Did Sansa Lose Lady Because of Lying to Arya

[butterbumps!]

Im aware its a crime but Joffery did say that he was struck by Arya yet Bob said it was a childrens fight and that it was done.

And what does Sansa's silence change? Robert says it's a mere children's fight, yet caves when Cersei suggests they punish the Starks for this "children's fight" according to the law, calling for "a wolf." How would Sansa standing up for Arya have changed this? Because King Robert is a deep sympathizer of the smallfolk and would have overruled the law out of the goodness of his heart? Because the goodness of his heart overruled Cersei's thirst to chasten the Starks?

Even if Sansa told the truth Arya wouldnt have been punished because Bob saw it as a childrens fight nothing to charge her for.

First of all, you're supposed to be proving that Sansa's lack of testimony caused Lady's death, not Arya's punishment.

And you're writing your own waterloo here by trying to appeal to the fact that Robert saw it as a children's fight as somehow evidence there would be no punishment. But the fact remains that Robert did, in fact, think this was a children's quarrel AND even with this in mind, decided to punish it as a matter of the state by calling for the execution of a proxy.

Cersei tried insisting that Arya would be punished but Bob blocked it.

Exactly. Because what Arya did was actually illegal.

Im inclined to think he would do the same if Sansa told the truth because its still a childrens fight it the kings eyes.

He may not have taken Arya's hand, but like I said, he would have killed one of the direwolfs anyway. There is nothing Sansa did that could have changed this.

You still havent proven me wrong, its opinion not fact.

It's not opinion. I showed you that Sansa's lack of testimony did not contribute to Lady's death. You have failed to show precisely how Sansa's actions here caused the death of her wolf. Forget whether Arya would be punished directly. Whether Sansa stayed silent or sided with Arya, Lady was going to die. End of story.

[Mladen]

How is lying at court and betraying your sister justified? Then afterwards it seems Sansa keeps betraying her family, because as Bran says she has lost her wolf. Her actions are not justifiable.

They are and you can keep claiming otherwise as much as you like.., Simply, Sansa couldn't protect Lady because it wasn't about her, and as butterbumps said wolf would be killed no matter what. Truth or no truth, scars are there and wild animal who did it must be removed. So Lady's death had nothing to do whether Sansa would tell the truth. And keeps betraying her family? You make her sound like a Frey... She disobeyed her father and it had tragic consequences, nothing more. We could say the same about Bran. Sansa was the victim the moment she stepped in Cersei's room, as Bran was victim when he got pushed. You may think that her actions are not justifiable because you don't like it and you have created this image of her being traitor in the family, but the point is that text gives us enough evidence to see that all her actions are justifiable. And this is the world where we justify Jaime for pushing Bran, Tyrion for killing Tywin, and this is suddenly unforgivable... You'll have to do better...

[TheMysteriousOne]

This argument is done and has been won.

[twizz]

Do I really need to explain how wrong is the assumption that Sansa had anything with Ned's death?

You can try

[The Prince of Ice]

And what does Sansa's silence change? Robert says it's a mere children's fight, yet caves when Cersei suggests they punish the Starks for this "children's fight" according to the law, calling for "a wolf." How would Sansa standing up for Arya have changed this? Because King Robert is a deep sympathizer of the smallfolk and would have overruled the law out of the goodness of his heart? Because the goodness of his heart overruled Cersei's thirst to chasten the Starks?

First of all, you're supposed to be proving that Sansa's lack of testimony caused Lady's death, not Arya's punishment.

And you're writing your own waterloo here by trying to appeal to the fact that Robert saw it as a children's fight and therefore would not have punished Arya. But the fact remains that Robert did, in fact, think this was a children's quarrel AND even with this in mind, decided to punish it as a matter of the state by calling for the execution of a proxy.

Exactly. Because what Arya did was actually illegal.

He may not have taken Arya's hand, but like I said, he would have killed one of the direwolfs anyway. There is nothing Sansa did that could have changed this.

It's not opinion. I showed you that Sansa's lack of testimony did not contribute to Lady's death. You have failed to show precisely how Sansa's actions here caused the death of her wolf. Forget whether Arya would be punished directly. Whether Sansa stayed silent or sided with Arya, Lady was going to die. End of story.

Guess theres no arguing with you, i concede to this fight Butterbumps, you win.

[twizz]

They are and you can keep claiming otherwise as much as you like.., Simply, Sansa couldn't protect Lady because it wasn't about her, and as butterbumps said wolf would be killed no matter what. Truth or no truth, scars are there and wild animal who did it must be removed. So Lady's death had nothing to do whether Sansa would tell the truth. And keeps betraying her family? You make her sound like a Frey... She disobeyed her father and it had tragic consequences, nothing more. We could say the same about Bran. Sansa was the victim the moment she stepped in Cersei's room, as Bran was victim when he got pushed. You may think that her actions are not justifiable because you don't like it and you have created this image of her being traitor in the family, but the point is that text gives us enough evidence to see that all her actions are justifiable. And this is the world where we justify Jaime for pushing Bran, Tyrion for killing Tywin, and this is suddenly unforgivable... You'll have to do better...

Her actions cause her to lose her wolf. Ned also believes that if Sansa were to tell the truth it would help Arya. Her lie was something Ned himself didnt see coming. No it was not justifiable. She is a character who throughout the majority of the first book thinks about no one but herself. She was the lone wolf and therefore loses her wolf.

[butterbumps!]

Her actions cause her to lose her wolf. Ned also believes that if Sansa were to tell the truth it would help Arya. Her lie was something Ned himself didnt see coming. No it was not justifiable. She is a character who throughout the majority of the first book thinks about no one but herself. She was the lone wolf and therefore loses her wolf.

Ned doesn't believe Sansa's feigned memory loss would help Arya. In fact, he explains to Arya later why Sansa had to lie.

Since it seems you keep missing this:

Those who attribute the loss of Lady to Sansa, in any capacity as a contributing factor, and/or that her remaining neutral was a "poor choice," are sorely mistaken.

First of all, let's get out of the way that Sansa's lie is strictly contained to her staying silent and siding with neither. Her lie helps neither Joffrey nor Arya. So let's get that clear. She doesn't side with Joffrey's version of events. She tells her father exactly what happened the night Arya disappears, so Ned knows the truth all throughout this farce of a trial.

Secondly, what happens if Sansa sides with Arya? Let's say she admits that Joffrey attacked Mycah first. This would not have mattered, that is, the truth would not have saved Arya here. The truth of the story is that Joffrey attacks Mycah first, prompting Arya to attack Joffrey to defend her (smallfolk) friend. How in heavens name would testifying to this in a court of the king help Arya? In truth, Joffrey did not attack Arya until Arya attacked him. Does anyone sincerely believe that if Sansa came forward with the revelation that Joffrey threatened a peasant (supposedly out of chivalry according to the scene) and was subsequently attacked by Arya, that Arya would be exonerated?

For those still unconvinced that the truth would actually be more damaging to Arya, we have precedent for such things. In The Hedge Knight, Dunk is put on trial for protecting a smallfolk puppeteer against the Crown Prince, and would have received capital punishment had he not chosen a trial by combat.

Thirdly, what is incontrovertible about this whole affair is that Joffrey does, in fact, have a wolf bite on his arm. There is nothing Sansa can say-- especially not the truth, which would confirm that Nymeria attacked Joffrey-- to negate the fact that Joffrey's arm is evidence of a wolf attack.

The truth of the attack, that is, what actually happened, is utterly justified from our POV of Arya's actions, and she behaved gallantly there, but sadly, this gallantry puts her on the wrong side of the law when it comes to trial. Sansa's lie actually did save Arya from a potentially worse fate (striking the Crown Prince would normally result in a loss of the attacker's hand, and she was, in fact, the one who attacked Joffrey first).

If you want to blame anyone for how this played out, thank Robert, for turning a juvenile scuffle into a political trial, and thank Cersei, for reminding him that "we have a wolf."

[Mladen]

You can try

No, I only have to refer to what GRRM has written, and if many people would have been more careful while reading, they would also understand that Sansa had nothing with Ned's death. Ned died because of a Joffrey's whim (most likely manipulated by LF), not because Sansa did anything... She may have something with his imprisonment, but his death? No.

[Mladen]

Her actions cause her to lose her wolf. Ned also believes that if Sansa were to tell the truth it would help Arya. Her lie was something Ned himself didnt see coming. No it was not justifiable. She is a character who throughout the majority of the first book thinks about no one but herself. She was the lone wolf and therefore loses her wolf.

How? How was Lady involved in this case? No one would ever think that they would go after Lady? Ned was even durprised to hear that. And Ned understood Sansa far better than any of you would admit. What she did had no influence in losing her wolf... Look at Butterbumps' post again...

[mrunderhill]

They are and you can keep claiming otherwise as much as you like.., Simply, Sansa couldn't protect Lady because it wasn't about her, and as butterbumps said wolf would be killed no matter what. Truth or no truth, scars are there and wild animal who did it must be removed. So Lady's death had nothing to do whether Sansa would tell the truth. And keeps betraying her family? You make her sound like a Frey... She disobeyed her father and it had tragic consequences, nothing more. We could say the same about Bran. Sansa was the victim the moment she stepped in Cersei's room, as Bran was victim when he got pushed. You may think that her actions are not justifiable because you don't like it and you have created this image of her being traitor in the family, but the point is that text gives us enough evidence to see that all her actions are justifiable. And this is the world where we justify Jaime for pushing Bran, Tyrion for killing Tywin, and this is suddenly unforgivable... You'll have to do better...

Sorry how do we know Lady would have been killed no matter what. Please post some evidence for this? You are making assumptions and acting like they are facts. If Joffrey was proven to be a liar, then there is a good chance Lady might have been spared and Cersei may have been too embarrassed to press for the wolf's execution.

Why do you keep twisting things to make Sansa seem a better person? She did not disobey her father, she went and betrayed him to his enemies, after he had explicitly told her the danger.

Sorry Sansa was not victim, she went and betrayed her father. It's a bit of a joke you are comparing Bran climbing around his home with Sansa deliberately making the decision to betray her father and force him to stay in a dangerous area.

Sorry I don't justify any of those acts. I have said Jaime must face his punishment for pushing Bran many times, nor have I ever defended Tyrion for killing his father. So just because some people like to defend their favourite characters no matter what don't throw me in the same boat.

[Kittykatknits]

You can try

No, I only have to refer to what GRRM has written, and if many people would have been more careful while reading, they would also understand that Sansa had nothing with Ned's death. Ned died because of a Joffrey's whim (most likely manipulated by LF), not because Sansa did anything... She may have something with his imprisonment, but his death? No.

Mladen is right here. Sansa had nothing to do with his death, LF is the one who whispered in Joff's ear to make it happen? Remember Varys and Tyrion talking in Clash with that now infamous line about a small man casting a large shadow? The man in this convesation isn't Tyrion, it's LF. Just before Varys' riddle, they are talking about the death of Ned and Tyrion is wondering how it could have happened. Cersei and Varys wanted him alive yet it seemed like Payne was ready to act. Who is left and who gave the order? It's Littlefinger. That's what Varys was telling Tyrion only he didn't quite pick it up.

[twizz]

Ned doesn't believe Sansa's feigned memory loss would help Arya. In fact, he explains to Arya later why Sansa had to lie.

Since it seems you keep missing this:

Those who attribute the loss of Lady to Sansa, in any capacity as a contributing factor, and/or that her remaining neutral was a "poor choice," are sorely mistaken.

First of all, let's get out of the way that Sansa's lie is strictly contained to her staying silent and siding with neither. Her lie helps neither Joffrey nor Arya. So let's get that clear. She doesn't side with Joffrey's version of events. She tells her father exactly what happened the night Arya disappears, so Ned knows the truth all throughout this farce of a trial.

Secondly, what happens if Sansa sides with Arya? Let's say she admits that Joffrey attacked Mycah first. This would not have mattered, that is, the truth would not have saved Arya here. The truth of the story is that Joffrey attacks Mycah first, prompting Arya to attack Joffrey to defend her (smallfolk) friend. How in heavens name would testifying to this in a court of the king help Arya? In truth, Joffrey did not attack Arya until Arya attacked him. Does anyone sincerely believe that if Sansa came forward with the revelation that Joffrey threatened a peasant (supposedly out of chivalry according to the scene) and was subsequently attacked by Arya, that Arya would be exonerated?

For those still unconvinced that the truth would actually be more damaging to Arya, we have precedent for such things. In The Hedge Knight, Dunk is put on trial for protecting a smallfolk puppeteer against the Crown Prince, and would have received capital punishment had he not chosen a trial by combat.

Thirdly, what is incontrovertible about this whole affair is that Joffrey does, in fact, have a wolf bite on his arm. There is nothing Sansa can say-- especially not the truth, which would confirm that Nymeria attacked Joffrey-- to negate the fact that Joffrey's arm is evidence of a wolf attack.

The truth of the attack, that is, what actually happened, is utterly justified from our POV of Arya's actions, and she behaved gallantly there, but sadly, this gallantry puts her on the wrong side of the law when it comes to trial. Sansa's lie actually did save Arya from a potentially worse fate (striking the Crown Prince would normally result in a loss of the attacker's hand, and she was, in fact, the one who attacked Joffrey first).

If you want to blame anyone for how this played out, thank Robert, for turning a juvenile scuffle into a political trial, and thank Cersei, for reminding him that "we have a wolf."

Ned knows the truth, and he called Sansa to "the stand" to tell the truth. Your theory that Arya would get punished if Sansa backed up her story (which Ned expected her to do) doesn't stick because it takes into consideration medieval law but doesn't factoring in Robert's personality. Robert had no problem with his son learning harsh lessons. He would not have punished Arya for coming to the defense of Mycah. If so Ned would have never called on Sansa to tell what really happened.

[The Prince of Ice]

Sorry how do we know Lady would have been killed no matter what. Please post some evidence for this? You are making assumptions and acting like they are facts. If Joffrey was proven to be a liar, then there is a good chance Lady might have been spared and Cersei may have been too embarrassed to press for the wolf's execution.

This, thank you for posting this Mrunderhill.

If Joff was proven to be a liar by Sansas testimony then theres a possibility Lady might live but the plot required her to die, she might have lived after that but Lady was doomed from the get go.

[ab aeterno]

Ned knows the truth, and he called Sansa to "the stand" to tell the truth. Your theory that Arya would get punished if Sansa backed up her story (which Ned expected her to do) doesn't stick because it takes into consideration medieval law but doesn't factoring in Robert's personality. Robert had no problem with his son learning harsh lessons. He would not have punished Arya for coming to the defense of Mycah. If so Ned would have never called on Sansa to tell what really happened.

Firstly, Sansa was named by both of them as having been there, so Ned could hardly do anything but bring her to the stand. Secondly, Robert wouldn't have killed Lady had it been just down to him, but it wasn't. Cer$ei pressured him into having Lady executed. She would have pressured him to punish Arya too.

Mladen is right here. Sansa had nothing to do with his death, LF is the one who whispered in Joff's ear to make it happen? Remember Varys and Tyrion talking in Clash with that now infamous line about a small man casting a large shadow? The man in this convesation isn't Tyrion, it's LF. Just before Varys' riddle, they are talking about the death of Ned and Tyrion is wondering how it could have happened. Cersei and Varys wanted him alive yet it seemed like Payne was ready to act. Who is left and who gave the order? It's Littlefinger. That's what Varys was telling Tyrion only he didn't quite pick it up.

Very well said K3!

[butterbumps!]

Ned knows the truth, and he called Sansa to "the stand" to tell the truth.

It's interesting that Ned knows the truth, yet doesn't speak up. How does this play into your version of events, I wonder? If the truth was truly something that could exonerate Arya, then why doesn't Ned speak up? What do you make of his silence, I wonder?

Your theory that Arya would get punished if Sansa backed up her story (which Ned expected her to do) doesn't stick because it takes into consideration medieval law but doesn't factoring in Robert's personality.

First, Ned does not actually expect Sansa to speak the truth. Where are you getting this from? He plainly explains to Arya why Sansa did not give a testimony a few chapters later.

Secondly, even IF Arya wouldn't be punished directly because of Ned's relationship with Robert, how can you seriously argue that it's Sansa's lack of testimony that causes Robert to punish Sansa's wolf?

Robert had no problem with his son learning harsh lessons. He would not have punished Arya for coming to the defense of Mycah.

But the wolf that attacked Joffrey would have. Since this wolf was not available, Lady would have been the proxy.

If so Ned would have never called on Sansa to tell what really happened.

Ned didn't call on Sansa. The KING did. Like the buffoon he is.

[twizz]

No, I only have to refer to what GRRM has written, and if many people would have been more careful while reading, they would also understand that Sansa had nothing with Ned's death. Ned died because of a Joffrey's whim (most likely manipulated by LF), not because Sansa did anything... She may have something with his imprisonment, but his death? No.

Sansa's actions help set in motion Cersei's plot which ultimately led to Ned's death (even if Cersia herself didn't what Ned dead). To say that she had no part in Ned's death is foolish. But I will put it simpler for you. Sansa's actions played a part in Ned's fall.

[Mladen]

Sorry how do we know Lady would have been killed no matter what. Please post some evidence for this? You are making assumptions and acting like they are facts. If Joffrey was proven to be a liar, then there is a good chance Lady might have been spared and Cersei may have been too embarrassed to press for the wolf's execution.

Tell me how would Sansa hide the fact that Joffrey was indeed bitten by wild animal. Animal would be killed even though Arya was telling the truth. Direwolf wouldn't be seen as dog, and they would even put a dog to death, yet alone direwolf. Nymeria was dead the moment she bit Joffrey, and Arya saved her life by chasing her away with Jory.

Why do you keep twisting things to make Sansa seem a better person? She did not disobey her father, she went and betrayed him to his enemies, after he had explicitly told her the danger.

She disobeyed him, or that is what is called when someone doesn't do what was ordered. Ned never spoke of Lannisters as enemies, or Cersei, he spoke about Jaime. And in Sansa's mind those 2 were separable...

Sorry Sansa was not victim, she went and betrayed her father. It's a bit of a joke you are comparing Bran climbing around his home with Sansa deliberately making the decision to betray her father and force him to stay in a dangerous area.

Yes, you see how it works? You present fallible argument, and someone proves it otherwise. Difference is I do that intenionally, and am capable of admitting mistakes. Thing is Sansa didn't willingly betrayed her father, she didn't know the possible ramifications, and she was manipulated to tell Cersei everything she knew. Cersei used her trust and her childish love for Joffrey to find out some data she needed. We usually call the children who are manipulated victims... It's like real life scenario where kidnapper offering sweets make child to enter the car...

Sorry I don't justify any of those acts. I have said Jaime must face his punishment for pushing Bran many times, nor have I ever defended Tyrion for killing his father. So just because some people like to defend their favourite characters no matter what don't throw me in the same boat.

I was talking about ASOIAF, not fans... For every act there is some justification behind it. Even for RW, we got Tywin's excuse...

[The Prince of Ice]

Firstly, Sansa was named by both of them as having been there, so Ned could hardly do anything but bring her to the stand. Secondly, Robert wouldn't have killed Lady had it been just down to him, but it wasn't. Cer$ei pressured him into having Lady executed. She would have pressured him to punish Arya too.

She did pressure him to punish Arya and Bob said shut up woman pretty much. Ned wasnt gonna let Bob punish her daughter for doing the RIGHT and honorable thing. This is why i say if Bob did punish Arya then Ned would have given up the position as Hand of King.

How can you serve a man who punishes a child for doing the right thing?

[butterbumps!]

This, thank you for posting this Mrunderhill.

If Joff was proven to be a liar by Sansas testimony then theres a possibility Lady might live but the plot required her to die, she might have lived after that but Lady was doomed from the get go.

At what part in all of this does Sansa's testimony become the critical piece that decides Lady's life? What is so hard to understand about this.

Sansa tells the truth: It is confirmed that Arya attacked Joffrey first to stand up for a peasant. Then Nymeria attacks Joffrey and Arya steals his sword and disposes it. Verdict: Cersei would have called for punishment of the Starks; Lady is the most likely target

Sansa doesn't testify: neither side of the story is confirmed, but Joffrey has evidence of a wolf bite no matter who struck first. Verdict: Cersei calls for punishment of the Starks; Lady is the most likely target

[Mladen]

Sansa's actions help set in motion Cersei's plot which ultimately led to Ned's death (even if Cersia herself didn't what Ned dead). To say that she had no part in Ned's death is foolish. But I will put it simpler for you. Sansa's actions played a part in Ned's fall.

I don't need simplification of poor analysis... NO, Sansa had small role in his imprisonment, but Ned's death was Joffrey's doing... All is written in the book called Game of thrones... I recommend it.