Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY
Sign in to follow this  
jsbrads

Morgase’s Justice

Recommended Posts

She was wrong. She ruled that Perrin was a mercenary when at the time he was a citizen who she failed to protect.

Perrin was a citizen traveling within the border of his own country. He left a campfire and was pursued by the illegal trespassers, ie mercenary army. The army whom faced no threat by Perrin, chased him down and illegally demanded he disarm. 

Perrin was completely allowed to kill every whotecloak, and legally had no liability.

The one excuse for Morgase is her emotional bias. Her error is understandable because Perrin was leading an army on foreign at the end of the series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Umm he attacked them for killing wolves, he wasn't protecting Fgwene or himself.  He went crazy because they attacked wolves.  Wolves have no legal protection, Perrin commited murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prior to Perrin’s attack on them, they tracked him down and demanded while armed that he disarm himself. A foreign army using force to disarm a law abiding citizen is legal justification to use force against those individuals. (Just rereading Book1)

The legal justification used was the precedent of illegal killing between two none state groups of mercenaries. Perrin was a legal citizen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But that isn't why Perrin attacked them.  The Whitecloaks also had a reason to be wary, you come across people hiding it stands to reason you will be suspicious.  They had no idea who was hiding there or their intentions.  But it comes down to why Perrin attacked the whitecloaks, and it wasn't to defend his Egwene or his life.  Not to mention Perrin would admit he didn't at that time consider himself a legal citizen of Andor, no one in the Two Rivers did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Sabio said:

But that isn't why Perrin attacked them.  The Whitecloaks also had a reason to be wary, you come across people hiding it stands to reason you will be suspicious.  They had no idea who was hiding there or their intentions.  But it comes down to why Perrin attacked the whitecloaks, and it wasn't to defend his Egwene or his life.  Not to mention Perrin would admit he didn't at that time consider himself a legal citizen of Andor, no one in the Two Rivers did.

No offense Sabio, but in my opinion that is a very weak legal argument. Let's try this.

In the United States of America if you trespass on my property (in my state of Alabama) and there is sufficient warnings clearly posted and you enter my house and attack me I have the legal option to shoot you. Now, let's say that on your way in you mumbled to yourself "Oh my goodness, look at that bible this guy has, he must be a religious nut" and I hear you say that. Now, you might say to yourself "You can not legally shoot a man for denouncing your religion!" and I would agree. I would argue, however, that under the law I do have the right to shoot you for trespassing, breaking and entering, and assaulting me.
It does not matter why Perrin attacked them. Legally, as a mercenary (which he was not) he had no call to attack them. As a citizen under the protection of the impotent and less than wise Morgase he actually does have the legal right to defend himself from an invading army illegally trespassing on Andoran soil and threatening him.

 

No, it does not come down to WHY he attacked them. Not in an Andoran court, nor according to Anglo-Saxon common law which is what predicated US law and is also the basis for Andor in the Wheel of Time. All that matters is the law, not a particular perception of why someone did something legal.

"You legally defended yourself from hostile invaders! And you didn't like his hat, that takes away your rights as a citizen!" just does not wash here, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine two Andoran citizens on the road to the Westwoods in Two Rivers. One is a local, and he sees a man he doesn’t recognize. At first the local is polite and cheerful, walks up to the guy, falls in beside him and starting chatting with him. Where are you from? Where are you going? Who do you know around here? The stranger for whatever reason, sullen, quiet, issues, refuses to respond in anyway. The local man draws a weapon and demands he stop and disarm.

This local man has much better standing than the whitecloaks, and Perrin has a much better standing than the stranger.

hope this explains it.

Disagree? Tell me why, or example, thanks 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was never attacked, they can demand to know who is hiding in order to determined if the people hiding are a threat.  They had a right to be wary.  They weren't in a town or near a town.  It might of been Andor on a map but it was no mans land they were in.  A place where any stranger may be a bandit and not patrolled by any guards etc...   So it's not unreasonable they would ask people they found hiding to come out of hiding.  Perin's own words "I killed those men, but they attacked my friends (wolves), I wasn't in control of myself.  I was ready to surrender.  But with the wolves in my head.... I felt their pain.  Then he thought to himself "He hadn't wanted to kill those Whitecloaks, but he had.  And he's done it in a frenzy, without control.  but the honest truth was he had lost control."  

 

Morgase then even read Andor Law "The law is very clear Perrin may feel the wolves were his friends, but the law states that a man's hound or livestock is worth a certain price.  Slaying them is unlawful, but killing a man in retribution is even more so."  So being an Andor citizen doesn't mean one can kill at the slightest provocation against an outsider. Perrin had no right to kill two people because of a wolf. Andor law doesn't allow you to kill for animals being harmed.

 

Also using laws and logic from today doesn't work in a series where in many nations a noble could murder you on the spot and not face justice.  Using todays stand your ground laws and such doesn't work in a fantasy series.  Perin was in the wrong because by his own words he killed to defend wolves, not because of threats from the Whitecloaks. and admits he wasn't in control of himself.  He didn't kill because he was attacked or thought Egwene might be harmed, he attacked because a wolf was killed.  Whitecloaks were allowed to pass through Andor, we saw in the first book they were allowed in towns in certain numbers, even the capital.  No where does it say Whitecloaks were banned from Andor.  So they weren't an invading army that was trespassing.    Later in the series yes, you could say the whitecloaks in the two rivers were invaders and Perin would of been justified to try and drive them out had he wanted to.

Edited by Sabio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can accept that Perrin didn’t do a very good job defending himself.

The actual facts of the case were that an army chased a few people because the army  was scared?

They demanded he disarm with drawn weapons. They commanded him to come out. Even the Westwood local had more basis to question the stranger and we all understand the local has no right to draw on the stranger and demand he disarm. And if he did, the local would be responsible for the results, not the stranger. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Legally , Morgase was wrong.

 

Perrin's inner reason for killing them is irrelevant.

 

A fanatical foreign army attempted to forcibly disarm and capture a legal citizen of Andor. They had no legal standing, while Perrin had every reason to defend himself and Egwene. It doesnt matter that he did it out of  rage for killing wolves. The Whitecloaks had no basis for attempting to disarm and detain a citizen of a country that they were trespassing 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2019 at 5:49 PM, Fievelgoespostal said:

Legally , Morgase was wrong.

 

Perrin's inner reason for killing them is irrelevant.

 

A fanatical foreign army attempted to forcibly disarm and capture a legal citizen of Andor. They had no legal standing, while Perrin had every reason to defend himself and Egwene. It doesnt matter that he did it out of  rage for killing wolves. The Whitecloaks had no basis for attempting to disarm and detain a citizen of a country that they were trespassing 

 

Agreed. Perrin should not ever have been brought to trial. He's traveling through no man's land--of course he's armed! And he may not have realized he was an Andoran subject in Andoran lands, but the Whitecloaks certainly knew he was in Andor. They had no right to be there as an army.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2019 at 2:08 PM, Sabio said:

Umm he attacked them for killing wolves, he wasn't protecting Fgwene or himself.  He went crazy because they attacked wolves.  Wolves have no legal protection, Perrin commited murder.

 

I was with you but murdr murder is extreme....

 

Morgase has one of the most even handed grasps on justice and such in the series IMO.

 

Obviously she arguably isn't even a central character but she could be ... in  another context

and I definitely feel underrated and in spiirt more important than is let on...

Edited by CrystallineTart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people are missing something: Perrin agreed to a trial, but he never agreed to submit to the judgement of that trial.

 

Perrin agreed to the trial not because he wanted to be vindicated, or had any faith in the justice of Morgase, but because he needed a public forum to work out his own inner conflict.

 

The killing of those Whitecloaks has been weighing on him because that was the first time he lost control, the first time he went berserk, and in his mind, gave in to the wolf in him. Perrin needed to understand why that happened. It was part of his process of reconciling with his Wolfbrother nature.

 

Perrin also didn't want to fight the Whitecloaks, but the Whitecloaks hated Perrin for two things: the killing of two Whitecloaks that night, and the death of Geofram Bornhald. The latter was a much more grave matter than the killing of two random grunts, and Perrin successfully convinced Galad that he had nothing to do with it.

 

Morgase's judgement didn't matter. Realistically, no sane commander would start a battle over the death of two grunts, and even if the Whitecloak commander proved to be insane, Perrin had the strength to crush them. However, he needed to try a peaceful resolution first, and agreeing to the trial was the best option he could see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not true, Perin told Galad he would abide by the decision.  Perin knew Morgase would view it fairly with no bias.  He had no intention of facing the justice there but he would of kept his word and faced justice when the Last Battle was over.  

 

They weren't grunts to Galad they were two children of the light that he was told had been murdered by perin.  They mattered very much to Galad.  Yes to the hand of the light those two getting killed would of simply been an excuse to torture Perin,  Galad always did what was right and stopping Perin even if it meant his death was the right thing to do.   Perin was a man Galad was told killed 2 whitecloaks, led a legion to their deaths, and they accused him of bringing Trollocs into the Two Rivers.  So to Galad this was a very dangerous man who needed to be stopped.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best way to see Morgase's Justice is just a lot of stuff from book 5 fires of heaven... she has quite a few great

moments I mean it's alway s possible to sorta of pick on very precise moments with individuals in life as well as

in fiction and in media perhaps....

 

Nonetheless her character as a whole I don't know it would take awhile to analyze her in my opinion... seeing as

how she has such a diverse role and so many different important aspects to her character....

 

Worthy basically of a whole tome of Morgase or something where everything written is discussing her character

and intentions or analysis.... could be a really interesting read...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2019 at 5:54 PM, Sabio said:

Not true, Perin told Galad he would abide by the decision.  Perin knew Morgase would view it fairly with no bias.  He had no intention of facing the justice there but he would of kept his word and faced justice when the Last Battle was over.  

 

They weren't grunts to Galad they were two children of the light that he was told had been murdered by perin.  They mattered very much to Galad.  Yes to the hand of the light those two getting killed would of simply been an excuse to torture Perin,  Galad always did what was right and stopping Perin even if it meant his death was the right thing to do.   Perin was a man Galad was told killed 2 whitecloaks, led a legion to their deaths, and they accused him of bringing Trollocs into the Two Rivers.  So to Galad this was a very dangerous man who needed to be stopped.

 

Perrin promised that bit *after* Morgase announced her judgement. It was a way for him to avoid fighting the Whitecloaks.

 

This wasn't the Perrin that went into the Two Rivers looking to turn himself in to the Whitecloaks. He had a very clear goal going into this, and that was to avoid bloodshed if possible.

 

By the time Morgase reached her verdict, Galad understood what had actually happened that night, and he agreed with Morgase. That means he no longer saw Perrin as a dangerous darkfriend, so it would have made no sense for him to fight Perrin over that incident. Note that when Bornhald and Byar first told Galad of Perrin, his attitude was careful skepticism. He erred on the side of his men, but was willing to give Perrin a fair trial. This was not someone who had already made up his mind on the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perin also as he entered the tent was upset because it was clear the way his men were standing that they weren't going to let him be taken which made him feel like a coward.  He even thought what was the point of a trial if one wasn't going to abide by the decision, it would just be a sham.  Perin was going to abide by the decision but he wasn't going to do it before the Last Battle.  Yes he didn't want to fight the whitecloaks and he wanted to avoid bloodshed but Perin was fully prepared to accept the judgement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Solarz, good insight into Galad.

I agree with Galad, but his character is completely opaque to me. Perhaps he was written that way, or he and I wouldn’t be able to understand each other if we met in the real world. 

Edited by jsbrads

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...