Game of Thrones: How Would the Justice-System Ever Work?

[Realitycrash]

How the hell is the Justice System in GoT supposed to work, really? if you think about it, it soon breaks down, due to one simple notion: Trial By Combat.
If every losing party of a court-case can simply declare that they wish to have a Trial By Combat, then Justice simply amounts to whoever is the biggest fellow or has the deepest pockets (to hire the biggest fellow). In fact, the richest guild in Westeros should be the Justice-Guild, which specialize in doing nothing but letting noble-men and women hire their sell-swords to win their court-cases. Furthermore, why would the commons ever tolerate such a system? Yes, a feudalistic system of Justice will forever be corrupt, but there is still a chance of actual victory against one's Lord.
In this system, a Lord can always afford to hire an armor-clan mercenary to fight in his stead, and unless the commoner want to risk his, his son's or neighbors life, fighting without armor and training against a professional, he will have to bow his head in defeat. This applies to all the less wealthy Houses as well, as they would hardly tolerate being pushed around in legal-matters because those with more money could simply buy out every good sellsword in the area.

 

[Vegosiux]

It seems someone's trying to mash Trial by Combat and Combat by Champion together.

Maybe it makes sense in-universe, but I can't have much respect for a society that employs that kind of a rule, I can't have much respect for it, fictional or not. And that's as much as I'd say, don't want the swarm descending again.

 

[Realitycrash]

It seems someone's trying to mash Trial by Combat and Combat by Champion together.

What's the difference, pray tell?

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

It doesn't make sense to us in a secular society, but it needs to be understood that Westeros is not secular. They worship the Seven Gods and the belief is that that in the case of a Trial by Combat, the Gods themselves judge. Thus, the winner of the fight did so because his cause was the just one in the eyes of the Gods and men cannot dispute the judgement.

An accused calling for a trial by combat is saying they'll let the Gods decide their fate. If they win, it is the Gods' will and they are set free. It works because Westerosi believe in the Seven, that's really the bottom line there. It wasn't unlike the "Red God" declaring The Hound innocent of murder when the Brotherhood accused him but their leader lost to him in single combat.

Ultimately, it remains an option for those who would prefer to put their fate in the hands of the Gods than in those of men, since perhaps men have already judged guilt before the trial even starts. Those accused won't find justice there.

 

[hazabaza1]

It seems someone's trying to mash Trial by Combat and Combat by Champion together.

What's the difference, pray tell?

Trial by Combat is you fight someone yourself, Combat by Champion is you get someone to fight for you.

Spoiler: Spoilers for TV show

The only reason Tyrion is spamming trial by combat/champion is because he has the money and relations to make it work. Most people aren't skilled at fighting and if they are there's probably 0.5% of people who can stand up to someone like Gregor Clegane. I think I heard somewhere that in certain cases the demand can just be turned down, Cersei just has Gregor and hates Tyrion. Don't quote me on that though.

Also the idea of a "justice league" probably won't work in a GoT/real world setting because even the tiniest wounds can fuck a dude up horrifically. A character who's been cut from the show gets a small slash on his hand and... doesn't end well. A justice guild will need constant new blood who are good at fighting and willing to die for another person/money.

 

[Vegosiux]

It seems someone's trying to mash Trial by Combat and Combat by Champion together.

What's the difference, pray tell?

Trial by Combat is simply what it sounds like, the strength of your case is tested in actual combat. Combat by Champion is when you send someone else to fight in your stead (regardless of whether the other side does that too, or fights for themselves in person).

Now the trial by combat itself is problematic, because you'd expect a professional "arbiter" sent in for such an occasion will likely be well trained, and the average defendant would not, so the deck is generally stacked in favor of conviction. If you add people being able to send others to fight in their stead, then you've stacked it even more, because the "arbiter" will likely be even better trained because of the nature of the opponents they'll face.

Plus, if we as a society had that kind of system, we'd still be clubbing each other over the head and stuff...

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

Applying real-world logic to things that don't exist and don't follow the rules of our universe has NEVER EVER EVER ended in people bickering about the pettiest possible shit and making themselves look like total doofuses.

Ever!

OT: Don't start thinking about this kind of stuff too hard. Just don't. It never ends well.

 

[Realitycrash]

It seems someone's trying to mash Trial by Combat and Combat by Champion together.

What's the difference, pray tell?

Trial by Combat is you fight someone yourself, Combat by Champion is you get someone to fight for you.

Spoiler: Spoilers for TV show

The only reason Tyrion is spamming trial by combat/champion is because he has the money and relations to make it work. Most people aren't skilled at fighting and if they are there's probably 0.5% of people who can stand up to someone like Gregor Clegane. I think I heard somewhere that in certain cases the demand can just be turned down, Cersei just has Gregor and hates Tyrion. Don't quote me on that though.

Also the idea of a "justice league" probably won't work in a GoT/real world setting because even the tiniest wounds can fuck a dude up horrifically. A character who's been cut from the show gets a small slash on his hand and... doesn't end well. A justice guild will need constant new blood who are good at fighting and willing to die for another person/money.

There will always be enough people willing to die for money. Just look at our world right now. Mercenaries are not in short supply. Remember that these will be well-trained and equiped, fighting peasants without skills or armor. Rember the scene where the Dohraki warrior fights..Armored what's-his-face and the warrior gets his blade stuck in the armor? Yeah, that is what would happen in most fights.
Most Lords will have to money. No peasants will. However, if the right can be refused, then why would what's-her-face Lorde of Eyre not refuse it at the first trial of Tyrion?

 

[hazabaza1]

It seems someone's trying to mash Trial by Combat and Combat by Champion together.

What's the difference, pray tell?

Trial by Combat is you fight someone yourself, Combat by Champion is you get someone to fight for you.

Spoiler: Spoilers for TV show

The only reason Tyrion is spamming trial by combat/champion is because he has the money and relations to make it work. Most people aren't skilled at fighting and if they are there's probably 0.5% of people who can stand up to someone like Gregor Clegane. I think I heard somewhere that in certain cases the demand can just be turned down, Cersei just has Gregor and hates Tyrion. Don't quote me on that though.

Also the idea of a "justice league" probably won't work in a GoT/real world setting because even the tiniest wounds can fuck a dude up horrifically. A character who's been cut from the show gets a small slash on his hand and... doesn't end well. A justice guild will need constant new blood who are good at fighting and willing to die for another person/money.

There will always be enough people willing to die for money. Just look at our world right now. Mercenaries are not in short supply. Remember that these will be well-trained and equiped, fighting peasants without skills or armor. Rember the scene where the Dohraki warrior fights..Armored what's-his-face and the warrior gets his blade stuck in the armor? Yeah, that is what would happen in most fights.
Most Lords will have to money. No peasants will. However, if the right can be refused, then why would what's-her-face Lorde of Eyre not refuse it at the first trial of Tyrion?

Just did some research about the matter of denying the trial. Turns out that it can be done by the accuser at any point but it's some heavy heathen behaviour.

Your other point is just something I'm somewhat confused by. If the guild or whatever is made for nobles who are being accused, why would they use it against peasants? People in the lower classes (at least in GoT) are treated like complete shit, and would have to be wildly idiotic to ask for a trial by combat to prove their worth because the average young lord probably has more training with a weapon than any given fully grown peasant.

And if it's the lords accusing lords situation, well then people like Gregor Clegane come up again. People who are just absurdly powerful and are owned by the higher ups will probably always win.

I dunno, maybe I'm not seeing it or maybe you're not putting your point across right but I don't really see how this "justice guild" is a flawless idea.

 

[Realitycrash]

It seems someone's trying to mash Trial by Combat and Combat by Champion together.

What's the difference, pray tell?

Trial by Combat is you fight someone yourself, Combat by Champion is you get someone to fight for you.

Spoiler: Spoilers for TV show

The only reason Tyrion is spamming trial by combat/champion is because he has the money and relations to make it work. Most people aren't skilled at fighting and if they are there's probably 0.5% of people who can stand up to someone like Gregor Clegane. I think I heard somewhere that in certain cases the demand can just be turned down, Cersei just has Gregor and hates Tyrion. Don't quote me on that though.

Also the idea of a "justice league" probably won't work in a GoT/real world setting because even the tiniest wounds can fuck a dude up horrifically. A character who's been cut from the show gets a small slash on his hand and... doesn't end well. A justice guild will need constant new blood who are good at fighting and willing to die for another person/money.

There will always be enough people willing to die for money. Just look at our world right now. Mercenaries are not in short supply. Remember that these will be well-trained and equiped, fighting peasants without skills or armor. Rember the scene where the Dohraki warrior fights..Armored what's-his-face and the warrior gets his blade stuck in the armor? Yeah, that is what would happen in most fights.
Most Lords will have to money. No peasants will. However, if the right can be refused, then why would what's-her-face Lorde of Eyre not refuse it at the first trial of Tyrion?

Just did some research about the matter of denying the trial. Turns out that it can be done by the accuser at any point but it's some heavy heathen behaviour.

Your other point is just something I'm somewhat confused by. If the guild or whatever is made for nobles who are being accused, why would they use it against peasants? People in the lower classes (at least in GoT) are treated like complete shit, and would have to be wildly idiotic to ask for a trial by combat to prove their worth because the average young lord probably has more training with a weapon than any given fully grown peasant.

And if it's the lords accusing lords situation, well then people like Gregor Clegane come up again. People who are just absurdly powerful and are owned by the higher ups will probably always win.

I dunno, maybe I'm not seeing it or maybe you're not putting your point across right but I don't really see how this "justice guild" is a flawless idea.

Alright, ignore fighting against peasants then. Try Lord vs Lord. Any situation in which one has a claim, the one with most money can hire The Mountain for instant win. Hell, why doesn't he just live like a king from this money?
My point is that if you CAN cry Trial by Combat whenever you are losing, why wouldn't any Lord do this? And with demand for skilled fighters, there would be a supplier (a guild) to fill the role.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

My point is that if you CAN cry Trial by Combat whenever you are losing, why wouldn't any Lord do this? And with demand for skilled fighters, there would be a supplier (a guild) to fill the role.

Losing a trial might mean going to the Wall, jail, exile, etc. Trial by combat, being a fight to the death, means that losing is quite...final.

 

[Silvanus]

How the hell is the Justice System in GoT supposed to work, really? if you think about it, it soon breaks down, due to one simple notion: Trial By Combat.

Keep in mind, Trial by Combat was a real thing [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_by_combat] during the Middle Ages, so it's not an absurd notion to use it in a fictional setting which draws from our own history.

Most Lords will have to money. No peasants will. However, if the right can be refused, then why would what's-her-face Lorde of Eyre not refuse it at the first trial of Tyrion?

Lysa Arryn thought that a Trial by Combat would be just as stacked in her favour as a regular trial would have been: Tyrion seemed not to have anybody to champion himself (being in the company only of his own captors and Arryn bannermen), so would have had to fight himself. Lysa had recourse to various Knights of the Vale. She thought it would be a cakewalk, essentially.

 

[hazabaza1]

It seems someone's trying to mash Trial by Combat and Combat by Champion together.

What's the difference, pray tell?

Trial by Combat is you fight someone yourself, Combat by Champion is you get someone to fight for you.

Spoiler: Spoilers for TV show

The only reason Tyrion is spamming trial by combat/champion is because he has the money and relations to make it work. Most people aren't skilled at fighting and if they are there's probably 0.5% of people who can stand up to someone like Gregor Clegane. I think I heard somewhere that in certain cases the demand can just be turned down, Cersei just has Gregor and hates Tyrion. Don't quote me on that though.

Also the idea of a "justice league" probably won't work in a GoT/real world setting because even the tiniest wounds can fuck a dude up horrifically. A character who's been cut from the show gets a small slash on his hand and... doesn't end well. A justice guild will need constant new blood who are good at fighting and willing to die for another person/money.

There will always be enough people willing to die for money. Just look at our world right now. Mercenaries are not in short supply. Remember that these will be well-trained and equiped, fighting peasants without skills or armor. Rember the scene where the Dohraki warrior fights..Armored what's-his-face and the warrior gets his blade stuck in the armor? Yeah, that is what would happen in most fights.
Most Lords will have to money. No peasants will. However, if the right can be refused, then why would what's-her-face Lorde of Eyre not refuse it at the first trial of Tyrion?

Just did some research about the matter of denying the trial. Turns out that it can be done by the accuser at any point but it's some heavy heathen behaviour.

Your other point is just something I'm somewhat confused by. If the guild or whatever is made for nobles who are being accused, why would they use it against peasants? People in the lower classes (at least in GoT) are treated like complete shit, and would have to be wildly idiotic to ask for a trial by combat to prove their worth because the average young lord probably has more training with a weapon than any given fully grown peasant.

And if it's the lords accusing lords situation, well then people like Gregor Clegane come up again. People who are just absurdly powerful and are owned by the higher ups will probably always win.

I dunno, maybe I'm not seeing it or maybe you're not putting your point across right but I don't really see how this "justice guild" is a flawless idea.

Alright, ignore fighting against peasants then. Try Lord vs Lord. Any situation in which one has a claim, the one with most money can hire The Mountain for instant win. Hell, why doesn't he just live like a king from this money?
My point is that if you CAN cry Trial by Combat whenever you are losing, why wouldn't any Lord do this? And with demand for skilled fighters, there would be a supplier (a guild) to fill the role.

First of all this.

My point is that if you CAN cry Trial by Combat whenever you are losing, why wouldn't any Lord do this? And with demand for skilled fighters, there would be a supplier (a guild) to fill the role.

Losing a trial might mean going to the Wall, jail, exile, etc. Trial by combat, being a fight to the death, means that losing is quite...final.

Second because fights are not guarenteed, take longer to do and I think only the accused can initiate one. Is someone is sure they're going to win without needing a fight the guy accusing them can challenge them to a duel probably but there's no legal or religious obligation to accept.

Spoiler: Spoilers for next episode probably (going off of the books)

Nobody expected Gregor to die in the fight against Oberyn. Probably not even Tyrion, he just took his last shot since he knew he was going to be condemned anyway. But initiating any kind of fight is risky in any situation, all it takes to kill someone is a pitchfork from the side when they're a little bit distracted and no matter how good you are you die pretty easily.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

Thank goodness we live in a civilized era, where trial by lengthy expensive court case is mandatory and outcomes are often based heavily on how good a lawyer you can afford, and for how long.

Justice simply amounts to whoever is the biggest fellow or has the deepest pockets (to hire the biggest fellow). In fact, the richest guild in Westeros should be the Justice-Guild, which specialize in doing nothing but letting noble-men and women hire their sell-swords to win their court-cases. Furthermore, why would the commons ever tolerate such a system?

Thank goodness in todays word those 'rich guilds' cannot hire the best 'sell-swords' in the lands who do nothing but argue for the side who pays more to win their legal cases.

Thank goodness commoners aren't at a physical or financial disadvantage when going through the court system with a grievance against a large multinational corporati... sorry, I mean a guild because said rich business can purchase the biggest, strongest legal team to fight for them against the commoner's legal strength bought by their meager monetary offering.

Actually, screw this, I think I've just managed to disillusion myself from our current legal system. TRIAL BY COMBAT FOR EVERYONE!

 

[Realitycrash]

My point is that if you CAN cry Trial by Combat whenever you are losing, why wouldn't any Lord do this? And with demand for skilled fighters, there would be a supplier (a guild) to fill the role.

Losing a trial might mean going to the Wall, jail, exile, etc. Trial by combat, being a fight to the death, means that losing is quite...final.

Only a fight to death for the champion, not for the accused. And if what you did is a death-penelty offense anyway, then why not go nuts? Murder the king? Burn down a church? Rape children, etc? If you are rich, just hire someone to fight for you.

 

[Esotera]

Apparently it's not ok in the 21st century to offer trial by combat... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1416262/Court-refuses-trial-by-combat.html

And the GoT is not exactly the best example if you're looking for a utopia where everyone gets justice. The system is imperfect and can be abused by people with power - which is what makes it an intreesting universe, as utopias are generally boring to read about.

 

[Woiminkle]

Well I'm not sure about this at all, but I doubt that anyone who isn't a Lord or at least a knight would have the right to call for a trial by combat. It would most probably not be an option in cases where there is no doubt, such as somebody being caught red handed or if they've already confessed since I doubt any society would allow somebody to admit their guilt and then escape justice by hiring a champion.
Also I think Bron is more the exception than the rule when it comes to sellswords willing to engage in life or death combat against a fully armoured opponent. I mean you either win some money or you die. Even if it was like a really big purse it's still a huge risk. It would need to be retire early kind of money so anyone hired by that guild would only ever fight once, win or lose.
Add to that the small pool of nobles in the kingdom who mostly settle their differences during wars I honestly don't see trials by combat coming up all that often to require a service to find fighters. Especially since then Northron Lords are all about swinging their own swords and the Southron ones seem to have plenty of eager young sycophants willing to fight for them as is.
Like I said though I'm not sure how it all works really, I don't remember if the books explain it in much depth.

 

[fezgod]

The reason why everybody doesn't use a trial by combat is because a) you have to be a noble and b) you're expected to fight in the combat yourself. In the two trials we have seen in the show, the reason why two champions are chosen to fight is because the accuser is a woman (Cersei Lannister and Lysa Arryn) while the accused (Tyrion) is physically handicapped.

In regards to who can be somebodies' champion, I would venture to say that having a lot of money won't always mean you have the best champion. Knights don't fight for money, they take up service with their liege lord - the Mountain wouldn't fight for any other Lord besides the Lannisters. Since every Lord wants the best fighters, every decent knight already has a Lord they are in service to. Serving a Lord means you get land, roaming Westeros as a sellsword means you get gold - one of these is more valuable in the long run. Sellswords are unreliable, they'll only take fights they know they will win. Which is why Bronn served Tyrion in the Eyrie but not now.

And how often do trials occur in Game of Thrones anyhow? Plenty of people, including nobles, are executed/murdered without any justification.