StarDestroyer.Net BBS

JonB wrote:To put it differently, if Officer JonB said to the accused criminal Vortex Empire (no offense), "Sign this confession or I shoot you dead!" while displaying a loaded weapon, how would a judge react to the signed confession? The crime itself doesn't really matter, but how evidence was achieved.

I'd say that if the officer was holding an unloaded weapon it'd be a better analogy, given that the defendant is under no actual threat of being killed but believes they are. Such a confession should and almost certainly would be thrown out and this is effectively the same thing.

Thing is, in this scenario Luga is, metaphorically, a loaded weapon: the fact that she would start eating bits of you if you gave her a chance is fairly well known, or at least rumored to the point of being "common knowledge." Imagine if somehow the officer could appear to load the gun without actually doing so, such that the prisoner had every reason to believe a loaded gun was pointed at their head, we'd have a close parallel to this situation.

TheClueless wrote:And your comment on Branch's fate brings up the less pleasant reason why I voted to throw out the confession. Spending the rest of her natural life in solitary confinment, is probably much better that what will happen to Branch if she's declared "innocent" (because the FBI screwed up beyond the prosecutor's ability to salvage the case).

I don't consider that a reason to vote to throw out the confession. If we can't lawfully punish someone for a crime we believe they committed, it's deeply wrong for us to conspire to have someone else punish them for us.

The fact of the matter is that, if the public learned of her betrayal, she would end up dead one day.

Under those circumstances, if similar cases have been handled in the past, wouldn't it be reasonable for the judge to add "and get her a new identity" or some such to an acquittal? Is there any history of this?

I agree the confession is tainted. However; The prosecution could use the logic that got her identified in the first place if a conviction is essential. But...
Punishing her in this life is a waste of time. She's no longer relevant and enough of her co conspirators are identified to render them irrelevant too. And a trial won't help find the rest. Likely to do the opposite in fact.

Now that the trial (is an actual trial in process? or are we in some pre-trial wangling stage?) has generated publicity it is good enough to drop the charges and let public behavior take it's course.

If she ends up in hell, too bad. Like someone said that ain't the USA. And if she ends up in heaven... for me, that is worse.

I have to think that this part is being written for the bennifit of the third book, cause I cant think of any reason why this trial is even taking place. What ever happened to turning a spy , I am pretty sure that Luga would make an interesting control.

Declan

I don't consider that a reason to vote to throw out the confession. If we can't lawfully punish someone for a crime we believe they committed, it's deeply wrong for us to conspire to have someone else punish them for us.

While you may have the right of it, what is fiction for if not to engage in flights of fancy, and who among us doesn't enjoy the idea that if someone who we knew was guilty was getting off on a technicality than they'd end up being punished for it? Isn't that the entire point of having superheroes after all, to punish the people who the police can't/won't?

Once again it's you're completely morally in the right, but will you admit that it would be vicerally satisfying to see her get some non legalized just desserts? Possibly something less then a lynching, more like a public shunning where no one will hire her for a job and possibly (I forget how the 'Managment has a right to refuse customers" "Soup Nazi" law works) she might end up finding herself fasting again for an entirely different reason...

Jamesfirecat wrote:While you may have the right of it, what is fiction for if not to engage in flights of fancy, and who among us doesn't enjoy the idea that if someone who we knew was guilty was getting off on a technicality than they'd end up being punished for it?

[raises hand]
That sort of thing scares the hell out of me, because I have a pretty good idea of where it leads. It's like a story that ends with the hardcore "we all wear uniforms and march a lot, strength through strength, all loyalty to the Leader!" political party winning the election: we know that's going to end badly, even if in-story the party in question aren't actually a bunch of rampaging SOBs.

I mean, stories where someone goes vigilante, bucks orders, and punishes someone who got away with a crime can be really good, I agree. But I don't care for that vindictive feeling of "let's come up with the worst dramatically appropriate punishment we can imagine for this bastard!"

Question: have you read "Night Watch" by Terry Pratchett?

declan wrote:I have to think that this part is being written for the bennifit of the third book, cause I cant think of any reason why this trial is even taking place. What ever happened to turning a spy , I am pretty sure that Luga would make an interesting control.

Declan

I'm not sure she'd make a good double agent.

The best double agents are single agents who aren't hardcore devotees of their own cause, or who are but can easily be pressured into betraying that cause. Since fundamentalist religion comes with a martyrdom meme, it's going to be very difficult to turn her reliably.

I suspect that the possibility of turning her was considered and rejected in favor of pressing charges in some kind of secret trial. I'm not sure exactly what the details of the trial are, but I suspect that if the judge orders "and don't let word get out that she was accused in the first place," it's still possible for that order to be obeyed.

Now Luga really IS my most FAVORITE CHARACTER in Armageddon! Come ON! She's now BREASTBLEEDING LUGA! FANGS FOR THE MAMMARIES!

Stuart, PLEASE have her shack it up with my awesome self-insert character!

Their adventures will be titled: Everybody Loves Luga

ray245, you are wrong. It's tidbits like these that add to the greater Pantheocide mythos.

I also think Agent "Kamikaze" Sith would've been a funnier and cooler self-insert if the "Sith" was reworded into "Smith". Because then we wouldn't know who Stuart would be referencing, until the nickname "Kamikaze" gets thrown in and we'd be like "LOL! Agent Kamikaze Smith!"

That would've been cleverer.


BUTT ANYWAY! Speaking of collaborators and traitors working with Heaven... I think it would be an AWESOME (or stupid) plot development to have another traitor, this time in the staff of Barack Obama or some other world leader. Perhaps the Pope.

Like, when the world leaders go to Yamantu Mountain to meet with VLADIMIR PUTIN, the traitor will then tell Micheal - and now knowing the location of the world's leaders, Mikey Mike will UNLEASH HEAVEN on Y-Mountain. Just in time, right when Belial has figured out an alternative way to create SKY VOLCANOES!

Then, dig this. I don't know how well giant mountain bunkers can stack up against SKY VOLCANOES, but HOLY SHIT MAN. Imagine, lava falling down from the sky to occlude the bunker's entrances. Perhaps the sheer WEIGHT of so much molten rock can devastate the interiors as well. The heat, the horrible gaseous fumes, all that.

Perhaps it will end with many of the world leaders DIEING!

But not VLADIMIR PUTIN. In the sky-volcano-ravaged bunkers of Yammantu, he shall use his SUPERIOR BODILY PHYSIQUE and his KGB TRAINING to wage an epic STRUGGLE OF SURVIVAL - gathering a plucky band of WORLD LEADER SURVIVORS in a journey to the center of the earth.

VLADIMIR PUTIN will lead Barack Obama, Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy - along with that douche Burlesconi and maybe Robert Mugabe and Pope Benedict - to survival, to free air, to dry land... to DAYLIGHT!

Yes.

This is gonna be fucking awesome.

Stuart.

You must do it.

Do it.

I DARE YOU!

Question: have you read "Night Watch" by Terry Pratchett?

Yes I have and I've enjoyed most of Terry Pratchett's works. Mind telling me what it has to do with our current discussion? By the way I do not ask that in a mocking tone of voice but rather a curious one, I'm always interested in establishing new connections between the things I love...

Shroom Man 777 wrote:BUTT ANYWAY! Speaking of collaborators and traitors working with Heaven... I think it would be an AWESOME (or stupid) plot development to have another traitor, this time in the staff of Barack Obama or some other world leader. Perhaps the Pope.

Like, when the world leaders go to Yamantu Mountain to meet with VLADIMIR PUTIN, the traitor will then tell Micheal - and now knowing the location of the world's leaders, Mikey Mike will UNLEASH HEAVEN on Y-Mountain. Just in time, right when Belial has figured out an alternative way to create SKY VOLCANOES!

Then, dig this. I don't know how well giant mountain bunkers can stack up against SKY VOLCANOES, but HOLY SHIT MAN. Imagine, lava falling down from the sky to occlude the bunker's entrances. Perhaps the sheer WEIGHT of so much molten rock can devastate the interiors as well. The heat, the horrible gaseous fumes, all that.

Perhaps it will end with many of the world leaders DIEING!

But not VLADIMIR PUTIN. In the sky-volcano-ravaged bunkers of Yammantu, he shall use his SUPERIOR BODILY PHYSIQUE and his KGB TRAINING to wage an epic STRUGGLE OF SURVIVAL - gathering a plucky band of WORLD LEADER SURVIVORS in a journey to the center of the earth.

VLADIMIR PUTIN will lead Barack Obama, Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy - along with that douche Burlesconi and maybe Robert Mugabe and Pope Benedict - to survival, to free air, to dry land... to DAYLIGHT!

Yes.

This is gonna be fucking awesome.

Stuart.

You must do it.

Do it.

I DARE YOU!

I don't know if you're crazy or awesome. Maybe both. Crawesome?

Aaaanyways. Nice to know Luga didn't harm any male appendages after all. That was a...disconcerting thought.

I had something else to say... but dammit

Buritot wrote: I don't know if you're crazy or awesome. Maybe both. Crawesome?

Nah, Shroom's just being Shroom. No adjective, portmanteau or not, can ever adequately capture his batshittery.

Although, are you sure it's such a good idea daring Stuart to do something, Shroom? Remember the series of events that led to the appearance of Private Ye Twat...

Not really.

But man, if he goes with this idea - OH MAN.

VLADIMIR PUTIN: "Whatever you do! Don't look down!" *holds Angela Merkel's hand*

ANGELA MERKEL: "NEIN!"

The only danger of an lava attack on Yamantau is the lava closing the entrance - which can be undone. Lava, after all, is just rock, and can be blown up.

But leaving Shrooms raving rambling (TM) aside - some kind of attack against Yamantau would be nice to see.

Heh, sounds like you're familiar with my raving rambles (TM). First-time Shroomer, long time fan?

Yeah... I do a whole lot of that in threads that I like. The more I rant and rave and carry on, the more I think the thing is awesome. I am very excitable.

Simon_Jester wrote:

TheClueless wrote:And your comment on Branch's fate brings up the less pleasant reason why I voted to throw out the confession. Spending the rest of her natural life in solitary confinment, is probably much better that what will happen to Branch if she's declared "innocent" (because the FBI screwed up beyond the prosecutor's ability to salvage the case).

I don't consider that a reason to vote to throw out the confession. If we can't lawfully punish someone for a crime we believe they committed, it's deeply wrong for us to conspire to have someone else punish them for us.

You do have a point here, but I don't think that the US government would need to conspire to have Branch punished by a third party. Even if her arrest, confession and (pre?) trial haven't already been discovered by the press, how long before someone finds out about this? And unless the US government gives Branch a whole new identity - which I think is highly unlikely - how long before someone decides to get revenge (whether or not Branch was part of whatever has gotten them angry), or get more information out of her? Yes, the FBI is probably going to have some agents keeping an eye on her. But if you just want someone dead, are patient, and have a sniper rifle....

As for my comment over my decision to vote that the judge would deep six the confession, perhaps it would be have been more precise (and yet still honest) to state that when I was forced to conclude that there was no way a US court should keep the confession, the thought that - no matter what happened in the courtroom - Branch was a dead woman walking helped to keep me from grinding my teeth over the stupidity of the FBI in this situation.

Is such a thought morally wrong? Yes.

Is such a thought a danger to what - at least in the west - would be considered a pillar of civilization? Yes.

But - much as I want to deny it - did I think it? Yes.

When you look at the estimated age of life on Earth, it wasn't that long ago that "an eye for an eye" was the accepted norm when it came to what was referred (correctly or not) as justice.

Jamesfirecat wrote:

Question: have you read "Night Watch" by Terry Pratchett?

Yes I have and I've enjoyed most of Terry Pratchett's works. Mind telling me what it has to do with our current discussion? By the way I do not ask that in a mocking tone of voice but rather a curious one, I'm always interested in establishing new connections between the things I love...

Remember what Sam Vimes does in "Night Watch" when he finally catches up with Carcer at the end, in the graveyard? [further information excised because I can't get spoiler tags to work; read it yourself if you like...

That is my idea of a good ending that punishes the evil. I believe that civilization is bigger than its own villains and has the power to move beyond them. And the way it does so is by defeating them while following its own rules, rather than diving head first into an adolescent revenge fantasy.

I'm not immune to the vindictive glee of watching a true bastard get what they deserve; I liked Dirty Harry, for instance. But that doesn't mean I think it's the best kind of ending, especially in a story that is largely about the advantages of civilization over barbarism.

Buritot wrote:Aaaanyways. Nice to know Luga didn't harm any male appendages after all. That was a...disconcerting thought.

You do realize that a demon from Hell isn't likely to feel much compunction about committing perjury if it's convenient, right? As far as I'm concerned, we still don't know...

TheClueless wrote:As for my comment over my decision to vote that the judge would deep six the confession, perhaps it would be have been more precise (and yet still honest) to state that when I was forced to conclude that there was no way a US court should keep the confession, the thought that - no matter what happened in the courtroom - Branch was a dead woman walking helped to keep me from grinding my teeth over the stupidity of the FBI in this situation.

I see your point. Maybe my problem is that I can't build up quite as much righteous hatred of the "kill the bitch!" variety as most of the other people here.

I don't like the character, but I see her as being as much the bad guys' victim as she is their tool.

Simon_Jester wrote:I believe that civilization is bigger than its own villains and has the power to move beyond them. And the way it does so is by defeating them while following its own rules, rather than diving head first into an adolescent revenge fantasy.

I'm not immune to the vindictive glee of watching a true bastard get what they deserve; I liked Dirty Harry, for instance. But that doesn't mean I think it's the best kind of ending, especially in a story that is largely about the advantages of civilization over barbarism.

This is an excellent point, and one I'd like to emphasize.

If the purpose of this story is anything other than a pure SF historical derivation ("if that happens, then this might happen"), then it's probably to show the triumph of civilization over barbarism. In this case, civilization jolly well ought to win; which means, no showing the crowd gleefully tearing her apart afterwards.

Hm. I suppose Stuart would know better than me what his own story is about, though.

In this case, civilization jolly well ought to win; which means, no showing the crowd gleefully tearing her apart afterwards.

We had Phelps beaten to death by the mob and he was only being a total asshole. Active treason will get her enemy of humanity status. And there is no one on Earth who would want to help her. This is much, much worse than the situation for the Nazis after the fall of the Third Reich.

Well, getting back to the court, I think I'm going to err on the side of caution and say that the judge should throw out the confession, since the ramifications of letting that take hold are the definition of legal squick.

However, even if little Miss Benedict Arnold were to be acquitted, her usefulness as an enemy agent would be absolutely nothing. Merely by being charged means she will never be able to get a job in any sort of sensitive area, sort of like how if someone is charged with child porn, even if their case is thrown out due to a technicality it would be awfully hard for them to get a job as a teacher.

usagihunter101 wrote:Well, getting back to the court, I think I'm going to err on the side of caution and say that the judge should throw out the confession, since the ramifications of letting that take hold are the definition of legal squick.

However, even if little Miss Benedict Arnold were to be acquitted, her usefulness as an enemy agent would be absolutely nothing. Merely by being charged means she will never be able to get a job in any sort of sensitive area, sort of like how if someone is charged with child porn, even if their case is thrown out due to a technicality it would be awfully hard for them to get a job as a teacher.

Her life expectancy would be zero. Do you honestly think she wouldn't be assassinated in broad daylight? What jury would convict? Or if you have a terminal illness what better way to be popular in hell than to kill an agent of heaven?

Note: Assault is the threat of violence. Assault and Battery is the threat of violence, followed by an actual attack. Therefore, Luga assaulted Branch with her mental image of eating a breast.

The confession should be thrown out. The FBI screwed up when they brought Luga into the same room as the suspect, knowing full well the influence Luga's pheromones may have. If they wanted to get away with using Luga as an implied threat, they would have done better to have Luga in the adjacent observation room with the light turned on, so Branch could see a demon staring at her through the window. Not to say they would get away with that either, but that tactic would stand a better chance.

If you allow the confession, then pumping drugs into the room via the ventilation system becomes an acceptable tactic if you don't have a succubus handy.

If you allow the confession, then any form of mental anguish becomes an acceptable tactic, such as sitting a suspect down in a room decorated with torture instruments, putting a suspect through a mock firing squad, etc.

A court decision on this point has nothing to do with Branch's well being; rather, it is about a point of law. Therefore, Branch's possible fate if the charges are dropped has no bearing on the decision making process.

Branch's confession probably cannot be used to justify a court ordered wiretap or arrest warrant either. But, that should not stop federal agents from keeping an eye on anyone named by Branch. Once you collect new, untainted evidence, then you don't have a problem with wiretaps and arrests.

Simon_Jester wrote:Maybe my problem is that I can't build up quite as much righteous hatred of the "kill the bitch!" variety as most of the other people here.

I don't like the character, but I see her as being as much the bad guys' victim as she is their tool.

I agree. When I said she would likely be murdered, I didn't mean that she should be murdered, just that this was a likely outcome. It may also happen that the prospect of being killed, or worse, will be used to keep her "voluntarily" in custody.

I'm also not sure that civilization versus barbarism is much of a theme here, if at all. Heaven is as civilized as Earth, after all, just not as politically modern. Do do recall that the current head of the Earth coalition, one V. Putin, does not have a positive reputation for respecting the rule of law and ideals of democracy.

Modernity vs. mediaevalism, perhaps? I think science vs. superstition is still a valid theme too. Certainly Stuart likes to show that actions do have consequences, which seems to be a thread through his work.

bcoogler wrote: The FBI screwed up when they brought Luga into the same room as the suspect,

Not at all. We acquired the necessary intelligence. Ve haff all zeir namessss. Her legal fate is trivial by comparison.

There is a draft in place. Branch can simply be drafted on the spot and sent to Hell. Her duty station can be the inside of a locked Conex.

If this is an existential situation, then there are no effective rules. If the courts get in the way, they will be marginalized.

"John Marshall has rendered his opinion. Now let him enforce it." That precedent still stands beside Marbury vs. Madison. In practice, it takes two branches of government to overthrow the third. Do not underestimate the level of passion to be exerted by a nation of people, hell a World, every one of whom has had friends and relatives murdered in the present conflict.

All of this will play out in Book Three. There will be literally a Hell of political fallout.

Bayonet wrote:Not at all. We acquired the necessary intelligence. Ve haff all zeir namessss. Her legal fate is trivial by comparison.

This is what I was getting at. My guess is that in this case the FBI fell back on their mandate as a counter-intelligence agency, rather than their mandate as a law enforcement agency. (Not that the two are mutually exclusive, but they sometimes have different goals)

The intelligence was more important than the prosecution. I don't blame the US Attorney for trying though, that's his job.

There is a draft in place. Branch can simply be drafted on the spot and sent to Hell. Her duty station can be the inside of a locked Conex.

Sounds good to me.

If this is an existential situation, then there are no effective rules. If the courts get in the way, they will be marginalized.

"John Marshall has rendered his opinion. Now let him enforce it." That precedent still stands beside Marbury vs. Madison. In practice, it takes two branches of government to overthrow the third. Do not underestimate the level of passion to be exerted by a nation of people, hell a World, every one of whom has had friends and relatives murdered in the present conflict.

Its not always necessarily a conflict. There are any number of reasons the FBI might want a ruling such as that established by this case. Ambiguous case law is often worse than bad case law.

EDIT for clarification: Some areas of computer privacy are only defined right now by analogy. The problem is that there may be many competing analogies.

Buritot wrote:I don't know if you're crazy or awesome. Maybe both. Crawesome?

I believe the term that applies to him best is Crazy Awesome.

Simon_Jester wrote:You do realize that a demon from Hell isn't likely to feel much compunction about committing perjury if it's convenient, right? As far as I'm concerned, we still don't know...

...there are some things in life that should never be spoken of. This is one of them.