Case 15: (Includes Poll: Should I stop here?)

Given the cases are cluttering up the forum now, should i stop at Case 15

  • 1. yes, fifteen is enough :slight_smile:
  • 2. no, carry on doing them here.
  • 3. don't care
  • 4. ask for a PBP forum for those who enjoy them and carry on there
  • 5. I don't read them either way

0 voters

OK, it has been suggested the cases are starting to clutter up the forum, and I therefore am thinking of ending early after 15 cases. I had asked Matt to do a case, and that will still appear if he has time, or any of my other guest Praeco's: but I am concerned that yep, it really is taking up a lot of space and i have other work I should be doing. So I have attached a poll - should I stop, or carry on. I don't mind either way to be honest, it's been fun :slight_smile:

Case 15: Death of a Redcap

Stephen, a redcap of the Stonehenge Tribunal was fleeing in to Loch Leglean having stolen a wand from Cordelia of Flambeau, when he approached the covenant of Horsingas to seek shelter. There the maga Anna of Tytalus ordered her shield grog Fergus to slay the redcap, and Fergus ignoring Stephen's pleas for mercy killed him. Cordelia has been charged with the death of the Redcap, but argues he was killed while committing a Hermetic Crime, denying Cordelia of her magical resources, and therefore Forfeit Immunity applies and no crime was committed. The Tribunal notes that the offence occurred in a different Tribunal. Cordelia has travelled north of the border however to testify on Anna's behalf. This is surprising given the long standing enmity between the two women.

cj x

I assume that it is Anna the one charged with the death of the redcap.

Geronimus of Bjornaer speaks

As long as he was committing a hermetic crime she is (by the letter) legally clear. Her decision to slay the redcap would need to be ratified by a superior organization (a tribunal) but she made a legal decision at the time. However, her rash action against a redcap when he was in her power already and could have been thrown in jail to await the trial of the tribunal is questionable. At least.

I will also point out that Anna is not amongst the most level headed members of our Order, having acted rashly and overstepping her rights in the past, so I vote for her to be declared guilty of a heinous crime and marched for taking justice by his own hand instead of waiting for the judgement of her peers.

It is known to all magi of the tribunal that Anna killed the daughter in law of Geronimus "by accident" during a raid


Asked about the case, Tijentsus ex Guernicus frowns

"Forfeit immunity is a legal principle, not a blanket writ of execution ! It has degrees and applies in precise circumstances !

First of all, it applies during the committing of a crime, and shortly after. It does not applies days after a theft in another Tribunal ! Furthermore, it should be strictly proportional to the crime committed. The theft of a magic wand hardly calls for an immediate execution, particularly when Anna could have easily detained the repcap and handed him over to the proper authorities !

I believe that on both counts forfeit immunity does not apply here, and Anna ex Tytalus is guilty of murdering another magus. The fact that this magus was a thief, if it is proved, might be a mitigating circumstance, I leave that to the appreciation of the Tribunal. I also suggest that the examining quaesitor should inquire more closely into how and why Stephen ex Mercere choose to take refuge with Anna ex Tytalus, and why she immediately took her rival's side. I certainly would not want to throw accusation lightly, but could it be that she was the one who suggested the theft in the first place, then killed her accomplice to hide the fact ? Did she immediately return the wand that was stolen ?"

(see HoH:TL p. 45 on Forfeit Immunity)

Edgar ex Misc speaks up.

More information is needed. When did Anna know that Stephen bore a stolen item? What attempt did she make to restrain him and remove the item from his possession before calling for lethal force? What capacities to flee, resist or threaten did Stephen possess and did he try to use them?

I would argue that fleeing with an item one has stolen is an ongoing crime and forfeit immunity applies. But neither the magnitude of the offence nor the difficulty of stopping the offender seem warrant slaying him.

I agree. We need more information. Why did Anna feel the need to kill the Recap immedatitly? Whay did the Redcap steal the wand?"

Barnabus of Bonisagus looks up from the scroll he was making notes in and says:

"I entirely agree with the learned Tijentsus. The lack of proportionality is astounding. To take someone's life when your life is not under threat... Most inappropriate! Is our sister Anna going to argue that she was afraid of being struck down by the Redcap? I know that House Mercere equips its agents with some remarkable devices but it's news to me that they can threaten a maga on her own doorstep with a shield grog beside her!"

"I think the Tribunal has been cheated of the chance to investigate this fully and justice has been thwarted! If no clear mitigation is found I would support Marching her. To do otherwise would say that we consider a Redcap's life a trifle!"

Anna's past tragic accidental slaying of Geronimus' granddaughter aside, she has a reputation as a rash, violent and hot tempered maga. She yells out in her defence "Fie on ya all, you scrawny sons and daughters of a Diedne's Ferret! I knew because a grog came a ridin' north, and told em the redcap was a thief - and I'll tell ya this, he meant to rob me to, as he has robbed so many of us! I did the Tribunal, nay, the Order a service by stickin' him like a pig!"

There are many mutterings of agreement. Stephen was heavily involved in the vis trade, and in arranging loans of vis for magi in need from the Mercer House in Coventry. He also was the principle collector of Tribunal Fines in both the Stonehenge and Loch Leglean Tribunal. The real crime of Stephen in the eyes of many magi however was that rather than charging one pawn in five interest on a seven year loan, like many magi, Stephen charged three pawns a year for every five borrowed, and resorted to violence or robbery to collect his "debt" if magi defaulted. Known to hold several registered vis sources in his own name, Stephen had also been accused of spying, blackmail, and theft of magical resources, as well as tampering with House Mercere records. While an investigation was conducted of the latter charge, he was found innocent, and Mercer House has continued to support him, despite his growing unpopularity. Many magi at the Tribunal owed Stephen vis. As the loans were nominally from the Mercer House, Coventry , Stonehenge, the actual ownership of these debts will now be up for discussion.

cj x

Ah, that Stephen; happily I had never dealt with him myself. A history of violence against his fellow Magi does change things somewhat. Successful violence at that, hmm.

Perhaps, Anna, you could give a little more detail about the slaying. What was Stephen's manner as came to your covenant? What orders did you give your Grog? Did Stephen have weapon in hand when slain? Did you owe him vis? glances at the senior Mercere present as he asks the last question.

Barnabus assumes an expression of sarcastic surprise.

"Oh? You did this on the basis of the word of a grog? Such trust between maga and bodyguard is remarkable! I wish more of our colleagues were that close to their retainers. Perhaps we could have him before us now to give his account of what was going on? Hmmm?"