1) It's a nobles-vs-peasants thing. Nobles have an expectation that you won't just straight-up kill their family members and get uppity about it. With peasants, the demands of justice have more to do with a combination of preventing feuds among the peasantry itself and generally scaring them into compliance. If this guy had just been talking shit about the Targaryens, commuting his sentence to the Wall might well have been something we'd all agreed on, but he ALSO started a riot, and that's the kind of thing the state has to be seen to crack down on.
2) As a general rule, following a traitor or seditionist in this kind of society is much less of a serious offense than being one, unless you are a peasant and sometimes even if you are. The thing is, a lot of the lines of power and authority in this system run along lines of inheritance and personal loyalty, so it's often normal for low-tier knights and whatnot to be under some degree of personal obligation to follow the younger cousin against the older cousin or something like that. This results in a bit more mercy being shown to the losing side... but not to the leader of the losing side, necessarily.
Not necessarily. See for example the 'Fighting Words' doctrine. A lot of legal systems recognize the concept of certain verbal statements that are either intended to provoke violence or are so aggravating as something that can justify or be a mitigating factor in the case of assault. In a society like Westeros in which the monarchy is nearly all powerful and can lop off heads left and right statements insulting the monarchy are probably considered to be some of the least justifiable forms of speech.
This is the sort of situation for which we could really do with some additional legal education. I'd be shocked if Jaehaerys never sat a case discussing someone engaging in Lese Majeste, which would have resulted in obligatory precedent for future cases. For all we know Jaehaerys had not just the speaker hanged, but had the people around him hanged as well for being collaborators, which could have explained the eagerness of the merchant's companions in silencing him if so due to them not wanting to be punished alongside him in case they didn't take immediate action to stop him from badmouthing the royal family.
That would exclude us from capital politics, though. Our mid term aim (i.e., longer term than the progress, but of course shorter term than us becoming Queen) was a seat on the Small Council. The idea was to accumulate political experience there.
Or well, at least that is the common wisdom, that residing on Dragonstone would exclude one from KL politics. Often, when a Targaryen prince or pricness did withdraw to Dragonstone, it was a sort of self-isolation. However, well, it is less than a day's ride on dragonback between KL and Dragonstone, so that common wisdom may not be entirely correct...
But still, given the precedence, going to Dragonstone could be seen as primarily leaving the capital, rather than taking care of our fief. As a sort of retreat, hence. I do think it is better to accumulate political experience with capital politics.
But still, given the precedence, going to Dragonstone could be seen as primarily leaving the capital, rather than taking care of our fief. As a sort of retreat, hence. I do think it is better to accumulate political experience with capital politics.
@Teen Spirit since we're going by show canon over book canon in this quest then it is explicit that the Hand of the King can sit in judgement for the Iron Throne in lieu of the king, as shown in the case when Otto sat in judgement over the matter of the Velaryon inheritance due to how ill Viserys was at the time. Does Rhaenyra know about whether the Hand of the King's judgements when sitting the Iron Throne also carry the weight of binding precedent, I.E other judges have rule to rule the same way as the Hand did when facing similar cases, or does it have to specifically be the king that passes the judgement for the judgement to become an obligatory precedent?
@Teen Spirit since we're going by show canon over book canon in this quest then it is explicit that the Hand of the King can sit in judgement for the Iron Throne in lieu of the king, as shown in the case when Otto sat in judgement over the matter of the Velaryon inheritance due to how ill Viserys was at the time.
That's books canon as well. Not necessarily F&B, but ASOIAF - Eddard as Hand of the King pronouncing judgement over Ser Gregor Clegane, in the name of the king.
Though in any case, legal codes and jurisprudence do not seem very well developed in Westeros to begin with. Lords will rule as they see fit, so whether it is the King or the Hand setting precedent won't matter that much as the weight of precedent itself doesn't seem very heavy - with local judgements, it would need to be a really egregious case for it to make waves all the way up to King's Landing. The King sometimes enact single, disparate legal acts (see Jaehaerys legally ending the right of the first night, for example), and that then might get enforced (but not in regions too far from royal authority, like the Boltons and Umbers...), but there is no royal legal code or anything.
Making a written legal code for the entire realm (or at least of the areas of Andal law) would be one of those things that could give a monarch a cool moniker, I guess. I suppose that would have been more up scholar!Rhaenyra's alley... though then again, Justinian didn't personally write his code either, but merely gathered and financed experts to do it.
That's books canon as well. Not necessarily F&B, but ASOIAF - Eddard as Hand of the King pronouncing judgement over Ser Gregor Clegane, in the name of the king.
Though in any case, legal codes and jurisprudence do not seem very well developed in Westeros to begin with. Lords will rule as they see fit, so whether it is the King or the Hand setting precedent won't matter that much as the weight of precedent itself doesn't seem very heavy - with local judgements, it would need to be a really egregious case for it to make waves all the way up to King's Landing. The King sometimes enact single, disparate legal acts (see Jaehaerys legally ending the right of the first night, for example), and that then might get enforced (but not in regions too far from royal authority, like the Boltons and Umbers...), but there is no royal legal code or anything.
Making a written legal code for the entire realm (or at least of the areas of Andal law) would be one of those things that could give a monarch a cool moniker, I guess. I suppose that would have been more up scholar!Rhaenyra's alley... though then again, Justinian didn't personally write his code either, but merely gathered and financed experts to do it.
It's actually noted in the supplemental books that during Jaehaerys' reign Jaehaerys put into law a legal code for the entire realm. The laws that make up the code were written by Jaehaerys and his small council, particularly by Jaehaerys' hand, septon Barth.
Also keep in mind that when it comes to the Umbers the Boltons and the First Night that publicly the Boltons and Umbers are only "rumored" to practice the first night. While we know for a fact that at least the Boltons still practice the first night, that they feel the need to still hide their practice of it suggests that they to would need to be worried about enforcement in case they practiced it openly.
Perception and firm statements often matter more than trying to weigh the relative severity of crimes with absolute objectivity
Whether he didn't start the fight is a subject of debate
There are a half dozen testimonies stating that he was the aggressor, though they (and also he) were all drunk, which makes events opaque
Just sticking to the certainties though
He openly admits that he spoke sedition against the crown, and the others stepped in to stop him because they suspected he was trying to start something ugly
To lessen the sentence by sending him to the Wall is to effectively state that the fight and three deaths weren't his fault
That the people defending the Targaryen name were wrong to step forward to support us
Which is an inherently weak position for the crown itself to argue
It looks ungrateful and it tells people not to support us
By contrast, even though it would seem like supporting a coup against one's lord would be a bigger deal there are some big mitigating factors that afford more room for leniency to those knights
They were rebelling against Jeyne, not the Iron Throne
They were supporting one Arryn against another
As knights, their business is more intrinsically tied to politics, whereas that Merchant should have just kept his head down and mouth shut
As Arnold's men, they can be perceived as "just following orders" and being mislead by Arnold
This is a decent (though not bulletproof) defense for the period, as obedience to one's lord is valued very highly by the system, and creates grey wiggle room when those loyalties conflict
Arnold acts as a scapegoat/lightning rod of sorts, where people can go "yep, it was all this guy's idea, shame he dragged all you other guys into this mess with him"
Which leaves room to say "Tell you what, admit that Arnold was in the complete wrong and dragged you into a mess he never should have and that you wanted no part of, and you'll be shown leniency... unless of course you'd like to continue to stand by him"
Also in and out of itself it's questionable whether we want to pass a judgement that says that certain actions that are illegal if you're sober cease to be illegal if you're drunk.
Plus there is the whole dimension that the North is looking at this as a foreshadowing of how Rhaenyra will be as queen when they are still smarting over the New Gift for several reasons. They probably wouldn't like her sending a man off to the Wall when he got several people killed by insulting her/the royal family in a attempt at provocation against her tour. It's not the kind of person they would like to see fill that institution that they greatly respect.
Which leaves room to say "Tell you what, admit that Arnold was in the complete wrong and dragged you into a mess he never should have and that you wanted no part of, and you'll be shown leniency... unless of course you'd like to continue to stand by him"
I mean, this fellow was given the chance to make a statement in his defense, he could have abjured his expressed belief that the Targaryens were unnatural abominations, and instead his only defense was that he was drunk at the time he said those things. That is to say, "I still do believe those things, I was just stupid to say them." To which the response is "yeah, you were; and also to say what you just did."
"Hmm, yes," the steward said as he checked his notes. "The armsmen who found him did report his fields had been overtaken by a foulness known to rot the limbs and drive a person mad. But Lord Stark has provisions set aside for such incidents. If he had simply come to Winter Town, his family would have been provided for."
"My daughter wouldn't survived that long!" the farmer replied sharply. "She's only alive because the soldier who found me took pity and provided some of his own ration."
Less relevant now that the vote is over, and also something that may be either unintentional or just me misunderstanding the timescales involved
But upon rereading I do question the poacher's logic of deciding to venture into the royal forests rather than travel to Winter Town because he deemed that the journey would take too long
Medieval travel is pretty slow and he might have been looking at a few days to travel there and back again on foot with a mule
But hunting is also a pretty lengthy endeavor, and he couldn't possibly have expected to just walk into the forest and being back a buck
It can take days to track down a deer, and smaller game can also be pretty hit or miss
Noble hunts employ huntsman and foresters whose job is to track down and mark the location of game days in advance for a reason
A single desperate man with a starving family, who is presumably not a hunter by trade, would have to get extremely lucky to grab a bow off the wall and come back with a deer or a whole brace of rabbits or pheasants in a just a day or two
And that feels especially the case since autumn is setting in and game would be even sparser
I'm not saying that he's lying
Those fields didn't get imaginary blight
But there does seem to be a lot of credence to the assertion that if he had the time to go poaching, then he should have had the time to go travel to Winter Town for aid
I mean, this fellow was given the chance to make a statement in his defense, he could have abjured his expressed belief that the Targaryens were unnatural abominations, and instead his only defense was that he was drunk at the time he said those things. That is to say, "I still do believe those things, I was just stupid to say them." To which the response is "yeah, you were; and also to say what you just did."
Remorse wouldn't have hugely mattered in this case
It wouldn't have mitigated the crime of three deaths
If it had just been the sedition charge, then him theoretically going "I didn't mean it, liquor just made me say stupid things, I'm very sorry" could give room for mercy provided he recants his words
Especially since his offense would be against solely us, which gives us more leeway when it comes to addressing that offense
But the murder kind of makes that impossible
Regret can't unkill those people
To grant mercy would be to say that those deaths were justified
And that's not a statement I think we can make, regardless of how mournful he is or isn't about his words
In the alternate universe where he's all teary eyed and regretful we'd most likely still have to cut his head off
Perhaps, but murderers do go to the Wall sometimes. It's an available alternative punishment for any crime. And remorse and repentance (or their absence) can make a difference in sentencing. Any number of defendants with guilty consciences even ask for the Wall. This fellow didn't; he was, ultimately, as defiant as Arnold til he ran out of chances.
Less relevant now that the vote is over, and also something that may be either unintentional or just me misunderstanding the timescales involved
But upon rereading I do question the poacher's logic of deciding to venture into the royal forests rather than travel to Winter Town because he deemed that the journey would take too long
Medieval travel is pretty slow and he might have been looking at a few days to travel there and back again on foot with a mule
But hunting is also a pretty lengthy endeavor, and he couldn't possibly have expected to just walk into the forest and being back a buck
It can take days to track down a deer, and smaller game can also be pretty hit or miss
Noble hunts employ huntsman and foresters whose job is to track down and mark the location of game days in advance for a reason
A single desperate man with a starving family, who is presumably not a hunter by trade, would have to get extremely lucky to grab a bow off the wall and come back with a deer or a whole brace of rabbits or pheasants in a just a day or two
And that feels especially the case since autumn is setting in and game would be even sparser
I'm not saying that he's lying
Those fields didn't blight themselves
But there does seem to be a lot of credence to the assertion that if he had the time to go poaching, then he should have had the time to go travel to Winter Town for aid
Even if from an objective point of view trying to go on what can be expected to be a lengthy hunt until you capture game not making sense when going to Wintertown is an option, from the Poacher's subjective point of view it could be that he thought that if he tried hunting there was always a chance he could get lucky and come back with game quickly, whereas if he tried reaching Wintertown the time required to make such distance would definitely mean his daughter starving to death, making it so that choice was between his daughter definitely dying on the way to Wintertown and her maybe dying in case he doesn't manage an exceptionally quick hunt.
Even if from an objective point of view trying to go on what can be expected to be a lengthy hunt until you capture game not making sense when going to Wintertown is an option, from the Poacher's subjective point of view it could be that he thought that if he tried hunting there was always a chance he could get lucky and come back with game quickly, whereas if he tried reaching Wintertown the time required to make such distance would definitely mean his daughter starving to death, making it so that choice was between his daughter definitely dying on the way to Wintertown and her maybe dying in case he doesn't manage an exceptionally quick hunt.
I don't know if that fits the timescale either
Starvation doesn't take you by surprise
It's one thing if you have no alternative, but if Stark's provisions are well known then he should have set off for Winter Town before reaching the "one day away from my daughter passing away from starvation" mark
I suppose it's technically possible that he and his family discovered the blight while already weeks into starvation
And maybe the Starks only give out provisions if the crops are blighted, and not if your reserves are depleted from summer snows so he couldn't have left earlier
But I feel like that shouldn't be the case
For one thing he'd be in no condition to hunt for anything if he was a day or two away from death by starvation himself
But also
A program like what the Starks have exist to preserve farmers (and probably other citizens) during bad seasons so that they'll still be here to farm during good seasons
Farmers on the brink of starvation are not productive, and the fact that this program exists at all tells me the Starks are both aware and proactive about this
"My last harvest underperformed and the summer snows ate through my reserves" ought to qualify you for this assistance
It shouldn't be hyper specific and stingy such that they'll only give you food after conducting a thorough investigation to see if your crops are blighted or something
Just a visit to Winter Town and then the journey back with a cart of provisions and an official to quickly ascertain that you do in fact need the help sitting on the coach beside you
A few guards or so as escort for the large quantity of food moving by road
I don't know if that fits the timescale either
Starvation doesn't take you by surprise
It's one thing if you have no alternative, but if Stark's provisions are well known then he should have set off for Winter Town before reaching the "one day away from my daughter passing away from starvation" mark
I suppose it's technically possible that he and his family discovered the blight while already weeks into starvation
And maybe the Starks only give out provisions if the crops are blighted, and not if your reserves are depleted from summer snows so he couldn't have left earlier
But I feel like that shouldn't be the case
For one thing he'd be in no condition to hunt for anything if he was a day or two away from death by starvation himself
Also
A program like what the Starks have exist to preserve farmers (and probably other citizens) during bad seasons so that they'll still be here to farm during good seasons
Farmers on the brink of starvation are not productive, and the fact that this program exists at all tells me the Starks are both aware and proactive about this
"My last harvest underperformed and the summer snows ate through my reserves" ought to qualify you for this assistance
It shouldn't be hyper specific and stingy such that they'll only give you food after conducting a thorough investigation to see if your crops or blighted or something
Just a visit to Winter Town and then the journey back with a cart of provisions and an official to quickly ascertain that you do in fact need the help sitting on the coach beside you
The poacher mentions that it was his daughter that in danger of starving to death, not himself. Children are more vulnerable to the effects of starvation than adults.
Also the guy was a panicking, probably uneducated, father, not a medical professional. Could be his daughter had longer then he thought and he went overboard to protect her from the hunger. Real people experiencing a crisis are not necessarily going to act like omniscient rationality machines.
The poacher mentions that it was his daughter that in danger of starving to death, not himself. Children are more vulnerable to the effects of starvation than adults.
Also the guy was a panicking, probably uneducated, father, not a medical professional. Could be his daughter had longer then he thought and he went overboard to protect her from the hunger.
More vulnerable yes
But an 8 year old won't starve to death so quickly that you wouldn't see the crisis approaching weeks in advance
Which is the main point
And I am presuming that the father, loving family man that he is, is splitting up and rationing the food such that his 8 year old being a day away from death puts himself close behind her
And if she's more or less a day away from death then he's in no condition to go hunting
So the fact that he is in condition to go hunting means that she probably isn't
And if he misjudged the situation then like... yeah?
Like I said, I don't think he was lying
Somewhere something went wrong
Either he should have left for Winter Town much earlier and didn't
Or he had more time than he thought
More vulnerable yes
But an 8 year old won't starve to death so quickly that you wouldn't see the crisis approaching weeks in advance
Which is the main point
And I am presuming that the father is splitting up and rationing the food such that his 8 year old being a day away from death puts himself close behind her
And if she's more or less a day away from death then he's in no condition to go hunting
So the fact that he is means that she probably isn't
And if he misjudged the situation then like... yeah?
Like I said, I don't think he was lying
Somewhere something went wrong
Either he should have left for Winter Town much earlier and didn't
Or he had more time than he thought
Okay something to make clear. It wasn't that he didn't harvest his field. He did, then the blighted grain killed his brother so he got rid of the whole harvest. Which meant he very quickly went from having some food to no food.
More vulnerable yes
But an 8 year old won't starve to death so quickly that you wouldn't see the crisis approaching weeks in advance
Which is the main point
And I am presuming that the father, loving family man that he is, is splitting up and rationing the food such that his 8 year old being a day away from death puts himself close behind her
Not necessarily. In a sitution like the one Teen Spirit described in which suddenly all the food goes bad, you may not have anything to ration with. In that case everyone lasts for as long as they can manage without food, be that say, (throwing random numbers) two weeks for the father and one week for the child, for example.
Not necessarily. In a sitution like the one Teen Spirit described in which suddenly all the food goes back, you may not have anything to ration with. In that case everyone lasts for as long as they can manage without food, be that say, two weeks for the father and one week for the child, for example.
I feel like you're not getting the main thrust of what I'm saying
The man and his family have just gotten through some rough summer snows and the following growing season, their pantry is looking a bit thin but the next harvest is coming soon, no need for panic just yet, probably just some worry lines, maybe tighten the belts a bit if you want to be cautious
The harvest comes in and everyone breathes a sigh of relief at restocking their larders, before they find out maybe a few days later that it's all tainted and his brother tragically dies
The whole harvest needs to be thrown out and burnt
They take a look at their food stocks and oh god they have barely any/no food left
Now is the immediate point in time that he should have grabbed everything he needed to make an immediate trip down to Winter Town
He would make it in time if he'd done this
He doesn't do this for some reason
Apparently he panicked in the wake of his brother's death
Instead he either goes off into the royal forests in a desperate gambit to poach some wild game, something that would likely take about as long as the journey to Winter Town anyway and is unsustainable through the winter
Or he holds down the fort at his homestead with little to no food and... idk, sits in denial at the situation, maybe starts trying to replant before realizing how doomed that effort is, and runs out the clock on valuable time as starvation actually starts setting in
And then tries poaching as a Hail Mary after completely exhausting all remaining supplies and precious time
Either way, the steward is correct, despite mitigating circumstances, he should have traveled to Winter Town and it's an unfortunate tragedy that he didn't
[X][Second] Execute him. Also decree that the first claim on the traitor merchant's estate will go to pay customary damages for wrongful death to the survivors of each of the three dead men. If there is anything left for the merchant's heirs to inherit after the wrongful death damages have been paid, then they can have it.
[X][Second] Write-In: Execute him. Also decree that the first claim on the traitor merchant's estate will go to pay customary damages for wrongful death to the survivors of each of the three dead men. If there is anything left for the merchant's heirs to inherit after the wrongful death damages have been paid, then they can have it.
[X] [Second] Write-in "With three men dead at your feet do you have anything else to say in your defence?" -[X]If he pleads for the Wall then allow it. Otherwise execute him.
[X] [First] Compromise: With no document proving if the road can be tolled or not, you find it reasonable that House Whitehill does so. However, you also find it reasonable that House Forrester is receiving recompense for the actions of the Whitehill armsman. House Whitehill will have to pay for the reconstruction of the dam.
[X][First] Compromise: There is no evidence for Forresters' claim that the road should be toll-free. As the Boltons are currently maintaining the road, it is their right to allow the Whitehills to levy tolls along it. So far as this court is concerned, the tolls stand as they are now, not to be altered until the dam is completed. However, the saboteur confessed to being a Whitehill armsman before dying. As the Whitehills apparently have no evidence that the saboteur was not one of their armsmen, they must be held at least partly liable for the sabotage. The court holds that the Whitehills must pay half the costs of the dam reconstruction. The court admonishes the Forresters for having tortured the key witness to death, thus weakening the evidence of their own claims. Hypothetically, if the saboteur was here to testify today, then the Forresters might have been awarded higher damages.
[X] [First] Side with the Whitehills and keep the tolls in place. Make it clear to the court that by torturing the sabotager to death the Forresters denied the court the ability to assess his testimony, thus both foiling the court's ability to examine potentially valuable evidence as well as leaving the foresters with no evidence to their claims, forcing you to rule against them.
[X] [First] Write-in: House Whitehill as a vassal of House Bolton is allowed to levy tolls on the road given their previous maintenance work and the lack of documentation provided by House Forrester. However, the levy must be set at a reasonable level that is comparable to other road tolls levied in the North. House Whitehill is responsible for the actions of its armsmen and must provide recompense to House Forrester. The recompense shall be set at half the cost of repairing the dam. Any further actions against the dam or similar infrastructure by House Whitehill or servants of House Whitehill will face significantly more harsh punishments as decided on by House Stark
[X][First] Side with the Whitehills and keep the tolls in place. Since the Boltons are the ones maintaining the road, it is their right to allow the Whitehills to levy tolls along it. Make it clear to the court that if, as the Forresters allege, a Whitehill armsman had hypothetically destroyed the dam, then the Whitehills might hypothetically be liable, even if the sabotage did not occur at their orders. However, it appears that the Forresters have destroyed the evidence of their own claim by killing the only witness in the process of trying to torture a confession out of him. While the Forresters' own word is not in doubt, it is now impossible to determine whether the dead saboteur was lying or telling the truth. As such, the court cannot hold the Whitehills liable for the destruction of the dam.
[X] [First] Write-in: It's clear that the 'evidence' obtained at the point of a knife from a bandit is suspect. No doubt once the brigand was put to the question he would claim anything in the hopes that it would end the questioning. Were such flimsy evidence reliable it would be cause for war, given Lord Forrester has started no war he clearly sees how such flimsy claims from a bandit are less than reliable and has chosen to limiting himself to claiming coin for the damages wrought. Damage with no proven responsible party. Still. A bandit did the deed of destroying the dam which caused damage to Forrester land. Damage for which they deserve recompense. The road was allegedly built for the use of both houses, but no evidence or records of such exist. Despite this the road lies on Whitehill land and they are responsible for it's upkeep, thus a toll for it's use seems reasonable. What is not however reasonable is raising the toll to take advantage of ones fellow nobles plight. The tolls charged to House Forrester Stand. They will pay them. And the coin shall go directly to The Lord Paramount of the north to go towards the reconstruction of the dam. Thus forth, the Lord Stark and his house Shall be responsible for the upkeep of the whitehill road and the levying of any fair tolls for their use. Until and unless that he or his duly appointed representative is convinced that it can managed fairly. We suggest their fair and honourable conduct be reviewed in two years. (Subject to QM approval)
[X] [first] Suggest that Whitehill and Forrester each put forward a champion to determine whether the armsman belonged to house Whitehill or not in trial by combat. If he is determined to belong to Whitehill then they have a responsibility for the actions of their armsman, even assuming Lyanna did not order it of him, and so must pay for the reconstruction of the dam. If he is determined to be unrelated to house Whitehill then they owe Forrester nothing.
[X] [First] Compromise: With no document proving if the road can be tolled or not, you will find it reasonable that House Whitehill does so. However, you will also find it reasonable that House Forrester is receiving recompense for the actions of the Whitehill armsman. House Whitehill will have to pay for the reconstruction of the dam.
[X][First] The Boltons maintain the road, so if they want the Whitehills charging a toll, then they can. But no raising the toll any higher than it is now. The Forresters have evidence that a Whitehill man destroyed the dam. But because the Forresters tortured the only witness to death, their case against the Whitehills is weakened. The Whitehills pay only half the cost of repairing the dam, and get to keep the money from charging the Forresters the higher tolls.
[X][Third] Write-In: In recognition of the poacher's unusual and desperate conditions, and that he may remain able-bodied and capable of supporting his daughter, the court will allow him to compensate Lord Stark by forfeiting all his land. The land is now Stark property, to rent to tenants or otherwise to do with as they see fit.
[X][Third] In recognition of the poacher's unusual and desperate conditions, and that he may remain able-bodied and capable of supporting his daughter, the court will allow him to compensate Lord Stark by forfeiting all his land. The land is now Stark property, to rent to tenants or otherwise to do with as they see fit.
[X] [Third] The father is sent to the night watch, the daughter can become a servant at Winterfell or another castle if her mother agrees. The mother can follow her daughter, or stay on the farm.
[X] [Third] Send him to the Wall, but only after a set period whereupon it is ensured his wife and daughter are able to safely provide for themselves without his presence.
[X] [Third] Write-in "The punishment is intended to ensure you don't steal again. Your farm is blighted, easy enough to return that to the Lord Paramount for him to bestow it on another. Congratulations on hunting the buck. You'll serve your lord with both hands as an archer, until your service has paid off the worth of the buck. And the rations the soldier spared you. Your wife can't handle the farm alone and your daughter can't be allowed to starve. Your wife and child will be employed by the lord Stark, to serve his guests, work in his kitchens, cook and clean. (Subject to QM Approval)
[X][Third] Since the poacher was a desperate man, we commute his sentence. Instead of death or maiming, he will forfeit all his land to the Starks. He is now a tenant of the Starks and not a freeholder. They can decide his rents.
You considered the Forrester and Whitehill case carefully. You did not want to dismiss the Forrester claims out of hand, they were honorable vassals of the Lord Stark's Wife's family and Northerners weren't the type to lie from what you knew, but for that same reason you also had to take Lady Whitehill at her word.
"While the damage to Forrester lands and property is very serious," You did your best to keep your tone neutral but authoritative, "and the testimony of the fiend who did this is deeply concerning. On their own they simply aren't enough to prove anything to my satisfaction. If they had survived he could have provided specifics about his service to house Whitehill that would have helped this matter considerably. As it is, there's no records of his service and no records of the road's proper designation."
You were annoyed that the Forresters killed that man before you could get a chance to talk with him. Had he survived, you have no doubt he easily could have made sense of the contradiction that was his service to House Whitehill and Lyanna Whitehill's testimony otherwise. But the Forresters eagerness for revenge, while understandable, had left you with only a few words from the man.
"The Iron Throne sees no cause for the Tariffs to be reduced or removed at this time," you declared, "The Whitehills are free to tariff that road as they see fit within the boundaries of the laws imposed by both Winterfell and the Iron Throne."
"Thank you, Princess," Lady Whitehill said as she bowed deeply, "House Whitehill is grateful for your sage judgement in this matter."
It was clear the Forrester heir was disappointed but he keep his calm as he bowed and thanked you for your time.
The two left after that, but not before a few more hateful glances were shared between them.
Lord Stark's face was impassive as he stood beside you, as though he had been carved from the stones. Most of the room seemed to agree with your judgement.
You think you made the right call but you knew very little of any of the laws involved and there was so little proof to go on. The lords seemed pleased but you felt frustrated.
The Forrester-Whitehill dispute had been frustrating and you couldn't deny you felt regret as the farmer cried in front of you, knowing he was going to be torn away from his wife and daughter forever. But compared to what you were about to do, both of those felt downright trivial.
The merchant had slandered your father, the entire royal family, and multiple people were dead because of him. There was only one way you could have ruled, the man had to die, and it must be by your own hands. You had passed the sentence, now it was time for you to swing the sword.
You couldn't back out and have someone else handle the execution. Not after your conversation with Lord Stark, not while every person in Winterfell knew of your exploits in White Harbor. You were no wispy maiden with barely the strength to hold a sword, you were a warrior. To do anything less than carry out the sentence yourself would look craven to Lord Stark and his men.
Lord Stark had the merchant dragged out into one of the courtyards. Then the merchant was made to kneel with his head resting on a block.
There had been some discussion as to what you would use to do the deed. You thought your sword would be enough, the trial at the Eyrie had proven it was enough for the task. But that wasn't acceptable to Lord Stark. Too much risk of things going wrong, of needless suffering. You were to be given a proper executioner's blade, and there was only one executioner's blade in Winterfell, Ice.
You stared at the blade intently as you prepared for what was to come. It's blade was Valyrian steel, spell-forged and dark as smoke. It was utterly massive, as wide as your hand and tall as a grown man. Too big to ever see real combat, it was clear the blade had been forged long ago with only one purpose in mind.
You never thought your first experience with Valyrian Steel would be like this.
A long sigh escaped your lips as you focused on the doomed man before you.
"If you have any last words," your voice was quiet and firm, "it is best you say them now."
Man deserved one last chance to speak freely, no matter what he had done."
"I didn't start that fight," Amos declared, his voice shaking from terror, "kill me for my words, but I did not throw the first punch."
"Is this really so important right now?" You asked, stunned by his persistence on the matter.
You had expected begging, crying, probably even insults thrown at you and your father. You never thought he would keep arguing like this.
"I'm a drunkard who talks and spends too freely, I won't deny that," he was adamant, "But I am no murderer and I will not die as one. Those men could have left me alone or gutted me when I left the bar and they would have made it home just fine. They started the fight, not me."
"For what it's worth, I believe you," your words seemed to grant some measure of peace to the man as he knelt there.
The man would be dead in moments and was spending some of his last breath on this. If nothing else he clearly believed he had not thrown the first punch. It didn't change anything, his words alone were a threat to you and your father. And even if he had not thrown the first punch, the fight had been caused by his words.
He may not have been a murderer, but those men were dead because of him all the same.
No more delays now, you had a duty to fulfill.
"In the name of King Viserys of House Targaryen, First of His Name, King of the Andals, and the Rhoynar, and the First Men. Lord of the Seven Kingdoms and Protector of the Realm" you declared as your grip tightened on the sword, "I, Rhaenyra of House Targaryen, Princess of Dragonstone, do sentence you to die."
You raised Ice, even for you the blade felt absurdly heavy and almost a struggle to wield. Thankfully you did not have to raise it high.
You felt little as the blade came down, the sword passing through his neck like it was nothing. Were it not for the now familiar thud of a head impacting a stone floor.
The first time you killed a man there had been nothing but stunned silence from you and everyone around. You had started full of rage and ended feeling like your entire body had been thrown into an ice bath.
Now, you heard mutterings of agreement and support as you stared down at the lifeless body of Amos.
The first time had been quick, an act of anger against an utterly vile man. This had been cold, dispassionate, the fallen someone who had slandered your family but in his last moments had cared more about convincing you of what he thought was the truth. You had little feelings for this man, he deserved to die but you can't say you hated him.
This, this wasn't as bad as the first time. You still felt an icy claw at your heart as you stared down. But it had been easier than before, much much easier. And you couldn't help but feel more than a touch terrified at that realization.
You quickly returned Ice to its proper owner. Lord Stark stared at you appraisingly for a long moment before giving you a deep nod.
"It was clean and quick, few could ask for a better death," his voice full of praise as he spoke, "You did your duty well, Princess."
+7 Stress
You Have Earned the Respect of House Stark
The sound of hooves filled the woods as your hunting party dashed through the Wolfswood. You were two days into the hunt, two days filled with hunting for birds and smaller game but now you were on the trail of something quite large. Something everyone would be talking about in time, provided you managed to kill the damn thing.
"Halt!" Bennard Stark called out, bringing the line of horses to a stop, "We've lost the tracks."
Lord Stark had affairs in Winterfell that couldn't wait, so his brother Bennard was made Master of the Hunt. He and a number of other northern lords, their sons, and servants, lead you and Rhea into the Wolfswood for some game hunting. There had been some mutters of discontent when the two of you joined but Rhea was quick to point out her family probably hunted more often than any northern lord and she had plenty of experience on the hunt, and Bennard along with some of the other lords were quick to declare you were more of a man than most of the younger men in the hunting party. You had no idea if you should take the compliment in stride or be offended by it.
Regardless, the Northern lords were treating the two of you like just another one of the group. Even providing you both with boar spears. The spears remained covered and unbloodied for now, part of you was grateful for that, hunting boars by all accounts was a terrifying ordeal for even the bravest of men, but part of you wanted a proper challenge. You'd bested so many men at the tourney, and now part of you really wanted to see how you'd fare against beasts.
Thankfully the Wolfswood provided the hunt with a real challenge, a massive great elk that was easily ten feet tall at the shoulders. a Majestic beast like that was a rarity for even the Northerners around you. The antlers would make a fine trophy or perhaps even an awe inspiring bow. And the kill would further prove to any who had doubts of just how capable a warrior you were.
The only problem was catching the damn thing, the hunting party had been cashing the buck on and off for hours, losing him for a bit before picking the trail again only for the massive beast to outrun them. They were wearing it down, but the massive thing somehow provided quite adept at hiding.
"Judging by the tracks, this thing has taken a turn towards the right," the younger Stark declared as he stared at the last remaining set of hoof marks, "which means he'll double back. We should head back the way we came, maybe we can catch him by surprise."
"Double back?" Rhea questioned, "why would we do that?"
"That path leads to jagged hills and a mountain pass that's been blocked by a landslide for the past two months," Bennard explained, "I've seen that pass myself, no way an animal this size could get over it. Our best hope is to double back."
"We just rode over a dozen horses through these woods," Rhea argued, "And we all stink of sweat and grim and blood, it will smell us or the horses well before we ever see it. We should follow it and try to pick up its tracks that way."
Bennard shook his head, "To the left is dense forest too big for this beast to run through. I know these woods well, back the way he came is the best route out of this area with the mountains the way they are."
"And I've been hunting since I was able to ride a horse," Rhea shot back, "Nothing that big has survived for this long by being careless around humans. If this thing has survived out here for this long, it probably knows the woods better than you do."
"Or it's new here and doesn't know its way," Bennard replied.
"If it was new here we would still be able to follow it," Rhea was steadfast in her arguments, "Let me follow it at least."
"This is not a beast for any one hunter," Bennard said, his voice softening as he considered her words, "You need to bring people with you, and I won't force anyone to follow you."
The other hunters largely refused, preferring to trust in Stark's personal experience. After a long moment, one older man spoke up.
"I'll join the Bronze Lass," Eddard Mormont, the uncle of the current Lord of Bear Island, declared, "No offense Bennard but I think she has the right of it."
"None taken," Bennard, "Alright, one more and I'll agree to split the party."
You could feel Rhea's eyes on you even before you looked. Even if someone else decided to join you knew that Rhea wouldn't be able to leave without you anyways, she was after all your sworn shield for the time being, it would look bad if she left you mid-hunt.
Personal experience had shown that Rhea was a skilled hunter who knew what she was talking about. And if it was just the three of you, it would be trivial for you to get a private conversation with her before the hunt was over.
On the other hand, Bennard and the other Northern lords knew these words better than either of you. And on a personal level ,if you did manage to get the kill, you'd have a much bigger audience if the group stuck together.
What Do You Do?
[] Split the Hunting Party, Follow Rhea.
[] Keep the Hunting Party Together, Follow Bennard's plan. QM's Note: Yeah the decisions were ultimately not particularly important though I will say as far as the Northerners are concerned your judgements were solid and just. So it's a success.