You had the NERV to fight a war with children

By

-

April 3, 2021

Evangelion In A Nutshell

Neon Genesis: Evangelion takes place in 2015 in Tokyo-3 – fifteen years after a global cataclysmic event, the Second Impact, destroyed much of Earth. As Tokyo-3 recovers it becomes besieged by alien creatures dubbed “Angels.” To fight the Angels and protect humanity, the U.N. sanctioned the creation of a paramilitary force: NERV. NERV, led by Gendo Ikari (Gendo), was successful in preventing humanity’s annihilation through its deployment of massive piloted machines called EVAs that defeated the Angels.

Uncovering The Legal Issues

While protecting humanity, he along with his NERV cohorts i.e. Misato Katsuragi (Misato) and Ritsuko Akagi (Ritsuko) violated multiple international human rights laws. Additionally, U.N. officials violated international law because they too participated in and sanctioned the NERV operations that resulted in the violations. How exactly then did NERV and the U.N. violate international human rights laws you ask? They recruited and deployed children to fight in war.

NERV’s cadre of EVA pilots are only children. They are Shinji Ikari (Shinji), Rei Ayanami (Rei), and Asuka Langley Soryu (Asuka) who are each fourteen years old throughout the show. Their age plays a critical role as they are legally minors. Legal systems endeavor to protect minors at all costs from the horrors of war – especially preventing their recruitment into active conflicts as child soldiers.

Breaking Down The Law

This universal principle, which is considered customary international law, was originally codified in Article 50(2) of the Fourth Geneva Convention in 1949, where it held that occupying powers were not to enlist children “in formations or organizations subordinate to it.” Pertaining to international armed conflicts (IAC) – Additional Protocol I, Article 77(2) states that “parties to the conflict shall take all feasible measures in order that children who have not attained the age of fifteen years do not take a direct part in hostilities and, in particular, they shall refrain from recruiting them into their armed forces.” The International Criminal Court puts its foot down in Article 8(2)(b)(xxvi) where it states that enlisting children under the age of fifteen into armed forces or groups constitutes a war crime in IACs. The aforementioned articles are but a tip of the iceberg when it comes to international legal condemnation of child soldiers. Thus, the law is resolute in holding that children under fifteen are not to be found in war zones and are not to be recruited by armed forces or groups in an active conflict. Gendo and his cohorts and the U.N. violated both of these.

NERV and the U.N. are engaged in an IAC against the Angels. Under Common Article 2 of the Geneva Conventions, IAC is defined when two or more sovereign states engage in armed conflict or have a declared war, even if one of the states doesn’t recognize the declaration of war. Although the Angels come from space, the closest framework we can operate in is IAC because the Angels represent a fighting force from a foreign entity which we can treat as a sovereign state and Earth has engaged in armed conflict via deployment of EVAs and U.N. forces. This permits the Rome Statute and Geneva Conventions to become applicable to determine war crime violations.

Proof of Violations

NERV and the U.N. didn’t take feasible precautions to prevent bringing children into their organization because they actively recruited and deployed children for their program’s needs. For example, in the very first episode, Gendo had Misato pick up Shinji and bring him to NERV. As Shinji’s father, Gendo knew his son’s age to be fourteen yet still had him pilot EVA-01 and fight the Angels. The U.N. knew Asuka was fourteen yet escorted her from Germany on their aircraft carrier to pilot EVA-02 and fight the Sixth Angel – Gaghliel. Gendo and his cohorts, and the U.N. repeatedly deployed Shinji, Asuka, and Rei to combat zones throughout the series – ignoring their serious psychological trauma from war – to beat the Angels. They intentionally violated international law with each recruitment and forced deployment of the EVAs.

They Are War Criminals

William T. Sherman once said that “war is hell.” Hell should not be something that children should be exposed to nor required to participate in. That is why we codified and enshrined via preemptory norms the laws prohibiting children from being enlisted and required to fight as child soldiers. Shinji, Asuka, and Rei were utilized as a means to an end by NERV and the U.N. Although they beat the Angels – Shinji, Asuka, and Rei lost what made them children and gained their own demons. Therefore, under international law, Gendo, Ritsuko, Misato and U.N. leadership are war criminals for actively enlisting and forcing children to fight the Angels. Now, we have to ask…how can they be held accountable?

Defending the Scarlet Witch

By

Sylvia La Rosa

-

April 2, 2021

0

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…

On the Basis of XB

By

Josh Gilliland

-

March 23, 2021

0

Star Trek Picard introduced the concept of “XBs” (for Ex-Borg) who were the “most despised people” in the galaxy. Given the Borg Collective is comparable to Soviet Communism forcefully assimilating all in their path for the “collective” good, it is easy to see why there would be a bias against XBs. However, like those who suffered under the heel of Soviet oppression, XB’s were victims of Borg totalitarianism.

Given the prospective discrimination against XBs, what are the possible legal protections for them?

Prohibition Against Racial Discrimination

If XBs are considered a race, the 14^th Amendment prohibition on racial discrimination is a means of protecting the rights of Reclaimed Borg.

Section 1 to the 14^th Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits states from depriving individuals of life, liberty, and property, without due process of law and equal protect of the law. A universe of civil rights laws have been enacted to prohibit racial discrimination, such as the ability to enter contracts under 42 U.S.C. § 1981.

The issue with XBs is that the Borg assimilated thousands of species. Any XB is still a member of their original species, just that the Borg assimilated them. This would make discrimination against someone who is an XB is not because of race, but because they were assimilated. For example, a Vulcan who was assimilated is still a Vulcan. The XB does not lose the fact they are a member of their species. This would move discrimination out of a racial basis and into the fact they are survivors of being members of the Borg.

Prohibition Against Discrimination on the Basis of a Disability

The prohibition against discriminating against individuals with disabilities is a stronger means to protect XBs. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was enacted because Congress identified a history of irrational employment discrimination where society isolated and segregate individuals with disabilities. Board of Trustees of Univ. of Alabama v Garrett, 531 U.S. 356 (2001), citing 42 U.S.C. 12101(a)(2).

The ADA states that no “entity shall discriminate against a qualified individual on the basis of disability in regard to job application procedures, the hiring, advancement, or discharge of employees, employee compensation, job training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment.” 42 U.S.C. § 12112. A “Qualified individual” is someone who, with or without reasonable accommodation, “can perform the essential functions of the employment position that such individual holds or desires. ” 42 U.S.C. § 12111(8).

A “disability” is defined as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one of more major life activities. 42 U.S.C. § 12102(1)(A). “Major life activities” can include any of the following, but are not an exhaustive list: caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, communicating, and working. 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2)(A). Major life activities also include bodily functions, such as normal cell growth, neurological, and other bodily functions. 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2)(B).

Reclaimed Borg includes individuals who have endured physical mutilation and are missing arms, eyes, and other body parts. Moreover, XBs would have been dependent on having functional cortical nodes to control their remaining cybernetic implants in order to live. All of these physical conditions would limit the “major life activities,” of XBs, because of their experience being assimilated and reclaimed. As such, XBs would fall under the protection of the ADA and related laws to protect individuals with disabilities from discrimination.

Review of Falcon and the Winter Soldier with Mark Zaid

By

Josh Gilliland

-

March 21, 2021

0

The Falcon and the Winter Soldier is everything from action packed spy story to character study of healing after extreme trauma. It is also filled with a multiverse of legal issues.

Mark Zaid joined me for our first video podcast on Get Vokl exploring these issues. Check out the video or recording below for our analysis of the Falcon’s rescue mission to save an Air Force officer, the conditions of Bucky’s pardon, and the legal mess after half of the planet went from missing to returned after The Blip.

The Mass Tort Action Against The Scarlet Witch

By

Josh Gilliland

-

March 10, 2021

0

The conclusion of WandaVision had the revelation that the citizens of Westview had been subject to Wanda’s control, including everything from child neglect to shared nightmares for everyone in the town. It was refreshing to see the town not revert to burning Wanda at the stake, but everyone in the town should seek legal representation; there is a mass tort to be litigated.

The causes of action against Wanda Maximoff could include:

False Imprisonment

Assault

Loss of Consortium

Torture

Child Endangerment

Child Neglect

This a good start before amending a complaint for additional causes of action.

False Imprisonment

The crime of False Imprisonment is when “A person commits a disorderly persons offense if he knowingly restrains another unlawfully so as to interfere substantially with his liberty.” N.J. Stat. § 2C:13-3. The tort of False Imprisonment is “the constraint of the person without legal justification.” Leang v. Jersey City Board of Education, 198 N.J. 557, 591 (N.J. 2009), citing Mesgleski v. Oraboni, 330 N.J.Super. 10, 24, 748 A.2d 1130 (App.Div. 2000). The tort of false imprisonment has two elements: (1) “an arrest or detention of the person against his or her will” and (2) “lack of proper legal authority or legal justification.” Id.

The citizens of Westview could show there was a magical energy field (hereinafter “The Hex”) that encompassed the entire town. The Hex prohibited anyone from leaving the town. Furthermore, Wanda had no legal justification for creating The Hex that prohibited anyone from leaving or entering The Hex. As such, a claim of False Imprisonment would survive a motion to dismiss and summary judgment. The citizens of Westview would have a high likelihood of success on their claim.

Assault

There is not a direct common law or statutory tort for magical mind control. However, traditional application of common law assault could provide legal relief for Wanda’s victims:

A person is subject to liability for the common law tort of assault if: “(a) he acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the person of the other or a third person, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and (b) the other is thereby put in such imminent apprehension.

Wigginton v. Servidio, 324 N.J.Super. 114, 129, 734 A.2d 798 (App.Div. 1999) (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 21 (1965)). The tort of battery rests upon a nonconsensual touching. Perna v. Pirozzi, 92 N.J. 446, 461, 457 A.2d 431 (1983).

Wanda’s Hex on the citizens of Westview forced them to think they were different people with very different lives. Moreover, the “storyline” changed daily, jumping between different eras. Wanda’s magical “touch” was the cause of this changing environment that turned the people of Westview into her personal meat puppets. This might be enough for liability. If it is not, the people of Westview were in imminent apprehension of being under Wanda’s control once they had been released from The Hex. Those facts should be sufficient to show liability.

Loss of Consortium

There were citizens of Westview who were separated from their spouses outside of The Hex. Those spouses could have a claim for loss of consortium, which is a claim to compensate a person who has lost a spouse’s “society, companionship and services due to the fault of another.” Kibble v. Weeks Dredging Construction Co., 161 N.J. 178, 190 (N.J. 1999), citing Wolfe v. State Farm Ins. Co., 224 N.J. Super. 348, 350 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 111 N.J. 654 (1988). This claim is both derivative and independent of the other claims in the case, because the damages of the affected spouse “may be awarded to the spouse suffering the direct injury.” Kibble at *190, citing Hauck v. Danclar, 262 N.J. Super. 225, 227 (Law Div. 1993).

Torture

Citizens of Westview complained of the emotional assault from being controlled by Wanda. Unfortunately, New Jersey does not allow for a cause of action for torture. These claims would need to be brought under the assault claim.

Think of the Children

The children of Westview were not present on the streets, schools, or playgrounds until “Halloween.” In the final episode, a distraught mother complained her daughter had been kept in her room. Moreover, the mother begged Wanda to be able to hold her child again.

Wanda’s actions raise serious issues of child neglect and abuse. New Jersey law states the following are crimes against children:

Abuse of a child shall consist in any of the following acts: (a) disposing of the custody of a child contrary to law; … or (h) in an institution as defined in section 1 of P.L. 1974, c.119 (C. 9:6-8.21 ), willfully isolating the child from ordinary social contact under circumstances which indicate emotional or social deprivation.

Abandonment of a child shall consist in any of the following acts by anyone having the custody or control of the child: (a) willfully forsaking a child; (b) failing to care for and keep the control and custody of a child so that the child shall be exposed to physical or moral risk without proper and sufficient protection; (c) failing to care for and keep the control and custody of a child so that the child shall be liable to be supported and maintained at the expense of the public, or by child caring societies or private persons not legally chargeable with its or their care, custody and control.

Cruelty to a child shall consist in any of the following acts: …. (b) inflicting upon a child unnecessary suffering or pain, either mental or physical; … (e) or exposing a child to unnecessary hardship, fatigue or mental or physical strains that may tend to injure the health or physical or moral well-being of such child.

Neglect of a child shall consist in any of the following acts, by anyone having the custody or control of the child: (a) willfully failing to provide proper and sufficient food, clothing, maintenance, regular school education as required by law, medical attendance or surgical treatment, and a clean and proper home, or (b) failure to do or permit to be done any act necessary for the child’s physical or moral well-being. Neglect also means the continued inappropriate placement of a child in an institution, as defined in section 1 of P.L. 1974, c.119 (C. 9:6-8.21 ), with the knowledge that the placement has resulted and may continue to result in harm to the child’s mental or physical well-being.

N.J. Stat. § 9:6-1

Wanda’s Hex forcing parents to not care for their children could meet the requirement of abuse for willfully isolating children from ordinary social contact; willfully forsaking their children; causing the child unnecessary suffering or pain; and failing to provide everything from food to a regular school education.

Is Wanda Judgment Proof?

There is substantial evidence against Wanda for her civil wrongs committed upon the people of Westview. Unfortunately, Wanda’s property is limited to an undeveloped lot and possibly a car. That is insufficient to fund a meaningful settlement for Wanda’s victims. However, there might be creative settlement options if Wanda transmutes her undeveloped land to gold or other precious gems. This could be means of compensating Wanda’s victims for inflecting her personal trauma on an entire town.

Wanda’s Restraint on Westview: A Review Under NJ’s False Imprisonment Laws

By

Kean Zimmerman

-

March 6, 2021

0

As WandaVision was coming to a close, the latter episodes delved into the the history of Wanda Maximoff and her traumatic past. However, while we learned more and more about the Sokovian Avenger, the original concern for the residents of Westview, NJ remains. Although we can certainly sympathize with the emotional trauma Wanda is grappling with, this doesn’t necessarily give her a free pass for her actions. At the end of the day, Wanda may be liable for some serious charges brought by the state of New Jersey on behalf of its citizens.

Liability for False Imprisonment

New Jersey criminal code recognizes the law of False Imprisonment. The relevant statute states:

N.J.S. § 2C:13-3. False imprisonment

A person commits a disorderly persons offense if he knowingly restrains another unlawfully so as to interfere substantially with his liberty. In any prosecution under this section, it is an affirmative defense that the person restrained was a child less than 18 years old and that the actor was a relative or legal guardian of such child and that his sole purpose was to assume control of such child.

Ignoring the possibility of affirmative defenses regarding the children in the Hex, it seems fairly clear that Wanda has interfered substantially with the liberty of the residents of Westview, NJ. The question comes down to whether or not Wanda did this “knowingly.” As the word knowingly implies that there is some level of intent required with false imprisonment, Wanda must have intended to interfere with the liberty of Westview residents.

An argument can be made that initially Wanda was unaware of what she was doing when the Hex was made. However, we know that Wanda was in control of the Hex, and she at some point became aware of what she was doing to the Westview residents. In episode three when she ejected Captain Monica Rambeau from the Hex, she demonstrated that she could manifest the ability to release people from the confines of the Hex. This acknowledgement and understanding that there were “outsiders” that could be ejected from the Hex by her own doing could satisfy the knowing element of the false imprisonment statute. However, a prosecutor would have to prove that Wanda was aware at that time that she was the one keeping Captain Rambeau in Westview, NJ and it’s not clear from the ejection alone that this was the case.

False Imprisonment is a disorderly persons offense which comes with a potential of six months in jail, and a fine of up to $1,000 per person. According to Jimmy Woo, the town has a population of 3,892 (this analysis does not include any SWORD agents subsequently caught in the Hex). Assuming Wanda would only be charged with counts of false imprisonment, and all of the town’s residents were present when Wanda created the Hex, she could be facing approximately 1,946 years in jail and a fine of $3,892,000. Given that it is unclear what income she has, if any, trying to make restitution may be a bit of a problem for her.

Liability for Kidnapping

In New Jersey, the Criminal Code defines Kidnapping as follows:

N.J.S. § 2C:13-1. Kidnapping.

A. Holding for ransom, reward or as a hostage. A person is guilty of kidnapping if he unlawfully removes another from the place where he is found or if he unlawfully confines another with the purpose of holding that person for ransom or reward or as a shield or hostage.

B. Holding for other purposes. A person is guilty of kidnapping if he unlawfully removes another from his place of residence or business, or a substantial distance from the vicinity where he is found, or if he unlawfully confines another for a substantial period, with any of the following purposes:

(1) To facilitate commission of any crime or flight thereafter;

(2) To inflict bodily injury on or to terrorize the victim or another;

(3) To interfere with the performance of any governmental or political function; or

(4) To permanently deprive a parent, guardian or other lawful custodian of custody of the victim.

Kidnapping in New Jersey comes with significant penalties ranging from five to thirty years in state prison per offense, depending on the violent nature of the offense. In this context, it seems unclear whether Wanda would be responsible for any counts of kidnapping. Although Tyler Hayward stated that she “took an entire town hostage” in episode five, there is no evidence that Wanda has been holding the Westview residents as some sort of ironic “shield” in the face of S.W.O.R.D.

Interestingly, there is a potential argument that Wanda committed the act of kidnapping for other purposes, specifically to inflict bodily injury on or terrorize the victim or another. Vision’s interactions with the Westview residents, outside the presence of Wanda, demonstrate that even under her spell they have some awareness of what is happening to them and are plainly terrified. A prosecutor could easily gather statements from the Westview residents to substantiate the sheer terror they felt while being trapped in their own town, forced to play along in Wanda’s fantasy. However, Wanda would only be found guilty if it’s determined that her holding of a town resident for a substantial period was for the purposes of injuring or terrorizing them. Based on what we know, this entire event is likely born from Wanda’s grief and the town of Westview was simply swept up in Wanda’s powers, without her intending to harm anyone.

Although there is a chance she could be found guilty of kidnapping, it is much more likely that a prosecutor would push for conviction of the lighter charges of false imprisonment since the standard for conviction is marginally more attainable.

Pardon or Prosecution

At this point the events of WandaVision have wrapped up and Wanda’s future seems uncertain. The seventh episode certainly provided some context for Wanda’s grief and how her powers came to engulf the town of Westview. Given her seeming confusion as to how the town’s residents came to be under the influence of her powers, this may provide a defense to any charges of false imprisonment or kidnapping. However, it will remain to be seen how those same residents, and the state of New Jersey, view Wanda now that they have been released from her spell.

Did Scarlet Witch Commit Desecration of a Corpse?

By

Josh Gilliland

-

February 21, 2021

0

Grief can make people take radically unhealthy actions. For Wanda Maximoff in WandaVision, Wanda has made some very troubling decisions over the death of the Vision in Avengers Infinity War. Spoilers ahead.

WandaVision takes place three weeks after the events of Avengers Endgame. We learned in the fourth episode “We Interrupt This Program,” that Wanda is the cause of the events in WestView. Adding the crimes of kidnapping a town, Wanda has reanimated Vision’s corpse. We see a glimpse of the body devoid of color and lifeless eyes with a chunk missing out of his forehead. If Vision were a human being, using magic to use a corpse like a puppet would be a clear issue of desecration. What is the answer when the corpse is a robot?

Desecration of a corpse in the second degree in New Jersey is when a person:

(1) Unlawfully disturbs, moves or conceals human remains;

(2) Unlawfully desecrates, damages or destroys human remains; or

(3) Commits an act of sexual penetration or sexual contact, as defined in N.J.S. 2C:14-1, upon human remains.

N.J. Stat. § 2C:22-1(a)(1), (2), and (3).

Human remains are defined as “the body of a deceased person or the dismembered part of a body of a living person but does not include cremated remains.” N.J. Stat. § 2C:22-1(c).

Wanda would be in significant legal trouble if Vision was considered “human,” because 1) Wanda had to recover Vision’s body from a SWORD facility. The act of moving the remains from the SWORD facility to WestView would meet the first prohibition of the law.

The second prohibition does not apply, because Wanda has not destroyed the Vision’s remains.

The third prohibition could have been met, but luckily we will never know, because Wanda has create G rated sitcoms from the 1950s to 70s (and PG rated from the 1980s and 2000s) as her reality. There is also reasonable doubt because Wanda’s pregnancy was caused by magic with her delivering twins within one episode.

The best argument for Wanda’s defense is that the Vision is not a human being, thus he did not have a corpse to desecrate. This also would go with the theme of arguing the Vision was not a human being in order to avoid a murder charge against Wanda for killing the Vision (the first time) by destroying the Mind Stone.

Even if Wanda can avoid conviction for desecrating the Vision’s corpse, what she is doing is radically unhealthy. Reanimating a body like a puppet for one’s delusion is not a good way to heal from loss; it is living in denial.