The motivation is already there, since there's a trial. No one in Westeros likes the scary Roose, and those who have never heard of him will certainly love to see his banner, his sigil, and to learn about his customs. A family that skins people alive, blehhhhh…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Nowy Tends said:

Of course Roose's guilt can be proven. Do you seriously think a court would call Lord Umber a liar?

Why the hell not? He's done nothing to garner a reputation for honesty and has shown to be dishonorable to the point where he'd renege on his Liege lord not out of loyalty to the IT but because he wouldn't get the position in a battle he wanted. Daenarys would be a fool to wholeheartedly trust his word (especially when he was the one to have brought the whole "let's secede" idea for the north), against Roose. It's a he said, she said thing.

He may have saw Roose stab Robb, but he's not the type of witness to which someone would hope for. And guilt for what exactly? Killing a rebel to Ironthrone? Quite honestly, Dany herself has faced insurrection in Mereen and would realize she doesn't want members of a rebellion to think should they betray the leaders of it for the IT they will be punished.  If you do right by the throne the expectation must be the throne does right by you, that killing traitors, even in not so honorable manner won't get them condemnation from the throne..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Killing a rebel to Ironthrone?

The little prick sitting on the IT at this time was an usurpator, people are now (time of trial) aware of this. We can imagine that Cersei's confession during her trial will be used by the Prosecutor…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

He's done nothing to garner a reputation for honesty and has shown to be dishonorable to where he'd renege on his Liege lord not out of loyalty to the IT but because he wouldn't get the position in a battle he wanted.

Like the incident was reported by all Westeros newspapers, and debated on Westeros TV…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nowy Tends said:

The little prick sitting on the IT at this time was an usurpator, people are now (time of trial) aware of this. We can imagine that Cersei's confession during her trial will be used by the Prosecutor…

Yes he would be as much an Usurper as much as Stannis Baratheon is and Robert was, in the the eyes of Targyen loyalists. Assuming Cersi would admit to such a thing to the public(quite honestly I find there being nothing but good reason to keep that secret to her grave), since it' would shame her and delegitimizatize her children. Roose was never privy to any knowledge that definitively say Joffery Baratheon, was not the son of Robert Baratheon- all anyone could definitely prove is that he did decide to assist the IT in keeping the country intact in exchange for a pardon for participating in a rebellion and the  promise for a reward.  You'd might as well make the case to condemn all the lords who fought for the IT in Two5k due to them making in the name of Joffery Bartheon not knowing he was the spawn of incest-and no, Stannis's ridiculous claim of Joffery and his siblings being show isn't ironclad proof they(the lords pledged to Joffery) should have known-it looks like the lazy excuse a bitter and jealous uncle came up with to steal his brother's children's throne to which quite honestly, most people would dismiss if they haven't read the AGOT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nowy Tends said:

Like the incident was reported by all Westeros newspapers, and debated on Westeros TV…

He made a big spectacle in front of the lords backing Robb after his first battle-so quite honestly, it's not going to be hard to find out the quite frankly shameful behavior of this bloodlusting glory hound during the war and see he's no care for honor there is no reason to take his word as sacrosanct-he's very much a scumbag quite frankly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/13/2018 at 5:35 AM, HelenaExMachina said:

Greatjon I am almost sure wasn’t,

 

On 4/13/2018 at 7:49 AM, SeanF said:

The Greatjon was present.  He knocked out one of the attackers with a leg of lamb.

I got messed up with this Greatjon and Smalljon stuff. Then someone corrected me.  I added the Jon’s to my cheat sheet of names and nicknames.

A Storm of Swords - Catelyn VII              She saw Smalljon Umber wrestle a table off its trestles. Crossbow bolts thudded into the wood, one two three, as he flung it down on top of his king. Robin Flint was ringed by Freys, their daggers rising and falling. Ser Wendel Manderly rose ponderously to his feet, holding his leg of lamb. A quarrel went in his open mouth and came out the back of his neck. Ser Wendel crashed forward, knocking the table off its trestles and sending cups, flagons, trenchers, platters, turnips, beets, and wine bouncing, spilling, and sliding across the floor.

Please dunna ask which Manderly son was returned to White Harbor for the supposed death of Davos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/12/2018 at 9:08 AM, Widowmaker 811 said:

Robb himself was an outlaw.  He was a rebel.  

Pick a side. In the story are you pro Stark, Lannister or Targ?

Yes, according to the IT Robb was a rebel and traitor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On April 12, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Jon Fossoway said:

Treason can be pardoned, IMO. Breaking tradition (breaking the law of hospitality, kinslaying et al) just cant go unpunished. I doubt Roose could result beheaded in a trial as the aforementioned, but he certainly could be stripped from lands or exiled, doomed to live in infamy.

Presuming Tyrion was accepted into her inner circle-how could she pretend to be outraged at Roose for helping someone break social mores when she has someone in her corner whose committed patricide. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Clegane'sPup said:

 

I got messed up with this Greatjon and Smalljon stuff. Then someone corrected me.  I added the Jon’s to my cheat sheet of names and nicknames.

A Storm of Swords - Catelyn VII              She saw Smalljon Umber wrestle a table off its trestles. Crossbow bolts thudded into the wood, one two three, as he flung it down on top of his king. Robin Flint was ringed by Freys, their daggers rising and falling. Ser Wendel Manderly rose ponderously to his feet, holding his leg of lamb. A quarrel went in his open mouth and came out the back of his neck. Ser Wendel crashed forward, knocking the table off its trestles and sending cups, flagons, trenchers, platters, turnips, beets, and wine bouncing, spilling, and sliding across the floor.

Please dunna ask which Manderly son was returned to White Harbor for the supposed death of Davos.

Wylis, who was a prisoner in Harrenhal at the time, and enjoying some delicious Hoat Goat stew...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Clegane'sPup said:

Pick a side. In the story are you pro Stark, Lannister or Targ?

Yes, according to the IT Robb was a rebel and traitor.

Not just the iron throne, Stannis considers him a rebel as well, once he put the crown on his head he became a rebel and a traitor. Dany may well see Stark rule a better fit than Roose/Ramsay (and GRRM has already set this up quite organically in the books, the prospect of Ramsay ruling sickens the Bolton's closest allies), but there is no reason she would put them on trial for this, as all Roose has done is do the bidding  for the, at the time accepted, Crown rather than a rebel lord. 

The precedent that would set would only weaken Dany and her royal descendants powers while strengthening the overlords of the realm, who were the ones who ended her families reign, by making it a crime to choose the state over the overlord of the regions. 


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Not just the iron throne, Stannis considers him a rebel as well

When reading this tale I am a Stark supporter.

Robb did not have a desire to sit the IT. He wanted his sisters; I think, not sure though, he wanted a Lannister hostage; and to return to the North. There is, in the text a complete description of Robb’s demands.

Stannis has a desire to sit the IT. He believes he is King Bob’s successor. The Iron Throne (Lannister/Baratheon) don't agree with him.

Dany has a desire to sit the IT. She believes the Targ’s are the rightful rulers of Westeros. The IT doesn't consider the Dragon Queen a problem right now ---- Lannister/Baratheon are preoccupied with other problems.

None of that has a part to play with Roose and the northmen.  Roose and Ramsey are guilty of crimes against the North (House Stark).  I think the northmen are going to take care of the R & R problem now that fArya is out of WF.

As far as predictions go I have been wrong more times than I have been correct.

In this story I would very much like it if Roose gets feathered with arrows while sitting at the dais breaking his fast and Ramsey gets run down by a dierwolf while he tries to flee WF. Those wishes have no bearing on my real life values. I'm talking about a fictional story. A rather violent one at that.

I would need to find a way to block the stink from my nose, but If I have to try to defend Lord Bolton to the IT, the only thing I can come up with is that he went along with the Lords of the North out of fear that he and his men would be peril, that Lord Bolton was always loyal to the IT. When Roose saw the opportunity to save his House and men he took it. That might help his case south of the Neck, but it isn’t going to help his case north of the Neck.

If Stannis gets a hold of Roose no trial. A short question and answer session perhaps. Roose knows what awaits him.Roose knows what he did. I doubt that there will be a surrender. :dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...