Official court of law vol. 2(Robb Stark)

[Frey Pie]

Defendant: Robb Stark Lord of Winterfell, King in the North alias 'The Young Wolf,' this court charges you with the crimes of

1. Conspiracy by calling your bannermen to war against the king of the 7 Kingdoms Joffrey Baratheon first of his name.

2. Acts of treason by rebellion against the realm.

3. Breach of a legal binding agreement with house Frey.

4. And the murder Stafford Lannister alias ‘Uncle Dolt’.

Counselors present your case and pass your judgement!

1. Not Guilty: As stipulated by my fellow jurors Joffrey Lannister was not the true King. Furthermore, i beleive that it is the Kings duty to protect and dispense justice to his lords and smallfolk. It is my belief, that had Joffrey been King, he was still in breach of this sacred duty. The beheading of the High Lord Stark was done unlawfully, as was the mistreatment of both Sansa and Arya Stark. In addition, the accused family was being acted against violently in the Riverlands without significant provocation. For all the above reasons i find Robb Starks actions to be both right legally and morally

2.Robb swore no oaths to the realm and so was not in breach of any.

3.Guilty as charged. I would advise a monetary and land compensation to be payed by the Crown. Futhermore in the interest of the Kingdom, i believe a marriage to Edmure Tully should be enacted, aswel as a public apology by the King.

4. Not guilty. Stafford Lannister was killed in battle, nothing illegal

[Walder Waters]

Binding agreement with the Frey family? It is by definition a piece of paper saying he'll marry the girl, not a courteous promise. I can promise you the moon and I don't owe you it. If, however, you lose face when I don't own up, you have the right to be angry and make noise about it. That's about it.

I think Robb acted with a legal intention to be bound as such circumstances are custom.

[straits]

I think Robb acted with a legal intention to be bound as such circumstances are custom.

Intentions and customs do not make for an official court of law. They make the entire phrase 'official court of law' as legit as the Holy Roman Byzantine empire, which is neither holy, nor Roman, nor Byzantine. Say it like it is.

[The Other Others]

1- Robb never swore a oath of allegence to the Iron Throne or the King. Innocent.

2- One man's rebel is another man's freedom fighter. He had a claim to independence and he used it. The North knelt to the Targs and Targs only. They had all right to rebel against a unjust regime.

(Bit of speculation here, but Joff seemed like the type to be another Aerys. And he doesn't like Starks.)

3-Was a oath involved? I don't recall. They are his vassals anyway,or at least indirectly. That involves a oath. Innocent.

4- Men die. He was Commander of the opposing army. When you want to kill somthing you take it's head. Innocent.

[The Other Others]

I think Robb acted with a legal intention to be bound as such circumstances are custom.

It seemed like a deal rather than a formal agreement.

[Walder Waters]

It seemed like a deal rather than a formal agreement.

I'm not familiar with all aspects of the common law. What are the requirements for a formal agreement?

[Golden&Crimson]

name='Lion Of Judah' timestamp='1355772237' post='3917441']

Now for the trial.

Defendant: Robb Stark Lord of Winterfell, King in the North alias 'The Young Wolf,' this court charges you with the crimes of

1. Conspiracy by calling your bannermen to war against the king of the 7 Kingdoms Joffrey Baratheon first of his name.

2. Acts of treason by rebellion against the realm.

3. Breach of a legal binding agreement with house Frey.

4. And the murder Stafford Lannister alias ‘Uncle Dolt’.

Counselors present your case and pass your judgement!

1- Guilty: he raised a rebellion against the legitimate and ointed King of the Seven Kingdoms; the only excuse that the so-called "King in the North" can have is to avenge the death of his father, the late Eddard Stark, who himself confessed a crime of high treason against the Iron Throne in front of the good subjects of King`s Landing, being mercifully executed by royal orders.

After refusing to come to bend the knee to His Grace, Joffrey Baratheon I and repent his trecherous behavior an entering again in the Peace of the King the accused Robb Stark will suffer: Death by Sword.

2- Guilty: has Joffrey Baratheon I is the legitimate and ointed King of the Seven Kingdoms, any rebellion against him is a rebellion against the Seven Kingdoms, plus the so-called "King in the North" tried the most grievous act of separating a constituient region under the rule of the Iron Throne.

The only penality that can punish acordingly that nefarious act of Robb Stark is: Death by Sword.

3- Dismissed: after breaking the solemn promise of marrying a Frey woman, in exchange of the fealty and help House Frey (which the Frey did with all good will and using their resources in favor of the so-called "King in the North"), Robb Stark married Jeyne Westerling, vassal of House Lannister and subject of the Iron Throne.

Has this binding has no force of law, because was an agreement between two traitors to the Iron Throne (one unrepentant, Robb Stark; the other repentant, Lord Walder Frey of the Twins), Robb Stark is dismissed from this charge.

4- Dismissed: several witnesses saw that the killer of Ser Stafford Lannister was the accomplice of Robb Stark, Rickard Karstark.

In view of the testimonies, Robb Stark his dismissed from this charge.

[Pod The Impaler]

I think the Court charges on its own motion so that the legality of the offended party is irrelevent for the proceedings. Even if Joffrey is not the legal king a rebellion for separation may be illegal.

Incorrect. On a charge of treason, which is political in nature, the legitimacy of the power one is transgressing against is of paramount importance. One simply cannot be a traitor to an illegitimate government.

If the court itself is Joffrey's court enforcing Joffrey's laws, then it has no legitimacy either. If we work on the theory that it is some mystical independent court (one that does not answer to one side or the other), then the question of legitimacy is what the case depends on.

[Lion of Judah]

1- Robb never swore a oath of allegence to the Iron Throne or the King. Innocent.

2- One man's rebel is another man's freedom fighter. He had a claim to independence and he used it. The North knelt to the Targs and Targs only. They had all right to rebel against a unjust regime.

(Bit of speculation here, but Joff seemed like the type to be another Aerys. And he doesn't like Starks.)

3-Was a oath involved? I don't recall. They are his vassals anyway,or at least indirectly. That involves a oath. Innocent.

4- Men die. He was Commander of the opposing army. When you want to kill somthing you take it's head. Innocent.

House Frey was not subservient to Winterfell, they are to Harrenhal. They gave troops to Robb Stark with a promise of marriage, had a promise of marriage not been made they would not have joined his fight against the crown. Thus making the agreement legally binding, I think the argument of the Frey accepting the marriage proposal to Edmure is a very legitimate argument.

[Euron Pink Eye]

Is this a legal argument or a political opinion?

Well by precedent a lot of people have gone unpunished by revoked contracts etc. Was the point i was making. Whilst also clearly stating a definitive legal argument that they had agreed upon rectification of the broken contract

[The Other Others]

I'm not familiar with all aspects of the common law. What are the requirements for a formal agreement?

Neither am I but I have rough knowledge of law. There need to be impartial witnesses (in Westeros, a Septon or maester), a contract signed by both parties making the agreement and any others concerned during the agreement or representatives and a oath to the god or gods of all parties. Bethroals can be broken, there is no law against it (see Joffery and Sansa).

Walder should have obeyed as Robb as he is his liege lord through Edmure and that is a formal agreement.

[ab aeterno]

House Frey was not subservient to Winterfell, they are to Harrenhal. They gave troops to Robb Stark with a promise of marriage, had a promise of marriage not been made they would not have joined his fight against the crown. Thus making the agreement legally binding, I think the argument of the Frey accepting the marriage proposal to Edmure is a very legitimate argument.

To Riverrun, not Harrenhal.

[Fragon]

I find him innocent on 1 and 2 for many multiple reasons :

• Robb himself never swore allegiance to Joeffrey Baratheon,
  
• Robb's father Lord Eddard Stark was murdered unjustly, we know that, the question is wheter Robb knew that (as it will explain whether cause of rebellion is just). Well I think a son of Eddard Stark who was groomed for lordship by him for all his life would know that the Ned would never commit treason to the rightful king without morally right grounds.
  
• Robb's bannermen pushed him to fight for independence eventhough house Stark was sworn to the Iron Throne, he should have bent the knee to Stannis but he had no way of knowing that the Stannis was the rightful king at the moment On the other hand if the northmen want independence it would be hard to condemn them.
  

Globally I find him neither innocent or guilty on charges 1 and 2 because of the unstable state of the realm and his early death, I find his actions right and understandable, for a definitive verdict I would have to wait and see how he would have dealt with Stannis. For the sake of a verdict I say innocent on these two.

I find him guilty on 3, and his punishment should be determined by House Frey among the following options :

• Gold
  
• Independence of the Kingdom of the North and the Riverlands (with the risk of entering to an open conflith with that)
  
• A new marriage arrangement with a prestigious family
  

+ Public excuses by made by the king himself.

I find him innocent on 4, as it was a battleground, everybody is killing everybody and as the killing blow was given by Rickard Karstark.

[The Other Others]

House Frey was not subservient to Winterfell, they are to Harrenhal. They gave troops to Robb Stark with a promise of marriage, had a promise of marriage not been made they would not have joined his fight against the crown. Thus making the agreement legally binding, I think the argument of the Frey accepting the marriage proposal to Edmure is a very legitimate argument.

The Freys were at the time sworn to Riverrun which was either in a alliance with Winterfell or a vassal of Winterfell. Either way, Walder's oath to "provide service" includes letting his lord's allies cross the Twins and sending his levies.

[Lion of Judah]

To Riverrun, not Harrenhal.

But when house Frey took Riverrun from the Tullys they weren't given overlordship they were just deemed a cadet branch, which was technically still under House Baelish of Harrenhal.

[Walder Waters]

Neither am I but I have rough knowledge of law. There need to be impartial witnesses (in Westeros, a Septon or maester), a contract signed by both parties making the agreement and any others concerned during the agreement or representatives and a oath to the god or gods of all parties. Bethroals can be broken, there is no law against it (see Joffery and Sansa).

Walder should have obeyed as Robb as he is his liege lord through Edmure and that is a formal agreement.

So without these formal requirements the "agreement" was invalid and more some sort of declared but not executed intention?

[Lion of Judah]

The Freys were at the time sworn to Riverrun which was either in a alliance with Winterfell or a vassal of Winterfell. Either way, Walder's oath to "provide service" includes letting his lord's allies cross the Twins and sending his levies.

They weren't sworn to Riverrun though, they swore to Winterfell and did so after the marriage proposal was agreed upon. In a legal sense Walder Frey was not the one who initiated the breach of agreement, that happened once the pact of marriage was broken.

[Lion of Judah]

Just to be clear there is a misconception that House Stark was overlords to House Frey, that is incorrect. The overlord to house Frey would be House Baelish of Harrenhal. Even after house Frey took the River lands from House Tully, they were never given overlord status to the River lands. They were just a Cadet branch of House Frey whose overlord is House Baelish of Harrenhal.

[Walder Waters]

@Lion Of Judah:

Although I am not completly convinced I am reconsidering my vote. If I change my mind, am I allowed to change my vote? And if so, may I edit my origional post or add a new section at its end or just make another post?

[Golden&Crimson]

It is good to remember that:

A) All subjects of the legitimate and anointed King of the Seven Kingdoms are obliged to fealty to the King: no particular oath is required.

B) Any agreement made between traitors is void of any legal obligation.