What compromise will be found between the Stark children ?

[Apoplexy]

2 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

I do not hate Sansa, I find her probably the second most interesting character, the themes the character has been created to explore, the game of thrones, what one must lose of themselves to pursue political power, to enact change, is extremely interesting.

Resist what parts of the text you will, but you won't be able to say you weren't told or that GRRM pulled a bait and switch.

If GRRM decides to turn Sansa into a dark, scheming character, it would be extremely jarring. All the Stark children, including Jon, have a lot of Ned Stark in them. Sansa in particular. She is calm and contemplative. She is young and so of course lacks maturity. In spite of the different paths that all the Stark children have taken, they have tried to be decent and fair. And on that note, if its only the schemers that end up coming on top towards the end, the whole series would be a disappointment.

[chrisdaw]

7 hours ago, Nevets said:

Poisoning her cousin for expediency?  She is giving him sweetsleep because she thinks it's necessary for his benefit.  She wants him to become stronger, not weaker.  We know this because it's in her thoughts.  

By the way, what hateful words of Cersei's has she repeated?  From what I recall, she has rejected Cersei's teachings. The Stark children are in arcs where they will

learn skills from morally dubious mentors, and then break with them when they realize their mentors' malign intent.

Sansa is developing a mind of her own.  She is not going to blindly follow anybody, especially not Littlefinger, who she doesn't trust and never did. 

Just because you play the game doesn't mean you have to become a horrible person.  Someone like Olenna Tyrell can do so more or less ethically.  Yes, she's done some dubious stuff, but even murdering Joffrey was probably to Westeros's benefit.  Sansa may become a bit more devious and ruthless, and that is probably a good thing.  If her father had been more devious and ruthless, he might still be alive.

By the way, if you think Arya is going to become a face-changing killer, you haven't been paying attention there, either. If the FM are training her to be an assassin, they are doing so in a very roundabout fashion. But that's a discussion for another day.  

Sansa has Robert drugged against the best available health advice for the child because it suits her agenda. Olenna/LF attempted to murder a 13 year old boy at his wedding feast, with poison. Arya assassinated someone in service to the FM without issue, and killed more people for her own sake and (got) will get away with it because among other things that's part of her FM training. I don't care to find and quote the text of her parroting Cersei (and she thinks it, she doesn't say it) because it won't matter, this is a text resistant fanbase and it'll just be handwaved for unicorns like everything else.

If Ned had been more devious and ruthless he wouldn't have been Ned Stark.

6 hours ago, Apoplexy said:

If GRRM decides to turn Sansa into a dark, scheming character, it would be extremely jarring. All the Stark children, including Jon, have a lot of Ned Stark in them. Sansa in particular. She is calm and contemplative. She is young and so of course lacks maturity. In spite of the different paths that all the Stark children have taken, they have tried to be decent and fair. And on that note, if its only the schemers that end up coming on top towards the end, the whole series would be a disappointment.

Sansa exists to be a scheming character, there's no deciding. It is not a coincidence that Ned Stark held sacred above even his honour and his life the safety of children, and that it is a child and family that Sansa is currently poisoning. The direct disregard for Ned Stark's moral code and family is the whole point. You should already be jarred.

[Terrorthatflapsinthenight9]

7 hours ago, Apoplexy said:

If GRRM decides to turn Sansa into a dark, scheming character, it would be extremely jarring. All the Stark children, including Jon, have a lot of Ned Stark in them. Sansa in particular. She is calm and contemplative. She is young and so of course lacks maturity. In spite of the different paths that all the Stark children have taken, they have tried to be decent and fair. And on that note, if its only the schemers that end up coming on top towards the end, the whole series would be a disappointment.

I agree, Sansa will be the most calculating and cynical of the surviving Stark children but she won't become another Littlefinger, she'll be closer to the Tyrells in the sense that she'll work and care very strongly for her family and country and I think that she'd want to at least genuinely to better the lives of the northerners. 

[Apoplexy]

6 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

Sansa has Robert drugged against the best available health advice for the child because it suits her agenda.

Robert would come to her room at night. He behave with her as he did with her mother. And Sansa is a child herself. She just wanted to be left alone.

6 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

Arya assassinated someone in service to the FM without issue, and killed more people for her own sake and (got) will get away with it because among other things that's part of her FM training. I don't care to find and quote the text of her parroting Cersei (and she thinks it, she doesn't say it) because it won't matter, this is a text resistant fanbase and it'll just be handwaved for unicorns like everything else.

If Ned had been more devious and ruthless he wouldn't have been Ned Stark.

Intent matters. Arya wasn't murdering to scheme. She wanted to train to be an assassin. Assassins murder. And the reason for her ending up training to be an assassin was the trauma she faced. And please find the part in text where she thinks it. And if you don't want to, say so. General bemoaning of 'fandom' isn't an argument.

6 hours ago, chrisdaw said:

Sansa exists to be a scheming character, there's no deciding. It is not a coincidence that Ned Stark held sacred above even his honour and his life the safety of children, and that it is a child and family that Sansa is currently poisoning. The direct disregard for Ned Stark's moral code and family is the whole point. You should already be jarred.

Ned Stark was made the best choices he thought he could for his children. He wasn't infallible or irreproachable. But he wasn't a narcissist putting his honor above his children's safety. As for Sansa, we disagree. 

[Apoplexy]

6 hours ago, Terrorthatflapsinthenight9 said:

I agree, Sansa will be the most calculating and cynical of the surviving Stark children but she won't become another Littlefinger, she'll be closer to the Tyrells in the sense that she'll work and care very strongly for her family and country and I think that she'd want to at least genuinely to better the lives of the northerners. 

I agree. Making one (or a handful) of calculated decisions does not make you Cersei or LF. They operate on a completely different spectrum, and Sansa isn't on it. 

[GMantis]

On 12/23/2021 at 7:29 PM, Mourning Star said:

We could go through all the subtler plot points and parallels, but at the end of the day, she lost her wolf because of her betrayal of her house. If there is one thing that separates the Ned’s of the world from the Cersei’s, it’s that he does not kill children.

Sansa’s refusal to tell the truth about the incident on the trident caused her sister and the butchers boy loyal to house stark to be hunted like animals. Her actions led directly to Micah’s death, and her comments later betray a deep lack of morality and empathy. Ned’s rule was broken and Lady died by Ned’s sword. I don’t know that her, or the Hound, can ever really be redeemed for this.

Before going through all the subtler points and parallels, how about not blatantly distorting clearly stated points? Mycah was murdered by the Hound before Sansa had the opportunity to give her testimony before the King and the same with the chase of her sister.

  

On 12/26/2021 at 10:57 AM, chrisdaw said:

Sansa exists to be a scheming character, there's no deciding. It is not a coincidence that Ned Stark held sacred above even his honour and his life the safety of children, and that it is a child and family that Sansa is currently poisoning. The direct disregard for Ned Stark's moral code and family is the whole point. You should already be jarred.

Even if Sansa was the heartless schemer you're imagining her to be, she still wouldn't want to poison Robin. At the time she wanted to give him sweetsleep, Littlefinger's whole position as Lord Protector (and by extension Sansa's own) was dependent on Robin staying alive, so poisoning him would be extremely counterproductive. Sansa learned about the new plan about replacing Robin only after descending from the Eyrie.

 

 

[Here's Looking At You, Kid]

Jon, Bran, and Arya will never be acceptable to the north.  Bran is a crippled boy who talks to the trees.  Jon is a man who broke his vows to the Watch and sent Mance Rayder against the north.  Sansa is a pawn and will always remain clueless.  Rickon versus whoever will be pulling Sansa's strings. 

[Mourning Star]

On 12/23/2021 at 4:34 PM, Nathan Stark said:

This is not even a little bit true. Sansa didn't refuse to tell the truth about what happened to her, Arya, Joffrey and Micah. She told Ned. She obfuscated in front of the king and Cersei, because she is betrothed to their son, the crown prince. Ned shouldn't have dragged her in front of the King and Queen and asked her to tell them their son is a sociopath. The fact that you are blaming Sansa for Lady's death, and not Cersei, shows why we should not take arguments like yours seriously, because it is so flagrantly unjustified. Saying 11 year old Sansa is no better than Cersei, who committed murder at 10, just makes me discount your argument even more.

Sansa's refusal to tell the truth about the incident on the Trident is objectively what leads to Micah's death and her own sister being hunted like an animal.

This wasn't like a few hours either... it was four days. FOUR DAYS!

As someone with a sibling, especially a little sibling, this is absolutely shocking to me. Sure, she was only a kid, but that's an excuse not a justification. We all understand her lack of action in the moment of the actual incident, but to consciously choose to not come forward for days while your little sister is hunted and your servant is killed is really hard to brush aside.

As you pointed out, Cersei was only a kid too and that doesn't make her murder any more palatable. Is Sansa's silence the same as actively pushing someone down a well? No! (As I said right from the start). But, it is well worth a comparison. As anyone who's ever taken a descent philosophy class will tell you, there is a very solid case for inaction being as much a moral choice as action.

Trying to blame Ned is silly. He cannot force her to tell the truth, he lets her make her own choices. In this case Sansa sides with the Lannister's and Cersei demands Lady's death. Choices have consequences, especially in a story like this one. Sansa's choice directly lead to Lady's death.

But, it's hardly worth getting into further if you just discount the story as written because of your head cannon.

[Mourning Star]

On 1/1/2022 at 9:32 PM, GMantis said:

Before going through all the subtler points and parallels, how about not blatantly distorting clearly stated points? Mycah was murdered by the Hound before Sansa had the opportunity to give her testimony before the King and the same with the chase of her sister.

  

Sansa had 4 days to come forward with the truth. She let a servant she ostensibly had a responsibility to protect, and her little sister be hunted for four days...

On 1/1/2022 at 9:32 PM, GMantis said:

Even if Sansa was the heartless schemer you're imagining her to be, she still wouldn't want to poison Robin. At the time she wanted to give him sweetsleep, Littlefinger's whole position as Lord Protector (and by extension Sansa's own) was dependent on Robin staying alive, so poisoning him would be extremely counterproductive. Sansa learned about the new plan about replacing Robin only after descending from the Eyrie.

Sansa is actively participating in poisoning Robert... are you really debating that?

Littlefinger's plot of marrying Sansa to Harry "the heir", only makes sense if the plan is for Robert to die.

It's hard for me to see this situation as anything other than Sansa being a conspirator or comically oblivious to her surroundings.

As I said, there is room for her to redeem herself, but I'm not at all sure that is where the story is headed.

[GMantis]

11 hours ago, Mourning Star said:

Sansa had 4 days to come forward with the truth. She let a servant she ostensibly had a responsibility to protect, and her little sister be hunted for four days...

She told her father what had happened the day of the attack. What more could she do exactly? It was up to her father to prevent the chase, but even he could do little since it was the queen that had sent searching parties after Mycah and Arya.

11 hours ago, Mourning Star said:

Sansa is actively participating in poisoning Robert... are you really debating that?

Littlefinger's plot of marrying Sansa to Harry "the heir", only makes sense if the plan is for Robert to die.

It's hard for me to see this situation as anything other than Sansa being a conspirator or comically oblivious to her surroundings.

You are really going to argue that Sansa is participating in a plot to poison Robert when she learned about the plot after administering the sweetsleep (which the maester failed to explain is a deadly poison)? At the time this happened (just before their descent from the Eyrie), as far as Sansa knew, Littlerfinger's plot was to control the Vale as Lord Protector in the name of Robert. Robert dying would therefore be counterproductive to his plans. It's only after descending from the Eyrie that she meets with Littlefinger and learns (in the last scene of the last of her chapters in the books) about the new plan that requires Robert's death. Now if the released sample chapter from the Winds of WInter contained a scene of Sansa giving Robert sweetsleep again (against the explicit advise of Colemon) you would certainly have a good case that she was poisoning him. Since however nothing like that happened, I really don't see on what your claims are based.

11 hours ago, Mourning Star said:

As I said, there is room for her to redeem herself, but I'm not at all sure that is where the story is headed.

It would be perhaps a good idea to try to understand the story that has already happened before trying to guess where it's headed. Otherwise you wouldn't be making bizarre claims like Sansa's role in Mycah's death (none whatsoever) being in any way comparable to Cersei's role in the death of Melara Hetherspoon  (almost certainly murdered by Cersei).

12 hours ago, Mourning Star said:

Sansa's refusal to tell the truth about the incident on the Trident is objectively what leads to Micah's death and her own sister being hunted like an animal.

This wasn't like a few hours either... it was four days. FOUR DAYS!

As someone with a sibling, especially a little sibling, this is absolutely shocking to me. Sure, she was only a kid, but that's an excuse not a justification. We all understand her lack of action in the moment of the actual incident, but to consciously choose to not come forward for days while your little sister is hunted and your servant is killed is really hard to brush aside.

As you pointed out, Cersei was only a kid too and that doesn't make her murder any more palatable. Is Sansa's silence the same as actively pushing someone down a well? No! (As I said right from the start). But, it is well worth a comparison. As anyone who's ever taken a descent philosophy class will tell you, there is a very solid case for inaction being as much a moral choice as action.

It's amazing what a long post you've written to defend a claim that is disproved by a single sentence:

Quote

Ned had heard her version of the story the night Arya had vanished. 

[Mourning Star]

15 hours ago, GMantis said:

She told her father what had happened the day of the attack. What more could she do exactly? It was up to her father to prevent the chase, but even he could do little since it was the queen that had sent searching parties after Mycah and Arya.

Tell the truth. Can you show me where she does that in the text? Maybe I missed it

15 hours ago, GMantis said:

You are really going to argue that Sansa is participating in a plot to poison Robert when she learned about the plot after administering the sweetsleep (which the maester failed to explain is a deadly poison)? At the time this happened (just before their descent from the Eyrie), as far as Sansa knew, Littlerfinger's plot was to control the Vale as Lord Protector in the name of Robert. Robert dying would therefore be counterproductive to his plans. It's only after descending from the Eyrie that she meets with Littlefinger and learns (in the last scene of the last of her chapters in the books) about the new plan that requires Robert's death. Now if the released sample chapter from the Winds of WInter contained a scene of Sansa giving Robert sweetsleep again (against the explicit advise of Colemon) you would certainly have a good case that she was poisoning him. Since however nothing like that happened, I really don't see on what your claims are based.

It’s not really an argument. Sansa is (either knowingly or obliviously) participating in poisoning her cousin and now appears to be planning to marry his heir. This is better known as usurping.

Your complaint about the timing is weirdly arbitrary… Sansa knows Littlefinger is a murderer. Sansa knows the medical advice for Robert. She’s complicit, the only debate is how aware she is. 

15 hours ago, GMantis said:

It would be perhaps a good idea to try to understand the story that has already happened before trying to guess where it's headed. Otherwise you wouldn't be making bizarre claims like Sansa's role in Mycah's death (none whatsoever) being in any way comparable to Cersei's role in the death of Melara Hetherspoon  (almost certainly murdered by Cersei).

Sansa is as responsible as anyone but the Hound for Mycah’s death.

You can try to make excuses but she let the poor kid get hunted for days through the woods and ridden down like an animal because she wouldn’t tell the truth. The rest is window dressing.

15 hours ago, GMantis said:

It's amazing what a long post you've written to defend a claim that is disproved by a single sentence:

What was Sansa’s version? Maybe you can quote that for us? Lol

[Terrorthatflapsinthenight9]

The question about Sansa is what position she will have at Winterfell and for all of the North once she goes back home, and what political power and possibilities she will have here. 

It's pretty that she'll be the Starks' political mind but what position she will really have is yet to be known.  

Maybe she could also start learning from other political players than Littlefinger, who for all his cunning and political intelligence is far from flawless and whose success was very often based on luck. At least she could learn several lessons from Wyman Manderly. 

[BlackLightning]

20 hours ago, Mourning Star said:

Sansa's refusal to tell the truth about the incident on the Trident is objectively what leads to Micah's death and her own sister being hunted like an animal.

What do you mean by refusal to tell the truth?

She told her father. Her problem is that she didn't tell the king the truth....but the king already knew the truth anyways.

 

[GMantis]

1 hour ago, Mourning Star said:

Tell the truth. Can you show me where she does that in the text? Maybe I missed it

See at the bottom.

1 hour ago, Mourning Star said:

It’s not really an argument. Sansa is (either knowingly or obliviously) participating in poisoning her cousin and now appears to be planning to marry his heir. This is better known as usurping.

Your complaint about the timing is weirdly arbitrary… Sansa knows Littlefinger is a murderer. Sansa knows the medical advice for Robert. She’s complicit, the only debate is how aware she is. 

How is my complaint weirdly arbitrary? Your version of events would have Sansa poisoning Robert in the furtherance of a plot that she could not be aware of. Littlefinger being a murderer doesn't mean that he wants to murder Robert. Again, just shortly before that he's been appointed as Lord Protector of the Vale in the name of Robert. Knowing only that, murdering him would be the last thing Littlefinger would want to do.

The medical advice is far from clear. The maester speaks of the sweetsleep accumulating, but without informing Sansa of the exact consequences. He inquires about dangerous symptoms (bleeding from the nose) which are not present and upon that decides that the sweetsleep can be allowed but only if no further amounts are administered for half a year. Since we haven't got far enough to see what has happened in this period, it's not yet clear whether Robert is being poisoned and even less of what Sansa's role would be in such poisoning.

1 hour ago, Mourning Star said:

Sansa is as responsible as anyone but the Hound for Mycah’s death.

You can try to make excuses but she let the poor kid get hunted for days through the woods and ridden down like an animal because she wouldn’t tell the truth. The rest is window dressing.

Again, read first the relevant passage in chapter 16 of AGOT (Eddard III) that I've quoted at the bottom of my post. To Sansa of complicity in Mycah's death is absurd. You've build your view of Sansa on a blatant misreading of the text.

1 hour ago, Mourning Star said:

What was Sansa’s version? Maybe you can quote that for us? Lol

Considering that her father thought that Sansa telling her version to the king would prove Arya's story, it must be have been the true one. Must I quote the whole passage in question?
 

Quote

 

Prince Joffrey was pale as he began his very different version of events. When his son was done talking, the king rose heavily from his seat, looking like a man who wanted to be anywhere but here. “What in all the seven hells am I supposed to make of this? He says one thing, she says another.”

“They were not the only ones present,” Ned said. “Sansa, come here.” Ned had heard her version of the story the night Arya had vanished. He knew the truth. “Tell us what happened.”

 

 

[Mourning Star]

41 minutes ago, GMantis said:

See at the bottom.

How is my complaint weirdly arbitrary? Your version of events would have Sansa poisoning Robert in the furtherance of a plot that she could not be aware of.
 

If you know the medical advice, and you don’t listen, that’s a choice… don’t look up!

41 minutes ago, GMantis said:

Littlefinger being a murderer doesn't mean that he wants to murder Robert. Again, just shortly before that he's been appointed as Lord Protector of the Vale in the name of Robert. Knowing only that, murdering him would be the last thing Littlefinger would want to do.

Littlefinger has all but stated he plans for Robert to die… he wants to marry Sansa to Harry first (then probably kill Harry if we are being honest!). 

41 minutes ago, GMantis said:

The medical advice is far from clear. The maester speaks of the sweetsleep accumulating, but without informing Sansa of the exact consequences. He inquires about dangerous symptoms (bleeding from the nose) which are not present and upon that decides that the sweetsleep can be allowed but only if no further amounts are administered for half a year. Since we haven't got far enough to see what has happened in this period, it's not yet clear whether Robert is being poisoned and even less of what Sansa's role would be in such poisoning.

Maybe I’m misremembering… but doesn’t Sansa cover up the nose bleeds? 

41 minutes ago, GMantis said:

Again, read first the relevant passage in chapter 16 of AGOT (Eddard III) that I've quoted at the bottom of my post. To Sansa of complicity in Mycah's death is absurd. You've build your view of Sansa on a blatant misreading of the text.

I don’t think so. I just reread it. What was her story? It’s not on the page… and when it came time to tell her story she didn’t. She was a kid, we all understand her perspective, it was still wrong.

41 minutes ago, GMantis said:

Considering that her father thought that Sansa telling her version to the king would prove Arya's story, it must be have been the true one. Must I quote the whole passage in question?

Did he? What truth did Ned know? You can claim to know what happened off page but without a quote it’s headcannon.

Her sister was in mortal peril, she should have been screaming from the rooftops… at bare minimum. 

It’s just so shocking to me to have a little sibling and imagine treating them this way, I think it’s really hard to justify four days of doing nothing, then panicking and lying.

[Mourning Star]

55 minutes ago, BlackLightning said:

What do you mean by refusal to tell the truth?

She told her father. Her problem is that she didn't tell the king the truth....but the king already knew the truth anyways.

What truth did she tell Ned?

Its not at all clear. Did she even think to mention Mycah? How about being drunk?

We can imagine whatever we want but with it happening off page then her doing nothing for four days, then lying, it’s wild to assume she told the objective truth. Especially given her later comments about the “butchers boy” and faulty memory (self deception) in general.

[GMantis]

1 minute ago, Mourning Star said:

If you know the medical advice, and you don’t listen, that’s a choice… don’t look up!

The medical advice was that Robert could take Sweetsleep twice more and then not again for half a year. It remains to be seen whether this is being followed.

1 minute ago, Mourning Star said:

Littlefinger has all but stated he plans for Robert to die… he wants to marry Sansa to Harry first (then probably kill Harry if we are being honest!). 

Stated his plans after the sweetsleep was administered.

1 minute ago, Mourning Star said:

Maybe I’m misremembering… but doesn’t Sansa cover up the nose bleeds? 

No, there is no such thing mentioned.

1 minute ago, Mourning Star said:

I don’t think so. I just reread it. What was her story? It’s not on the page… and when it came time to tell her story she didn’t. She was a kid, we all understand her perspective, it was still wrong.

Her story is not on the page. The fact that she told the story to her father on the very night of Arya's disappearance is very much on the page. Knowing this story, Ned decided that repeating it to the king would be helpful for Arya. How much clearer could this be exactly?

I should remind you that just a few posts ago you were claiming that Sansa told no one about the incident and that this led to Mycah's death. I think at least this claim has been completely disproved. It's a separate issue that she refused to repeat the story to the king, but even if she had, it wouldn't have helped Mycah.

1 minute ago, Mourning Star said:

Did he? What truth did Ned know? You can claim to know what happened off page but without a quote it’s headcannon.

Why would Ned want Sansa to testify if her version of events didn't match with Arya's? And Ned certainly believes that Arya is telling the truth, so what other interpretation could there be of him saying that Sansa told him the truth? This is not headcanon. Not everything has to be spelt out to the reader to be absolutely obvious.

[Jaenara Belarys]

24 minutes ago, Mourning Star said:

Maybe I’m misremembering… but doesn’t Sansa cover up the nose bleeds? 

1 hour ago, GMantis said:

No. That's fanfic. The maester asks if he's been bleeding from the nose, and she says no. Considering that she apparently spends a lot of time with Robert, I'm inclined to believe her. 

[Mourning Star]

40 minutes ago, Jaenara Belarys said:

No. That's fanfic. The maester asks if he's been bleeding from the nose, and she says no. Considering that she apparently spends a lot of time with Robert, I'm inclined to believe her. 

In a chapter full of lies, where Robert is constantly wiping his nose… and his eyes are red and complains of a hurting head? I’m inclined to think she is lying… but having just looked, it is absolutely not explicit.

Maester Colemon cares only for the boy, though. Father and I have larger concerns.

This is a startling contrast to how her actual father choose to treat “the boy”, Jon.

48 minutes ago, GMantis said:

I should remind you that just a few posts ago you were claiming that Sansa told no one about the incident and that this led to Mycah's death. I think at least this claim has been completely disproved. It's a separate issue that she refused to repeat the story to the king, but even if she had, it wouldn't have helped Mycah.

Four days and Sansa didn’t tell anyone, didn’t go out looking, didn’t do anything to help. We don’t know what she told Ned, and she constantly lies about this event and others through the  story.

I stand by my comments. She shared responsibility for Mycah’s death.

Sansa said. "The Hound is Joffrey's sworn shield. Your butcher's boy attacked the prince."

[GMantis]

4 minutes ago, Mourning Star said:

Four days and Sansa didn’t tell anyone, didn’t go out looking, didn’t do anything to help.

In Ned's chapter we have it clearly stated: "Ned had heard her version of the story the night Arya had vanished. He knew the truth."  I mean, in the very next sentence of your post you admit that she told her father, but it's not known what she had told.

As for doing something, why would her father let her go in the very forest where his other daughter had already vanished and where hostile search parties were out? And what exactly could she have done to help, other than inform her father?

4 minutes ago, Mourning Star said:

We don’t know what she told Ned, and she constantly lies about this event and others through the story.

We know that Ned thought that her testimony would help Arya. Why else would he want her to testify in front of the king? We know that Ned considered it the truth after hearing Arya's testimony. Why would he do that if the two testimonies didn't match?

And it doesn't matter at all whether Sansa lied about this and other events. The question is solely about whether Ned had heard her version the day Arya disappeared and whether that version was correct. This is directly answered in Ned's chapter.

 

4 minutes ago, Mourning Star said:

 Stand by my comments.

Your comments are not even internally consistent. First it was that Sansa told no one. Now you're saying that she told something, but that she was lying. How can you stand by both of these comments?