Or, being feudal lords who have a large degree of freedom in their land they could go to the edge and wimp out.And they could wimp out because of prejudices and nudges....These prejudices and other little nudges have what effect exactly? They would change the sentence passed down how? The prejudices remain constant. In all cases, the Judge in question passes the sentence. In the Starks case, they would only pass the sentence if they're willing to carry it out themselves, which, in my primitive worldview, means it's -less- likely that they would sentence one to death. Not more.
Or they could wimp out at sentencing time because those prejudices and nudges bias them. For example: I know people that would be seriously squeamish about sentencing a woman to death because then they'd have to hurt that woman. There's nothing just about this prejudice. At all.
There's a difference between passing a sentence knowing it's done and passing a sentence having to carry it out and I'm not convinced that the effect is necessarily positive.And I'm not taking cues from a bunch of medieval nobles.
Well, there we go.Yes. If I'm willing to call the thing a crime and immoral, I am willing to carry out a sentence I consider moral.