The execution of Janos Slynt was spot on vol 2

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, kissdbyfire said:

It's truly baffling. Some things are open for debate speculation, and sure, different people will have different opinions etc. But this is spelled out, we have Jon's thoughts on the matter, and I don't get why people are still arguing that it was personal, it was vengeance, yadda yadda yadda. 

I mean, seriously, this is a non-thread, on its third iteration, debating a non-issue. The mind boggles. 

You chastize others debating the topic of  a thread you've brought up now twice. If you aren't really interested in hearing the others view of Jon's decision being biased by Slynt's killing of Jon's father, or not being the decision in general, why exactly are you even making this thread? Seriously did you want an Eco-chamber(to where only people who agree with your op, where there's an understanding of Jon's execution being "spot on" by everyone),  or did you just make this thread to poke fun at Jon's "haters" who express disagreement with the notion that Slynt's execution was just and/or necessary, because I don't honestly see any other reason you keep making threads on this topic. 

[Bernie Mac]

1 hour ago, kissdbyfire said:

It's truly baffling. Some things are open for debate speculation, and sure, different people will have different opinions etc. But this is spelled out, we have Jon's thoughts on the matter, and I don't get why people are still arguing that it was personal, it was vengeance, yadda yadda yadda. 

lol come on, you love this shit, you are the main reason a thread still exists. 

[White Ravens]

1 hour ago, Buell Rider said:

The NW should have beheaded Jon Snow for failing to carry out justice when he let Mance Rayder off the hook.  But they stabbed him instead.  Dead is dead.  So I guess Jon got what he gave.

Jon and the rest of the Night's Watch witnessed Melisandre and Stannis burn Mance Rayder in the flames and as he writhed and screamed in agony Jon ordered his archers to give him the mercy of a quick death.  Melisandre later revealed that she had swapped Mance with Rattleshirt and glamoured them to look one like the other.  Melisandre and Stannis let Mance off the hook, not Jon.

[Varysblackfyre321]

22 hours ago, White Ravens said:

Jon and the rest of the Night's Watch witnessed Melisandre and Stannis burn Mance Rayder in the flames and as he writhed and screamed in agony Jon ordered his archers to give him the mercy of a quick death.  Melisandre later revealed that she had swapped Mance with Rattleshirt and glamoured them to look one like the other.  Melisandre and Stannis let Mance off the hook, not Jon.

We don't definitely know if Stannis is privy to the plot; he could be(I believe he is), but Jon's acting on the idea that Stannis is completely ignorant of Melisandre's trick(hench him plotting to ship Arya away from Westeroes-a bad idea  and something to which could land him on the pyre if he was found to have done just that). Melisandre and Jon left Mance off the hook; Jon could have easily detained this apparent fugitive(Mance clearly not within Stannis' custody),  by law should be executed for his oath breaking and murders of his own brothers. Jon had a choice in either revealing Melisandre's deception and arresting Mance(given he doesn't believe Stannis is privy to the ruse he has nothing really to fear), or go along with the plot with the promise of saving his 11 year old sister from a painful  death. Whether or not one agrees with Jon's decision, please let's not pretend he did not have the ability to punish Mance for his crimes or that it wouldn't be he in his rights of Lord commander to do so. 

[Ygrain]

On 8/2/2018 at 8:02 AM, Wylla Manderly said:

You really don't understand it. Of course Jon thinks about Slynt and how he hates him and how it would be satisfying to kill him. But despite his personal feelings Jon offers him the commanding position at Greyguard. And I asked it in my last post and do so again. Which other suitable position could Jon offer to Slynt? And Slynt refuses this command by Jon. And he not only refusses but he also insults Jon. And still Jon gives him another chance to think it over.

And he even hopes that Slynt would come to his sense. That's not the behaviour of one hell-bent on revenge...

 

On 8/2/2018 at 8:02 AM, Wylla Manderly said:

The prognosis of future behaviour also plays a part in sentencing today. A judge also considers possible future behaviour based on the past behaviour of the accused. He also considers if the accused shows remorse. As Janos' behavour clearly shows that he probably would't change and he doesn't show remorse Jon comes to the conclusion that no other option would work. And again, this is a very rational decision.

Good job 

10 hours ago, Dorian Martell's son said:

This is what happens when people don't read the same book

Yep. This is how religious wars start.

9 hours ago, Buell Rider said:

The NW should have beheaded Jon Snow for failing to carry out justice when he let Mance Rayder off the hook.  But they stabbed him instead.  Dead is dead.  So I guess Jon got what he gave.

 

7 hours ago, White Ravens said:

Jon and the rest of the Night's Watch witnessed Melisandre and Stannis burn Mance Rayder in the flames and as he writhed and screamed in agony Jon ordered his archers to give him the mercy of a quick death.  Melisandre later revealed that she had swapped Mance with Rattleshirt and glamoured them to look one like the other.  Melisandre and Stannis let Mance off the hook, not Jon.

You ninjaed me to it. Jon didn't let Mance off the hook, he merely made use of the situation as it occured, and nowhere did he state that Mance's crimes are forbidden and forgotten.

[Dorian Martell's son]

16 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

You chastize others debating the topic of  a thread you've brought up now twice. If you aren't really interested in hearing the others view of Jon's decision being biased by Slynt's killing of Jon's father, or not being the decision in general, why exactly are you even making this thread? Seriously did you want an Eco-chamber(to where only people who agree with your op, where there's an understanding of Jon's execution being "spot on" by everyone),  or did you just make this thread to poke fun at Jon's "haters" who express disagreement with the notion that Slynt's execution was just and/or necessary, because I don't honestly see any other reason you keep making threads on this topic. 

it isn't chastising to bring up something spelled out in the books. This is even more spelled out than R+L=J. You can deny it due to a publishing technicality, but deep down you know its true.  

[Lord Varys]

15 hours ago, Ygrain said:

You ninjaed me to it. Jon didn't let Mance off the hook, he merely made use of the situation as it occured, and nowhere did he state that Mance's crimes are forbidden and forgotten.

That is a ridiculous cop-out for Jon Snow's responsibility there. Yes, he was tricked by Melisandre and Mance (and Stannis), but those fools told him what they did. What did Jon Snow prevent from demanding that somebody fetch him another block, so he could have taken both the head of Mance Rayder and of Melisandre of Asshai who had both made a sham and a travesty out of justice?

Even Stannis Baratheon could not fault Jon for that after his return. Mance was an oathbreaker, deserter, and enemy of the Watch, and Mel obviously colluded with the man to keep him alive. Punishing them for their crimes would be well within Jon's rights as Lord Commander (but, of course, to continue to suck up to Stannis Jon certainly could have spared Mel's life).

Mel and Stannis even made Mance Jon's man - meaning that Jon Snow, and nobody else, had jurisdiction over Mance Rayder. In fact, the very reason why Mel reveals who 'Rattleshirt' truly is is that Jon refuses to allow a man as corrupt as Rattleshirt try to save his sister.

Jon was completely within his rights to execute Mance - and he knows he could (and should) have done that. He later chastises himself for not doing so.

[Only 89 selfies today]

White Ravens, to answer your question from the previous section:

Jon should have had Mance Rayder executed the moment Mel removed the illusion.  That would have been justice.  Mance is a criminal who deserved to get executed for desertion and other serious crimes against the Night's Watch.  

[Only 89 selfies today]

16 hours ago, Ygrain said:

You ninjaed me to it. Jon didn't let Mance off the hook, he merely made use of the situation as it occured, and nowhere did he state that Mance's crimes are forbidden and forgotten.

Jon allowed Mance off the hook.  He sent Mance to rescue Farya.  He gave the man accomplices to carry out his Abel the Bard deception to get into Winterfell.  Jon was willing and Jon actually did overlook Mance Rayder's crimes because he needed him to rescue his sister.  Jon broke the laws of the watch for Arya.  He was willing to let the guiltiest of the guilty go unpunished just to get Arya.  Jon was a corrupt lord commander because he abused the authority of his office to serve the interest of himself and the Starks.

[Bernie Mac]

8 hours ago, Dorian Martell's son said:

it isn't chastising to bring up something spelled out in the books. This is even more spelled out than R+L=J. You can deny it due to a publishing technicality, but deep down you know its true.  

It is not spelled out though, quite the opposite as the chapter makes Jon's feelings about Slynt more than clear. 

 Jon slid the oilcloth down his bastard sword, watching the play of morning light across the ripples, thinking how easily the blade would slide through skin and fat and sinew to part Slynt's ugly head from his body. All of a man's crimes were wiped away when he took the black, and all of his allegiances as well, yet he found it hard to think of Janos Slynt as a brother. There is blood between us. This man helped slay my father and did his best to have me killed as well.

Jon is more than clear how this is personal for him.  It would be for anyone, that is why no judge would be trying a person who had previously killer a member of their family, it is almost impossible for their to not be a conflict of interest. 

Either GRRM is writing Jon as a human being or he is writing him as an emotionless robot. 

[White Ravens]

9 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

We don't definitely know if Stannis is privy to the plot; he could be(I believe he is), but Jon's acting on the idea that Stannis is completely ignorant of Melisandre's trick(hench him plotting to ship Arya away from Westeroes-a bad idea  and something to which could land him on the pyre if he was found to have done just that). Melisandre and Jon left Mance off the hook; Jon could have easily detained this apparent fugitive(Mance clearly not within Stannis' custody),  by law should be executed for his oath breaking and murders of his own brothers. Jon had a choice in either revealing Melisandre's deception and arresting Mance(given he doesn't believe Stannis is privy to the ruse he has nothing really to fear), or go along with the plot with the promise of saving his 11 year old sister from starving to death. Whether or not one agrees with Jon's decision, please let's not pretend he did not have the ability to punish Mance for his crimes or that it wouldn't be he in his rights of Lord commander to do so. 

Okay sure.  Let's also please stop presenting the binary that since Jon killed Janos he should also have killed Mance as if the two situations are identical.  I'd also please like to request that people stop presenting Jon's decision to kill Janos as simple revenge for his roll in Ned's beheading and the slaughter of the Stark household guardsmen in the Red Keep.  Janos' supporters on these threads never mention the fact that Janos attempted to kill Jon after he arrived at the wall and that his actions were motivated by loyalties to Tywin Lannister and the Iron Throne.  We are constantly told on these threads that Jon is a horrible person for not forgiving Janos for killing his father because past crimes are forgiven when a man joins the Watch but it is rarely acknowledged that once Janos arrived at the wall he violated the rules of the watch by acting as a lackey willing to kill a brother of the Watch to advance the interests of his political backers (House Lannister).

[White Ravens]

1 hour ago, Bernie Mac said:

It is not spelled out though, quite the opposite as the chapter makes Jon's feelings about Slynt more than clear. 

 Jon slid the oilcloth down his bastard sword, watching the play of morning light across the ripples, thinking how easily the blade would slide through skin and fat and sinew to part Slynt's ugly head from his body. All of a man's crimes were wiped away when he took the black, and all of his allegiances as well, yet he found it hard to think of Janos Slynt as a brother. There is blood between us. This man helped slay my father and did his best to have me killed as well.

Jon is more than clear how this is personal for him.  It would be for anyone, that is why no judge would be trying a person who had previously killer a member of their family, it is almost impossible for their to not be a conflict of interest. 

Either GRRM is writing Jon as a human being or he is writing him as an emotionless robot. 

This post is what I'm talking about in my last post:

"This man helped slay my father and did his best to have me killed as well."

Slynt isn't just some scumbag who helped kill his father before taking his vows at the Wall, he's also this guy who arrived at the Wall and tried to kill Jon for political reasons serving the Iron Throne. 

 

 

 

[Varysblackfyre321]

17 minutes ago, White Ravens said:

Okay sure.  Let's also please stop presenting the binary that since Jon killed Janos he should also have killed Mance as if the two situations are identical.  I'd also please like to request that people stop presenting Jon's decision to kill Janos as simple revenge for his roll in Ned's beheading and the slaughter of the Stark household guardsmen in the Red Keep.  Janos' supporters on these threads never mention the fact that Janos attempted to kill Jon after he arrived at the wall and that his actions were motivated by loyalties to Tywin Lannister and the Iron Throne.  We are constantly told on these threads that Jon is a horrible person for not forgiving Janos for killing his father because past crimes are forgiven when a man joins the Watch but it is rarely acknowledged that once Janos arrived at the wall he violated the rules of the watch by acting as a lackey willing to kill a brother of the Watch to advance the interests of his political backers (House Lannister).

Slynt supporter? I suggested, taking the man's tongue or gelding the man as being more appropriate than execution. Not that man is good. How many people in these threads have you actually seen say Jon is a horrible a person for executing Slynt? How many have actually said Slynt was a good/great person?  Seriously saying X action done by a character was not practical or just  whatever is not automatically saying that character is a horrible person. 

[Bernie Mac]

42 minutes ago, White Ravens said:

This post is what I'm talking about in my last post:

"This man helped slay my father and did his best to have me killed as well."

Slynt isn't just some scumbag who helped kill his father before taking his vows at the Wall, he's also this guy who arrived at the Wall and tried to kill Jon for political reasons serving the Iron Throne. 

He sent him on the same task Jon had taken when Jon killed Qhorin Halfhand, the task was to kill Mance Rayder. Due to Jon's time with the Wildlings he was the only one in a position to get close enough to the king of the Willings. If he wanted him dead would he not simply have him murdered in his cell. 

When do we hear that Tywin wanted Jon dead? Jon was nothing more than a bastard, he was not on Tywin's radar. Where is it suggested that Tywin wanted him dead? 

There are legitimate reasons why some would be hesitant of Jon, he led a bunch of Wildlings across the Wall for a start and had killed a fellow brother. 

 

Janos is obviously a scumbag, but then so are many of the people on the Wall, but once they become brothers their past crimes are forgiven, Jon, for very obvious reasons, was never going to be able to do that for Slynt. He executed him for who he was, not because he refused an order. 

[Ygrain]

4 hours ago, Only 89 selfies today said:

Jon allowed Mance off the hook.  He sent Mance to rescue Farya.  He gave the man accomplices to carry out his Abel the Bard deception to get into Winterfell.  Jon was willing and Jon actually did overlook Mance Rayder's crimes because he needed him to rescue his sister.  Jon broke the laws of the watch for Arya.  He was willing to let the guiltiest of the guilty go unpunished just to get Arya.  Jon was a corrupt lord commander because he abused the authority of his office to serve the interest of himself and the Starks.

Sigh. The one letting Mance off the hook was Melisandre, when Rattleshirt was executed instead of him. Jon had nothing to do with that, he was not privy to her scheme. He was merely presented with the outcome which he could not change without opening a whole can of worms, and he utilized this resource best he could.

Besides, in case it escaped you, rescuing Farya is not just personal, it is also about breaking Ramsay's hold of the North through his marriage to her. No Stark wife, no support to the Boltons.

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

It is not spelled out though, quite the opposite as the chapter makes Jon's feelings about Slynt more than clear. 

 Jon slid the oilcloth down his bastard sword, watching the play of morning light across the ripples, thinking how easily the blade would slide through skin and fat and sinew to part Slynt's ugly head from his body. All of a man's crimes were wiped away when he took the black, and all of his allegiances as well, yet he found it hard to think of Janos Slynt as a brother. There is blood between us. This man helped slay my father and did his best to have me killed as well.

Jon is more than clear how this is personal for him.  It would be for anyone, that is why no judge would be trying a person who had previously killer a member of their family, it is almost impossible for their to not be a conflict of interest. 

Either GRRM is writing Jon as a human being or he is writing him as an emotionless robot. 

Sigh. And how does the scene unfold? Jon puts away the sword and offers Slynt cooperation and command. Is the symbolism of hiding the naked steel lost on you? He found it hard not to hate Slynt but he tried his best to put it aside as he should, and when Slynt threw a tantrum, Jon hoped that he would reconsider and come back to his senses. That's not behaviour and thoughts of someone looking for an excuse to kill Slynt.

2 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Slynt supporter? I suggested, taking the man's tongue or gelding the man as being more appropriate than execution.

Or perhaps he should peel Slynt's skin Astapor style? 

Death in its finality is the gravest punishment but I am not actually sure if mutilation should be considered milder, especially when affecting one's social functioning and/or self-esteem like the ones you suggested. Some might even find death preferable.

In the books, we don't see any castrated or muted black brothers, don't we? I wonder how they would react to such a punishment, and who would carry it out. Somehow, I don't see Dolorous Ed being comfortable with that. And I can't imagine GRRM writing Jon as doing it personally, that would make him look like Ramsay, and I think his men would be revolted.

[Varysblackfyre321]

4 hours ago, Ygrain said:

is the gravest punishment but I am not actually sure if mutilation should be considered milder, especially when affecting one's social functioning and/or self-esteem like the ones you suggested. Some might even find death preferable.

I didn't say castrating or taking Slynt's tongue would be milder-I said it would be more appropriate than the sentence; given the watch what the watch is dealing with the death sentence should only be used when other forms of punishment cannot be expected to work towards the same goals.

4 hours ago, Ygrain said:

In the books, we don't see any castrated or muted black brothers, don't we? I wonder how they would react to such a punishment, and who would carry it out. Somehow, I don't see Dolorous Ed being comfortable with that. And I can't imagine GRRM writing Jon as doing it personally, that would make him look like Ramsay, and I think his men would be revolted.

I don't think Edd would particularly object anymore to participating in Slynt's castrasion or tongue pulling out anymore than he did when he was called upon to help execute Slynt-he was very cool about it. I don't think Jon need do it personally, or see it he has to do it personally-Like I don't  see Eddard Stark or most Stark Lords personally mutilating every thief or rapists that's brought his way personally. I see it more  likely that it would make those brave traditionalists souls who dislike Jon be less likely to revolt. Well probably if Jon also took some safety precautions instead acting like his rank in it of itself would protect him-very bad move on his part given what he plans to do. 

Mutilation is a legitimate form of punishment in the seven kingdoms; hell the only way to avoid such most times is to join the night's watch.  Hell Briene(whose as noble as they come in most regards), personally sees Randyl Tarley sentence a thief to having 7 fingers taken for having robbed a holy place; Briene doesn't seem particularly horrified at the sentence. 

I honestly don't see most black brothers being anymore revolted than Jon's execution of Slynt.

[Varysblackfyre321]

4 hours ago, White Ravens said:

Okay sure.  Let's also please stop presenting the binary that since Jon killed Janos he should also have killed Mance as if the two situations are identical.  I'd also please like to request that people stop presenting Jon's decision to kill Janos as simple revenge for his roll in Ned's beheading and the slaughter of the Stark household guardsmen in the Red Keep.  Janos' supporters on these threads never mention the fact that Janos attempted to kill Jon after he arrived at the wall and that his actions were motivated by loyalties to Tywin Lannister and the Iron Throne.  We are constantly told on these threads that Jon is a horrible person for not forgiving Janos for killing his father because past crimes are forgiven when a man joins the Watch but it is rarely acknowledged that once Janos arrived at the wall he violated the rules of the watch by acting as a lackey willing to kill a brother of the Watch to advance the interests of his political backers (House Lannister).

Hell to be clear you didn't really address any of my points in my last post; Mance is no longer Stannis' prisoner in Jon's eyes-clearly he can't be given Jon thinks Stannis is ignorant of Melisandre's trick. At most Jon can see Mamce as now a fugitive; he was no longer in Stannis(whose well away at this point), custody, it's ridiculous to pretend he wouldn't be in his legal rights to have Mance swiftly executed-what could possibly be Stannis' objection? That Jon found out the turncoat brother-killing Mance who Stannis condemned to death was found masquerading as the man Stannis legally pardoned and had the audacity to put to death the man Stannis himself said would be executed? There simply is no reasonable danger from Stannis in simply killing Mance, there's no legal loophole that makes it so Jon as lord commander could not be seen as legally in the right for punishing or at the very least detaing Mance for further judgment.

[Bernie Mac]

2 hours ago, Ygrain said:

 

Sigh.

lol no one has a gun to your head, if replying to this thread is such a hardship then don't do it. 

2 hours ago, Ygrain said:

 

And how does the scene unfold? Jon puts away the sword

Of course he does, he needs a trumped up excuse to kill him. Even the rotten Slynt would not execute someone with out some kind of excuse. 

The point is that the only chapter the author has Jon fantasizing about murdering him is the very chapter he does it. 

2 hours ago, Ygrain said:

 

and offers Slynt cooperation and command. Is the symbolism of hiding the naked steel lost on you? He found it hard not to hate Slynt but he tried his best to put it aside as he should, and when Slynt threw a tantrum, Jon hoped that he would reconsider and come back to his senses. That's not behaviour and thoughts of someone looking for an excuse to kill Slynt.

 

Slynt did come to his senses, he was begging to be allowed to go to Greyguard, Jon did not care, he had his excuse to kill him. 

Jon even thinks of the appropriate punishments but then comes up with possible crimes Slynt may do in the future to justify to himself that he had to kill him.  He fantasized about killing him and two pages later got his wish. 

2 hours ago, Ygrain said:

In the books, we don't see any castrated or muted black brothers, don't we?

We also didn't see a Lord Commander order the execution of another brother till Jon's first week in the job, whats your point? 

[kissdbyfire]

6 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

He sent him on the same task Jon had taken when Jon killed Qhorin Halfhand, the task was to kill Mance Rayder. Due to Jon's time with the Wildlings he was the only one in a position to get close enough to the king of the Willings. If he wanted him dead would he not simply have him murdered in his cell.

Slynt and Thorne wanted Jon dead. Maester Aemon wouldn't let them kill him or leave him to die in an ice cell, so they came up w/ the idea of sending Jon to kill Mance instead knowing Jon would be killed whether he succeeded or not. If he succeeded it'd be the cherry on top and they'd be rid of both Jon and Mance, and if Jon failed they'd still be rid of him. And the only reason it didn't go down that way is because Stannis arrived. 

[The Sunland Lord]

9 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Slynt supporter? I suggested, taking the man's tongue or gelding the man as being more appropriate than execution. Not that man is good. How many people in these threads have you actually seen say Jon is a horrible a person for executing Slynt? How many have actually said Slynt was a good/great person?  Seriously saying X action done by a character was not practical or just  whatever is not automatically saying that character is a horrible person. 

Cutting tongues is a punishment that is ordered by usually cruel/twisted men in the series (Aerys II, Roose, Euron Greyjoy). It certainly is not Jon Snow's style, Ned Stark's bastard son. 

Decapitation is considered cleaner and more just in Westeros, especially in the North. Certainly some would personally choose to live, but some would not and would prefer a "clean death". It's just that they don't get to choose. 

Gelding is more for rapists?