> Keep in mind that at the time of the injury, your outlaw WAS a member
> of your clan. The Orlanthi believe in community liability, not
> individual. When Killer Varanil kills five Grey Dogs, your entire clan
> is entirely liable. Outlawing him is a good idea and might serve as
> partial compensation, but your clan is still on the hook.
I'd argue (as a non-lawyer, but I've played a lawspeaker in an RPG :-). ) that whatever he was at the time of the murder, by the time the Greydogs show up he is no longer kin, and we aren't responsible for his crimes. There is a window of opportunity that our clan is liable (between the murders and the outlawry), and if the Greydogs miss it, too bad for them. We (as a community) have dealt with the problem of Killer, and he is no longer our responsibility (I'm not bothering with why we outlawed Killer, it may have been for something else entirely). The 'Dogs need to take it up directly with Killer.
> YGMV, but that's how I see it (as a lawyer who has spent a lot of time
> looking at various historical legal systems and has wasted much time
> pondering the ramifications of community liability).
As I said, it's something for the Lawspeakers to hash out. I can see arguments for both sides of the case.
RR
He was born with the gift of laughter and the sense that the world was mad
R. Sabatini, Scaramouche
Powered by hypermail