Is there a Stark above ten who didn't have a hand in a false trial?

[butterbumps!]

Ned beheaded innocent Lady, I mean jfc.

Sansa is deceiving Joffrey, not arguing for Dontos' side. It is presumptuous to know better than the king what justice is. But yes, it is a weak example and by today's standard what Sansa did was right.

You can't have this both ways. In the first quote you argue that Ned's execution of Lady was not justice because Lady is innocent. YET, this was in fact a case of a trial in front of the king in which it was determined that Lady was to be the legal proxy for Nymeria's punishment. Ned swung the sword on the sentence the king ruled.

Then, in this second example, you say that the King is the legal authority and that by simply going against the King that Sansa is defrauding justice even though she is protecting an innocent. These two examples are mutually exclusive and kind of implode the argument.

Justice isn't the same thing as morality, and I think the conflation of the two is a major issue in this thread. Justice is about legality, and does not align with morality as often as one might like.

Justice isn't really the question in the Sansa + Joff example; she intervened before he gave his final ruling. For Sansa to be unjust, Joff would have had to sentence Dontos to death, and Sansa would have had to sneak him out covertly. The fact that Sansa took the legal channel makes this example moot.

[The Fallen]

` First Robb, now the whole Stark clan? Trolling for Starks! I can't wait for the next anti-Stark topic.

Let me just say this, the Starks are infallible, virtuous, the crème de la crème; they epitomize all that is right in Westeros. The Seven themselves couldn't give you a fairer trial than the Starks.

[rivergirl]

Sansa lied to forestall justice on Dontos Hollard, then perjured against Marillion.

On this one, i'd say you're right- although it probably has more to do with showing how Sansa has lost all faith in the "King's Justice" as well as trials by combat. By that point, considering she was living with LF, she was probably aware of what happened with Tyrion, Oberyn and the Mountain- i.e. she knows that trials by combat are bullshit because Tyrion's champion died even though she knows that he had nothing to do with the Purple Wedding.

Arya killed the NW deserter with no authority to do so.

This one is true to an extent. She didn't really have the authority to do it, but where were the rest of the Starks? Arya knew that her father beheaded NW deserters, so it makes sense that she'd see it as her duty to do so in his absence. I'm not saying it was the right thing to do by any means, but i can see how in her point of view it might have been. Especially since Arya isn't known to really consider a person's crimes before she decides to kill them. Ilyn Payne didn't actually do anything wrong but she still wants to kill him because he swung the sword on Ned, even though it was under Joffrey's orders. Likewise, Dareon deserted the NW, where Jon was. Arya would undoubtably be angry at the "betrayal" of her brother.

Cat forced the Imp into trial by combat when word stood against word.

Not exactly unfair- Cat really did believe he tried to get Bran killed. It's like how Cersei honestly believed Tyrion killed Joffrey. Sometimes defendants are innocent, but Catelyn didn't accuse him for no reason. She was wrong, of course, but she thought it was him.

Robb let Cat get away with no punishment after she freed Jaime.

Firstly there was no trial, and secondly he's not about to behead his own mother AND lose the support of the Riverlands and the Vale (Lysa) in the process.

Ned beheaded innocent Lady, I mean jfc.

It was either him or Ilyn Payne, i think Ned did the best he could given the circumstances. Again, there was no trial because Lady is a direwolf and therefore can't talk.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

You really don't like the Starks. Are you?

Sansa lied to forestall justice on Dontos Hollard, then perjured against Marillion.

What justice? Whose justice?

Arya killed the NW deserter with no authority to do so.

Arya knows the laws, for the NW deserter punishment is death.

Cat forced the Imp into trial by combat when word stood against word.

She had any right to demand a trial by any means possible.

Robb let Cat get away with no punishment after she freed Jaime.

Didn’t he arranged for her to stay to Seagard?

Ned beheaded innocent Lady, I mean jfc.

You blame Sansa forestalling justice and you blame Ned who followed King’s orders? That is weak.

I see a pattern there.

Me too a trollish pattern.

And to answer the question: yes, Benjen Stark.

Do we have any information on Benjen?

[Thendel]

Not exactly true. Catelyn was at this point Ned's appointed representative in the North. Obviously the arrest taking place in the Riverlands complicates matters legally, but it's far from clear "miscarriage of justice". Martin himself explained it this way:

Good find, I honestly didn't think a lady had the right to administer justice without her lord's express approval, even on her own territory. My bad.

[Lord Illidan Stormrage]

So what i pick up from this tread is that if Tyrion kidnapped... uhm pardon *arrested* Cat because she tried to kill him (he has proof - that's what Cersei said) in the Riverlands where he has no authority and drags her to Casterly Rock to be judged by Tywin (fair trial ofcourse - she can choose whenever Tywin will declare her guilty or she can face the Mountain in a trial of combat (with right of champion ofcourse - any lord of the west who feels like it can help her)) is perfectly justifiable with some people on this forum? Or the Starks have some privilige when it comes to abductions... sorry i meant arrests to the Lannisters?

[locke and key]

No she did not. She does not have the autority to arrest someone with no permission, no proof or just trial. She THOUGH Tyrion is guilty - if that was enough proof for arrest then Westeros has the most messed up legal system in all the fantacy world - a woman of equal status to a man though him guilty and arrested him with to proof to bring him to a mock trial and torment (the sky cages).

have you never heard the phrase "I Arrest you on Suspicion"

[butterbumps!]

So what i pick up from this tread is that if Tyrion kidnapped... uhm pardon *arrested* Cat because she tried to kill him (he has proof - that's what Cersei said) in the Riverlands where he has no authority and drags her to Casterly Rock to be judged by Tywin (fair trial ofcourse - she can choose whenever Tywin will declare her guilty or she can face the Mountain in a trial of combat (with right of champion ofcourse - any lord of the west who feels like it can help her)) is perfectly justifiable with some people on this forum? Or the Starks have some privilige when it comes to abductions... sorry i meant arrests to the Lannisters?

Somewhat yes, though that's not the right parallel yet.

I thought the impromptu plan by Cat was to never try Tyrion at the Eyrie. I think that's critical for comparison and this accusation. This is what I understand the "plan" to be:

1. Cat has reason to believe Tyrion tried to murder Bran; she also had extremely compelling evidence that the Lannister killed Jon Arryn.

2. When her cover is blown, she arrests Tyrion and accuses him.

3. She takes Tyrion to the Eyrie to speak to Lysa about her previous accusations against the Lannisters to understand if there is more proof.

4. With further evidence and now the Vale's backing, Cat would present Tyrion to the king in KL for justice.

Cat did not intend to give Tyrion a trial at the Vale. She (wrongly I admit) counted on Lysa's being sane and therefore not fool enough to put Tyrion in a position to call for a trial while there.

I would like to point out for this thread that each time Lysa tried to make a further injustice toward Tyrion, Cat mitigated this by ensuring that the closest thing to justice was being done (i.e., that Tyrion was actually given a trial when he asked, that Tyrion was actually let go when he won).

So, from what I understand, it would have been legal for a Lannister to accuse and arrest a Stark for a crime with reasonable cause, take them into ally territory to gather further evidence along those lines (I think the Vale was arguably only a tangent from the path back south towards KL from the inn), and return to KL for judgment from the king, which is what Cat was doing.

I would, however, like to point out a second related issue about this, however. While yes, in a broad sense I believe that the scenario you outlined is technically true in terms of legality (I think), the reader's sympathy for this is likely much less enthusiastic in that case. That is, Lysa's enormity aside, I put my trust in Cat far more than I do in Tywin to judge fairly and treat the prisoner decently in this circumstance. We see Cat involved with Tyrion's trial, and though it turns out wrongly, she does, in fact adhere to legal and fair standards. We also see Tywin preside over a trial (Tyrion's); not only do we see Tywin at the helm of what is a downright circus of justice, rigged to find Tyrion guilty, Tywin was going to allow his son to be put to death. I think that the divergent characters of Cat and Tywin matter in this circumstance; yes, it would be legal as well, but I believe Cat would play fair while Tywin would not (given that we see them do exactly that).

[locke and key]

So what i pick up from this tread is that if Tyrion kidnapped... uhm pardon *arrested* Cat because she tried to kill him (he has proof - that's what Cersei said) in the Riverlands where he has no authority and drags her to Casterly Rock to be judged by Tywin (fair trial ofcourse - she can choose whenever Tywin will declare her guilty or she can face the Mountain in a trial of combat (with right of champion ofcourse - any lord of the west who feels like it can help her)) is perfectly justifiable with some people on this forum? Or the Starks have some privilige when it comes to abductions... sorry i meant arrests to the Lannisters?

Cat is perfectly in authority to do this, the starks are granted the right to exercise the law by the Crown, Catelyn was exercising the laws of winterfell by arresting Tyrion on the suspicion of attempting to murder her son

[Lord Illidan Stormrage]

Somewhat yes, though that's not the right parallel yet.

I thought the impromptu plan by Cat was to never try Tyrion at the Eyrie. I think that's critical for comparison and this accusation. This is what I understand the "plan" to be:

1. Cat has reason to believe Tyrion tried to murder Bran; she also had extremely compelling evidence that the Lannister killed Jon Arryn.

2. When her cover is blown, she arrests Tyrion and accuses him.

3. She takes Tyrion to the Eyrie to speak to Lysa about her previous accusations against the Lannisters to understand if there is more proof.

4. With further evidence and now the Vale's backing, Cat would present Tyrion to the king in KL for justice.

Cat did not intend to give Tyrion a trial at the Vale. She (wrongly I admit) counted on Lysa's being sane and therefore not fool enough to put Tyrion in a position to call for a trial while there.

I would like to point out for this thread that each time Lysa tried to make a further injustice toward Tyrion, Cat mitigated this by ensuring that the closest thing to justice was being done (i.e., that Tyrion was actually given a trial when he asked, that Tyrion was actually let go when he won).

So, from what I understand, it would have been legal for a Lannister to accuse and arrest a Stark for a crime with reasonable cause, take them into ally territory to gather further evidence along those lines (I think the Vale was arguably only a tangent from the path back south towards KL from the inn), and return to KL for judgment from the king, which is what Cat was doing.

I would, however, like to point out a second related issue about this, however. While yes, in a broad sense I believe that the scenario you outlined is technically true in terms of legality (I think), the reader's sympathy for this is likely much less enthusiastic in that case. That is, Lysa's enormity aside, I put my trust in Cat far more than I do in Tywin to judge fairly and treat the prisoner decently in this circumstance. We see Cat involved with Tyrion's trial, and though it turns out wrongly, she does, in fact adhere to legal and fair standards. We also see Tywin preside over a trial (Tyrion's); not only do we see Tywin at the helm of what is a downright circus of justice, rigged to find Tyrion guilty, Tywin was going to allow his son to be put to death. I think that the divergent characters of Cat and Tywin matter in this circumstance; yes, it would be legal as well, but I believe Cat would play fair while Tywin would not (given that we see them do exactly that).

To the last point - Tywin did not do anything at Tyrion's trial - everything was cooked by Cersei and Tywin had nothing to do with it. In the end he was persuaded that Tyrion is the killer just like everyone else. And even after that he was planning to save Tyrion from death by sending him to the wall.

[Lord Illidan Stormrage]

Cat is perfectly in authority to do this, the starks are granted the right to exercise the law by the Crown, Catelyn was exercising the laws of winterfell by arresting Tyrion on the suspicion of attempting to murder her son

The Lannisters are granted the right to exerise the law as well.

[butterbumps!]

To the last point - Tywin did not do anything at Tyrion's trial - everything was cooked by Cersei and Tywin had nothing to do with it. In the end he was persuaded that Tyrion is the killed just like everyone else. And even after that he was planning to save Tyrion from death by sending him to the wall.

I doubt it; Cersei doesn't do things while Tywin is in town that Tywin has not approved of. Besides, Tywin was the head judge in this scenario, not Cersei.

I strongly disagree that Tywin was actually going to send Tyrion to the Wall. When Jaime rescued him, it was hours before his scheduled execution. I don't believe that Tywin believed Tyrion was guilty, but I do believe that Tywin wanted to be rid of Tyrion after the trial by combat. I think that at best, Tyrion would have had an accident on his way.

[Tini]

The Starks were granted the right to exercise the law in Winterfell and the North. Or rather, the lord of Winterfell was granted that right. Catelyn was not in the North when she arrested Tyrion, and not authorized by the Crown or the local lords to exercise the law as she did.

[locke and key]

The Lannisters are granted the right to exerise the law as well.

Yes, they are but this doesn't mean that they can't be declared criminals

[locke and key]

The Starks were granted the right to exercise the law in Winterfell and the North. Or rather, the lord of Winterfell was granted that right. Catelyn was not in the North when she arrested Tyrion, and not authorized by the Crown or the local lords to exercise the law as she did.

If catelyn was trying to arrest someone for breaking the laws of her land she would be allowed to pursue them through other lands, in the smae way that if someon commits a crime in one country then flees over the border the police of that country can follow them and arrest them there.

and besides lysa was the local lord in the eyrie and she authorised cat to do this

[straits]

To the last point - Tywin did not do anything at Tyrion's trial - everything was cooked by Cersei and Tywin had nothing to do with it. In the end he was persuaded that Tyrion is the killer just like everyone else. And even after that he was planning to save Tyrion from death by sending him to the wall.

Tywin did not intend to save Tyrion. Is his statement 'you are no son of mine' also true?

Varys and his network were clearly the only ones able to spirit Tyrion, and they were demonstrably not under Tywin's control. Tywin had no practical means to intervene in a matter of hours while saving face.

[Lord Illidan Stormrage]

Tywin did not intend to save Tyrion. Is his statement 'you are no son of mine' also true?

Varys and his network were clearly the only ones able to spirit Tyrion, and they were demonstrably not under Tywin's control. Tywin had no practical means to intervene in a matter of hours while saving face.

He had - Kevan taking his to the execution and telling him to ask to be send to the wall to which Tywin would grasiously agree.

[Thendel]

If catelyn was trying to arrest someone for breaking the laws of her land she would be allowed to pursue them through other lands, in the smae way that if someon commits a crime in one country then flees over the border the police of that country can follow them and arrest them there.

and besides lysa was the local lord in the eyrie and she authorised cat to do this

Actually, that's only the case if there's a legal understanding between the two countries, like the Schengen agreement between EU states. Otherwise, police cannot pursue criminals across borders without violating the sovereignty of the neighboring country.

[thetitansbastard]

So was Dareon not a deserter?

[Where Went Whent]

I'm surprised this topic is still in existence.