Dareon was a victim of Arya's brand of "justice"

[Alyn Oakenfist]

Just now, Lord Varys said:

Actually, Gared didn't really deserve to be killed. He is described as 'half-mad', and it seems clear he didn't return to CB because he wanted to desert, but that the fear of what he saw drove him mad with fear and had him try to get as far away from the Wall as possible.

You don't kill people if they are not (fully) responsible for their actions ... and even less so if they know rather crucial stuff about a threat to all of mankind.

Westeros doesn't have the insanity plea, and if Ned spares him he create a dangerous precedent.

[Lord Varys]

4 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Westeros doesn't have the insanity plea, and if Ned spares him he create a dangerous precedent.

He still doesn't seem to know or care why Gared did what he did. The man as an old veteran who had served decades at the Wall. His reasons for defecting should have been taken seriously ... and not have resulted in his execution but rather in the decision to send as many men to the Wall as possible to find and deal with the Others and their wights.

Instead, Ned ignored the truth.

And I'm not so sure there is no insanity plea in Westeros. People who are clearly out of their mind are usually not viewed as fit for execution even in rather primitive societies.

[SeanF]

37 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

And Jon didn't execute him for that.

He did it for insubordination and mutiny. Also before you say he went overkill, take the British Navy and Army, nowadays, which in the 2006 Armed Forces Act defines mutiny as:

I think we can all agree Janos fits quite well into the first two. The second one especially I would say fits him like a glove.

The punishment nowadays for this is life in prison. Death would have been the punishment until the late 20th century. No, Jon did not exaggerate. He did what any military leader would have done with a mutinying subordinate. Anything besides death, and Jon would have looked weak and invited even more mutiny

Any commander would have executed Slynt for mutiny.

[Alyn Oakenfist]

1 minute ago, SeanF said:

Any commander would have executed Slynt for mutiny.

Exactly, yet people still think he's some sort of martyr

[Daeron the Daring]

1 minute ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Exactly, yet people still think he's some sort of martyr

Clearly only Stark haters try to portray people like Dareon, Gared or Janos Slynt as martyrs. But that doesn't change the fact that Ned should've been listened to Gared instead of executing him the regular way. He gave him the right to talk knowing noone will listen to him, whatever he tells. That pretty much made giving him the right of last words pointless. A mistake from Ned's part, but again, a mistake fitting for him.

Slynt got what he deserved, again.

I already wrote down my opinion why Arya shouldn't have killed Dareon. That does not make Dareon a martyr.

[Nevets]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

He still doesn't seem to know or care why Gared did what he did. The man as an old veteran who had served decades at the Wall. His reasons for defecting should have been taken seriously ... and not have resulted in his execution but rather in the decision to send as many men to the Wall as possible to find and deal with the Others and their wights.

Instead, Ned ignored the truth.

And I'm not so sure there is no insanity plea in Westeros. People who are clearly out of their mind are usually not viewed as fit for execution even in rather primitive societies.

Gared apparently said nothing before his death.   He certainly said nothing about the Others.  If he had, we would have heard about it by now.  There were several POVs present. 

[Lord Varys]

7 minutes ago, Nevets said:

Gared apparently said nothing before his death.   He certainly said nothing about the Others.  If he had, we would have heard about it by now.  There were several POVs present. 

Bran did overhear something Gared said, but he didn't understand it or couldn't make sense of it.

[CamiloRP]

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Actually, Gared didn't really deserve to be killed. He is described as 'half-mad', and it seems clear he didn't return to CB because he wanted to desert, but that the fear of what he saw drove him mad with fear and had him try to get as far away from the Wall as possible.

You don't kill people if they are not (fully) responsible for their actions ... and even less so if they know rather crucial stuff about a threat to all of mankind.

This I agree with, and I think I even brought it up in this thread.

[MissM]

13 hours ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

All of the main characters, except Jon and Sansa, have high IQ.  Daenerys, Bran, Tyrion, Samwell, and Jorah are smart people.  Arya is somewhat smart for her age and still be crazy.  Arya is a psycho and a villain.

People keep explaining why that doesn't make any sense and yet you persist? Ramsay Bolton rapes, hunts and tortures people alive for SPORT. That is a psycho and villain. You're so completely off track and have zero perspective on what you're even saying. A dude who was sent to the Wall for raping a girl and an oathbreaker and a heartless man stealing money and leaving families destitute are Arya's worst acts that you and all the other Arya Hate Group members bandwagon. 

It's so perverse how this one girl can get you so hot and bothered! 

What's worse, you don't even have the whole story yet and already made your (wrong) conclusion. You don't know what GRRM is going to do with Arya and I'm willing to bet it isn't going to result in the ridiculous clown of a character this topic has created and doesn't exist in the books. You all make the reddit GoT fandom seem rational. 

BTW, somewhat smart? Just say you don't like the character instead of just creating a completely different fictional person in your head to throw shit at. 

 

[Alyn Oakenfist]

51 minutes ago, MissM said:

People keep explaining why that doesn't make any sense and yet you persist? Ramsay Bolton rapes, hunts and tortures people alive for SPORT. That is a psycho and villain. You're so completely off track and have zero perspective on what you're even saying. A dude who was sent to the Wall for raping a girl and an oathbreaker and a heartless man stealing money and leaving families destitute are Arya's worst acts that you and all the other Arya Hate Group members bandwagon. 

Let them be, they're not worth it. We've been asking for any kind of proof, and they gave none, just repeating "Reee, Arya insane". At this point they're clearly arguing in bad faith, so I don't think they're worth our time.

[The Commentator]

14 hours ago, Bowen Marsh said:

That was a travesty of justice.  But what do you expect from a Stark.  Ned killed Gared, Robb killed Karstark, and Jon killed Slynt.  Okay, maybe Karstark sort of deserved it.  But Gared and Slynt did not.  Arya's morals are fickle and erratic.  If she even has working morals by this time.  She's got problems upstairs.  Teaching Arya the methods of murder is  like giving Michael Myers a bazooka.  The faceless men are building a monster. 
 

They’re building a weapon who could bite at both ends.  The killing of Raford will cause trouble back home.  She’s a liability.

[Lilac & Gooseberries]

40 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

They’re building a weapon who could bite at both ends.  The killing of Raford will cause trouble back home.  She’s a liability.

Raff deserved much worse than what he got at the end.

[Nathan Stark]

I agree that the execution of Gared was a tragic miscarriage of justice, caused by following the letter of the law. As a reader, we can recognize the value of what Gared had to say and why Ned ought to have listened to him. However, before we all go off half-cocked on the "Ned was wrong and stupid to kill Gared" train of thought, it would be useful to remember a few important points.

First, Ned is a character in ASOIAF. He is not a member of the audience reading the story. We have access to information that Ned does not, and cannot, have access to, namely, that the Others have returned and were witnessed by Gared. It is unrealistic to expect Ned to know this information that would be needed to spare Gared.

Next, Gared is described as "half-mad," and possibly rambling about Others returning. Given the cultural context, and the fact that he has broken his Nights Watch vows, Ned really doesn't have any reason to believe in the truth of what Gared says. Ned later tells Bran that the typical Nights Watch deserters "knows his life is forfit, and will not hesitate to commit any crime, no matter how vile." And here he sees a half-mad, rambling Nights Watch deserter who may or may not, as far as Ned knows, be a danger to the local population. All he knows for sure is that the law regarding Nights Watch desertion has been broken. Would any other northern lord have done any different?

Finally, there's the fundamental problem that the Others have been gone so long that everybody either believes them dead for good or else a story to scare kids. When your only witness to their existence and return is "half-mad," and a Nights Watch deserter besides, is it any wonder that Ned doesn't believe Gared is telling the truth? 

As a reader of ASOIAF, I think Ned was wrong to kill Gared. But putting it all in context, it is impossible for me to condemn Ned for his actions. Like it or not, Ned has far more immediate legal, cultural and practical reasons to execute Gared than he does for sparing him.

[SeanF]

14 minutes ago, Nathan Stark said:

I agree that the execution of Gared was a tragic miscarriage of justice, caused by following the letter of the law. As a reader, we can recognize the value of what Gared had to say and why Ned ought to have listened to him. However, before we all go off half-cocked on the "Ned was wrong and stupid to kill Gared" train of thought, it would be useful to remember a few important points.

First, Ned is a character in ASOIAF. He is not a member of the audience reading the story. We have access to information that Ned does not, and cannot, have access to, namely, that the Others have returned and were witnessed by Gared. It is unrealistic to expect Ned to know this information that would be needed to spare Gared.

Next, Gared is described as "half-mad," and possibly rambling about Others returning. Given the cultural context, and the fact that he has broken his Nights Watch vows, Ned really doesn't have any reason to believe in the truth of what Gared says. Ned later tells Bran that the typical Nights Watch deserters "knows his life is forfit, and will not hesitate to commit any crime, no matter how vile." And here he sees a half-mad, rambling Nights Watch deserter who may or may not, as far as Ned knows, be a danger to the local population. All he knows for sure is that the law regarding Nights Watch desertion has been broken. Would any other northern lord have done any different?

Finally, there's the fundamental problem that the Others have been gone so long that everybody either believes them dead for good or else a story to scare kids. When your only witness to their existence and return is "half-mad," and a Nights Watch deserter besides, is it any wonder that Ned doesn't believe Gared is telling the truth? 

As a reader of ASOIAF, I think Ned was wrong to kill Gared. But putting it all in context, it is impossible for me to condemn Ned for his actions. Like it or not, Ned has far more immediate legal, cultural and practical reasons to execute Gared than he does for sparing him.

Exactly right.  Time and again in this tale, we can say X was wrong to act as they did, while acknowledging, we as readers have information that X did not have. 

[Lord Varys]

Ned isn't an evil guy for killing Gared ... but he is still stupid and wrong there. Especially in light of that fact that he is a Stark and is actually supposed to preserve the knowledge about the Others and stuff.

And to be sure - until such a time as we get more information I'll assume that Gared is called 'half-mad' because he talked about the Others, not because he completely snapped.

For all we know he may have been on his way to Winterfell to inform the Starks about what happened beyond the Wall.

It is also, overall, completely crazy to execute this guy before you actually figure out what happened to Will and, especially, Ser Waymar Royce. Gared would have known that and eventually sends out Benjen Stark to figure out what happened there.

This entire thing doesn't really make much sense - Gared can only be viewed as a deserter if the Watch branded him as such. If they didn't then he could be on some kind of mission south of the Wall. But if Mormont denounced Gared as a deserter then why the hell is he still looking for Will and Royce when they were part of Gared's party and should thus also be deserters if Gared is viewed as a deserter?

And more importantly, if Gared was viewed as a deserter because Mormont branded him as such, why didn't Eddard Stark question him in detail about the whereabouts of Royce - a man so important that the First Ranger himself - Ned's own brother - was later dispatched to find.

That entire mission was a fool's errand with Ned killing the best lead they had for finding Royce.

[Tucu]

Jon was present during Gared's interrogation and execution but he never recalls him mentioning anything about wights, WWs or the Others. At Craster he recalls his execution but that is all:

Quote

Jon remembered a spray of red blood on white snow, and the way Theon Greyjoy had kicked the dead man's head. The man was a deserter. On the way back to Winterfell, Jon and Robb had raced, and found six direwolf pups in the snow. A thousand years ago.

It is likely that Gared never mentioned anything significant.

[Nathan Stark]

48 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Ned isn't an evil guy for killing Gared ... but he is still stupid and wrong there. Especially in light of that fact that he is a Stark and is actually supposed to preserve the knowledge about the Others and stuff.

And to be sure - until such a time as we get more information I'll assume that Gared is called 'half-mad' because he talked about the Others, not because he completely snapped.

For all we know he may have been on his way to Winterfell to inform the Starks about what happened beyond the Wall.

It is also, overall, completely crazy to execute this guy before you actually figure out what happened to Will and, especially, Ser Waymar Royce. Gared would have known that and eventually sends out Benjen Stark to figure out what happened there.

This entire thing doesn't really make much sense - Gared can only be viewed as a deserter if the Watch branded him as such. If they didn't then he could be on some kind of mission south of the Wall. But if Mormont denounced Gared as a deserter then why the hell is he still looking for Will and Royce when they were part of Gared's party and should thus also be deserters if Gared is viewed as a deserter?

And more importantly, if Gared was viewed as a deserter because Mormont branded him as such, why didn't Eddard Stark question him in detail about the whereabouts of Royce - a man so important that the First Ranger himself - Ned's own brother - was later dispatched to find.

That entire mission was a fool's errand with Ned killing the best lead they had for finding Royce.

Ned doesn't know about Royce or Will. So you are projecting your knowlege as a member of the audience onto the character in the book who cannot know that information. Ned isn't stupid for not knowing this. And the Watch doesn't need to denounce Gared as a deserter. If he wasn't, and was south on Watch business, he would have some way of being able to prove it. 

[Lord Varys]

4 minutes ago, Nathan Stark said:

Ned doesn't know about Royce or Will. So you are projecting your knowlege as a member of the audience onto the character in the book who cannot know that information. Ned isn't stupid for not knowing this. And the Watch doesn't need to denounce Gared as a deserter. If he wasn't, and was south on Watch business, he would have some way of being able to prove it. 

So you think it would be okay for any lord to, say, arrest and execute Benjen Stark when he was visiting with Ned?

That wouldn't make any sense.

If Ned didn't contact CB after arresting Gared then his execution would make even less sense. But if he did contact CB he must know about Royce.

And, of course, Benjen must also know about Gared's death visiting with Ned shortly after the execution. Why the hell would either he or Mormont go look for Royce north of the Wall? Gared defected and fled south, so if Will and Royce were still alive wouldn't the most logical assumption be that they, too, defected and fled south of the Wall?

[Ser Duncan of Flea Bottom]

I am not really fond of what Arya is becoming, I don't think she should have killed Dareon, even though he had deserted the Night's Watch. Don't get me wrong, he left Sam, Gilly, the baby and Maester Aemon to their luck, that was really messed up.

Now, he is young, he probably saw a chance to start over, since he knew the Night's Watch wouldn't send men to Essos to look for a deserter.

Arya's sense of justice is very misguided, she is basically driven by revenge, she is still Arya, she is not "No One" as she claims to be and that will cost her.

She killed Dareon because she recongized the black clothing of the Night's Watch, then again, what if he was sent there by the Night's Watch? (what was the case, although he had deserted). Arya just presumed he was a deserter and killed him.

The same could have happened to Sam if they met, she would recognize the colours of the Night's Watch and killed him and Sam is also on the same mission.

She could very well kill an innocent because she wants to kill people for any reason she can think of.

[Alyn Oakenfist]

2 minutes ago, Shadow of Asshai said:

The same could have happened to Sam if they met, she would recognize the colours of the Night's Watch and killed him and Sam is also on the same mission.

They did meet, and Arya helped him out with a few bravos. Arya knew Dareon was a deserter, that was why she killed him, not because of his clothing.