Arya Stark and the Murder of Dareon - Guilty or Not Guilty?

[Craving Peaches]

9 minutes ago, Rondo said:

All of us had fun discussing the subject.

I doubt everyone had fun.

9 minutes ago, Rondo said:

Arya is really nuts. 

But she isn't. If she were really nuts, she'd be completely divorced from reality. She wouldn't be tracking Dareon down when no one else was about because he was a Night's Watch deserter. She'd be attacking random people in the open for no apparent reason at all.

Arya is likely traumatised but I really doubt she is insane, at least nowhere near insane enough to have her aquitted. She is beginning to lack morality, not sanity.

13 minutes ago, Rondo said:

What do you do with an interesting clinical case like Arya?

Westeros, and by extension the whole planet, has little to none in the way of facilities to care for a traumatised child like Arya. Were she in the real world, Arya would likely have people to help her, a psychologist (please note this does not mean she is insane) and others such as social workers who work with children. She would have specialist support. If she were in the real world, she never would have murdered Dareon in the first place, because (aside from everything not existing), in the event of her family members being killed there would be support for her available and she would be given help to reunite with her surviving family. She would not be recruited by a group of assassins, she would not be in such a vulnerable state as she was in the Riverlands, and so on.

16 minutes ago, Rondo said:

It would be contrary to the public good to let her loose.  Surely you can agree to that.

If we go down that route then a good portion of the characters would have to be locked up. Daenerys and her dragons, for one. Invading Westeros with flying, fire breathing lizards is contrary to the public good. Starting another conflict in the already war-torn country just because you feel entitled to an uncomfortable iron chair is contrary to the public good. Bringing Dothraki and religious zealots into the Seven Kingdoms is contrary to the public good.

[Nevets]

3 hours ago, Rondo said:

The thread titled "Arya's Mental Illness" is closed now but you can find it easily.  All of us had fun discussing the subject.

Arya is really nuts.  I should ask you Craving Peaches. So do you treat her and manage her so she can't murder?  What do you do with an interesting clinical case like Arya?  It would be contrary to the public good to let her loose.  Surely you can agree to that.  

You do realize that the total number of people she has killed by choice is . . . two.  Both of whom were criminals.  Deserters are criminals and his original offense is irrelevant to this discussion.  Her other victim, Raff, was a war criminal.  I don't agree with her actions, but she is hardly a serious public safety threat.

What she needs is a safe, secure environment away from the Faceless Men, and preferably a mentor to help her through some of her issues.  Obviously, such an environment is difficult to find in Martinland.  Mentors could include someone like Brienne, but there are other possibilities; just someone she will respect and listen to.

[Nevets]

16 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Well, he’s a member of NW that has abandoned his duty and makes no secret of it either. Guilty. Execute him and geld him while you’re at it since the avoided punishment of the crime committed is gelding. 
 
Arya has been too merciful with this criminal, I congratulate her on keeping her calm since as a highborn maiden she would’ve been most offended by this rapist who targets maidens of the nobility. Oh the humanity! What has the planetos come to that ladies of the highest birth are raped in their very own bedchambers by filthy commoners. 

Somehow I get the feeling that this post isn't intended to be taken seriously; certainly not literally.  Too bad your irony got missed.  

If I'm wrong I do apologize.

I do agree that his actions will be regarded as wrongful whether she agreed or not.  We're not in the modern world and shouldn't pretend we are.  As Martin once put it, they have a rigid class structure and that structure has teeth.  Teeth which took a big chunk out of Dareon.

[Quoth the raven,]

Guilty of the crime of murder.  Dareon she murdered because he was a man of the night's watch and she thinks he betrayed Jon.  She murdered the insurance underwriter because killing him was her ticket to where she wants to go.  There is nothing justified about those killings.  It's just a crazy Arya murdering them because she wanted to. 

[Craving Peaches]

3 hours ago, Quoth the raven, said:

It's just a crazy Arya

She's not crazy though.

[Corvo the Crow]

.

[Craving Peaches]

Just now, Corvo the Crow said:

Also Daenerys does need treatment, without it she’ll end up Aerys the third in a few years. Perhaps she is named Daenerys to remind of Aerys.

You can get lots of names from her name. It's quite interesting.

D a e n e r y s

Gives you Aerys, Naerys, Aenys, Daenys, and possibly more.

3 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

I agree, in the real world Jon would be informed of this by a phone call from Sam, and he’d have contacted the Braavosi authorities.

To be honest I don't think it would even reach that stage in the real world. Arya would likely have been reunited with her family or at least had someone to care for her, she wouldn't be in the company of assassins.

[Corvo the Crow]

.

[Corvo the Crow]

.

[Craving Peaches]

1 hour ago, Corvo the Crow said:

I meant that Dareon’s case would be handled through authorities, Arya would not have needed to take matters into her hand.

Yes, they could request to extradite him or something like that.

[The Sleeper]

Sure, it was murder. You could argue that all of her kills were murders. After all, since Cersei's coup she's been on the wrong side of the law. Killing Raff the Sweetling also qualifies as murder. It is obvious why it hasn't been mentioned. While it does qualify as murder, it is quite difficult to defend Raff. 

As far as she is concerned, Dareon needed to be punished and she was the only one to do it. She did personally and took responsibility for it, she had established his guilt, as well as his unwillingness to return to his duties and had observed his behaviour and character and found no extenuating circumstances. According to what applies in Westeros Dareon's life was forfeit. 

Jaime, on his way to Riverrun discovered some deserters squatting in an abandoned tower and promptly had them hanged. This incident took barely half a paragraph, while Dareon occupied large portions of Sam's and Arya's chapters where his actions and character are examined. The contrast is jarring, yet Jaime was legally empowered to do so. 

This is not the only example. We have various lords summarily dispensing justice, including Ned, often inflicting death and horrendous punishments with little thought.

So what if it was murder? 

 

[Craving Peaches]

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

Killing Raff the Sweetling also qualifies as murder. It is obvious why it hasn't been mentioned. While it does qualify as murder, it is quite difficult to defend Raff. 

It is still murder though. Raff may be horrible but Arya has no legal excuse to kill him.

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

After all, since Cersei's coup she's been on the wrong side of the law.

I don't think this is relevant because she's in Braavos, not Westeros. Cersei is not in charge there, nor does the NW have jurisdiction there. Not that Arya is acting on their behalf either.

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

You could argue that all of her kills were murders.

Of course they were, she is an assassin-in-training. None of them are going to be legal.

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

As far as she is concerned, Dareon needed to be punished and she was the only one to do it. She did personally and took responsibility for it, she had established his guilt, as well as his unwillingness to return to his duties and had observed his behaviour and character and found no extenuating circumstances. According to what applies in Westeros Dareon's life was forfeit. 

They weren't in Westeros. Even if they were in Westeros, Arya is a child. She thought she had the right to take the law into her own hands. I think she did not.

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

Jaime, on his way to Riverrun discovered some deserters squatting in an abandoned tower and promptly had them hanged. This incident took barely half a paragraph, while Dareon occupied large portions of Sam's and Arya's chapters where his actions and character are examined. The contrast is jarring, yet Jaime was legally empowered to do so.

He was, because he was carrying out the legal punishment for outlawry in Westeros, hanging, in Westeros, with the capacity to do so as he was an adult acting on behalf of the crown.

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

This is not the only example. We have various lords summarily dispensing justice, including Ned, often inflicting death and horrendous punishments with little thought.

Arya is not a ruling lady. She is not an adult. And she doesn't even follow Ned's own example.

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

So what if it was murder? 

I don't think the books are trying to promote vigilantism or self-help. The situation is clearly meant to be more complex than, 'Arya murdered this guy, who cares? He was an idiot etc.' I don't think it is the right thing to do and I don't think the intention is to present it as the right thing to do. It is illegal and immoral in my view.

[Corvo the Crow]

.

[Craving Peaches]

Just now, Corvo the Crow said:

Was he carrying out legal punishment when he brazenly assaulted the King's childhood best friend, Hand of the King Lord Eddard of House Stark in the streets and killed his household guards, men loyal to the end? I think not. 

No, but they weren't outlaws were they? I have ammended the statistics to reflect his killing of the guardsmen.

[The Sleeper]

On 10/18/2022 at 9:02 PM, Craving Peaches said:

It is still murder though. Raff may be horrible but Arya has no legal excuse to kill him.

I don't think this is relevant because she's in Braavos, not Westeros. Cersei is not in charge there, nor does the NW have jurisdiction there. Not that Arya is acting on their behalf either.

Of course they were, she is an assassin-in-training. None of them are going to be legal.

They weren't in Westeros. Even if they were in Westeros, Arya is a child. She thought she had the right to take the law into her own hands. I think she did not.

He was, because he was carrying out the legal punishment for outlawry in Westeros, hanging, in Westeros, with the capacity to do so as he was an adult acting on behalf of the crown.

Arya is not a ruling lady. She is not an adult. And she doesn't even follow Ned's own example.

I don't think the books are trying to promote vigilantism or self-help. The situation is clearly meant to be more complex than, 'Arya murdered this guy, who cares? He was an idiot etc.' I don't think it is the right thing to do and I don't think the intention is to present it as the right thing to do. It is illegal and immoral in my view.

Kind of missing the point. 

In terms of who is dully appointed to dispense justice, this is largely dependent on one's current allegiance. Jaime for instance is acting knowingly on the orders of a usurper and as conspirator of said usurper; therefore anything and everything he does in an official capacity is illegal. This applies literally to everyone in the story. They are all considered rebels and traitors by someone. The only person you could say has undisputed claim on being the source of law based on what is commonly known, in the sense that are no other known or confirmed heirs of house Targaryen, is Dany, but then she proceeds to savagely violate the customs of the Dothraki and then proceeds to assault sovereign states. Not that I really blame her for it. 

In terms of culpability, Dareon's is indisputable. Since you mentioned it, whether it is immoral or not applies not just to Dareon and Arya, but to desertion in general. And universally deserters face very severe punishments with death being very common. And I am not talking about ASoIaF but the real world, now. You can't really lay this on Arya, she is acting on what she has been taught.

The issue of jurisdiction has no bearing on the facts. Sure, Arya has no business killing people in the streets of Braavos, but on the other hand Dareon remains a deserter as any perpetrator remains guilty of the crime he committed regardless of his location. Furthermore the legality of the action never comes up since she wasn't caught and the punishment the Faceless Men inflict is independent of the righteousness of Arya's action or lack therefore. In other words it never becomes an issue in the story. 

In terms of the characters in question, Arya is an eleven year-old that has grown up in a warrior society and a war zone recently. This means she is not old enough to grasp the nuances and has witnessed and suffered gross injustice on behalf of the authorities of her country and justice as hse knows it is dispensed by individuals determined by birth based on their own personal judgement. On the other hand Dareon is a dick who in his way has probably been a victim of circumstance. (I doubt that had Mathis Rowan believed that Dareon had raped his daughter, he would have allowed him to simply take the black). Does he deserve death? I don't think so but Westeros by and large does. 

I don't think the series promotes vingilantism, but it does examine justice in a greater context. 

In light of all that, the only issue that arises from Arya's murder of Daeron in terms of legality is that of jurisdiction. It would be interesting to see what would have happened if Sam reported Dareon to the Braavosi authorities. Another relevant issue would be the actions taken by the Braavosi regarding the Lyseni ships from Hardhome. Did they arrest the Lyseni? After all Hardhome is not under Braavosi jurisdiction. Unfortunately, it hasn't come up. 

So I come back to my original question. What if it was murder? It hardly seems relevant. 

[Craving Peaches]

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

The issue of jurisdiction has no bearing on the facts. Sure, Arya has no business killing people in the streets of Braavos, but on the other hand Dareon remains a deserter as any perpetrator remains guilty of the crime he committed regardless of his location.

I don't think that's strictly true. Where I live, blasphemy is not a crime. If I went to a country where it was a crime, committed it there and then returned home, I would not be guilty of blasphemy under the laws of my home country. I would be guilty under the laws of the other country. If the punishment for the crime of blasphemy in that country was death, a person acting on behalf of the other country could not just execute me in my home country for blasphemy. They would have to try and have me extradited (which would likely fail). The concept of extradition doesn't seem to exist in Westeros. Unless desertion is also punishable by death in Braavos as well, then while there Arya is not entitled to kill Dareon because he is a deserter.

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

Furthermore the legality of the action never comes up since she wasn't caught and the punishment the Faceless Men inflict is independent of the righteousness of Arya's action or lack therefore. In other words it never becomes an issue in the story.

I doubt anyone will ever bring it up, but I think it's significant that Arya herself spends quite a lot of time thinking about it, going over why she did it. It feels like an attempt to justify it, to assure herself that she has done the right thing. It won't be a big issue in the story, but right now it seems to be a significant internal issue for Arya.

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

Another relevant issue would be the actions taken by the Braavosi regarding the Lyseni ships from Hardhome. Did they arrest the Lyseni? After all Hardhome is not under Braavosi jurisdiction.

As far as I can recall, the Braavosi did not arrest them when they were in Hardhome. They arrested them when they were in Braavos. To be comparable to Arya's situation the Braavosi would have to arrest them when they were in Hardhome.

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

In terms of who is dully appointed to dispense justice, this is largely dependent on one's current allegiance. Jaime for instance is acting knowingly on the orders of a usurper and as conspirator of said usurper; therefore anything and everything he does in an official capacity is illegal. This applies literally to everyone in the story. They are all considered rebels and traitors by someone.

In Westeros, yes, but in Braavos who is the rightful King of the Seven Kingdoms or not is less relevant. Not to mention that Arya isn't acting on anyone's authority but her own, which has little to no legal basis. She's a noble but she's not head of the house, she's not even of age, and she's in a foreign country.

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

In terms of culpability, Dareon's is indisputable. Since you mentioned it, whether it is immoral or not applies not just to Dareon and Arya, but to desertion in general. And universally deserters face very severe punishments with death being very common. And I am not talking about ASoIaF but the real world, now. You can't really lay this on Arya, she is acting on what she has been taught.

Arya is not following the example set by her own father when it comes to executing deserters though.

Quote

Yet our way is the older way. The blood of the First Men still flows in the veins of the Starks, and we hold to the belief that the man who passes the sentence should swing the sword. If you would take a man's life, you owe it to him to look into his eyes and hear his final words. And if you cannot bear to do that, then perhaps the man does not deserve to die.

Going by the in-world logic from the culture that Arya has been raised in, it is debatable whether Dareon deserved to die or not.

2 hours ago, The Sleeper said:

So I come back to my original question. What if it was murder? It hardly seems relevant.

It isn't particularly relevant to the wider world, but I think it's important for Arya's character. With her first few kills, we see up front that the victims are all horrible people. But with Dareon, there is an element of doubt. If he did not commit the crime he was sentenced for, did he really deserve to be forced to join the Watch, a penal colony, for life? And so did he really deserve to be killed for leaving said penal colony? He's not the most sympathetic character but he's more sympathetic than the others. It also could point to a gradual loosening of Arya's morals.

[H Wadsworth Longfellow]

On 10/15/2022 at 9:29 AM, Craving Peaches said:

I am certain the fact that she viewed Dareon as a deserter was what motivated her to do the deed.

Those are her thoughts.

It means the same thing.  It does not excuse Arya's crime of murder.  

[the trees have eyes]

On 10/17/2022 at 10:17 AM, Corvo the Crow said:

He comitted a crime, rape or not and since the act was without the lord’s consent, it is a rape.

I don't think that's right.  He certainly damaged her marriage prospects but 

A Game of Thrones - Jon IV

"Lord Rowan of Goldengrove found him in bed with his daughter. The girl was two years older, and Dareon swears she helped him through her window, but under her father's eye she named it rape

 

suggests she could have said it wasn't. 

 

And then there's Amerei "Gatehouse Ami" Frey.  She was willing enough though tbf we are never told what happened to the four squires she was found with.

 

On 10/17/2022 at 11:43 PM, Nevets said:

You do realize that the total number of people she has killed by choice is . . . two.  Both of whom were criminals.  Deserters are criminals and his original offense is irrelevant to this discussion.  Her other victim, Raff, was a war criminal.  I don't agree with her actions, but she is hardly a serious public safety threat.

What she needs is a safe, secure environment away from the Faceless Men, and preferably a mentor to help her through some of her issues.  Obviously, such an environment is difficult to find in Martinland.  Mentors could include someone like Brienne, but there are other possibilities; just someone she will respect and listen to.

To be fair she killed the stable boy in King's Landing and the Bolton guard at Harrenhall.  These are kills out of expediency but neither are criminals and the cutting of the guard's throat bothers me as much as Daeron.  The child soldier analogy is a good one as she has become desensitised to and accustomed to taking life.  Arguably, the insurance salesman is a further step down this slippery slope as she is being taught to kill without understanding why (I'm not sure if she reasons out why the salesman is to die or perhaps she rationalises the act to justify it to herself).

On 10/20/2022 at 3:43 PM, The Sleeper said:

she proceeds to savagely violate the customs of the Dothraki and then proceeds to assault sovereign states. Not that I really blame her for it. 

Taken out of context I love how this fragment reads.  Eh, that's all. 

On 10/20/2022 at 6:48 PM, Craving Peaches said:

I don't think that's strictly true. Where I live, blasphemy is not a crime. If I went to a country where it was a crime, committed it there and then returned home, I would not be guilty of blasphemy under the laws of my home country. I would be guilty under the laws of the other country. If the punishment for the crime of blasphemy in that country was death, a person acting on behalf of the other country could not just execute me in my home country for blasphemy. They would have to try and have me extradited (which would likely fail).

Tell that to Salman Rushdie 

She is kind of copying Ned in executing a deserter and, if not exactly listening to his last words, hearing him explain himself to Sam.  But she gets it wrong.  The point of the last words is to hear his final rebuttal or extenuating circumstances and Daeron says over and over again "the girl was willing".  Logically, if there was no crime, then a forced oath to avoid death or castration is an oath he should be released from, not executed for breaking.  Arya doesn't seem to give any weight to his last words and to be more motivated by the fact that he is abandoning the NW, and by extension Jon, and is angry with him for it.  I know she never specifically references Jon but I always consider that an understood subtext.

[Nevets]

31 minutes ago, the trees have eyes said:

I don't think that's right.  He certainly damaged her marriage prospects but 

A Game of Thrones - Jon IV

"Lord Rowan of Goldengrove found him in bed with his daughter. The girl was two years older, and Dareon swears she helped him through her window, but under her father's eye she named it rape

 

suggests she could have said it wasn't. 

 

To be fair she killed the stable boy in King's Landing and the Bolton guard at Harrenhall.  These are kills out of expediency but neither are criminals and the cutting of the guard's throat bothers me as much as Daeron.  The child soldier analogy is a good one as she has become desensitised to and accustomed to taking life.  Arguably, the insurance salesman is a further step down this slippery slope as she is being taught to kill without understanding why (I'm not sure if she reasons out why the salesman is to die or perhaps she rationalises the act to justify it to herself).

Taken out of context I love how this fragment reads.  Eh, that's all. 

Tell that to Salman Rushdie 

She is kind of copying Ned in executing a deserter and, if not exactly listening to his last words, hearing him explain himself to Sam.  But she gets it wrong.  The point of the last words is to hear his final rebuttal or extenuating circumstances and Daeron says over and over again "the girl was willing".  Logically, if there was no crime, then a forced oath to avoid death or castration is an oath he should be released from, not executed for breaking.  Arya doesn't seem to give any weight to his last words and to be more motivated by the fact that he is abandoning the NW, and by extension Jon, and is angry with him for it.  I know she never specifically references Jon but I always consider that an understood subtext.

I'm not too bothered by the stableboy or the Bolton guard.  I consider them more or less justified under the circumstances.  She felt she would be endangered or at least far worse off if she didn't kill them, and she may be right.  The Bolton guard was also the victim of her poor planning.  She only realized at the last minute that she wouldn't be able to convince or intimidate him into letting her out, and she had crossed the Rubicon by taking the horses, dagger, and map.

The insurance guy was on orders, and even then they had to push her pretty hard.  The Faceless Men implied he had been cheating his customers.  Arya chose to believe that though its actual truth is unknown.

I don't recall Arya ever hearing anything about Dareon's past.  She wasn't present for the fight, I know that.  His last words were that he had told Sam he should leave Aemon behind, but it was too late now.