Court of Law v. 7 (Gregor Clegane)

[SeanF]

While it is a deserved punishment our goal is justice, not revenge so I won't say yea or nay. If you guys want to vote on it, then someone draw it up and if it passes by majority then it's in. Though I would caution our goal is justice, not revenge. :drunk:

On reflection, I think that death by burning is an adequate punishment.

It's certainly not one of the harder cases to try (I'm looking forward to Tyrion, Daenerys, and Stannis).

[Faceless Assassin]

Guilty for all (except 4):

-Death by sword. (Done in KL)

Unless captured by Dornishmen or the Lords of Riverrun, then Gregor is sentenced to death, method is at the Lords discretion.

Bring out the King's Justice.

[SeanF]

^{Guilty for all (except 4):}

^{-Death by sword. (Done in KL)}

^{Unless captured by Dornishmen or the Lords of Riverrun, then Gregor is sentenced to death, method is at the Lords discretion.}

^{Bring out the King's Justice.}

^{I should think the Sand Snakes would come up with something imaginitive.}

[Yukle]

(Mostly not guilty)

Overall, for crimes committed during Robert's Rebellion: Guilty, Death by beheading. For crimes committed after Robert's Rebellion, specifically Charge 3: Night's Watch or castration.

Just because something happened during a war it doesn't make it any less disgusting. After all, Clegane's actions are what caused this war! These were the first acts of violence in the entire awful affair and it wasn't a reasoned response to the arrest of just one Lannister. Tywin's instructions were criminal, and Clegane is a criminal for following them.

You can't be forgiven for war crimes just because there was a war and this is especially true if you're started the war with those actions!

[snowtarg]

Acts during the Rebellion cannot be prosecuted, as they were pardoned by King Robert.

I see nothing in the rules posted above regarding pardons. Just as Robert pardoned his supporters, I'm sure King Joffrey has pardoned everyone who supported him in the War of the Five Kings. Our judgements should not be restricted by partisan decrees by previous monarchs.

[SeanF]

I think the O/P has made it plain that Royal Pardons don't count, unless the King has given a pardon for treason that was committed against that King.

[snowtarg]

Just because something happened during a war it doesn't make it any less disgusting.

If we are judging him on our personal standards of disgust, then we should charge him with cruelty to animals (beheading his horse) as well. Furthermore, Gregor Clegane did not start the War of the Five Kings, Tywin Lannister did. Clegane was simply fulfilling his feudal obligations by following the orders of his liege lord.

[Lady Sansa Stark]

Guilty on all counts, except for:

• The kidnapping of Lady Arya Stark, considering she was a war prisoner. I deem this too far a stretch to call it kidnapping.
  
• Count 10 and 11. By the time that happened, Robert Baratheon was no longer King, Joffrey Baratheon was. Tywin Lannister was Hand of the King. If I recall correctly, decrees such as these of previous King's do not matter anymore when they apply to the new Hand of the King.
  

Sentence: Death by sword. I don't particularly like death by fire.

[Thendel]

Is it just me, or am I the only one who vouches for monetary fines in addition to capital punishment? Gregor has destroyed not only lives, but things of material value as well.

To echo Lion of Judah, this is about justice, not revenge, and justice is, as I see it, is to punish wrong deeds and make them right where possible, and this would be for the defendant to pay for real material damage, regardless of being convicted guilty in other charges might mean he pays with his head as well. In short, capital punishment should not exclude monetary fines where appropriate, and I urge my fellow jurors to consider this, so that we might do full justice to the riverfolk in the name of the crown.

[Lady Sansa Stark]

Is it just me, or am I the only one who vouches for monetary fines in addition to capital punishment? Gregor has destroyed not only lives, but things of material value as well.

To echo Lion of Judah, this is about justice, not revenge, and justice is, as I see it, is to punish wrong deeds and make them right where possible, and this would be for the defendant to pay for real material damage, regardless of being convicted guilty in other charges might mean he pays with his head as well. In short, capital punishment should not exclude monetary fines where appropriate, and I urge my fellow jurors to consider this, so that we might do full justice to the riverfolk in the name of the crown.

Do monetary fines ever coincide with capital punishment? I don't think so, though I wouldn't know, as my country doesn't have capital punishment. But, a dead man cannot pay fines, and you would surely agree with me that punishing the family for the crimes of the convicted is no justice either, right?

[Thendel]

Do monetary fines ever coincide with capital punishment? I don't think so, though I wouldn't know, as my country doesn't have capital punishment. But, a dead man cannot pay fines, and you would surely agree with me that punishing the family for the crimes of the convicted is no justice either, right?

Capital punishment has been long abolished in my country as well, so this might serve as a disclaimer that I'm not personally familiar with the concept I'm trying to promote.

To my knowledge, when you inherit after someone, you also inherit any outstanding debts of your benefactor, thus a net loss after your benefactor is possible, provided you were left everything. In Westeros, it is more or less the default position that the heir inherits everything from the lord or lady.

Also, the difference between a noble's personal wealth and the wealth of his lands is fluid, if even existent. The head of the family practically controls its fortune and the distribution of its accrued wealth between them is his privilege alone. Accordingly, the wealth of the individual isn't as clear cut as you make it out to be, as they are usually entirely dependant on the collective wealth of the family, rather than being actually wealthy by themselves. Moreover, every action of the head of the family is considered to be in a formal capacity, thus the gain or loss of the head's actions reflect back on the family as a whole.

I'm just trying to adjust my view of the justice of this court with the "reality" of Westeros, where material wealth is the property of family, not the individual, thus members of the family suffer and prosper in accordance with the family as a whole. It's obviously dramatically different from the values of Western society, but I find it to be pointless to try do induce modern views of individual vs. group on a legal system that is fundamentally different in design from the modern one. Thus punishing the family, or collective punishment, if you prefer, is the reality of Westerosi justice, as is the collective benefiting as a whole. In that sense, it should be in line with the values espoused by this court we are playing at that the family prospers and loses in accordance with the head's performance, especially when it comes to matters of absolute material value.

At least that's how I see it. It's not how I would want justice to be handled where I live, but my society (and probably yours as well, if I am any judge) is fundamentally different from that of Westeros. I hope this makes sense.

Edit: The above does not mean I espouse family members of the convicted to be physically harmed or incarcerated in any way due to the actions of the head. There is a very important difference between monetary and physical punishment, as evidenced by people seeing Tywin and Aerys giving entire houses the Castamere treatment as crossing the line.

[Pod The Impaler]

To my knowledge, when you inherit after someone, you also inherit any outstanding debts of your benefactor, thus a net loss after your benefactor is possible, provided you were left everything. In Westeros, it is more or less the default position that the heir inherits everything from the lord or lady.

Also, the difference between a noble's personal wealth and the wealth of his lands is fluid, if even existent. The head of the family practically controls its fortune and the distribution of its accrued wealth between them is his privilege alone. Accordingly, the wealth of the individual isn't as clear cut as you make it out to be, as they are usually entirely dependant on the collective wealth of the family, rather than being actually wealthy by themselves. Moreover, every action of the head of the family is considered to be in a formal capacity, thus the gain or loss of the head's actions reflect back on the family as a whole.

I'm just trying to adjust my view of the justice of this court with the "reality" of Westeros, where material wealth is the property of family, not the individual, thus members of the family suffer and prosper in accordance with the family as a whole. It's obviously dramatically different from the values of Western society, but I find it to be pointless to try do induce modern views of individual vs. group on a legal system that is fundamentally different in design from the modern one. Thus punishing the family, or collective punishment, if you prefer, is the reality of Westerosi justice, as is the collective benefiting as a whole. In that sense, it should be in line with the values espoused by this court we are playing at that the family prospers and loses in accordance with the head's performance, especially when it comes to matters of absolute material value.

I think the idea is that the dead person's estate (coin wealth, land, etc.) is liable for any fines or reparations, to the point of being carved up as reparations. Any next of kin inheriting this estate would be required to pay out, and then whatever's left would be theirs.

In this case, I think Gregor's only kin relation is Sandor, who isn't exactly making himself available, and probably wouldn't mind if they pull down the castle and give the land away, since he abandoned it due to his brother's actions long ago.

[SeanF]

There's no reason why Ser Gregor can't be both executed, and stripped of his lands and wealth, and the proceeds used to compensate his victims.

[Winds of Winter blow cold]

He probably will be stripped of lands wealth & titles too, I only mentioned the death sentence because that's most important.

[Jslay427]

Community Service seems the best course here imo.

[Winds of Winter blow cold]

What will it take to get a ruling?

[Le Cygne]

Guilty of all, death by fire.

How is count 5 of the Jaime one guilty, look at the tally.

[Nyrhex]

Charge 1) 2 Counts of murder-During a competitive joust Ser Gregor intentionally and successfully sort to cause fatal injury to Ser Hugh of the Vale. Ser Clegane upon invading the Riverlands successfully attacked castle Darry, killing 8 year old Lord Lyman Darry.

On the first count: Not guilty on account of reasonable doubt.

On the second account: Guilty.

Added: Murder of Elia Martell, and her children: Rhaenys and Aegon: Guilty.

Charge 2) Genocide-Ser Gregor Clegane committed unwarranted acts of genocide against the people of the Riverlands.

While it is agreed that Ser gregor is responsible for mass murder and war crimes, the charge of genocide is too severe. Not guilty.

Charge 3) Rape-Upon sacking Stony Hedge the seat of House Bracken, Ser Gregor Clegane sexually assaulted and raped one of Lord Jonos Bracken daughters.

Guilty.

Added: The rape of Elia Martell: Guilty.

Charge 4) Slavery-Many survivors of Ser Cleganes’ attacks throughout the Riverlands were taken to Harrenhal Castle, where they forced into labor and abused directly by his command and Ser Clegane himself.

Forced labour of prisoners of war does not count as slavery. Not guilty.

Charge 5) Torture-Ser Clegane stood by while ‘Tickler’ carried out acts of torture at his command. According to witness Chiswyck "Tickler makes them howl so hard they piss themselves..."

Guilty.

Charge 6) Theft-Upon sacking the many castles of the Riverlands Ser Gregor stole all of the castles food supplies.

War booty. Not Guilty.

Charge 7) Arson-Ser Gregor burnt the Castle Stoney Hedge along with it’s unharvested crops.

Legitamate war tactic in the ASOIAF and medieval context. Not guilty.

Charge 8) Vandalism-We seek to charge Ser Gregor with vandalism for the above acts as well.

Legitamate war tactic in the ASOIAF and medieval context. Not guilty.

Charge 9) Kidnapping-While this charge may seem to be a reach, this court argues that the forceful taking of Lady Arya Stark of Winterfell should be deemed as kidnapping in the eyes of judges in this court. Ser Gregor was not aware of Lady Arya Stark, but the act of taking her against her will should not be dismissed.

As Ser Gregor did not know her identity, it seems unfair to hold him responsible again for the same act. Taking prisoners of war and putting them to forced labour is legitamate in context. Not guilty.

Charge 10) Treason-Ser Gregor openly attacked men ordered by the Hand of the King Lord Eddar Stark of Winterfell and carrying the banner of King Robert Baratheon when they sort to bring him in to answer for his many atrocities. This attack was no different from an attack on the king himself.

Guilty.

Charge 11) Assault (against Kingsmen)-For the act of resisting arrest this court finds that Ser Gregor’s actions warrant a charge of assault.

Guilty.

Verdict:

[Lion of Judah]

On reflection, I think that death by burning is an adequate punishment.

It's certainly not one of the harder cases to try (I'm looking forward to Tyrion, Daenerys, and Stannis).

I have been intentionally avoiding those trials because if I bring them to the court, then I can't argue for or against any of them. I very much want to argue for or against those characters, I don't want to be left out of those arguments. And! We may have to change the ground rules for those trials as well because I know popularity or lack thereof would mean 2 of those characters can never get a fair trial in this setting.

[Lion of Judah]

Charge 1) 2 Counts of murder-During a competitive joust Ser Gregor intentionally and successfully sort to cause fatal injury to Ser Hugh of the Vale. Ser Clegane upon invading the Riverlands successfully attacked castle Darry, killing 8 year old Lord Lyman Darry.

On the first count: Not guilty on account of reasonable doubt.

On the second account: Guilty.

Added: Murder of Elia Martell, and her children: Rhaenys and Aegon: Guilty.

Charge 2) Genocide-Ser Gregor Clegane committed unwarranted acts of genocide against the people of the Riverlands.

While it is agreed that Ser gregor is responsible for mass murder and war crimes, the charge of genocide is too severe. Not guilty.

Charge 3) Rape-Upon sacking Stony Hedge the seat of House Bracken, Ser Gregor Clegane sexually assaulted and raped one of Lord Jonos Bracken daughters.

Guilty.

Added: The rape of Elia Martell: Guilty.

Charge 4) Slavery-Many survivors of Ser Cleganes’ attacks throughout the Riverlands were taken to Harrenhal Castle, where they forced into labor and abused directly by his command and Ser Clegane himself.

Forced labour of prisoners of war does not count as slavery. Not guilty.

Charge 5) Torture-Ser Clegane stood by while ‘Tickler’ carried out acts of torture at his command. According to witness Chiswyck "Tickler makes them howl so hard they piss themselves..."

Guilty.

Charge 6) Theft-Upon sacking the many castles of the Riverlands Ser Gregor stole all of the castles food supplies.

War booty. Not Guilty.

Charge 7) Arson-Ser Gregor burnt the Castle Stoney Hedge along with it’s unharvested crops.

Legitamate war tactic in the ASOIAF and medieval context. Not guilty.

Charge 8) Vandalism-We seek to charge Ser Gregor with vandalism for the above acts as well.

Legitamate war tactic in the ASOIAF and medieval context. Not guilty.

Charge 9) Kidnapping-While this charge may seem to be a reach, this court argues that the forceful taking of Lady Arya Stark of Winterfell should be deemed as kidnapping in the eyes of judges in this court. Ser Gregor was not aware of Lady Arya Stark, but the act of taking her against her will should not be dismissed.

As Ser Gregor did not know her identity, it seems unfair to hold him responsible again for the same act. Taking prisoners of war and putting them to forced labour is legitamate in context. Not guilty.

Charge 10) Treason-Ser Gregor openly attacked men ordered by the Hand of the King Lord Eddar Stark of Winterfell and carrying the banner of King Robert Baratheon when they sort to bring him in to answer for his many atrocities. This attack was no different from an attack on the king himself.

Guilty.

Charge 11) Assault (against Kingsmen)-For the act of resisting arrest this court finds that Ser Gregor’s actions warrant a charge of assault.

Guilty.

Verdict:

LOL I am digging the link...Awesome.