After finishing WandaVision, I’m starting to think Wanda (aka The Scarlett Witch) is going to need a defense attorney and like the gunner that I am, my hand is raised and waving to volunteer for that position. Among some of her crimes the most prevalent are kidnapping, false imprisonment, and torture. How would I defend her though if given such an honorable opportunity? Reality check: spoilers ahead so if you have not finished watching the series stop reading now. If you’re still reading, I know MCU doesn’t exactly have the same penal code as California but let’s pretend she was being prosecuted for her crimes here in California.
What possible defenses could Wanda have? I mean she kidnapped the residents of West View, kept them falsely imprisoned against their will, and tortured them using mind control but maybe she has a very valid defense… not guilty by reason of insanity? Maybe I can have a doctor evaluate her and say she isn’t competent to stand trial? Maybe I can argue she didn’t complete the crimes based on the elements of the offenses? Well, worth a shot I guess so here goes nothing. I’ll be using the CA Penal Code and pretending it applies to MCU crimes (assuming superheroes in the MCU can commit and be prosecuted for crimes…).
First, we need to look at the elements of each offense so let’s start with the crime of kidnapping the residents of West View. Kidnapping is a violation of PC 207(a). In order to be prosecuted for this offense, the prosecutor must show beyond a reasonable doubt, that my client Wanda (1) took, held or detained another person by using force or instilling reasonable fear; (2) using that force or fear, she moved the person or made the person move a substantial distance and (3) the other person did not consent to the movement.
This one should be easier to defend against than the other two offenses. For starters, under the first element, Wanda did not take or hold any resident of West View by use of any force or reasonable fear, but I will concede, she did detain them. In order for this to work though, the prosecution would have to convince a jury that the mind control Wanda had the residents under classifies as a means of force or reasonable fear. Not everyone will agree but the mind control Wanda exercised over the residents by keeping them in the hex as different characters with all new personalities was not use of any means of force but there might be a slight convincing argument that it did instill reasonable fear in some of the residents.
When Vision woke up his coworker Norm from the mind control in Episode 2, Norm freaked out showing us he was in obvious fear and with reason. How would you react if all of a sudden you were woken up to find yourself in a different decade, with no color, and no clue where your kids are (because let’s not forget there were no kids in the town at the start). However, when other characters were woken up towards the end of the season like Herb and Dottie, they did not react with the same fear. In fact, they were quite calm. I would even argue that some of the residents knew exactly what was happening and were active participants. And no, I’m not talking about Agnes (don’t get me started on that evil witch). For example, Herb on the Halloween episode even asked Wanda if she wanted a do over or if everything in the scene was to her liking meaning he was an active participant and very aware of what was happening. Granted the same cannot be said for all of the residents but if prosecution wants to argue Wanda had all the residents under her control by using mind control to instill in them reasonable fear, then this would obviously fail because that blanket argument wouldn’t work across the board to all the residents.
As for the second element, using the force or fear to move the person or make the person move a substantial distance, that fails easily. Wanda didn’t move anyone. In fact, the residents of West View were o so very lucky to be able to stay in their homes and in their towns. No one needed to move anywhere and could continue to enjoy the luxuries of their beautifully remodeled town West View, New Jersey. Prosecutor will also fail at arguing Wanda made those residents move because she didn’t make them move anywhere. She actually did the opposite and allowed them to stay in their beautiful town. The beauty about prosecution failing to meet this element of the charge, they fail at proving this entire charge of kidnapping. BOOM! One element defended against, means Wanda can’t be guilty of kidnapping unless prosecution can argue beyond a reasonable doubt that EVERY element of the offense was committed. One charge defeated; on to the next.
I would argue the third element but let’s not waste our breath when element #2 failed. Besides, if residents are asking Wanda if she likes the scene or needs something changed, then they are active participants and if they are active participants one could argue they consented. I digress though. Let’s move on and confidently defend against false imprisonment.
False imprisonment is a violation of Penal Code Section 236/237. In order to be found guilty of this offense, prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Wanda (1) intentionally restrained or confined or detained someone by violence or menace and (2) she made the other person stay or go somewhere against that person’s will. For starters, let me remind everyone that sometimes a defense attorney must concede to certain charges when there is no viable and reasonable defense. I mean other than NGRI or telling the court I am declaring a doubt on my client (1368), I highly doubt this count is defendable. Wanda definitely detained the residents of West View inside the hex and she made them stay there against their will. After all, no one left the hex without Wanda’s permission or unless Wanda threw them out like she did Monica Robinson. Sometimes a defense attorney’s best move in a jury trial is to concede to one count if it means they’ll be able to fight the other more egregious counts to a jury with more reasonable arguments. Save face per say.
Torture under the CA Penal Code is violation of PC 206. Wanda won’t be found guilty of this offense unless the prosecution can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she inflicted great bodily injury (GBI) on someone else AND when inflicting the injury, she intended to cause cruel or extreme pain and suffering for the purpose of revenge, extortion, persuasion or for any sadistic purpose.
Well now. This should be fun.
Great bodily injury?? The only person, if you could call her a person, that suffered any great bodily injury at the hands of Wanda or Scarlett Witch, is Agnes or better said, Agatha, in the final episode. Last I checked, none of the residents of West View were injured even at the hands of Wanda. Unless prosecution is naming Agatha Harkness as the victim of a crime or pretend Pietro, then none of the residents of West View would meet these criteria. I guess prosecution could try and argue that the mind control is GBI (which would be a stretch) but not even this would work because GBI is legally defined as significant or substantial physical injury, greater than minor or moderate harm. Unless I missed an episode, from what I saw, the residents of West View were actually very well protected and taken care of from any harm. It was the perfect little (albeit twisted) white picket fence town.
As we’ve already read earlier in this article, when the prosecution fails to meet one element of the offense, they fail to prove the charge in its entirety. But for the fun of it lets briefly argue the second element. Did Wanda intend to cause cruel or extreme pain and suffering for the purpose of revenge, extortion, persuasion or for any sadistic purpose? One could argue that it is pretty sadistic to live out your dreams with a dead Vision recreated from your powers and if that is the reason she caused the residents of West View to suffer then maybe so this element is met. However, I would argue she did not intend to cause cruel or extreme pain and suffering. She wasn’t even in the right frame of mind to have the specific intent for that part of the crime. She made it clear that she didn’t mean to hurt anyone in the final episode when the residents had her surrounded meaning she lacked any intent to cause anyone suffering. All in all, I’m not sure prosecution would be able to prove this charge at all in light of the fact that the only person that sustained anything remotely close to GBI is the villain, Agatha Harkness, and let’s be real she deserved that… I mean, that was self-defense and defense of others by Wanda. Not guilty on torture.
Overall, in order to defeat all 3 charges, I would have a doctor evaluate Wanda to see if she even had the requisite state of mind to commit any of the charged offenses. The fact that she was burdened by grief and anger throughout the entire series, makes any reasonable person question whether she was even sane during the commission of these offenses. The best defense to all of these charges would be not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI). This is the strongest argument because the McNaughten Rule would apply. This rule basically boils down to the defendant did not understand the nature of their criminal act or did not understand what she was doing was morally wrong. Wanda made it very clear throughout the series that she didn’t realize what was happening and this can be seen in the various scenes where she seems dazed and confused about what is happening.
In the 3 last episodes, Agatha Harkness needs to remind Wanda of everything that has been going on that led to the creation of this West View that exists only in the hex. It’s almost as though through those entire episodes Wanda refuses to remember or doesn’t remember what is happening and why. It isn’t until the final culmination when Wanda is surrounded by all the residents of West View who are no longer under her mind control, that she realizes what she’s done, the harm she caused, the people she’s hurt and the extent to which she took this. I’m no doctor, but I have a feeling that this would be the strongest defense to all of these allegations because I firmly believe that Wanda didn’t understand the nature of her criminal act until after the fact, but never as these events were happening. This defense would save her.
Ultimately, would anyone really prosecute a superhero, nonetheless, an Avenger or do the ends justify the means when it comes to their actions? It definitely is interesting to consider and defending acts like these are very difficult. I think for now, I’ll stick to my prosecution background and leave the defending to the real defense attorneys. Until next time…
