Please Login or Register!

Vampire Laws

Go down

Vampire Laws

Post  Aslinn Dhan on February 11th 2010, 12:35 pm

Here is another little thing reacquired in a forray to nameless for much loved stuff I didn't swick away with fast enough.

1. The Vampire is tied to his maker until he/she is released.
2. The Vampire, once released, holds no loyalty to his/her maker
3. Vampires must be invited into the home of a mortal.
4. If a mortal rescinds their invitation, they must leave immediately.
5. Vampires must not feed on a mortal belonging to another Vampire.
6. Strict penalties are involved if you violate the "____is mine" tradition
7. Vampires must pay stiff penalties if they kill one of their own kind.
8. Vampires first.
9. Selling V is a taboo practice
10. Authority is according to age and rank

11. Backward thinking Vampires are dangerous to the movement
12. You must present yourself at the nest or headquarters of the HVIC (Head Vampire In Charge- whomever that may be)
13. All legal disputes are brought before and heard by the Magister
14. Vampires must keep their fangs off teacup humans, no matter who cute and tasty they may be. They are not Vampire veal.

15. Should you not want to mainstream it is always wise to have a breathers consent before feeding
16. It is never wise to have a romance with another Vampire

17. If a Vampire's human shows interest in another Vampire without glamour, of their own free will, the original Vampire partner must acquiesce to the human's wishes.

Aslinn Dhan
Maker
Maker

Posts : 4302
Join date : 2010-02-07
Age : 51
Location : East Coast

Back to top Go down

Re: Vampire Laws

Post  Aslinn Dhan on June 15th 2010, 3:57 pm

18. Vampire Blood is to be restricted to procreation

Aslinn Dhan
Maker
Maker

Posts : 4302
Join date : 2010-02-07
Age : 51
Location : East Coast

Back to top Go down

Re: Vampire Laws

Post  Barrister on July 12th 2010, 7:01 pm

At first Aslinn thought this would be a good piece for the Mythology thread, then after she read it, she thought it would be a good piece for the vampire laws thread, and I concur.....

Crime and Punishment: The Law as Religion and Vice Versa

So, Aslinn has this very eccentric library and one of the books I am reading is the Malleus Maleficarum. I don’t intend on repeating it word for word but it is basically a book set up in three parts with a series of challenges and rebuttals on points of law concerning the supernatural.

Part one concerns itself with investigating the supernatural, the signs of the devil and the rational of a God who would allow such evil power to exist. The second part concerns itself with the works of witchcraft how they can be countered. The third part concerns itself with both the legal (civil) and Ecclesiastical (Church) dealings with the witches they bring to trial. This part is broken up into three areas: Area One was concerning the accusing of the witch and what constitutes evidence and who may be a reliable witness. Area two discusses the trial and testimony and Area Three discusses the use of “Being Put to the Question” and the final judgment and punishment of the witch.

As a barrister, I am fascinated with early thought on the law and crime and punishment. In some instances, it is not as different as our own, in our present world. In others, the laws are barbarous and simply insane. Much as we are insulted as human beings there are places in the world where laws are different regarding men and women, i.e., the laws in Iran that have one set of punishments far more cruel and terrible for women than for men, where the MM would not be seen as too terribly unjust, we see that we have not traveled so far in the 521 years since the Malleus was written.

And I write of this book because of the attitudes and history of the Magister. Aslinn tells me the Magister claimed he had a history with the Inquisition and, having been so, I imagine he carried over his knowledge of the law into his vampire life. He simply applies its essential truths as he sees it to his new world and he has taken his faith in God and replaced it with faith in his vampirism. The blood, since there is no human soul to save, is the life he wishes to keep pure and safe.

The MM states without question there is a dark world of the Devil and his agents. For the Magister, this evil is organized anti-vampire groups and vampires who do not guard the blood as sacred. He believes in absolute punishment, which is why our vampires find themselves in such precarious situations.

Anything is permissible to the Magister. He employs torture. To wit: the torture endured by our Pam and the threat of more to Eric if he does not produce Bill Compton. We have also seen Eric as a ruthless lawman (in human eyes) in his dealings with Lafayette. Bill apologizes to Sookie in a way: “I am sorry you had to see what passes as for justice in our world,” (S2E4) and he further says “I have had worse Sheriffs,” (S2E4)

But even Eric was compelled to tell the truth. Whatever his reasoning for charging Bill before the court and bringing him to the Magister for the death of Long Shadow, Eric had to testify about Sookie and why she was there and the implication was that though what Bill had done was bad, all Eric could have done once he found out the truth was bring Long Shadow to stand trial before the Magister and he would have been punished. Unfortunately, Bill became Judge, Jury and Executioner and thus had to stand trial for his crimes. His reasons were negligible.

In the Malleus Maleficarum, the judge and jury were the Inquisition. There was no trial before your peers. In the vampire world, the tribunal votes for the righteousness of the judgment, not the guilt or innocence of the accused. Which I suppose is how it is done with the Inquisition. In the book, The Name of the Rose, William is an Inquisitor who has a ben sinister on his name because he voted against the righteous claim of Bernardo Gui, the head Inquisitor. I imagine the same would have been said to any vampire who thought Bill’s punishment was too harsh.

One of the questions put to Sprenger and Kramer is concerning the reliability of the witnesses against the accused. They said in part one that the witness statement of “mortal enemies” were acceptable even though there could be a hidden agenda behind it. Eric certainly had an agenda for charging Bill. He wanted Sookie. In a human court, I would have cross examined Eric and said his testimony was tainted because he wanted Bill’s human, Sookie Stackhouse, and that would have caused a question of doubt in the minds of the jury (tribunal) as to the truthfulness of the testimony.

I would have further suggested that if Mr. Northman had truly thought of Miss Stackhouse as a valuable human, he would have killed Long Shadow himself to protect Sookie which he as Sheriff would have had the right to do. (This of course is what he did in the book, though not without repercussions, he did have to pay a fine) In so doing, I would then charge Eric before the tribunal for bringing false charges and even fomenting the death of Long Shadow because he knew or suspected in advance that Long Shadow might be the culprit and having Bill bring Sookie to him to investigate was a self motivated plan to get not only his thieving partner but the telepathic human who belonged to Bill Compton. I would further say that Eric may have even suspected Log Shadow might try to kill Sookie before she could indict him. I might even try to pin a charge of attempted theft on Eric, as his design was to gain possession of Sookie, who was by vampire law, the property of Bill and therefore untouchable.

Now, Russell Edgington makes a declaration about whether or not vampire royalty can be staked. He says that is not an option for punishing royalty. However, I would point out, as Aslinn has, there are forms of punishment for nobility who murder. Elizabeth Bathory was walled into her house, Gilles De Rais was killed, even monarchs have been executed by uprisings. If the monarch is guilty of profaning the blood, which is the most grievous accusation which can be brought upon a vampire outside of causing final death, I would say this would cause the situation of Regent Incontestus that is the Unlawful Ruler, a ruler who does not follow the law of the land, and therefore cannot enforce the law.

Also, one must consider that since in the times of the past the Church made a King, the Magister must act in the place of the Church. Magister acting as “In Locus Pontificus” or “In Place of the Pope” makes the vampire King/Queen. The Church often dealt with unruly monarchs, even to excommunicating them and killing them, either openly or by stealth. In the case of the Magister, it may be that he will be public in his execution of whatever punishment he might have for any monarch for blasphemy of the blood.

In the books, the Magister is replaced by the Ancient Pythoness, one of the original oracles. Further, Bill acts as a judge during a series of court hearings and a vampire is staked as punishment for the crime of anti-social behaviour. When Queen Sophie Anne is brought up for killing her husband, she faces presumably final death, which is why Sookie’s testimony is so important.

As we watch the evolving stories and the role of the Magister in the stories, I will be more and more interested in how their law comes to light. I wonder if the writers of the show have realized just how complex a world they have created?

Barrister
Fledgling
Fledgling

Posts : 423
Join date : 2010-03-19
Age : 44

Back to top Go down

Re: Vampire Laws

Post  Fairy on July 12th 2010, 9:25 pm

Excellent points Barrister. I doubt that AB has delved too far into the possibilities of which you speak. As far as vampire law, I think I like the system Charlaine Harris presents in the books. It seems more just than having one person serve as judge, jury, and executioner.

Well done Sir.
avatar
Fairy
Maker
Maker

Posts : 1860
Join date : 2010-02-09
Location : Georgia

Back to top Go down

Re: Vampire Laws

Post  Aslinn Dhan on July 12th 2010, 9:53 pm

19. Vampires cannot accuse their monarch of crimes...this is a treasonable offense

Aslinn Dhan
Maker
Maker

Posts : 4302
Join date : 2010-02-07
Age : 51
Location : East Coast

Back to top Go down

Re: Vampire Laws

Post  Aslinn Dhan on August 11th 2010, 11:17 am

20. Refuting the highest levels of the Vampire government (the Authority) is blasphemy.
21. Vampire rulers must have marriages approved by the Authority.
22. A Vampire cannot charge his sovereign with a crime unless he/she has aligned himself with another ruler.
23. Royalty is not above the law.

Aslinn Dhan
Maker
Maker

Posts : 4302
Join date : 2010-02-07
Age : 51
Location : East Coast

Back to top Go down

Re: Vampire Laws

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum