Judgement For The Damned--Paladins, Vampires; What Price For Victory?

[Lord Pendragon]

But what the pally did was murder, not coold blood but in the heat of the moment, but murder no less.
And therefore he would be an ex pally.

I disagree. It was justice. It may have become expedited justice, but it was justice nontheless. A few coils of rope doesn't transform a condemned killer into an innocent victim.

 

[painandgreed]

Tactically stupid by announcing his intentions when a quick attack might have spared the girl as the vampire attacked the paladin instead, yes. Morally wrong, no. Paladins, while good and lawful, are still warriors meant to purge, nay...cleanse, the world of evil though force of arms. It sounds like he was doing his job as the person he executed was responsible for the death of the girl as well as previous evils.

 

[sword-dancer]

I disagree. It was justice. It may have become expedited justice, but it was justice nontheless. A few coils of rope doesn't transform a condemned killer into an innocent victim.

I don´t say the probölem was that he was innocent, i said the pally acted evil because he didn`t acuse the prisoner(not necessarily POW) of his crimes, listened to his arguments and considered them under the light of righteouss justice, looked for proof, and then made his decision and acted accordinly.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

So, your conception of justice is a process. That explains a lot. In my view, the process is only relevant to the degree that it produces (or is likely to produce) a just result. If the paladin held a quick trial or inquisition, it would not change the justice of the result. Condemning the innocent or releasing the guilty would both be injustice. (As a side note, how good would the trial have to be in order for you to consider it justice? Would the tiefling need a lawyer? Would the tiefling need a jury with no previous knowledge of the case? Or could the paladin in question act as judge and jury then act as executioner?)

I don´t say the probölem was that he was innocent, i said the pally acted evil because he didn`t acuse the prisoner(not necessarily POW) of his crimes, listened to his arguments and considered them under the light of righteouss justice, looked for proof, and then made his decision and acted accordinly.

 

[sword-dancer]

So, your conception of justice is a process. That explains a lot. In my view, the process is only relevant to the degree that it produces (or is likely to produce) a just result. If the paladin held a quick trial or inquisition, it would not change the justice of the result. Condemning the innocent or releasing the guilty would both be injustice. (As a side note, how good would the trial have to be in order for you to consider it justice? Would the tiefling need a lawyer? Would the tiefling need a jury with no previous knowledge of the case? Or could the paladin in question act as judge and jury then act as executioner?)

Yes, it is insofar that the process is the only tool i consider able to get first both the view of the tiefling, did he done the crimes the pally believed he `d done of his own free will, short of divine acts.
The goal is justice not the formalities of a codified law, if the pally had the legitimate authority to act as judge and jury he had the duty to act as executioner when needed.

It may be interesting, that one of the rights of a free man in the ma and beforte, that he could only called guilty by a court of free man, not by his Lord alone.