Home Blog

Legal Target Practice with the Punisher

Marvel’s The Punisher on Netflix makes every shot count. The series has the most character development out of all of the Marvel shows on Netflix. It takes the Punisher beyond being the revenge driven killing machine, diving into the character’s motivations, history, and personal code. The show is extremely violent, which is balanced against understanding service members living with PTSD and recovery from grief.

The Punisher is target practice for legal issue spotting. Here are just a few of the crimes depicted in the series.

Illegal Gambling

One of the first crimes seen is a small gang robbing a mob gambling ring. Gambling under New York law is when a person risks something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance, on the agreement they will receive something of value based on the outcome. N.Y. Penal Law § 225.00. The mob run poker games were a criminal enterprise, which is a group of people with common purpose engaged in structured criminal conduct. N.Y. Penal Law § 460.10. The mob organizers likely could be proven guilty of promoting gambling in the first degree, because they had profits of more than $500 per day from their games. N.Y. Penal Law § 225.10


There is A LOT of torture in Punisher. Multiple characters are tied to chairs for beatings, including Carson Wolf, Micro, and Frank Castle.

The relevant New York laws for torture are Menacing and Assault. Menacing is when someone places another person in a reasonable fear of physical injury, serious injury, or death, by displaying a deadly weapon. N.Y. Penal Law § 120.14. Menacing turns into Assault once physical contact has been made. N.Y. Penal Law § 120.10.

Reckless Driving

The episode “Resupply” has a car chase with a 1967 Mustang driven by DHS Agent Dinah Madani vs. the Punisher in a recent model Mustang. It is a great car chase, but nevertheless, raises the issue of “reckless driving.” New York defines this prohibited activity as driving in a manner that “unreasonably interferes with the free and proper use of the public highway, or unreasonably endangers users of the public highway.” N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 1212. While the streets had been cleared for the DHS sting operation, the charging Mustangs playing chicken was a clear risk to others on the roads and not proper law enforcement procedures.

Murder of Federal Agents

There is a staggering number of DHS Agents killed by members of Anvil. It is a crime to kill an officer or employee of the United States. See, 18 U.S.C.S. § 1114. As the Federal Agents were all shot in gunfights in the performance of their duties, the deaths arguably were willful and deliberate, thus could be punished as Murder. See, 18 U.S.C.S. § 1111.


Micro hacks local, state, and Federal computers for large volumes of information. The list of violations against him could include 1) prohibiting accessing national defense information; 2) prohibiting accessing information from any department or agency of the United States; and 3), prohibiting accessing nonpublic computers used by the government. 18 USCS § 1030(a)(1), (a)(2)(B), and (a)(3).

There is a similar list for New York computers accessed, including the unauthorized use of a computer, computer trespass, computer tampering, and unlawful duplication of data. See, N.Y. Penal Law §§ 156.05, 156.10, 156.27, and 156.29.

Faking Own Death

Micro faked his own death after sustaining what should have been a fatal gunshot wound, if not for his cell phone. This technically is fraud and if there were any pending Federal charges against him, faking one’s own death would be a “substantial interference with the administration of justice” that would warrant a sentence enhancement. U.S. v. Hecht, 212 F.3d 847, 848 (3d Cir. 2000).

Warrantless Wiretaps

The CIA conducted unauthorized wiretaps to find information on the “Punisher tip line.” This information was then used to kidnap a mother and child. Wiretapping anyone in the United States without a warrant would violate the 4th Amendment of the United States. Spy agencies kidnapping US citizens is also clearly illegal.


Lewis Wilson planted and detonated three homemade bombs around New York, including the Federal Courthouse and Alcohol, Tabacco, and Firearms offices. This is domestic terrorism, because bombings are acts dangerous to human life that are intended to intimidate the civilian population, influence government policy, and affect the conduct of government by mass destruction within the United States. 18 USCS § 2331(5).

Attempted Assassination of Senator

Lewis Wilson attempted to assassinate [fictional] Senator Stan Ori in “Virtue of the Vicious.” Assuming Ori was a U.S. Senator, Federal law states that anyone who kidnaps and kills a United States Senator (or member of Congress or the Executive Branch) shall be punished by death or imprisonment up to life. 18 USCS § 351(b)(2). While Wilson was not successful, he could have been charged for the attempt on the Senator’s life.

Desecration of Corpses for Drug Smuggling

The drug trafficking conspiracy include heroine being smuggled in the bodies of service members killed in Afghanistan. This would qualify as a criminal conspiracy under 21 U.S.C.S. § 963 to distribute drugs illegally under 21 U.S.C.S. § 959 by the desecration of corpses under 10 U.S.C.S. § 934.

Secured from Drills

Marvel’s The Punisher is an exceptional show. There are many other legal issues to discuss, so stay tune for more.

What Happens on Sakaar, Stays on Sakaar

Sakaar in Thor Ragnarok made Las Vegas look like a fast food playground. The Grandmaster is like an evil Willy Wonka mixed with Caligula, but without the singing, and everyone who got a golden ticket had to fight for their lives as gladiators.

Let’s explore some of the many legal issues on Sakkar.

Valkyrie Engaged in Human Trafficking

Valkyrie spent centuries in exile on Sakaar capturing “contenders” to be sold to the Grandmaster for gladiator games. While Valkyrie clearly suffered from PTSD and alcoholism for longer than many nations have existed, there is no way around the fact she kidnapped and trafficked sentient life forms into slavery.

The law prohibits kidnapping and selling people into forced labor. Whoever kidnaps someone for the purpose of forced labor can be imprisoned for life. See, 18 U.S.C.S. § 1590. Valkyrie kidnapped both Thor and the Hulk, who she subsequently sold to the Grandmaster. It is unknown how many others she sold to fight for their lives in the Grandmaster’s arena, but she had the reputation of bringing the Grandmaster “prized” fighters for the arena.

Valkyrie’s decision to help in the liberation of Asgard does show Valkyrie sought atonement for past actions and making a significant life change for redemption.

How Many “Dougs” did the Hulk Kill?

Pugilistic contests between two fighters are highly regulated sporting events. In California, those who organize amateur or prize fights are guilty of a misdemeanor, and can be jailed for at least thirty days and not more than a year. Cal. Penal Code § 412. States such as Nevada allow boxing matches of unarmed combat where a contestant can reasonably be expected to suffer injuries. Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 467.0107.

The battles in the Grandmaster’s arena were armed gladiatorial fighters where death was an excepted result. Moreover, the Grandmaster offered freedom to those who could beat the Grandmaster’s “champion,” the Incredible Hulk. One fatality of those matches was an individual known as “Doug.” It is unknown how many “Dougs,” were killed by the Hulk, but apparently enough for the Hulk to develop a fan base that supported an industry of Hulk-themed signs, masks, and green fireworks.

The gladiatorial fights on demonstrate Sakaar objectively lacked any rule of law founded with a sense of morality. Entertainment with mutual combat that can result in death, which is where two individuals engage in a duel or fight by mutual agreement, is highly suspect. People v. Fowler, 178 Cal. 657, 671-72, 174 P. 892, 897-98 (1918). The only way self-defense can used to justified killing one’s opponent in cases of mutual combat, is by “retreating to the wall,” thus showing there is no other way to escape without killing the other party. Id.

Korg’s revolutionaries had a legitimate reason to revolt given the fact they were forced to fight for entertainment. It is worth noting that the Christian emperors in Rome ended gladiatorial combat not because it was cruel, but because the fights “presupposed that salvation could be achieved through military valor” which “conflicted with the eschatology that Christians were trying to teach.” ARTICLE: PICKING AT MORALS: ANALYTICAL JURISPRUDENCE IN THE AGE OF NATURALIZED ETHICS, 26 S. Cal. Interdis. L.J. 493, 510-511. As much as the Grandmaster claimed the revolution ended in a tie, there is no doubt those who were enslaved to fight would put an end to the games.

As for the Hulk, it is not known how many people he killed in combat, or how many died of injuries after their fight. Regardless, there is a huge problem for the Hulk, because it appears he killed others for entertainment, which has no legal justification.

The Sakaar Defense

It is extremely difficult to defend Valkyrie and Hulk for their actions on Sakaar. Valkyrie potentially spent centuries capturing people and selling them to slavery. The Hulk participated in an unknown number of gladiatorial battles that produced an unknown number of fatalities. Taking the position these actions were legally permissible because Valkyrie and Hulk were on Sakaar requires accepting that morality is relative. What is “right” verses “wrong” are not contingent on location, which makes these issues very haunting from Thor Ragnarok.

Are Asgardians Refugees under International Law?

Asgardians come from the land of ice and snow, from the midnight sun, where the hot springs flow. The surviving Asgardians at the end of Thor Ragnarok were driving their ship to new lands on Earth. Would the Norns weave for them a fate where the Asgardians legally qualify as refugees?

International treaties define refugees, in relevant part, as those who “owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.” USCS Protocol Refugee.

Well-Founded Fears

Surtur destroyed Asgard, the planetoid nation-state atop the cosmic Yggdrasil World Tree, in the final battle with Hela. As such, the Asgardians were like many of the displaced people after World War II without a homeland.

Countries including the Norway and the United States (in part) ratified the Protocol Refugee Status, plus other international treaties on refugees. The first stage of analysis of whether Asgardians are refugees turns on whether they have a well-founded fear or persecution based on race. Both Surtur and Hela demonstrated clear threats to Asgard, with Hela slaughtering the entire Asgardian army, murdering the Warriors Three, and ordering the deaths of civilians. Surtur actually succeeded in destroying the Asgardian planetoid. As such, nations such as the United States or Norway could find Asgardians have both a well-founded fear of the Goddess of Death and are unable to return home.

Emergency Refugee Status

The President of the United States has the authority grant refugee status for humanitarian concerns in the event of an unforeseen emergency. 8 U.S.C.S. § 1157. If the Asgardian Exodus does not fall under the Protocol Refugee Status, the [fictional] President Ellis could grant emergency refugee status because of the Goddess of Death’s attempted genocide and destruction of Asgard by Surtur, would qualify as an “unforeseen emergency.” Plus, the United States would love reverse engineering the Grandmaster’s spaceship and possible Asgardian technology.

Denial of Refugee Status for Loki and Valkyrie

The Protocol Refugee Status and US law will not grant refugee status to those who committed a crime of violence or war crimes. 8 U.S.C.S. § 1101. This is problematic for Loki, as he did lead an alien invasion in New York City in a conspiracy with Thanos to conquer the Earth. This is also a significant challenge for Valkyrie, as she spent possibly centuries capturing people and selling them into slavery to fight in the Grandmaster’s gladiator games. While Thor arguably could pardon both Loki and Valkyrie for their crimes against Asgard, nations on Earth would have a difficult time forgetting about Loki’s Chitauri invasion of New York.

Twilight of the Gods

Asgardians would likely be granted refugee status, given their well-founded fear of persecution and an unforeseen emergency. There would be an issue of settlement, such as creating a new homeland for the Asgardians, compared to accepting them into different countries. Perhaps Norway would be willing to grant Thor land to build a new city-state of Asgard, but that would be problematic to allow the creation of a new nation on Earth.

The Good Fight: The Rebel Alliance & The Law of War

Back in the days when Star Wars was just the original trilogy and the beloved Holiday Special (that’s the correct usage for “beloved,” right?), things were fairly black and white for the Rebellion. Their struggle against the Galactic Empire was daunting, but the Alliance was portrayed as a scrappy but unified group that shared a common goal.

Fast-forward to Rogue One and Star Wars Rebels and suddenly the Rebels’ fight is not so simple anymore. Instead of a cohesive group of do-gooders, these new stories portray the Rebel Alliance in a more realistic fashion. We see the Rebellion as a troubled group dogged just as much by internal fractures as they are by Imperial forces.

Star Wars dialogue about the law of war? Be still my beating heart.

A big part of their internal struggle is deciding how exactly they should fight the Empire. The recent Star Wars Rebels episode “In the Name of the Rebellion” dove into the Rebellion’s debate about how to wage war. In it, Saw Gerrera confronts Mon Mothma over her unwillingness to take more extreme measures in the fight against the Empire. Mon Mothma fires back, accusing Saw of breaking the rules of engagement and killing civilians and prisoners.

In her fiery retort, Mon Mothma touches on some very real concerns that are at the heart of the law of war. Long ago, the Latin maxim “Silent enim leges inter arma” (or, “In times of war, the law falls silent”) spoke to the lawless chaos of war. While Saw Gerrera probably has that slogan tattooed on him somewhere, the belief that war was inherently lawless was discarded long ago. Laws, customs, and treaties developed over the course of millennia to help reign in war’s lawless carnage. Those rules collectively became known as the law of war.

The concept of trying to apply rules to something as destructive and frenzied as war might seem silly. However, the law of war serves to bring some semblance of humanity to warfare by protecting fundamental human rights and guarding against unnecessary suffering.

Perhaps the Ewoks need a bit of…mentorship in the fine art of not being carnivorous war criminals.

How the Rebel Alliances chooses to wage its war against the Empire is therefore a critically important decision—one that Mon Mothma gets right. Saw Gerrera sees the Empire as a brutal, unyielding foe who must be met with an equally brutal resolve. Imperial forces certainly have little concern for the law of war—to Saw Gerrera, that’s reason enough to show no restraint or mercy. He openly mocks Mon Mothma because he believes that the Rebellion is doomed to failure as long as it tries to fight honorably against such a dastardly opponent.

But Saw is blinded by his unbridled thirst for vengeance. His endgame is not a fight for the fate of the galaxy, but a bloodletting designed to make the Empire pay. His tactics of killing civilians and prisoners severely undermine the larger Rebel effort. In Rebel Rising, Saw’s forces assassinate an Imperial governor and intentionally massacre countless civilians in the process. Saw’s objective was to send a message to Emperor Palpatine about what the Empire was up against. In reality, the mass murder achieved virtually nothing and instead fueled Imperial efforts to portray the rebels as frightening terrorists.

The Galactic Empire would like to extend its warm appreciation to Saw Gerrera, whose generous battlefield foolishness helped make this propaganda campaign possible.

On real world battlefields, violating the law of war is often a similarly powerful motivator for enemy forces. Late in World War II, Hitler ordered his commanders at the Battle of the Bulge to be especially brutal during the battle to frighten Allied forces. In response to Hitler’s orders, Nazi forces in Malmedy, Belgium infamously executed 84 American prisoners of war during the battle. However, word of the “Malmedy Massacre” quickly spread through Allied ranks, sparking outrage that fueled American forces to break the back of the German offensive.

Mon Mothma’s choice to have the Rebels fight according to the law of war is a reflection of the Alliance’s ultimate goal of restoring the galaxy. She recognizes that the Rebellion has no chance at victory if it does not win over the hearts and minds of galactic citizens. The Empire’s willingness to violate the law of war is no excuse for the Rebellion to do the same. Stooping to the Empire’s level and trading in atrocities would all but forfeit the moral high ground and give citizens little reason to rally to their cause—a result that would doom their movement as much as any devastating loss in battle.

Saw’s tirade against Mon Mothma wrongly paints the law of war and rules of engagement as needless restrictions that handcuff Rebel forces. What he fails to see is that sticking to those rules can actually be a “combat multiplier,” or in other words, something that dramatically enhances effectiveness and helps accomplish the mission.

During the Gulf War, Allied forces used leaflets like the one below to tempt Iraqi forces to surrender by highlighting the protections and humane treatment they would receive. The leaflets showcased U.S. respect for the law of war and were a huge success on the battlefield, motivating large numbers of Iraqis to peacefully surrender.

Leaflet dropped during the Gulf War. The text on the backside read: The U.S. abides by the rules of the Geneva Convention. Ceasing fire will provide you humane treatment, food and water, medical treatment, shelter, and return to your homes after hostilities.

Lord Vader wasn’t the type to throw down his lightsaber just because Rebels played by the rules. Nonetheless, the Alliance’s respect for the law of war led to similar tactical successes. Although the Battle of Endor far from ended the war, countless Imperials surrendered to Rebel forces, including two super star destroyers. Similarly, the Galactic Concordance flexed the rule of law and law of war to help usher the final surrender of remaining Imperial forces, ending the Galactic Civil War. Those successes would have never occurred if Mon Mothma had cast aside the Alliance’s core values and let the law fall silent during war.

Rather than attend a class on the law of war, Saw Gerrera chooses obliteration by Death Star.

Ewoks Are War Criminals

Forces of Destiny An Imperial Feast has revealed a truth about Ewoks after the battle of Endor: captured Imperials were going to be fire roasted alive. It is unknown if any Storm Troopers were indeed cooked as part of the victory feast seen in Return of the Jedi, but at least one group of prisoners of war were saved from the dinner menu by Leia Organa.

Say what you will about Anakin Skywalker’s many hate crimes, but at least he never ate a Tusken Raider or Youngling.

The issue of eating POWs was the central charges of the war crimes trial for the Japanese officers on Chichi Jima after World War 2. James Bradley tells the full extent of the cannibalism in great detail in his book Flyboys: A True Story of Courage. The trial was the first time that cannibalism and torture were allegations for war crimes. See, BOOK REVIEW: Judgment at Tokyo: The Japanese War Crimes Trials, 171 Mil. L. Rev. 220, 224 and Celebrating Volume 50: The Early History of the Washburn Law Journal, 50 Washburn L.J. 433, 440-441, citing George E. Erickson, Jr., Note, United States Navy War Crimes Trials (1945-1949), 5 WASHBURN L.J. 89 (1965). Torture ultimately was not addressed as a war crime until 1980. Judgment at Tokyo, at *224. Moreover, Bradley explained that since cannibalism, as vengeance killings had never been an issue before, the prosecutors charged the Japanese officers with desecration of a corpse.

The carnivorous Ewoks carried Imperial POWs out on stakes to be cooked over an open fire. Others Storm Troopers were restrained to watch their fellow service members cooked alive. One Ewok struck a bound Trooper when Leia Organa attempted to stop the Ewoks from murdering their prisoners of war. This conduct would fall under the many recognized forms of war crimes including:

I) Torture, because 1) striking a bound POW was designed to inflict physical and mental pain for punishment or intimidation; and 2) imprisoned Storm Troopers forced to watch their fellow service members stripped and cooked alive over an open fire would cause mental suffering;

II) Cooking POWs is cruel or inhuman treatment for the infliction of serious physical and mental suffering;

III) The act of killing Storm Trooper POWs for dinner is murder;

IV) Cooking Storm Troopers would be mutilation or maiming; and

V) Slow roasting Storm Troopers on a rotisserie would intentionally cause serious bodily harm to the prisoners of war.

18 U.S.C.S. § 2441(A), (B), (D), (E), and (F).

If remnants of the Empire captured Ewoks for prosecution, it is very clear that Ewoks purposely committed an opening crawl worth of war crimes. The act of cooking prisoners of war would be horrific crimes of torture and murder. General Organa was justified in stopping these atrocities, but the question remains, how many helmets used as drums during the tribal performance of “Yub Nub,” belonged to Storm Troopers who were eaten by Ewoks?

Halloween Podcast Spectacular with Monster Party!

It is time to celebrate Halloween with a special series of spooky podcasts! Jessica and I first analyzed the legal issues in the 1974 Mel Brook’s classic Young Frankenstein. The four members from the wicked podcast Monster Party then individually joined me to share their love, thoughts, and legal questions on The Wolf Man (1941), Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954), The Mummy (1932) and Frankenstein (1931).

A big thank you to Matt Weinhold, Shawn Sheridan, James Gonis, and Larry Strothe from Monster Party for their detailed discussions on these classic films. Each of them could be qualified as an expert witness for their knowledge of these characters. Plus they all have amazing action figures and collectables that would make Forrest Ackerman proud.

The Mummy’s Curse of Liability

The 1932 Universal Monster Classic The Mummy, tells the story of Imhotep, who was mummified alive for the crime of sacrilege for attempting to resurrect Princess Ankh-es-en-amon with Scroll of Thoth over 3,700 years ago.

Imhotep was awaken from death when an archeologist read the Scroll of Thoth in 1921. After a decade of “living” in the 20th Century, Imhotep assumed the identity Ardath Bey and directed an archeological team to find the tomb of Ankh-es-en-amon. Following a failed attempt to resurrect Ankh-es-en-amon’s mummified remains failed, Imhotep learned Ankh-es-en-amon had been reincarnated multiple times and was living as Helen Grosvenor. Imhotep planned to kill Helen in a ceremony to bring Ankh-es-en-amon back as a living mummy, her soul purified of the other lives she had lived.

Let’s unwrap a few layers of the Mummy’s legal issues.

Mummifying Imhotep Was Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Imhotep’s attempt to resurrect Ankh-es-en-amon was a capital offense that was punishable by death that extended into the afterlife. Even though Imhotep’s sentence was carried out 3,500 years before the formation of the United States, the death sentence of mummifying a person alive is the exact sort of punishment the Eighth Amendment precludes.

An execution is cruel and unusual punishment if the method presents a “substantial” or “objectively intolerable” risk of serious harm. Baze v. Rees, 553 U.S. 35, 40 (2008). Other courts have articulated the legal standard for determining whether a form of execution violations the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment as follows:

1) Presents a substantial risk that a prisoner will suffer unnecessary and wanton pain in an execution;

2) Violates the evolving standards of decency that mark a mature society, and

3) Minimizes physical violence and mutilation of the prisoner’s body.

State v. Mata, 275 Neb. 1, 48, 745 N.W.2d 229, 266 (2008)

The United States has a history of allowing executions, starting with hangings at the founding of the country, later firing squads, to finding the most “humane and practical” methods for executions “known to modern science.” Glossip v. Gross, 135 S. Ct. 2726, 2731 (2015). These methods have included electrocution, because it was thought to be less painful and more humane than hanging, to the gas chamber, to lethal injection. Id.

Mummifying Imhotep alive would pose an “objectively intolerable” risk of serious harm. First off, Imhotep was wrapped alive and sealed in a totally dark sarcophagus to die, either from starvation or the lack of air. It does not take an archeologist who can read hieroglyphics to see that Imhotep would suffer unnecessary and wanton pain in an execution by suffocating to death in darkness. Furthermore, the Pharaoh had the slaves who buried Imhotep killed, followed by the soldiers who killed the slaves also killed. This double digit body count would go against the evolving standards of decency that mark a mature society, where executing one man requires several dozen more to also die for national security. Finally, leaving Imhotep in total darkness to either starve or suffocate does not limit the physical violence he suffered in death.

Based on the above, “death by mummification,” would be cruel and unusual punishment.

Can Ankh-es-en-amon Be Resurrected under the Free Exercise Clause?

Imhotep illegally entered the Cairo Museum to perform a religious ceremony with the Scroll of Thoth in an attempt to resurrect Ankh-es-en-amon’s mummified remains. Imhotep murdered a guard who discovered him during the ceremony.

If this had been in the United States, the “Free Exercise Clause” under the First Amendment gives people the right to “believe and profess whatever religious doctrine one desires.” Parker v. Hurley, 514 F.3d 87, 103 (1st Cir. 2008). However, it is not a general protection of religion or religious belief. Id.

If the Free Exercise Clause is raised as a defense to a tort (in this case, trespassing), the issue is whether the defendant’s conduct was religious. Wisconsin v. Yoder, S. Ct. 1526, 1533-34 (1972). Arguably reading the Scroll of Thoth in an attempt to resurrect Ankh-es-en-amon would be a form of praying. However, the Free Exercise Clause does not shield clergy from wrongdoing or allow them to ignore laws of general applicability. See, Sanders v. Casa View Baptist Church, 898 F. Supp. 1169, 1174 (N.D. Tex. 1995). This would include trespassing and there is no religious exception to committing murder.

Praying to bring Ankh-es-en-amon back to life arguably would be protected conduct, however, that free exercise ends with intentional torts and crimes.

Desecration of a Corpse and Attempted Murder

Imhotep’s plan to kill Helen Grosvenor in order to bring Ankh-es-en-amon back as a living mummy has multiple legal problems. The first was burning Ankh-es-en-amon’s mummy, because that was desecration of a corpse. Many states recognize there is a tort for abuse or mishandling of a dead body. See, Frys v. City of Cleveland, 107 Ohio App. 3d 281, 284, (1995). The wrinkle with Ankh-es-en-amon’s mummy was it was not in its tomb, but in its sarcophagus on display at the Cairo Museum. That being said, burning the body still required it being removed from its resting place and destroyed.

Imhotep planned to murder Helen Grosvenor in order to make her a living mummy. There is no exception to murder in order to cleanse a reincarnated soul of other past lives. This would be a crime…. provided a 3,700 year old living mummy could be incarcerated on this plane of existence.

Mummy Dearest 

Imhotep is a cold and calculated killer, not just because he is a reanimated corpse. Imhotep acted with a specific intent to manipulate others for his ultimate goal of brining Ankh-es-en-amon back from the dead. The problem for Imhotep is he killed at least two people, enslaved another, committed fraud in representing who he was to the British expedition, destroyed historic artifacts of cultural significance at the Cairo Museum, and attempted to murder Helen Grosvenor. There is no legal justification for these crimes, however, the Egyptian Goddess Isis claimed jurisdiction of Imhotep’s wrongful conduct.