Your Most Hated ASOIAF theory

[Sandy Clegg]

1 hour ago, CamiloRP said:

It's so watertight you haven't been able to respond to most of my arguments...

 

But they're all speculation that don't have basis in text, as opposed to the accepted version of events. And the speculation is cut off at the source, once we realise that Littlefinger knew about Joff's death before Sansa even got on the boat. Until there is evidence to counteract that then there's no point wondering if Tyrion was the target, unless the we think the Tyrells went against LF's plan, somehow missed the target and Joff died anyway. Which would be kind of funny at least. 

George's quotes are on the thread I linked. He does reserve the right to change his mind, he's said, but just the fact that he goes into some detail about what the plan was .... this is rare for him to do if it was a 'still to be revealed' plot thread. 

We're just repeating what's been said in past discussions, though.

[CamiloRP]

1 hour ago, kissdbyfire said:

How do you reckon?

because of this quote from him:

"I wanted to make it little bit unclear what exactly has happened here, make the readers work a little to try and figure out what has happened."

[CamiloRP]

56 minutes ago, Sandy Clegg said:

But they're all speculation that don't have basis in text,

I especulated on two ocations: the strangler being able to be disolved in saliva or in stomach acid, and LF being able to get in and out of KL without being noticed. Both of which are reasonable assumptions. The rest are just questions the "Olenna poisoned Joffrey" theory can't answer.

 

Quote

as opposed to the accepted version of events. And the speculation is cut off at the source, once we realise that Littlefinger knew about Joff's death before Sansa even got on the boat. Until there is evidence to counteract that then there's no point wondering if Tyrion was the target, unless the we think the Tyrells went against LF's plan, somehow missed the target and Joff died anyway. Which would be kind of funny at least.

Again, htere are reasonable explanations on how LF would know, there are no reasonable explanations for why LF would involve the Tyrells, why the Tyrells would accept to be involved with him, why LF would want to kill Joffrey, why would Olenna do the poisoning herself, or why Olenna would risk Margeary's life. The "Olenna poisoned Joffrey" theory can't answer any of these questions and the only evidence it has is the word of a liar and Olenna fixing Sansa's net, that isn't "water tight".

 

Quote

George's quotes are on the thread I linked. He does reserve the right to change his mind, he's said, but just the fact that he goes into some detail about what the plan was .... this is rare for him to do if it was a 'still to be revealed' plot thread.

I haven't found the quotes in the thread, but if they are anything like the quote I know, he's just explaining what LF said was his plan.

[Sandy Clegg]

28 minutes ago, CamiloRP said:

The "Olenna poisoned Joffrey" theory can't answer any of these questions

Ok but these questions are raised by you, not the text. Both the Tyrells and LF do very well out of Joff's murder. So there is the rationale. The plan worked. They got what they want. Was it complex? Yes. Needlessly so? No. It had as many moving pieces as it required to ensure distance, plausible deniability and a fall guy in Sansa.

29 minutes ago, CamiloRP said:

I especulated on two ocations: the strangler being able to be disolved in saliva or in stomach acid, and LF being able to get in and out of KL without being noticed. Both of which are reasonable assumptions. The rest are just questions the "Olenna poisoned Joffrey" theory can't answer.

I skipped a few hoping someone else would pitch in because I'm knackered  Can't speak to dissolving in saliva or acid because it's not in the text. 

 

32 minutes ago, CamiloRP said:

I haven't found the quotes in the thread, but if they are anything like the quote I know, he's just explaining what LF said was his plan.

He might add some wrinkles to the story, sure, but he just doesn't talk about plots unless they're kind of done with. And we might never get closure on this in the way we want anyway, because that's not how history works and George likes his books to feel like history. So the debate will rage on. But I think he puts deliberate bread crumbs in the text for a reason (like the bells fading), and we should follow them if we can.

I mean, there are a number of 'what ifs' apart from yours that also sound enticing - what if Tywin was the target? What if it was the Red Viper? You can open the floodgates on a lot of stuff and they will find a willing audience because everyone wants to upset the apple cart. But at some point we have to draw a line under it if it doesn't add to the immediate story. If it is revealed that the plan went down differently, I suspect it'll be a throwaway comment by a character in ADOS, just to tease us, because I can't see how the Tyrells wanting Tyrion dead affects him now that he's in Essos. That chapter is closed.

Well, I did have something I was going to write on the strangler, as I don't think George is done with it by a long shot. Maybe I'll go back and finish it, as this has given me some new things to think about.

[CamiloRP]

13 minutes ago, Sandy Clegg said:

Ok but these questions are raised by you, not the text.

But they are valid questions that you could answer if you had a watertight theory, it wouldn't have these holes.

 

Quote

Both the Tyrells and LF do very well out of Joff's murder.

Nope, the Tyrells have to deal with Cersei as regent without Joff acting as a check on her, and Cersei depowers them (Joff would've likely gave more power to the Tyrells, as he is shown to like Mace, listen to Margeary and mistrust Cersei's advice for being a woman).

On the other hand, Littlefinger can't marry Sansa because Tyrion is still alive.

 

21 minutes ago, Sandy Clegg said:

So there is the rationale. The plan worked. They got what they want.

No, they got was LF say they wanted after the fact, but he's a known liar, we don't know if this is what anyone wanted.

 

Quote

Was it complex? Yes. Needlessly so? No.

It is. Olenna could've taken the poison herself if she was gonna de her own poisoning. What if Sansa doesn't wear the net? What if Dontos gave the information away to Cersei/Joff? LF uses him because he needs Sansa's trust, but the Tyrells don't know kidnapping Sansa is a part of the plan.

The Tyrells gain nothing by involving LF, Dontos and Sansa, and Petyr gains nothing by involving the Tyrells. It only adds extra steps and extra conspiratos and moving parts. That's the deffinition of needlesly complex.

 

Quote

It had as many moving pieces as it required to ensure distance, plausible deniability and a fall guy in Sansa.

If the Tyrells expected Sansa to stay there and be blamed for it, she would be the fall guy (tho Tyrion is also the fall guy, that's why Petyr got the jousting dwarves, and then there's the attempt to pretend the thing was a choaking, so I'd argue there's no need for Sansa to be the second fall guy). But if they expected Sansa to be the fall guy, they couldn't use her as a way to keep Petyr in check. Also Sansa would be an awful fall guy for the Tyrells, as anyone would try to find where she got the net from and the easiest guess (besides Tyrion) would be the Tyrells, the ones who talked with her the most, even going out of their way to hide what they were talking about.

If the Tyrells expected Sansa to get out during the wedding, there was no need for her to carry the poison, as her disappearance would act as a sign of her guilt anyway, and no one would be able to know she had poison in her hair, so Olenna would be free to carry the poison in her pocket (like she pressumably does after taking it from Sansa) instead of having to stealthily take it from her with pressumably slow and weak hands.

 

Quote

I skipped a few hoping someone else would pitch in because I'm knackered  Can't speak to dissolving in saliva or acid because it's not in the text. 

If it dissolves in wine then it dissolves in saliva and in aid, both of which are more corrosive than wine.

 

Quote

He might add some wrinkles to the story, sure, but he just doesn't talk about plots unless they're kind of done with. And we might never get closure on this in the way we want anyway, because that's not how history works and George likes his books to feel like history. So the debate will rage on. But I think he puts deliberate bread crumbs in the text for a reason (like the bells fading), and we should follow them if we can.

Yes, he trows in some breadcrumbs, like the fact that LF needs Tyrion to die in order to marry Sansa, or that it doesn't make sense to simulate a choaking with something no one can choak on, the fact that LF has admitedly no reason for wanting Joffrey dead, the fact that Olenna makes no sense either as a conspirator or as a poisoner, and so on,

 

Quote

I mean, there are a number of 'what ifs' apart from yours that also sound enticing - what if Tywin was the target?

I haven't read any arguments that favor that, there could be, and I might even be persuaded, but from the get go, Joff was poisoned either by the wine in his and Marge's cup or by Tyrion's fault, it makes little sense for someone to try and murder him in that way.

 

Quote

What if it was the Red Viper?

This makes way more sense than Tywin as the target, and if you suppose Oberyn was conspiring with LF, it makes more sense than Olenna doing the poisonning, as he has, pressumably, faster hands and more of a reason to want Joffrey dead (he is the one who bennefits the most from the situation after all), but it still makes little sense for him adn Petyr to be allied, like with Olenna, they don't need eachother in order to pull it off.

 

Quote

You can open the floodgates on a lot of stuff and they will find a willing audience because everyone wants to upset the apple cart. But at some point we have to draw a line under it if it doesn't add to the immediate story.

Well, it adds to it, if the true story is what LF said to Sansa we have a story with weird motivation and a bunch of contrivances that don't feel too realistic and don't make much sense, and it can add to the story in another way: Tyrion is still alive and Petyr should (and does) still want him dead.

There was another poisoning Petyr was responsable of: that of Jon Arryn. The first thing we heard about it was that Cersei killed him, and that lie also came from LF. What did the revelation that it was a lie add to the story?I imagine that if when AGOT was first published someone theorized Jon Arrin was killed by LF, they would've been treated like a madman who wanted to "upset the apple cart" and go against what was established. That made up person would have less evidence than me, but they would still be correct.
Besides, George loves his parallels, so the lie about the poisoner of Joffrey could parallel the lie about the poisoner of Jon Arryn, we even find out about Jon Arryn's poisoning not long after Petyr tells Sansa his "plan" with Olenna.

 

Quote

because I can't see how the Tyrells wanting Tyrion dead affects him now that he's in Essos.

Again, I don't think the Tyrells were involved in any way, I said that a few times before and spent a lot of time arguing why it makes little sense for Petyr to trust on the Tyrells, the Tyrells to trust on Petyr and Olenna to be the one did the poisoning.

[Nevets]

Two things worth mentioning:

Sansa received the hairnet from Littlefinger's agent right after the Blackwater.  At that time, Tyrion was not a factor for anyone.  So I doubt he was the intended target.

Tyrion's slice of pie was placed before him while he was in his seat at the table, next to Sansa.  If he eats and chokes, Sansa is going nowhere.  He wound up next to Joffrey because Joffrey was being a jerk.  The dwarves were gone by then.

 

@CamiloRP I've tried to analyze as a theory, without relying on LF's confession.  Here goes:

What we know:

LF knew someone fiddled with Sansa's hairnet.  Olenna Tyrell 'adjusted' it.  No one else is mentioned touching it.  One crystal was missing afterwards.  The crystal matches the description we have for the Strangler.

It is stated that the strangler is administered dissolved in wine.  No other method has been given.  Olenna was in proximity to Joffrey's chalice, as was Garlan, Margaery's brother.  Either could slip it in, with a warning to Margaery not to drink.  If drinking is unavoidable, she can spill it.  You lose the opportunity, but are no worse off than before.

Baelish visited Highgarden, giving plenty of opportunity for plotting.  He tells Sansa that he had his servants spread stories about Joffrey's violence and cruelty.  The Tyrells' meeting with Sansa is consistent with this.  They clearly had heard stories they didn't fully trust and were looking for confirmation and more detail.

The Tyrells have motive to kill Joffrey.  He is violent and cruel, and was abusive to his betrothed.  There is a reasonable fear Margaery could be a target of abuse.  And Loras, now a kingsguard, is known to be hot tempered.  A violent, and likely fatal, reaction to Margaery's mistreatment is a strong possibility.  Cersei told Ned that if Jaime had known Robert had hit her, Jaime probably would have killed Robert.  And Jaime is calm, cool, and collected compared to Loras.  Kingslayer stew coming up.  Even Sansa could see that coming.

Tommen is someone they can more easily mold into being a good husband, as well as being a better ruler than his brother, who showed signs of a tyrannical nature.  Nobody wants a repeat of Aerys II, which was where Joffrey seemed to be heading.

While I would not care to take this case to a modern court for literary purposes, it is good enough for me to conclude that Baelish and the Tyrells conspired to murder Joffrey.  The main flaw is Baelish's motive.  I suspect he has one, we just aren't aware of it yet.

For what it's worth, I don't think Sansa was intended as a fall guy, but a way to get the murder weapon in undetected.  The two sides don't trust one another, and this is a way for the Tyrells to put some distance between themselves and the weapon, In case of betrayal.

I also think the Tyrells were planning on it being passed off as accidental, while Baelish was intending on implicating Tyrion, especially after his marriage to Sansa.

Edited April 4 by Nevets
Tagged Camilo RP

[Sandy Clegg]

8 hours ago, CamiloRP said:

I don't think the Tyrells were involved in any way, I said that a few times before and spent a lot of time arguing why it makes little sense for Petyr to trust on the Tyrells, the Tyrells to trust on Petyr and Olenna to be the one did the poisoning.

It's all confusing so I'll simplify.

You say

a) Baelish did not try to kill Joff

b) he did try to kill Tyrion 

c) the Tyrells weren't involved. 

We can see from the text, however, that

a) we clearly know that Joff was LF's target because he had foreknowledge of his death on the ship. This is the crucial fact that wipes away all arguments that Tyrion was the target, which you haven't fully addressed.

b) see a)

c) if Joff was the target, it makes perfect sense for the Tyrells to be involved, in fact it makes sense that they were the chief instigators and sought LF's help rather than the other way round. 

Whatever LF's reasons - chaos, sowing disruption, making moves no-one expects, etc. - he's entitled to them because that's the character GRRM has given us. They aren't out of character, they just reveal to us more of his character. We don't need to understand him completely, he's an enigmatic figure with shady motives who takes calculated risks.

Might he have had an ulterior secondary motive to kill Tyrion as well? Possibly. Dontos had instructions to whisk Sansa away when the poisoning was done, and two murders would be a bigger distraction than two. There are quite a few permutations I'd happily accept on top of the wine being poisoned, just not one that leaves Joff out as a target. The poison simulated choking exactly as Cressen says it does, GRRM has Tyrion patently notice the purple discolouration of the wine, and the amethyst used to do it was gone from the hairnet. 

[CamiloRP]

6 hours ago, Sandy Clegg said:

 

a) we clearly know that Joff was LF's target because he had foreknowledge of his death on the ship. This is the crucial fact that wipes away all arguments that Tyrion was the target, which you haven't fully addressed.

I have adressed it: LF could've easily heard the bells or been in KL, it's not impossible, improbable or hard to imagine, it's not a certainty that he has heard the bells, but he could've, and that's enough.

 

Quote

c) if Joff was the target, it makes perfect sense for the Tyrells to be involved, in fact it makes sense that they were the chief instigators and sought LF's help rather than the other way round.

You keep lumping in the Tyrells with LF even when discussing the possibility of Tyrion being the target, which makes no sense.

And, no, it doesn't make perfect sense for them to be involved even if Joff was the target, even less so for them to be the ones who sought LF's help. They don't need LF in any way. He's a known scheeming liar, who brings nothing to the table and has no reason for wanting Joffrey dead. How would they go about approaching the subject? Again, it makes even less sense when you consider that LF's plan, if the Tyrells are involved, is the following:

- Dontos gives Sansa a hairnet and convinces her to wear it during the wedding (risks: Dontos spills to Cersei in return for something; Donto's looses the the hairnet or sells it to get booze; Dontos fails to convince Sansa).

- Sansa wears the hairnet during the wedding (risks: Sansa looses the hairnet; Sansa forgets about Dontos desire for her to use it, or doesn't like it so she doesn't use it; the hairnet breaks; Sansa is scared by the plan and spills to Cersei).

- Olenna takes the poison from the hairnet before the banquet starts (risks: she isn't fast enough and fails to retrieve the poison; someone spotts her taking a stone from Sansa; her hands fail when she attempts to take the stone so the stone falls and everyone sees it).
Another risk I haven't mentioned before is someone noticing Sansa's hairnet is missing a stone, something that might cause Sansa to panic, revealing the plan, and something that is really likely as, if Olenna took the stone when Sansa thinks she did, Sansa spends a great deal of time with a missing stone, and the missing stone seems easy to notice, as Sansa notices it as soon as she takes the hairnet off.

- Olenna puts the poison in the wine (risks: someone sees her doing it (very likely, as she is unlikely to have fast hands, as likely as every riks in the point above); her hands fail and the stone falls to the floor; Margeary drinks from the wine and dies; Joff offers Margeary some wine, she refuses, Joff drinks and die, Margeary is implicated).

Then there's the added risk of all of it being a set up by LF, a man who has been nothing but loyal to Joff (as far as the Tyrells know).

If Olenna wanted Joffrey to die in the wedding she could've just folloed the following steps:

- Ask her maester for some strangler, robb it like Tyrion did, send a servant to buy it, ask one of her maester family members for it, send a servant to robb it.

- Take the poison to the wedding.

- Put it in the wine (or even better in Joff's food).

This removes a lot of risks, first of all, only having two conspirators (Olenna and whoever procures the poison) reduces significantly the risk of someone spilling; and reducing the number of steps and complexity reduces significantly the risk of something not working according to plan, also, putting the poison in Joff's food reduces the chances of Margeary dying or being implicated in Joff's murder. But there's still the problem of old Olenna doing the poisoning herself in front of a thousand people, this makes no sense, she could do the following:

- Send someone to robb the strangler (preferibly someone with fast hands).

- That person goes with her to the wedding or she plants them as a guard or servant.

- That person poisons the wine, reducing the risk of being seen.

This removes the risk of being spotted significantly, but it increases the risk of someone spilling, as Olenna stealing the poison from a maester or asking a family member for it would be safer, still, she could have a trusted man with more skill than her, and it's still les risky than trusting in a known liar loyal to the king, a drunken fool and a teenage girl.

 

For LF this plan is also extremly risky: Olenna might spill; Olenna might trust in someone else and they might spill; Olenna might be spotted taking or using the poison. And again, how would he go about approaching the subject? and what do the Tyrells bring to the table?

It makes more sense for LF to plant a henchman in the wedding (something he can easily do, as he has many henchmen and is part of organizing the wedding), the have this henchman steal a stone from Sansa's hairnet as he's serving the food (this henchman might even be a skilled tief, reducing significantly the risk of being caught), then the henchman uses the poison and his target dies. Easier, simpler, way less risky. He might even killed this henchman as he did Dontos, tying up a loose end, something he can't do with Olenna, or at least not as easily and he hasn't done it yet.

This points to Tyrion as a target because, in addition of LF having more motives to kill him than to kill Joffrey, the poison was close to Tyrion (right next to him, simplifying the poisoning), but Sansa wasn't close to Joffrey. And noone noticing Sansa's hairnet is missing a stone points to the poison not being taken when she thought it was, that would mean the stone was missing for a long time, and the missing stone is easy to notice.

 

Quote

Whatever LF's reasons - chaos, sowing disruption, making moves no-one expects, etc. - he's entitled to them because that's the character GRRM has given us. They aren't out of character, they just reveal to us more of his character. We don't need to understand him completely, he's an enigmatic figure with shady motives who takes calculated risks.

Killing Joffrey isn't a calculated risk, he stands nothing to gain and a lot to lose, killing Tyrion however, he would only gain from that.

 

Quote

Might he have had an ulterior secondary motive to kill Tyrion as well? Possibly. Dontos had instructions to whisk Sansa away when the poisoning was done, and two murders would be a bigger distraction than two. There are quite a few permutations I'd happily accept on top of the wine being poisoned, just not one that leaves Joff out as a target. The poison simulated choking exactly as Cressen says it does, GRRM has Tyrion patently notice the purple discolouration of the wine, and the amethyst used to do it was gone from the hairnet. 

I never argued that the poison wasn't used, I even used it as an argument against Oberyn being the culprit, so I don't know what's your point with that.

Wine is generally descrived as purple in real life and in the series as well, there are a few instances of wine being descrived as purple.

[Sandy Clegg]

26 minutes ago, CamiloRP said:

I have adressed it: LF could've easily heard the bells or been in KL, it's not impossible, improbable or hard to imagine, it's not a certainty that he has heard the bells, but he could've, and that's enough.

Hmm, maybe we are working under different criteria of what seems 'fair evidence'. Nothing is impossible in a fantasy world, sure. Yet GRRM goes out of his way to set parameters, which we should respect. And if he deliberately has Sansa rowing out beyond past the point where the bells are fading, then this needs to be addressed. The words don't appear as if by magic on the page.

The problem is that George likes to muddy the waters of his mysteries. He knows what he's doing when he has Jamie question whether the wine was poisoned. He's seeding doubt in the reader's mind, because that makes the solving more interesting. But then - to play FAIR - he seeds trickier clues which negate one or the other theory. 

I mean, I'm not even that good at analysing plot points, to be honest - I just read that old thread (up until it got taken over by one poster) and decided on which interpretation had more support. I leave the plot analysis to others. But I am kind of interested in the poison plot currently, so I'm pitching in more than usual. 

Responding to textual evidence with 'what ifs' doesn't address the issue. LF was not in KL, he was at sea, so the burden of proof is on you to show me that there was evidence of him being at KL. Because that would have been a big risk, having his ship seen, right? A stupid risk, which makes no sense for a clever man who knows the value of an alibi. The fact of his ship being so far out to sea shows us the lengths he goes to remain hidden. Then he kills Dontos. Seems like this LF guy really cares about not being seen ...

Him hearing long-faded bells likewise has no basis in physics or textual evidence. And if George had wanted us to know the faraway bells could still be heard, he would've put something on the page to that effect: "as they neared the ship, Sansa could just make out the distant bells". But he doesn't, so we have to use what information we do have. 

This board is full of 'what if' posts, so you'll find plenty of support. It's fun to speculate. I even liked this 'Tyrion was the target' theory when I first read it years ago. I think. So although none of these 'what ifs' convince me, they may be enough for others. That's fine, we all have different criteria for what constitutes textual evidence. I can get pretty crazy with my own theories at times (and will again) but I hope I always use the text as a reference. 

But "he could've" just isn't the same as "he did, and the text shows it".  Especially when the text goes out of its way to disprove it, by having the ship be conspicuously far away from KL. 

This isn't to say there won't be more wrinkles to come in this purple wedding affair. I'd prefer to stay away from 'binary' theories that pitch one outcome against another in fact. There's probably a third, fourth, fifth option, or some combination of many theories, that would also satisfy the purple wedding.

I blame Preston Jacobs for all this binary thinking - in his videos he likes to use emotive language like "oh my god, it's so DUMB to think that Littlefinger would do X, Y or Z. As if he wrote the books himself. It's kind of manipulative and means people switch off their critical thinking for fear of being on the 'dumb side'. Well, if that's so then I guess I'm a happy dummy.

[CamiloRP]

56 minutes ago, Sandy Clegg said:

Hmm, maybe we are working under different criteria of what seems 'fair evidence'. Nothing is impossible in a fantasy world, sure. Yet GRRM goes out of his way to set parameters, which we should respect. And if he deliberately has Sansa rowing out beyond past the point where the bells are fading, then this needs to be addressed. The words don't appear as if by magic on the page.

The problem is that George likes to muddy the waters of his mysteries. He knows what he's doing when he has Jamie question whether the wine was poisoned. He's seeding doubt in the reader's mind, because that makes the solving more interesting. But then - to play FAIR - he seeds trickier clues which negate one or the other theory. 

I mean, I'm not even that good at analysing plot points, to be honest - I just read that old thread (up until it got taken over by one poster) and decided on which interpretation had more support. I leave the plot analysis to others. But I am kind of interested in the poison plot currently, so I'm pitching in more than usual. 

Responding to textual evidence with 'what ifs' doesn't address the issue. LF was not in KL, he was at sea, so the burden of proof is on you to show me that there was evidence of him being at KL. Because that would have been a big risk, having his ship seen, right? A stupid risk, which makes no sense for a clever man who knows the value of an alibi. The fact of his ship being so far out to sea shows us the lengths he goes to remain hidden. Then he kills Dontos. Seems like this LF guy really cares about not being seen ...

Him hearing long-faded bells likewise has no basis in physics or textual evidence. And if George had wanted us to know the faraway bells could still be heard, he would've put something on the page to that effect: "as they neared the ship, Sansa could just make out the distant bells". But he doesn't, so we have to use what information we do have. 

This board is full of 'what if' posts, so you'll find plenty of support. It's fun to speculate. I even liked this 'Tyrion was the target' theory when I first read it years ago. I think. So although none of these 'what ifs' convince me, they may be enough for others. That's fine, we all have different criteria for what constitutes textual evidence. I can get pretty crazy with my own theories at times (and will again) but I hope I always use the text as a reference. 

But "he could've" just isn't the same as "he did, and the text shows it".  Especially when the text goes out of its way to disprove it, by having the ship be conspicuously far away from KL. 

This isn't to say there won't be more wrinkles to come in this purple wedding affair. I'd prefer to stay away from 'binary' theories that pitch one outcome against another in fact. There's probably a third, fourth, fifth option, or some combination of many theories, that would also satisfy the purple wedding.

I blame Preston Jacobs for all this binary thinking - in his videos he likes to use emotive language like "oh my god, it's so DUMB to think that Littlefinger would do X, Y or Z. As if he wrote the books himself. It's kind of manipulative and means people switch off their critical thinking for fear of being on the 'dumb side'. Well, if that's so then I guess I'm a happy dummy.

Thing is, I never said "he definitely did and the text proves it" my first reply on this post is exactly that: I don't like the idea that Joff was the intended victim, but I don't think it's impossible.

I don't have to prove that LF was in KL, because the text doesn't sat otherwise, he was out of KL when Sansa meets with him, but before we don't know. There would be little risk of him being spotted, and even if he was spotted, he was far away from Joff, so he couldn't be the culprit unless you assume a henchman, which would also negate the eary aliby.

It comes down to what you think is more believable: that LF was able to hear the bells or that Olenna agreed to such a stupid and convoluted plan, LF agreed to such a stupid and convoluted plan, and that they manage to trust on eachother enough so they are able to talk about regicide, while not trusting eachother so much as to have the same plan for sansa, teh fact that no one noticed Sansa's missing stone, no one noticed Olenna handling the poison, etc. To me it's quite clear that one of the options is more plausible than the other.

[Frey family reunion]

10 hours ago, Sandy Clegg said:

we clearly know that Joff was LF's target because he had foreknowledge of his death on the ship. This is the crucial fact that wipes away all arguments that Tyrion was the target, which you haven't fully addressed.

No we don’t know that LF had foreknowledge of Joff’s death.  We know he had knowledge of Joff’s death after the fact.  We also know that the bells were ringing in King’s Landing before Sansa left the city.  We also know that the ringing of the bells carried over the water.  We also know that the ringing of the bells signaled the death of a king.

LF’s ship was traveling from the east while Sansa’s rowboat was traveling from the west, when they came together.  It’s very conceivable that LF’s ship was either docked or closer to the city when Joffrey died.  Hence, LF could have been given an audible clue that Joffrey had died.

The problem with Littlefinger plotting to poison Joffrey, is that Littlefinger had no motive to kill Joffrey.  He certainly had at least two motives for wanting Tyrion dead.  We also know that despite Littlefinger’s boasting of having cast suspicion on Tyrion, his dwarves were not the reason that suspicion was cast on Tyrion.

It was Cersei’s accusation apparently born from her own experiences with Tyrion’s hostility to Joff coupled with the prophecy from the Wood’s witch that caused her to cast the blame on Tyrion.  Nothing to do with Littlefinger.  

We also know that a poison was used that was supposed to make everyone believe that the recipient of the poison died choking on a morsel of food.  Not exactly a good poison to use to also try and falsely implicate someone else.

[Frey family reunion]

23 hours ago, Sandy Clegg said:

Sansa rows and rows and rows long after the bells fade. Then they come upon Littlefinger's ship, which is too far out to hear or see anything of KL.

The problem is that Littlefinger’s ship wasn’t anchored at that location, just like the rowboat, it too was moving across the water, just in the opposite direction.  It’s very possible that the ship was originally anchored in port or much closer to King’s Landing.

[Sandy Clegg]

44 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

LF’s ship was traveling from the east while Sansa’s rowboat was traveling from the west, when they came together.  It’s very conceivable that LF’s ship was either docked or closer to the city when Joffrey died.

LF is travelling towards Sansa's boat, from the sea, which indicates they had not come from KL. Conceivable doesn't come into it, we are shown the direction they are coming with no proof of them having turned about. It's 'inconceivable' that they had been closer to KL (risking being seen!), then sailed further out  ... only to give Oswell some rowing practice. Mayen it was his 'arm day'. If they were already close enough to KL to hear the bells, why not stay there and make the rowing journey shorter, and get Sansa on board sooner? Evidence and common sense are both lacking in that hypothetical, sorry.

51 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

The problem with Littlefinger plotting to poison Joffrey, is that Littlefinger had no motive to kill Joffrey.

LF already admits to this. Either we believe in his odd tactics or not. But the reason is given in the books. It's a subjective point to assume he was lying, I'm afraid.

 

56 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

 We also know that despite Littlefinger’s boasting of having cast suspicion on Tyrion, his dwarves were not the reason that suspicion was cast on Tyrion.

It's not exactly a secret that Tyrion and Joff disliked each other. Tyrion has slapped and insulted him several times, and not in private. So when LF hypes up the jousting dwarves to Joffrey, this turns Joffrey's wedding into a focal point for the obvious hatred Joff has for his uncle. LF gambles on his read of Joff's nature - that given the chance he would mock his uncle, causing enough public friction that Tyrion would seem to have enough motive for murder, in the absence of any other suspect (Sansa would have disappeared by then, which is anyway enough to put suspicion on her husband). Joff's final gesture is either the culmination of his fixation on Tyrion throughout the wedding, or he really was reaching out to his uncle for help. We'll never know. I'm not saying LF didn't get lucky here - he really bloody did. But he gambled and won, and then was cocky as hell about it. He's annoyingly smug, but that doesn't necessarily make him a liar.

1 hour ago, Frey family reunion said:

We also know that a poison was used that was supposed to make everyone believe that the recipient of the poison died choking on a morsel of food.  Not exactly a good poison to use to also try and falsely implicate someone else.

That misreads the purpose of the poison.

The strangler poison would have appeared in Pycelle's autopsy regardless. The main purpose of using the strangler poison is its deadly effectiveness, but more crucially the fact that it manifests as a fit of choking on food. This choking exhibition was the thing that was needed to give Sansa time to get away, while kingsguard rushed to dislodge this non-existent yet persistent morsel of food. No 'false implication' is ever suggested as the reason  for its use. Another, more silent, poison that eats away at someone's intestines (like the mushrooms used to kill Nurse) would have killed Joffrey just as dead. But more slowly, and with less public display. Which doesn't serve Sansa's escape one bit.

The assassins needed Joff to die loudly, publicly, and gasping for help to draw people around him. They certainly didn't need him to die in seconds flat. And perhaps that explains why he was able to last that little bit longer than Cressen after drinking the wine. An instant death makes it nigh on impossible for Sansa to get away. So maybe that strangler dosage had been weakened slightly ... to give Joff this slightly longer choke duration for public effect.

I mean, I apologise if that's a naughty bit of speculation. But I guess that's what we're doing here?

[CamiloRP]

I don't know why but the notification just showed up now, sorry for not replying sooner.

16 hours ago, Nevets said:

Two things worth mentioning:

Sansa received the hairnet from Littlefinger's agent right after the Blackwater.  At that time, Tyrion was not a factor for anyone.  So I doubt he was the intended target.

Someone tried to kill Tyrion in the Blackwater, so someone wanted him dead. Tyrion thinks it was Cersei, but Cersei never thinks about her trying to kill him. Also, the person who tried to kill Tyrion was Mandon Moore, a Kingsguard placed in the order by Jon Arryn, but Jon didn't like him. Was he persuaded to put him there by Lysa? Was she asked to persuade him by Littlefinger?

Also, there are a few reasons for LF to want Tyrion dead, other than being wed to Sansa: he knows about the dagger and he seems to be playing against him in the game of thrones.

 

Quote

Tyrion's slice of pie was placed before him while he was in his seat at the table, next to Sansa.  If he eats and chokes, Sansa is going nowhere.  He wound up next to Joffrey because Joffrey was being a jerk.  The dwarves were gone by then.

Joffrey was being a jerk because of the dwarves, the dwarves hired by Littlefinger to create conflict between Joff and Tyrion. Also Joffrey died close to were Sansa was, after all, he took Tyrion's pie out of his plate, next to Sansa, and died shortly after. With Tyrion it would've been the same thing, he dies, chaos, people scream, cry, go over to him, and Sansa has ample opportunity to escape.

 

Quote

@CamiloRP I've tried to analyze as a theory, without relying on LF's confession.  Here goes:

What we know:

LF knew someone fiddled with Sansa's hairnet.  Olenna Tyrell 'adjusted' it.  No one else is mentioned touching it.  One crystal was missing afterwards.  The crystal matches the description we have for the Strangler.

So far so good, with the added caveat that the missing stone was so easy to spot Sansa noticed it immediately, but no one did, despite it being missing from before the banquet, if Olenna took it at that time.

 

Quote

It is stated that the strangler is administered dissolved in wine.  No other method has been given.  Olenna was in proximity to Joffrey's chalice, as was Garlan, Margaery's brother.  Either could slip it in, with a warning to Margaery not to drink.  If drinking is unavoidable, she can spill it.  You lose the opportunity, but are no worse off than before.
 

If something can dissolve in winee, it can dissolve in saliva and in your stomach. Besides, from Cressen's experience it dissolves quite fast, and we notice the same thing with Sansa: it leaves a smudge, meaning it either isn't very firm, or it partially disolved with the sweat of whoever took it's hand.

 

Quote

Baelish visited Highgarden, giving plenty of opportunity for plotting.

While talking uop Joffrey and acting like his loyal advisor, how would he approach regicide under those circumpstances? why would he? how would the Tyrells aproach him? why would they?

 

Quote

 He tells Sansa that he had his servants spread stories about Joffrey's violence and cruelty. 

This is part of his confession, it should be ignored.

 

Quote

The Tyrells' meeting with Sansa is consistent with this.  They clearly had heard stories they didn't fully trust and were looking for confirmation and more detail.

Joffrey's cruelty was an open secret, even the willingly blind Robert new about it, it's likely they knew it from Renly (close to the Tyrells, lived in KL most of his life) or Loras, who spent some time in KL and must have witnessed it.

 

Quote

The Tyrells have motive to kill Joffrey.  He is violent and cruel, and was abusive to his betrothed.  There is a reasonable fear Margaery could be a target of abuse.  And Loras, now a kingsguard, is known to be hot tempered.  A violent, and likely fatal, reaction to Margaery's mistreatment is a strong possibility.  Cersei told Ned that if Jaime had known Robert had hit her, Jaime probably would have killed Robert.  And Jaime is calm, cool, and collected compared to Loras.  Kingslayer stew coming up.  Even Sansa could see that coming.

Tommen is someone they can more easily mold into being a good husband, as well as being a better ruler than his brother, who showed signs of a tyrannical nature.  Nobody wants a repeat of Aerys II, which was where Joffrey seemed to be heading.

While I would not care to take this case to a modern court for literary purposes, it is good enough for me to conclude that Baelish and the Tyrells conspired to murder Joffrey.  The main flaw is Baelish's motive.  I suspect he has one, we just aren't aware of it yet.

Petyr agrees to not having a motive, and he looses easily manipulable Joffrey for less easy to manipulate Cersei, and misses an opportunity to get rid of Tyrion. And again, there's also how bonkers the plan is: there's no need for the Tyrells to involve LF and there's no need for LF to involve the Tyrells, is overly risky and it adds nothing but complexity. For us to believe LF allies with the Tyrells for regicid, we must find a reason, and the reason must be important enough to add all that extra risk to the plan.

 

Quote

For what it's worth, I don't think Sansa was intended as a fall guy, but a way to get the murder weapon in undetected.  The two sides don't trust one another, and this is a way for the Tyrells to put some distance between themselves and the weapon, In case of betrayal.

The two sides apparently trust one another enough to openly talk about regicide with eachother while one of the sides is the allways loyal servant of the king and the other is the king's inlaws.

I also don't think Sansa was intended as a fall guy, and she was a way to get the poison in, but this goes against the LF-Olenna theory, as if she took the stone when she fixed her hairnet, she was the one who got the murder wepon in, and didn't put any distance between her and it, as she's the one who carried it throughout the banquet and the one who used it.
Also, we hear of no one searching the guests, and Olenna has no problem sneaking the poison in, so she wouldn't need Sansa as a delivery system.

 

[Frey family reunion]

17 hours ago, Sandy Clegg said:

LF is travelling towards Sansa's boat, from the sea, which indicates they had not come from KL. Conceivable doesn't come into it, we are shown the direction they are coming with no proof of them having turned about. It's 'inconceivable' that they had been closer to KL (risking being seen!), then sailed further out  ... only to give Oswell some rowing practice. Mayen it was his 'arm day'. If they were already close enough to KL to hear the bells, why not stay there and make the rowing journey shorter, and get Sansa on board sooner? Evidence and common sense are both lacking in that hypothetical, sorry.

Nah, we just know that they meet up in the bay, and we know that Littlefinger had never actually left King’s Landing.  There is no reason that they were parked deep out in the Bay.  Petyr wasn’t on a recognizable ship, he was on a simple merchant vessel, so there is no reason they couldn’t have stayed anchored near King’s Landing.  The only thing that Pety wouldnt’ have wanted anyone seeing is Sansa getting on that particular ship, which is why the two boats would have rendezvoused further out in the Blackwater.

[Evolett]

Solid arguments in your last post @Sandy Clegg, much of which is supported by the text, such as the ff:

17 hours ago, Sandy Clegg said:

The strangler poison would have appeared in Pycelle's autopsy regardless. The main purpose of using the strangler poison is its deadly effectiveness, but more crucially the fact that it manifests as a fit of choking on food.

 

Quote

Cressen no longer recalled the name the Asshai’i gave the leaf, or the Lysene poisoners the crystal. In the Citadel, it was simply called the strangler. Dissolved in wine, it would make the muscles of a man’s throat clench tighter than any fist, shutting off his windpipe. They said a victim’s face turned as purple as the little crystal seed from which his death was grown, but so too did a man choking on a morsel of food.

 

 

I've come across further potential clues to the Tyrells as the perpetrators, in particular this statement by Lady Alerie (Margaery's mother) to her daughter when the High Septon begins the prayer for the dead for Joff:

Quote

The High Septon knelt beside him. “Father Above, judge our good King Joffrey justly,” he intoned, beginning the prayer for the dead. Margaery Tyrell began to sob, and Tyrion heard her mother Lady Alerie saying, “He choked, sweetling. He choked on the pie. It was naught to do with you. He choked. We all saw.”

 

Now, why would Lady Alerie reasure Margaery that she had nothing to do with the death? Her daughter weeping is normal and to be expected under the circumstances. I find this very suspicious and a potential hint at Alerie's involvement. It suggests she was at least aware of Olenna's plan. She may have even administered the poison. As Marge's mother, Alerie would have been just as motivated to protect her daughter as Olenna was and she was present when Sansa was questioned about Joff's character by Lady Olenna. 

 

Another perhaps subtle hint can be found in one of Sansa's early chapters:

Quote

her (Arya) hair all tangled and her clothes covered in mud, clutching a raggedy bunch of purple and green flowers for Father. Sansa kept hoping he would tell Arya to behave herself and act like the highborn lady she was supposed to be, but he never did, he only hugged her and thanked her for the flowers. That just made her worse. Then it turned out the purple flowers were called poison kisses, and Arya got a rash on her arms. Sansa would have thought that might have taught her a lesson,

 

 The purple and green flowers could symbolise Tyrell involvement: flowers and the colour green in reference to their House and the purple poison kisses as a nod to the Strangler. Sansa expects Ned to admonish Arya for behaving like a commoner but he thanks her for the flowers instead. Since Ned was executed on Joff's orders, his expressing thanks for the flowers is an apt piece of symbolism. 

 

[Sandy Clegg]

On 4/5/2024 at 3:56 PM, Frey family reunion said:

 Petyr wasn’t on a recognizable ship, he was on a simple merchant vessel, so there is no reason they couldn’t have stayed anchored near King’s Landing.

Not sure I agree with any of the above - he's aware of the need to be out of sight of KL due to being involved in a murder plot at the king's wedding. He even has his man ready to whisk Sansa away. If he's so unconcerned with his ship being spotted, why make Sansa's trip out there so unnecessarily long? In fact, why lurk near KL at all? What does he hope to gain by remaining  in sight, at such unnecessary risk when he's gone to such lengths to distance himself? 

We're shown the ship's prow coming towards Sansa. She doesn't approach the stern, which would make more sense if LF had just been lurking there waiting for her to arrive. Then they could have been on their way as quick as possible, before being seen. None of the evidence points towards him having recently left KL at all. Unless they just circled around the bay, making sea-donuts for no reason. Seems kind of illogical and warping the facts to fit a theory rather than deducing from the facts given to us.

[Sandy Clegg]

On 4/4/2024 at 10:33 PM, CamiloRP said:

Also, there are a few reasons for LF to want Tyrion dead, other than being wed to Sansa: he knows about the dagger and he seems to be playing against him in the game of thrones.

From GRRM:

"I don’t know how it comes across in the show, because I haven’t actually seen it yet, but the poison that is used to kill Joffrey is one that I introduce earlier in the books and its symptoms are similar to choking. So a feast is the perfect time to use this thing. I think the intent of the murderer is not to have this become another Red Wedding—the Red Wedding was very clearly murder and butchery. I think the idea with Joffrey’s death was to make it look like an accident — someone’s out celebrating, they haven’t invented the Heimlich maneuver, so when someone gets food caught in his throat, it’s very serious.

"I based it a little on the death of Eustace, the son of King Stephen of England. Stephen had usurped the crown from his cousin, the empress Maude, and they fought a long civil war and the anarchy and the war would be passed down to second generation, because Maude had a son and Henry and Stephen had a son. But Eustace choked to death at a feast. People are still debating a thousand of years later: Did he choke to death or was he poisoned? Because by removing Eustace, it brought about a peace that ended the English civil war. Eustace’s death was accepted [as accidental], and I think that’s what the murderers here were hoping for — the whole realm will see Joffrey choke to death on a piece of pie or something. But what they didn’t count on, was Cersei’s immediate assumption that this was murder.

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/game-of-thrones-purple-wedding-george-r-r-martin-explains-thinking-behind-king-joffrey-s-demise-9262045.html

This kind of goes against what I said about the poison earlier, if George says the murderers just wanted it to look like an accident. And that might seem like poor planning, as we do see Pycelle deducing that it was poison. This is in part due to the fact that Tyrion had swiped his supply, however, in order to give Cersei the shits. If he had left Pycelle's potions in place, who knows if Pycelle would have reached that conclusion. Did the murderers know about Tyrion's theft? We don't know. Did it benefit them? Yup. As did Cersei's hatred - which LF surely knew about. This plan was never perfect, but it seems Tyrion was fated to take the fall due to his own actions somewhat - his standing up to Joffrey, his inability to hold his sarcastic wit, his sabotage of Cersei's poophole. 

 The whole Sansa being a fall guy is up for question, sure. It seems as thought LF and the Tyrells did work together - I just can't see how we separate them, see @Nevets post - but I am prepared to accept that, once agreeing to conspire in Joffey's murder, Littlefinger went over and above what he had planned with the Tyrells, introducing the jousting dwarves for example. It would be in character for him of twist the plan to his own ends somewhat. So I think we can say that while it was a joint effort, each side may have kept something up their sleeves. Sansa's escape may not have been something LF told the Tyrells about. And in the end, as long as Joff is dead, the Tyrells have little to complain about as long they are not fingered for the murder.

On 4/4/2024 at 10:33 PM, CamiloRP said:

Petyr agrees to not having a motive, and he looses easily manipulable Joffrey for less easy to manipulate Cersei, and misses an opportunity to get rid of Tyrion. And again, there's also how bonkers the plan is: there's no need for the Tyrells to involve LF and there's no need for LF to involve the Tyrells, is overly risky and it adds nothing but complexity. For us to believe LF allies with the Tyrells for regicid, we must find a reason, and the reason must be important enough to add all that extra risk to the plan.

I can only say that I'm not sure I see it as any less risky than doing it on one's own. With an accomplice you share the blame and possibly can point to their guilt to save your own ass. Adding complexity seems to be LF's modus operandi, too, don;t forget. He sets the Starks against the Lannisters by getting Lysa to poison Jon Arryn. None of which he does himself. He maintains distance - and this requires additional steps, which means complexity. But that's just his character. 

Another thing I find odd to reconcile is why LF would persuade Joffrey to have the jousting dwarves at the feast, if his motive was to kill Tyrion. He's setting up Tyrion for humiliation - which helps to point the finger of blame at him. Unless LF just wanted Tyrion to suffer maximum humiliation at the point of his death? Littlefinger going to this unnecessary length - and therefore extra risk - seems out of character. But LF doing all he can to unsettle Tyrion .... to cast him as someone for whom the last straw has finally broken the camel's back? That only puts more suspicion on Tyrion, which is a win-win for LF.

[sifth]

Most of the Pink Letter theories I hate. The only ones that make sense is Ramsay himself sending it or possibly Mel.

[CamiloRP]

12 hours ago, Sandy Clegg said:

From GRRM:

"I don’t know how it comes across in the show, because I haven’t actually seen it yet, but the poison that is used to kill Joffrey is one that I introduce earlier in the books and its symptoms are similar to choking. So a feast is the perfect time to use this thing. I think the intent of the murderer is not to have this become another Red Wedding—the Red Wedding was very clearly murder and butchery. I think the idea with Joffrey’s death was to make it look like an accident — someone’s out celebrating, they haven’t invented the Heimlich maneuver, so when someone gets food caught in his throat, it’s very serious.

"I based it a little on the death of Eustace, the son of King Stephen of England. Stephen had usurped the crown from his cousin, the empress Maude, and they fought a long civil war and the anarchy and the war would be passed down to second generation, because Maude had a son and Henry and Stephen had a son. But Eustace choked to death at a feast. People are still debating a thousand of years later: Did he choke to death or was he poisoned? Because by removing Eustace, it brought about a peace that ended the English civil war. Eustace’s death was accepted [as accidental], and I think that’s what the murderers here were hoping for — the whole realm will see Joffrey choke to death on a piece of pie or something. But what they didn’t count on, was Cersei’s immediate assumption that this was murder.

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/game-of-thrones-purple-wedding-george-r-r-martin-explains-thinking-behind-king-joffrey-s-demise-9262045.html

This kind of goes against what I said about the poison earlier, if George says the murderers just wanted it to look like an accident. And that might seem like poor planning, as we do see Pycelle deducing that it was poison. This is in part due to the fact that Tyrion had swiped his supply, however, in order to give Cersei the shits. If he had left Pycelle's potions in place, who knows if Pycelle would have reached that conclusion. Did the murderers know about Tyrion's theft? We don't know. Did it benefit them? Yup. As did Cersei's hatred - which LF surely knew about. This plan was never perfect, but it seems Tyrion was fated to take the fall due to his own actions somewhat - his standing up to Joffrey, his inability to hold his sarcastic wit, his sabotage of Cersei's poophole.

It also goes against putting the poison in wine, something you cant choak on, if Joffrey hadn't miraculously grabbed Tyrions pie, no one would've thought he choaked.

 

Quote

The whole Sansa being a fall guy is up for question, sure. It seems as thought LF and the Tyrells did work together - I just can't see how we separate them, see @Nevets post - but I am prepared to accept that, once agreeing to conspire in Joffey's murder, Littlefinger went over and above what he had planned with the Tyrells, introducing the jousting dwarves for example. It would be in character for him of twist the plan to his own ends somewhat. So I think we can say that while it was a joint effort, each side may have kept something up their sleeves. Sansa's escape may not have been something LF told the Tyrells about. And in the end, as long as Joff is dead, the Tyrells have little to complain about as long they are not fingered for the murder.

I don't think Sansa was the fall guy, it makes absolutely no sense for what LF wants, but if she isn't the fall guy, why would the Tyrells involve her instead of Olenna taking her own poison in her pocket?

 

Quote

I can only say that I'm not sure I see it as any less risky than doing it on one's own. With an accomplice you share the blame and possibly can point to their guilt to save your own ass.

Sharing the blame won't save you tho, people guilty of regicide die, it doesn't matter if there's only one culprit or a thousand.

And the risk increases, like you said, any party could;ve pointed to the other as a culprit.

 

Quote

Adding complexity seems to be LF's modus operandi, too, don;t forget. He sets the Starks against the Lannisters by getting Lysa to poison Jon Arryn. None of which he does himself. He maintains distance - and this requires additional steps, which means complexity. But that's just his character.

The thing is, he set them against eachother using the tools he had, he can trust on Lysa because she's absolutely obsessed with him, he has no reason to trust the Tyrells, and they have no reason to trust him.

 

Quote

Another thing I find odd to reconcile is why LF would persuade Joffrey to have the jousting dwarves at the feast, if his motive was to kill Tyrion. He's setting up Tyrion for humiliation - which helps to point the finger of blame at him. Unless LF just wanted Tyrion to suffer maximum humiliation at the point of his death? Littlefinger going to this unnecessary length - and therefore extra risk - seems out of character. But LF doing all he can to unsettle Tyrion .... to cast him as someone for whom the last straw has finally broken the camel's back? That only puts more suspicion on Tyrion, which is a win-win for LF.

The dwarves disctract Tyrion, so he doesn't notice when someone takes poison from his wive's head and place it on his food.